Articles

The Grand Mufti Denies the Invalidity of Divorce during the Curfew
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 03-07-2023

The Grand Mufti Denies the Invalidity of Divorce during the Curfew

 

His Grace the Grand Mufti of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Sheikh Abdul Karim Al-Khasawneh, denied what was mentioned in a message that some people are circulating, which attributes to His Grace the statement that divorce that takes place during the days of curfew is invalid.

 

He said that this claim is false and that divorce cases are handled by the Department`s Muftis during this temporary circumstance and in an exceptional manner to facilitate for the citizens. He added that it is necessary that people involved in such cases visit the Department after this epidemic ends to get a written Fatwa.

 

His Grace warned against circulating such rumors via social media and doing so is typical of the hypocrites and a form of lying and fabricating, which are amongst the major sins. Allah the Almighty says {what means}: " It is those who believe not in the Signs of God, that forge falsehood: it is they who lie!" 

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to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication.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.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on leaving the Sunnah prayer of Dhuhr due to fatigue?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
According to the general rule, a Muslim should strive to maintain the Sunnah prayers before and after the obligatory prayers (al-sunan al-qabliyyah wa al-ba'diyyah). One is permitted to pray them sitting from the outset, but if one leaves them due to severe fatigue, there is no objection to doing so. It is recommended (mustahabb) to make up (qadā') a time-bound supererogatory prayer (nafl mu'aqqat) at any time if it was missed.
Al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "If a time-bound supererogatory prayer is missed, it is recommended to make it up according to the more authoritative view (al-azhar), based on the hadith recorded in the two Ṣaḥīḥs: 'Whoever sleeps through a prayer or forgets it should pray it when he remembers it.' This is also supported by the fact that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) made up the two rak'ahs of Fajr when he and his companions overslept in the valley and missed the dawn prayer until the sun had risen [narrated by Abū Dāwūd with an authentic chain]." And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

If someone delays making up fasts for a year, can they give fidyah before performing qada?

Yes, it is permissible to give fidyah before making up the missed fasts (qada), because each is an independent obligation, and there is no required order between them. 

Is it required to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts?

● It is preferable to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts if they were missed due to a valid excuse.
● However, if the fasts were missed without a valid excuse, then fasting consecutively is obligatory, because making up the missed fasts in this case must be done immediately.
Separating the makeup fasts goes against the obligation of immediacy, but if someone does so, their fasts will still be valid. However, they will be sinful for delaying without a valid reason.