Articles

Statement regarding the Templeton Award
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 19-06-2023

Statement regarding the Templeton Award

 

Statement regarding His Majesty King Abdullah II`s Winning of the Templeton Award

 

The General Iftaa` Department extends its warmest congratulations to His Majesty King Abdullah Ibn Al Hussein, the Jordanian people and the Arab and Islamic nation over His Majesty's winning of the Templeton World Award. This Award comes in recognition of His Majesty's efforts in bringing about inter-faith harmony, protecting Islamic and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem, and safeguarding religious freedoms.

 

This Award reflects the West’s appreciation and respect for His Majesty’s efforts in accomplishing harmony between Muslims themselves and between Islam and other religions, which reflects the royal intellectual vision that rests on love, peace and harmony amongst all people. His Majesty launched a number of initiatives enhancing the unity of the Muslims, which is a key purpose of Sharia. One of these was "The Amman Message", (9th of November, 2004). This Message paved the road for recognizing Islamic Schools of Thought, called for establishing dialogue and Muslim`s accepting each other and cooperating amongst themselves, rejecting the approach of tagging Muslims with disbelief (Takfir) and shunning them out. The aim is to achieve harmony between fellow Muslims and followers of Islam.

In addition, the initiative “A Common Word” was launched from Amman in 2007 under the patronage of The Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought. It called for peace and coexistence between Muslims and Christians as well as establishing a common platform that rests on love of God, love of neighbor. Under this initiative, periodical meetings are held to activate Muslim-Christian dialogue to achieve harmony between the members of society of different sects and beliefs. 

 

On October 20, 2010, the United Nations adopted the (Interfaith Harmony Week) initiative presented by His Majesty the King, may Allah protect him, so that the first week of February becomes the Interfaith Harmony Week. The aim of this initiative is to provide a focal point through which all individuals of good intentions realize that the common values that they believe in outweigh the points of disagreement, thus forming a strong source of peace and harmony among all people of different ideas and orientations.

His Majesty's winning this Award constitutes respect for the moderate path that Jordan adopts following in the footsteps of His Majesty the King. We call on everyone to follow this approach derived from the verse in which Allah says {what means}: "Invite to your Lord's Way with wisdom and good advice, and debate with them in the most dignified manner."

 

We ask Allah to protect Jordan and the rest of the Muslim countries and that peace and stability prevail all over the world.

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




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

Is it permissible to offer an Udhiyah on behalf of the deceased?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) on behalf of a deceased person is permissible. This is the official position of the Hanbali school (as stated in Kashshaf al-Qina’ by al-Bahuti,Vol.6/P.428) and was also upheld by the prominent Shafi'i scholar Al-’Abbadi (mentioned in Bidayat al-Muhtaj by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah,Vol. 4/P.358). It has likewise been narrated as a valid view among some Maliki and Hanafi scholars.
 
In fact, Imam Abu Dawud dedicated an entire chapter in his Sunan collection entitled, "Chapter on Sacrificing on Behalf of the Deceased." In it, he recorded a narration from Hanash, who said: "I saw 'Ali sacrificing two rams, so I asked him, 'What is this?' He replied, 'The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded me to offer a sacrifice on his behalf, so I am sacrificing on his behalf.'"
 
Imam Abu Dawud also narrated from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "O Allah, this is from You, for You, and on behalf of Muhammad and his Ummah (community). In the Name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest," and he then slaughtered the animal.
 
The textual evidence here lies in the fact that our Master, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), offered a sacrifice on behalf of his entire community—and it is well-established that his community includes those who have already passed away.
 
Furthermore, there is an abundance of sacred texts demonstrating that the rewards of righteous deeds reach the deceased. For instance, it is permissible to fast on behalf of a deceased person who passed away with missed obligatory fasts, and it is equally permissible to perform Hajj on their behalf, both of which are firmly established in authentic Hadiths. Therefore, if the reward of fasting (which is a purely physical act of worship) and Hajj (which is a joint physical and financial act of worship) can reach the deceased, then the reward of an Udhiyah reaches them with greater reason (by way of A Fortiori argument). This is because it is a purely financial act of worship, falling under the general category of charity (Sadaqah).
 
Additionally, scholars have reached a consensus (Ijma') that the rewards of charity reach the deceased, and since the Udhiyah is inherently an act of charity, it falls under the same ruling. Consequently, based on all the aforementioned evidence, we hold the view that offering a sacrifice on behalf of the deceased is entirely permissible. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

Is a person who forgot to make up missed fasts until the next Ramadan began required to pay expiatory compensation (Fidyah) alongside the makeup fast (Qada')?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Whoever forgets to make up missed fasts of Ramadan (Qada') until the following Ramadan begins incurs no sin, pursuant to the statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): "Indeed, Allah has pardoned for my nation their mistakes, their forgetfulness, and that which they are coerced into doing." [Narrated by Ibn Majah, and Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Sunan Al-Kubra]
 
Furthermore, such an individual is not obligated to pay a expiatory compensation (Fidyah). It is stated in Bushra Al-Karim (p. 580)—one of the authoritative Shafi'i jurisprudential texts: "As for delaying it [the makeup fasts] due to a valid excuse—such as travel, breastfeeding, forgetfulness, or ignorance of the prohibition of delay (even for one living among scholars)—no Fidyah is required. This is because delaying performance during the actual month is permissible due to these excuses; hence, delaying makeup fasts is even more permissible, even if it continues for years."
And Allah Almighty knows best.

Where should a woman following her husband or another man in prayer stand?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If a single woman prays with a man—whether she is his wife or a non-mahram (Ajnabiyyah)—the Sunnah is for her to stand behind the Imam and be shielded by him. If the Imam is leading both a man and a woman, the man should stand to the Imam's right, and the woman should stand behind the male follower (Muqtadi). In this way, she is shielded from the Imam by the male follower and remains at a distance from the follower and his line of sight. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

Is it permissible for a guardian (Big brother) to unlawfully stop his sister from getting married?

If the guardian denies her right in getting married for an unlawful reason, she should go to court in order to settle that matter, and the guardian is considered sinful in this case.