Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(277): "Ruling on Exploiting Endowed Land"

Date Added : 22-05-2019

Resolution No.(277)(11/2019), By The Board of Iftaa', Researches and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Exploiting Endowed Land"

Date: (11/ Ramadan/1440 AH), corresponding to (16/5/2019 AD).

 

All perfect praise be to Allah the Lord of the Worlds.

On its sixth session held on the above date, the Board reviewed the letter (4/2/3/2905) of His Excellency Minister of Awqaf, Dr. Abulbasal. It states that the endowed land No.(45) of Um Attieh area (59) in Salt city, estimated at (320 Meters), was donated in 2000 for the purpose of building a mosque. However, building the mosque on the above land became impossible because it violates the effective laws and regulations of constructing mosques, the endowed land itself is small and three mosques were built in the same area. Knowing that the above land is commercial, what is the ruling of Sharia on investing it in favor of endowment programs by building a small Musala on part of it instead of a mosque?

After deliberating, the Board arrived at the following decision:

According to scholars, it is allowed for the endowment (Waqf) administrator to take the necessary steps to achieve the interest expected from the Waqf and preserve its benefits. Ibn Qhodamah says: "If the Waqf was damaged and its benefits were stopped….for example, a mosque that people have deserted or was too small and impossible to expand, or was expanded to the extent that it became impossible to maintain save by selling part of it. In this case, it is permissible to sell part of it to maintain the rest." Moreover, if it wasn`t possible to benefit from it at all, then selling it is permissible. In a narration by Abi Dawoud, Ahmad said: "If there were two valuable pieces of wood in a mosque, then it is permissible to sell them in order to maintain the mosque." {Al-Moghni, vol.6/pp.28}.

In conclusion, it is permissible to invest the above land to achieve the purpose for which it was endowed without any stoppage or delay. This is provided that the revenue is spent in favor of the mosque itself since the stipulation of the endower has the same binding force as the text of Sharia. And Allah The Almighty Knows Best.

 

Chairperson of Iftaa` Board,

Grand Mufti of Jordan,

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh

Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh, Member

Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat, Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Al-Hijjawi, Member

Judge Khalid Woraikat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zou`bi/ Member

Prof. Adam Nooh Al-Qhodaat/Member

Prof. Abdullah al-Fawaaz/Member

Dr Mohammad Khair al-Esa/Member

Dr. Rashaad Al-Kelaani/Member

 

 

 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Why was the exact date of Laylat al-Qadr concealed?

The wisdom behind this is to encourage Muslims to strive in worship throughout all the nights of Ramadan, or at least in the last ten nights. By doing so, they will earn the reward of observing Laylat al-Qadr as well as the reward of worshiping on other blessed nights.

What is the ruling on combining more than one intention in the prayer, such as combining the *sunnah* of wuḍūʾ with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*, or combining the *sunnah* of greeting the mosque (*taḥiyyat al-masjid*) with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Combining two intentions in a single act of worship, which some jurists call the “overlapping of acts of worship”, has several cases and precise rules. These can be consulted in the books of legal maxims, such as al-Manthūr fī al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyyah by al-Zarkashī and al-Ashbāh wa’l-Naẓāʾir by al-Suyūṭī. Among the most important of these rules:
First: If all of the acts of worship that one wishes to combine under one intention are obligatory, the intentions do not overlap. An example is combining the intention of the obligatory ʿAṣr prayer with that of the obligatory Dhuhr prayer. The intentions do not overlap in this case.
Second: If the two acts are specified supererogatory prayers (nawāfil muqayyadah) that are aimed at in themselves because of a particular time, occasion, or cause, or if they are an obligatory prayer and a specified supererogatory prayer, the intentions again do not overlap. An example is the Duha prayer, which may not be combined with, for instance, the regular sunnah of Dhuhr.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm: “Whatever is not, in meaning, an absolute voluntary prayer, such as the Duha sunnah… is not subsumed under another. Rather, if he intends something else along with it… the prayer is not validly entered. This is because combining two obligations, two specified supererogatory prayers, or an obligation and a specified supererogatory prayer invalidates the prayer in cases not built upon overlapping, as ritual purification (ṭahārah) is.”
Third: If the two acts are absolute voluntary prayers (nawāfil muṭlaqah), or one of them is, where the texts of the Sharīʿah show that the aim of the voluntary act is to fill the time with worship, then overlapping of intentions is permissible. An example is the obligatory Dhuhr prayer together with the sunnah of greeting the mosque (taḥiyyat al-masjid). And Allah Almighty knows best.

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 of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.