Announcement of the Passing of the Esteemed Sheikh Kamel Khatatbeh

| | عربي

Home

Articles

Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible to combine Zuhr and Asr prayers for being occupied with a wedding ceremony?

No, it isn`t permissible to combine Zuhr and Asr, or Maghrib and Isha because of being busy with a wedding since the exemption for combining prayers is based on lawful excuses, and this isn`t one of them. And Allah Knows Best.

Is it obligatory to make up all missed prayers?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.

Making up missed prayers (qaḍāʾ) is a sharʿī obligation, established by the practice of the Prophet ﷺ himself — when the disbelievers preoccupied him on the Day of the Trench and he missed the ʿAṣr prayer, he made it up afterward. This is further affirmed by the ḥadīth: "Fulfil what you owe to Allah, for Allah is most deserving of being fulfilled." (Reported by al-Bukhārī.)

Accordingly, a person who has missed prayers should set aside his voluntary and Sunnah prayers and replace them with make-up prayers in their stead. There is no objection to making up one missed prayer alongside each obligatory prayer that is performed — praying the equivalent missed prayer together with each current obligatory prayer as a practical and manageable way of gradually clearing one's debt of missed prayers. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

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 rewarded for refraining from all that breaks their fast when required to do so, and is it considered a valid fast?

If a person eats or drinks thinking that Fajr has not yet arrived, but then someone informs them that Fajr had already begun, they must refrain from eating for the rest of the day and make up the fast later.

If they observe the required restraint (imsak), they will be rewarded for obeying the command because fulfilling an obligation brings reward.

However, this is not considered a valid fast in terms of rulings. For example:

● It is not disliked (makruh) for them to use a miswak after noon.

● They are not encouraged to hasten the breaking of the fast at sunset.

● Other fasting-related rulings do not apply to them.

Send Your Question

Zakaat Account

Articles

Announcement of the Passing of the Esteemed Sheikh Kamel Khatatbeh

Author : The General Iftaa` Department

Date Added : 28-08-2023

Announcement of the Passing of the Esteemed Sheikh Kamel Khatatbeh

The General Iftaa Department, represented by His Eminence the Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdulkarim Al-Khasawneh, and His Excellency the Secretary-General Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalaileh, along with the esteemed Muftis, researchers, and administrators, mourn the passing of the honorable Sheikh Kamel Khatatbeh, the Mufti of Ajloun Governorate. They extend their deepest condolences to the Khatatbeh clan in general and to the family of the deceased in particular. They pray to Allah Almighty to replace the deceased with a better abode than his, a better family than his, better neighbors than his, and to grant him a place in His spacious gardens.

Indeed, to Allah we belong and to Him we shall return.

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author

• The General Iftaa` Department Commends the Decisive Security Operation: Jordan is Impervious to Terrorism and Terrorists

• Rabī‘ al-Awwal: The Month of the Prophetic Sīrah and the Season of Emulating the Loftiest Example

• The Obligation to Honor the Prophetic Station and to Uphold Complete Etiquette toward His Noble Rank

• An Official Statement from the General Iftaa' Department

• Regarding Women Driving Cars

• Dr. Zaid Ibrahim Al-Kilani Appointed as the Secretary-General of the General Iftaa` Department

• Launching the General Iftaa Department's Channel on Whatsapp

• A Royal Decree Appoints Hasanat as Grand Mufti

• Caution and Verification are behind the Delay in Issuing Fatwa

• Statement from the Iftaa` Department regarding Tarawih Prayer

>>> 1 2 3 4 5 <<<

Comments

Name

E. mail Address

Country

Comment Title

Comment

Enter the number shown on the image

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

There are olive trees within the precincts of the mosque, and my father covers the costs of electricity, water, and other needs of the mosque. Is it permissible for him to take the olive harvest?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

If trees and fruit-bearing crops are planted in a mosque for the mosque itself, they may only be spent on the mosque’s interests. If they were planted for the public way (musabbalah), that is, for the general public, then any Muslim who enters the mosque may eat from them. If the planter’s intention is unknown, they are treated like those dedicated for public use, wherever custom has so run.

It is stated in Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/p.295): “The fruit of a tree planted for the mosque within it is not freely permitted without compensation. Rather, the imam spends its equivalent value on the mosque’s interests. The tree left its planter’s ownership here without any verbal declaration because of the evident indication. The case of planting it for the mosque excludes planting it as musabbalah, in which case eating from it without compensation is permissible, and likewise if his intention is unknown, where custom has so run. The tree may be uprooted from the mosque if the imam sees fit. Indeed, if he makes the plot a mosque while a tree stands in it, the imam may uproot it, even if the endower included it within the endowment (waqf).”

The father is a donor (mutabarriʿ), so he is not entitled to take anything in return for his donation to the mosque.

The Ministry of Awqāf is the body that supervises the affairs of endowments, so it must be consulted and the Sharīʿah and administrative instructions regulating such matters must be considered. And Allah Almighty knows best.

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.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on speaking with one's fiancée (before the marriage contract) by telephone and WhatsApp?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

Before the marriage contract, the two engaged persons remain non-mahram (strangers) to one another. Reciting al-Fātiḥah, receiving some money on account of the dowry (mahr), or accepting a gift are all merely a promise of marriage and not a valid contract under the Sharīʿah.

It is therefore forbidden for the engaged couple, before the marriage contract is concluded, to be alone together (khalwah) or to shake hands. It is likewise forbidden to speak by telephone or correspond without need. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is a person who is in a state of Janabah (major ritual impurity due to having a marital intercourse, ejaculation, menstruation, and post-delivery impurities) sinful if he/she goes about his/her daily life activities in that state i.e. without making Ghusl (ritual bath)?

It goes without saying that a Muslim should always be in a state of ritual purity so as to be able to perform prayers and recite Quran. It is from Sunnah (Prophetic tradition) that a Muslim hastens to make Ghusl from Janabah, but he/she is not sinful in case he/she delayed that provided that he/she doesn`t miss prayers. However, it is permissible for him/her to go about their daily activities while in a state of Janabah, but had better bathe in order not to miss any prayer.