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 eating or drinking during the second Adhan?

It is not permissible to eat or drink during the second Adhan because it announces the break of dawn and the obligation to start fasting. Allah Almighty says {what means}:"and eat and drink until you can discern the white streak of dawn against the blackness of night." [Al-Baqarah/187].
Whoever eats or drinks during this time invalidates their fast, and they must refrain from eating for the rest of the day and make up for the missed fast later.

 

Does vomiting during the day in Ramadan break the fast?

Intentional vomiting is one of the nullifiers of fasting; whoever vomits deliberately breaks their fast.
However, if vomiting occurs involuntarily, the fast remains valid as long as nothing returns to the body cavity (jauf). If anything is swallowed back, the fast is invalidated.
The Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever is overcome by vomiting does not have to make up the fast, but whoever induces vomiting deliberately must make it up." [Narrated by Abu Dawood and At-Tirmidhi]

What is the ruling on the cessation of blood after (40) days from delivery, but later continued sporadically during two days of Ramadan?

Once postpartum bleeding (Nifas) ceases, and the woman is certain that it won`t reoccur, then she becomes ritually pure and so she is free to make Ghusl (purificatory bath), pray, and fast. If the bleeding reoccurs before fifteen days from its cessation, and before the end of (60) days after delivery, then the ruling on postpartum bleeding is effective, and her fasting and prayer are null and void, thus she must make up the fasting that she missed and not the prayer during those particular days.

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.

See More