عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(102): "Ruling of Sharia on some Dealings of the American Stores Company""

Date Added : 13-03-2016

 

Resolution No.(102) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies: "Ruling of Sharia on some Dealings of the American Stores Company"

Date: 5/4/1427 A.H, corresponding to 3/5/2006 A.D

 

 

We have received the following question: 

What is the ruling of Sharia concerning the dealings of the American Stores Company (ASC)?

The Company`s dealings are as follows:

The Company may take part in an auction and during the bidding process it may be offered a sum of money in return for withdrawing. Is accepting that offer and taking that money lawful or unlawful?

Moreover, the Company concludes joint indemnity and investment contracts whereby an agreed upon condition sets a certain amount of indemnity e.g. 20% from the overall sales, with a certain minimum stipulated in the contract. Is conditioning a minimum in these contracts lawful or unlawful?

Also, the Company deals with non-Islamic banks, but is currently dealing with the  Jordan Islamic Bank. Is dealing with the latter bank through Islamic Murabaha lawful, taking into consideration that, in essence, the dealing is similar to that carried out with non-Islamic banks?

Would you kindly clarify the position of Sharia on the above so as to adhere to its provisions when dealing with the Islamic banks?

The Board is of the following view:

1- It is forbidden to offer or take any sum in return for withdrawing from a bid because this leads to defrauding people`s goods. Allah, The Almighty, Said (What means): "So give full measure and weight and do not defraud people’s goods." {Al-A`araf/85}. Also, the Prophet (PBUH) said: "There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm." {Ibn Majah}.

2- Having reviewed a sample of the above contracts which the Company concluded with other parties, the Board realized that they don`t adhere to the provisions of Sharia in the following aspects:

The juristic framing of these contracts is that they are Ijarah (Hiring) contracts because one of the parties offers a specific place to the other party in return for a certain wage. What counts in these contracts is their implied meaning, not their phrases and structures.

The wage in an Ijarah contract should be specified, because the Prophet (PBUH) said: "Whoever employs a person should inform him of his wage." In these contracts the wage is not specified. It is either: e.g. 20% from the overall sales or a certain defined sum, and the higher is collected by the company.

Defining the wage as 20% from the overall sales makes it unspecific because both parties are unaware of what will be sold, and this annuls the contract because it becomes an aleatory contract. The Prophet (PBUH) has forbidden aleatory sale. He said: "If anyone makes two transactions combined in one bargain, he should have the lesser of the two or it will involve usury." {Sunan Abu-Dawud}.

In conclusion, dealing with the Jordan Islamic Bank through Islamic Murabaha is lawful so long as the Bank complies with its conditions stipulated in Sharia.

A key condition is that the Bank must purchase the commodity upon the purchaser`s request, collect it, possess it, guarantee it, then sell it to the purchaser because the Prophet (PBUH) told Hakeem Bin Hazim: "If you purchase food, don`t sell it until you collect and take possession of it." {Musnad Ahmad}. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

 

 

 

* Murabaha means selling an object while informing the purchaser of its original price and the profit he is getting in this deal. The conditions of the validity of this sale/transaction are the same as the other sales/transactions, i.e. the sold item itself should be lawful, pure, useful, in the possession of seller, and the seller should be able to hand it over to the purchaser.

 

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzuldeen Attamimi

Dr. Yousef Ghyzan/ Member

Dr. Abdulmajeed Assalaheen/ Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Hijjawi/ Member

Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh/ Member

Dr. Ahmad Hilayel/ Member

Sheikh Nae`im Mujahid/ Member

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakri

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible to eat from an Udhiyah slaughtered on behalf of a deceased person?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to eat from the sacrifice (uḍḥiyyah) that is offered on behalf of a deceased person. This is the madhhab (school of thought) of the Hanbalis. In this case, the heirs take the place of the deceased as if he were alive, with the same rights to eat from it, give it in charity, and offer it as a gift.
 
It is stated in Maṭālib Uli al-Nuhā (Vol.2/P.472): "Offering a sacrifice on behalf of a deceased person is better than offering one on behalf of a living person, because the deceased is unable (to perform deeds) and is in need of reward. It is to be treated like a sacrifice on behalf of a living person in terms of eating, giving charity, and giving gifts." And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on praying behind a disliked Imam?

 

 
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is mildly disliked (Makruh Tanzihan) for a man—other than the permanent designated Imam (Imam Ratib)—to lead people in prayer if the majority of them dislike him due to a religiously blameworthy reason (Amr Madhmum Shar‘an), such as associating with open sinners (Fussaq), for example. As for the followers who dislike him, the prayer behind him is not disliked for them. However, if less than the majority dislike him, or if the majority dislike him for a reason that is not religiously blameworthy, then his leading the prayer is not disliked. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

I bought an apartment, and I am saving money to pay the remaining balance of its price — is zakāh obligatory on this money?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Zakāh is obligatory on all saved/hoarded wealth. Once the total wealth reaches the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for zakah— equivalent to the value of 85 grams of pure 24-karat gold) and a full ḥawl (lunar year) has elapsed over it, zakāh becomes obligatory at a rate of (2.5%) — even if the wealth is earmarked for basic future needs, and even if the wealth's owner is in debt. Debt does not prevent the obligation of zakāh, nor is it deducted when calculating the zakāh due, based on the general and unrestricted wording of all the Qur'anic verses commanding zakāh, which draw no distinction between someone in debt and anyone else.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone possesses exactly the niṣāb, and owes an equivalent amount in debt, zakāh remains obligatory on what is in his possession, and the debt does not prevent this obligation" — meaning, the obligation of zakāh on what is presently in his possession.
The ḥawl (annual cycle) recognized for zakāh, as well as for the other sharī‘ah obligations that Allah, the Exalted, has imposed upon Muslims, is the Hijrī (lunar) year. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on giving the expiation of an oath (Kaffarat al-Yamin) to a charity that feeds the poor?

 

 

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.

It is allowed for a Muslim to appoint a proxy (agent) to distribute the expiation (Kaffarah) on their behalf. Our jurists have explicitly stated the permissibility of delegation (Tawkil) in the distribution of Zakat, Kaffarah, and vows (Nadr).

It is stated in Mughni al-Muhtaj (Vol.3/P.237): 'One has the right to pay the Zakat of their wealth personally... and they also have the right to delegate it.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

See More