عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(159): "Ruling on Dividing Part of the Blood Money Accepted by one of the Victim`s Heirs from the Killer`s Family, in Intentional Killing, amongst other Heirs, each according to his Share as Stipulated in Sharia"

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(159) (25/2010) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Dividing Part of the Blood Money Accepted Amongest Heirs in Intentional Killing, each according to his Share as Stipulated in Sharia"

Date: 17/1/1432 AH, corresponding to 23/12/2010 AD.

 

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.

During its twelfth session held on the above date, the Board reviewed the following question:

Five years ago, my son was intentionally killed in Saudi Arabia by a Saudi citizen. Two weeks passed over his marriage to a Jordanian woman before he was murdered. When the killer was sent to court, his family offered (25) million Riyals as Diyah (blood money) in return for waiving our right to Qisas (retribution). I along with his father insisted on Qisas and obtained an authorization to that end from all the heirs of my son including his wife.

Several years later, the court ruled for Qisas. However, one hour before the execution of that sentence, we were told that it has been delayed and I was told to check with the Saudi Ministry of Interior.

When I arrived there, I found out that my son`s widow has waived her right to Qisas in return for (5) million Riyals, and so the killer`s life will be spared and we will receive (25) million Riyals as Diyah.

Is the five million Riyals received by my son`s widow hers or should that sum be divided amongst his heirs as stipulated in Sharia.

 After prolonged deliberations, the Board decided:

The five million Riyals received by the victim`s widow from the killer`s family must be divided amongst the heirs of the killed in accordance with Sharia. This is the opinion of the Malikite jurists and it is most compatible with the principles of justice, the provisions of Sharia and  the juristic principle pertaining to warding off harm. 

It is stated: "If one of the victim`s heirs waived his right to Qisas in return for an amount, which is more or less than his share from the Diyah stipulated in Sharia, other heirs become obliged to waive their right to Qisas and take their share from the Diyah as well." [Hashyat Ibn Abdeen Ala-Asharih Al-Khabeer].

As clearly stated in the aforementioned quotation, if one of the two guardians of the victim, in intentional killing, waived his right to Qisas against taking more or less than his share in the Diyah, then the other guardian is obliged to follow suit. This is also supported by the Hadith of the Prophet (PBUH): "There is no injury nor return of injury". And Allah Knows Best.

 

Head of the Iftaa` Board, The Grand Mufti of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, His Grace Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Vice Head of the Iftaa` Board, Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

Dr. Yahia Al-Botoosh/ Member

His Eminence, Sheikh Sa`ied Hijjawi/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Essa

Judge Sarrie Attieh

Dr. Abdulrahman Ibbdah/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Oklah/ Member

Dr. Abduln`nassir Abu Al Bass`al/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Gharaibeh/ Member

Executive Secretary of the Iftaa` Board, Sheikh Mohammad Al-Hunaiti

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on someone who combines two prayers as an early combination (jam‘ taqdīm), and then arrives at his place of residence during the time of the second prayer — is he obligated to repeat it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Whoever combines Ẓuhr and ‘Aṣr while traveling — that is, before he has reached the built-up boundaries of his hometown [upon returning] — his combination (jam‘) of the two prayers remains valid, even if he arrives at his place of residence before the time for the second prayer has actually begun. This is because the combination was already validly completed with its proper conditions fulfilled, and he is not obligated to repeat the second prayer [upon arrival].
A traveler is permitted to make use of the concessions of shortening (qaṣr) and combining (jam‘) prayers once the distance of travel reaches (81 km) or more, provided that his journey is a permissible one, and that he begins shortening and combining only after actually setting out on the journey and passing beyond the built-up limits of the city in which he resides. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on a fictitious marriage for the purpose of obtaining citizenship?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There is no such thing in our noble sharīʿah as a "nominal" or "fictitious" marriage or divorce. Marriage and divorce are among the sacred ordinances of Allah, and it is not permissible to manipulate them or use them as a stratagem to obtain worldly gains.
The foundational purpose of a marriage contract is the permanence and continuity of the relationship between the spouses — to establish a family, and to bring forth righteous offspring. So sacred is this bond that Allah the Almighty Himself described it as a solemn covenant (mīthāq ghalīẓ), saying {what means}: "And if you wish to replace one wife with another and you have given one of them a great amount of wealth, do not take any of it back. Would you take it in injustice and manifest sin? And how could you take it while you have gone in unto each other and they have taken from you a solemn covenant?" [Al-Nisāʾ/ 20–21]
Accordingly, it is not permissible to resort to manipulation and deception in contracts that Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has described as a "solemn covenant" — all for the sake of material and worldly benefit. Marriage is built upon permanence and does not admit of a fixed time limit. If a time limit is stipulated in the contract, the contract is rendered invalid by the consensus of the jurists. Similarly, marriage is impermissible when there exists a mutual, concealed intention to limit its duration — even if no time limit is explicitly mentioned in the contract — for this constitutes a form of unlawful circumvention of the sharīʿah. This is to say nothing of the lying and deception that such conduct involves, the prohibition of which needs no elaboration. Lying, deception, and fraud for the purpose of obtaining worldly gains are among the gravest of sins.
If, however, the marriage contract is first concluded in a valid sharʿī manner and then registered civilly, it is sound and fully valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it Sunnah to cook the meat of the 'aqīqah?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is Sunnah not to distribute the meat of the 'aqīqah raw. Rather, it is recommended to cook it with something sweet — such as raisins or honey — as a good omen and expression of hope for the sweetness of the newborn's character and conduct throughout their life. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible for one who sacrifices on behalf of another, with the latter's permission, to eat from the sacrifice?

It is permissible for someone who sacrificed on behalf of another with their permission to eat from it with their permission, and they stand in their place (act as their representative) in distributing it.
 
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.8/P.141): "And he—meaning the one sacrificing on his own behalf, provided he has not apostatized—has the right to eat from a voluntary sacrifice and his sacrificial gift; rather, it is recommended. As for an obligatory sacrifice, it is forbidden for him to eat from it, whether it was designated as such initially or as a liability in his dhimmah. And excluded by what has preceded is if he sacrifices on behalf of another, or if he apostatized, then it is not permissible for him to eat from it, just as it is absolutely impermissible to feed a disbeliever from it."(The text I found indicates the impermissibility of eating) ???
 
And it is stated in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (Vol.5/P.262): "If a person offers a sacrifice on behalf of a living person with their permission, does he act as their representative in distributing it—on the grounds that permission to sacrifice is permission to distribute it—or does it depend on their explicit permission? This requires consideration, but the first view is not far-fetched." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More