Chapter 1
General
21844: What are the qualities which a person must attain
if he wants to set himself up to issue fatwas?
Question:
What are the qualities which a person must attain if
he wants to set himself up to issue fatwas?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Ibn al-Qayyim said:
Abu `Abd-Allaah ibn Battah mentioned in his book
al-Khala' that Imaam Ahmad said: No man should
set himself up to issue fatwas until he has attained
five qualities:
1. He should have a good intention, for if he does
not have a good intention, he will not be blessed and
there will be no blessings in his words.
2. He should be knowledgeable, forbearing, dignified
and calm.
3. He should have a strong grasp of knowledge.
4. He should have a strong personality and not be
affected by people's criticism.
5. He should know what people are like.
This is what Ahmad said, and this is indicative of
his status and knowledge. These five qualities are
the foundation for issuing fatwas. If any of them are
lacking, there will be a commensurate defect in the mufti.
A'laam al-Muwaqqi'een, 4/153. (www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable 
21271Why is the legacy mentioned first in the aayah,
"after payment of legacies that you may have bequeathed
or debts" [al-Nisa' 4:12]?
Question:
Why is the word wasiyah (legacy, will, bequest) mentioned in the Qur'an before the word dayn
(debt?) when we know that the debt must be paid off before
the legacy is given?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Al-Qurtubi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
"What is the reason why the legacy is mentioned before the
debt, when the debt takes precedence according to
scholarly consensus, i.e., the debts of the deceased must be
paid off from his estate before his will is executed… this
may be answered in five ways:
1 _ What is meant is that these two issues take
precedence over the issue of inheritance, and the order in which
they are mentioned is not indicative of which one is
more important. Hence the bequest was mentioned first.
2 _ Because the legacy is less binding than debt, it
is mentioned first to show that it is nevertheless
important, as when Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
"What sort of Book is this that leaves neither a
small thing nor a big thing…"
[al-Kahf 18:49]
4 _ The legacy is mentioned first because it is the
share of the poor and needy, and the debt is mentioned
second because it is the share of the lender who can seek it
with force and who has a strong argument to support his case.
5 _ Because the legacy is something that is initiated
by the person, it is mentioned first, whereas the debt
is something that is well established and clear whether
he mentioned it or not.
See al-Jaami' li Ahkaam al-Qur'aan by al-Qurtubi,
vol. 5, p. 74.
Some scholars added two extra points:
"The legacy is mentioned first because the legacy is
an act of kindness and upholding family ties, unlike the
debt which usually results from a kind of neglect. So the
phrase starts with the legacy because it is of greater virtue.
And it was said that the legacy is mentioned first
because it is something that is given for nothing in return,
whereas the debt is given in return for something. So payment
of the legacy is harder for the heirs than payment of the
debt, and paying the legacy may be thought of as a form
of waste, unlike the debt which the heir will pay
with condifence." See al-Tahqeeqaat al-Mardiyaah
fi'l-Mabaahith al-Fardiyyah by Shaykh Saalih
al-Fawzaan, p. 27.
Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
21511: How to deal with papers on which Allaah's name
is mentioned
Question:
What is the sharia's ruling about personal names
found in newspapers etc that include either the prophet's
name or Allah's name (Abdullah, AbdulKarim)? How may
these papers be disposed of or destroyed?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
These papers on which Allaah's name is mentioned
should be kept and protected against being handled
with disrespect until you have finished with them. When
you have finished with them and no longer have any need
of them, they should be buried in a clean place, or burnt,
or kept in a place where they will be protected
against disrespect, such as in a cupboard or on shelves, etc.
Fatwa of Shaykh Ibn Baaz from Fataawa Islamiyyah,
vol. 4, p. 313. (www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
21179: Meaning of the word Pokemon
Question:
What is Meaning of the word Pokemon ?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
We have heard many suggestion as to the meaning of
this world, which may be exaggerations made up by
some people, or they may rumours spread by competitors.
The correct view is that this is a name that comes
from Japan. It is taken from the (English) words
"Pocket monster" and means an animal that is small enough to
fit in one's pocket. "Pokemon" is an abbreviation of
these two words.
And Allaah knows best.
Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
22948: She is asking about the zakaah on white gold,
and about a house that is haunted by the jinn
Question:
1 _ In shops and gold souqs they sell a metal which
is white like silver; some people call it white gold and
some call it platinum. Do I have to pay zakaah on it, and is
the rate of zakaah on it the same as zakaah on yellow gold?
2 _ There is a certain mark that appears on the
forehead of some men, which people call the sign of prayer.
My husband does not have this mark even though he
prays all the prayers regularly in the mosque and is
very religious. Is this mark what is referred to by the
aayah (interpretation of the meaning): "The mark of them
(i.e. of their Faith) is on their faces (foreheads) from the
traces of prostration (during prayers)" [al-Fath 48:29]?
Why don't all men get this mark, and why don't women get
it? Does its absence mean anything?
3 _ We have been living in a rented apartment for
five years, and we have felt and noticed many things that
make us think that the apartment is inhabited by jinn. In the
last few days I have seen a glass cup in the kitchen,
flying and throwing itself against the wall, crashing to the
ground in pieces of glass. We don't know what to do.
4 _ I am a Muslim woman and like many others I am filled with grief at what America and the Jews are
doing to the Muslims. I do not know what is my duty
before Allaah with regard to this matter, and what I can do
so that I will be free of blame before Allaah. Is there
any specific thing that I should do?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
1 _ If it is gold or silver, then zakaah has to be paid on
it. To be certain of what it is, you should consult the
experts in that field.
2 _ This mark does not necessarily appear on the
forehead of every person who prays. Rather people vary in
the nature of their skin, and the fact that it appears does
not mean that a person is righteous. The well-known
view among the mufassireen is that the phrase
"The mark of them (i.e. of their Faith) is on their
faces" refers to the light of obedience.
3 _ You have to read Soorat al-Baqarah in the house
once a day for three days.
4 _ Strive in making du'aa' for your brothers there,
that Allaah may answer your prayers; and give charity to
them as much as you can.
Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
21375: Rulings on revitalizing disused land
Question:
What constitutes revitalizing disused land
(al-mawaat)? What are the rulings on that?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Al-Mawaat is that which has no soul. The meaning
here is land which has no owner.
The fuqahaa' (may Allaah have mercy on them)
defined it as land which is not being used for a specific
purpose and which is not owned by anyone whose ownership
is protected by sharee'ah.
Two things are exempted from this definition:
(1) Land which has come under the protected
ownership of a Muslim or a kaafir via purchase, as a gift or
any other means.
(2) Land which serves the interests of owners
whose ownership of land is protected, such as roads,
courtyards and waterways, or lands which serve the interests of
city dwellers, such as graveyards, garbage dumps,
places designated for Eid prayers, woodlots and pastures.
None of these may be acquired by revitalizing the land.
So if the land is not owned by a person whose
ownership is protected, and it is not serving a specific purpose,
and someone revitalizes it, then he becomes the owner of
it, because of the hadeeth of Jaabir which was attributed
to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him): "Whoever revitalizes dead (disused) land, it becomes
his." This was narrated by Ahmad and al-Tirmidhi, who
classed it as saheeh. There are other ahaadeeth which are
similar in meaning, some of which are narrated in
Saheeh al-Bukhaari.
Most of the fuqahaa' of different regions agreed
that possession of disused land may be taken by
revitalizing it, although they differed as to the conditions attached
to that, except for the disused lands of the Haram
(sanctuary of Makkah) and of `Arafaat, which cannot be
taken possession of by revitalizing them, because that
would make it too difficult to perform the rituals and because
he would be taking land which may have to be used
during the Hajj.
Revitalizing disused land may take several forms:
(1) If a person encloses it with a solid wall to keep
others out, of the kind that is usually used for that purpose,
then he has revitalized it, because the Prophet (peace
and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Whoever
encloses land with a wall, it becomes his." This was narrated
by Ahmad and Abu Dawood from Jaabir, and classed
as saheeh by al-Jaarood; a similar report was narrated
from Samurah. This indicates that enclosing the land is one
of the things by which a person earns the right to
ownership. What should be borne in mind is what the word
haa'it (wall) refers to in linguistic terms; if a person
merely places stones, piles of dirt or a small wall around the
land which does not keep anyone out, or he digs a ditch
around it, then he does not take possession of it, but he will
have more right to revitalize it than anyone else, and he is
not permitted to sell it unless he revitalizes it.
(2) If he digs a well on the disused land and reaches
water, then he has revitalized it. If he digs a well but does
not reach water, then he does not take possession of the
land thereby, but he will have more right to it than
others, because he has started to revitalize it.
(3) If he brings water to the disused land from a spring
or river, then he has revitalized it thereby, because the
water is of more benefit to the land than a wall.
(4) If he drains water from disused land which was
covered with water, because of which the land was not
suitable for farming, and he drains the water so the land
then becomes fit for that use, then he has revitalized it,
because this is of more benefit to the land than the wall by
building which, according to the report, one takes possession
of the land.
Some of the scholars think that revitalizing disused
land should not stop there; rather the matter should be
referred to `urf (custom) and what the people count as
revitalizing land, because through this revitalizing process he
will become the owner of the land. This was the view of
a group of Hanbali imams and others, because
sharee'ah made revitalizing the land the condition for
taking possession of it, but it did not define precisely what
was meant by revitalizing. So we should refer to what
is regarded as revitalizing land according to custom.
The Muslim ruler has the right to give land to one
who will revitalize it, because the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) gave land to Bilaal ibn
al-Haarith al-`Aqeeq, he gave land in Hadramawt to Waa'il ibn
Hajr; and he gave land to `Umar, `Uthmaan and a number
of the Sahaabah. But the recipient does not become the
owner of the land just because he has been given it, unless
he revitalizes it, but he has more right to it than others, so
if he revitalizes it, it becomes his, and if he is unable
to revitalize it, the ruler can take it back and give it
to someone else who is able to revitalize it. `Umar ibn
al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) took
back land from those who were unable to revitalize it.
Whoever reaches a permissible thing first _ apart
from disused land _ such as game [animals or birds for
hunting] or wood, then he has more right to it.
If water that is permissible for everybody (i.e., water
that is not owned by anybody) passes through people's
lands, such as a river or the water of a wadi, then the owner
of the higher land has the right to use the water for
irrigation and to withhold it until it reaches the ankles, then he
should let it flow to people further on, and so on in turn.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)
said, "Irrigate (your land), O Zubayr, then withhold the
water until it reaches the walls between the pits round the
trees" (agreed upon). `Abd al-Razzaaq quoted Mu'ammar
al-Zuhri as saying, "We looked at the words of the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him),
`then withhold the water until it reaches the walls between
the pits round the trees,' and it came up to the ankles."
In other words, they worked it out from the story and
found that it came up to the ankles, so they made that the
standard for deciding how much the first one should take, then
the next one, and so on. Abu Dawood and others
narrated from `Amr ibn Shu'ayb that the Prophet (peace
and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ruled concerning
the waterway of Mazoor (a well known wadi in
Madeenah) that the (owner of the) higher (land) should withhold
the water until it reached the ankles, then the (owner of
the) higher (land) should let it flow to the lower (land).
But if the water is owned, it should be divided among
the owners based on the size of their land, and each of
them may dispose of his share as he wishes.
The leader of the Muslims has the right to protect
the grazing lands of the flocks belonging to the Bayt
al-Maal (treasury) of the Muslims, such as horses used for
jihad and camels given in charity, so long as that will not
harm the people by making things difficult for them. Ibn
`Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) narrated that the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)
protected (the land of) al-Naqee' for the horses of the Muslims. It
is permissible for the ruler to protect the grass of
disused lands for the camels given in charity, the horses of
the mujaahideen, the cattle given as jizyah (tax paid by
non-Muslim subjects of the Islamic state) and lost animals,
if there is a need for that and if that will not cause
hardship to the Muslims.
From al-Mulakhkhas al-Fiqhi by Shaykh Saalih
ibn Fawzan Aal Fawzaan. (www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
21577: Rulings on lending
Question:
What does lending mean? And what are the rulings
on lending?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
The fuqaha' (may Allaah have mercy on them)
defined lending as permitting someone to benefit from an
item which will remain to be returned to its owner afterwards.
This definition excludes things that can only be
benefited from by destroying or consuming them, such as food
and drink.
Lending is prescribed in the Qur'aan and Sunnah, and
by scholarly consensus.
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
"… and refuse al-maa'oon (small kindnesses)."
[al-Maa'oon 107:7]
meaning, things that people exchange amongst themselves. Allaah condemned those who withhold
them from the people who need to borrow them. Those
who believe it is obligatory to lend things quoted this aayah
as evidence, and this was the view chosen by Shaykh
al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him)
in cases where the owner is rich.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him) borrowed a horse in order to give it to Abu Talhah, and
he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)
borrowed some shields from Safwaan ibn Umayyah.
Lending something to a person who needs it is an act
of worship which brings great reward, because it
comes under the general heading of co-operating in
righteousness and piety.
For lending to be valid, it must meet four conditions:
1 _ The one who is lending should be qualified to
donate the item, because lending is a kind of donation; so it
is not valid on the part of a minor, one who is insane, or
a fool.
2 _ The borrower should be qualified to receive
the donation, so that if he accepts it that will be valid.
3 _ The item lent should be something which it
is Islamically permissible to benefit from. So it is
not permissible to lend a Muslim slave to a kaafir, or to
lend hunting equipment to a muhrim, because Allaah
says (interpretation of the meaning):
"… but do not help one another in sin
and transgression…" [al-Maa'idah
5:2]
4 _ The item lent should be something which can be
used but will remain, as described above.
The lender has the right to ask for the item back
whenever he wants, unless asking for it back will cause some
harm to the borrower, such as when he has borrowed a boat
to convey his goods and it is still at sea, or if he asked
him to let him use his wall to rest the ends of his wood on _
he cannot ask him to give the wall back so long as the
ends of his wood are still resting on it.
The borrower has to take better care of the borrowed
item than of his own possessions, so that he can return it
in good condition to its owner, because Allaah
says (interpretation of the meaning):
"Verily, Allaah commands that you should render
back the trusts to those, to whom they are due"[al-Nisaa'
4:58]
This aayah indicates that it is obligatory to render
back trusts, which includes items loaned. The Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Return
trusts to those who entrusted you with them." The texts
indicate that it is obligatory to take care of things that have
been entrusted to you, and that it is obligatory to return
them to their owners in good condition. This general
meaning includes items that are loaned, because the borrower
is entrusted with them and is expected to return them. He
is permitted to benefit from them within the limits
dictated by custom, but he is not permitted to be extravagant
in his use of them in such a way that he destroys them, or
to use them in a way for which they were not designed to
be used, because the owner did not give him permission
to use them in that way, and Allaah says (interpretation
of the meaning):
"Is there any reward for good other than good?"
[al-Rahmaan 55:60]
If the borrower uses it for something other than
the purpose for which he borrowed it, and it is
destroyed, then he is responsible for it, because the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "The one
who borrows is responsible for what he borrows until he
returns it." (Narrated by the five, and classed as saheeh by
al-Albaani). This indicates that it is obligatory to return
what one has taken of another person's property, and that he
is not free of responsibility until he has given it back to
its owner or the owner's deputy.
If it is destroyed whilst being used in the proper
manner, the borrower is not to be held accountable for that,
because the lender gave him permission to use it, and if
that happens to an item that he has been permitted to
use, then he is not to be held accountable for that.
However, the scholars differed as to whether the
borrower is held to be responsible for something that is
destroyed whilst he was using it for a purpose other than that
for which it was borrowed. One group said that he is to
be held accountable for it whether he abused it or not,
because of the general meaning of the words of the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), "The one
who borrows is responsible for what he borrows until he
returns it." This would apply in cases where an animal dies,
a garment gets burned or a borrowed item is stolen.
Another group said that he is not to be held accountable for it if
he did not abuse it, because a person cannot be
held accountable if he did not abuse it. Perhaps this view
is more correct, because the borrower takes it with
the permission of the owner, so it is a trust for him,
like something with which one is entrusted.
The borrower has to look after the loaned item, take
care of it and hasten to return it to its owner when he no
longer has any need of it. He should not be negligent
concerning the item, or expose the item to the risk of
destruction, because it is a trust and because the owner has done
him a favour, and
"Is there any reward for good other than good?"
[al-Rahmaan 55:60 _ interpretation of the
meaning].
From al-Mulakhkhas al-Fiqhi by Shaykh Saalih
ibn Fawzan Aal Fawzaan (www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
21656: Should he give water to a thirsty man when he
fears that he himself may become thirsty in the desert?
Question:
If a person is walking in the desert and he has some
water, but he fears that he may become thirsty later on, and
there is someone who is thirsty now, does he have to give
him water or not?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Ibn Hajar al-Haythami was asked this question and
he replied:
Two views were mentioned in al-Majmoo', in (the
chapter called) al-Muqaddam, and I do not know of anyone
who stated that one of them was more correct than the
other. The one which appears to be more correct is that he
should give water to the one who is thirsty at that time, if there
is the fear that he will die of thirst, because his death
is certain, unlike the one who has the water, who has
the chance of finding more water later on. But if he is in
an arid land where he despairs of finding water and he
thinks it most likely that death is inevitable if he gives away
the water that he has with him, then the matter is subject
to further discussion, and it is more likely that giving
the water in this case is not obligatory. The same applies
if the thirsty person fears that he may lose a limb or
become sick etc. because of his thirst, and the one who has
the water fears that he may die later on, then it is also
more likely to be correct that he does not have to give away
the water.
Al-Fataawa al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kubra, 1/69.
(www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
22140: Can a person be considered as a shaheed if he
dies whilst on a business trip by sea?
Question:
Can a person be considered as a shaheed (martyr) if
he dies whilst on a business trip by sea?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have
mercy on him) was asked about a man who traveled by sea
for the purpose of trade, and he was drowned _ did he die
as a shaheed?
He replied, yes, he died as a shaheed, so long as he
was not travelling for sinful purposes. For it was narrated in
a saheeh report that the Prophet (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) said: "The one who drowns is
a shaheed, the one who dies of a stomach disease is
a shaheed, the one who is burnt to death is a shaheed,
the one who dies of the plague is a shaheed, the woman
who dies giving birth is a shaheed, and the one who is
crushed by a collapsing building is a shaheed." And people
killed in other ways were also mentioned.
Travelling by sea for the purpose of trade is
permissible, if one thinks it is most likely to be safe. If it is not
safe then he should not travel for the purpose of trade; if
he did that [i.e., traveled when it was not safe to do so],
then he has contributed to his own death, and in such a
case we cannot say that he was a shaheed. And Allaah
knows best.
Al-Fataawa al-Kubra, 3/23 (www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
10323: Rulings on seizing things wrongfully
Question:
What is the ruling on taking another person's
property wrongfully (ghasb)?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
Ghasb in Arabic means to seize something
wrongfully. In Fiqh terminology, it means taking the property of
others wrongfully, by force.
Ghasb is haraam according to the consensus of
the Muslims, because Allaah says (interpretation of
the meaning):
"And eat up not one another's property unjustly (in
any illegal way, e.g. stealing, robbing,
deceiving" [al-Baqarah 2:188]
Ghasb is one of the worst kinds of eating up
another person's property unjustly, because the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Your
blood, your property and your honour are sacred to you."
And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
"The property of a Muslim is not permissible unless he
gives his consent."
The property that is seized by force may be real estate
or it may be moveable goods, because the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
"Whoever seizes a handspan of land unlawfully, will surround
him to the depth of seven earths."
The one who has seized anything unlawfully must
repent to Allaah and return the seized property to its owner
and ask him for forgiveness. The Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Whoever has done
any wrong to his brother, let him seek his forgiveness
today, before there will be no dinar and no dirham [i.e., the
Day of Resurrection], when if he has any hasanaat
(good deeds), some of his hasanaat will be taken and given
to the one who was wronged, and if he does not have
any hasanaat, some of the sayi'aat (bad deeds) of the one
who was wronged will be taken and thrown onto him, and
he will be thrown into Hell," or as he (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) said it. If the seized property
is still there, it should be returned as it is, and if it is
not there, then he must replace it.
Imaam al-Muwaffaq said: "The scholars agreed that it
is obligatory to return the seized property if it is still in
its original condition and has not changed."
Similarly, he is obliged to return the seized property
along with any increase, whether it is connected to it or
separate, because that is the growth of the seized property, so
it also belongs to the original owner.
If the one who seized the property has built anything
or planted crops on the seized land, he has to remove
the buildings or crops if the owner asks him to, because
the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)
said, "The sweat of the evildoer counts for nothing."
(Narrated by al-Tirmidhi and others; classed as hasan). If that
has caused any damage to the land, he is to be penalized
for that damage. He also has to erase any traces of
building or planting that remain, so that the land may be
given back to its owner in good condition.
He also has to pay rent covering the period from the
time when he seized the land to the time when he gave it
back, - i.e., the rent for a similar piece of land _ because
he unlawfully prevented its owner from benefiting from
it during this time.
If he seized something and kept it until the price
dropped, he has to make it up to the proper price, according to
the correct opinion.
If he mixed the seized property with something else
that can be told apart from it _ like mixing wheat with
barley _ the one who seized it has separate it and return it . If
he mixed it with something that cannot be told apart from
it _ such as mixing wheat with wheat _ then he has to
give back the equivalent, by volume or weight, without
mixing it. If he mixed it with something the same or better, or
he mixed it with something different that cannot be told
apart from it, then the mixture should be sold and each of
them should take his share of the price, in proportion. If
the value of the seized goods is reduced in this fashion,
and it sells for less than what it would be sold for if sold on
its own, then the one who seized it has to make up the loss.
The scholars also mentioned regarding this topic that
"all hands involved in seizing property by force are
responsible and must guarantee its return." This means that all
hands which received the seized property from the one
who seized it must all guarantee to replace the property if it
is damaged or destroyed. These hands number ten: the
hand of the one who buys it etc.; the hand of the one who
rents it; the hand of the one who takes it in order to possess
it without paying anything in return, such as one
who receives it as a gift; the hand of the one who obtains it
to serve the interests of one who is paying him, such as
an agent; the hand of the one who borrows it; the hand
of the one who seizes it by force unlawfully; the hand of
the one who has it under his control such as one who seeks
to use it for trade; the hand of the one who marries a
woman who was seized by force ; the hand of the one who
takes it in return for something without any financial
transaction being involved; and the hand of the one who destroys
the seized property on behalf of the one who seized it.
In each of these cases, if the second person knows
the truth of the matter, and that the one who is giving it
to him is the one who seized it unlawfully, then he is
also responsible for replacing it, because he transgressed
when he knew that there was no permission from the owner
of the property. If he did not know the truth of the
matter, then only one who seized it in the first place is
responsible for replacing it.
If the seized property is of a type that is usually
rented out, then the one who seized it has to pay rent for
property of that type for the period during which he kept it,
because the benefit is something that is to be measured in
monetary terms, so he has to repay that as well as returning
the property itself.
All of the ways in which the one who seized the
property has disposed of it are null and void, because he did
not have the permission of the owner.
If something is seized and the owner is not known, and
it cannot be returned to him, then he should hand it over
to the governor who can restore it to its rightful place, or
he can give it in charity on behalf of its owner; if he gives
it in charity then the reward for that will go to the owner.
In this manner the one who seized it wrongfully may
be absolved.
Wrongful seizure of property is not restricted only
to taking it by force; it may also include taking it by way
of false dispute or false oaths. Allaah says (interpretation
of the meaning):
"And eat up not one another's property unjustly (in
any illegal way, e.g. stealing, robbing, deceiving), nor
give bribery to the rulers (judges before presenting your
cases) that you may knowingly eat up a part of the property
of others sinfully" [al-Baqarah
2:188]
The matter is serious and the reckoning will be severe.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him) said: "Whoever seizes a handspan of land unlawfully,
will surround him to the depth of seven earths."
And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
"If I decide in a person's favour mistakenly
concerning that which is his brother's right, let him not take it, for
I am giving him a piece of fire."
From al-Mulakhkhas al-Fiqhi by Shaykh Saalih
ibn Fawzaan ibn `Abd-Allaah Aal Fawzaan p:130
(www.islam-qa.com)
Our Price: $13.50 Pages: 300 Downloadable
 |
|
PAGES: 362
(6 in x 9 in)
ISBN: 1861794118 |
| Click: HERE to Download the book and get two other FREE books | |  | and Get immediate access to the
full volume and the
FREE Bonuses |
|
