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 incumbent on a husband to pay the alimony of his wife if she had left him and stayed at her parent`s without his permission?

When a wife leaves her house, and stays at her parent`s without asking her husband, she is considered a Nashiz (wife who refuses to abide by her husband’s orders), and so she doesn`t deserve an alimony.

Is it permissible for an elderly person, a pregnant woman, or someone with a chronic illness to pay fidyah before Ramadan begins?

It is not permissible for an elderly person, a pregnant woman, or someone with a chronic illness to pay fidyah before Ramadan begins.
Additionally, it is not allowed to pay fidyah for more than one day in advance, because fidyah is a substitute for fasting, and fasting is not yet obligatory at that time.
However, it is permissible to pay fidyah for a single day in advance, by analogy with paying zakat up to one year in advance.

What is the ruling on a second congregation [being formed] in the mosque?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is disliked to deliberately seek to establish a second congregation in a mosque that is not one frequented by transient passersby — such as a neighborhood mosque with a regular, appointed imam — unless permission is granted by that imam, since doing so implies criticism and an affront to him. However, if the mosque is one frequented by transient passersby — such as mosques located in marketplaces — then a second or even third congregation is permissible there, whether or not it has a regular, appointed imam, and whether or not that imam gives his permission. This is because such mosques experience a continuous flow of people coming and going, so no implication of criticism toward the imam is perceived in the formation of multiple congregations in that setting. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

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.