عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(104): “Ruling on the Medical Insurance of those Working for the American Jordanian Company for Apparel (Jordache)“

Date Added : 28-10-2015

 

Resolution No.(104) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

“Ruling on the Medical Insurance of those Working for the American Jordanian Company for Apparel (Jordache)“

Date: 5/4/1427 AH, corresponding to 3/5/2006 AD.

 

 

 

 

Question:

What is the Sharia ruling as regards the medical insurance of the workers of the American Jordanian Company for Apparel (Jordache) at the general clinics?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

The Board is of the view that medical insurance is a branch of cooperative insurance, which is considered from the bare contracts. This contract isn`t affected by the contributors` ignorance as regards its benefit to them because they are contributors. Moreover, it isn`t risky, usurious or aleatory. 

Taking the above medical insurance into consideration, we realize that it takes the same ruling as cooperative insurance, which is an insurance with an institution that cares about workers, and isn`t a traditional insurance company. However, the Board recommends adjusting the maximum of age: (until  fifty) to become (as long as he works for the company).

The Board also recommends deleting article (14) of the draft agreement so as for the medical insurance to become effective through that institution`s commitment to cover the workers medical care during the period assigned in the draft. Based on that, the medical insurance included in the future draft agreement becomes permissible from the view point of Sharia. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

Iftaa` Board

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

Dr. AbdulMajeed Al-Salaheen

Dr. Abdukareem Al-Khasawneh

Dr. Yousef Ghyzaan

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri

Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi

Sheikh Nae`im Mujahid

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

"If the fidyah becomes obligatory upon a pregnant or nursing woman because she broke her fast out of fear for her child, is it obligatory from her own wealth, or from her husband's wealth?"

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The fidyah (ransom/compensation payment for breaking the fast) is obligatory from the wife's own wealth, and is not obligatory upon the husband unless he voluntarily chooses to pay it on her behalf.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/P.174): "If the two [the pregnant woman and the nursing mother] fear for the child alone — such as a pregnant woman fearing miscarriage, or a nursing mother fearing that her milk supply would decrease, thereby endangering the child — then both the qaḍā' (making up the missed fast) and the fidyah become obligatory upon them, to be paid from their own wealth." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What does (Whoever fasts Ramadan with faith and seeking reward) mean?

This phrase is part of a hadith in which the Prophet ﷺ said:
"Whoever fasts Ramadan with faith and seeks his reward from Allah, their past sins will be forgiven." [Agreed upon]
The meaning is:
● They fast Ramadan with firm belief that Allah has made it obligatory.
● They fast out of obedience to Allah, knowing they will meet Him.
● They hope for reward from Allah and fast purely out of their faith while seeking His reward.

Is it permissible to give to the poor from among the People of the Book from the Udhiyah?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to give to the poor among the People of the Book from a voluntary sacrifice (uḍḥiyyat taṭawwuʿ), just as it is permissible to give charity (ṣadaqah) to them. This opinion is a view (wajh) within the Shāfiʿī school, which was favored by al-Muḥibb al-Ṭabarī and Imam al-Nawawī. [See: Ḥāshiyat Ibn Qāsim al-ʿAbbādī ʿalā Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.9/P.365)]. And Allah Almighty 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.

See More