Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No. (30): "Ruling on Dealing with Orphans Funds in Long-Term Transactions"

Date Added : 18-03-2021

Resolution No. (30): "Ruling on Dealing with Orphans Funds in Long-Term Transactions"
Date: 7/11/1413 AH, corresponding to 9/02/1993 AD

 

What is the ruling on the criteria adopted by Orphans' Fund Development Foundation?

The Board is of the view that the criteria adopted by the aforementioned foundation is the best for the time being; as well as the Board of Iftaa' urges it to exert more effort as regards continuous development in their methods in order to reach the proper justice while distributing profits and to look for all the means to obtain the best criteria in this regard. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice Dr.Nooh Al-Qodaat

Deputized Grand Mufti of Jordan, Sheikh Saeid Hijjawi
Dr. Abdassalam Al-Abbadi
Dr. Ibrahim Khash-shan
Dr. Mahmood al-Sartawi
Dr. Ahmad Hilayel
Dr. Rateb Ad-Daher
Mahmood Shewayat

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on objecting to the Mosque Imam regarding the joining of prayers due to rain?

 
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is not permissible for any of the congregants to object to the Imam in the mosque, whether the objection is to demand the joining of prayers or to oppose it; for the general principle is that the Imam possesses the religious knowledge (Al-Ilm al-Shar‘i) that qualifies him to make the decision in this matter. And Allah the Exalted knows best."

Is it required to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts?

● It is preferable to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts if they were missed due to a valid excuse.
● However, if the fasts were missed without a valid excuse, then fasting consecutively is obligatory, because making up the missed fasts in this case must be done immediately.
Separating the makeup fasts goes against the obligation of immediacy, but if someone does so, their fasts will still be valid. However, they will be sinful for delaying without a valid reason.

What is the ruling on performing the Witr prayer as a single rak`ah?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to perform the Witr prayer as a single unit (rak‘ah). It was narrated from Ibn ‘Umar that a man asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ about the night prayer, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ replied: 'The night prayer is offered two by two (mathna mathna). If one of you fears the approach of dawn, let him pray a single rak‘ah to make what he has prayed odd-numbered (Witr) for him.' (Related by al-Bukhari & Muslim)). However, limiting the prayer to only one rak‘ah is considered 'contrary to the preferred way' (Khilaf al-Awla).
 
It is stated in Al-Minhaj al-Qawim Sharh al-Muqaddimah al-Hadramiyyah (p. 137): 'The minimum of Witr is one rak‘ah, but limiting it to that is contrary to what is best.'
 
The most complete form of Witr is eleven units, while the minimum level of 'perfection' is three units. It is stated in ‘Umdat al-Salik (p. 60): 'The minimum of Witr is one rak‘ah, and its maximum is eleven, performing the taslim (salutation) after every two units. The lowest level of perfection is three units with two separate taslims (meaning 2+1).' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

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.