عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(221): "The Prize Resulting from Transferring the Maid`s Salary is hers, not her Employer`s"

Date Added : 23-02-2016

Resolution No.(221) (3/2016) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"The Prize Resulting from Transferring the Maid`s Salary is hers, not her Employer`s"

Date: 8/Jumada 1/ 1437, corresponding to 17/2/2016 AD.

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

During its second session held on the above date, the Board reviewed a question that read as follows:

I transfer my maid`s salary, to her family, through an exchange office which holds a prize draw on such transfers. Do I have the right to collect the won prize or is it my maid`s, taking into consideration that I pay for the transfer fees?

After deliberating, the Board decided what follows:

The salaries of the above employer`s maid, which he transfers to her family, are a debt on him. Legal scholars define debt as "A rightful obligation due on a person", and this includes any confirmed obligation incurred by a loan, a sale/transaction, an Ijarah (hiring) or else.

The above salaries is a debt, on you, possessed by your maid, in return for her work at your house, and she is permitted to dispose of it as she likes, including appointing you as her proxy with that money. Legal scholars have permitted  authorizing  the person,  on whom one`s debt is due, to dispose of that debt the way they ask him to.

For instance; the proxy in this regard is permissible as stated by scholars; whereas Ashrbini stated: "If he/she authorized their employer to buy them an item in return for their debt, due on him, and he did, then that is permissible according  to the more famous of the two opinions that validate proxy purchase." [Al-Mughni, vol3/pp.236].

In conclusion, the above money is possessed by the maid, and her employer functions as her proxy in transferring it to her family abroad; therefore, the loss or profit incurred by that proxy contract is hers, so the prize is hers as well; because it has resulted from her authorizing him. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, The Grand Mufti of Jordan, Sheikh Abdulkareem Alkhasawneh

Vice Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Prof. Ahmad Hilayel

Dr. Hayel Abdulhafeez/ Member

Prof. Abdulnnasir Abulbasal/ Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Hijjawi/ Member

Dr. Yahia Albotoosh/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Alessa/ Member

Dr. Khalid Alworaikat/ Member

Prof. Abdullah AlFawaaz/ Member

Dr. Mohammad AlKhalayleh/ Member

Dr. Mohammad AlZou`bi/ Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

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.

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.

What is the ruling on reciting the Chapter after Al-Faatihah , and what should a worshiper who forgets it do?

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds.                                                                                                                                                                  Any other part of Qur'an that a worshiper reads after Al-Faatihah during the first and the second Rak`ahs is a Sunnah, and forgetting to do so doesn`t nullify prayer, and doesn`t require performing Sujood As-Sahw (prostration of forgetfulness). And Allah Knows Best.

Does the Obligatory Ritual Bath (Ghusl) Suffice in Place of Ablution (Wuḍūʾ)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The more prudent course is to perform ablution (wuḍūʾ) after the ritual bath (ghusl), so as to exit the difference of scholarly opinion and because the sufficiency of the ritual bath in place of ablution is contingent upon a number of conditions and requirements being met. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More