عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Iftaa` Department and the Irresponsible Media
Author : Prof. Abdulkodos AlKhodah
Date Added : 25-10-2022

Iftaa` Department and the Irresponsible Media

 

Two years ago, a research center in the Islamic Maghreb conducted an opinion poll about the most reliable House of Iftaa` from the point of view of the society. The result was in favor of Jordan`s Iftaa` Department and was commended by the virtuous scholars of that country where they supported this testimony of the people with a scholarly testimony.

I have remembered this at a time we are witnessing non-innocent attempts led by media trumpets, known for their dissatisfaction with virtue and whatever words and deeds reflecting it, to distort the beautiful image of this renowned institution. Their main concern was to offend this religious institution through intentional cherry picking of certain parts of fatwas to incite ridicule. 

The reality of the situation is that ridicule is an old-new tool recorded in the Quran about the people of Noah (What means): "Every time that the chiefs of his people passed by him, they threw ridicule on him". It was also recorded as a systematic approach against the calls for goodness, reform, and wisdom. For these individuals, reform doesn`t suit their agendas and hinders them from practicing their special patterns of living and values which don`t reflect the moderate Islam, its deeply rooted values, its provisions, and etiquettes.

This was also recorded in history when people wanted to reduce the influence of the clergy although this is valid in Christianity but not in Islam. Therefore, pokers and comic writers came to the front and highlighted the image of the clergy in a form that provoked laughter. In western societies, this was the first effective step to get rid of some religious values standing in the way of individual life in its current form.

Here, it is necessary to show that severing parts of a Fatwa to present it in a funny form undoubtedly falls under ridiculing religion, which, as we all know, poses danger to faith. 

On the other hand, attempting to defame a renowned, national, religious institution is an unfair rivalry because this institution is respected on the domestic and international levels, known for its credibility, wise leadership, dedicated and qualified staff. It has acquired reputation for organizing and issuing fatwas. This Department has opted for achieving the best interest of this country through propagating moderate Islam and responsible freedom.

The antagonists of this institution failed to notice that their attitude encourages what is called "The Chaos of Fatwas" which almost caused national disasters in different situations leading to undermining the social fabric and the economic dimensions. Will there be affirm stand against these childish acts?! 

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]




Comments


Captcha


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 is the ruling on waiving a debt owed by a debtor and counting it toward zakāh?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Waiving a debt owed by a debtor, with the intention of counting it toward zakāh, does not fulfill the zakāh obligation. Rather, it constitutes an ordinary act of charity, for which Allah rewards the giver generously — since one of the conditions for the validity of zakāh is that the person paying it must form the intention of zakāh at the actual moment the wealth is paid out. In this case, the debt has already been established as a standing obligation upon the borrower, so it is not valid to simply redirect the intention toward zakāh after the fact.
It is preferable, instead, for the creditor to first collect the debt from the debtor, and then return to him the amount of money he is required to pay as zakāh — or a portion of it — if the debtor happens to fall under one of the eight categories that Allah, the Exalted, has commanded be given from zakāh.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone gives [money] to a poor person, stipulating that the recipient return it to him in payment of a debt owed to him, or says, 'I am making what you owe me into zakāh, so take it [as such]' — this is not valid. But if he gives it to him with the [unstated] intention that the recipient will use it to repay him, or says, 'Repay what you owe me, so that I may [then separately] give it to you as zakāh,' or the debtor himself says, 'Give it to me, so that I may [then] repay you with it' — this is valid, and there is no binding obligation for the recipient to actually fulfill this [informal understanding]." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it permissible to pay the Zakah (obligatory charity) for settling the debt of a deceased relative?

It is impermissible to pay the Zakah for settling the debt of the deceased since Zakah is paid to eligible recipients who are alive. As for the debts of the deceased, they are to be settled from the estate before dividing it amongst the heirs, but if the deceased didn`t leave an estate, then it is desirable for his/her heirs to settle those debts if they can afford them. And Allah 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.

Is it permissible for the children of a deceased father to settle his debt from the Zakah (obligatory charity) money due on them?

It is impermissible to use the Zakah of one`s money for settling the debts of the deceased. However, children should settle the debts of their deceased parents out of filial piety. And Allah Knows Best.

See More