Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(21): "Is the Killer (Inheritor) Entitled to Inherit the Person whom he had Killed (Inheritee)"

Date Added : 29-11-2015

Resolution No.(21) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:
"Is the Killer (Inheritor) Entitled to Inherit the Person whom he had Killed (Inheritee)"
Date: 30/7/1411 AH, corresponding to 14/2/1991.

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

On the above date, the Board reviewed the verdict issued by the High Court of Justiciary whereby  (Mr. X) wasn`t found criminally responsible for his father`s death because of his mental and psychotic state, as confirmed by the reports of specialized doctors.

Article (183) of the Jordanian Civil Status Law obligates enforcing the preponderant opinion of the Hanafite School of Thought in both the judiciary and Sharia systems. This article reads as follows: "An inheritor who kills his inheritee while being in a state of insanity or suffering from a mental illness that makes him unaware of his actions, enjoys the right to inherit him."

Based on article (586), from the Jordanian Civil Status Law, which reads as follows: "If he has killed the inheritee out of Qisas (Retribution), as a (Had) prescribed penalty, in self-defense, was an indirect cause, or he (killer) hasn`t reached the age of puberty or was insane, then he is entitled to inherit him".

In conclusion, the Iftaa` Board rules that the above murderer is entitled to receive a share from the estate of the murdered (his father). And Allah Knows Best.

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice Mohammad Mohailan
The Grand Mufti of Jordan, Izzaldeen At-tamimi
Dr. Abdullahlim Ar-ramahi
Dr. Abdusallam Al-Abbadi
Dr. Ahmad Helayel
Dr. Yaseen Daradkeh
Dr. Abdulahaleem Al-Ramahi
Dr. Mohammad Al-Qhodat
Sheikh Ibrahim Khashan

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible to pay the Fitr Zakah (obligatory charity) of Ramadan on behalf of a dead person?

The Fitr Zakah of Ramadhaan isn`t due on one who had passed away before the sunset of the last day of Ramadan. And Allah Knows Best.

What is the ruling on someone who possesses cash reaching the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for zakah), and then uses part of it to purchase gold before the ḥawl (lunar year) is complete — must he pay zakāh on all of it [combined], or only on the remaining cash, excluding the gold?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Gold acquired for hoarding and saving is subject to zakāh once it reaches the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for Zakah) — when combined with any cash held — and once a full ḥawl (lunar year) has elapsed over it. The starting point for calculating this ḥawl is the ḥawl of the paper currency [used to purchase it], which had already reached the niṣāb and was then used to purchase the gold.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.78): "As for someone who sells silver in exchange for gold, or vice versa, zakāh remains obligatory upon it, since he builds [the calculation of] its ḥawl upon [the ḥawl established at the time of] the original transaction [i.e., when the wealth was first acquired]."
This has already been explained in detail in Fatwa No. 2670 — please refer to it.
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Does nosebleed during the day in Ramadan affect the validity of fasting?

A nosebleed does not affect the validity of fasting unless some of the blood reaches the body cavity or the person intentionally swallows it. In such a case, their fast is invalid, and they must refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day and make up for that day later.

What is the ruling on offering a sheep as a sacrifice (Udhiyah) if its fat-tail is sound, except that when it was young, the tip of its fat-tail was cut so that it would grow larger? And what is the ruling in case of doubt regarding the amount that was cut?

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Cutting a minor, insignificant portion from the tip of an animal's fat-tail (al-alyah) to encourage it to grow larger is not considered a defect, and it does not prevent the animal from being valid for sacrifice (Udhiyah).
 
It is stated in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (Vol.9/P.352): "There is some scholarly deliberation regarding the common practice of cutting the tip of the fat-tail so that it grows larger. It could potentially be likened to a partial cut of the ear—supported by the jurists' general rule: 'even if it is a small amount.' On the other hand, if it is an exceptionally minor cut, it might have no effect on validity. This is explicitly clarified by the juristic exception to the general rule, which states that cutting a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm. This latter view is more well-founded.
 
Furthermore, I found that some scholars investigated this matter and concluded: 'It should not affect validity if a custom-sanctioned portion of its fat-tail is removed during its youth to make it grow larger and look better, just as castrating a male animal causes no harm.' However, applying this unconditionally contradicts the established texts of the jurists, as understood from what I have laid out; thus, the restriction I specified is what must be relied upon."
 
Similarly, it is mentioned in Nihayat al-Muhtaj (8/135): "If a small piece is cut from the fat-tail to help it grow larger, the most well-founded view is that the sacrifice remains valid, as was given in a formal legal verdict (Fatwa) by my father [Shihab al-Din al-Ramli], may Allah be pleased with him. This is proven by the jurists' maxim: 'The loss of a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm.'"
 
In cases where there is doubt as to whether the portion cut was large or small, the animal is still deemed valid for sacrifice. It is noted in Hashiyat al-Shubramallisi ‘ala Nihayat al-Muhtaj (Vol.8/P.135):
 
"This matter requires careful consideration, but the closer and more correct view is that it is valid. This is because soundness is the default state for the animal from which the piece was cut, and it aligns with what usually occurs—namely, that the part removed to help the fat-tail grow larger is naturally very small." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.