Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(81): “The Ruling of Sharia on Printing Two Copies of the Quran“

Date Added : 28-10-2015

 

Resolution No.(81) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

 "The Ruling of Sharia on Printing Two Copies of the Quran“

Date: 9/7/1425 AH, corresponding to 25/8/2004 AD.

 

 

 

 

Question: 

I have attached two copies of the Quran, and would like to know whether printing them is permissible or not?

First copy: Printed by Dar Al-Kahir, Beiruit, size 35/25 cm, 4th edition 1402, and includes a marginal index on each page of the Mus-haf.

Second copy: Memorization Mus-haf written on cards that hold Tafseer Al-Jalalain, first edition 2004 AD.

Answer: All perfect praise be to Allah.

The Board is of the view that the marginal index in the first copy usually leads to concealing the marks indicating the Quran`s parts, Ahzaab, Arbaa`, pauses and instances of prostration. The Board sees that such a copy of the Mus-haf is lawful so long as it preserves the marks which indicate the above mentioned.

 

 

As regards the second copy, the Board has the following remarks:

1- This copy changes the order of the Quran`s chapters as  revealed from Allah The Almighty.

2- Writing the Mus-haf on cards eliminates the marks indicating its parts, Ahzaab, Arbaa`, pauses and instances of prostration.

3- Placing Tafseer {science of explaining the meaning of the Quran} Al-Jalalain behind these cards contradicts with the practice observed by Al-Salaf Al-Saleh {righteous predecessors} who kept the interpretation on the margins.

4- There are many methods for memorizing the Quran other than the cards method.

Therefore, the Board bans printing the second copy. And Allah Knows Best.

 

The Board of Iftaa`
Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzaldeen At-Tamimi
Dr. Abdullah Al-Manasrah
Dr. Yousef Ghyzaan
Dr. Abdulmajeed Al-Salaheen
Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri
Sheikh Naei`m Mujahid
Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

A woman became pure [from menstruation] before Fajr, but did not perform ghusl until after sunrise — what is the ruling on her fast?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Her fast is valid, since ghusl (ritual bathing) is not a condition for the validity of the fast, but rather for the validity of the prayer. However, she is sinful for delaying the Fajr prayer beyond its designated time without a valid excuse.
It is known that the time for Fajr prayer ends at sunrise. Nevertheless, she must still perform ghusl, and make up the Fajr prayer. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Can a person required to give kaffarah feed it to their own family members?

The kaffarah must be given to the poor and needy who are not financially dependent on the one giving the kaffarah.
If a person feeds it to their own family members, it does not count as kaffarah, and their obligation remains unfulfilled.

Does the Obligatory Ritual Bath (Ghusl) Suffice in Place of Ablution (Wuḍūʾ)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The more prudent course is to perform ablution (wuḍūʾ) after the ritual bath (ghusl), so as to exit the difference of scholarly opinion and because the sufficiency of the ritual bath in place of ablution is contingent upon a number of conditions and requirements being met. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

I broke my oath and am now obligated to pay the expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn). Would it be valid to fulfill this by inviting the poor and needy to a meal for them to eat from?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn) is given to the poor (fuqarā') and needy (masākīn), and it must be given in the form of ownership (tamlīk) transferred to them of the required amount — namely, one mudd of the staple food of the locality, or its equivalent monetary value. It isn`t valid to invite the poor or needy to a meal prepared for them to eat from, as this does not constitute "ownership" (tamlīk) but merely "permission to partake" (ibāḥah).
Imam al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What is intended is that ownership be transferred to them; therefore, providing them with lunch or dinner [as a meal to eat from] isn`t valid." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muhtāj,Vol. 5/P.50]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.