عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(209): "The Administrative Fees Charged on UJ`s Staff Provident Fund"

Date Added : 05-10-2015

Resolution No.(209)(19/2014), by The Board of Iftaa', Researches and Islamic Studies:  

"The Administrative Fees Charged on UJ`s Staff Provident Fund"

Date: 30/ Zulqidah/1435 A.H, corresponding to 25/9/2014 A.D

 

All perfect praise be to Allah. Blessings and peace be upon Prophet Mohammad and upon his family and companions.

The Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies reviewed, in its twelfth session held on Thursday (30/ Zulqidah/1435 A.H)-(25/9/2014 A.D), the letter of His Excellency the President of Jordan University which reads as follows:

UJ`s staff provident fund committee decided, on its session No.(4/2014), to address the General Iftaa` Department so as to obtain their religious ruling on deducting (50)JDs. out of each (1000)JDs. from the sums given by the above Fund for the zero-interest loans, and it suggests that the administrative fees be within the following formula (charging (25)JDs. on each loan transaction regardless of the value, or the duration of that loan) ?

After careful study and deliberation, the Board decided what follows:

It is permissible to adjust the administrative fees charged on good-will loans so that they would become a fixed sum which is separated from the loan`s value, or duration, provided that this sum covers the administrative fees only, without any increase as a profit. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Head of the Iftaa` Board: The  Grand Mufti  of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan His Grace Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khassawwneh

Vice head of the Iftaa` Board: Prof. Ahmad Hilayel

Prof. Hayel Abdulhafeez/ Member

Prof. Abdulnasser Abu Al-Bassal

His Eminence Sheikh Sa`eed Hijjawi/ Member

Dr. Yahia Al-Bottoosh/Member

Prof. Mohammad Al-Qudah/Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Z`oubee/Member

Dr. Wassif Al-Bakhri/Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is the marriage, which lacks a valid legal contract, a guardian, and a court registration, valid?

It is incumbent that a valid marriage contract be concluded in the presence of a guardian and two trustful witnesses, and it should be registered in the court to protect the rights of the wife. Actually, a valid marriage contract is what differentiates between sound marriage and fornication.

What is the ruling on mentioning Allah`s name upon slaughtering an animal?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is a Sunnah (prophetic tradition) for the person slaughtering to say: "Bismillah" (In the Name of Allah), though the most complete and perfect phrasing is to say: "Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim" (In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful). This is in accordance with the words of Allah Almighty: "So eat of that [meat] upon which the name of Allah has been mentioned." (Al-An'am/118)
 
However, pronouncing it is not an obligatory requirement (Wajib). If someone omits it—whether deliberately or out of forgetfulness—the meat remains entirely lawful (Halal) to eat, though purposely omitting it is considered disliked (Makruh). And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

What is the ruling on someone who possesses gold with the intention of saving/hoarding it, and owns nothing else — is he obligated to sell a portion of it in order to pay the zakāh due on it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Zakāh becomes immediately obligatory on cash, and likewise on gold — that which is not designated for a woman's personal adornment— once both reach the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for zakah) and a full ḥawl (lunar year) has passed over them. It is not permissible to delay payment when it is genuinely possible to pay — meaning, when the wealth and the eligible recipients are both available. It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.129): "Zakāh is obligatory immediately once it becomes feasible to pay it, meaning when the wealth and the eligible recipients are both present."
The one paying zakāh must discharge the obligatory zakāh due on saved (hoarded) gold either from the gold itself, or from its equivalent monetary value, in the event that no other funds are available — since paying from the gold itself is the original default (al-aṣl). It becomes permissible to pay from other funds instead only because zakāh is built upon the principle of ease and leniency, as stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib (Vol.1/p.366): "When a full ḥawl has elapsed on wealth other than trade goods... zakāh attaches to the actual asset itself (al-‘ayn), and the poor effectively become partners in it — even, for example, [becoming partners] in camels through the value of a sheep [owed as zakāh on them]... Paying from other wealth is permitted only because zakāh is built upon the principle of ease and leniency."
Accordingly: the one paying zakāh must discharge it either from the actual saved gold itself, or by selling a portion of the gold equal to the amount of zakāh owed. He may also borrow money to pay the zakāh, or pay the zakāh in installments before the ḥawl is complete [as an advance payment]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on one who died owing debts and left no wealth? Is it obligatory upon the heirs to settle these debts?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general rule is that if a person dies owing rights to other people, such as debts, these are settled from his estate, if he left any wealth, before the estate is divided. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “The believer's soul is suspended by his debt until it is settled for him.” Graded ḥasan by al-Tirmidhī. Repayment of debts takes precedence over the heirs’ right to inheritance.
If the deceased left no estate, or left wealth that was insufficient to cover his debts, it is not obligatory for the heirs to pay from their own wealth, but it is recommended for them to do so, because the deceased’s dhimmah (legal liability) remains occupied by the debt. It is reported in some narrations that he remains held in suspension until his debt is paid, and it is not part of filial righteousness for a child to leave his father’s dhimmah burdened with debt.
All of the children may contribute to settling the debt on behalf of their father and cooperate in doing so, even in installments, according to their ability. And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More