Miscellaneous

Good Relations with Parents Even After their Death

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous ,

24th August 2018

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question:  If someone didn’t have a good relationship with their parents and both of their parents have passed away then what can the child do for their parents now to make things better?

 

الجواب حامداًَ و مصلياًَ

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

 

Answer

The most paramount of good deeds in the sight of Allāh Almighty after worshipping Him is being dutiful towards one’s parents whether in the state of happiness or in reluctance. There could be many reasons as to why you didn’t have a good relationship with your parents so, what I would primarily suggest you to do is to reflect on the nature of your personal relationship with them. If you are at fault then seek sincere forgiveness from Allāh Almighty for your shortcomings in regards to their rights. Nevertheless, this does not mean that by mere seeking forgiveness you become absolved from your responsibilities.  Islām has set guidelines of how to honour them even after their death. Sayyidunā Mālik Ibn Rabi’ah as-Sa’di radhiyallahu anhu relates that we were once seated around the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam when suddenly one man from Bani Salmah (a name of a particular tribe) came and asked, “O Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam! Is there any act of kindness towards my parents remaining which I can do even after their death?” He said, “Yes! Praying for them, seeking forgiveness for them, fulfilling their oaths after their death, to join ties with relatives because (your) relationship was not established (with them) except through them (parents) and to honour their friends.” (Abū Dāwood)

The above Hadeeth hopefully answers your query as to what you and your other siblings must do after the demise of your parents.  May Allāh Almighty forgive your parents and grant them Jannatul-Firdaws, Āmeen.

[Allāh Knows Best]

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

Does transferring the Deeds of property onto someone else’s name make them the property owner?

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous , ,

18th December 2017

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Many people nowadays when purchasing a property, they put their next of kin’s name onto that property. This is done usually for specific reasons but the original buyer still maintains all financial responsibilities towards the property.  For instance, my father purchased a land with a property back home and transferred them both onto his wife’s (my mother’s) name for tax evasion purposes. My mother only bears her name on the land and property but my father is the one who still maintains the property and deals will all financial expenditure and income such as rent.  My question is Islamically, who is considered the owner of the land and property and if one dies before the other then in whose estate will the land and property fall under?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

As a general rule, proprietorship (full-ownership) is established through transferal of a property [or asset] onto someone else with the intention of ownership. This is known as Hiba (gift) in Islām. This is usually indicated through the donor’s words such as, I’ve gifted this to you, I’ve made you the owner of this, this belongs to you now etc.[1] Such statements or similar to them indicate to relinquishing his rights over that asset for someone else.[2] This simply means the recipient now has full control over the asset and the donor no longer has anything to do with it.

In reference to your particular case, merely transferring name of land & property to next of kin is insufficient and doesn’t make them the proprietor Islamically unless the intention of transferring complete ownership or gift is present as explained above.[3] Your father transferring them both onto your mother’s name solely for tax evasion is an indication that he has not made her the sole owner. Therefore, your father still reserves all rights over the property and land and both will be included in his estate after his death regardless of whoever dies first from your parents.

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Badai Sanai Kitābul Hiba, Ruknul Hiba, vol 8, p. 86-7

فَالْإِيجَابُ هُوَ أَنْ يَقُولَ الْوَاهِبُ وَهَبْتُ هَذَا الشَّيْءَ لَكَ أَوْ مَلَّكْتُهُ مِنْكَ أَوْ جَعَلْتُهُ لَكَ أَوْ هُوَ لَكَ أَوْ أَعْطَيْتُهُ أَوْ نَحَلْتُهُ أَوْ أَهْدَيْتُهُ إلَيْكَ أَوْ أَطْعَمْتُكَ هَذَا الطَّعَامَ أَوْ حَمَلْتُكَ عَلَى هَذِهِ الدَّابَّةِ وَنَوَى بِهِ الْهِبَةَ.

 

[2] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitābul Hiba, Bābul Awwal Tafseerul Hiba wa ruknuha., vol 4, p. 418

وَهِيَ نَوْعَانِ: تَمْلِيكٌ وَإِسْقَاطٌ وَعَلَيْهِمَا الْإِجْمَاعُ، كَذَا فِي خِزَانَةِ الْمُفْتِينَ.

[3] Durr wa Ibn Ābideen Shami p. 689 vol 5 – Shamila

(وَتَصِحُّ بِإِيجَابٍ كَ وَهَبْت وَنَحَلْت وَأَطْعَمْتُك هَذَا الطَّعَامَ وَلَوْ) ذَلِكَ (عَلَى وَجْهِ الْمِزَاحِ) بِخِلَافِ أَطْعَمْتُك أَرْضِي فَإِنَّهُ عَارِيَّةٌ لِرَقَبَتِهَا وَإِطْعَامٌ لِغَلَّتِهَا بَحْرٌ (أَوْ الْإِضَافَةِ إلَى مَا) أَيْ إلَى جُزْءٍ (يُعَبَّرُ بِهِ عَنْ الْكُلِّ كَ وَهَبْت لَك فَرْجَهَا وَجَعَلْته لَك) لِأَنَّ اللَّامَ لِلتَّمْلِيكِ بِخِلَافِ جَعَلْته بِاسْمِك فَإِنَّهُ لَيْسَ بِهِبَةٍ

(وَقَوْلُهُ: بِخِلَافِ جَعَلْته بِاسْمِك) قَالَ فِي الْبَحْرِ: قُيِّدَ بِقَوْلِهِ: لَكَ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَوْ قَالَ: جَعَلْته بِاسْمِك، لَا يَكُونُ هِبَةً؛ وَلِهَذَا قَالَ فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ: لَوْ غَرَسَ لِابْنِهِ كَرْمًا إنْ قَالَ: جَعَلْته لِابْنِي، يَكُونُ هِبَةً، وَإِنْ قَالَ: بِاسْمِ ابْنِي، لَا يَكُونُ هِبَةً، وَلَوْ قَالَ: أَغْرِسُ بِاسْمِ ابْنِي، فَالْأَمْرُ مُتَرَدِّدٌ، وَهُوَ إلَى الصِّحَّةِ أَقْرَبُ اهـ.

وَفِي الْمَتْنِ مِنْ الْخَانِيَّةِ بَعْدَ هَذَا قَالَ: جَعَلْته لِابْنِي فُلَانٍ، يَكُونُ هِبَةً؛ لِأَنَّ الْجَعْلَ عِبَارَةٌ عَنْ التَّمْلِيكِ، وَإِنْ قَالَ: أَغْرِسُ بِاسْمِ ابْنِي، لَا يَكُونُ هِبَةً، وَإِنْ قَالَ: جَعَلْته بِاسْمِ ابْنِي، يَكُونُ هِبَةً؛ لِأَنَّ النَّاسَ يُرِيدُونَ بِهِ التَّمْلِيكَ وَالْهِبَةَ اهـ.

 

Kaffarah for Multiple Oaths Breached

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous

3rd January 2017

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: What is the ruling about a person who has taken multiple oaths in the past and breached every single one of them? The person has breached approximately 100 oaths. Is he now required to give Kaffarah for each oath breached or can he just give one kaffarah to suffice for all?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

The classical Hanafi scholars have differed whether breaching an oath multiple times results in multiple Kaffarahs or not. The mainstream position is that breaking multiple oaths does result in multiple Kaffarahs. In other words, to give Kaffarah for each broken oath is necessary.[1] This is because the penalty for breaching an oath is less severe compared to the Kaffarah of other acts of worship breached such as Ramadhān fast. The Kaffarah for breaching an oath is to either free a slave, clothe [or] feed ten poor people [miskeen] an adequate meal twice a day or alternatively give each miskeen money equivalent to fitrana. If one is unable to do any of the above [for instance, they themselves are poor] then as a last resort, fast for three consecutive days.

Nonetheless, Ibn Ābideen Shāmi rahimahullah (a renowned Hanafi jurist) quotes another opinion reported from Imām Muhammad rahimahullah (a renowned student of Imām Abū Haneefah rahimahullah) of a single Kaffarah incorporating multiple oaths breached. This means that one Kaffarah will suffice for the multiple oaths breached according to him.[2] The first position is the mainstream position whilst the second is the most lenient position.[3] Since the second position is also a valid position, in your particular case you may act on this; to give one Kaffarah to release yourself from the 100 oaths you breached only if giving Kaffarah 100 times proves difficult for you.

It must be noted that following the mainstream position is necessary but acting on the second opinion is valid only when genuine constraint is inevitable. However, sincere repentance from breaking the oath multiple times is also necessary.

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] Ibn Nujaym, Bahrur Rāiq, Kitābul Aymān, p.490 vol 4

وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ الْمُصَنِّفُ مَسْأَلَةَ تَعْدَادِ الْكَفَّارَةِ لِتَعَدُّدِ الْيَمِينِ وَهِيَ مُهِمَّةٌ قَالَ فِي الظَّهِيرِيَّةِ وَلَوْ قَالَ: وَاَللَّهِ وَالرَّحْمَنِ وَالرَّحِيمِ لَا أَفْعَلُ كَذَا فَفَعَلَ فَفِي الرِّوَايَاتِ الظَّاهِرَةِ يَلْزَمُهُ ثَلَاثُ كَفَّارَاتٍ وَيَتَعَدَّدُ الْيَمِينُ بِتَعَدُّدِ الِاسْمِ لَكِنْ يُشْتَرَطُ تَخَلُّلُ حَرْفِ الْقَسَمِ وَرَوَى الْحَسَنُ عَنْ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ أَنَّ عَلَيْهِ كَفَّارَةً وَاحِدَةً وَبِهِ أَخَذَ مَشَايِخُ سَمَرْقَنْدَ وَأَكْثَرُ الْمَشَايِخِ عَلَى ظَاهِرِ الرِّوَايَةِ وَلَوْ قَالَ: وَاَللَّهِ وَالرَّحْمَنِ لَا أَفْعَلُ كَذَا فَفَعَلَ يَلْزَمُهُ كَفَّارَتَانِ فِي قَوْلِهِمْ جَمِيعًا وَالْفَرْقُ عَلَى قَوْلِ أُولَئِكَ الْمَشَايِخِ أَنَّ الْوَاوَ إذَا اتَّحَدَ ذِكْرُهُ يَحْتَمِلُ أَنْ تَكُونَ وَاوَ عَطْفٍ وَيَحْتَمِلُ أَنْ تَكُونَ وَاوَ الْقَسَمِ وَلَا يَثْبُتُ الْقَسَمُ بِالشَّكِّ وَالِاحْتِمَالِ بِخِلَافِ مَا إذَا تَعَدَّدَ ذِكْرُهُ؛ لِأَنَّ أَحَدَهُمَا لِلْعَطْفِ وَالْآخَرَ لِلْقَسَمِ

Ibnul Humām, Fathul Qadeer Kitābul Aymān, p. 73 vol 5

[فُرُوعٌ: فِي تَعَدُّدِ الْيَمِينِ وَوَحْدَتِهَا وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ]

فَلَوْ قَالَ بِوَاوَيْنِ كَوَاللَّهِ وَوَالرَّحْمَنِ فَكَفَّارَتَانِ فِي قَوْلِهِمْ. وَرَوَى ابْنُ سِمَاعَةَ فِي غَيْرِ الْمُخْتَلِفَةِ عَنْ مُحَمَّدٍ نَحْوَ وَاَللَّهِ وَاَللَّهِ مُطْلَقًا هَذَا قَبْلَ ذِكْرِ الْجَوَابِ. أَمَّا لَوْ قَالَ وَاَللَّهِ لَا أَفْعَلُ كَذَا ثُمَّ أَعَادَهُ بِعَيْنِهِ فَكَفَّارَتَانِ، وَكَذَا لَوْ قَالَ لِامْرَأَتِهِ وَاَللَّهِ لَا أَقْرَبُك ثُمَّ قَالَ وَاَللَّهِ لَا أَقْرَبُك فَقَرُبَهَا مَرَّةً لَزِمَهُ كَفَّارَتَانِ، رُوِيَ ذَلِكَ عَنْ أَبِي يُوسُفَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ -، وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَ فِي مَجْلِسٍ أَوْ مَجَالِسَ. وَرَوَى الْحَسَنُ أَنَّهُ إنْ نَوَى بِالثَّانِي الْخَبَرَ عَنْ الْأَوَّلِ صَدَقَ دِيَانَةً، وَهِيَ عِبَارَةٌ مُتَسَاهَلٌ فِيهَا، وَإِنَّمَا أَرَادَ أَنْ يُرِيدَ بِالثَّانِي تَكْرَارَ الْأَوَّلِ وَتَأْكِيدَهُ، اخْتَارَ هَذَا الْإِمَامُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْفَضْلِ قَالَ: فَإِنْ نَوَى بِهِ الْمُبَالَغَةَ أَوْ لَمْ يَنْوِ شَيْئًا يَلْزَمُهُ كَفَّارَتَانِ، وَقَدْ مَرَّ فِي الْإِيلَاءِ فِي التَّجْرِيدِ عَنْ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ: إذَا حَلَفَ بِأَيْمَانٍ عَلَيْهِ لِكُلِّ يَمِينٍ كَفَّارَةٌ وَالْمَجْلِسُ وَالْمَجَالِسُ فِيهِ سَوَاءٌ. وَلَوْ قَالَ عَنَيْت بِالثَّانِي الْأَوَّلَ لَمْ يَسْتَقِمْ فِي الْيَمِينِ بِاَللَّهِ سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَى وَلَوْ حَلَفَ بِحِجَّةٍ أَوْ عُمْرَةٍ يَسْتَقِيمُ، وَهَذَا يُخَالِفُ مَا رَوَى الْحَسَنُ. وَفِي الْخُلَاصَةِ عَنْ نُسْخَةِ الْإِمَامِ السَّرَخْسِيِّ فِي أَيْمَانِ الْأَصْلِ: إذَا حَلَفَ عَلَى أَمْرٍ أَنْ لَا يَفْعَلَهُ ثُمَّ حَلَفَ فِي ذَلِكَ الْمَجْلِسِ أَوْ فِي مَجْلِسٍ آخَرَ أَنْ لَا يَفْعَلَهُ أَبَدًا ثُمَّ فَعَلَهُ إنْ نَوَى يَمِينًا مُبْتَدَأَةً أَوْ التَّشْدِيدَ أَوْ لَمْ يَنْوِ فَعَلَيْهِ كَفَّارَةُ يَمِينَيْنِ، أَمَّا إذَا نَوَى بِالثَّانِي الْأَوَّلَ فَعَلَيْهِ كَفَّارَةٌ وَاحِدَةٌ

[2] Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Aymān, p.486 vol 5

وَفِي الْبَحْرِ عَنْ الْخُلَاصَةِ وَالتَّجْرِيدِ: وَتَتَعَدَّدُ الْكَفَّارَةُ لِتَعَدُّدِ الْيَمِينِ، وَالْمَجْلِسِ وَالْمَجَالِسِ سَوَاءٌ

(قَوْلُهُ وَتَتَعَدَّدُ الْكَفَّارَةُ لِتَعَدُّدِ الْيَمِينِ) وَفِي الْبُغْيَةِ: كَفَّارَاتُ الْأَيْمَانِ إذَا كَثُرَتْ تَدَاخَلَتْ، وَيَخْرُجُ بِالْكَفَّارَةِ الْوَاحِدَةِ عَنْ عُهْدَةِ الْجَمِيعِ. وَقَالَ شِهَابُ الْأَئِمَّةِ: هَذَا قَوْلُ مُحَمَّدٍ. قَالَ صَاحِبُ الْأَصْلِ: هُوَ الْمُخْتَارُ عِنْدِي. اهـ. مَقْدِسِيٌّ، وَمِثْلُهُ فِي الْقُهُسْتَانِيُّ عَنْ الْمُنْيَةِ

[3] Ahsanul Fatawa, Kitābul Aymān vol 5 p. 495

 

Quran Recitation and Speaker

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous

24th August 2016

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question – We have a monitor linked to the local masjid in our house. If a bayān is on is it best to turn it off if I am reading the Qur’ān? Usually there are many time when Muhammad SAW is mentioned and I know we always have to repeat SAW but if I am reading should I turn this off so not to have to break during Qur’ān to repeat what is heard on the monitor?

 

الجواب حامداًَ و مصلياًَ

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

 

Answer

 

If you are engaged in recitation of the Holy Qur’ān and suddenly a scholar delivers a speech transmitted through the receiver in your home then best to turn it off so that you give full attention to the Holy Qur’an. If you wish to listen to the speech and stop reciting then even that is ok.

 

 

 [Allāh Knows Best]

 

 

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

The Holy Prophet’s sallallahu alayhi wasallam Marriage in Paradise

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous ,
The Holy Prophet’s sallallahu alayhi wasallam Marriage in Paradise

12th August 2016

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Is it true that Sayyidah Maryam radhiyallahu anha will marry our beloved Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam in Jannah?

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

Answer

According to a prophetic narration, recorded in Mu’jam Tabrāni, the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said to Sayyidah A’ishah radhiyallahu anha that Allāh Almighty will marry him to (Sayyidah) Maryam radhiyallahu anha the daughter of Imrān, (Sayyidah) Kaltham radhiyallahu anha the sister of Sayyidunā Moosā alayhissalaam and (Sayyidah) Āsiya radhiyallahu anha the wife of Fir’awn.[1]  Some scholars such as Imām Dhahabi rahimahullah have classified this Hadeeth as weak due to a specific narrator being unreliable in the chain of transmission. Its weakness in the chain however, does not negate the possibility of the Holy Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam marrying them due to their lofty status. Their piety has been clearly expressed both in the Holy Qur’ān and in the prophetic tradition and for them becoming his wives does not go against his status. So Allāh Almighty can allow this to happen in Jannah if He so Wills. Its possibility can also be proven by the fact that Sayyidah Maryam radhiyallahu anha remained unmarried throughout her life whilst Sayyidah Āsiya radhiyallahu anha was married to a tyrant who relentlessly persecuted her because of her faith in Allāh Almighty and Prophet Moosā alayhissalaam. This inevitably terminates the marriage between them due to the clash of faiths. As for Kaltham radhiyallahu anha, the the Qur’ān and Hadeeth make no clear reference of her marriage in this world.  Allāh Almighty promises the believers, both men and women, on multiple occasions in the Holy Qur’ān that they will relish the company of their spouse(s) in Jannah. This suggests that every believing man and woman will marry those of their own choices and no one will be left unmarried, including the three aforesaid women. If viewed in this way then arguably, it is plausible that Allāh Almighty can permit the marriage of these three great women with the Messenger sallallahu alayhi wasallam.

Henceforth, though the authenticity of the Hadeeth is objectionable by some scholar, it does not conflict with the general Islamic principles and neither negates its possibility of happening. We must however consign its true knowledge to Allāh Almighty Himself.

 

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

[1] Tabrāni, Mu’jamul Kabeer No:8006

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ نُوحِ بْنِ حَرْبٍ الْعَسْكَرِيُّ، ثنا خَالِدُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ السَّمْتِيُّ، ثنا عَبْدُ النُّورِ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللهِ، ثنا يُونُسُ بْنُ شُعَيْبٍ، عَنْ أَبِي أُمَامَةَ قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ لِعَائِشَةَ: «أَشَعَرْتِ أَنَّ اللهَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ زَوَّجَنِي فِي الْجَنَّةِ مَرْيَمَ بِنْتَ عِمْرَانَ، وَكَلْثَمَ أُخْتَ مُوسَى، وَامْرَأَةَ فِرْعَوْنَ

First Born Child Being a Female

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous , ,

7th May 2016

 

Question: Kindly tell me the status of the Hadeeth “Lucky is the woman whose first child is a daughter”

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

The Hadeeth has been transmitted by Ibn Asākir and Daylami from two companions; Sayyidunā Wathila Ibn Asqa radhiyallahu anhu and Sayyidah Āisha radhiyallahu anha that blessed is that women whose first born child is a girl. This is an isolated report however and not commonly found in any of the major Hadeeth works. Hadeeth critics such as Imām Sakhāwi rahimahullah classify this narration as week. Ibn al-Qayyum al-Jawzi rahimahullah, known for his rigidness in Hadeeth classification, renders this report as fabricated.[1] Thus, the authenticity of the above Hadeeth is questionable. This however does not negate the merits of bearing female children in general as Islām honours daughters and not just sons. The Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam promised Jannah to those parents who nurture their daughter(s) according to the Islamic principles, do not inflict harm upon them, do not prefer sons over them (in order to degrade daughters) and also treat them with kindness.[2] In another report, the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said, “Whoever endures (the responsibility in nurturing and providing for them) until they reach puberty (and ready for marriage) then he will come on the day of judgment whereas me and him (like this), joining his fingers.”[3] 

Thus, daughters in general are a source of blessing in Islam. The Hadeeth you quoted about a first child being born is weak but other Ahadeeth such as the one above explain the merits of rearing daughters in general.

 

 

 [Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam            

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] al-kafi, vol 2, page 6

Faidul Qadeer, (No: 8237 6/11)

(من بركة المرأة) على زوجها كما جاء مصرحا في رواية (تبكيرها بالأنثى) تمامه عند الخطيب والديلمي ألم تسمع قوله تعالى {يهب لمن يشاء إناثا} فبدأ بالاناث (ابن عساكر) وكذا الخطيب والديلمي كلهم (عن واثلة) بن الأسقع ورواه الديلمي عن عائشة مرفوعا بلفظ من بركة المرأة على زوجها تيسير مهرها وأن تبكر بالإناث قال السخاوي: وهما ضعيفان اه بل أورده ابن الجوزي في الموضوعات فقال: موضوع

[2] Musnad Imām Ahmad No: 1957

عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ” مَنْ وُلِدَتْ لَهُ ابْنَةٌ، فَلَمْ يَئِدْهَا، وَلَمْ يُهِنْهَا، وَلَمْ يُؤْثِرْ وَلَدَهُ عَلَيْهَا – يَعْنِي الذَّكَرَ – أَدْخَلَهُ اللهُ بِهَا الْجَنَّةَ “

[3] Saheeh Muslim No: 149

عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «مَنْ عَالَ جَارِيَتَيْنِ حَتَّى تَبْلُغَا، جَاءَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ أَنَا وَهُوَ» وَضَمَّ أَصَابِعَهُ

 

Hijamah (Cupping) Insurance

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous , ,

30th April 2015

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Is it permissible to have public liability insurance when doing Hijamah (cupping) on others? This is in case if someone makes a wrongful claim against you.

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

Answer

In reference to your query, all forms of insurance schemes fall under the scheme of qimar (gambling) which is categorically forbidden in the Qur’an and the Sunnah. However, only those types of insurances are permitted which are either required by law or there is a genuine necessity depending on the circumstances, for instance car insurance and those similar to it. Such insurances have been Islamically permitted due to the rule of dharoorat and Hajat (extreme necessity – fulfilling their respective conditions).

As far as complementary therapy, such as cupping, insurance for public liability is concerned, firstly this is not a legal requirement by law but only in case if a patient wants to take legal action against the therapist. Secondly, therapist experts generally consider cupping as a safe treatment, when done properly that is so to cleanse and enhance the blood circulation. So long as the therapist knows what he is doing, the chances of the patient’s health falling at risk is very slim. Thus, insurance cannot be considered as a general necessity (dharorat or Hajat) in this case.

In conclusion, there is no Islamic legitimacy in applying for public liability insurance for cupping therapy due to the fact that it is part of Qimar scheme and not considered a genuine necessity, hence must be avoided.

 [Allãh Knows Best]

 

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

Using Hand Sanitizers

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous

10th November 2014

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: What is the Islamic ruling on using alcohol based sanitizers which according to experts, is an effective anti-bacteria as well as a disinfecting substance preventing the transmission of disease?

  

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

Answer

Hand sanitizers or hand antiseptics are used as an alternative to hand washing with soap and water. Most of the sanitizers come in various forms such as liquids, foam and gel and contain around 70-80% ethanol alcohol combined. Alcohol free sanitizers are even available but not as common as alcohol-based ones, because alcohol-based sanitizers are considered to be more effective in killing germs quicker compared to non-alcohol based ones and moreover, it enhances hygiene. [1] This is why they are more popular in hygienic environments such as hospitals.

 The Islamic Ruling on Alcohol based Sanitizers

The ethanol alcohol contained in hand sanitizers is generally the denatured form and is the result of chemical process. It is therefore pure and can be used as a disinfectant product to eliminate germs. They are generally provided in hospitals so to uphold hygiene especially when coming in contact with patients. One can also apply the rule of Umoom Balwa (public predicament) which according to the classical jurists is a justification for allowing leniency in rulings.

A renowned contemporary Jurist, Shaykh Mufti Taqi Uthmani states;

“The explanation given regarding alcohol that intoxicates, the usage of which has become prevalent today used commonly in medicines, perfumes and other products. (The ruling of such products is) if it (the alcohol ingredient) is extracted from grapes and dates then it cannot be regarded as permissible or pure. However, if it is from other than them (i.e. grapes and dates) then the view of Imām Abū Haneefah rahimahullah and Imām Abū Yūsuf rahimahullah can be taken, in that it is not unlawful to use it for medication or any other legitimate reasons so long as it does not reach to the level of intoxication.”[2]

Some have stated that once the gel, liquid or foam is rubbed on to the hand, it dries within 30-40 seconds, which arguably causes the alcohol to evaporate into the air. If this is the case, then the question of prohibition and impurity would not arise at all.

In summary, there is no harm in rubbing ethanol based hand-sanitizers on to the hands and due to its purity washing the hands before reading Salāh is not necessary.

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] https://healthfully.com/274406-the-effectiveness-of-ethanol-hand-sanitizers.html

 

[2] Takmilah Fathul Mulhim vol 3 p.608

The First Meal in Jannah

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous

27th December 2013

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Please can you kindly explain why the first meal in Jannah is fish liver?

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

Answer

The Hadeeth which refers to the first meal in Jannah is quite lengthy so only an excerpt of it will be mentioned. During migration, when the Holy Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam arrived to Madinah, Sayyidunā Abdullāh Ibn Salām radhiyallahu anhu approached him and posed three questions to him to ascertain his Prophethood because only a Prophet of Allāh would know the answers to these questions. Amongst those three questions was, “What will be the first food the people of Jannah will consume?” The Holy Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam replied, “The extra liver of a fish (or whale).”[1]

Its true wisdom rests with Allāh Almighty alone, but Hafiz Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalāni rahimahullah explains that this is because it is generally perceived as something easily consumed and requires no difficulty.[2] Since Jannah is a place of relaxation and pleasure for eternity, then perhaps Allāh Almighty would initially serve this food as a first impression that there will be no endurance of any form of pain or difficulty ever.     

 

 [Allãh Knows Best]

 

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] Saheeh Bukhari No:3938

َنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ سَلاَمٍ، بَلَغَهُ مَقْدَمُ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ المَدِينَةَ فَأَتَاهُ يَسْأَلُهُ عَنْ أَشْيَاءَ، فَقَالَ: إِنِّي سَائِلُكَ عَنْ ثَلاَثٍ لاَ يَعْلَمُهُنَّ إِلَّا نَبِيٌّ، مَا أَوَّلُ أَشْرَاطِ السَّاعَةِ؟، وَمَا أَوَّلُ طَعَامٍ يَأْكُلُهُ أَهْلُ الجَنَّةِ؟، وَمَا بَالُ الوَلَدِ يَنْزِعُ إِلَى أَبِيهِ أَوْ إِلَى أُمِّهِ؟، قَالَ: «أَخْبَرَنِي بِهِ جِبْرِيلُ آنِفًا» قَالَ ابْنُ سَلاَمٍ: ذَاكَ عَدُوُّ اليَهُودِ مِنَ المَلاَئِكَةِ، قَالَ: «أَمَّا أَوَّلُ أَشْرَاطِ السَّاعَةِ فَنَارٌ تَحْشُرُهُمْ مِنَ المَشْرِقِ إِلَى المَغْرِبِ، وَأَمَّا أَوَّلُ طَعَامٍ يَأْكُلُهُ أَهْلُ الجَنَّةِ فَزِيَادَةُ كَبِدِ الحُوتِ، وَأَمَّا الوَلَدُ فَإِذَا سَبَقَ مَاءُ الرَّجُلِ مَاءَ المَرْأَةِ نَزَعَ الوَلَدَ، وَإِذَا سَبَقَ مَاءُ المَرْأَةِ مَاءَ الرَّجُلِ نَزَعَتِ الوَلَدَ

[2] Fathul Bari p.341 vol 7

وَأَمَّا أَوَّلُ طَعَامٍ يَأْكُلُهُ أَهْلُ الْجَنَّةِ فَزِيَادَةُ كَبِدِ الْحُوتِ الزِّيَادَةُ هِيَ الْقِطْعَةُ الْمُنْفَرِدَةُ الْمُعَلَّقَةُ فِي الْكَبِدِ وَهِيَ فِي الْمَطْعَمِ فِي غَايَة اللَّذَّة وَيُقَال إِنَّهَا أهنأ طَعَام وأمرأه

 

Backbiting

jknfatawa1 Miscellaneous

10th May 2013

 

Question:The sin of backbiting/slandering is well understood, my question is in what circumstances is it permissible to backbite/slander. Please provide detailed reply with examples.

 

الجواب حامداًَ و مصلياًَ

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

 

Answer

Before answering your question, it is necessary to explain what slandering and backbiting is as both are different from each other thus implying different injunctions. Backbiting is to converse about someone behind his/her back in the presence of someone else whereby the person about whom he or she has backbitten would be offended if he/she heard about the conversation even if what the person has said is true. If what the person has said behind his/her back is not true then that is known  as slandering. This is clear from the following Hadeeth;

Sayyidunā Abū Hurairah radhiyallahu anhu relates that that the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam once said, “Do you know what Gheebah (backbiting) is?” The said, “Allāh and His Messenger know best.” He said, “You relating about your brother that which he dislikes.” He was asked, “What if it is (true) about my brother of what I have said?” He said, “If it is in him of what you have said then you have backbitten about him, and if it is not in him of what you have said (i.e. not true about him) then you have slandered him.” (Muslim)

Slandering under any circumstances would not be permissible because what someone says about another person behind their backs is not true at all. Thus, it becomes false accusation. In regards to backbiting the classical scholars have enlisted stringent rules for it to be permissible. If any of those rules are not complied to then backbiting will not be permissible.

It is stated in Fatāwa Hindiyyah;

“If a man fasts and performs Salāh but harms people with his hands and tongue and mentions that which is in him then that will not be regarded as backbiting (for other to be warned). If he informs the Sultān (leader) in order to discipline him then there is no sin upon him.” (442/5)

 

Imām Ghazāli rahimahullah enlists six scenarios where backbiting is permitted;

1: To disclose someone’s faults by complaining to the judge or those in authority of him committing oppression or any unlawful act so that the judge or those in authority can discipline him. This is permissible only for the one who is the victim of the crime.

 

2: To disclose someone’s faults to a reliable person in order to seek his assistance to change the perpetrator’s evil habits so that he returns to the right path. The prime reason for mentioning his evil habits to that individual must be so that he could admonish the perpetrator and make him repent from his sins.

 

3: To disclose someone’s faults to a qualified jurist (Mufti) e.g. he says my father, my mother or my husband etc is oppressing me or is involved in such unlawful habits, in order to request for some legal advice or a legal verdict about such person. [In such circumstances it is preferable to say “What is the ruling regarding such and such person…” rather than specifying the name though it would still be permissible].

 

4: To disclose someone’s faults in order to warn others of his evil habits e.g. seeing a learned person being inclined towards evil habits or possessing heretical beliefs, thus not reliable. [This category was practiced by many great scholars of Hadeeth when doing a critical analysis of the chain of narrators in order to grade the ranks of Hadeeth accordingly and to ensure that the Hadeeth is transmitted through reputable source].

 

5: Someone is famously known by that natural defect therefore relating that to someone else e.g. A’mash (blear-eyed) was the name of a famous Hadeeth scholar etc.

 

6: Someone indulging in open sin therefore disclosing that to others e.g. Drinking alcohol, impinging on other people’s affairs, gathering people’s wealth unjustly (or stealing) etc. The Messenger of Allāh e said, “Whosoever takes off the veil of shame from his face then there is no backbiting against him.” (See Ihyā-Uloomud-Deen 140-142/3 for more details)

 

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department