عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(318): "Ruling when the Donor Stipulates Replacing the Waqf with another"

Date Added : 08-01-2023

Resolution No. (318), By The Board of Iftaa, Researches and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling when the Donor Stipulates Replacing the Waqf with another"

Date: (21 Jumada al-Ula, 1444 AH), corresponding to (15/12/2022 AD).

 

 

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 its fifteenth meeting held on the above date, the Board of Iftaa` reviewed the letter sent from His Excellency the Minister of Awqaf and Islamic affairs Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh. It read as follows:

According to the Waqf deed presented by Mrs. X, she stipulated selling her endowed flat and building a mosque instead. A copy of this deed No.(1/93/5) (5/12/2006) issued by the Sharia Court of Shmesani area has been attached.

From an Islamic perspective, is the condition of this donor considered valid?

After deliberating, the Board decided what follows:

If the endower stipulated replacing the Waqf (Religious endowment) with another, through buying, selling or direct replacement, then this is approved on the level of fatwa and the judiciary based on the view of the Hanafi jurists who said that in such case the condition of the endower is considerable. It was mentioned in [Al-Fatawa Al-Hindiyah] and other Hanafi books: "If the endower said: "This land of mine is a Waqf for charity till the Day of Judgment provided that it is allowed for me to replace it with something else. It is considered a Waqf out of Istihsan (Application of discretion in legal matters) if the second Waqf was bought with the same price of the first. This view was also given in the book [Moheet Al-Sarkhasi]. Moreover, the second Waqf takes the same conditions of the first and there is no need to renew the conditions of the Waqf in the first place. This was also mentioned in [Fatawa Khadi Khan]. In addition, if the endower stipulated replacing the Waqf with another but didn`t specify that the latter should be a piece of land or a house and sold the first Waqf, then he/she is allowed to replace it with a Waqf of the same kind; a land  or a house. Similarly, if the donor didn`t specify a country, then the replacement may take place in the country of his choice. This view was mentioned in [Al-Kholasah]: "If the endower said that he/she should replace the Waqf with a house, then he/she isn`t allowed to replace it with a piece of land and vice-versa."

In conclusion, the Iftaa` Board is of the view that it is permissible to fulfill the condition of the endower, sell the abovementioned flat for the highest price, then use that amount to build a mosque instead. And Allah The Almighty Knows Best.

 

Grand Mufti of Jordan, Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Prof. Mahmoud Al-Sartawi/ Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Hijjawi/ Member

Prof. Amjad Rasheed/ Member

Prof. Adam Nooh Al-Qhodah/ Member

Dr. Jameel Khatatbeh/ Member

Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Younes al-Zou`bi/ Member

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on purchasing sacrificial animals and authorizing their slaughter via telephone?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is preferable for the one offering a sacrifice (udhiyah) to slaughter the animal himself, in adherence to the Sunnah, or to be present at the slaughter if possible.
 
It is valid to authorize a butcher to purchase a sacrificial animal on his behalf and slaughter it, regardless of whether the animal is owned by the butcher or the butcher is acting as an agent in its sale—according to the Hanbali school—provided that the butcher specifically designates and purchases the animal for the person offering the sacrifice before slaughtering it. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the correct point at which to raise the hands when standing up for the third rak‘ah (after the middle tashahhud)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Raising the hands while saying the takbīr [when rising for the third rak‘ah] is a recommended sunnah, and omitting it does not affect the validity of the prayer. The proper time for this is after rising from the middle tashahhud, once one has fully stood up.
It is stated in I‘ānat aṭ-Ṭālibīn (Vol.1/P.158): "His statement, 'and rising from the first tashahhud' — meaning, this manner [of raising the hands] is also a sunnah when he rises from the first tashahhud, that is, when he stands upright from it.
Consider [the question]: when precisely does the raising of the hands begin? Is it at the very start of rising from the first tashahhud, or after he has reached the minimum position of rukū‘ [i.e., once fully upright]? The apparent, [correct] view is the latter — even though the outward wording [of the text] might suggest the former — because at the very start of his rising, he is still relying on both hands [to push himself up, and therefore cannot yet raise them]."
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik (p. 53): "If his prayer extends beyond two rak‘ahs, he sits after them in the iftirāsh position, recites the tashahhud, and sends blessings upon the Prophet ﷺ alone, without [mentioning] his family [at this point]. He then stands while saying the takbīr, supporting himself with his hands; and once he has stood upright, he raises them level with his shoulders." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on performing Tarawih in sets of four rak‘ahs with only one Tasleem?

It is not permissible to combine more than two rak‘ahs with a single Tasleem in Tarawih prayer. Whoever does so, their prayer is invalid. Shaykh al-Islam Imam Muhammad al-Ramli (may Allah have mercy on him) stated: "If a person prays four rak‘ahs of the Tarawih prayer with a single Tasleem, it is not valid if they did so intentionally and with knowledge [of the prohibition]. Otherwise, it becomes an 'absolute voluntary prayer' (nafl mutlaq); because it is contrary to what has been prescribed." [Nihayat al-Muhtaj, Vol.2/P.127].

See More