Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(16): “Inheriting on Basis of Wala (Allegiance) and Manumission“

Date Added : 02-11-2015

Resolution No.(16) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:
“Inheriting on Basis of Wala (Allegiance) and Manumission“
Date: 29/1/1411 AH, 20/8/1990 AD

 

We have received the following question: 
Mr. (Q) died this year in Makkah. His father Mr. (P) was a manumitted slave of Mr. (Y). Mr. (P) who had an heir (D) died without leaving him any estate. What is the ruling of Sharia on (D), does he remain manumitted like his father, or does he become free by the manumission of his father?
Mr. (Q) has died leaving a wife, a bequest, a debt, movable and immovable property in banks and companies...etc. His sole heir was his wife since he had no paternal relatives. Are the heirs of Mr. (Y) eligible to receive any share from the estate of Mr. (P) If yes, then to whom. The question that arises here is: who inherits Mr. (Q), and how should his estate be distributed after his debts are settled and his bequest is executed in charitable causes?
Answer: All success is due to Allah.
In this case, Mr. (Y) isn`t entitled to receive anything from the estate of Mr. (P). However, Mr. (Q`s) wife`s share is a quarter, and the rest of the estate is given to the public treasury because Mr. (P`s) mother is originally a free woman. This is based on what was stated in the books of jurisprudence: {Moghni Al-Mohtajj} and {Ash-sharh Al-Kabeer}; in volume (7), (P243) , in addition to another page of the latter book (247), that reads as follow: “One whom any of his free parents was originally free isn`t bound to pledge allegiance to anyone“. 
According to the articles of the Jordanian Law in force: “Mr. (Q`s) wife shall receive a quarter of his estate according to Islamic Sharia, and she shall also take the rest of his estate because she is his sole heir. This is stipulated in article (181) of the Jordanian Civil Status Law, which states that the rest of the estate shall be received by one of the spouses in case one of them died while having no paternal relatives.“ And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Mohammad Mohailaan
The Grand Mufti of Jordan, Izz Ad-Deen At-Tamimi
Dr. Yaseen Dradkeh
Dr. Ahmad Hilayel
Dr. Ibrahim Zaid Al-Khaylani

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on the Friday bath (ghusl al-Jumu'ah)?

The Friday bath is a confirmed Sunnah, based on the Prophet's (peace be upon him) saying: "Whoever performs ablution on Friday, it is good for him, and whoever takes a bath, bathing is better." (Reported by Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi who said it is a hasan hadith). It is recommended for everyone who wants to attend the Friday prayer, even if they are not from its usual attendees, like a woman or a boy.
If a person is in a state of major impurity (junub) and intends by his bath both lifting the major impurity and the Friday bath, he achieves both. If he intends only one of them, he achieves only what he intended. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, 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.

I have a brother who is harsh in his dealings [with me], and many problems have occurred between us, and I do not intend to reconcile with him. What is the ruling of Islamic Law on that?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is not permissible for a Muslim to abandon or boycott his fellow Muslim brother for more than three days. This is based on the saying of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him: "It is not lawful for a Muslim to forsake his brother for more than three [days], meeting each other but one turns away and the other turns away, and the better of the two is the one who initiates the greeting (salam)." (Reported by al-Bukhari.)
A Muslim must strive to end such estrangement (hajr), so as not to fall under the prohibition mentioned in the hadith. If he takes the initiative to reconcile but the other party does not respond, then there is no sin upon him. We remind [ourselves] of the saying of Allah, the Exalted: "And let them pardon and overlook. Do you not wish that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." (An-Nur/22). And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.