Can one Perform Tayammum Due to COVID-19?

  23rd April 2020

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: If an old man has been diagnosed with COVID-19 symptoms (along with suffering from several other illnesses) and was asked to isolate and not to come out of his room if there’s nobody there to give him water then can he perform tayammum instead?

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer:

Thank you for your question. In reference to your query, COVID-19 itself is not a concession for tayammum but rather to do with whether water is accessible to the patient or not. If he is able to leave the room to for instance use the toilet, to shower or to wash his hands before and after eating, especially as we have been advised to wash our hands more often during this pandemic, and water is not proven to be harmful to him then he cannot perform tayammum. Performing wudhu becomes necessary especially times like this to helps us stay clean from dirt, germs etc.[1] It must be remembered that the purpose of isolation is so not to come in contact with people, not necessarily for not being able to use the bathroom or shower etc. They are allowed to relieve themselves and clean themselves generally, hence tayammum is not an option for them.

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

Written by:  Apa Sajeda        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam    

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1]Fatawa Hindiyya. , Kitab Taharah, Baab Al-Tayyamum, Vol 1, Pg 28.

وَالْأَصْلُ أَنَّهُ مَتَى أَمْكَنَهُ اسْتِعْمَالُ الْمَاءِ مِنْ غَيْرِ لُحُوقِ ضَرَرٍ فِي نَفْسِهِ أَوْ مَالِهِ وَجَبَ اسْتِعْمَالُهُ

 

 Fatawa Hindiyya. , Kitab Taharah, Baab Al-Tayyamum, Vol 1, Pg 27.

(وَمِنْهَا عَدَمُ الْقُدْرَةِ عَلَى الْمَاءِ) يَجُوزُ التَّيَمُّمُ لِمَنْ كَانَ بَعِيدًا مِنْ الْمَاءِ مِيلًا هُوَ الْمُخْتَارُ فِي الْمِقْدَارِ سَوَاءٌ كَانَ خَارِجَ الْمِصْرِ أَوْ فِيهِ وَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَ مُسَافِرًا أَوْ مُقِيمًا. هَكَذَا فِي التَّبْيِينِ لَا يَجُوزُ التَّيَمُّمُ لِعَدَمِ الْمَاءِ فِي الْمِصْرِ وَكَذَا الْقُرَى الَّتِي لَا يُفَارِقُهَا أَهْلُهَا أَوْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ نَهَارًا وَذُكِرَ عَنْ السُّلَمِيُّ جَوَازُ ذَلِكَ وَالصَّحِيحُ عَدَمُ الْجَوَازِ وَالْخِلَافُ بَعْدَ الطَّلَبِ، وَأَمَّا قَبْلَهُ فَلَا يَجُوزُ إجْمَاعًا

 

Al-Haddadi, Al- Jawharatun Nayirah, Kitab Taharah, Baab Al-Tayyamum., Vol , Pg 21.وَفِيهِ إشَارَةٌ إلَى أَنَّهُ لَا يَجُوزُ التَّيَمُّمُ لِعَدَمِ الْمَاءِ فِي الْمِصْرِ سِوَى الْمَوَاضِعِ الْمُسْتَثْنَاةِ وَهِيَ ثَلَاثَةٌ: خَوْفُ فَوْتِ صَلَاةِ الْجِنَازَةِ أَوْ صَلَاةِ الْعِيدِ، أَوْ خَوْفِ الْجُنُبِ مِنْ الْبَرْدِ وَعَنْ السُّلَمِيِّ جَوَازُ ذَلِكَ وَالصَّحِيحُ عَدَمُ الْجَوَازِ؛ لِأَنَّ الْمِصْرَ لَا يَخْلُو عَنْ الْمَاءِ

 

Eligibility of Zakāt Due to COVID-19 Lockdown

21st April 2020

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Can a person send Zakāt money back home to someone in Pakistan who is unable to work and bring income to the home due to current coronavirus lockdown?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

In reference to your query, due to the dire circumstances around the current pandemic and enforced lockdowns in such developing countries, such people would not be regarded as poor people[1] merely for not being able to leave their home to earn[2] and provide for their families provided if they have sufficient savings to get by whether in the form of cash, gold or any other investments. As such, they would not be eligible[3] to receive Zakāt money. If they, however, become impoverished whereby apart from losing their job, they have no savings or nothing to survive on to provide for themselves and family then they become eligible for Zakāt.

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

 Written by:  Maulana Anas Mullah        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

 JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] Fatawa Hindiyya, Kitabuz Zakaat, Bab al Masarif, vol 1, p 187

(مِنْهَا الْفَقِيرُ) وَهُوَ مَنْ لَهُ أَدْنَى شَيْءٍ وَهُوَ مَا دُونَ النِّصَابِ أَوْ قَدْرُ نِصَابٍ غَيْرُ نَامٍ وَهُوَ مُسْتَغْرَقٌ فِي الْحَاجَةِ فَلَا يُخْرِجُهُ عَنْ الْفَقِيرِ مِلْكُ نُصُبٍ كَثِيرَةٍ غَيْرِ نَامِيَةٍ إذَا كَانَتْ مُسْتَغْرَقَةً بِالْحَاجَةِ كَذَا فِي فَتْحِ الْقَدِيرِ. التَّصَدُّقُ عَلَى الْفَقِيرِ الْعَالِمِ أَفْضَلُ مِنْ التَّصَدُّقِ عَلَى الْجَاهِلِ كَذَا فِي الزَّاهِدِيِّ.

[2] Raddul Muhtaar, Kitabuz Zakaat, Bab al Masraf, vol 2, p 339

 أَيْ مَصْرِفِ الزَّكَاةِ وَالْعُشْرِ، وَأَمَّا خُمُسُ الْمَعْدِنِ فَمَصْرِفُهُ كَالْغَنَائِمِ (هُوَ فَقِيرٌ، وَهُوَ مَنْ لَهُ أَدْنَى شَيْءٍ) أَيْ دُونَ نِصَابٍ أَوْ قَدْرُ نِصَابٍ غَيْرِ نَامٍ مُسْتَغْرِقٍ فِي الْحَاجَةِ.(وَمِسْكِينٌ مَنْ لَا شَيْءَ لَهُ) عَلَى الْمَذْهَبِ، – لِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى {أَوْ مِسْكِينًا ذَا مَتْرَبَةٍ} [البلد: ١٦]- وَآيَةُ السَّفِينَةِ لِلتَّرَحُّمِ

 

[3] Ibn Nujaym, Al Bahr al Raiq, Kitabuz Zakaat, vol 2, p 258

وَالْأَوْلَى أَنْ يُفَسَّرَ الْفَقِيرُ بِمَنْ لَهُ مَا دُونَ النِّصَابِ كَمَا فِي النُّقَايَةِ أَخْذًا مِنْ قَوْلِهِمْ يَجُوزُ دَفْعُ الزَّكَاةِ إلَى مَنْ يَمْلِكُ مَا دُونَ النِّصَابِ أَوْ قَدْرَ نِصَابٍ غَيْرِ تَامٍّ، وَهُوَ مُسْتَغْرِقٌ فِي الْحَاجَةِ، وَلَا خِلَافَ فِي أَنَّهُمَا صِنْفَانِ هُوَ الصَّحِيحُ؛

 

Subscribing to a Death Committee; Permissible or not?

Subscribing to a Death Committee; Permissible or not?

20th April 2020

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Death\Funeral committees which are run in many local Muslim communities. From a sharia perspective are they sharia compliant? Are they generally permissible in Islām?  From what I can gather is that each member pays a fixed amount each year say £100, after 1yr you can then make a claim to cover full funeral costs irrespective of whether one’s contributions were sufficient to cover the cost of a funeral.  Not sure of what happens to over payments. When contributing to such a committee who owns each contribution in the fund; is it the member or trustees? Is Zakaat payable if so who is liable each member or the trustees? How does this differ from standard insurance? Does any special intention have to be made at the outset by each member? If setting up a community death committee, what is one’s sharia obligations?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

In reference to your query, for the sake of clarity, there are multiple Death Committees operating in the UK, each one functioning under specific conditions. The earliest Death Committee was founded around during the 1980s by a group of elders back home in Pakistan who recognised the need for generating funds to fulfil funeral expenses for the local villagers due to poverty. This concept was then transposed to the UK with some modifications of its terms and conditions over time. Many Masajids, funeral directories and local people connected with funeral services offer this scheme to their local people, each one operating differently from others with specific set of conditions. To address each of those conditions in light of its Islamic ruling is not possible lest it complicates the discussion unless the legal ruling of a specific clause from the condition is specified in the query. After obtaining information about its model and terms and conditions from websites, acquaintances who are members of the scheme and speaking to reliable funeral committees running the committee as well as scholars who have dealt with its legal stance, we conclude with the following answer.[1] To begin with, first understand the scheme itself. Death Committee was founded under the pretext of assisting the Muslim community to help cover all funeral costs at the time of someone’s death. It operates by people contributing funds on a yearly basis (or monthly charges by certain committees) in exchange of funeral services. Initially, an application form is filled out along with a joining fee payment as an initial subscription and then followed with a yearly payment of a fixed amount. The amount varies depending on the funeral costs as it tends to rise occasionally. Different committees charge different amount nevertheless, it averages between £30-£100 yearly. By paying the joining fee (varying between different committees) you become a member of this scheme which means that you are eligible to the benefits of the funeral package (which again varies between different committees). The annual contribution is paid by one member of the family. This single membership includes spouse and children below the age of 18. After reaching the age of 18, he or she is now responsible for renewing their own membership by paying the applicable fee. Anyone failing to pay the fee after its due date is issued a reminder and respite to pay the amount. Failing to pay will automatically remove them from the membership and all contributions made are non-refundable. In order to rejoin, a joining fee must be paid in addition to the yearly membership fee. In the advent of the death of a member, the next of kin or spouse continues with the existing membership without any additional charges. In the case when an individual remarries then they either continue with their existing membership or pay the new membership fee depending on the specific requirements set by the committee. All annual contributions are placed in a mutual pot that subsidises all funeral expenses. Occasionally, certain committees may request extra contributions from its members when they run short of funds. The operators of this scheme – trustees – set up a bank account and deposit all of the funds into it and take charge over these funds by discharging all funeral expenditures for its deceased beneficiary from this pot. The funding covers funeral directories, cemeteries costs, transportation if buried abroad including one person’s return ticket and in some cases catering costs. If a member dies abroad and buried there then a certain amount is paid to the family members to cover all local costs. Some committees cover repatriation costs as well whilst other may not necessarily cover it.

Most trustees, as some have informed me, do not take personal wages from the funds except that the initial joining fee is used to cover all admin costs. The information and as confirmed by the trustees, this contribution is not like a family kittee bank; a collective funding of savings by members to financially support each other and then reimbursed through monthly payments. Contrarily, the Death Committee, as some have mentioned to me, is a charitable contribution and not a loan-based system. Meaning that all members contribute as a form of charity to become recipients of all funeral benefits. This thus dismisses the question of underpayment or overpayment as all funds are treated as a charity contribution in return of funeral benefits for themselves, their families and for other contributing members.

The foregoing was a basic outline of the scheme across the board. They however differ in the details; each one operating with specific requirements and conditions dissimilar from the other. This being the dilemma, it is difficult to make a generic statement whether every committee comply fully with the Islamic ethical codes or not. Hence, all committees must be judged respectively by their own merit based on their terms and conditions.

In our understanding, no such model pre-existed our time during the prophetic time nor the generation of the companions or in the subsequent generation. Tracing such scheme in search of a similitude precedence from the Sunnah so to seek a clear legal stance is difficult, which means that this scheme is an unprecedented one. This scheme will therefore be judged according the general principles outlined in Islām. As far as the concept itself is concerned, it is not a reprehensible one but rather a beneficial concept for the welfare of Muslims. It in of itself concurs with the general Sharī῾ah objectives of Maslaha namely, public interest of procuring benefit and deferring harm. The rationale behind the Death Committee is to relieve individuals from the exorbitant costs of funeral expenses at the time of one’s death through a mutual funding in a pool affordable to everyone. The committee then uses the funds to cover all funeral costs. Essentially, to create ease for people and remove the financial constrains they inevitably incur. It can therefore be treated as a charitable contribution, as was pointed out earlier, with the aim of Muslims supporting one another. What is necessary is that the terms and conditions must not infringe the Islamic principles. It is to primarily serve the interest of the members and not the trustees themselves. No such clause should be included that lead to further harm for the members or entail any form of compulsion. For example, as a charity-based operation it is not permissible to fine members for delay in payment as this is force. It is however permissible to exclude members from the committee if they fail to make any further contributions. Likewise, no additional charges can be imposed on members like for instance, charging new members the overall costs of the past years as this goes against the principles of equity and fairness.

From the Sharī῾ah perspective, the Death Committee can represent somewhat a takaful or waqf model or alternatively a simple tabarru model.  A takaful or a waqf model means that all participants agree to pay a certain premium in a pool.[2] Each participant in return becomes a recipient of a type of cover they require for their personal circumstances – which in this case, funeral services. All risks are specified and all participants share the risks mutually. Takaful is a mutual co-operation system used as an alternative model to conventional insurance.[3] Albeit takaful and waqf operate differently, the end result is not much different. Whilst in the takaful model, the participants are considered the owners of the funds, the waqf model is somewhat a charity model where participants are not the owners but are the beneficiaries.  In the waqf model for instance, the operators can choose to invest in the money if need be to benefit the waqf funds only – e.g. to increase the funds to cover all funeral costs. The operators are not considered the owners of the waqf funding as a whole but act as guardians over it. They can however take a reasonable wage if necessary but only when the participants are aware of it and does not affect the waqf funding to cover funeral costs. [4] Each model requires a details discussion in respect to its application to the Death Committee with certain conditions which is beyond the scope of our answer. Suffice to say, it is important to remember that the participants are the primary beneficiaries and not the trustees. Should it be the case where the trustees use the funds to procure profit from it or based on a risk model whereby if during the year someone dies then they are paid out otherwise the operators take full possession over the funding pool, then this resembles conventional insurance that is prohibited. The primary distinction between insurance and the takaful/waqf model is that in the latter, the participants are the primary beneficiaries and (as in the takaful model) the owners of the funds, whereas in the former case – insurance – the company takes complete ownership over the funds for profit procurement and for private investors to invest in.

Another alternative model is a tabarru model which simply means charity. In other words, that members voluntarily contribute an amount to support one another to cover all expenses. In this model, there is no formal structure nor any conditions or a specific amount to be paid annually, unlike a waqf or takaful model that is structured with an agreed amount paid annually. It is merely to benefit people financially during urgent times. So, any Death Committee following either of these models whilst complying to their respective conditions makes it a valid scheme otherwise not.

The question of Zakāt on the funds depends on which respective model is adopted. If it resembles a takaful model then the participants are liable to pay Zakat on it as they are considered the owners. Other than that, in the tabarru’ or waqf model the participants are not liable to pay Zakāt on it as they do not own it. The trustees in this case however are encouraged to pay Zakāt on it so that it is not left without Zakat being paid on it although it is not essential as waqf and tabarru are both a form of charity in of themselves.

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

Written and researched by Mufti Abdul Waheed

Answer attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] See the following links for more information on Death Committee, [accessed 30th March 2020]

http://ilfordmosque.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Funeral-Membership-Form-with-Rules-and-Regulations-Dec-2014.pdf

http://bmf1.co.uk/thaqwa-funeral-committee/

http://www.crawleymosque.com/funeral-assurance-committee/

http://www.wasiyyah.co.uk/Death%20Committee.html

https://theislamicburialfoundation.com/funeral-services.php

Information was also obtained from personal interview with senior members for instance, Maulana Zaffar from Pakistan Muslim Welfare Society on Tue 7th April 2020 who have been running the service for 30 plus years with 100 plus members.

 

[2] Waqf is permitted in all moveable assets including Janaziz preparations.

Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Waqf, vol 2, p. 361

وَأَمَّا وَقْفُ الْمَنْقُولِ مَقْصُودًا فَإِنْ كَانَ كُرَاعًا أَوْ سِلَاحًا يَجُوزُ فِيمَا سِوَى ذَلِكَ إنْ كَانَ شَيْئًا لَمْ يَجْرِ التَّعَارُفُ بِوَقْفِهِ كَالثِّيَابِ وَالْحَيَوَانِ لَا يَجُوزُ عِنْدَنَا وَإِنْ كَانَ مُتَعَارَفًا كَالْفَأْسِ وَالْقُدُومِ وَالْجِنَازَةِ وَثِيَابِهَا وَمَا يُحْتَاجُ إلَيْهِ مِنْ الْأَوَانِي وَالْقُدُورِ فِي غَسْلِ الْمَوْتَى وَالْمَصَاحِفِ لِقِرَاءَةِ الْقُرْآنِ قَالَ أَبُو يُوسُفَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: إنَّهُ لَا يَجُوزُ، وَقَالَ مُحَمَّدٌ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: يَجُوزُ، وَإِلَيْهِ ذَهَبَ عَامَّةُ الْمَشَايِخِ رَحِمَهُمْ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى مِنْهُمْ الْإِمَامُ السَّرَخْسِيُّ كَذَا فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ وَهُوَ الْمُخْتَارُ وَالْفَتْوَى عَلَى قَوْلِ مُحَمَّدٍ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -، كَذَا قَالَ شَمْسُ الْأَئِمَّةِ الْحَلْوَانِيُّ كَذَا فِي مُخْتَارِ الْفَتَاوَى وَلَوْ جَعَلَ جِنَازَةً وَمُلَاءَةً وَمُغْتَسَلًا يُقَالُ بِالْفَارِسِيَّةِ حَوْضُ مَسِّينِ وَقْفًا فِي مَحِلِّهِ فَمَاتَ أَهْلُهَا كُلُّهُمْ لَا يُرَدُّ إلَى الْوَرَثَةِ بَلْ يُحْمَلُ إلَى مَكَان آخَرَ أَقْرَبَ إلَى هَذِهِ الْمَحَلَّةِ كَذَا فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb  al-waqf, vol 4 p. 340

(وَمَحَلُّهُ الْمَالُ الْمُتَقَوِّمُ)

[3] Institute of Islamic Banking and Insurance, https://www.islamic-banking.com/explore/islamic-finance/islamic-insurance-takaful, [accessed 30th March 2020]

 

[4] For more details on the Islamic waqf system, see Shaykh Khalid Sayfullah Rahmani, Qamūs al-Fiqh, Ch. Waqf, vol 5, pp. 293-309

Giving Ghusl to the deceased Body Who has Died as a Result of Coronavirus

30th March 2020

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: If someone has passed away due to coronavirus and the hospital staff has returned the body wrapped up in a plastic bag so that no one is affected with the disease then how should the body be given ghusl?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

In reference to your query, it must be noted that there are many obligatory rights that are afforded to the deceased person, amongst which is the ghusl; whether full ghusl according to the sunnah method or mere pouring water over the body. So long as Ghusl is possible, resorting to other means such as wiping or tayammum will not suffice. [1] Based on the information provided from reliable sources and speaking to those experienced in the field, washing (as well as shrouding) the dead body possess very little risk of transmission of COVID-19 from the body to the person provided that adequate precautions are adopted by those washing and shrouding the body.[2] This suggests that it is not permitted to discard the ghusl due to the fear of transmission if it is proven to be less likely the case. The jurists have mentioned that without the ghusl and burial had commenced, then ghusl would have to be given and Janazah Salah repeated.[3] Given the current circumstances, those washing the body must wear the appropriate gear; the PPE (personal protective equipment) to fulfil this obligation.

If in a hypothetical situation, ghusl becomes no longer possible due to the severity of the situation and government bans it altogether, then due to dharurah, one can wipe wet hands/cloth (soaked that is) over the body bag like as if someone wipes over a bandage due to a wound. If this is not possible then it is permissible to resort to tayammum (dry ablution).[4]

If the governmental restrictions tighten, then in absolute dire situations the deceased would then have to be buried with neither ghusl nor tayammum. However, as indicated above that this is currently not the case hence, the body must be washed (or wiped over with water or dry ablution if need be that is).

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

 

Written by:  Maulana Anas Mullah      Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

 JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Al bahr al raaiq, Kitaabul Janaaiz, vol 2, p 187

وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ الْمُصَنِّفُ صِفَةَ الْغُسْلِ، وَمَنْ يَغْسِلُ وَالْغَاسِلَ وَحُكْمَ الْمَيِّتِ قَبْلَهُ وَبَعْدَهُ أَمَّا الْأَوَّلُ فَهُوَ مِنْ فُرُوضِ الْكِفَايَةِ كَالصَّلَاةِ عَلَيْهِ وَتَجْهِيزِهِ وَدَفْنِهِ حَتَّى لَوْ اجْتَمَعَ أَهْلُ بَلْدَةٍ عَلَى تَرْكِهَا قُوتِلُوا، وَلَوْ صَلَّوْا عَلَيْهِ قَبْلَ الْغُسْلِ أَعَادُوا الصَّلَاةَ، وَكَذَا إذَا ذَكَرُوا قَبْلَ أَنْ يُهَالَ عَلَيْهِ التُّرَابُ يُنْزَعُ اللَّبَنُ وَيُخْرَجُ وَيُغَسَّلُ وَيُصَلَّى عَلَيْهِ، وَإِنْ أَهَالُوهُ لَمْ يُنْبَشْ، وَلَمْ تُعَدْ الصَّلَاةُ عَلَيْهِ، وَلَوْ بَقِيَ مِنْهُ عُضْوٌ فَذَكَرُوهُ بَعْدَ الصَّلَاةِ وَالتَّكْفِينِ يُغَسَّلُ ذَلِكَ الْعُضْوُ وَيُعَادُ، فَإِنْ بَقِيَ أُصْبُعٌ وَنَحْوُهَا بَعْدَ التَّكْفِينِ لَا يُغَسَّلُ وَقَالَ مُحَمَّدٌ يُغَسَّلُ عَلَى كُلِّ حَالٍ كَذَا فِي الْمُجْتَبَى

 

[2] See, Dr S.Shahid, Evaluating the current guidelines regarding the handling and ritual washing (Ghusl) of the Muslim Deceased Patient with COVID-19, Leicester, [25th March 2020]

British Board of Scholars & Imams (BBSI), http://www.bbsi.org.uk/covid-funeralguidance/ [Accessed 29th March 2020].

According to the Royal College of Pathologists, a Body bag is not required but only to maintain dignity, see, https://www.rcpath.org/uploads/assets/0b7d77fa-b385-4c60-b47dde930477494b/G200-TBPs-Guidance-for-care-of-deceased-during-COVID-19-pandemic.pdf

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/COVID-19-safe-handling-of-bodies-or-persons-dying-from-COVID19.pdf

[3] ref: 1

[4] Kasani, Bada’I al Sanaa I’, Kitaabul Janaaiz, Vol 1, P 304

وَمِنْهَا وُجُودُ الْمَاءِ؛ لِأَنَّ وُجُودَ الْفِعْلِ مُقَيَّدٌ بِالْوُسْعِ وَلَا وُسْعَ مَعَ عَدَمِ الْمَاءِ فَسَقَطَ الْغُسْلُ، وَلَكِنْ يُيَمَّمُ بِالصَّعِيدِ لِأَنَّ التَّيَمُّمَ صَلُحَ بَدَلًا عَنْ الْغُسْلِ فِي حَالِ الْحَيَاةِ فَكَذَا بَعْدَ الْمَوْتِ، غَيْرَ أَنَّ الْجِنْسَ يُيَمِّمُ الْجِنْسَ بِيَدِهِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ يُبَاحُ لَهُ مَسُّ مَوَاضِعِ التَّيَمُّمِ مِنْهُ مِنْ غَيْرِ شَهْوَةٍ، كَمَا فِي حَالَةِ الْحَيَاةِ فَكَذَا بَعْدَ الْمَوْتِ

Radd al Muhtaar, Kitabul Janaiz, vol 2, p 201

(قَوْلُهُ يُمِّمَ لِفَقْدِ مَاءٍ إلَخْ) قَالَ فِي الْفَتْحِ وَلَوْ لَمْ يُوجَدْ مَاءٌ فَيُمِّمَ الْمَيِّتُ وَصَلَّوْا عَلَيْهِ ثُمَّ وَجَدُوهُ غَسَّلُوهُ وَصَلَّوْا عَلَيْهِ ثَانِيًا عِنْدَ أَبِي يُوسُفَ وَعَنْهُ يُغَسَّلُ وَلَا تُعَادُ الصَّلَاةُ عَلَيْهِ، وَلَوْ كَفَّنُوهُ وَبَقِيَ مِنْهُ عُضْوٌ لَمْ يُغَسَّلْ فَإِنَّهُ يُغَسَّلُ ذَلِكَ الْعُضْوُ وَلَوْ بَقِيَ نَحْوُ الْأُصْبُعِ لَا يُغَسَّلُ اهـ

 Fatawa Hindiyya, vol 1, p 160

وَإِذَا مَاتَ الرَّجُلُ فِي السَّفَرِ وَلَيْسَ هُنَاكَ مَاءٌ طَاهِرٌ يُيَمَّمُ وَيُصَلَّى عَلَيْهِ، هَكَذَا فِي الْمُحِيطِ.
رَجُلٌ مَاتَ وَلَمْ يَجِدُوا مَاءً فَيَمَّمُوهُ وَصَلَّوْا عَلَيْهِ ثُمَّ وَجَدُوا مَاءً غُسِّلَ وَصُلِّيَ عَلَيْهِ ثَانِيًا فِي قَوْلِ أَبِي يُوسُفَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى – كَذَا فِي فَتَاوَى قَاضِي خَانْ .

 

Should the Masājid be Closed and is it Permissible to Perform Jumu’ah Salāh at Home Because of the Coronavirus?

27th March 2020

Question: As you are aware that because of the enormous outbreak of the coronavirus, many organisations have decided close the Masājid whilst others choose to keep it open. What is the correct position and what are the guidelines regarding those vulnerable to the coronavirus? As a result of closing the Masājid, Jumu’ah Salāh has also been suspended. Would it be permissible to perform Jumu’ah Salāh at home or should Zuhr Salāh be performed instead?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

Thank you for your very much pertinent question in our time. There has been a significant discussion amongst the circles of the scholars across the country whether the Masājid (plural of Masjid) should remain open or closed and whether or not Jumu’ah Salāh should be suspended altogether in light of the coronavirus pandemic. It is inevitable that scholars will differ amongst each other on this issue due to its unprecedented nature. Valid reasons exist on both sides concerning both issues respectively. What is important, nonetheless, is that regardless of whatever stance you take, you abide by it whilst to simultaneously, respect the opposing view. The global COVID-19 pandemic has unfortunately evoked anxiety and panic amongst many of our Muslim brothers and sisters globally and hence, not something to be treated lightly. As we are all responsible for our actions, it is necessary not to turn this into a polemical debate nor make others a target of criticism just because they hold a different view. May Allāh Almighty keep us all strong and united during such adversity, Amīn. Concerning the case in question about Masājid, our personal stance is that so long as the decision rests in the hands of the Muslims, the Masājid should remain open for the five daily Salāh times, [1] but operate within a restricted capacity in light of the government guidelines. So long as the government does not enforce the closure of all religious places, the five daily Salāhs and Adhān should continue so that the Masājid are not abandoned altogether even if it means only a handful of Muslims attend. Masājid are amongst the important shrines in the Islamic tradition established for the worship of Allāh alone and are a source of refuge in critical crises like the current pandemic. Albeit it is unexpected how long this pandemic will continue; it is estimated that it can last for weeks or even months. So potentially, we are looking at everyone praying Salāh in their homes throughout that duration or even longer. There are a few reasons why we stress that the Masājid should remain open;

  1. In one narration the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam referred to those frequenting the Masjid as the people of Allāh, whilst in another narration, he said that a sign of faith in a person is the one who frequents the Masjid.[2] Frequenting the Masjid helps rejuvenate our faith and connection with Allāh Almighty, and closing them only diminishes our connection with Him.
  2. The Masājid are a means of averting Allāh’s In one narration narrated by Sayyidunā Anas ibn Mālik radhiyallahu anhu from the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam, “Whenever Allāh intends to punish people, He (the Almighty) looks at the people (inhabitants) of the Masājid, and so He averts the punishment.”[3]

One cannot imagine Allāh Almighty’s infinite mercy over His creation that He averts his punishment because of those populating His blessed house. This illustrates His love for those continuing to inhabit His house for worship and moreover, they serve as a means of protection for others. It is counterproductive and inconceivable in a believer’s mind to expect Allāh Almighty to remove this pandemic when His blessed houses are emphatically instructed to be fully closed without anyone worshipping therein. Whilst many would argue the case otherwise applying the law of necessity, keeping the Masājid open does not necessarily prevent following government restrictions such as social distancing and isolating the vulnerable ones. In light of the current government guidelines,[4] we recommend that a dedicated handful (2 or 3) of young men amongst the local community to continue joining the Imām in the five daily prayers whereas the rest of the people perform their Salāhs at home in a small congregation. The Masājid must also follow all hygienic protocols set by health professions. They must at least remain open during Salāh times short enough to perform the fardh prayers only. All Salāhs including Jumu’ah must be performed in a short manner. For the Jumu’ah Salāh, according to a prophetic tradition reported in Dār al-Qutni, four people including the Imām is sufficient for the validity of the Salāh.[5] Only the Arabic khutbah should be recited with a short recitation of tilāwat in the two rak’ats prayer. The Sunnah prayers of all the Salāhs should be performed at home. After the congregational prayer, the congregants should disperse maintaining two meters distance between each other. If possible, all should wear a face mask so to prevent droplet particles transmitting.

As for the frail, the vulnerable and those tested positive of COVID-19, they must remain home and not attend the Masjid. Such people fall under the remit of genuinely excused people who are exempted from attending the congregational prayers including Jumu’ah Salāh. The Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam himself excused them from the congregational prayers including Jumu’ah.[6] It is worth noting here that in spite of the concession, whilst there are those amongst the ill people who cannot be barred from attending the Masjid, there are specific categories amongst them who can be prevented. For the latter instance, jurists cite the case of a leper (majdhūm) regarding whom there is apprehension that if he attends the congregational prayer and other congregants are likely to be infected by him then the people can prevent him from coming to the Masjid so to avert others being harmed by him.[7] In a similar case, COVID-19 patients (as well as those vulnerable to it) can be restricted from attending the Masjid using the same analogy of a majdhūm. They are required to self-isolate so to prevent the harm of the disease transmitting onto others.

Apart from illness, other legitimate reasons that prevent communal prayers include dire circumstances. For instance, if an Imām (the leader) prevents people from congregating for the Jumu’ah Salāh for a specific reason then they should not congregate at all. This is only if the reason was acceptable circumstantially, otherwise, the people will not obey him and congregate to perform the Jumu’ah Salāh amongst themselves.[8] It must be reminded that the Imām here refers to the Muslim Khalif who was commissioned with the responsibility of leading the masses in Jumu’ah. Although no such Imām exists in our context, the point to note from this is that the Sharī῾ah gives concessions where public predicament (umūm balwa) exists on the grounds of specific reasons that affect the general masses whether such reasons are based on circumstantial reasons or illnesses.

At the present moment, the government and health ministers have cautioned all citizens by enforcing social distancing so to mitigate the spread of the virus. Most importantly, to prevent an overflow of an unexpected high number of COVID-19 patients being admitted into the hospital. Yet in spite of this, the number of deaths and affected people continue to rise exponentially. As a result of this, the government has instructed all citizens to remain home and not to leave without necessity. From a fiqhi stance, it raises the question that how can those not tested positive of COVID-19 be excused of not attending the congregational prayers in the Masjid? Under the topic of plague (tā’oon), Ibn Ābidīn Shāmi rahimahullah discusses the variant opinions as to whether a healthy person residing in a city struck with plague is treated similar to an excused person or not. According to some Shāfi’ee scholars a healthy person can be treated as a genuinely excused (ill) person (considering the likelihood probability of being affected by the plague) whilst according to the Hanafi principles, he is still viewed a healthy person (hence no exemptions apply). Ibn Ābidīn Shāmi rahimahullah concludes that such matters are left contingent on the predominant assumption of the fear of perishing or not.[9] In other words, if the probability of being infected by disease transmitting and dying is greater, then the law of illness would apply to all. So given the circumstantial evidence of the crises, it can be argued that the general Muslim population residing in the midst of the pandemic along with the death toll and the infectious rate climbing are genuinely excused from attending the congregational prayers at the Masjid and thus, everyone should perform their Salāhs at home in small groups of family members. In all cases, where it is deemed necessary for people not to attend the communal prayers collectively, then according to the narration of Sayyidunā Abdulah Ibn Abbās radhiyallahu anhu, the muadhin can announce during the Adhān صَلُّوا فِي بُيُوتِكُمْ (perform Salāh in your homes) instead of the words حَيَّ عَلَى الصَّلاَةِ.[10]

The foregoing discussion was necessary so to understand the ruling of concession applicable to the present pandemic. We now move onto the second part of the above question of performing Jumu’ah Salāh at home. One must remember that there are distinct rulings pertaining to Jumu’ah Salāh alone that don’t apply to the five daily Salāhs. Take for instance, to perform the five daily Salāhs in congregation is not an integral condition for their validity whilst for the Jumu’ah Salāh, performing it in congregation is conditional. Among the distinct ruling that pivots this discussion and pertinent to the topic is that in the Hanafi school law, granting public access (Idhn al-Ām) to anyone wanting to participate is essential. So, to perform Jumu’ah Salāh at a place where there is restricted access or in a private space where people generally do not congregate for the communal prayer is not permitted. Other forms of restrictions that invalidate the Jumu’ah Salāh include closing the doors on others to prevent entry.[11] The underlying rationale is that Jumu’ah by its definition implies Jama’ah – a group of people – so by its very nature, it must be performed in a public place were all are able to congregate. Contrarily, the home environment is generally not viewed as a communal place for people to congregate but restricted for family members only. For this reason, classical scholars prohibited performing Jumu’ah Salāh in prisons, however later scholars allowed it due to necessity with the condition that none of the inmates are prevented from attending.[12]

Henceforth, for the condition of idhn al-Ām to be fulfilled, people must either congregate in communal places or one must give the local community public access into their home such that no one is prevented entry.[13] This means that one cannot restrict anyone nor limit the number of attendees of those who wish to join. But in doing so defeats the very objective of social distancing because large congregations pose a greater risk of disease infection. Enthusiastic people who hear about a Jumu’ah congregation taking place nearby tend to flock towards it. This would inevitably lead people to unintentionally overlook all precautionary measures primarily due to the likelihood chance of the gathering exceeding the maximum limit that requires social distancing and thus, increases the risk of contagiousness. Once again, the presumption of public predicament (umūm balwa) comes into play here. For this reason, it is therefore not advisable to take the risk of attempting to congregate people for the Jumu’ah Salāh and instead, substitute it with Zuhr Salāh at home (because of genuine predicament) which now becomes the original fardh prayer in the absence of Jumu’ah prayer.[14] In doing so, one can perform it individually or in a small congregation with family members.

 

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Jurists have stated that keeping the Masājid closed even during Salāh times is Makrooh.

Binayah Sharhu Hidayah vol 2 p.470

ويكره أن يغلق باب المسجد؛ لأنه يشبه المنع من الصلاة، وقيل: لا بأس به إذا خيف على متاع المسجد في غير أوان الصلاة،

(ويكره أن يغلق باب المسجد؛ لأنه يشبه المنع من الصلاة) ش: أي لأن الإغلاق شبه المنع فيكره؛ لِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى {وَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنْ مَنَعَ مَسَاجِدَ اللَّهِ أَنْ يُذْكَرَ فِيهَا اسْمُهُ} [البقرة: 114] (البقرة: الآية 114) ، وقوله أن يغلق من الإغلاق، ولا يقال: غلق فهو مغلوق إلا في لغة رديئة متروكة، وفي ” الجامع الصغير ” ويكره غلق باب المسجد وهو على اللغة المتروكة، وصوابه إغلاق باب المسجد.

م: (وقيل: لا بأس به) ش: أي بإغلاق باب المسجد م: (إذا خيف على متاع المسجد) ش: من السرقة م: (في غير أوان الصلاة) ش: أي في غير وقتها للاحتياط وهو حسن، وقيل: إذا تقارب الوقتان كالعصر والمغرب والعشاء لا يغلق، وبعد العشاء يغلق إلى طلوع الفجر، ومن طلوع الشمس إلى وقت الزوال، ذكره شمس الأئمة وقاضي خان، والتدبير في الإغلاق وتركه إلى أهل المحلة، فإنهم إذا اجتمعوا على رجل جعلوه متوليا بغير أمر القاضي يكون متوليا

 

[2] Tafseer ibn Kathīr vol 4, p. 120, commentary of [9:18]

عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ؛ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: “إِذَا رَأَيْتُمُ الرَّجُلَ يَعْتَادُ الْمَسْجِدَ فَاشْهَدُوا لَهُ بِالْإِيمَانِ؛ قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: {إِنَّمَا يَعْمُرُ مَسَاجِدَ اللَّهِ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ} وَرَوَاهُ التِّرْمِذِيُّ، وَابْنُ مَرْدَوَيْهِ، وَالْحَاكِمُ فِي مُسْتَدْرَكِهِ مِنْ حَدِيثِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ وَهْبٍ، بِهِ

عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: “إِنَّمَا عُمَّارُ المساجد هم أهل الله

[3] Tafseer ibn Kathīr vol 4, p. 120, commentary of [9:18]

عَنْ أَخِيهِ مَالِكِ بْنِ دِينَارٍ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ مَرْفُوعًا: “إِذَا أَرَادَ اللَّهُ بِقَوْمٍ عَاهَةً، نَظَرَ إِلَى أَهْلِ الْمَسَاجِدِ، فَصَرَفَ عَنْهُمْ”. ثُمَّ قَالَ: غَرِيبٌ

 

[4] These recommendations are in light of the current guidelines with the possibility of change depending on the circumstances.

 

[5] Darul Qutni no. 1594

بَابُ الْجُمُعَةِ عَلَى أَهْلِ الْقَرْيَةِ

عَنْ أُمِّ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الدَّوْسِيَّةِ , قَالَتْ: سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: «الْجُمُعَةُ وَاجِبَةٌ عَلَى أَهْلِ كُلِّ قَرْيَةٍ وَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُونُوا إِلَّا ثَلَاثَةً وَرَابِعُهُمْ إِمَامُهُمُ».

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, vol 2 p. 151

(و) السادس: (الجماعة) وأقلها ثلاثة رجال (ولو غير الثلاثة الذين حضروا) الخطبة (سوى الإمام) بالنص لأنه لا بد من الذاكر وهو الخطيب وثلاثة سواه بنص – {فاسعوا إلى ذكر الله} [الجمعة: 9]-

(قوله وأقلها ثلاثة رجال) أطلق فيهم فشمل العبيد والمسافرين والمرضى والأميين والخرسى لصلاحيتهم للإمامة في الجمعة، إما لكل أحد أو لمن هو مثلهم في الأمي والأخرس فصلحا أن يقتديا بمن فوقهما، واحترز بالرجال عن النساء والصبيان فإن الجمعة لا تصح بهم وحدهم لعدم صلاحيتهم للإمامة فيها بحال بحر عن المحيط (قوله ولو غير الثلاثة الذين حضروا الخطبة) أي على رواية اشتراط حضور ثلاثة في الخطبة أما على رواية عدم الاشتراط أصلا أو أنه يكفي حضور واحد فأظهر (قوله سوى الإمام) هذا عند أبي حنيفة ورجح الشارحون دليله واختاره المحبوبي والنسفي كذا في تصحيح الشيخ قاسم (قوله بنص {فاسعوا} [الجمعة: 9] لأن طلب الحضور إلى الذكر متعلقا بلفظ الجمع وهو الواو يستلزم ذاكرا فلزم أن يكون مع الإمام جمع وتمامه في شرح المنية

 

[6] If they are exempted from the congregational prayers such as Jumuah then this includes all other prayers as well.

Muheet Burhani p. 86 vol 2

والأصل فيه قوله عليه السلام: «من كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر فعليه الجمعة إلا مسافر أو مملوك أو امرأة أو صبي أو مريض» غير أن الإسلام والبلوغ والعقل شرائط الوجوب، والصحة والإقامة والحرية والذكورة شرائط الأداء، حتى أن المسافر والمملوك والمريض إذا حضروا الجمعة وأدوها جازت، وكانت فريضة؛ لأن سقوط فرض السعي منهم للضرر والحرج، فإذا تحملوها التحقوا في الأداء بغيرهم.

والشيخ الكبير الذي ضعف، وعجز عن السعي لا تلزمه الجمعة كالمريض، وعلى المكاتب الجمعة، وكذلك على معتق البعض إذا كان يسعى فلا جمعة على العبد المأذون، وعلى العبد الذي يؤدي الضريبة.

Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb, vol 1, p. 144

(الْبَابُ السَّادِسَ عَشَرَ فِي صَلَاةِ الْجُمُعَةِ) وَهِيَ فَرْضُ عَيْنٍ، كَذَا فِي التَّهْذِيبِ (ثُمَّ لِوُجُوبِهَا شَرَائِطُ فِي الْمُصَلِّي) وَهِيَ الْحُرِّيَّةُ وَالذُّكُورَةُ وَالْإِقَامَةُ وَالصِّحَّةُ، كَذَا فِي الْكَافِي، وَالْقُدْرَةُ عَلَى الْمَشْيِ، كَذَا فِي الْبَحْرِ الرَّائِقِ، وَالْبَصَرُ، هَكَذَا فِي التُّمُرْتَاشِيِّ، حَتَّى لَا تَجِبَ الْجُمُعَةُ عَلَى الْعَبِيدِ وَالنِّسْوَانِ وَالْمُسَافِرِينَ وَالْمَرْضَى، كَذَا فِي مُحِيطِ السَّرَخْسِيِّ وَلَا عَلَى الْمُقْعَدِ بِالْإِجْمَاعِ، كَذَا فِي الْمُحِيطِ.

إذَا أَصَابَ النَّاسَ مَطَرٌ شَدِيدٌ يَوْمَ الْجُمُعَةِ فَهُمْ فِي سَعَةٍ مِنْ التَّخَلُّفِ، كَذَا فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ.

 

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, vol 2 p. 153

(وصحة) وألحق بالمريض الممرض والشيخ الفاني

Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitāb, vol 2 p. 163

وَأَمَّا الشَّيْخُ الْكَبِيرُ الَّذِي ضَعُفَ فَهُوَ مُلْحَقٌ بِالْمَرِيضِ فَلَا يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ، وَفِي فَتْحِ الْقَدِيرِ وَالْمَطَرُ الشَّدِيدُ وَالِاخْتِفَاءُ مِنْ السُّلْطَانِ الظَّالِمِ مُسْقِطٌ فَلَوْ قَالَ الْمُصَنِّفُ وَشَرْطُ وُجُوبِهَا الْإِقَامَةُ وَالذُّكُورَةُ وَالصِّحَّةُ وَالْحُرِّيَّةُ وَوُجُودُ الْبَصَرِ وَالْقُدْرَةُ عَلَى الْمَشْيِ وَعَدَمُ الْحَبْسِ وَالْخَوْفِ وَالْمَطَرِ الشَّدِيدِ لَكَانَ أَشْمَلَ

 

[7] See kifayatul Mufti vol 3, pg. 138

 

[8] Muheet Burhani p. 87 vol 2

الإمام إذ منع أهل مصر أن يجمعوا، حكي عن الفقيه أبي جعفر رحمه الله أنه إذا نهاهم مجتهداً بسبب من الأسباب، أو أراد أن يخرج ذلك الموضع من أن يكون مصراً لم يجمعوا، فأما إذا نهاهم متعنتاً، أو إضراراً بهم، فلهم أن يجتمعوا على رجل يصلي بهم الجمعة، ولو أن إمام مصر مصلٍ ثم نفر الناس عنه لخوف عدو وما أشبه ذلك ثم عادوا إليه، فإنهم لا يجمعون إلا بإذن مستأنف من الإمام.

 

[9] Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, vol 3 p. 390

مطلب حال فشو الطاعون هل للصحيح حكم المريض

(قوله ومثله حال فشو الطاعون) نقل في الفتح عن الشافعية أنه في حكم المرض وقال ولم أره لمشايخنا اهـ وقواعد الحنفية تقتضي أنه كالصحيح. قال الحافظ العسقلاني في كتابه بذل الماعون: وهو الذي ذكره لي جماعة من علمائهم. وفي الأشباه: غايته أن يكون كمن في صف القتال فلا يكون فارا اهـ وهو الصحيح عند مالك كما في الدر المنتقى.

قال في الشرنبلالية: وليس مسلما إذ لا مماثلة بين من هو مع قوم يدفعون عنه في الصف وبين من هو مع قوم هم مثله ليس لهم قوة الدفع عن أحد حال فشو الطاعون. اهـ. قلت: إذا دخل الطاعون محلة أو دارا يغلب على أهلها خوف الهلاك كما في حال التحام القتال، بخلاف المحلة أو الدار التي لم يدخلها فينبغي الجري على هذا التفصيل، لما علمت من أن العبرة لغلبة خوف الهلاك، ثم لا يخفى أن هذا كله فيمن لم يطعن

 

[10] Bukhari p.6 vol 2

901 – حَدَّثَنَا مُسَدَّدٌ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنِي عَبْدُ الحَمِيدِ، صَاحِبُ الزِّيَادِيِّ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الحَارِثِ ابْنُ عَمِّ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سِيرِينَ، قَالَ: ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ لِمُؤَذِّنِهِ فِي يَوْمٍ مَطِيرٍ: إِذَا قُلْتَ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ، فَلاَ تَقُلْ حَيَّ عَلَى الصَّلاَةِ، قُلْ: «صَلُّوا فِي بُيُوتِكُمْ»، فَكَأَنَّ النَّاسَ اسْتَنْكَرُوا، قَالَ: فَعَلَهُ مَنْ هُوَ خَيْرٌ مِنِّي، إِنَّ الجُمْعَةَ عَزْمَةٌ وَإِنِّي كَرِهْتُ أَنْ أُحْرِجَكُمْ فَتَمْشُونَ فِي الطِّينِ وَالدَّحَضِ

 

[11] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, , vol 2 p. 151

(قَوْلُهُ الْإِذْنُ الْعَامُّ) أَيْ أَنْ يَأْذَنَ لِلنَّاسِ إذْنًا عَامًّا بِأَنْ لَا يَمْنَعَ أَحَدًا مِمَّنْ تَصِحُّ مِنْهُ الْجُمُعَةُ عَنْ دُخُولِ الْمَوْضِعِ الَّذِي تُصَلَّى فِيهِ وَهَذَا مُرَادُ مَنْ فَسَّرَ الْإِذْنَ الْعَامَّ بِالِاشْتِهَارِ،

(قَوْلُهُ لِأَنَّ الْإِذْنَ الْعَامَّ مُقَرَّرٌ لِأَهْلِهِ) أَيْ لِأَهْلِ الْقَلْعَةِ لِأَنَّهَا فِي مَعْنَى الْحِصْنِ وَالْأَحْسَنُ عَوْدُ الضَّمِيرِ إلَى الْمِصْرِ الْمَفْهُومِ مِنْ الْمَقَامِ لِأَنَّهُ لَا يَكْفِي الْإِذْنُ لِأَهْلِ الْحِصْنِ فَقَطْ بَلْ الشَّرْطُ الْإِذْنُ لِلْجَمَاعَاتِ كُلِّهَا كَمَا مَرَّ عَنْ الْبَدَائِعِ

 

[12] See Shaykh Mufti Taqi Usmani Fiqhi Maqalāt, vol 4, pp. 30-38

[13] Muheetul Burhani vol 2 p. 85

والشرط السادس: الإذن العام، وهو أن تفتتح أبواب الجامع، ويؤذن للناس كافة حتى أن جماعة لو اجتمعوا في الجامع وأغلقوا الأبواب على أنفسهم وجمعوا لم يجزئهم ذلك وكذلك إذا أراد السلطان أن يجمع بحشمه في داره، فإن فتح باب الدار، وأذن للناس إذناً عاماً جازت صلاته، شهدها العامة أو لم يشهدوها، وإن لم يفتح باب الدار وأغلق الأبواب كلها، وأجلس عليها البوابين ليمنعوا الناس عن الدخول لم تجزئهم الجمعة؛ لأن اشتراط السلطان للتحرز عن تفويتها على الناس، ولا يحصل ذلك إلا بالإذن العام وكما يحتاج العام إلى السلطان لإقامة الجمعة والسلطان أيضاً يحتاج إلى العام بأن يأذن لهم إذناً عاماً حتى تجور صلاة الكل بهذا النظر من الجانبين

 Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, vol 2 p. 152

هُوَ يَحْصُلُ بِفَتْحِ أَبْوَابِ الْجَامِعِ لِلْوَارِدِينَ كَافِي فَلَا يَضُرُّ غَلْقُ بَابِ الْقَلْعَةِ لِعَدُوٍّ أَوْ لِعَادَةٍ قَدِيمَةٍ لِأَنَّ الْإِذْنَ الْعَامَّ مُقَرَّرٌ لِأَهْلِهِ وَغَلْقُهُ لِمَنْعِ الْعَدُوِّ لَا الْمُصَلِّي……. وَلَوْ فَتَحَهُ وَأَذِنَ لِلنَّاسِ بِالدُّخُولِ جَازَ وَكُرِهَ

(قَوْلُهُ لِأَنَّ الْإِذْنَ الْعَامَّ مُقَرَّرٌ لِأَهْلِهِ) أَيْ لِأَهْلِ الْقَلْعَةِ لِأَنَّهَا فِي مَعْنَى الْحِصْنِ وَالْأَحْسَنُ عَوْدُ الضَّمِيرِ إلَى الْمِصْرِ الْمَفْهُومِ مِنْ الْمَقَامِ لِأَنَّهُ لَا يَكْفِي الْإِذْنُ لِأَهْلِ الْحِصْنِ فَقَطْ بَلْ الشَّرْطُ الْإِذْنُ لِلْجَمَاعَاتِ كُلِّهَا كَمَا مَرَّ عَنْ الْبَدَائِعِ……..

قُلْت: وَلَا يَخْفَى بُعْدُهُ عَنْ السِّيَاقِ. وَفِي الْكَافِي التَّعْبِيرُ بِالدَّارِ حَيْثُ قَالَ: وَالْإِذْنُ الْعَامُّ وَهُوَ أَنْ تُفْتَحَ أَبْوَابُ الْجَامِعِ وَيُؤْذَنَ لِلنَّاسِ، حَتَّى لَوْ اجْتَمَعَتْ جَمَاعَةٌ فِي الْجَامِعِ وَأَغْلَقُوا الْأَبْوَابَ وَجَمَعُوا لَمْ يَجُزْ، وَكَذَا السُّلْطَانُ إذَا أَرَادَ أَنْ يُصَلِّيَ بِحَشَمِهِ فِي دَارِهِ فَإِنْ فَتَحَ بَابَهَا وَأَذِنَ لِلنَّاسِ إذْنًا عَامًّا جَازَتْ صَلَاتُهُ شَهِدَتْهَا الْعَامَّةُ أَوْ لَا وَإِنْ لَمْ يَفْتَحْ أَبْوَابَ الدَّارِ وَأَغْلَقَ الْأَبْوَابَ وَأَجْلَسَ الْبَوَّابِينَ لِيَمْنَعُوا عَنْ الدُّخُولِ لَمْ تَجُزْ لِأَنَّ اشْتِرَاطَ السُّلْطَانِ لِلتَّحَرُّزِ عَنْ تَفْوِيتِهَا عَلَى النَّاسِ وَذَا لَا يَحْصُلُ إلَّا بِالْإِذْنِ الْعَامِّ. اهـ. قُلْت: وَيَنْبَغِي أَنْ يَكُونَ مَحَلُّ النِّزَاعِ مَا إذَا كَانَتْ لَا تُقَامُ إلَّا فِي مَحَلٍّ وَاحِدٍ، أَمَّا لَوْ تَعَدَّدَتْ فَلَا لِأَنَّهُ لَا يَتَحَقَّقُ التَّفْوِيتُ كَمَا أَفَادَهُ التَّعْلِيلُ تَأَمَّلْ

Although Ibn Ābideen Shāmi argues that idhn-Ām was prescribed with the fear that the communal prayer is not missed due to only one congregation taking place in the previous times, other conditions must be taken into consideration so to ensure that the laws pertaining Jumu’ah Salāh are followed correctly. In light of the other conditions, it still does not befit performing Jumu’ah at home.

 

[14] Muheetul Burhani vol 2 p. 63

وإنما قال أبو حنيفة، وأبو يوسف، ومحمد رحمهم الله: إن أصل الفرض الظهر؛ لأن أصل الفرض في حق كل أحد ما يتمكن من أدائه بنفسه، وهو إنما يتمكن من أداء الظهر بنفسه، إما ما يتمكن بأداء الجمعة، ولأنا لو جعلنا أصل الفرض الجمعة كان الظهر خلفاً عن الجمعة عند فواتها، وأربع ركعات لا تكون خلفاً عن ركعتين، ولأن الظهر كان مشروعاً في هذا الوقت قبل شروع الجمعة

 

Paying Zakāt Before the End of the Year Due to Covid-19 Lockdown

24th March 2020

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Last year I paid my Zakāt on Ramadan 4th. In light of recent Covid-19 lockdowns in many countries, would it be permissible to pay this year’s Zakāt now, a couple of months earlier, such that Muslims around the world could buy food supplies in preparation for Ramadan and any further lockdown/restrictions?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

In reference to your query if one wishes to pay their Zakāt a few months earlier in order for other Muslims to benefit from, then it is permissible.[1] This is so long as it meets the conditions of paying Zakāt along with the likelihood of it remaining in your possession towards the end of the year. It must be noted that if there is an increase on the Zakatable money towards your annual Zakāt calculation date (4th Ramadhān in your case), after paying your Zakāt in advance, then you must pay Zakāt on that additional amount as well. As a recommendation though it is better to give a little extra enough so to save recalculating your Zakāt towards your annual Zakāt due date.

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

Written by:  Apa Gul-e-Maryam        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] Muheet Al Burhani, Kitab Zakaat, Vol 2, Pg 267

ويجوز تعجيل الزكاة قبل الحول إذا ملك نصابا عندنا؛ لأنه أدى بعد وجود سبب الوجوب؛ لأن سبب الوجوب نصاب نام؛ فإن نظرنا إلى النصاب

فالنصاب قد وجد؛ وإن نظرنا إلى النماء فقد وجد أيضا؛ لأن العبرة لسبب النماء وهو الإسامة أو التجارة لا لنفس النماء، وقد وجد سبب النماء

Shami, Kitab Zakaat, Vol 2, Pg 293

ولو عجل ذو نصاب) زكاته (لسنين أو لنصب صح) لوجود السبب، وكذا لو عجل عشر زرعه أو ثمره بعد الخروج قبل الإدراك؛ واختلف فيه قبل النبات وخروج الثمرة

Ikhtiyaar Li Taleel Mukhtar, Kitab Zakaat, Vol 1,Pg 103

ويأخذ المصدق وسط المال ; ومن ملك نصابا فعجل الزكاة قبل الحول لسنة أو أكثر، أو لنصب جاز

 

 

What to do if a Woman Sees blood after Completing Umrah?

What to do if a Woman Sees blood after Completing Umrah?

19th March 2020

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: A woman thought her periods had finished. She performed Ghusl, performed her Umrah and then cut her hair. She thereafter noticed some spotting (within ten days of her period). Must she now give a dam and remain in the state of Ihram until she completes her umrah again or does mere repeating the Umrah suffice?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer:

In reference to your query an umrah performed by such a woman in the described manner will not be completed.[1] She must, therefore, repeat her umrah after finishing her periods. After repeating her Umrah then no dam is required. Dam – sacrificing – of a sheep or goat only becomes necessary if she does not repeat it, as the dam is prescribed to expiate the mistake of performing umrah during menstruating.[2]

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

Written by:  Apa Sajeda        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam       

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] Qari Saeed Ahmed Saheb. Muallim Alhujjaj. Wajibat hajj Mey sey kisi wajib ku trq karna. p. 244.

جو طواف جنابت یا حیض و نفاس کی حالت میں کیا ہو اس کا اعادہ واجب ہے اور جو بے وضو کیا ہے اس کا اعادہ مستحب ہے

 

Qari Saeed Ahmed Saheb. Muallim Alhujjaj. Wajibat hajj Mey sey kisi wajib ku trq karna, p. 245

طواف عمرہ پورا یا اکثر یا اقل اگر چہ ایک ہی چکر ہو اگر جنابت یا حیض و نفاس کی حالت میں یا بے وضوء کیا تو دم واجب ہوگا

[2] Hidayaha, Book of Hajj

وَمَنْ طَافَ لِعُمْرَتِهِ وَسَعَى عَلَى غَيْرِ وُضُوءٍ وَحَلَّ فَمَا دَامَ بِمَكَّةَ يُعِيدُهُمَا وَلَا شَيْءَ عَلَيْهِ) أَمَّا إعَادَةُ الطَّوَافِ فَلِتَمَكُّنِ النَّقْصِ فِيهِ بِسَبَبِ الْحَدَثِ. وَأَمَّا السَّعْيُ فَلِأَنَّهُ تَبَعٌ لِلطَّوَافِ، وَإِذَا أَعَادَهُمَا لَا شَيْءَ عَلَيْهِ لِارْتِفَاعِ النُّقْصَانِ (وَإِنْ رَجَعَ إلَى أَهْلِهِ قَبْلَ أَنْ يُعِيدَ فَعَلَيْهِ دَمٌ) لِتَرْكِ الطَّهَارَةِ فِيهِ

Using Menstrual Cups During Periods; Permissible or Not?

16th March 2020

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Is using menstrual cup allowed during period days?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer: In reference to the above query, it is permissible but disliked to use a menstrual cup during the days of menses.[1] It is discouraged because it can break a virgin girl’s hymen by inserting the cup into her private area.[2] If she later married it would be assumed she has broken it by some other means, arousing suspicions. Therefore, to avoid the matter completely it is best to use sanitary towels which require no insertion.

With the menstrual cup itself, it is an eco-friendly reusable cup that is used for the same purpose as tampon but inserted inside the private area towards the cervix. It collects the menstrual fluid creating an airtight seal which prevents the blood from air exposure, decreasing the chances of an odour. The fluid can then be poured out the cup washed and inserted back in. A highly convenient means for women as it can be used in the same way as a tampon however with additional benefits.

The cups are widely available produced in different shapes and sizes to accommodate for all women depending on their age, flow, uterus and cervix size. It is now becoming a popular alternative due to its environmental benefits and its unique design, with it providing comfort, longevity in use [as the cups can last up to 10 years], and reusability.[3]

Though the cup holds its advantages for women it does present minor risks although preventable when care is taken. Vaginal infections and TSS can occur when using the cup as bacteria from the hands may contaminate the cup and therefore, cause infections when inserted into the private area. Furthermore, using the incorrect cup size can also cause discomfort and pain when inserting or removing the cup before and after use.[4]

Overall menstrual cups follow the same ruling as tampons in permissibility but disliked as they are inserted directly into the vaginal area, unlike tampons. Therefore, if a woman is able to use sanitary towels it is better to do so.

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

Written by:  Apa Gul-e-Maryam        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] Raddul Muhtar, Kitab Haydh, Vol 1, Pg 289

وفي شرح الوقاية: وضع الكرسف مستحب للبكر في الحيض وللثيب في كل حال، وموضعه موضع البكارة، ويكره في الفرج الداخل. اهـ.

 

Bahr Raiq, Kitab Haidh, Vol 1, Pg 203

لعباراتهم كما لا يخفى وفي شرح الوقاية ثم وضع الكرسف مستحب للبكر في الحيض وللثيب في كل حال وموضعه موضع البكارة ويكره في الفرج الداخل.

 

[2] Binayah , Kitab Haidh , Vol 1, Pg 636

وعن محمد بن سلمة أنه كان يكره للمرأة أن تضع كرسفها في الفرج الداخل؛ لأنه يشبه النكاح بيدها،

 

[3] https://www.intimina.com/explore/sainsbury/?gclid=CjwKCAiAuqHwBRAQEiwAD-zr3c7UiRo7EeAN5pdxbbOHe3EN_zZdhVMIMg5VNJE7MQIKY1-NAjyUehoCGqEQAvD_BwE

[4] https://www.healthline.com/health/menstrual-cup-dangers#potential-risks

Are Diseases Contagious? – The Hadeeth of Fleeing from a Leper

12th March 2020

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: I read in an article that A’isha radhiyallahu anha relates in a Hadith found in Sahih Bukhari that the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wasallam told people to flee from a leper as they would from a lion, is not what he would have said. The references given for this are from Fath al Bari, which is in Arabic and unfortunately, I am unable to read it. Kindly clarify whether this is true or not.

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

In reference to your query, the underlying issue rests on whether Islām agrees to the concept of an illness being contagious or not. Hadeeth scholars have differed whether the prophetic statement ‘flee from a leper as you flee from a lion’ is authentically established from the Noble Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam or not. Imām Bukhari transmits a report from Sayyidunā Abu Hurairah radhiyallahu anhu where the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said, “(There is) no ‘Adwa (no contagious disease is conveyed without Allah’s permission) nor is there any bad omen (from birds), nor is there any Hamah, nor is there any bad omen in the month of Safar, and flee from the leper as you flee from a lion.” In one narration,  (Sayyidah) A’isha radhiyallahu anha herself denied such report from the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam when she was asked but contrarily, there is another report where she apparently affirms the statement from him. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani rahimahullah (the author of Fath al-Bari) transmits a report from Saheeh ibn Khuzaimah in the Book of Reliance narrated from Sayyidah A’ishah radhiyallahu anha where she states, ‘and when you see a leper then flee from him just as you flee from a lion’. The strongest view is that the command of fleeing from a leper is authentically attributed to the Noble Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam. There are many similar reports that Ibn Hajar rahimahullah cites that allude to its authenticity. For instance, there is a narration in Saheeh Muslim where a man from the delegation of Thaqeef who suffered from leprosy (as a result he could not visit the Messenger sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam sent someone to him stating that indeed we have taken your pledge so return. This proves that the prophet exercised caution when coming in contact with a leper. However, there is another report that Ibn Hajar rahimahullah cites from Sayyiduna Jabir radhiyallahu anhu that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam ate with a leper in the same dish and said, ‘Reliance upon Allah and (our) trust in Him’. There are two types of reports that come to light here; one in which the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam  exercised caution whilst in another, he came into close contact with a leper.

This issue is heavily diversified and contested amongst the scholars partly due to the conflicting reports as in some have denied contagiousness of disease whilst others seem to affirm it. Some have opted the abrogation approach, others have chosen preference whilst most have sought to harmonize between the conflicting reports. Below is a summary of the In Hajar’s rahimahullah commentary of the diverse groups in the same sequence in his Fath al-Bari volume 10 pp.159-161. This will hopefully ground your understanding of the issue.

  1. This group views that the command of abstinence i.e. fleeing from a leper is abrogated and coming into contact with him is valid e.g. eating with him. This was the view of Sayyidunā Umar radhiyallahu anhu.
  2. This group and the most authentic position which the majority have adopted is that the command of abstinence is not abrogated. Rather the conflicting reports are reconcilable. The command of feeing is a preferable command whilst eating with a leper alludes to permissibility.
  3. This group have opted for preference, meaning that both narrations are not reconcilable therefore one narration must be preferred over the other. This group subdivides into two;
  4. The negation of contagiousness is preferred over those narration that affirm it. In other words, one is not commanded to flee nor exercise caution from a leper at all. This group adduce the report of Sayyidah A’isha radhiyallahu anha when she denied the narration of fleeing from a leper being attributed to the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam and said that we had a servant suffering from this illness who would eat from my plate, drink from my cup and sleep on my bed. Here Sayyidah A’isha radhiyallahu anha disproved of fleeing from a leper because the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam welcomed them in his home.
  5. This division prefers the narrations of contagiousness over those that deny it due to the overwhelming reports. Meaning that contrary to the above, one should exercise caution and distance themselves from a leper. These scholars such as Imam Tirmizi rahimahullah question the authenticity of the reports that a leper ate in the same plate with the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam. In their view, it was merely placing their hand on the same plate as opposed to eating in it.

After detailing the multiple views on this matter, Ibn Hajar rahimahullah leans towards the second group namely, reconciliation between the seemingly conflicting reports; preferable to exercise caution from a leper though coming in close contact with them is permissible. This is because all of the narrations have been transmitted through reliable chains that are undeniable. In his view, tarjeeh – preference is only resorted to when reconciliation is not possible and since reconciliation is possible, preference is not an option in this case. Moreover, most scholars adopt the approach of reconciliation so that all of the reports are practised in specific circumstances. Ibn Hajar rahimahullah presents the possible interpretations to harmonise the conflicting reports that affirm and deny illnesses transmitting.

  • Negating (the necessary ability of) contagiousness altogether and as for fleeing from a leper, this was a command in due consideration of the victim himself so to relieve his worry. When a leper sees a healthy person, it could naturally increase in his distress, hence the command was not to glare at lepers.
  • Both reports; the negation and affirmation of disease transmitting refer to two different occasions. The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam  negating transmission of the disease was in reference to those with strong faith whose reliance in Allah Almighty was very strong. A person with strong faith acknowledges that diseases are not contagious per se as all matters are in the hands of Allāh Almighty so a person one can avert themself from it. The one with weak faith, on the other hand, may not have strong reliance in Allah Almighty thus, the command of fleeing (suggesting disease transmission) apply to him only.
  • According to Abu Bakar Baqillani rahimahullah, the affirmation of leprosy transmission is an exceptional disease to the general command which negates contagiousness.
  • It is possible that the command of fleeing from leprosy does not fall under the remit of contagiousness but rather transmission through physical contact only like touching, embracing or even smelling. Where no physical contact occurs then the disease is not infectious.

[As a point of note, this explanation negates the disease having the ability to transmit if no physical contact occurs. So, the fact a person standing in front without touching him would not necessitate a person being affected by them.]

  • The report which negates disease transmitting was to refute people’s notion during the days of ignorance who assumed that disease is contagious without attributing its control to Allah Alone. The negation was thus to clarify that it is Allah who ultimately afflicts people with disease and illnesses and is able to cure them as well. As for those reports that affirm transmission of disease is to acknowledge the natural causes that Allah has set on earth. As in, the transmission of disease is a cause which Allah has placed on earth albeit He is the controller of all causes.

Ibn Hajar’s rahimahullah conclusion from the above possible interpretations is concerned with it being a matter of one’s personal faith. He states that people with weak faith are discouraged from coming near it whereas those with strong faith have the choice. It appears that the Prophet’s sallallahu alayhi wasallam practice on different occasions was to encompass both categories of people for the sake of ease.

Whilst the above discussion was related to a leper, if we assume the second position to be the most reliable position i.e. conflicting reports are reconcilable and relative to specific circumstances, as Ibn Hajar rahimahullah alludes to in his commentary, then similar ruling applies to all modern forms of endemic disease and viruses for instance coronavirus. One can exercise caution and avoid physical contact such as touching [e.g. shaking hands or embracing] and in doing so, does not go against reliance on Allāh Almighty. Yet, at the same time, we must believe that all matters rest in the hands of Allāh Almighty and it is only He who has the power to inflict and cure illness.

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written and Researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

Legal Stance on Cross Contamination

Download Article – Legal Stance on Cross-Contamination