عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Caution and Verification are behind the Delay in Issuing Fatwa
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 12-07-2023

Caution and Verification are behind the Delay in Issuing Fatwa

 

All perfect praise be to Allah the Lord of The Worlds. May His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

 

In clarification for what was published by the news website "Saraya" under the title: "The Iftaa` Department Delays Issuing a Fatwa Regarding Foods, Believed to be Forbidden, Consumed by Jordanians" the writer wonders about the justifications for the delay in providing an answer to this issue!

Regarding this matter, the General Iftaa` Department clarifies that the delay in providing an answer is not a form of procrastination, as initially stated in the title. Rather, it is following the noble prophetic approach of caution and thoroughness before issuing the Fatwa since Allah will hold the Department accountable for it. The Prophet (PBUH) said: "Deliberateness is from Allah, and haste is from Satan." (Transmitted by At-Tirmidhi).

 

This prophetic approach is the direct reason for controlling the Fatwa and preventing it from deviating towards extremism or leniency, safeguarding it from error and danger. Moreover, it ensures that the Mufti is cleared from liability before Allah on the Day of Judgment, especially in delicate and intricate matters such as the issue of the ingredients used in the food industry.

 

It is an issue related to hundreds of diverse products that affect the lives of all Muslims. Thousands of companies and factories oversee these products, each with its own manufacturing and composition methods. The knowledgeable jurist is the one who distinguishes and contemplates whether a transformative "impossibility" has occurred in the substance's composition, or if mere "consumption and immersion" is sufficient, as some jurists have stated. This has been the subject of decisions by specialized jurisprudential assemblies.

 

This matter requires a great deal of Ijtihad (Independent reasoning) and consideration of advancements in industries and sciences today. Thus, the Iftaa` Department sought the guidance of specialized official institutions, such as the General Organization for Food and Drug Administration, to inquire about similar issues within the scope of this research.

 

However, anyone who believes that a Fatwa is an improvised political statement or a media sound bite has misconceived the principles of Islamic Law, which aims to uphold the interests of individuals and prevent harm from befalling them. May Allah have mercy on the Islamic scholars who have bequeathed to us the humility of saying, "I don't know." They were not driven by shyness or arrogance to withhold knowledge from its rightful owners or delay issuing a Fatwa. As the Prophet (PBUH) said: "Whoever seeks the pleasure of people by displeasing Allah, Allah will be displeased with him, and people will be displeased with him." (Transmitted by Ibn Hibban).

 

We advise the media to not hinder scientific institutions from carrying out their work with caution and excellence, especially the religious institutions responsible for issuing Fatwas and religious knowledge.

 

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

If a traveler settles or a sick person recovers while fasting, is it permissible for them to break their fast?

● If a sick person starts the day fasting and then recovers during the day, they must complete their fast.
● If a traveler starts the day fasting and then settles (returns or stops traveling) during the day, they must also complete their fast.
● It is forbidden for both of them to break their fast because the concession (rukhsah) is no longer valid once its reason disappears.

I vowed to give a specific charity if a certain matter came to pass — what is the ruling on giving that charity before the matter is realised?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Fulfilling a vow (nadhr) is obligatory, in accordance with the word of Allah the Almighty: "And let them fulfil their vows." [Al-Ḥajj/ 29] And the saying of our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: "Whoever vows to obey Allah, let him obey Him; and whoever vows to disobey Him, let him not disobey Him." (Reported by al-Bukhārī.)
The Shāfiʿī scholars distinguished between a financial vow (nadhr mālī) and a bodily vow (nadhr badanī). They permitted the fulfilment of a financial vow to be brought forward — before the stipulated condition is met — but did not permit the same for a bodily vow, which may only be fulfilled after the condition has actually been realised.
Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is permissible to bring forward the fulfilment of a financial vow before the condition stipulated in it is met — such as saying: 'If I am healed, I vow to free a slave' or 'to give such-and-such in charity' — just as it is permissible to pay zakāh in advance. This is unlike a bodily vow, such as fasting." [Asnā al-Maṭālib, vol. 4/P.246]
Imām al-Bājūrī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Like expiation other than fasting, a financial vow — such as saying: 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave for the sake of Allah,' or 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave on the Friday following the recovery' — it is permissible to bring it forward before the recovery in the first case, and before the Friday following the recovery in the second case." [Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā Sharḥ Ibn Qāsim, Vol.2/P.596] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible for one who sacrifices on behalf of another, with the latter's permission, to eat from the sacrifice?

It is permissible for someone who sacrificed on behalf of another with their permission to eat from it with their permission, and they stand in their place (act as their representative) in distributing it.
 
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.8/P.141): "And he—meaning the one sacrificing on his own behalf, provided he has not apostatized—has the right to eat from a voluntary sacrifice and his sacrificial gift; rather, it is recommended. As for an obligatory sacrifice, it is forbidden for him to eat from it, whether it was designated as such initially or as a liability in his dhimmah. And excluded by what has preceded is if he sacrifices on behalf of another, or if he apostatized, then it is not permissible for him to eat from it, just as it is absolutely impermissible to feed a disbeliever from it."(The text I found indicates the impermissibility of eating) ???
 
And it is stated in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (Vol.5/P.262): "If a person offers a sacrifice on behalf of a living person with their permission, does he act as their representative in distributing it—on the grounds that permission to sacrifice is permission to distribute it—or does it depend on their explicit permission? This requires consideration, but the first view is not far-fetched." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

The imam recited a verse containing a prostration of recitation (*sajdat al-tilāwah*) but did not prostrate. After the imam's *salām*, a follower (*maʾmūm*) performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because the imam had not performed the prostration of recitation. Is it permissible to go against the imam in this way?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no sin on the imam if he omits the prostration of recitation (sujūd al-tilāwah), even deliberately. The maʾmūm (the one following the imam) is obliged to follow the imam in the prayer, so if the imam does not perform the prostration of recitation, it is not permissible for the follower to prostrate, because the imam is appointed only to be followed.
If the follower introduces a prostration after the imam’s salām but before his own salām, in a case where there is no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw), his prayer is invalidated if he knew it to be prohibited. Otherwise, he is excused on account of his ignorance and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Imām al-Jamal ʿalā Fatḥ al-Wahhāb: “His statement: ‘So the omission of the hayʾāt (the non-essential sunnahs of the prayer) is not compensated for by prostration; if one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to his ignorance.’”
Since this issue is one that is hidden from the laymen, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laymen are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of this issue is not invalidated, with the necessity of learning the rulings remaining. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More