Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(85): “Ruling on Exemption from the Rent of an Endowed Estate“

Date Added : 28-10-2015

 

Resolution No.(85) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

“Ruling on Exemption from the Rent of an Endowed Estate“

Date: 26/2/1426 AH, corresponding to 6/4/2005 AD.

 

 

 

 

Question:

What is the ruling of Sharia on the request submitted by the Committee of Mosques and Charitable Projects in which it seeks to be exempted from the rent due on the basement of Abulkasim`s Mosque, which it uses as a rehabilitation centre for the Jordanian young women?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

The Board is of the view that it is impermissible to exempt the above committee from the rent on permanent basis, and it should be recorded annually so as to ascertain the continuity of the endowed estate. However, it is permissible for the Endowments Council, later on, to relieve that committee from the whole rent or part of it since the committee is using that estate for charitable causes which agrees with the vision and message of the Ministry of Endowments. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

 

 

The Board of Iftaa`

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzaldeen At-Tamimi
Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi
Dr. Yousef Ghyzaan
Dr. Abdulkareem Khasawneh
Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri
Sheikh Naei`m Mujahid
Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on a vowed animal sacrifice?

A vowed animal sacrifice is to be distributed amongst the poor and needy, and neither the vow-maker, nor those supported by him are to eat from it.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

Is Zakah (obligatory charity) due on the Zakah money received by a poor person, and reached a Nissab (minimum amount liable for Zakah), and a whole lunar year had lapsed over having it in his possession?

Yes, the poor who possessed a Nissab for a whole lunar year is obliged to pay the Zakah due on that money even if it was given to him as a Zakah money in the first place. And Allah Knows Best.

What is the Islamic ruling on one who was unable to fast and then regained the ability?

 
He is not required to make up the fast (Qada) even if he becomes capable of it; whether he regained the ability to fast after paying the fidya (feeding a needy person for each day of missed fasting) or before it, because he was liable for paying it in the first place, so it remains binding upon him. However, if he delayed paying it beyond the first year, nothing is required of him due to the delay. If he is unable to pay it, it does not remain as a debt upon him. And Allah the Exalted knows best.