عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(140): "Ruling on Charging a Fee for Testing the Usability of Blood"

Date Added : 27-10-2015

 

Resolution No.(140)(4/2010): "Ruling on Charging a Fee for Testing the Usability of Blood"

Date: 7/5/1431 AH, corresponding to 22/4/2010 AD.

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

During its fourth session held on the above given date, the Board reviewed the question concerning the Ministry of Health`s decision to charge fifteen JDs for each blood unit. Having reviewed the letter of the Health Minister, in which he stated that the fee is for covering the expenses of carrying the blood units, the Board realized that it covers the cost of the tests run by the Ministry, and not a price for the blood itself. After prolonged deliberations, the Board decided what follows:

Since the charged sum is in for testing the blood`s usability and not a price for the blood itself, thus it is permissible. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Grand Mufti of Jordan, Dr. Abdulkareem al-Khasawneh

Vice Chairman of the Iftaa` Board,

                                                           Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

Sheikh Sa'eed Hijjawii/Member

                                                           Dr. Yahia al-Botoosh/ Member

                                                           Dr. Mohammad Khair al-Eesa/ Member

                                                           Judge Sari Atieh/ Member

                                                           Dr. Abdul-Rahman Ibdah/Member

                                                           Dr. Muhammad Aiqla Al-Ibrahim/Member 

                                                           Dr. Abdul-Naser Abu Al-Basal/Member 

                                                           Dr. Muhammad Al-Khalayla/Member 

                                                           Dr. Muhammad Al-Gharayba/Member 

                                                           Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat/ Executive Secretary of the Iftaa Board

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on one who sees moisture on his clothes and doubts whether it is semen or pre-seminal fluid (madhy)?

Whoever finds moisture upon waking from sleep and doubts whether it is semen or madhy, and cannot distinguish between them, he may choose between them and act according to his choice. If he wishes, he can consider it semen and perform the ritual bath, or consider it madhy, perform ablution, and wash what it has soiled. This is because if he fulfills the requirement of one of them, he is definitively free from it, and the default is his innocence from the other. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on selling sacrificial animals (udhiyah) described with specific attributes and authorizing an agent to slaughter them?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Selling sacrificial animals (udhiyah) that are described with specific attributes is permissible. This falls under the category of a salam sale (forward sale) if conducted using the terminology of salam, and under the category of a regular sale if not using the terminology of salam.
 
As for authorizing the seller to slaughter the sacrificial animal, the basic principle is that it is permissible, because the agent (wakil) stands in the place of the principal (muwakkil) in achieving his objective. This is a contract that the principal (the buyer) is entitled to perform himself, so authorizing another (the seller) to do so on his behalf is valid.
 
However, it is a condition for authorization to slaughter that the intention (niyyah) is present either at the time of slaughter or at the time of handing over the sacrificial animal to the agent. The basic principle is that the sacrificial animal must be specifically designated, as it is an act of worship. It is not required to designate it at the time of slaughter; rather, it is valid to do so before that.
 
It is permissible for the principal either to delegate the intention to the agent or to formulate it himself when authorizing the agent to slaughter. However, the sacrificial animal must be designated, even if at the time of slaughter, by the agent.
 
It is obligatory to designate the sacrificial animals so that each person offering a sacrifice receives his own specific animal. Therefore, charitable organizations and companies must take this into consideration and establish a specific mechanism that ensures no mixing of sacrificial animals occurs, so that each person offering a sacrifice receives his own designated animal. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible to eat from an Udhiyah slaughtered on behalf of a deceased person?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to eat from the sacrifice (uḍḥiyyah) that is offered on behalf of a deceased person. This is the madhhab (school of thought) of the Hanbalis. In this case, the heirs take the place of the deceased as if he were alive, with the same rights to eat from it, give it in charity, and offer it as a gift.
 
It is stated in Maṭālib Uli al-Nuhā (Vol.2/P.472): "Offering a sacrifice on behalf of a deceased person is better than offering one on behalf of a living person, because the deceased is unable (to perform deeds) and is in need of reward. It is to be treated like a sacrifice on behalf of a living person in terms of eating, giving charity, and giving gifts." And Allah Almighty knows best.

Must a woman seek her husband's permission to fast a make up fast (qada)?

● If there is ample time to make up for the missed fasts, a woman should seek her husband's permission before fasting.
● However, if the time is running out—such as when only the remaining days of Sha'ban are sufficient to complete the qada—she does not need his permission and must fast, because Allah’s command takes precedence over the husband's consent.

See More