عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(75): “Ruling on the System Applied by the Housing Fund of Jordan Phosphate Mines Company“

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(75): “System Applied by the Housing Fund of Jordan Phosphate Mines Company“

Date: 22/3/1425, corresponding to 12/5/2004 AD.

 

The Board received the following question:

What is the ruling of Islamic Sharia on the system applied by the housing fund of JPMC?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

The Board is of the following view:

1- Loans granted by the above fund entail usurious interests as indicated in articles (9, 15, 16, 17, and 18) and this violates the rules of Sharia pertaining to the prohibition of usurious loans, for Allah Says in this regard: “but God hath permitted trade and forbidden usury.” {Al-Baqarah/2}.

2- Deducting (500fils) from the salary of every subscribing employee as a contribution for social solidarity is permissible according to Islamic Sharia, because it is based on cooperation which is promoted by Islam. Allah The Exalted Says in this regard {What means}: “Help ye one another in righteousness and piety, but help ye not one another in sin and rancour: fear Allah, for Allah is strict in punishment.” {Al-Mai`dah/2}.

3- Deducting (0, 0015) annually from the value of the loan (as an allowance for services provided by the fund and for social solidarity) isn`t permissible in Islamic Sharia because there lies the reason behind the prohibition of usury. However, it is permissible to deduct a specific, reasonable and fixed sum in return for administrative services of each loan, regardless of its amount and repayment span since the effort involved is the same. Nonetheless, there should be no mixing between the sum charged in return for administrative services and that charged for social solidarity.

4- Housing and life insurance of subscribers isn`t permissible in Sharia because it involves usury and gambling, which are classified as contracts of uncertainty and compulsion. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzaldeen At-Tamimi
Dr. Ahmad Hilayel
Dr. Yousef Ghyzaan
Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi
Dr. Wasif Abdulwahaab
Sheikh Saeid Hijjawi
Dr. Mohammad Abu Yahia
Sheikh Nai`em Mujahid
Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

 

 

 

 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Should a prayer performer who forgets to offer the middle Tashahod (saying ash-hadu anala ilaha ila-alah) offer Sujood As-Sahw (prostration of forgetfulness)?

He/she should offer two prostrations of forgetfulness at the end of the prayer. And Allah Knows Best.

Does the intention (niyyah) of the principal (muwakkil) suffice for the sacrifice (dhabḥ) of the udhiyyah?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person appoints an agent (wakīl) to perform the slaughter (dhabḥ) on their behalf, the intention (niyyah) of the principal (the one appointing the agent) suffices, and there is no need for the agent to have this intention himself. In fact, even if the agent is unaware that he is performing the sacrifice on someone's behalf as an udhiyyah (sacrificial offering), this does not affect its validity. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

Does using a respiratory device (oxygen) affect the validity of fasting?

Using an oxygen device does not affect the validity of fasting because oxygen is a gas with no physical substance.
However, if medicinal substances with physical particles are added to the oxygen, its use would break the fast, as it enters the body cavity through a natural passage.

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.

See More