Statement on the so-Called "Deal of the Century"

| | عربي

Home

Articles

Summarized Fatawaa

A man led the people in prayer as imam, and at the end of the prayer he performed a prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw) because he had omitted a short sūrah after al-Fātiḥah. What is the ruling on his prayer and that of those praying behind him?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

According to the Shāfiʿī school, it is sunnah to recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah in the prayer. One who omits it has a valid prayer, and no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw) is prescribed for omitting it. If someone performs sujūd al-sahw for its omission while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. But one who is ignorant of the ruling, or who did so out of forgetfulness, his prayer is not invalidated, because this is among the matters that are obscure to people, and ignorance of it is not restricted to those who recently entered Islam.

Shaykh al-Islām al-Shams al-Ramlī said in Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj ilā Sharḥ al-Minhāj (Vol.2/p.70): “The remaining sunnahs are not compensated for by prostration, such as the remembrances (adhkār) of bowing and prostration, that is, the opening supplication (duʿāʾ al-iftitāḥ) and the sūrah, in accordance with the base rule, because they are not of the same nature as what has been reported [as compensable]. If one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to ignorance. As for the objection raised that the ignorant person does not know that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed, and whoever knows it knows its place, this is refuted by denying such a necessary connection, for the ignorant person may hear only that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed before the salām, and so assume that it applies to every sunnah and is not restricted to its prescribed place.”

This is among the matters that are obscure, in which the mukallaf is excused for ignorance, as stated by al-Shabrāmallisī in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.70).

However, if the imam prostrates, and the follower (maʾmūm) presumes that his imam’s prostration is for a reason for which one does not prostrate, it is not permissible to follow him in it, so long as the follower knows the ruling.

Accordingly, the prayer of one who did not recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah is valid, and sujūd al-sahw is not prescribed for it. Whoever prostrates out of ignorance or forgetfulness, his prayer is valid, because this is among the issues hidden from the general public. But whoever prostrates while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on performing the Duha (forenoon) prayer before its time has begun, because I go to school early in the morning?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

The Duha (forenoon) prayer is not valid if performed before its time has begun. Its time starts when the sun has risen to a noticeable height, that is, approximately fifteen minutes after sunrise, and it ends when the sun reaches its zenith (zawāl), shortly before the Dhuhr (noon) prayer. It is stated in Mughni al-Muhtaj (Vol.1/p.455): “Its time is from the rising of the sun [to a spear’s height] until the zenith.”

Accordingly, the Duha prayer is not valid if offered before the sun has risen, and its time remains open until just before Dhuhr. It may be performed at any time at school, during the break between classes or during recess. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."

Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].

However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.

Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].

Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].

If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

"I told my family at night: 'I will fast tomorrow as qaḍā' (a make-up fast),' but I forgot to make the intention before sleeping. Is my fast valid?"

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.

The intention is obligatory in acts of worship. For obligatory fasting, the required intention is to resolve to fast during the night [before dawn]. Its proper locus is the heart, while verbalizing the intention out loud in acts of worship is a sunnah — so that the tongue may align with the heart. If the intent behind the statement in question was the intention to fast, then it is valid; but if the intent was merely to inform someone, or reflected hesitation or doubt, then it is not valid.

It is stated in *Bushrā al-Karīm* (Vol.1/P.216): "It is a sunnah to verbalize the intention — that is, whatever has already been intended in the heart, whether an obligatory or a voluntary act — such as specifying the number of rak‘ahs, just before the opening takbīr — so that the tongue may assist the heart, and because this is further removed from whispered doubts (waswasah), and in order to accommodate the view of those who held it obligatory in every act of worship that requires an intention (even though this is a minority position), by analogy with Ḥajj."

Accordingly: if the intention to fast arose in your heart before the second adhān [i.e., before Fajr], then your fast is valid.

And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Send Your Question

Zakaat Account

Articles

Statement on the so-Called "Deal of the Century"

Author : The General Iftaa' Department

Date Added : 30-01-2020

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful

Statement on the so-Called "Deal of the Century"

All perfect praise be to Allah the Lord of the Worlds. May His blessings and peace be upon Prophet Mohammad, all his kin and companions.

The General Iftaa` Department censures and rejects the so-called "Deal of the Century" and affirms that Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine and that the Hashemite custodianship over it is amongst the non-negotiable, religious and national principles. It also affirms the right of the Palestinians to live on their national territory and that none has the right to surrender a bit of sand from the land of Palestine. Jordan will continue to defend Jerusalem, its holy sites and the blessed land of Palestine, and this is the position of all Jordanians led by His Majesty King Abdullah II. Allah Says (What means): "And God hath full power and control over His affairs; but most among mankind know it not." [Yousef/21].

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author

• Suicide is a Major Sin

• The General Iftaa` Department`s Statement: The Religion is Naseehah (Sincere Advice)

• A Statement on the Grave Sin and Crime of Mixing the Quran with Music

• Representing the People in the Parliament is a Responsibility, the Vote is a Trust, and Buying the Voter`s Will is Forbidden according to Islamic Law

• Clarification from Iftaa` Department

• A Statement on the Importance of Getting Fatwa from its Reliable Sources to Maintain Unity of the Muslim Ummah

• Statement on Fatwa and Credibility in its Dissemination

• The Obligation of Supporting Palestinians Defending Al-Aqsa Mosque and Sheikh Jarrah Neighborhood

• People Infected with COVID-19 are Prohibited to Mix with Others in order to Avoid Transmitting the Infection

• The General Iftaa` Department Condemns the Insulting Cartoons about the Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)

>>> 1 2 <<<

Comments

Name

E. mail Address

Country

Comment Title

Comment

Enter the number shown on the image

Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.

Summarized Fatawaa

What are the key differences between the 'aqīqah and the uḍḥiyyah?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.

The following are the key differences between the 'aqīqah and the uḍḥiyyah:

First: The 'aqīqah is slaughtered as an act of drawing closer to Allah the Almighty and expressing gratitude for the blessing of a newborn child. The uḍḥiyyah, on the other hand, is slaughtered as an act of drawing closer to Allah and expressing gratitude to Him specifically during the days of slaughter (ayyām al-naḥr).

Second: The 'aqīqah is performed on the seventh day from the birth of the newborn, whereas the uḍḥiyyah is performed on Eid al-Aḍḥā and its time extends for three days after the Eid.

Third: The 'aqīqah is performed once in a lifetime for the newborn, whereas the uḍḥiyyah is recommended every year for the one who is financially capable to offer it.

Fourth: It is Sunnah for the one intending to offer the uḍḥiyyah to refrain from cutting his hair and nails until after he has slaughtered. This is not a Sunnah for the one intending to perform the 'aqīqah.

Fifth: It is Sunnah for the 'aqīqah to be cooked and distributed to the poor in its cooked form. The uḍḥiyyah, by contrast, must be distributed as raw meat. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Which is more excellent for a woman: to pray in the mosque or in her house?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.

Our Master the Prophet ﷺ said: 'It is more excellent for a woman to pray in her house than in her courtyard, and more excellent for her to pray in her private chamber than in her house.' Therefore, a woman’s adherence to her home and her refraining from going to the mosques—in obedience to the command of Allah the Exalted—attains a great reward and abundant recompense. Furthermore, women praying in congregation within their homes is better than their attendance at the mosques, based on the aforementioned Hadith. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

A pregnant woman has iron deficiency. When she showers, she becomes very tired and feels cold. What is the ruling on tayammum in this situation?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.

One should not resort to tayammum (dry ablution) as a substitute for the obligatory ghusl (ritual bathing) so long as it remains possible to use water — for example, by heating the water, warming the place where the bathing takes place, or taking other similar precautions. However, if such measures prove ineffective, or are simply not possible to carry out, and performing ghusl [with cold water] would result in severe harm, then tayammum becomes permissible in that case, due to genuine inability to use water on account of the harm that would result, as described in the question. That said, she must make up (qaḍā') the prayers she performed using this tayammum.

It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm: "One should not perform tayammum on account of cold unless warming the limbs fails to remove the aforementioned harm, and no means are available to heat the water — such as a vessel, firewood, or fire — and one fears [that using cold water would result in] any of the harms mentioned earlier in the discussion on illness: danger to life, loss of function in a limb, the onset or worsening of an illness, delayed recovery, or the [visible bodily] blemish mentioned in that discussion on illness. In such a case, tayammum becomes permissible due to the harm involved, but the prayer must still be made up afterward (qaḍā'). If, however, warming the body proves effective, or the means to heat the water are available, or none of the aforementioned harms are feared — then tayammum is not permissible, even if using the water causes some degree of discomfort or pain, since mere discomfort alone does not permit resorting to tayammum." And Allah, the Exalted, 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.