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 performing istinja' before every ablution?

Istinja' is not from the conditions for the validity of ablution. It is only obligatory for prayer when there is impurity from urine or stool on the private part, or if there is fear of the impurity spreading to the body or clothing. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is the father a Mahram (Non-marriageable) to his son`s mother-in-law?

The father is a non-Mahram (Marriageable) to his son`s mother-in-law, so it is impermissible for them to look at each other, or to have a seclusion (Khalwah).

What is the ruling on wiping the head during ablution from behind a barrier like a headscarf (hijab)?

The obligation in ablution is to wipe some of the head; it is not a condition to wipe all of it. As for one who has a turban or headscarf on their head, it is permissible for them to wipe over it after wiping a part of their head in any place. This is easily done at the front of the head. This means the woman begins by wiping the front of her head from under the headscarf, then completes the wiping to the back of the head from over the headscarf. If the woman wipes over the headscarf on her head and the moisture reaches the scalp or some hair within the boundaries of the head, it suffices for wiping the head. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it required to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts?

● It is preferable to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts if they were missed due to a valid excuse.
● However, if the fasts were missed without a valid excuse, then fasting consecutively is obligatory, because making up the missed fasts in this case must be done immediately.
Separating the makeup fasts goes against the obligation of immediacy, but if someone does so, their fasts will still be valid. However, they will be sinful for delaying without a valid reason.

See More