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.
Is Zakah (obligatory charity) due on leased property, and how is it calculated?
Zakah isn`t due on the leased property itself, but on the saved income from that property if it reached Nissab (minimum amount liable for Zakah), and a whole lunar year had lapsed over saving it.
How is the niṣāb (minimum threshold) of gold calculated when one owns gold of multiple different karats?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Zakāh is obligatory on cash and on gold designated for saving or for trade, provided the total reaches the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for Zakah), and a full ḥawl (lunar year) has elapsed over it. The niṣāb is (85) grams of 24-karat gold; for 21-karat gold, the niṣāb equals (97) grams; and for 18-karat gold, it equals (113) grams.
If one owns gold of multiple different karats, the person paying zakāh should calculate the monetary value of all the gold he owns, combining these values together to determine whether the total reaches the niṣāb. He then pays zakāh on this combined monetary value, once the total reaches the niṣāb. The relied-upon position is to calculate the zakāh based on the buying price [i.e., the price the gold merchant would pay the owner to purchase the gold from him] on the day the zakāh obligation is due. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on obtaining financing from Islamic banks by bringing invoices in prior arrangement with the seller, then taking the cash after the financing is approved — with the purpose of settling debts and buying a car?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It appears from the transaction described that its underlying purpose is to obtain cash through resorting to a legal artifice (ḥīlah/tawarruq-style trick), and it is not permissible to engage in such trickery or to coordinate with the various parties merely to obtain liquidity. This is because such artifices bring the sale closer in reality to a ribā-based (usurious) transaction, even if it outwardly appears otherwise.
The Prophet ﷺ said: "Do not commit what the Jews committed, thereby making lawful what Allah has made unlawful through the flimsiest of tricks." This was related by Ibn Baṭṭah in his book Ibṭāl al-Ḥiyal (p. 47), and many scholars have graded it as ḥasan (sound/acceptable).
We have already explained the impermissibility of engaging in such deceptive dealings with Islamic banks in Fatwa No. 516, so please refer to it. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
