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

| | عربي

Home

Articles

Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on a Friday sermon in which the khaṭīb did not explicitly exhort the congregation to be conscious of Allah (taqwā) in both sermons, but sufficed with commanding them to obey Allah and refrain from disobeying Him?

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

For the Friday sermon (khuṭbat al-Jumʿah) to be valid, certain essential pillars (arkān) must be fulfilled. Among these is the exhortation to be conscious of Allah (waṣiyyah bi-taqwā Allāh), which must be present in both sermons. Alongside this pillar, the praising of Allah (ḥamdallah) and the sending of blessings upon the Messenger of Allah ﷺ are equally required.

Shaykh al-Islām Imām Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "These three are pillars in each of the two sermons, because each sermon is independent and separate from the other." [Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj,Vol.4/P.447]

It is not a condition that the exhortation be expressed in any specific wording, nor is it required that the word "taqwā" itself be used — such as saying "I exhort you to be conscious of Allah." Rather, this pillar is fulfilled by any expression that contains a command to obey Allah the Almighty and to abstain from what He has prohibited.

Imām al-Khaṭīb al-Sharbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "The third pillar is the exhortation to taqwā... The specific wording of this exhortation is not required, according to the most correct view, because the purpose is admonition and the urging of obedience to Allah the Almighty. Therefore, any expression that conveys admonition suffices — whether long or short — such as: 'Obey Allah and be ever mindful of Him.'" [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj,Vol.1/P.550]

Accordingly, what the khaṭīb has done — by commanding obedience to Allah and forbidding disobedience to Him in both sermons — is valid and sufficient. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on a fictitious marriage for the purpose of obtaining citizenship?

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

There is no such thing in our noble sharīʿah as a "nominal" or "fictitious" marriage or divorce. Marriage and divorce are among the sacred ordinances of Allah, and it is not permissible to manipulate them or use them as a stratagem to obtain worldly gains.

The foundational purpose of a marriage contract is the permanence and continuity of the relationship between the spouses — to establish a family, and to bring forth righteous offspring. So sacred is this bond that Allah the Almighty Himself described it as a solemn covenant (mīthāq ghalīẓ), saying {what means}: "And if you wish to replace one wife with another and you have given one of them a great amount of wealth, do not take any of it back. Would you take it in injustice and manifest sin? And how could you take it while you have gone in unto each other and they have taken from you a solemn covenant?" [Al-Nisāʾ/ 20–21]

Accordingly, it is not permissible to resort to manipulation and deception in contracts that Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has described as a "solemn covenant" — all for the sake of material and worldly benefit. Marriage is built upon permanence and does not admit of a fixed time limit. If a time limit is stipulated in the contract, the contract is rendered invalid by the consensus of the jurists. Similarly, marriage is impermissible when there exists a mutual, concealed intention to limit its duration — even if no time limit is explicitly mentioned in the contract — for this constitutes a form of unlawful circumvention of the sharīʿah. This is to say nothing of the lying and deception that such conduct involves, the prohibition of which needs no elaboration. Lying, deception, and fraud for the purpose of obtaining worldly gains are among the gravest of sins.

If, however, the marriage contract is first concluded in a valid sharʿī manner and then registered civilly, it is sound and fully valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on applying perfume before entering the state of ihram

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

Applying some perfume (ṭīb) before entering the state of iḥrām does not affect the validity of the Ihram, even if its trace remains after the iḥrām has begun. Indeed, it is sunnah for the pilgrim performing Ḥajj or ʿUmrah to perfume himself before iḥrām.

The scholar Nawawī al-Jāwī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “The third of them is applying perfume to the body shortly before it, that is, before iḥrām, whether the one entering iḥrām is male or otherwise, young or old, married or unmarried. The recommendation applies after performing the ritual bath (ghusl), and it is fulfilled with any perfume whatsoever, though the best is musk, mixed with rose water or the like. There is no objection to the perfume remaining on the body after iḥrām; however, if a woman becomes bound by the mourning observance (iḥdād) after entering iḥrām, she must remove it. As for perfuming the garment, it is merely permissible, not recommended, according to the reliable position (al-muʿtamad). But if one removes his perfumed garment while the scent is still present in it and then wears it again, he is liable for the fidyah (expiation).” [Nihāyat al-Zayn, Vol.1/212]. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is incumbent upon the one offering the sacrifice if, after slaughtering the animal, they discover that one of its internal organs is damaged or diseased?

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

The presence of disease or defect in the internal organs of a sheep does not affect the validity of the sacrificial animal, unless the disease leads to the animal becoming emaciated and its meat becoming corrupted.

It is stated in al-Iqnā' (2/590) by Imam al-Shirbīnī: "The third disqualifying condition: an animal with a manifest illness — meaning one whose illness visibly results in emaciation and corruption of its meat. However, if the illness is minor and does not produce such effects, it doesn`t affect the validity of the sacrificed animal." And Allah Almighty 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

Who is the one required to slaughter the 'aqīqah?

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

It is Sunnah for the 'aqīqah to be slaughtered by the guardian of the newborn — the one upon whom the child's financial maintenance is obligatory — provided he is financially capable of doing so. 'Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib, may Allah be pleased with him, reported: "The Messenger of Allah ﷺ performed the 'aqīqah for al-Ḥasan with one sheep." — Narrated by al-Tirmidhī. And Allah Almighty knows best.

A man insulted the Divine Essence; is it obligatory for him to perform Ghusl?

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

Insulting or blaspheming the Divine Essence (Dhat al-Ilahiyyah) constitutes apostasy (Riddah). The perpetrator of this grave sin must immediately repeat the two testimonies of faith (Shahadah) and sincerely repent to Allah the Exalted. It is recommended (Sunnah) for them to perform a ritual bath (Ghusl), though it is not a mandatory condition [for the validity of their return to Islam]. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?

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

The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]

Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

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

The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.

The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.

Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.