Wednesday | 24 April 2024 | 15 Shawaal 1445

Fatwa Answer

Question ID: 1489 Category: Dealings and Transactions
property that may have been bought with insurance money

If someone's father worked as a marketing manager in a healh insurance company and bought a house-the children do not know what exact money was used to buy the house. They don't know any details about the salary of the father when he was working in the health insurance company. they only know that at the time that the house was bought their father was working in health insurance as a marketing manager. then after a few years the father left that job and began earning a halal income. It has been ten years or even more that the father has been earning from halal income. The original house bought has been recently given in rent to a family, and the father and his family have moved to a new house. Now one of the children is wondering whether the original house that was bought when the father was working in the health insurance company is halal or not? will the children be able to inherit that property? Will the children be able to live in that property if their father gifts it to them? The details of how the original house was bought are unknown and the child will not interrogate her father because she respects him and he has been earning a completely halal income for many years. Many years of living in the original house were spent while the father was earning a completely halal income. the father has been earning a completely halal income for 10-15 years but the child is having waswaas and confusion about whether the house that was bought while he was working in insurance would be halal for the kids to use in the future. Also when it comes to wealth, can the children assume that majority of the father's wealth is from halal income because he has been working through lawful means for many years? the child is having waswaas and confusion about future issues that may come up regarding inheritance because of the father had once been working in a health insurance company. can the children assume now that everything is lawful ever since the father switched his job? the old house and any wealth he has in cash is all lawful? the children will not interrogate their father about his old job in health insurance and inquire whether his salary was pure or not. they can't do so out of love and respect for him. he is a very pious man and this shows through the fact that he did not stay in that job and completely switched to a halal earning for many many years. 

بسم اللہ الرحمن الرحیم

الجواب وباللہ التوفیق

The income earned from employment in an insurance company is not halal, therefore, it will have a detrimental effect on the house built from it.

The shar’ei ruling would be that if the house was bought with entire haraam income, then the father should give it in charity to the poor without intention of any reward.

If the father gifts this house to his children, they should refuse to take it.

If that house comes into inheritance after death of the father, it becomes obligatory on the children to give it in charity, or at least give in charity as much amount is estimated as haraam. Having done so, it would be permissible to live in that house without hesitation.

If the father had earned halal besides haraam income, and if most of the wealth was halal, or if the father had clarified the source of income as halal, his word will be honored, and the wealth shall be considered halal. Hence inheritance of such wealth will be halal to take. If the father gifts some or all that wealth to his children, it will be permissible to accept it. 

غالب مال المہدي إن کان حلالاً، لا بأس بقبول ہدیتہ وأکل مالہ، ما لم یتعین أنہ من حرام، وإن غالب مالہ الحرام لا یقبلہا ولا یأکل، إلا إذا قال: إنہ حلال ورثہ أو استقرضہ۔ (البزازیۃ علی ہامش الفتاویٰ الہندیۃ، کتاب الکراہیۃ / الفصل الرابع في الہدیۃ والمیراث ۶؍۳۶۰ 

والسبيل في الكسب الخبيث التصدق".( المبسوط للسرخسی: ۱۲/۱۷۲

وفی رد المحتار: مَطْلَبٌ فِيمَن ورِثَ مالًا حَرامًا(قَوْلُهُ إلّا فِي حَقِّ الوارِثِ إلَخْ) أيْ فَإنَّهُ إذا عَلِمَ أنَّ كَسْبَ مُوَرِّثِهِ حَرامٌ يَحِلُّ لَهُ، لَكِنْ إذا عَلِمَ المالِكَ بِعَيْنِهِ فَلا شَكَّ فِي حُرْمَتِهِ ووُجُوبِ رَدِّهِ عَلَيْهِ، وهَذا مَعْنى قَوْلِهِ وقَيَّدَهُ فِي الظَّهِيرِيَّةِ إلَخْ، وفِي مُنْيَةِ المُفْتِي: ماتَ رَجُلٌ ويَعْلَمُ الوارِثُ أنَّ أباهُ كانَ يَكْسِبُ مِن حَيْثُ لا يَحِلُّ ولَكِنْ لا يَعْلَمُ الطَّلَبَ بِعَيْنِهِ لِيَرُدَّ عَلَيْهِ حَلَّ لَهُ الإرْثُ والأفْضَلُ أنْ يَتَوَرَّعَ ويَتَصَدَّقَ بِنِيَّةِ خُصَماءِ أبِيهِ. اهـ وكَذا لا يَحِلُّ إذا عَلِمَ عَيْنَ الغَصْبِ مَثَلًا وإنْ لَمْ يَعْلَمْ مالِكَهُ، لِما فِي البَزّازِيَّةِ أخَذَهُ مُوَرِّثُهُ رِشْوَةً أوْ ظُلْمًا، إنْ عَلِمَ ذَلِكَ بِعَيْنِهِ لا يَحِلُّ لَهُ أخْذُهُ، وإلّا فَلَهُ أخْذُهُ حُكْمًا أمّا فِي الدِّيانَةِ فَيَتَصَدَّقُ بِهِ بِنِيَّةِ إرْضاءِ الخُصَماءِ اهـ. والحاصِلُ أنَّهُ إنْ عَلِمَ أرْبابَ الأمْوالِ وجَبَ رَدُّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ، وإلّا فَإنْ عَلِمَ عَيْنَ الحَرامِ لا يَحِلُّ لَهُ ويَتَصَدَّقُ بِهِ بِنِيَّةِ صاحِبِهِ، وإنْ كانَ مالًا مُخْتَلِطًا مُجْتَمِعًا مِن الحَرامِ ولا يَعْلَمُ أرْبابَهُ ولا شَيْئًا مِنهُ بِعَيْنِهِ حَلَّ لَهُ حُكْمًا، والأحْسَنُ دِيانَةً التَّنَزُّهُ عَنْهُ فَفِي الذَّخِيرَةِ: سُئِلَ الفَقِيهُ أبُو جَعْفَرٍ عَمَّنْ اكْتَسَبَ مالَهُ مِن أُمَراءِ السُّلْطانِ ومِن الغَراماتِ المُحَرَّماتِ وغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ هَلْ يَحِلُّ لِمَن عَرَفَ ذَلِكَ أنْ يَأْكُلَ مِن طَعامِهِ؟ قالَ أحَبُّ إلَيَّ فِي دِينِهِ أنْ لا يَأْكُلَ ويَسَعُهُ حُكْمًا إنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ ذَلِكَ الطَّعامُ غَصْبًا أوْ رِشْوَةً وفِي الخانِيَّةِ: امْرَأةٌ زَوْجُها فِي أرْضِ الجَوْرِ، وإنْ أكَلَتْ مِن طَعامِهِ ولَمْ يَكُنْ عَيْنُ ذَلِكَ الطَّعامِ غَصْبًا فَهِيَ فِي سَعَةٍ مِن أكْلِهِ وكَذا لَوْ اشْتَرى طَعامًا أوْ كِسْوَةً مِن مالٍ أصْلُهُ لَيْسَ بِطَيِّبٍ فَهِيَ فِي سَعَةٍ مِن تَناوُلِهِ والإثْمُ عَلى الزَّوْجِ. اهـ (قَوْلُهُ وسَنُحَقِّقُهُ ثَمَّةَ) أيْ فِي كِتابِ الحَظْرِ والإباحَةِ. قالَ هُناكَ بَعْدَ ذِكْرِهِ ما هُنا لَكِنْ فِي المُجْتَبى: ماتَ وكَسْبُهُ حَرامٌ فالمِيراثُ حَلالٌ، ثُمَّ رَمَزَ وقالَ: لا نَأْخُذُ بِهَذِهِ الرِّوايَةِ، وهُوَ حَرامٌ مُطْلَقًا عَلى الوَرَثَةِ فَتَنَبَّهْ. اهـ. ح، ومُفادُهُ الحُرْمَةُ وإنْ لَمْ يَعْلَمْ أرْبابُهُ ويَنْبَغِي تَقْيِيدُهُ بِما إذا كانَ عَيْنَ الحَرامِ لِيُوافِقَ ما نَقَلْناهُ، إذْ لَوْ اخْتَلَطَ بِحَيْثُ لا يَتَمَيَّزُ يَمْلِكُهُ مِلْكًا خَبِيثًا، لَكِنْ لا يَحِلُّ لَهُ التَّصَرُّفُ فِيهِ ما لَمْ يُؤَدِّ بَدَلَهُ كَما حَقَقْناهُ قُبَيْلَ بابِ زَكاةِ المالِ فَتَأمَّلْ.(رد المحتار:۵/۹۹)