عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(50): "Ruling of Sharia on the Staff Provident Fund of a Shareholding Company"

Date Added : 27-12-2015

Resolution No.(50): "Ruling of Sharia on the Staff Provident Fund of a Shareholding Company"

Date: 2/5/1422 AH, corresponding to 22/7/2001 AD

We have received the following question:

What is the ruling of Sharia on the staff provident fund of a Jordanian shareholding company; and is the staff member subscribing to that fund obliged to pay Zakah in return for his savings in it?

Answer:

The Board is of the view that some of the investments undertaken by the above fund adhere to the rules of Islamic Sharia; whereas, others don`t. Therefore, profits made through lawful methods are equally lawful; whereas, those made from unlawful methods are equally unlawful.

Moreover, since subscribing to the above fund is mandatory, then there is no harm that every staff member subscribes to it because he has to make a living.

However, upon the collection of his claims from the above fund, including the profits, it is mandatory that every staff member investigates where they come from.

Therefore, those, which come from a lawful source of investment, are equally lawful.

Whereas, those which come from an unlawful source of investment are equally unlawful. The latter must be given to charity in order to get rid of the ill-gotten money.

However, if he couldn`t distinguish the lawful from the unlawful while knowing for sure that it is most probable that they include ill-gotten money, he may possess half of these profits on the basis that they are legitimate, and he should give the other half for charity to get rid of the ill-gotten money, unless he thought it is probable to be the other way around.

On the other hand, if he couldn`t tell the lawful from the unlawful while not knowing for sure that it is probable that they include money coming from an unlawful source, he may possess all of the profits as lawful money on the basis that Muslims` transactions are, in principle, valid and they are righteous people.

As regards the rule of Islamic Sharia on the Zakah of the savings of the staff member in that fund as well as that of their profits, the Board is of the view that he is obliged to give their Zakah once they reach Nisab (Minimum amount liable for Zakah) after one lunar year elapses over possessing them, in accordance with the opinion of the Maliki school of jurisprudence on the Zakah of debts. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, the Chief Justice, Sheikh Izuldeen At-tamimi

Dr. Wasif al-Bakhri

           Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi

            Dr. Mohammad Abu Yahia

        Sheikh Sae`id Al-Hijjawi

               Sheikh Mahmood Shewayat

                                             Dr. Yousef Ali Ghyzan Sheikh Nae`im Mujahid 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

My brother works in a conventional bank and gave me one of the gifts distributed to bank employees — what is the ruling on accepting it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There is no objection to accepting such gifts, because the physical gift itself does not carry any inherent prohibition — unlike stolen property. Sin does not transfer or extend to the one who receives the gift, for Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "And no bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another." [Al-Anʿām/164]
The evidence for this is that the Prophet ﷺ himself ate from the food of the Jews, conducted transactions with them, and purchased from them — and it is well known that their wealth was intermingled with ribā. Similarly, the wealth of conventional ribā-based banks is a mixture of the lawful and the unlawful.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is not forbidden to transact with one whose wealth is predominantly unlawful, nor to eat from it — as al-Nawawī affirmed in al-Majmūʿ." [Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj, Vol. 9/P.389] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is Zakah (obligatory charity) due on owned land?

Zakah is due on the land used as an article of merchandise and was originally bought for that end. Zakah is due on it at the end of every lunar year. Its value is estimated, and (2.5%) of the total value of all such lands owned by the questioner is given as Zakah. However, no Zakah is due on the land used for building a house, or an agricultural purpose.

Is it permissible to delay the ritual purification (ghusl) from major impurity (janabah) until after dawn?

Yes, it is permissible to delay ghusl from janabah until after dawn, as purity from janabah is not a condition for the validity of fasting. However, one must perform ghusl in time to pray Fajr within its designated time.

The imam recited a verse containing a prostration of recitation (*sajdat al-tilāwah*) but did not prostrate. After the imam's *salām*, a follower (*maʾmūm*) performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because the imam had not performed the prostration of recitation. Is it permissible to go against the imam in this way?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no sin on the imam if he omits the prostration of recitation (sujūd al-tilāwah), even deliberately. The maʾmūm (the one following the imam) is obliged to follow the imam in the prayer, so if the imam does not perform the prostration of recitation, it is not permissible for the follower to prostrate, because the imam is appointed only to be followed.
If the follower introduces a prostration after the imam’s salām but before his own salām, in a case where there is no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw), his prayer is invalidated if he knew it to be prohibited. Otherwise, he is excused on account of his ignorance and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Imām al-Jamal ʿalā Fatḥ al-Wahhāb: “His statement: ‘So the omission of the hayʾāt (the non-essential sunnahs of the prayer) is not compensated for by prostration; if one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to his ignorance.’”
Since this issue is one that is hidden from the laymen, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laymen are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of this issue is not invalidated, with the necessity of learning the rulings remaining. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More