Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(87): “Ruling on Purchasing Stocks of a non-Islamic Bank“

Date Added : 25-02-2020

Resolution No.(87) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies: “Ruling on Purchasing Stocks of a non-Islamic Bank“

Date: 2/4/1426 AH, corresponding to 11/5/2005 AD

 

Question: What is the ruling of Sharia on purchasing stocks of a non-Islamic bank?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.
The Board is of the view that purchasing stocks of non-Islamic banks is forbidden in principle because Allah The Almighty Says {what means}: “Those who devour usury will not stand except as stand one whom the Evil one by his touch Hath driven to madness. That is because they say: "Trade is like usury," but God hath permitted trade and forbidden usury. Those who after receiving direction from their Lord, desist, shall be pardoned for the past; their case is for God (to judge); but those who repeat (The offence) are companions of the Fire: They will abide therein (for ever).” {Al-Baqrah/275}. One who has purchased such stocks and wants to make repentance should suffice by taking his money{capital} without any increase, for Allah, The Almighty Says in this regard {what means}: “O ye who believe! Fear God, and give up what remains of your demand for usury, if ye are indeed believers. If ye do it not, Take notice of war from God and His Apostle: But if ye turn back, ye shall have your capital sums: Deal not unjustly, and ye shall not be dealt with unjustly.” {Al-Baqarah 278/279}. Therefore, it is imperative that he/she takes back his/her money {capital} without any increase since what is begotten through a forbidden act is forbidden as well. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Board of Iftaa`
Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzaldeen At-Tamimi
Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi                        Dr. Yousef Ghyzaan
Sheikh Saeid Hijjawi                                  Sheikh Naeim Mojahid
Sheikh AbdulKareem Al-Khasawneh      Dr. Wasif Al-Bakri
Dr. Abdulsalaam Al-Salaheen                   Dr.Abduaziz Al-Khayaat

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the Islamic ruling on the Udhiyah (sacrificial offfering)?

 
 
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The Udhiyah (sacrificial offering) is a Confirmed Sunnah (Sunnah Mu’akkadah) for every adult Muslim of sound mind who possesses the financial means, whether they are a resident, a traveler, or a pilgrim (Haj). This is based on the statement of the Prophet ﷺ: 'When the ten days [of Dhu al-Hijjah] begin and one of you desires to offer a sacrifice, let him not touch [cut] anything of his hair or skin' [Narrated by Muslim].
 
The point of evidence (Wajh al-Dalalah) here is that the Prophet ﷺ linked the sacrifice to the individual's will and desire by saying, 'and one of you desires.' This indicates that it is not obligatory (Wajib); had it been mandatory, he would have simply said, 'let him not touch his hair until he sacrifices' [without making it conditional upon desire].
 
Furthermore, it is narrated that Abu Bakr and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) would sometimes refrain from offering the sacrifice out of fear that people might mistakenly view it as an obligatory duty [Narrated by al-Bayhaqi and others with a good (Hasan) chain of transmission]. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is a wife considered divorced if her husband refused to go to bed with her (for sexual intercourse) for two months?

A wife doesn`t get divorced no matter for how long her husband refuses to have sex with her, and she had better go to court.