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to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication.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

What is the ruling on wiping over socks?

It is not permissible to wipe over most common socks today because the conditions for wiping are not met. The concession was reported for wiping over leather socks (khuff) and socks (jowrab) with conditions: They must be thick, not allowing poured water to penetrate, enable one to walk in them, be worn while in a state of purity (from ablution), cover the entire foot up to the ankles (meaning covering the protruding ankle bones), and not be torn. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Can a person required to give kaffarah feed it to their own family members?

The kaffarah must be given to the poor and needy who are not financially dependent on the one giving the kaffarah.
If a person feeds it to their own family members, it does not count as kaffarah, and their obligation remains unfulfilled.

What should someone do if they fasted for only 28 days in their country and then traveled to a place where Eid has already been declared?

If a person fasts in their country and then travels to another country where Eid has been declared, they must celebrate Eid with the people of that country.
● If their total fasts add up to 29 days, nothing is required of them.
● However, if they have only fasted 28 days, they must make up one day after Eid, because an Islamic month cannot be only 28 days.

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.