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

Does the intention (niyyah) of the principal (muwakkil) suffice for the sacrifice (dhabḥ) of the udhiyyah?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person appoints an agent (wakīl) to perform the slaughter (dhabḥ) on their behalf, the intention (niyyah) of the principal (the one appointing the agent) suffices, and there is no need for the agent to have this intention himself. In fact, even if the agent is unaware that he is performing the sacrifice on someone's behalf as an udhiyyah (sacrificial offering), this does not affect its validity. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

Is it incumbent on the fiancée to obey her fiancé?

When the woman settles in her husband`s house, it is incumbent on him to provide for her and it is incumbent on her to obey him. Before that, and if the marriage contract had been concluded, then she is lawfully his wife and thus she should abide by custom in treating him, but if the marriage contract hadn`t been concluded, then she should treat him as a non-Mahram (Marriageable).

If a father stops his daughter from getting married, is it permissible for her to conclude the marriage contract herself?

It is permissible for the father to stop his daughter from getting married if there was a lawful reason for that, and she isn`t allowed to conclude the marriage contract without her guardian. However, if her father denied her right in getting married for an unlawful reason, then she should go to court.

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.