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

What is the ruling on praying alone (munfaridan) in a row, and what should I do if I enter the mosque together with another person, and there is only a single gap in the first row with no second row present — should I fill that gap in the first row, or should I stand together with him in a new second row?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a person enters [the congregation] and finds no space available in the row, it is recommended for him — after making his opening takbīr for the prayer — to gently pull someone from the row in front of him to pray alongside him, provided he senses that this person would be agreeable to it. If that person does not agree, then he prays alone, and there is no dislike attached to his doing so in that case.
If he ends up praying alone [behind the row], it is sunnah for him to stand directly behind the imam. Then, if someone else arrives, that person stands to his right; and whoever comes after them stands to his left — and so on — such that the imam remains centered in the middle of the row. This is done so that everyone attains the reward of congregational prayer.
As for the case where two people enter the prayer together, and there is a gap in the row wide enough for only one person, then the two of them should pray together in a new row [of their own], and whoever arrives after them should fill that original gap. This is because if only one of the two fills the gap, the other would end up praying alone [which is to be avoided when it can easily be prevented].
Al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.1/P.494): "If he does not find space, then it is recommended for him, while still standing, to gently pull a single person from the row toward himself after making his opening takbīr — out of caution, so as to avoid the position held by some scholars that a person's prayer standing alone behind the row is not valid.
Az-Zarkashī and others said: this should only be done if it seems he would agree to it; otherwise, he should not pull anyone — indeed, doing so becomes impermissible, out of fear of causing discord (fitnah). It is recommended for the person being pulled to cooperate and agree, so that he may attain the reward of assisting in righteousness and piety (al-birr wat-taqwā). However, he should not pull one of two people [praying together] from the row, since this would cause one of them to end up praying alone. This is why the 'pulling' described here takes place only after the opening takbīr [i.e., once the person doing the pulling has already validly begun his own prayer]."
Accordingly: it is sunnah for you to pray alongside the person praying alone, and then, if someone else arrives afterward, you may go and fill the gap in the original row. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on someone who dies while having missed fasts?

● If a person dies before having the opportunity to make up the missed fasts—such as someone whose excuse (e.g., illness) persisted until their death—then no makeup fast (qada), fidyah, or sin applies to them.
● However, if they had the ability to make up the fasts but did not do so before passing away, the missed fasts must be compensated by giving a mudd of food for each missed day from their estate.
The Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever dies while having a month’s fast due, one needy person should be fed per day on their behalf." [Narrated by At-Tirmidhi]
Additionally, a guardian (wali) may fast on their behalf, as the Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever dies while having missed fasts, their guardian should fast on their behalf." [Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim]
In another narration: "If they wish." This indicates that both feeding the needy and fasting on behalf of the deceased are permissible options.

What are the conditions governing the portion that must be distributed to the poor from a voluntary uḍḥiyyah (sacrificial offering)?

 
 
 
 
 
 

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
The following conditions apply to the portion distributed to the poor from the sacrificial animal:
First: It must be meat — it isn`t valid to give the poor organs or offal such as the liver.
Second: It must be given raw — cooked meat does not fulfil the requirement.
Third: It must amount to no less than half a kilogram. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."
 
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].
 
However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.
 
Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].
 
Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].
 
If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More