عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(158): "Ruling when the Deceased`s Heirs Take his Life Insurance Money"

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(158) (24/2010) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling when the Deceased`s Heirs Take his Life Insurance Money"

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:

Is it permissible for the heirs to take the life insurance money of their deceased father or not? 

After prolonged deliberations, the Board decided what follows:

If the company for which the deceased used to work made that insurance for him and paid its installments, then it is permissible for his heirs to take whatever amount they can from the insurance company.

However, if the deceased himself made that insurance of his own accord and paid its installments, then it is permissible for his heirs to take the amount of these installments and to give the rest in charity to be Rewarded from Allah, because that money is ill-gotten. 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

 

Note: If it was a cooperative Islamic insurance company that adheres to the rules of Islamic Sharia, then it is permissible to deal with it as indicated in Fatwa No.(2994).

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on using snuff, inhaled vapor, or menthol rub (Vicks) during the day in Ramadan?

Using snuff, inhaled vapor, or menthol rub (Vicks) invalidates the fast because these substances enter the lungs through inhalation, and the lungs are considered part of the body cavity (jauf).
Whoever uses them must refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day out of respect for the sacred month and make up for that day after Ramadan.
However, if it is merely a scent and none of its substance reaches the body cavity, it does not break the fast.

What is the ruling on bypassing a nearby mosque for a distant one?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If a distant mosque has a larger congregation (Jama‘ah) while the congregation in the nearby mosque is smaller, and the congregation in the nearby mosque is not adversely affected by the worshiper's absence, then it is better for him to pray in the distant mosque with the larger congregation. However, if the congregation in the nearby mosque would be affected by his absence—such as if he is its Imam, or if his presence encourages others to attend—then praying in the nearby mosque is better. This ensures that the congregation is established in two different locations within the community. This is based on the saying of the Prophet ﷺ: 'A man's prayer offered with another man is purer than his prayer which he offers alone, and his prayer with two men is purer than his prayer with one and if they are more (in number), it is more beloved to Allah, the Mighty the Majestic' (Narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawood, and An-Nasa'i). And Allah the Exalted knows best.

Is it permissible to agree with a butcher to purchase the meat of an animal after it has been slaughtered — for instance, by buying the meat of a sheep at a price determined by the weight of its meat following slaughter, at a fixed rate per kilogram? And what is the ruling if the animal is being purchased with the intention of it being an uḍḥiyyah (sacrificial offering)?

 
 
 
 
 

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is not permissible to sell livestock in the manner of pricing each kilogram of meat after slaughter at a fixed rate, because the meat within the animal prior to slaughter is unseen and unknown. This leads to jahālah (ignorance of the subject matter) and gharar (contractual uncertainty), both of which are among the invalidating factors in sales transactions.
However, it is permissible for the buyer to issue a promise to purchase the meat of the animal after slaughter at a specified price per kilogram, with the actual sale being concluded at the time of weighing the meat — at which point both the quantity of the goods and the total price become known. There is no Sharī'ah objection to this arrangement.
The jurists have stipulated that for a sale to be valid, both countervalues must be present and observable. Al-Khaṭīb al-Shirbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states:
"It is valid to sell a heap of grain whose total measure is unknown to both contracting parties at a rate of one sā' per dirham. This sale is valid because the subject of sale is present and observable, and ignorance of the total price is not harmful since it is known in detail — and uncertainty is thereby lifted."— [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.355]
As for the uḍḥiyyah, the 'aqīqah, and vowed blood sacrifices (al-dam al-mandhūr) — full ownership of the animal must be established prior to slaughter. It is not valid for such animals to be slaughtered while still in the ownership of the butcher. Rather, the animal must be purchased alive and then slaughtered with the intention of uḍḥiyyah or the like. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is the one offering the sacrifice liable if its meat spoils?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
If the meat (of the sacrifice) spoils due to the negligence of the one offering the sacrifice in preserving it, or due to improper storage, then he is liable to compensate for the portion due to the poor (which is estimated as half a kilogram of meat). If the sacrifice was a vowed (mandatory) one, then he is liable for all of it.
 
However, if he was not negligent, then there is no liability upon him, because its ruling is the ruling of a trust (like an item left in someone's care). And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More