Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(25): "Ruling on the Mechanism of the Jordan Phosphate Mines Company Employees' Saving Fund"

Date Added : 07-12-2015

 

Resolution No.(25) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies: "Ruling on the Mechanism of the Jordan Phosphate Mines Company Employees' Saving Fund"

Date: 16/4/1413 AH, corresponding to 13/10/1992 AD.

We have received the following question: 
What is the ruling of Islamic Sharia on the Mechanism of the Jordan Phosphate Mines Company employees` saving fund?

Answer: All of Success is Due to Allah:
Sums that an employee takes from his salary, deductions from his pay, and equal sums paid by his company are all Halal (legal).
As regards profits, they are classified as follows: 
Profits that come from a Halal investment are Halal, such as: Company`s stocks and funds deposited in Islamic banks; whereas, those which come from a Haram (illegal) investment are Haram, such as: interests taken from non-Islamic banks and profits of companies that deal in Haram transactions.
In order for an employee to be on the safe side, he should seek the assistance of the financial officers and see what they think is most probable to be Halal money.
On the other hand, the Board is of the view that the illegal profits should be given to the poor and needy, even if they were his relatives whom he isn`t obliged to provide for and he is financially capable. This is because it isn`t permissible that he benefits from that illegal money directly or indirectly. Moreover, that money should also be spent on public projects.
The Board warns that in principle the mechanisms employed by such saving funds must comply with the rules of Sharia. And Allah Knows Best.

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, The Grand Mufti of Jordan, Dr. Nooh Al-Qhodaat

     Sheikh Sa`eid Hijjawi

Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi

     Mohammad Shewayat

   Dr. Yaseen Daradkeh

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on water that contains ornamental fish — does it become impure on account of their waste?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The water in a pond containing ornamental fish is pure so long as it has not been altered, for a small amount of fish waste (rawth) is pardoned and overlooked — provided it does not change the water.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Jamal ʿalā Sharḥ al-Manhaj (Vol.1/P.178): "A small amount of hair from a non-edible animal is pardoned, as is a small amount of hair from a riding animal — on account of the hardship involved in avoiding it — and likewise a small amount of fish waste is pardoned, unless it alters the water." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible to offer an Udhiyah on behalf of the deceased?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) on behalf of a deceased person is permissible. This is the official position of the Hanbali school (as stated in Kashshaf al-Qina’ by al-Bahuti,Vol.6/P.428) and was also upheld by the prominent Shafi'i scholar Al-’Abbadi (mentioned in Bidayat al-Muhtaj by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah,Vol. 4/P.358). It has likewise been narrated as a valid view among some Maliki and Hanafi scholars.
 
In fact, Imam Abu Dawud dedicated an entire chapter in his Sunan collection entitled, "Chapter on Sacrificing on Behalf of the Deceased." In it, he recorded a narration from Hanash, who said: "I saw 'Ali sacrificing two rams, so I asked him, 'What is this?' He replied, 'The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded me to offer a sacrifice on his behalf, so I am sacrificing on his behalf.'"
 
Imam Abu Dawud also narrated from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "O Allah, this is from You, for You, and on behalf of Muhammad and his Ummah (community). In the Name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest," and he then slaughtered the animal.
 
The textual evidence here lies in the fact that our Master, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), offered a sacrifice on behalf of his entire community—and it is well-established that his community includes those who have already passed away.
 
Furthermore, there is an abundance of sacred texts demonstrating that the rewards of righteous deeds reach the deceased. For instance, it is permissible to fast on behalf of a deceased person who passed away with missed obligatory fasts, and it is equally permissible to perform Hajj on their behalf, both of which are firmly established in authentic Hadiths. Therefore, if the reward of fasting (which is a purely physical act of worship) and Hajj (which is a joint physical and financial act of worship) can reach the deceased, then the reward of an Udhiyah reaches them with greater reason (by way of A Fortiori argument). This is because it is a purely financial act of worship, falling under the general category of charity (Sadaqah).
 
Additionally, scholars have reached a consensus (Ijma') that the rewards of charity reach the deceased, and since the Udhiyah is inherently an act of charity, it falls under the same ruling. Consequently, based on all the aforementioned evidence, we hold the view that offering a sacrifice on behalf of the deceased is entirely permissible. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

Is the one who gives up on marriage because he can`t afford it considered sinful?

Marriage is desirable, but one who can`t afford it isn`t considered sinful. However, he should supplicate to Allah, and seek His forgiveness.

What is the ruling on the cessation of blood after (40) days from delivery, but later continued sporadically during two days of Ramadan?

Once postpartum bleeding (Nifas) ceases, and the woman is certain that it won`t reoccur, then she becomes ritually pure and so she is free to make Ghusl (purificatory bath), pray, and fast. If the bleeding reoccurs before fifteen days from its cessation, and before the end of (60) days after delivery, then the ruling on postpartum bleeding is effective, and her fasting and prayer are null and void, thus she must make up the fasting that she missed and not the prayer during those particular days.