عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(177): "Does the Indemnity Insurance Paid to the Killed`s Heirs Suffice as a Diyah" .

Date Added : 02-11-2015

Resolution No.(177)(9/2012) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Does the Indemnity Insurance Paid to the Killed`s Heirs Suffice as a Diyah"
Date: 8/8/1433 AH, corresponding to 28/6/2012 AD.

 

All praise is due to Allah, peace and blessings be upon Prophet Mohammad and upon his family and companions:

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

Is it permissible to collect the indemnity insurance and does it suffice as a Diyah (Blood money)?

After prolonged deliberations, the Board came up with the following opinion:

If the effective regulations stipulate that the insurance company pays the indemnity insurance to the guardians of the victim and that it should be tantamount to the Diyah estimated in Sharia, then it is suffices, whether it was called an indemnity, or a Diyah.

However, if the indemnity insurance was less than the prescribed amount of the Diyah, then it is permissible for the guardians of the killed to claim the difference because it is an obligation on the killer.

Accordingly, there is no harm that the guardians of the killed accept the indemnity insurance, because Allah has granted them the right to receive the Diyah, which is indicated in the following verse: "Never should a believer kill a believer; but (If it so happens) by mistake, (Compensation is due) : If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing slave, and pay compensation to the deceased’s family, unless they remit it freely." {An-Nisa`/92}. Therefore, it doesn`t matter whether it was paid by the insurance company, charitable people, or the killer`s Aqila (Male relatives from his father`s side). And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the General Iftaa` Board, His grace the Mufti General of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Sheikh Sa`ied Hijjawi/ Member

Prof. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi/ Member

Prof. Mohammad Al-Khwdah/Member

Prof. Abdul N`nassir Abu-Al-bas`sal/Member

Dr.Yahia Al-Boutoosh/Member

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Az`zoubi/ Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on someone who possesses gold with the intention of saving/hoarding it, and owns nothing else — is he obligated to sell a portion of it in order to pay the zakāh due on it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Zakāh becomes immediately obligatory on cash, and likewise on gold — that which is not designated for a woman's personal adornment— once both reach the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for zakah) and a full ḥawl (lunar year) has passed over them. It is not permissible to delay payment when it is genuinely possible to pay — meaning, when the wealth and the eligible recipients are both available. It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.129): "Zakāh is obligatory immediately once it becomes feasible to pay it, meaning when the wealth and the eligible recipients are both present."
The one paying zakāh must discharge the obligatory zakāh due on saved (hoarded) gold either from the gold itself, or from its equivalent monetary value, in the event that no other funds are available — since paying from the gold itself is the original default (al-aṣl). It becomes permissible to pay from other funds instead only because zakāh is built upon the principle of ease and leniency, as stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib (Vol.1/p.366): "When a full ḥawl has elapsed on wealth other than trade goods... zakāh attaches to the actual asset itself (al-‘ayn), and the poor effectively become partners in it — even, for example, [becoming partners] in camels through the value of a sheep [owed as zakāh on them]... Paying from other wealth is permitted only because zakāh is built upon the principle of ease and leniency."
Accordingly: the one paying zakāh must discharge it either from the actual saved gold itself, or by selling a portion of the gold equal to the amount of zakāh owed. He may also borrow money to pay the zakāh, or pay the zakāh in installments before the ḥawl is complete [as an advance payment]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on speaking while relieving oneself?

It is disliked for one relieving himself to speak while doing so, except out of necessity. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

A pregnant woman has iron deficiency. When she showers, she becomes very tired and feels cold. What is the ruling on tayammum in this situation?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
One should not resort to tayammum (dry ablution) as a substitute for the obligatory ghusl (ritual bathing) so long as it remains possible to use water — for example, by heating the water, warming the place where the bathing takes place, or taking other similar precautions. However, if such measures prove ineffective, or are simply not possible to carry out, and performing ghusl [with cold water] would result in severe harm, then tayammum becomes permissible in that case, due to genuine inability to use water on account of the harm that would result, as described in the question. That said, she must make up (qaḍā') the prayers she performed using this tayammum.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm: "One should not perform tayammum on account of cold unless warming the limbs fails to remove the aforementioned harm, and no means are available to heat the water — such as a vessel, firewood, or fire — and one fears [that using cold water would result in] any of the harms mentioned earlier in the discussion on illness: danger to life, loss of function in a limb, the onset or worsening of an illness, delayed recovery, or the [visible bodily] blemish mentioned in that discussion on illness. In such a case, tayammum becomes permissible due to the harm involved, but the prayer must still be made up afterward (qaḍā'). If, however, warming the body proves effective, or the means to heat the water are available, or none of the aforementioned harms are feared — then tayammum is not permissible, even if using the water causes some degree of discomfort or pain, since mere discomfort alone does not permit resorting to tayammum." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More