Thursday, 9/6/2016 | 5:05 UTC+0

9th Fiqhi Seminar

Date: October 11- 14, 1996 Venue: Jaipur

The four day long seminar held between 11-14 October 1996 at Jamia-tul- Hidaya (Jaipur) assumes extraordinary significance in the Indian perspective owing to the fact that this Ninth Fiqhi Seminar was attended by no less than 300 luminaries including prominent jurists and scholars hailing from about 97 madrasas and educational institutions spread over the length and breadth of 14 states in India, besides a handsome participation from foreign countries as well.

However, there was no consensus on the issue of the ‘Nikahnama’ whilst important conclusions were arrived at on all other issues.

The part of discussion about ‘Zabiha by machines’ over which no conclusion could be drawn during the Seventh Fiqh Seminar was once again discussed thread bare this time. The conclusions arrived at in the Seminar are as follows:

Shares in the eyes of Shariah   

  1. BEquity share in some company is a proof of limited ownership of the shareholder in the company, and not a mere indication that he has invested that much amount in it.
  2. The buying of shares of the companies in their initial stages, which are in the process of collecting their capital, is not buying, rather it is participating or having a share in the company, from the Shariah point of view.
  3. Generally, the other properties of the company have more value than it’s capital. That’s precisely why it is sound to purchase the shares f any company. Nevertheless, if it is known that the amount to be paid is either less than or equal to the face value of shares, then under these circumstances it would not be correct to buy these shares at a price less than or more than it’s fixed amount.
  4. The buying and selling of shares of the companies which indulge in impermissible business like that of liquor or the meat of swine or interest-bearing loans is strictly invalid and impermissible.
  5. The delegates attending the Seminar observe that the establishment of companies which would conduct business on purely Islamic lines is feasible in India. The Seminar urges the Muslim traders and prominent economists to feel their religious responsibilities and strive to set up such business houses which would work solely on Islamic lines.

    Nevertheless, since such companies have not been established in India as yet or are present in a negligibly small number which work strictly on Islamic lines, therefore those Muslims who have capital and are unable to invest in valid and permissible business owing to certain circumstances, can purchase the shares of the companies carrying permissible business (for example, manufacturing of engineering instruments or items of general use) even if they have to indulge in interest transactions owing to legal liabilities and constraints.
  6. Muslims holding shares in such companies, whose prime business is permissible, although they are, incidentally, involved in certain impermissible practices, should try and forbid the company from such impermissible practices in future at the annual general meetings of shareholders. Furthermore, they should convince other shareholders too through mutual discussions in order to garner their support during the meeting.
  7. In case, interest is a part of the profits earned by the company in a fiscal year and it’s quantity is known, then it should be deducted from the profits earned by the shareholders and should be given away in charity (sadqah) without expecting any recompense for it.
  8. In case, interest is a part the profits reaped by the company, thereafter the interest- included income is invested in a business venture and profits, thus, earned out of it, then the interest shall be excluded from the profit earned proportionately and it should be given away as charity without expecting any recompense.

    Note : As to the clauses 7 & 8 mentioned above, Maulana Rais-ul- Ahrar Nadvi is of the opinion that such interest should be shelled out to non- Muslims alone.
  9. A company is a legal entity which represents the collective status of the shareholders. The Board of Directors is a group of people elected by the company, which expends on behalf of the company and in this way enjoys the status of an authourized representative of the shareholders. Moreover, it is incumbent upon all the shareholders to share the liabilities of expenditure of the Board of Directors provided they are in conformity with the rules and regulations laid down by the company.
  10. It is quite right to trade in the shares of those companies which undertake, solely, permissible business.
  11. The future sale, the prime objective of which is not meant to buy shares rather to neutralize their losses and gains with fluctuating values of shares is actually an interest-bearing business. It is quite invalid in the eyes of Islamic Shariah because it is an explicit and apparent form of gambling.
  12. The forward sale in which the sale does take place but the actual implementation of the transaction takes place in future, is not a sale rather, is an agreement to sell. The actual sale would take place only after the offer and its acceptance on the scheduled date.
  13. It would not be valid to sell off the shares before getting the share certificates in a cash/spot sale.
  14. The shareholder becomes the legal and authorised holder of the shares, once he gets the share certificates. He can sell off his shares even if his name has not been endorsed with the company due to certain official impediments.
  15. It is obviously proper to act as a broker in those transactions in which the buying or selling of shares is permitted. On the contrary, it is not permissible for a person to act as a broker in the transactions of those companies, which undertake impermissible business.

Trade of Fish which are still in water   

Prophet Mohammad (S.A.W) has refrained people form trading in fishes, still living in waters. Nowadays, several kinds of fish trade have surfaced up, which might be falling under this category. In this perspective, the Islamic Fiqh Academy, in its Ninth Seminar, held at Jamiat-ul-Hidaya (Jaipur) took up the issue for a thread bare discussion and arrived at the following conclusions :

  1. The rivers, streams or canals which are not the personal property or asset of any particular individual and which are leased out by the government to individuals, cooperative societies or village ‘panchayats’ for a specified period of time are waters at which fishing can be carried out. It is simply a matter of lease contract and hence permissible otherwise. However, the government ought not to lease out such lakes or pools which may have a baneful effect on the local populace.
  2. It would certainly not be valid to sell off the fishes still living in waters. In case the seller is the rightful owner of the fishes in the pool, then the sale would stand ‘Fasid’ under these circumstances. However, if the seller is not even the owner of these fishes, then the sale of these fishes under waters shall be ‘Batil’ (null & void). However, if the pool is a small one and the fishes can be easily taken out of the waters and can be handed over to the customers, the sale of the fishes under such circumstances, would be permissible.

There are three kinds of ownership of the fishes:

  1. The fishes might have come into the pool naturally on their own and the owner of the pool had taken measures to hem in these fishes.
  2. The pool might have been constructed with the intention of fish- rearing
  3. To use the pool for fish- hatchery.

Note: In the opinion of Maulana Shaheen Jamali Sb. (Madrasa Imdadul Islam, Meerut), even if the fishes are in water and the pool is such that it’s whole area can be covered with a net, then the selling of the fishes under water is also permissible keeping the modern modes of fishing, commercial transactions and human needs in view.

Buying and Selling before getting Possession  

In present times, there are numerous kinds of transactions in which the buyer sells off the purchased item to others before getting possession over it. Prophet Mohammad (S. A. W.) has justifiably urged people to abstain from selling off before getting actual possession thereon. In this perspective, the Ninth Seminar held under the aegis of the Islamic Fiqh Academy at Jamiat-ul-Hidayah, Jaipur discussed at length the issue in question and arrived at the following conclusions:

  1. As a principle it is not permissible to sell off anything before actually possessing it. Eventually, if the selling deal is struck before getting possession, the sale would be termed as Fasid rather than Batil (null and void) and shall become valid after getting possession.
  2. No specific condition has been laid out in the Holy Book and the Sunnah regarding the ownership rights, as if the Shariah has recognised the prevalent Muslim custom in this regard. Thus, the nature of the possession would be determined according to the nature of various kinds of goods and the prevalent system of that period.
  3. It is clear from the elucidations of the jurists, that possession over sold- off goods should be without any hindrance so that the buyer may use it freely. This facet has been termed as ‘Takhlya’ in Islamic Fiqh.
  4. A ‘Selling deal before getting possession is prohibited because there is always a risk of rescission, which means that unless the sold off property does not come under the real possession of the first buyer it may be possible that the sold off property may not come under his ownership at all and hence he might not be able to hand over the same to the second buyer.
  5. The prohibition of ‘selling-before - getting- possession’ is related to moveable properties only. On the other hand, selling-before-getting-possession is permitted in immovable properties, provided that there is no compelling hindrance to their utilization by the buyer.
  6. In case a person buys some goods or (say, from a factory) and sells it off to another person, although the sold off goods have not, even, been dispatched from the factory, such a sale falls under, the category of ‘Selling-before-getting-possession’ and stands invalid, whatsoever.
  7. A person purchases some goods from a factory etc. and places his order for transporting the goods by some special means (a ship, transporting vehicles, permits, etc.) and the items in question are dispatched from the factory as well. The buyer stands responsible in the eventuality of any loss and damage and also ready to bear the transportation expenses. In such a situation, the buyer shall be deemed to have the ownership right, in proxy, over the mode, of transporataion, whatsoever it may be. Thus, under such circumstances it is valid to sell the goods to the buyer before it reaches there because such a transaction does not fall under the category of selling-before-getting-possession, albeit it is certainly not permitted for the second buyer to sell off the goods to another person before it reaches to him. It shall be assumed as a deal falling under the category of ‘selling-before-getting-possession’.

Zabiha by Machine      

The issue of ‘Zabiha by machine’ was discussed and pondered over at the Seventh Fiqh Seminar of the Islamic Fiqh Academy held at Bharuch. The delegates had unanimously decided it’s validities and invalidities under various circumstances. However, the scholars and jurists were divided over one of the aspects of Zabiha by machine. The Seminar observed that such a grim issue requires another thoughtful deliberation and the pro and against views in nut-shell ought to be sent to the delegates for a second thought so that they may ponder over them once again and give their esteemed opinions over it. In this perspective, the Academy sent another comprehensive questionnaire. A number of replies poured in. In the light of these replies, the following conclusions were arrived at:

  1. In case the animal comes in front of the slaughterer in an unconscious state, hanging on form the chains or the strap of the machine run by electric power and the slaughterer recites “Bismillah” before slaughtering it with his own hands, making sure that the animal was alive at the instant of being slaughtered, then such a procedure is distinctly valid because only the process of carting is being carried out by the machine while the remaining act of slaughtering is done by the hands. The Academy urges the Muslim owners of the slaughter-houses to introduce and popularize this process itself. Several slaughterers can be employed in order to speed-up the slaughtering process, if need arises.
  2. Such a situation, where both the carting and the slaughtering of animals is done by the machines such that it starts functioning on pressing a button and the animals get slaughtered turn by turn; it has invoked different opinions:
    1. The slaughtering of the first animal would be permissible while the slaughtering of the remaining animals will be impermissible. This is the opinion voiced by most of the delegates present in the seminar.
    2. The slaughtering of the first animal would also be invalid. This is the view of some of the delegates who are as follows:
      • Mufti Shabbir Ahmad Qasmi, Muradabad
      • Maulana Badr Ahmed Mujeebi, Patna
      • Maulana Mujeebul Ghaffar Asad Azmi, Varanasi.
  3. The slaughtering of the first animal would stand valid. Moreover, the other animals which get slaughtered before the slaughtering process gets over is also permissible. This is the unanimous opinion of the following delegates:
    • Ml. Raisul Ahrar Nadvi
    • Ml. Sabahuddin Malik Falahi
    • Ml. Sultan Ahmed Islahi
    • Ml. Jalaluddin Ansar Umri
    • Ml. Yaqoob Ismail
    • Ml. Sadrul Hasan Nadvi
    • Ml. Qazi Mujahidul Islam Qasmi
    • Ml. Khalid Saifullah Rahmani
    • Mufti Nasim Ahmad Qasmi
    • Ml. Ijaz Ahmad Qasmi
  4. Those delegates who believe that only the first animal gets slaughtered in halal way by the slaughtering machines feel that if such a machine is invented which incorporates a large number of knives and which, with the push of a button, operates simultaneously slaughtering several animals at a time, such a process of slaughtering would be permissible from the Islamic point of view.
  5. Furthermore, it should be made clear that the aforesaid suggestions regarding the slaughtering by machines have been laid out keeping in view the specific structure of the machine. They do not hold good for all kinds and varieties of machines. Infact, legal and juristic opinions shall vary from machines to machines keeping in mind their specific structure and modus operandi.


Recent tweets

Bad Authentication data.. Please read document to config it correct.

About Us

Islamic Fiqh Academy (India) (IFA) was established in 1988 at New Delhi under the guidance and supervision of the great known Islamic Scholars.

Contact Us