28th October 2026
السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته
Question: Death\Funeral committees have become very common among many local Muslim communities. Some are offered by elders, and some are run by funeral directors or local Masjids. Kindly explain what it is and whether running and subscribing to such committees is permissible or not from a Sharī῾ah perspective?
الجواب حامداً و مصلياً
In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
Introduction
There are many death committees operating across UK. Our research indicates that the Sharī῾ah ruling on each committee depends on factors such as terms, structure, operation and their compliance with Islamic rules. Not all function on the same standards hence, a blanket ruling is not possible, and each committee must be assessed on its own merit. The initiative began in the 1980s, when elders from Pakistan sought to raise funds for the funeral expenses of poor villagers. It was later introduced in the UK and adapted over time. As you noted, many Masajid, funeral directors and local funeral-service providers offer this scheme to help Muslim communities cover exorbitant funeral costs. Our interviews with members and service providers showed that committees do not follow a uniform system as their conditions, structures, and charges vary. Many trustees we spoke to who lack specialist Islamic knowledge claim that scholars or Muftis have endorsed their schemes. Although it is not possible to examine every committee’s terms here, we will provide a concise overview of how these schemes generally operate, the fiqh related issues and our conclusive summary.
How does it Work?
Detailed information about the scheme can be obtained from relevant websites.[1] According to the people and scholars involved, death committees were established to help Muslim communities cover funeral costs when a member dies. Members contribute annually, although some committees collect monthly payments, in return for funeral services. To join, an applicant completes a form, signs to agree to the terms and conditions, pays an initial joining fee, and then makes a fixed annual/monthly contribution. This amount varies with funeral costs, which may rise over time. Although charges differ between committees, annual contributions generally range between £50 to £200. Payment of the joining fee grants membership and eligibility for the committee’s funeral package, the scope of which also varies. Some members informed us that a family member pays the annual contribution, which covers their spouse and children under 18. On reaching 18, each child must independently renew their membership and pay the applicable fee. Contributions are pooled to fund members’ funeral expenses, and committees may occasionally request additional payments if funds fall short. The scheme’s trustees deposit the money in a bank account and use it to meet the deceased member’s funeral expenses, including funeral directors’ fees, repatriation, cemetery costs, transport for burial abroad, and catering.
Members who fall behind on payments are reminded to pay; otherwise, their membership may be terminated, and previous contributions will not be refunded. Some committees also charge a rejoining fee, in addition to the annual membership fee, when membership is renewed. Some are reported to have fined members for late payments. If a member dies, their spouse or next of kin may continue the existing membership without further charges. If the spouse remarries, whether they may retain that membership or must pay a new joining fee depends on the committee’s rules. Most trustees receive no personal remuneration from the fund, while the initial joining fee covers administrative costs. Trustees state that the scheme is not a family kitty, in which members pool savings to support one another and later repay the money through monthly instalments. Instead, they regard contributions as charitable donations rather than loans: members donate to the fund and, in return, become eligible for the scheme’s funeral benefits. [2] Thus, they do not follow a specific Islamic model apart from considering it as a charitable cause. This is an overview of the scheme whilst simultaneously acknowledging that the details of the conditions, package and operation do change overtime. There are some that operate purely voluntarily by requesting donations from the local community in the advent of a person’s death without any formal structure as described above.
The Fiqh Discussion
Death committees are a modern issue with no direct precedent in the Sunnah, so their ruling must be assessed according to the general Sharī῾ah principles. Although they provide clear benefits, aspects of their operation raise concerns such as late payment fee charge, specific model and whether they resemble insurance like scheme or not. In principle, setting up a death committee system to serve the Muslim community by pooling funds to reduce the burden of high funeral costs when a member dies is not objectionable. Conceptually, any such scheme established for communal benefit; securing benefit, preventing harm, and alleviating hardship (e.g. exorbitant funeral costs or for poor individuals) falls within the broader concept of Maslaha. This is generally used in the absence of higher evidence that neither clearly endorses nor prohibit a certain action. This is used to safeguard the higher objectives of the Sharī῾ah and remove hardship, without violating the general Islamic principles.[3] If the scheme operates as a charitable arrangement through which Muslims support one another then fining members for late payment is not permissible, [4] and must be free from riba, qimar, maysir, and gharar.
Riba is interest namely, a benefit derived from capital without a genuine exchange. In other words, it occurs when money is exchanged for money without an intervening asset, product, or beneficial service. Where money is paid in return for a genuine service or commodity, the transaction does not constitute riba.[5] The second prohibition is qimar or maysir, both terms often used interchangeably. They refer to staking money on an uncertain outcome, creating the possibility that one party gains at the other’s expense through chance. A common example is a bet between two people in which the supporter of the losing team must pay an agreed amount.[6] Insurance companies operate on a qimar based model. If the policyholder makes no claim during the year, the insurer retains the full premium but if a claim is made, the policyholder may receive more or less than the amount contributed. Similarly, a death committee becomes impermissible if the trustee profits from members’ annual contributions or members receive a payout more or less than the amount contributed.[7] The final prohibition is gharar. Although loosely translated as deception, it technically refers to uncertainty about whether an outcome will occur or the product is unknown.[8] Qimar and maysir also contain elements of gharar as in money is staked for an uncertain event.
The above prohibitions share a common feature: they involve transactions between two parties that contain uncertainty or deception at the expense of one’s wealth, generate profit from capital without providing a service or product in return and payment in exchange of an uncertain outcome. These are not charitable arrangements. Any death committee scheme that involves riba, qimar, or gharar such as deception or uncertainty becomes impermissible. This typically occurs when a member stakes a contribution on whether his death occurs during the year, with certain individuals bearing the risk rather than sharing it collectively, while others profit. The following alternative models may help circumvent the above prohibitions and ensure death committees operate in accordance with the Sharī῾ah rules.
The first model is tabarru, meaning charity or sadaqah. Members voluntarily contribute funds to support one another and cover funeral expenses. This model has no formal structure, fixed contribution, or conditions; its sole purpose is to provide financial assistance in times of urgent need without expecting anything in return. Contributors relinquish personal ownership of their payments, and those managing the fund act as trustees, as with donations made for any Islamic cause.
Another useful approach is the takaful model. Derived from the triliteral root k-f-l, takaful denotes mutual responsibility, guarantee, and support. Under this cooperative system, members contribute to a common fund that assists participants when a specified loss occurs which in this case, a participant’s death. Its basic structure is as follows: Participants → contribute to a mutual fund → fund helps participants who suffer covered losses.
The contribution provides a mutual guarantee of assistance when a participant suffers a loss. Unlike tabarru’, which has no fixed amount, takaful permits a specified contribution under a valid contract. For a death committee, a participant may register by paying an initial joining fee and agreeing to a monthly or annual contribution. The trustee pools these payments with those of other participants for tabarru’ and ta’awun (mutual support). For example, the agreement may state: “I contribute £100 to this mutual fund and consent to its use in helping participants meet funeral costs upon death.” The trustee then pays the deceased member’s funeral expenses from the fund. To illustrate this, if 100 participants contribute £100 each annually, the fund receives £10,000 per annum. This money is not the trustee’s personal property but is allocated under the contract, primarily to the participants’ risk fund. During the year:
- Participant A has a qualifying loss (death) → the fund pays the approved claim.
- Participant B has a qualifying loss → the fund pays the approved claim.
- Participant C has no loss → C does not simply demand his entire contribution back.
- Trustees operate the scheme according to the agreed Shariah rules.
- If no death that year then no payout for anyone, nor trustees claim ownership over the funds.
Although participants contribute to support others, they may also receive services funded by other members’ contributions. The model’s permissibility depends on its terms and contractual arrangements being Sharī῾ah compliant. While classical Hanafi jurists did not expressly use the term takaful, contemporary Hanafi scholars including Jamiah Binoria’s fatwa scholars and Shaykh Mufti Taqi Usmani have permitted this system as a halal alternative to conventional insurance.[9] We believe this model can be extended to death committees so they don’t resemble conventional insurance; gharar and qimar. Key differences between conventional insurance and takaful are;
- Conventional insurance commercially exchanges premiums for coverage, whereas takaful pools participants’ contributions for mutual support.
- In conventional insurance, premiums transfer risk to the insurer whereas in takaful, participants collectively share the risk by supporting one another.
- In conventional insurance, the insurer owns the premiums whereas in takaful, the fund remains separate from the operator’s personal ownership.
- Conventional insurance premiums involve qimar and gharar, whereas takaful contributions are treated as tabarru’.
Another alternative is the waqf model, a charitable endowment established solely for Allāh’s pleasure. In a waqf, an owner permanently dedicates an asset as charity so that beneficiaries may use it or benefit from its produce or usufruct. For example, Zaid may endow land whose produce supports the poor or a property in which they may live. The donor no longer retains ownership over the asset. According to the accepted view, a waqf may consist of immovable property, such as land or buildings, or movable assets, such as books or cash. Its essential purpose is to preserve the endowed asset while allowing beneficiaries to derive benefit from it. The mutawalli manages the property and ensures that the endowment operates according to the laws of waqf. In a death committee, participants could dedicate cash to cover members’ funeral expenses or endow funeral equipment for communal use. Classical Hanafi jurists differed over whether a waqif (donor) may benefit from the endowment. The reliable position permits them even though the waqif no longer owns the endowed property.[10]
All three models, tabarru’, takaful, and waqf are based on charity and mutual support. The trustee does not own the funds but acts as a custodian or agent responsible for managing burial expenses. Another distinct model from the above three is wadīʿah (amānah, or trust) combined with wakālah (agency). Under this arrangement, members deposit fixed amounts into a common fund as safekeeping dedicated for their funeral arrangements, entrusted to a custodian, the mūdaʿ, who acts as their agent (wakīl). Each member retains ownership of their share and may receive no more than their total contribution. For example, if X pays £100 per month and dies after 24 months, then he receives £2,400 payout towards his funeral expenses; either executed by the trustees or by the family members.[11] If there’s a deficit, the either trustee can request participants for supplementary donations to cover additional costs or family members cover the remaining costs. If there’s overhead payment by any member, then the trustee can utilise the extra funds as voluntary contribution after obtaining consent from the member.
Conclusive Summary
The issue of subscribing to a death committee is a modern issue on which contemporary scholars inevitably differ. Masajid, funeral directors, and individuals have offered these services for over a decade. Their permissibility depends on compliance with the relevant Sharī῾ah requirements. Due to its complex nature, we conclude with the following ruling.:
- Death committees in the UK do not follow a unified system. Their structures and contractual terms vary. A blanket fatwa of permissibility and impermissibility is therefore not possible without assessing each committee on its own merit.
- Death committee established to alleviate exorbitant costs and provide relief for participants in executing funeral expenses is justifiable under Maslaha principle without it infringing the Sharī῾ah standards.
- A distinction must be made between a death committee’s purpose and its operation. Although its purpose is to support the Muslim community, such scheme presented as charitable must not resemble an insurance like system.
- If the scheme involves riba, qimar, maysir, or gharar then it becomes prohibited, which can only be determined by independently assessing the committee’s terms, conditions, and operation.
- We proposed four alternative models that could make a death committee Sharī῾ah compliant: tabarru’, takaful, waqf, and wadīʿah combined with wakālah. Their rules must be properly observed under the guidance of Sharī῾ah scholars.
- Even when based on a permissible model, the scheme must not fund those practices that conflict with Islamic teachings.
[Allãh Knows Best]
Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed
Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam
JKN Fatawa Department
[1] See the following links for more information on Death Committee, [accessed 30th March 2020]
http://bmf1.co.uk/thaqwa-funeral-committee/
http://www.crawleymosque.com/funeral-assurance-committee/
http://www.wasiyyah.co.uk/Death%20Committee.html
https://theislamicburialfoundation.com/funeral-services.php
Information was also obtained from personal interview with senior members for instance, Maulana Zaffar from Pakistan Muslim Welfare Society on Tue 7th April 2020 who have been running the service for 30 plus years with 100 plus members.
[2] We must emphasise here that the information provided was at the time of the research of this fatwa. We request seekers to conduct their own individual investigation about the specific death committee they are interested in joining.
[3] Mawsu’atul Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaitiyyah, vol 3, p. 324
الاِسْتِصْلاَحُ فِي اللُّغَةِ: نَقِيضُ الاِسْتِفْسَادِ. وَعِنْدَ الأُصُولِيِّينَ: اسْتِنْبَاطُ الْحُكْمِ فِي وَاقِعَةٍ لاَ نَصَّ فِيهَا وَلاَ إِجْمَاعَ، بِنَاءً عَلَى مَصْلَحَةٍ عَامَّةٍ لاَ دَلِيل عَلَى اعْتِبَارِهَا وَلاَ إِلْغَائِهَا. وَيُعَبَّرُ عَنْهُ أَيْضًا بِالْمَصْلَحَةِ الْمُرْسَلَةِ. وَالْمَصْلَحَةُ فِي اللُّغَةِ: ضِدُّ الْمَفْسَدَةِ. وَفِي الاِصْطِلاَحِ عِنْدَ الْغَزَالِيِّ: الْمُحَافَظَةُ عَلَى مَقَاصِدِ الشَّرْعِ الْخَمْسَةِ. وَالْمَصَالِحُ الْمُرْسَلَةُ: مَا لاَ يَشْهَدُ لَهَا أَصْلٌ بِالاِعْتِبَارِ وَلاَ بِالإِلْغَاءِ، لاَ بِالنَّصِّ وَلاَ بِالإِجْمَاعِ، وَلاَ يَتَرَتَّبُ الْحُكْمُ عَلَى وَفْقِهِ
Shaykh Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, Qamoos al-Fiqh vol 5, p. 105-106. Shaykh Khalid Saifullah argues its legality in all four legal schools and its conditions in the absence of a clear text that procures benefits and averts hardship.
[4] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Hudud, vol 4 p. 61-62
(لَا بِأَخْذِ مَالٍ فِي الْمَذْهَبِ) بَحْرٌ. وَفِيهِ عَنْ الْبَزَّازِيَّةِ: وَقِيلَ يَجُوزُ، وَمَعْنَاهُ أَنْ يُمْسِكَهُ مُدَّةً لِيَنْزَجِرَ ثُمَّ يُعِيدَهُ لَهُ، فَإِنْ أَيِسَ مِنْ تَوْبَتِهِ صَرَفَهُ إلَى مَا يَرَى.
(قَوْلُهُ لَا بِأَخْذِ مَالٍ فِي الْمَذْهَبِ) قَالَ فِي الْفَتْحِ: وَعَنْ أَبِي يُوسُفَ يَجُوزُ التَّعْزِيرُ لِلسُّلْطَانِ بِأَخْذِ الْمَالِ. وَعِنْدَهُمَا وَبَاقِي الْأَئِمَّةِ لَا يَجُوزُ. اهـ. وَمِثْلُهُ فِي الْمِعْرَاجِ، وَظَاهِرُهُ أَنَّ ذَلِكَ رِوَايَةٌ ضَعِيفَةٌ عَنْ أَبِي يُوسُفَ. قَالَ فِي الشُّرُنْبُلَالِيَّةِ: وَلَا يُفْتَى بِهَذَا لِمَا فِيهِ مِنْ تَسْلِيطِ الظَّلَمَةِ عَلَى أَخْذِ مَالِ النَّاسِ فَيَأْكُلُونَهُ اهـ وَمِثْلُهُ فِي شَرْحِ الْوَهْبَانِيَّةِ عَنْ ابْنِ وَهْبَانَ (قَوْلُهُ وَفِيهِ إلَخْ) أَيْ فِي الْبَحْرِ، حَيْثُ قَالَ: وَأَفَادَ فِي الْبَزَّازِيَّةِ أَنَّ مَعْنَى التَّعْزِيرِ بِأَخْذِ الْمَالِ عَلَى الْقَوْلِ بِهِ إمْسَاكُ شَيْءٍ مِنْ مَالِهِ عَنْهُ مُدَّةً لِيَنْزَجِرَ ثُمَّ يُعِيدُهُ الْحَاكِمُ إلَيْهِ، لَا أَنْ يَأْخُذَهُ الْحَاكِمُ لِنَفْسِهِ أَوْ لِبَيْتِ الْمَالِ كَمَا يَتَوَهَّمُهُ الظَّلَمَةُ إذْ لَا يَجُوزُ لِأَحَدٍ مِنْ الْمُسْلِمِينَ أَخْذُ مَالِ أَحَدٍ بِغَيْرِ سَبَبٍ شَرْعِيٍّ……….
وَالْحَاصِلُ أَنَّ الْمَذْهَبَ عَدَمُ التَّعْزِيرِ بِأَخْذِ الْمَالِ، وَسَيَذْكُرُ الشَّارِحُ فِي الْكَفَالَةِ عَنْ الطَّرَسُوسِيِّ أَنَّ مُصَادَرَةَ السُّلْطَانِ لِأَرْبَابِ الْأَمْوَالِ لَا تَجُوزُ إلَّا لِعُمَّالِ بَيْتِ الْمَالِ: أَيْ إذَا كَانَ يَرُدُّهَا لِبَيْتِ الْمَالِ
[5] Mawsu’atul Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaitiyyah, vol 22, p. 49
وَالأَصْل فِي مَعْنَاهُ الزِّيَادَةُ، يُقَال: رَبَا الشَّيْءُ إِذَا زَادَ، وَمِنْ ذَلِكَ قَوْل اللَّهِ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى: {يَمْحَقُ اللَّهُ الرِّبَا وَيُرْبِي الصَّدَقَاتِ} . وَأَرْبَى الرَّجُل: عَامَل بِالرِّبَا أَوْ دَخَل فِيهِ، وَمِنْهُ الْحَدِيثُ: مَنْ أَجْبَى فَقَدْ أَرْبَى وَالإِجْبَاءُ: بَيْعُ الزَّرْعِ قَبْل أَنْ يَبْدُوَ صَلاَحُهُ……….. وَالرِّبَا فِي اصْطِلاَحِ الْفُقَهَاءِ: عَرَّفَهُ الْحَنَفِيَّةُ بِأَنَّهُ: فَضْلٌ خَالٍ عَنْ عِوَضٍ بِمِعْيَارٍ شَرْعِيٍّ مَشْرُوطٍ لأَحَدِ الْمُتَعَاقِدَيْنِ فِي الْمُعَاوَضَةِ
Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Buyu’, vol 5 p. 168-169
بَابُ الرِّبَا هُوَ لُغَةً: مُطْلَقُ الزِّيَادَةِ وَشَرْعًا (فَضْلٌ) وَلَوْ حُكْمًا فَدَخَلَ رِبَا النَّسِيئَةِ وَالْبُيُوعُ الْفَاسِدَةُ فَكُلُّهَا مِنْ الرِّبَا فَيَجِبُ رَدُّ عَيْنِ الرِّبَا لَوْ قَائِمًا لَا رَدُّ ضَمَانِهِ لِأَنَّهُ يُمْلَكُ بِالْقَبْضِ قُنْيَةٌ وَبَحْرٌ (خَالٍ عَنْ عِوَضٍ) خَرَجَ مَسْأَلَةُ صَرْفِ الْجِنْسِ بِخِلَافِ جِنْسِهِ (بِمِعْيَارٍ شَرْعِيٍّ)
وَالْأَصْلُ فِيهِ أَنَّ كُلَّ مَا كَانَ مُبَادَلَةَ مَالٍ بِمَالٍ يَبْطُلُ بِالشُّرُوطِ الْفَاسِدَةِ لَا مَا كَانَ مُبَادَلَةَ مَالٍ بِغَيْرِ مَالٍ أَوْ كَانَ مِنْ التَّبَرُّعَاتِ، لِأَنَّ الشُّرُوطَ الْفَاسِدَةَ مِنْ بَابِ الرِّبَا، وَهُوَ يَخْتَصُّ بِالْمُعَاوَضَةِ الْمَالِيَّةِ دُونَ غَيْرِهَا مِنْ الْمُعَاوَضَاتِ وَالتَّبَرُّعَاتِ، لِأَنَّ الرِّبَا هُوَ الْفَضْلُ الْخَالِي عَنْ الْعِوَضِ، وَحَقِيقَةُ الشُّرُوطِ الْفَاسِدَةِ هِيَ زِيَادَةُ مَا لَا يَقْتَضِيهِ الْعَقْدُ وَلَا يُلَائِمُهُ فَيَكُونُ فِيهِ فَضْلٌ خَالٍ عَنْ الْعِوَضِ وَهُوَ الرِّبَا بِعَيْنِهِ
Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Ijarah, vol 6 p. 3-4
وَشَرْعًا (تَمْلِيكُ نَفْعٍ) مَقْصُودٍ مِنْ الْعَيْنِ (بِعِوَضٍ) حَتَّى لَوْ اسْتَأْجَرَ ثِيَابًا أَوْ أَوَانِي لِيَتَجَمَّلَ بِهَا أَوْ دَابَّةً لِيَجْنُبَهَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ أَوْ دَارًا لَا لِيَسْكُنَهَا أَوْ عَبْدًا أَوْ دَرَاهِمَ أَوْ غَيْرَ ذَلِكَ لَا لِيَسْتَعْمِلَهُ بَلْ لِيَظُنَّ النَّاسُ أَنَّهُ لَهُ فَالْإِجَارَةُ فَاسِدَةٌ فِي الْكُلِّ، وَلَا أَجْرَ لَهُ لِأَنَّهَا مَنْفَعَةٌ غَيْرُ مَقْصُودَةٍ مِنْ الْعَيْنِ
(قَوْلُهُ أَيْ بَدَلًا فِي الْبَيْعِ) فَدَخَلَ فِيهِ الْأَعْيَانُ فَإِنَّهَا تَصْلُحُ بَدَلًا فِي الْمُقَايَضَةِ فَتَصْلُحُ أُجْرَةً (قَوْلُهُ؛ لِأَنَّهَا ثَمَنُ الْمَنْفَعَةِ) أَيْ وَهِيَ تَابِعَةٌ لِلْعَيْنِ وَمَا صَلُحَ بَدَلًا عَنْ الْأَصْلِ صَلُحَ بَدَلًا عَنْ التَّبَعِ
[6] Mawsu’atul Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaitiyyah, vol 39, p. 404
الْمَيْسِرُ لُغَةً: قِمَارُ الْعَرَبِ بِالأَزْلاَمِ ، وَقَال صَاحِبُ الْقَامُوسِ هُوَ اللَّعِبُ بِالْقِدَاحِ أَوْ هُوَ النَّرْدُ، أَوْ كُل قِمَارٍ (2) . وَلاَ يَخْرُجُ الْمَعْنَى الاِصْطِلاَحِيُّ عَنِ الْمَعْنَى اللُّغَوِيِّ.
وَقَال ابْنُ حَجَرٍ الْمَكِّيِّ: الْمَيْسِرُ: الْقِمَارُ بِأَيِّ نَوْعٍ كَانَ، وَقَال الْمَحَلِّيُّ: صُورَةُ الْقِمَارِ الْمُحَرَّمِ التَّرَدُّدُ بَيْنَ أَنْ يَغْنَمَ وَأَنْ يَغْرَمَ. وَقَال مَالِكٌ: الْمَيْسِرُ: مَيْسِرَانِ، مَيْسِرُ اللَّهْوِ وَمَيْسِرُ الْقِمَارِ فَمِنْ مَيْسِرِ اللَّهْوِ النَّرْدُ وَالشِّطْرَنْجُ وَالْمَلاَهِي كُلُّهَا، وَمَيْسِرُ الْقِمَارِ مَا يَتَخَاطَرُ النَّاسُ عَلَيْهِ. وَبِمِثْل ذَلِكَ قَال ابْنُ تَيْمِيَّةَ
Ibn Abideen Shami, Minhatul Khaliq, vol 8, p. 554
[مسائل في المسابقة والقمار]
قَالَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ – (وَحَرُمَ شَرْطُ الْجُعْلِ مِنْ الْجَانِبَيْنِ لَا مِنْ أَحَدِ الْجَانِبَيْنِ) لِمَا رَوَى ابْنُ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا – «أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – سَبَقَ بِالْخَيْلِ وَرَاهَنَ» وَمَعْنَى شَرْطِ الْجُعْلِ مِنْ الْجَانِبَيْنِ أَنْ يَقُولَ إنْ سَبَقَ فَرَسُك فَلَكَ عَلَيَّ كَذَا، وَإِنْ سَبَقَ فَرَسِي فَلِي عَلَيْك كَذَا وَهُوَ قِمَارٌ فَلَا يَجُوزُ؛ لِأَنَّ الْقِمَارَ مِنْ الْقَمْرِ الَّذِي يُزَادُ تَارَةً وَيُنْقَصُ أُخْرَى وَسُمِّيَ الْقِمَارُ قِمَارًا؛ لِأَنَّ كُلَّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْ الْقِمَارَيْنِ مِمَّنْ يَجُوزُ أَنْ يَذْهَبَ مَالُهُ إلَى صَاحِبِهِ وَيَجُوزُ أَنْ يَسْتَفِيدَ مَالَ صَاحِبِهِ فَيَجُوزُ الِازْدِيَادُ وَالنُّقْصَانُ فِي كُلِّ وَاحِدَةٍ مِنْهُمَا فَصَارَ ذَلِكَ قِمَارًا وَهُوَ حَرَامٌ بِالنَّصِّ
[7] If the member overpaid and consented for the additional amount as voluntary contribution to support others, then that is permissible. The payout must not be less than the total contribution.
[8] Sarakhsi, al-Mabsoot, Kitāb al-Sarf, vol 14 p. 44
[بَابُ الصَّرْفِ فِي الْمَعَادِنِ وَتُرَابِ الصَّوَّاغِينَ]
وَمَا فِيهِ لَيْسَ بِمَعْلُومِ الْوُجُودِ وَالصِّفَةِ وَالْقَدْرِ فَكَانَ هَذَا بَيْعَ الْغَرَرِ. «وَنَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – عَنْ بَيْعٍ فِيهِ غَرَرٌ» وَلَكِنْ هَذَا إذَا لَمْ يُعْلَمْ هَلْ فِيهِ شَيْءٌ مِنْ الذَّهَبِ وَالْفِضَّةِ أَمْ لَا؟ فَإِنْ عُلِمَ وُجُودُ ذَلِكَ فَبَيْعُ شَيْءٍ مِنْهُ مُعَيَّنٍ بِالْعُرُوضِ جَائِزٌ عَلَى مَا بَيَّنَهُ إنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ.
[9] Jamia Binoria on the permissibility of Takaful. Fatwa No: 85338 https://www.onlinefatawa.com/view_fatwa_english/85338/Ruling-on-Pak-Qatar-Family-Takaful
Fatwa No: 80266 https://www.onlinefatawa.com/view_fatwa_english/80266/Ruling-on-life-insurance
Institute of Islamic Banking and Insurance, https://www.islamic-banking.com/explore/islamic-finance/islamic-insurance-takaful, [accessed 30th March 2020]
Islamic Insurance in Canada: The Future of Halal Financial Protection:
https://gettakaful.ca/islamic-insurance-in-canada-the-future-of-halal-financial-protection/ [accessed October 2026]
[10] For more details on the Islamic waqf system, see Shaykh Khalid Sayfullah Rahmani, Qamūs al-Fiqh, Ch. Waqf, vol 5, pp. 293-309
Abdullah Ibn Mahmud al-Musili, Al-Ikhtiyar li Ta’lil alMukhtar, vol 3, p.41
[كِتَابُ الْوَقْفِ]
قَالَ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ وَزُفَرُ: شَرْطُ جَوَازِهِ أَنْ يَكُونَ مُوصًى بِهِ، أَوْ يَقُولَ: إِذَا مِتُّ فَقَدْ وَقَفْتُهُ حَتَّى لَوْ لَمْ يُوصِ بِهِ لَا يَصِحُّ وَيَبْقَى عَلَى مِلْكِهِ يَجُوزُ بَيْعُهُ وَيُوَرَّثُ عَنْهُ إِلَّا أَنْ يُجِيزَهُ الْوَرَثَةُ فَيَصِيرَ جَائِزًا وَيَتَأَبَّدَ، وَلَوْ قَضَى الْقَاضِي بِلُزُومِهِ لَزِمَ وَنَفَذَ لِأَنَّهُ قَضَاءٌ فِي مُجْتَهِدٍ وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لِغَيْرِهِ إِبْطَالُهُ.
وَقَالَ أَبُو يُوسُفَ وَمُحَمَّدٌ: لَا يُشْتَرَطُ لِجَوَازِهِ شَيْءٌ مِنْ ذَلِكَ، وَهَذَا بِنَاءً عَلَى أَنَّ الْوَقْفَ عِنْدَهُ حَبْسُ الْعَيْنِ عَلَى مِلْكِهِ عَمَلًا بِمُقْتَضَى قَوْلِهِ وَقَفْتُ وَالتَّصَدُّقِ بِثَمَرَتِهِ وَغَلَّتِهِ الْمَعْدُومَةِ عَلَى الْمَسَاكِينِ، وَلَا يَصِحُّ التَّصَدُّقُ بِالْمَعْدُومِ إِلَّا بِالْوَصِيَّةِ، وَعِنْدَهُمَا هُوَ إِزَالَةُ الْعَيْنِ عَنْ مِلْكِهِ إِلَى اللَّهِ – تَعَالَى – وَجَعْلُهُ مَحْبُوسًا عَلَى حُكْمِ مِلْكِ اللَّهِ – تَعَالَى – عَلَى وَجْهٍ يَصِلُ نَفْعُهُ إِلَى عِبَادِهِ، فَوَجَبَ أَنْ يَخْرُجَ عَنْ مِلْكِهِ وَيَخْلُصَ لِلَّهِ – تَعَالَى – وَيَصِيرَ مُحَرَّرًا عَنِ التَّمْلِيكِ لِيَسْتَدِيمَ نَفْعُهُ وَيَسْتَمِرَّ وَقْفُهُ لِلْعِبَادِ. لَهُمَا أَنَّ الْحَاجَةَ مَاسَّةٌ إِلَى لُزُومِ الْوَقْفِ لِيَصِلَ ثَوَابُهُ إِلَيْهِ عَلَى الدَّوَامِ، وَأَنَّهُ مُمْكِنٌ بِإِسْقَاطِ مِلْكِهِ وَجَعْلِهِ لِلَّهِ – تَعَالَى – كَالْمَسْجِدِ فَيُجْعَلُ كَذَلِكَ.
Hanafi jurists differ whether the waqif stipulating condition to benefit from the waqf is allowed or not. Imam Muhammad forbids it and cannot benefit from it whilst Imam Abu Yusuf permits it. Generally, Imam Abu Yusuf’s position is adopted in waqf rulings. Ila’uddin Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb al-Waqf, vol 6 p. 220
[فَصْلٌ فِي شَرَائِطُ جَوَازِ الْوَقْف وَبَعْضُهَا يَرْجِعُ إلَى الْوَاقِفِ]
وَهَلْ يُشْتَرَطُ أَنْ لَا يَشْرُطَ الْوَاقِفُ لِنَفْسِهِ مِنْ مَنَافِعِ الْوَقْفِ شَيْئًا، عِنْدَ أَبِي يُوسُفَ لَيْسَ بِشَرْطٍ، وَعِنْدَ مُحَمَّدٍ شَرْطٌ (وَجْهُ) قَوْلِ مُحَمَّدٍ أَنَّ هَذَا إخْرَاجُ الْمَالِ إلَى اللَّهِ تَعَالَى وَجَعْلُهُ خَالِصًا لَهُ، وَشَرْطُ الِانْتِفَاعِ لِنَفْسِهِ يَمْنَعُ الْإِخْلَاصَ فَيَمْنَعُ جَوَازَ الْوَقْفِ، كَمَا إذَا جَعَلَ أَرْضَهُ أَوْ دَارِهِ مَسْجِدًا وَشَرَطَ مِنْ مَنَافِعِ ذَلِكَ لِنَفْسِهِ شَيْئًا، وَكَمَا لَوْ أَعْتَقَ عَبْدَهُ وَشَرَطَ خِدْمَتَهُ لِنَفْسِهِ وَلِأَبِي يُوسُفَ مَا رُوِيَ عَنْ سَيِّدِنَا عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – أَنَّهُ وَقَفَ وَشَرَطَ فِي وَقْفِهِ لَا جُنَاحَ عَلَى مَنْ وَلِيَهُ أَنْ يَأْكُلَ مِنْهُ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ، وَكَانَ يَلِي أَمْرَ وَقْفِهِ بِنَفْسِهِ، وَعَنْ أَبِي يُوسُفَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ – أَنَّ الْوَاقِفَ إذَا شَرَطَ لِنَفْسِهِ بَيْعَ الْوَقْفِ وَصَرْفَ ثَمَنِهِ إلَى مَا هُوَ أَفْضَلُ مِنْهُ يَجُوزُ؛ لِأَنَّ شَرْطَ الْبَيْعِ شَرْطٌ لَا يُنَافِيهِ الْوَقْفُ، أَلَا تَرَى أَنَّهُ يُبَاعُ بَابُ الْمَسْجِدِ إذَا خَلِقَ، وَشَجَرُ الْوَقْفِ إذَا يَبِسَ
Permissibility of waqf for all moveable items. Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Waqf, vol 2, p. 361
وَأَمَّا وَقْفُ الْمَنْقُولِ مَقْصُودًا فَإِنْ كَانَ كُرَاعًا أَوْ سِلَاحًا يَجُوزُ فِيمَا سِوَى ذَلِكَ إنْ كَانَ شَيْئًا لَمْ يَجْرِ التَّعَارُفُ بِوَقْفِهِ كَالثِّيَابِ وَالْحَيَوَانِ لَا يَجُوزُ عِنْدَنَا وَإِنْ كَانَ مُتَعَارَفًا كَالْفَأْسِ وَالْقُدُومِ وَالْجِنَازَةِ وَثِيَابِهَا وَمَا يُحْتَاجُ إلَيْهِ مِنْ الْأَوَانِي وَالْقُدُورِ فِي غَسْلِ الْمَوْتَى وَالْمَصَاحِفِ لِقِرَاءَةِ الْقُرْآنِ قَالَ أَبُو يُوسُفَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: إنَّهُ لَا يَجُوزُ، وَقَالَ مُحَمَّدٌ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: يَجُوزُ، وَإِلَيْهِ ذَهَبَ عَامَّةُ الْمَشَايِخِ رَحِمَهُمْ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى مِنْهُمْ الْإِمَامُ السَّرَخْسِيُّ كَذَا فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ وَهُوَ الْمُخْتَارُ وَالْفَتْوَى عَلَى قَوْلِ مُحَمَّدٍ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -، كَذَا قَالَ شَمْسُ الْأَئِمَّةِ الْحَلْوَانِيُّ كَذَا فِي مُخْتَارِ الْفَتَاوَى وَلَوْ جَعَلَ جِنَازَةً وَمُلَاءَةً وَمُغْتَسَلًا يُقَالُ بِالْفَارِسِيَّةِ حَوْضُ مَسِّينِ وَقْفًا فِي مَحِلِّهِ فَمَاتَ أَهْلُهَا كُلُّهُمْ لَا يُرَدُّ إلَى الْوَرَثَةِ بَلْ يُحْمَلُ إلَى مَكَان آخَرَ أَقْرَبَ إلَى هَذِهِ الْمَحَلَّةِ كَذَا فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ
[11] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Wadi’ah, vol 4, p. 338
(الْبَابُ الْأَوَّلُ فِي تَفْسِيرِ الْإِيدَاعِ الْوَدِيعَةِ وَرُكْنِهَا وَشَرَائِطِهَا وَحُكْمِهَا)
أَمَّا تَفْسِيرُهَا شَرْعًا فَالْإِيدَاعُ هُوَ تَسْلِيطُ الْغَيْرِ عَلَى حِفْظِ مَالِهِ الْوَدِيعَةُ مَا يُتْرَكُ عِنْدَ الْأَمِينِ، كَذَا فِي الْكَنْزِ.
وَأَمَّا رُكْنُهَا فَقَوْلُ الْمُودِعِ: أَوْدَعْتُكَ هَذَا الْمَالَ، أَوْ مَا يَقُومُ مَقَامَهُ مِنْ الْأَقْوَالِ أَوْ الْأَفْعَالِ وَالْقَبُولُ مِنْ الْمُودَعِ بِالْقَوْلِ وَالْفِعْلِ أَوْ بِالْفِعْلِ فَقَطْ، هَكَذَا فِي التَّبْيِينِ. الْوَدِيعَةُ تَارَةً تَكُونُ بِصَرِيحِ الْإِيجَابِ وَالْقَبُولِ وَتَارَةً بِالدَّلَالَةِ، فَالصَّرِيحُ قَوْلُهُ: أَوْدَعْتُكَ، وَقَوْلُ الْآخَرِ: قَبِلْتُ، وَلَا تَتِمُّ فِي حَقِّ الْحِفْظِ إلَّا بِذَلِكَ وَتَتِمُّ بِالْإِيجَابِ وَحْدَهُ فِي حَقِّ الْأَمَانَةِ حَتَّى لَوْ قَالَ لِلْغَاصِبِ: أَوْدَعْتُكَ الْمَغْصُوبَ، بَرِئَ عَنْ الضَّمَانِ وَإِنْ لَمْ يَقْبَلْ، فَأَمَّا وُجُوبُ الْحِفْظِ فَيَلْزَمُ عَلَى الْمُودَعِ فَلَا بُدَّ مِنْ قَبُولِهِ، وَالدَّلَالَةُ إذَا وَضَعَ عِنْدَهُ مَتَاعًا وَلَمْ يَقُلْ شَيْئًا، أَوْ قَالَ: هَذَا وَدِيعَةٌ عِنْدَكَ، وَسَكَتَ الْآخَرُ صَارَ مُودَعًا حَتَّى لَوْ غَابَ الْآخَرُ فَضَاعَ ضَمِنَ؛ لِأَنَّهُ إيدَاعٌ وَقَبُولٌ عُرْفًا، كَذَا فِي خِزَانَةِ الْمُفْتِينَ.
[الْبَابُ الثَّانِي فِي حِفْظِ الْوَدِيعَةِ بِيَدِ الْغَيْرِ]
وَلِلْمُودَعِ أَنْ يَدْفَعَ الْوَدِيعَةَ إلَى مَنْ كَانَ فِي عِيَالِهِ كَانَ الْمَدْفُوعُ إلَيْهِ زَوْجَتَهُ أَوْ وَلَدَهُ أَوْ وَالِدَيْهِ إذَا لَمْ يَكُنْ مُتَّهَمًا يُخَافُ مِنْهُ عَلَى الْوَدِيعَةِ، هَكَذَا فِي فَتَاوَى قَاضِي خَانْ. وَقَالَ بَكْرٌ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: لِعِيَالِهِ أَنْ يَضَعَهَا عِنْدَ مَنْ فِي عِيَالِهِ، كَذَا فِي الْوَجِيزِ لِلْكَرْدَرِيِّ، وَتَفْسِيرُ ” مَنْ فِي عِيَالِهِ ” فِي هَذَا الْحُكْمِ أَنْ يُسَاكِنَ مَعَهُ سَوَاءٌ كَانَ فِي نَفَقَتِهِ أَوْ لَا، كَذَا فِي الْفَتَاوَى الصُّغْرَى
Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Wakalah, vol 3, p. 560
الْبَابُ الْأَوَّلُ: فِي بَيَانِ مَعْنَاهَا شَرْعًا وَرُكْنِهَا وَشَرْطِهَا وَأَلْفَاظِهَا وَحُكْمِهَا وَصِفَتِهَا وَمَا يَتَّصِلُ بِهِ. أَمَّا مَعْنَاهَا شَرْعًا: فَهُوَ إقَامَةُ الْإِنْسَانِ غَيْرَهُ مَقَامَ نَفْسِهِ فِي تَصَرُّفٍ مَعْلُومٍ حَتَّى إنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ مَعْلُومًا يَثْبُتُ بِهِ أَدْنَى تَصَرُّفَاتِ الْوَكِيلِ وَهُوَ الْحِفْظُ، وَذَكَرَ فِي الْمَبْسُوطِ: وَقَدْ قَالَ عُلَمَاؤُنَا فِيمَنْ قَالَ لِآخَرَ: وَكَّلْتُكَ بِمَالِي: إنَّهُ يَمْتَلِكُ بِهَذَا اللَّفْظِ الْحِفْظَ فَقَطْ كَذَا فِي النِّهَايَةِ.
Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Wakalah, vol 3, p. 573
[الْبَابُ الثَّانِي فِي التَّوْكِيلِ بِالشِّرَاءِ]
فَإِنْ قَالَ: ابْتَعْ لِي مَا رَأَيْتَ جَازَتْ الْوَكَالَةُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ فَوَّضَ الْأَمْرَ إلَى رَأْيِهِ. كَذَا فِي التَّبْيِينِ، وَكَذَا لَوْ قَالَ: اشْتَرِ لِي بِأَلْفٍ ثِيَابًا أَوْ دَوَابَّ أَوْ أَشْيَاءَ أَوْ مَا شِئْتَ أَوْ مَا رَأَيْتَ أَوْ أَدْنَى شَيْءٍ حَضَرَكَ أَوْ مَا يُوجَدُ أَوْ مَا يَتَّفِقُ صَحَّ، وَكَذَا لَوْ قَالَ: اشْتَرِ لِي وَلَمْ يَزِدْ عَلَيْهِ بِأَلْفٍ أَوْ بِعْ أَوْ اجْعَلْ أَلْفًا مِنْ مَالِكِ بِضَاعَةً؛ لِأَنَّهُ تَفْوِيضٌ كَذَا فِي الْكَافِي وَكَذَا إذَا قَالَ: أَيَّ ثَوْبٍ شِئْتَ أَوْ أَيَّ دَابَّةٍ شِئْتَ أَوْ مَا يُسِّرَ لَكَ مِنْ الثِّيَابِ وَالدَّوَابِّ صَحَّ هَكَذَا فِي الْبَدَائِعِ.