النص المفهرس

Giving interest money to one's grandson
Question
A person has interest money. His grandson is poor. Can he give the
interest money to his grandson?
Answer
It is permissible to give interest money to one's poor and needy
grandson. When the owner of interest money is not known, it becomes
obligatory to give it in charity. In other words, it is a charity on behalf
of the owner and not from the person who is giving it. The [original]
owner is a stranger with respect to the grandson of the one who is
giving it.
Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Deoband:
Question: If unlawful wealth or invalid profits become accumulated by
a Muslim, and it is not possible to return these amounts to their
rightful owners, then to absolve himself from this tainted wealth, the
jurists state that it must be given in charity. My question is: Will the
recipients be only the poor and needy as is the case with normal
obligatory charities or can it be given to one's parents, children and
wife? Or, like zakāh, does it have to be given to outsiders?
Answer: The order to give unlawful wealth and tainted profits in
charity is based on a certain principle. Namely, the owner of this
wealth is unknown or it is not possible to convey it to him. This wealth
then falls under the ruling of luqtah (a lost item which has been
found). And the ruling for a luqtah is that if one has no hope of finding
its owner, he must give it in charity on behalf of the owner. When the
owner of unlawful wealth is unknown or it is not possible to convey it
to him, then giving this wealth in charity will, like a luqtah, be given
on behalf of the owner of that wealth. This is why it becomes correct
to refer to it as sadaqah (charity). And this is why it becomes lawful for
the poor to accept it. Other than this, just as it was haram for this
person to consume unlawful wealth, it would have been unlawful for
the poor as well. This wealth is given to the poor on behalf of the
owner and not on behalf of the one who earned it unlawfully. The
following texts affirm this:
وفى العشرين من بيوع الهندية .. وإنما طاب للمساكين على قياس اللقطة ...
Similar to the recipients of luqtah, the poor and needy are the
recipients of invalid profits and unlawful wealth which are wajib at-
tasadduq (obligatory to be given in charity). It becomes clear that
459

unlawful wealth which has been classified as obligatory to be given in
charity does not refer to every unlawful wealth. Rather, it only refers
to that unlawful wealth whose owner is unknown or nowhere to be
found, and therefore cannot be returned to him. Furthermore, in such
a case, this wealth falls under the ruling of luqtah and is given in
charity on behalf of the original owner. This is why it is permissible for
the poor to accept it. This wealth is not unlawful for them. It is also for
this reason that it can be given to one's parents, wife and children.
After all, it is not a charity from the person but on behalf of the
original owner.
ان تصدق به على أبيه يكفيه ولا يشترط التصدق على الاجنبي (٣٤٩/٥). وفيه
من متفرقات الغصب سئل يوسف بن محمد عن غاصب ندم على ما فعل و
أراد أن يرد المال إلى صاحبه وقع له اليأس عن وجود صاحبه فتصدق بهذا
العين بل يجوز للفقير أن ينتفع بهذا العين فقال: لا يجوز أن يقبله ولا يجوزله
الانتفاع وإنما يجب عليه رده إلى من دفعه إليه قال: إنما أجاب بهذا الجواب
زجراً لهم كيلا يتسابلوا في أموال الناس أما لو سلك الطريق في معرفة المالك
فلم يجده فحكمه حكم اللقطة، كذا فى التاتارخانية. (الفتاوى الهندية:
١٥٧/٥)١
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Giving interest money to non-Muslims
Question
A person has interest money. Is it necessary to give it to poor Muslims
or can it be given to non-Muslims as well?
Answer
Interest money can be given to non-Muslims but it is better to give it
to a poor Muslim.
قوله وصح دفع غيربا أى وصح دفع غير الزكاة إلى الذمي واجباً كان أو تطوعاً
كصدقة الفطر والكفارات والمنذور لقوله تعالى: "لا ينهاكم الله عن الذين
1 Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Deoband, vol. 2, pp. 383-386.
460

لم يقاتلوكم فى الدين" الآية، وخصت الزكاة بحديث معاذ رضي الله عنه وفيه
خلاف أبي يوسف. ولا يرد عليه العشر لأن مصرف مصرف الزكاة كما قدمناه
فلا يدفع إلى ذمي والصرف فى الكل إلى فقراء المسلمين أحب، وقيد بالذمي لأن
جميع الصدقات فرضاً كانت أو واجبة أو تطوعاً لا تجوز للحربي اتفاقاً كما في
غاية البيان. (البحر الرائق: ٢٤٢/٢، باب المصرف، كوئته)
( وكذا فى فتاوى الشامى: ٣٥١/٢، باب المصرف، سعيد)
Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah:
Interest money can be given to the poor and needy. The latter can
then use it. It is better to give it to Muslims than to non-Muslims.
Muslims are more eligible.1
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Interest money to construct toilets
Question
Is it permissible to use interest money to construct toilets in a
madrasah or school?
Answer
According to some muftīs, it is permissible to use interest money to
construct toilets for a madrasah, school and so on.
Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah:
The issue is a contentious one. It is better to give interest money to a
poor person. There is leeway to use it for the construction of roads and
other public welfare works. It cannot be used for a masjid. It may be
used for the construction of masjid toilets.2
Kifāyatul Muftī:
After receiving interest money, it could be used for public welfare
works or for the fulfilment of the needs of the poor. For example, on
orphans and needy people, stipends for students of madaris and
assisting them to purchase books, for the construction of travellers'
1 Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah, vol. 9, p. 279.
2 Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah, vol. 9, p. 279.
461

lodges, wells, roads, lighting of roads, etc. However, it should not be
spent on a masjid because it contradicts the sanctity of a masjid.1
Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il:
Interest money can be given for the individual needs of a poor person
and on public welfare works such as digging of wells. It should not be
used for the construction of masajid and madaris. However, the
'ulama' permitted its use for the construction of toilets.2
Islāmī Fiqh:
If a person is forced to deposit money in a bank and he receives
interest on it, he must not use it on himself or his family. Instead, he
must give it to the poor without the intention of reward. Alternatively,
he may give it to a reliable person who will then use it for public
welfare works such as the construction of roads, public toilets, etc.3
However, after resorting to the leeway of ownership, there has to be
caution in using interest money for the construction of toilets.
Nizām al-Fatāwā:
After giving it in the ownership of a poor person, it may be used for
the cleaning of masjid toilets. This is how the leeway will be applied:
Give the interest money to poor people who are eligible and make
them owners of it. The latter will then give it as a donation to the
masjid.
وقدمنا أن الحيلة أن يتصدق على الفقير، ثم يأمره بفعل بذه الأشياء. الدر
المختار مع رد المحتار: ٣٤٥/٢، كتاب الزكوة، باب المصرف، سعيد. (نظام
الفتاوى: ١٩٩/١)
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
The recipient of luqtah and usury
Question
Are the recipients of luqtah and usury the same or are they different?
1 Kifāyatul Muftī, vol. 7, p. 105.
2 Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 1, p. 253.
3 Islāmī Fiqh, vol. 2, p. 369.
462

Answer
The recipients of both are more or less the same. There doesn't seem
to be any difference. For example, a luqtah can be given to poor non-
Muslims. Interest money can also be given to them. The conferring of
ownership is not necessary for a luqtah. It can be used for public
welfare works and the shrouding and burial of deceased persons. In
the same way, some 'ulama' are of the view that ownership is not
necessary for interest money. Thus, interest and luqtah are not wajib
at-tasadduq. At the same time, they are not wajib at-tamlīk.
الدر المختار:
ورابعها الضوائع مثل مالا یکون له أناس وارثونا
فمصرف الأولین أتى بنص و ثالثها حواه مقاتلونا
ورابعها فمصرف جهات تساوى النفع فيها المسلمونا
قوله الضوائع: جمع ضائعة أى اللقطات ... وقوله ورابعها فمصرف جهات،
موافق لما نقله ابن الضياء في شرح الغزنوية عن البزدوي من أنه يصرف إلى
المرضى والزمنى واللقيط وعمارة القناطر والرباطات والثغور والمساجد وما
أشبه ذلك، ولكنه مخالف لما فى الهداية والزيلعي أفاده الشرنبلالي أى فإن
الذي فى الهداية وعامة الكتب أن الذي يصرف في مصالح المسلمين بو الثالث
كما مر، وأما الرابع فمصرف المشهور بو اللقيط والفقير والفقراء الذين لا
أولياء لهم فيعطى منه نفقتهم وأدويتهم وكفنهم وعقل جنايتهم كما فى
الزيلعى وغيره. (الدر المختار مع فتاوى الشامى: ٣٣٨/٢، باب العشر، سعيد)
المحيط البربانى:
اللقطات والتركات تصرف إلى ما فيه صلاح المسلمين، كمال الخراج والجزية
إلا أنه يجعل لها بيت على حدة، لما أنه ربما يظهر لها مستحق بعينها. وقال:
الخراج والجزية تصرف إلى المقاتلة، وإلى سد ثغور المسلمين، وبناء الحصون فى
463

الثغور وإلى مراصد الطريق في دار الإسلام ليقع الأمن عن قطع الطريق من
جهة اللصوص، وإلى كري الأنهار العظام الذي فيه صلاح المسلمين، وإلى من
فرغ نفسه لعمل المسلمين نحو القضاة والمحتسب والمفتين والمؤذنين والمعلمين
وإلى عمارة المساجد والقناطر وإلى معالجة المرضى إذا كانوا فقراء وإلى تكفين
الموتى الذين لا مال لهم وما أشبه ذلك، والحاصل: أن هذا النوع يصرف إلى ما
فيه صلاح الدين وصلاح دار الإسلام والمسلمين. (المحيط البربانى: ٦٢٣/٢،
الفصل السابع فى تعجيل الخراج)
البحر الرائق:
والرابع اللقطات والتركات التي لا وارث لها وديات مقتول لا ولي له قالوا:
مصرف اللقيط الفقير والفقراء الذين لا أولياء لهم يعطون من نفقتهم
وأدويتهم ويكفن به موتابم. (البحر الرائق: ١٢٨/٥، فصل فى الجزية، وكذا فى
تبيين الحقائق: ٢٨٣/٣)
وفى الفتاوى الهندية: والرابع اللقطات بكذا في محيط السرخسي وما أخذ من
تركة الميت الذى مات ولم يترك وارثاً أو ترك زوجاً أو زوجة وبذا النوع
يصرف إلى نفقة المرضى وأدويتهم وبم فقراء وإلى كفن الموتى الذين لا مال
لهم. (الفتاوى الهندية: ١٩١/١، باب فى صدقة الفطر. وكذا فى مجمع الانهر فى
شرح ملتقى الابحر: ٤٨٦/٢، فى تقسيم القسمة، بيروت)
Fatāwā 'Uthmānī:
It is almost unanimously accepted that tainted/filthy earning is wajib
at-tasadduq either because its rightful owner is unknown or it is not
possible to return it to him. This is why it falls under the ruling of
luqtah, and the ruling for the latter is that it is wajib at-tasadduq.
When listing the recipients of the Bayt al-Mal, the Hanafi jurists state
that it is only the poor who are the eligible recipients of a luqtah. From
this, the ruling has been extracted that, like zakah, it is essential for
the recipient to take ownership of it. However, this conclusion is
questionable.
464

Firstly, because some Hanafi jurists do not reserve a luqtah for the
poor alone. Rather, they say that it can be used for all works which are
of benefit to the Muslims. 'Allamah Shamī rahimahullah quotes from
‘Allāmah Bazdawī rahimahullāh:
أنه يصرف إلى المرضى والزمنى ...
Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar quotes a poem from 'Allamah ibn ash-Shahinah
which lists the recipients of the Bayt al-Mal. The same view is
preferred in it. However, 'Allamah Shāmī rahimahullah then makes an
objection to it by stating that books of jurisprudence in general state
that the poor are the recipients of a luqtah. He writes:
وأما الرابع فمصرف المشهور بو اللقيط الفقير والفقراء الذين لا أولياء لهم
فيعطى من نفقتهم وأدويتهم وكفنهم وعقل جنايتهم.
The same statement is found in several other juridical texts on the
issue of the recipient of a luqtah. However, after pondering over them,
the point which we learn is that although the jurists specified the poor
as the recipients for a luqtah, they did not lay down the condition of
ownership. A clear proof of this is that the shrouding of a deceased
poor person has been included as a beneficiary of a luqtah. Whereas,
ownership is not established for the shrouding of a deceased person.
We conclude from this that a luqtah can be given to the poor without
ownership.1
Hakīmul Ummat Hadrat Thanwī rahimahullah said that a luqtah can
be used for welfare works:
A person brought a stamp to me and said: "You gave me a bundle of
envelops to discard. I found this stamp in one of the envelops." I asked:
"What is the ruling with regard to stamps of this nature?" He said:
"This is a luqtah, and the ruling with regard to it is that if it is not
possible to identify its owner, it must be given for some good welfare
work." I am therefore giving it to the madrasah.2
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
1 Fatāwā 'Uthmānī, vol. 3, p. 136.
2 Ashraf al-Ahkām, p. 197 as quoted from Husn al-'Azīz, vol. 3, p. 6.
465

Ownership of unlawful wealth given in charity
Question
In a non-Muslim country, it is necessary to give in charity all monies
which have been acquired unlawfully, e.g. interest money. Is it
necessary to give it to the poor or can it be given for other welfare
works without giving it over in the ownership of the poor?
Answer
Some muftīs are of the view that wealth which has the element of
filthiness and unlawfulness in it has to be given to the poor. However,
other muftīs say that it can be used for public welfare works, e.g.
building of toilets, construction of roads, etc. They differentiate
between an obligatory charity (sadaqah wajibah) and wajib at-
tasadduq (that which is obligatory to give in charity). They say that
ownership by a poor person is necessary for an obligatory charity such
as zakāh and sadaqatul fitr. On the other hand, if something is
classified as wajib at-tasadduq, then ownership by a poor person is not
necessary.
When Rasūlullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam reached the area which
had been inhabited by the Thamud nation, and the Sahabah used the
water of those wells to make dough, he ordered them to feed the
dough to the camels.
عن ابن عمر رضي الله عنه أن الناس نزلوا مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم
أرض ثمود الحجر فاستقوا من بئريا واعتجنوا به فأمريم رسول الله صلى الله
عليه وسلم أن يهريقوا ما استقوا من بئريا وأن يعلفوا الإبل العجين وأمريم أن
يستقوا من البئر التي كانت تردبا الناقة. (رواه البخارى: ٤٧٨/١)
Another narration states that he ordered for the dough to be thrown
away. The dough had either become makrūh tahrīmī or tanzīhī. In
both cases, feeding it to the camels means that when something
becomes tainted and one cannot use it for one's self, there is leeway to
use it for some welfare work. Yes, alcohol has to be poured out and
discarded, it cannot be owned. 'Allāmah 'Aynī rahimahullah quotes
both views with regard to this dough, i.e. it is makrūh tahrīmī or
tanzīhī.
If a wealthy person finds a luqtah, it is obligatory on him to give it in
charity. He cannot use it for himself. However, the jurists permit its
use for the shrouding and burial of a deceased person.
466

وأما الرابع فمصرف المشهور بو اللقيط الفقير والفقراء الذين لا أولياء لهم
فيعطى من نفقتهم وأدويتهم وكفنهم وعقل جنايتهم.
‘Allāmah Bazdawī rahimahullāh writes:
أن يصرف إلى المرضى والزمنى واللقيط وعمارة القناطر والرباطات والثغور
والمساجد وما أشبه ذلك. (شامی: ٣٢٨/٢، سعيد)
Muftī Kifāyatullah Sahib rahimahullah writes with reference to money
which is deposited in a bank:
When money is deposited in a bank and interest is received for it, it
must be withdrawn so that one does not get the sin of aiding the
propagation of Christianity and Muslims becoming apostates. After
withdrawing the interest money, it must be used for public welfare
works or for the fulfilment of the needs of the poor. For example, on
orphans, the needy, stipends for students of Dīnī madaris, for their
textbooks, the construction of travellers' lodges, the digging of wells,
the construction of roads, the lighting of streets, etc. All these avenues
are permissible. However, it must not be spent on a masjid as this
negates its sanctity.1
Further details can be found in Fatāwā 'Uthmānī. This also seems to be
the view of Hadrat Muftī Muhammad Taqi 'Uthmanī, Hadrat Muftī
Muhammad Rafi 'Uthmanī and other muftīs. That is, tainted wealth is
wajib at-tasadduq, but it is not like obligatory charity. Sadaqah also
refers to what is not wajib at-tamlīk.
عن أبي بريرة رضي الله عنه قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: إذا
مات الإنسان انقطع عمله إلا من ثلاث، صدقة جارية، أو علم ينتفع به، أو
ولد صالح يدعوله. (رواه مسلم)
The word sadaqah is also used to refer to a waqf.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
1 Kifāyatul Muftī, vol. 8, p. 67.
467

Making profit from unlawful wealth
Question
A person gave R1000 to a person and collected R1500 from him. The
R500 is wajib at-tasadduq. However, he mistakenly spent the R500 in
some business and made R1000 from it. Now is this additional R500
also wajib at-tasadduq or can he keep it and spend it?
Answer
A person pointed to unlawful wealth and bought something with it.
The thing to which he pointed was paid with unlawful wealth. The
income of it is impermissible and it is wajib at-tasadduq. However, if
he bought some unlawful item without pointing to it, or, he pointed to
the unlawful item but paid it with lawful wealth, then Imam Abul
Hasan Karkhi rahimahullah is of the view that the profit acquired from
it will be lawful. Only the original unlawful wealth will be wajib at-
tasadduq.
Nonetheless, this does not mean that unlawful wealth should be made
a means for earning and making profits. It is totally forbidden to do
this. Yes, if a person does it mistakenly, then the ruling will be as
stated by Imām Karkhī rahimahullāh.
الدر المختار مع رد المحتار:
اكتسب حراماً واشترى به أو بالدرابم المغصوبة شيئاً، قال الكرخى: إن نقد
قبل البيع تصدق بالربح وإلا لا وفي رد المحتار: (قوله اكتسب حراماً، الخ)
توضيح المسألة ما فى التاتارخانية حيث قال: رجل اكتسب مالاً من حرام ثم
اشترى فهذا على خمسة أوجه إما أن دفع تلك الدرابم إلى البائع أولاً ثم اشترى
من بها أو اشترى قبل الدفع بها ودفعها أو اشترى قبل الدفع بها ودفع غیرہا أو
اشترى مطلقاً ودفع تلک الدرابم أو اشترى بدرابم آخر ودفع تلك الدرابم، ...
قال الكرخى فى الوجه الأول والثاني لا يطيب، وفى الثلاث الأخيرة يطيب،
وقال أبو بكر: لا يطيب فى الكل لكن الفتوى الآن على قول الكرخي دفعاً
للحرج عن الناس. وفى الوالوالجية: وقال بعضهم: لا يطيب فى الوجوه كلها وہو
468

المختار ولكن الفتوى اليوم على قول الكرخي دفعاً للحرج لكثرة الحرام.
(الدر المختار مع رد المحتار: ٢٣٥/٥، سعيد)
لو تصرف فى المغصوب والوديعة بأن باعه وربح فيه إذا كان ذلك متعيناً
بالإشارة أو بالشراء بدرايم الوديعة أو الغصب ونقدبا يتصدق بربح حصل
فيهما إذا كانا مما يتعين بالإشارة وإن كانا مما لا يتعين فعلى أربعة أوجه فإن
أشار إليها ونقديا فكذلك يتصدق وإن أشار إليها ونقد غيربا أو أشار إلى
غيربا ونقديا أو أطلق ولم يشر ونقدبا لا يتصدق فى الصور الثلاث عند
الكرخي قيل: وبه يفتى. (الدر المختار: ١٨٩/٦، سعيد)
وكذا في حاشية الطحطاوي على الدر المختار وزاد بقوله: والمختار أنه لا يحل
مطلقاً كذا فى الملتقى ولو بعد الضمان بو الصحيح كما في فتاوى نوازل
واختار بعضهم الفتوى على قول الكرخي في زماننا لكثرة الحرام وبذا كله على
قولهما وعند أبي يوسف لا يتصدق بشيء منه كما لو اختلف الجنس ذكره
الزيلعي. (حاشية الطحطاوى على الدر المختار: ١٠٥/٤)
To sum up, the R500 which was acquired as a profit is not wajib at-
tasadduq. It can be used. However, one should not do this in the future
because unlawful wealth must be given in charity immediately.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Giving as charity an amount which is different from the interest money
Question
A person has an amount of money in a British bank and he receives
interest for it. He has some other money with him, and he wants to
give it in charity in lieu of the interest which is being added to his
account in Britain. Will he absolve himself in this way or is it necessary
for him to withdraw exactly that amount of interest from the British
bank and give it in charity?
Answer
It is preferable and better to give the same money in charity. However,
if the person wants to free himself from the interest money, and
469

therefore gives into charity some other money, he will absolve himself
of his responsibility. This is because notes are not identifiable
specifically. Furthermore, banking institutions do not pay the interest
separately; they merely add it to the original amount which was
deposited. It is therefore impossible to distinguish the original money
from the interest money.
الدر المختار مع رد المحتار:
لو خلط السلطان المال المغصوب بمالم ملكه، لأن الخلط استهلاك إذا لم
يمكن تميزه عند أبي حنيفة، وقوله أرفق، إذ قلما يخلو مال عن غصب. وفى
الشامية: قوله لأن الخلط استهلاك، أى بمنزلة من حيث أن حق الغير يتعلق
بالذمة، لا بالأعيان،.لأنا نقول: إنه لما خلطها ملكها، وصار مثلها ديناً في
ذمته، لا عينها. (الدر المختار مع رد المحتار: ٢٩٠/٢، مطلب فيما لو صادر
السلطان جائزاً، سعيد)
الفتاوى البزازية:
ما يأخذه الأعونة من الأموال ظلماً ويخلط بماله وبمال مظلوم آخر يصير
ملكاً له وينقطع حق الأول فلا يكون أخذه عندنا حراماً محضاً نعم لا يباح
الانتفاع به قبل أداء البدل فى الصحيح من المذيب. (الفتاوى البزازية على
بامش الهندية، قبيل كتاب الزكاة، ٨٣/٤)
(وكذا فى فتاوى الشامى: ٢٩٢/٢، مطلب فى التصدق من المال الحرام، سعيد)
A clear example for this issue is when collectors are appointed by the
madaris to go around collecting donations for the madrasah. Quite
often, they cannot return immediately after collecting the donations.
Consequently, the 'ulama' have permitted that if a collector cannot
reach the madrasah while the latter needs the money immediately, he
may inform his family to give a certain amount of money from his own
money. The 'ulama' state that since he has paid the madrasah from his
personal money, he would have absolved himself from his
responsibility. It will be totally permissible for him to use the zakāh
money [which he had collected] for himself.
470

The sending of zakah monies from one country to another is a
common practice. Here too, the same currency of the receiving
country is not given. Rather, it is exchanged. For example, zakāh
containing rands, pounds or dollars is distributed among the poor of
India and Pakistan in rupees. Refer to Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Zakarīyyā,
vol. 3, p. 193.
To sum up, it is not good to pay interest from one's pure money. Once
the interest is withdrawn, it must be handed over immediately to the
poor. Also, it is not permissible to deposit money in a bank with the
intention of earning interest.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Changing interest money for an item
Question
A person buys certain items with interest money and gives them to a
poor person. Is this permissible? For example, he bought a sewing
machine with interest money and gave it to a poor person. Is it
necessary to give the actual interest money to the poor without
intention of reward, or is it permissible to buy something and give it to
him?
Answer
The point which we gauge from the writings of the jurists is that it is
necessary to convey the original wealth to the poor. When the original
owner is unknown, the original amount or item has to be given in
charity. It is not permissible to change it.
فتاوى الشامى:
فيجب رد عين الربا لو قائماً لا رد ضمان يعني إنما يجب رد ضمان لو
استهلكه. (فتاوى الشامى: ١٦٩/٥، باب الربا، سعيد)
(ويجب رد عين المغصوب) لقوله عليه السلام على اليد ما أخذت حتى ترد
ولقوله عليه السلام "لا يحل لأحدكم أن يأخذ مال أخير لاعباً ولا جاداً،
وإن أخذه فليرده عليه، زيلعي، وظابره أن رد العين بو الواجب الأصلي بو
الصحیح. (فتاوى الشامى: ١٨٤/٦، كتاب الغصب، سعيد)
471

فتح القدير:
قال إذا تغيرت العين المغصوبة بفعل الغاصب حتى زال اسمها وعظم منافعها
زال ملك المغصوب من عنها وملكها الغاصب وضمنها ولا يحل له الانتفاع
بها حتى يؤدى بدلها وقال :... فإن موجب أصل الغصب إنما بورد العين ولا
يصار إلى رد المثل أو القيمة إلا بعد بلاك العين فلم يكن رد المثل أو القيمة
إلا بعد بلاك العين. (فتح القدير مع الهداية: ٣٣٢/٩، دار الفكر)
(قوله وإنما الذي يجب حقاً للشرع) قال بعض الفضلاء: قد علمت أن العقد
المذکور تعلق بسببه حقان حق العبد وہو رد عين إن كان باقياً ورد ضمان إن
مستهلكاً وحق الشرع وبورد عينه بنقض العقد السابق المنهي عنه شرعاً.
(منحة الخالق على بامش البحر الرائق: ١٢٥/٦، باب الربا، كوئته)
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Paying traffic fines with interest money
Question
Can interest money be used to pay traffic fines?
Answer
It is necessary to obey those laws of the government which are not in
conflict with the Shari'ah. Yes, if they are oppressive or against the
Shari'ah, then a person must not obey them. The laws which apply to
roads and highways are promulgated for the safety and ease of people.
It will therefore be necessary to abide by them. If a person commits an
offence and the police stop him and fine him, it will be a valid fine and
it is not permissible to pay it with interest money. Yes, if the police
overcharges, then one may pay the fine from the interest which was
received from a government bank. It is not permissible to give interest
which was collected from a private bank for the payment of a
government fine.
وتجب طاعة الإمام عادلاً كان أو جائراً إذا لم يخالف الشرع. (فتاوى الشامى:
٢٦٣/٤، سعيد)
472

Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah:
When a person lives under a government, he is legally obliged to obey
its laws. If he breaks the law, he will be committing an offence.1
(قوله عن طاعته) ... ومثله ما ذكره عن الدرر وجهم أنه إذا لم يكن كذلك
يكون عاجزاً أو جائراً ظالماً يجوز الخروج عليه. (فتاوى الشامى: ٢٦٤/٤،
سعيد)
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Paying for service charges with interest money
Question
Is it permissible to pay a bank's service charges with interest money?
A bank generally has a monthly service charge. This charge is applied
proportionately to its creditors and debtors. It is normally used to pay
the bank's directors, workers, guards, etc.
Answer
Bank workers are responsible for accounts, protection, safeguarding
and so on. They are paid by the bank. Those who deposit their money
in the bank or take loans from banks, get together to pay the workers.
The fundamental issue is one of need. Those who are in need of this
work will have to be paid. After looking at the issue deeply, we
conclude that the need is on both sides. The bank is in need in the
sense that it trades with people's money and makes a profit from it.
Depositors are also in need because their monies are protected. They
can withdraw their money whenever they want. Because of their need,
they presented themselves at the bank; the bank did not extend an
invitation to them. The service charge of the bank is therefore valid
and it is not permissible to pay for it with interest money. If not, it will
entail deriving benefits from interest money. And the Shari'ah does
not permit deriving any benefit from usury. Exercising caution on this
issue is essential.
1 Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah, vol. 16, p. 148.
473

الهداية:
وأجرة الكيال وناقد الثمن على البائع أما الكيل فلا بد من للتسليم وبو على
البائع ومعنى بذا إذا بيع مكايلة، وكذا أجرة الوزان والزراع والعداد، وأما
النقد فالمذكور رواية ابن رستم عن محمد لأن النقد يكون بعد التسليم، ألا
ترى أن يكون بعد الوزن والبائع بو المحتاج إليه ليميز ما تعلق به حق من
غيره أو ليعرف المعيب ليرده، وفي رواية ابن سماعة عن على المشترى لأنه
يحتاج إلى تسليم الجيد المقدر، والجودة تعرف بالنقد كما يعرف القدر بالوزن
فيكون عليه وأجرة وزان الثمن على المشتري لما بينا أنه بو المحتاج إلى تسليم
الثمن وبالوزن يتحقق التسليم. (الهداية: ٢٩/٣)
( وكذا فى الفتاوى الهندية: ٢٨/٣، الفصل السادس فيما يلزم المتعاقدين من
المؤنة فى تسليم المبيع والثمن. والمحيط البربانى، الفصل الثالث فى قبض المبيع
بإذن البائع، ٢٧١/٦. والبحر الرائق: ٣٠٦/٥، كتاب البيوع. وكذا فى مجمع الانهر
شرح ملتقى الابحر: ٣١/٣، دار الكتب العلمية، بيروت)
بحوث فى قضايا فقهية معاصرة:
لا مانع شرعاً من أن يطالب البنك مستقرضيه بأداء مبلغ مقابل التكلفات
الإدارية التي تحملها في تقويم المشروعات، ومتابعة تنفيذها، ما دام ذلك المبلغ
لا يجاوز التكلفات الفعلية الواقعة في ذلك المشروع خاصة، فإن كان من
الممكن تحديد بذه التكلفات بدقة، فهو الأنسب الأوفق بأحكام الشرعية، فإنه
لا غبار على جوازه .. ما دامت بذه العمولة لا تجاوز أجر المثل على مثل بذه
الأعمال، فإن الذي لا يجوز مطالبة الربح أو الأجر عليه، بو عمل القرض
بنفسه، أما الأعمال الإدارية بالنسبة لذلك القرض، فلا يجب شرعاً أن تكون
مجانية ...
474

ونظير ذلك ما ذكره الفقهاء أن القاضي والمفتي لا يسع لهما مطالبة الأجر من
الخصم، أو المستفتي، ولكن يجوز لهما أن يطالبه بأجرة كتابة الفتوى، أو
كتابة الوثائق، والمحاضر والسجلات، ما دامت بذه الأجرة لا تجاوز أجر المثل
على مثل بذه الأعمال، ولا تتخذ حيلة لاكتساب الأجرة على الإفتاء والقضاء
نفسها.
وجاء فى الدر المختار للحصكفى: يستحق القاضى الأجر على كتب الوثائق،
والمحاضر، والسجلات قدر ما يجوز لغيره كالمفتي، فإنه يستحق أجر المثل على
كتابة الفتوى لأن الواجب عليه الجواب باللسان دون الكتابة بالبنان، ومع
بذا الكف أولى، احترازاً عن القيل والقال، وصيانة لماء الوجه عن الابتذال.
ويقول العلامة ابن عابدين تحته:
قال فى جامع الفصولين: للقاضي أن يأخذ ما يجوز لغيره، وما قيل في كل ألف
خمسة درابم، لا نقول به، ولا يليق ذلك بالفقه، وأى مشقة للكاتب في كثرة
الثمن؟ وإنما أجر مثله بقدر مشقته أو بقدر عمله في صنعته أيضاً كحكاك،
وثقاب يستاجر بأجر كثير في مشقة قليلة، وقال بعض الفضلاء: أفهم ذلك
جواز أخذ الأجرة الزائدة، وإن كان العمل مشقته قليلة ونظريم لمنفعة
المكتوب له، قلت: ولا يخرج ذلك عن أجرة مثله فإن من تفرغ لهذا العمل،
كثقاب اللآلي مثلاً لا يأخذ الأجر على قدر مشقته، فإنه بمؤنت، ولو ألزمناه
ذلك لزم ضياع بذه الصنعة، فكان ذلك أجر مثله. (رد المحتار: ٩٢/٦، كتاب
الاجارة، مسائل شتى، سعيد). (بحوث فى قضايا فقهية معاصرة: ٢٠٤/١-٢٠٦)
From the above-quoted texts it seems that it is permissible to collect
service fees from a debtor, however, the same reason is found for a
person wanting a loan. A bank bears the expenses of safeguarding,
accounting and other arrangements. It is not necessary that it must
bear all this for free. Rather, it may levy appropriate charges from its
depositors for the safety of their monies. Thus, I do not see any reason
475

to say that these charges are impermissible. Since a service charge is
valid, it will be impermissible to use interest money to pay for it.
بذا ما عندي إن كان الصواب فمن الله وإن كان الخطأ فمني ومن الشيطان.
"ولعل الله يحدث بعد ذلك أمرا."
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
Giving interest money as a bribe
Question
A person needs a certain task to be done and has to pay a bribe for it.
Can he use interest money to pay it?
Answer
It is not permissible to use interest money to pay a bribe. The person
will be committing a double sin; one for using interest money and the
other for bribery.
Āp Ke Masā'il Aur Oen Kā Hull:
Question: Usury is haram and so is bribery. How is it to spend a haram
on something which is haram? What I mean is that is it permissible to
use interest money to pay a bribe?
Answer: A person will be committing two sins; accepting interest
money and giving a bribe.1
Mahmūd al-Fatāwā:
Question: If a person wants to construct houses on agricultural land,
the government imposes something called NA. The government and
the officers who are in charge cause us immense inconvenience and
stress. The government charges a certain amount to obtain an NA and
the officers demand bribes. Can interest money be given for these two
[NA and bribes]?
Answer: Whatever amount the government collects as NA can be paid
with interest money if the latter is received from a government bank.
However, the interest money cannot be given to the officers as bribery
because that money does not go to the government.2
1 Āp Ke Masā'il Aur Oen Kā Hull, vol. 6, p. 242.
2 Mahmūd al-Fatāwā, vol. 3, p. 72.
476

Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
477

INSURANCE
Medical aid
Question
Is medical aid permissible?
Answer
The medical aid schemes which are in vogue in non-Muslim countries
ought to be permissible as an ijarah contract. The essence of this
contract is that one party gives a specified amount while the other
party bears the responsibility of the medical treatment. There are two
parallels to this:
1. It is a common practice in the villages, towns and cities of India and
Pakistan for barbers, ironmongers, carpenters, etc. to take the
responsibility of carrying out work for people. With the maturing of
crops, the people give them some of the crop or some cash money.
This practice was common in Afghanistan, India, Deoband, Thanah
Bhawan, Saharanpur and other places. The barber took the
responsibility of setting right the hair of members of a family. This
responsibility is unspecified (majhul) but not a cause of disputes.
When the crops mature, the people give him some of the grain or some
cash money. In a medical aid, one party takes the responsibility of
medical treatment. In both scenarios, there is ignorance with regard to
the actual work, but it is not a cause of dispute.
It is stated in al-Hidayah that if a person appoints another as a
representative by saying: "Try and effect a reconciliation on my behalf
with respect to a murder," and the representative is successful in this,
then the representative is not obliged to pay the amount for the
reconciliation. However, if the representative accepted the
responsibility of paying the amount, it will be obligatory on him. The
author of al-Hidayah then writes:
لأنه حينئذ مواخذ بعقد الضمان. (الهداية: ٢٥٠١٣، باب التبرع بالصلح
والتوكيل به)
2. It is unanimously permitted to hire a wet-nurse. Here too, one party
takes the responsibility of suckling an infant while the other party
pays a wage for it. The times when the child will be fed are unknown,
but this ignorance is not a cause of dispute. It is therefore permitted by
all scholars.
478