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 someone who possesses cash reaching the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for zakah), and then uses part of it to purchase gold before the ḥawl (lunar year) is complete — must he pay zakāh on all of it [combined], or only on the remaining cash, excluding the gold?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Gold acquired for hoarding and saving is subject to zakāh once it reaches the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for Zakah) — when combined with any cash held — and once a full ḥawl (lunar year) has elapsed over it. The starting point for calculating this ḥawl is the ḥawl of the paper currency [used to purchase it], which had already reached the niṣāb and was then used to purchase the gold.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.78): "As for someone who sells silver in exchange for gold, or vice versa, zakāh remains obligatory upon it, since he builds [the calculation of] its ḥawl upon [the ḥawl established at the time of] the original transaction [i.e., when the wealth was first acquired]."
This has already been explained in detail in Fatwa No. 2670 — please refer to it.
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on someone who combines two prayers as an early combination (jam‘ taqdīm), and then arrives at his place of residence during the time of the second prayer — is he obligated to repeat it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Whoever combines Ẓuhr and ‘Aṣr while traveling — that is, before he has reached the built-up boundaries of his hometown [upon returning] — his combination (jam‘) of the two prayers remains valid, even if he arrives at his place of residence before the time for the second prayer has actually begun. This is because the combination was already validly completed with its proper conditions fulfilled, and he is not obligated to repeat the second prayer [upon arrival].
A traveler is permitted to make use of the concessions of shortening (qaṣr) and combining (jam‘) prayers once the distance of travel reaches (81 km) or more, provided that his journey is a permissible one, and that he begins shortening and combining only after actually setting out on the journey and passing beyond the built-up limits of the city in which he resides. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it permissible to divide a single Sa‘ of Zakat al-Fitr—or its equivalent value in cash—among more than one poor person?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Zakat al-Fitr is estimated at one Sa‘ per person, but the number of people to whom this Sa‘ can be given has not been specified. For this reason, it is permissible to distribute a single Sa‘ among more than one poor person. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

 
What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks while uncertain about the arrival of dawn, then later finds out that dawn had not yet broken?

If a person does this, their fast remains valid, as it is confirmed that they ate during the night. Similarly, if someone eats while uncertain and remains unsure whether they ate before or after dawn, their fast is still valid. This is based on the maxim of Sharia Law, which states: "Certainty is not removed by doubt." Certainty, here, is the presence of night, and the doubt concerns the arrival of dawn. Therefore, one relies on certainty and disregards doubt.

See More