الموقع الرئيسي

Articles

A Royal Decree Appoints Hasanat as Grand Mufti
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 06-11-2023

A Royal Decree Appoints Hasanat as Grand Mufti

 

The General Iftaa Department is pleased to extend its warmest congratulations and best wishes to Dr. Ahmad Ibrahim Al-Hasanat on the issuance of the royal decree appointing him as the Grand Mufti of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. We pray to Almighty Allah to grant him success and guidance in his new role.

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to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication.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

My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]
Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. 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.

What is the ruling on praying alone (munfaridan) in a row, and what should I do if I enter the mosque together with another person, and there is only a single gap in the first row with no second row present — should I fill that gap in the first row, or should I stand together with him in a new second row?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a person enters [the congregation] and finds no space available in the row, it is recommended for him — after making his opening takbīr for the prayer — to gently pull someone from the row in front of him to pray alongside him, provided he senses that this person would be agreeable to it. If that person does not agree, then he prays alone, and there is no dislike attached to his doing so in that case.
If he ends up praying alone [behind the row], it is sunnah for him to stand directly behind the imam. Then, if someone else arrives, that person stands to his right; and whoever comes after them stands to his left — and so on — such that the imam remains centered in the middle of the row. This is done so that everyone attains the reward of congregational prayer.
As for the case where two people enter the prayer together, and there is a gap in the row wide enough for only one person, then the two of them should pray together in a new row [of their own], and whoever arrives after them should fill that original gap. This is because if only one of the two fills the gap, the other would end up praying alone [which is to be avoided when it can easily be prevented].
Al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.1/P.494): "If he does not find space, then it is recommended for him, while still standing, to gently pull a single person from the row toward himself after making his opening takbīr — out of caution, so as to avoid the position held by some scholars that a person's prayer standing alone behind the row is not valid.
Az-Zarkashī and others said: this should only be done if it seems he would agree to it; otherwise, he should not pull anyone — indeed, doing so becomes impermissible, out of fear of causing discord (fitnah). It is recommended for the person being pulled to cooperate and agree, so that he may attain the reward of assisting in righteousness and piety (al-birr wat-taqwā). However, he should not pull one of two people [praying together] from the row, since this would cause one of them to end up praying alone. This is why the 'pulling' described here takes place only after the opening takbīr [i.e., once the person doing the pulling has already validly begun his own prayer]."
Accordingly: it is sunnah for you to pray alongside the person praying alone, and then, if someone else arrives afterward, you may go and fill the gap in the original row. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on wudu (ablution) when there is an adhesive substance on the hand that is difficult to remove?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general principle is: if what is applied to the limbs of wudu' (ablution) does not form a barrier substance preventing water from reaching the skin, then the wudu' is valid despite its presence. However, if these substances prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudu' is not valid with their presence, and they must be removed so that water reaches the hair or skin without any barrier.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "If there is wax, dough, henna, or similar substances on some of his limbs [of wudu'], and this prevents water from reaching any part of the limb, then his purification (tahara) is not valid — regardless of whether the amount is much or little. But if there remains on the hand or elsewhere only the trace and color of the henna, without its substance [i.e., the physical residue itself], or the trace of a liquid oil such that the water touches the skin of the limb and flows over it, though it does not remain [as a barrier] — then his purification is valid." [Al-Majmu' , Vol.1/P.529]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.