An heir who killed the deceased

Barred for deliberate, quasi-deliberate and accidental killing — but not for causing a death indirectly, and not if the killer was a child or insane. Ibn ‘Abidin lists deprivation of inheritance among the consequences that attach to unlawful homicide, alongside retaliation, blood-money, expiation and sin, and his gloss draws the outer limit at once: “what is meant here is a FORBIDDEN killing, so it does not take in a killing the law permits, such as retaliation or stoning”. Inside that limit the Hanafis are broad: quasi-deliberate killing (striking with something that does not usually kill, which carries blood-money on the clan, sin and expiation) bars, and so does accidental killing — shooting at game and hitting a man, rolling onto him in one’s sleep, dropping a stone on him — provided the killing was not done by right. Two exclusions are distinctive, and the school argues for both. Killing by causation rather than by act — digging a well, or setting a stone where the deceased then fell — does not bar, because the man is not literally a killer: he can dig on his own land and answer for nothing. And a child or an insane person does not lose the inheritance, because the bar is a penalty for a forbidden act and their acts cannot be described as forbidden, the law’s address not reaching them; nor can carelessness be laid at their door. A further Hanafi consequence: a barred killer does not exclude anyone else either — Ibn ‘Abidin, “his existence is as his non-existence”.

Sources: Radd al-Muhtar (Hashiyat Ibn ‘Abidin), Kitab al-Jinayat, opening — “(al-qatlu) alladhi yata‘allaqu bihi al-ahkamu al-atiyatu min qawadin wa diyatin wa kaffaratin wa ithmin wa HIRMANI IRTHIN (khamsatun)”; and the gloss “wa’l-hasilu anna al-murada huna qatlun muharramun, fa-la yashmalu al-qatla al-ma’dhuna bihi shar‘an ka-qisasin wa rajm” (Muhammad Amin b. ‘Abidin (d. 1252 AH)) · Radd al-Muhtar (Hashiyat Ibn ‘Abidin), Kitab al-Fara’id, fasl fi’l-hajb — one page carrying two rules: “(anna man adla bi-shakhsin la yarithu ma‘ahu) ka-ibni al-ibni la yarithu ma‘a al-ibn”; and “wa’l-mahrumu ka-ibnin kafirin aw qatilin la yahjubu ‘indana aslan” — the gloss adding that the Hanafis reserve the word mahrum for one barred by something in himself, such as being a slave or a killer, and mahjub for one barred by someone else (Muhammad Amin b. ‘Abidin (d. 1252 AH)) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Irth” §17, al-qatl — the agreed core and the point of departure: “ittafaqa al-a’immatu al-arba‘atu ‘ala anna al-qatla alladhi yata‘allaqu bihi al-qisasu yamna‘u al-qatila al-baligha al-‘aqila mina al-mirathi idha kana al-qatlu mubashiran. Wa’khtalafu fi’l-muradi bi’l-qatli alladhi yujibu al-qisasa, kama ’khtalafu fima idha kana al-qatilu sabiyyan aw majnunan aw ghayra mubashirin li’l-qatli aw kana al-qatlu khata’an”; and the Hanafi position that killing resembling deliberate killing and accidental killing both bar (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Irth” §17 cont. — the four-way split set out: for the Hanafis the accidental killer is barred “idha lam yakun al-qatlu bi-haqq”, but “idha kana al-qatlu bi’l-sababi duna al-mubasharati … aw kana al-qatilu sabiyyan aw majnunan fa-la hirmana ‘inda al-Hanafiyya”; “wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu wa’l-Malikiyyatu fi’l-arjahi ila anna al-qatila ‘amdan mubashiran aw mutasabbiban yumna‘u mina al-mirathi mina al-mali wa’l-diyati wa law kana sabiyyan aw majnunan”, with the other Maliki view that a child’s or madman’s deliberate act counts as accidental “fa-yarithu mina al-mali duna al-diya”; killing by way of qisas, hadd or self-defence barring nobody for the Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis; and for the Shafi’is “anna kulla man lahu madkhalun fi’l-qatli yumna‘u mina al-mirathi, wa law kana al-qatlu bi-haqqin ka-muqtassin wa imamin wa qadin wa jalladin … wa shahidin wa muzakkin” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Irth” §17 cont. — the Shafi’i extension worked out (two people falling from a height, the upper not inheriting from the lower because he killed him, the lower inheriting from the upper because he did not); the Hanafi argument that one who kills by causation is not literally a killer and that a child or a madman cannot be described as doing something forbidden; and the Shafi’i reading of the hadith “laysa li’l-qatili min al-mirathi shay’” as meaning anyone with a hand in the killing (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, entry “Qatl al-Khata’” §10, “al-hirman min al-mirath” — the four schools side by side on ACCIDENTAL killing: “dhahaba al-Hanafiyyatu wa’l-Shafi‘iyyatu ila anna al-qatla al-khata’a sababun min asbabi al-hirmani mina al-mirath, li-qawli al-nabiyyi ‘al-qatilu la yarith’, wa li-anna al-qatla qata‘a al-muwalata wa hiya sababu al-irth. Wa dhahaba al-Malikiyyatu ila anna man qatala muwarrithahu khata’an fa-innahu yarithu mina al-mali wa la yarithu mina al-diya. Wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu ila anna al-qatla al-madmuna” — continued on the next page — “bi-qisasin aw diyatin aw kaffaratin la irtha fihi, fa-in kana ghayra madmunin … fa-yarithuhu, li-annahu tarattaba ‘an fi‘lin ma’dhunin fih” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) — the Mawsu’a’s Hanafi sections (footnoted to al-Sirajiyya), corroborated from Ibn ‘Abidin’s own Radd al-Muhtar.

Only deliberate wrongful killing bars the estate; the accidental killer keeps the inheritance but loses the blood-money. This is the sharpest divergence in the whole question, and Khalil’s text states it in two clauses. First: no inheritance for one who kills the person he would inherit from — whether by causation or by direct act, and even if the killer is a child or insane — where the killing was ‘amdan ‘udwanan, deliberate and wrongful, “even if he pleads a doubt” that saves him from retaliation, the example given being a father who throws a stone at his son and kills him. Then: “like one who kills accidentally — he does not inherit OF THE BLOOD-MONEY, and he does inherit of the estate”. The same treatment is extended to a man who kills an heir in lawful self-defence because that heir was trying to kill him: he inherits the property, not the blood-money. al-Dasuqi records a competing reading inside the school — that a child’s or an insane person’s deliberate act is itself treated as accidental, so they too keep the property and lose only the blood-money, which he calls the apparent view and attributes to Tafa and al-Farisi. He also notes a curiosity: on the school’s well-known position a killer still inherits wala’ — the patronage tie — whether the killing was deliberate or accidental. The Malikis are also the one school to list ignorance of who died first among the impediments in its own right.

Sources: al-Sharh al-Kabir li’l-Dardir with Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, [Mawani‘ al-Mirath], the third impediment — “wa la yarithu qatilun li-muwarrithihi … aw sabiyyan aw majnunan tasabbuban aw mubasharatan (‘amdan ‘udwanan, wa in ata bi-shubhatin) tadra’u ‘anhu al-qisasa ka-ramyi al-walidi waladahu bi-hajarin fa-mata minhu … (ka-mukhti’in) la yarithu (mina al-diyati) wa yarithu mina al-mal”; al-Dasuqi recording the contrary view of Tafa and al-Farisi that a child’s or a madman’s deliberate act is treated as accidental; and the fa’ida that on the well-known position of the school a killer inherits wala’ whether the killing was deliberate or accidental (Ahmad al-Dardir (d. 1201 AH) with Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Dasuqi (d. 1230 AH)) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Irth” §17 cont. — the four-way split set out: for the Hanafis the accidental killer is barred “idha lam yakun al-qatlu bi-haqq”, but “idha kana al-qatlu bi’l-sababi duna al-mubasharati … aw kana al-qatilu sabiyyan aw majnunan fa-la hirmana ‘inda al-Hanafiyya”; “wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu wa’l-Malikiyyatu fi’l-arjahi ila anna al-qatila ‘amdan mubashiran aw mutasabbiban yumna‘u mina al-mirathi mina al-mali wa’l-diyati wa law kana sabiyyan aw majnunan”, with the other Maliki view that a child’s or madman’s deliberate act counts as accidental “fa-yarithu mina al-mali duna al-diya”; killing by way of qisas, hadd or self-defence barring nobody for the Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis; and for the Shafi’is “anna kulla man lahu madkhalun fi’l-qatli yumna‘u mina al-mirathi, wa law kana al-qatlu bi-haqqin ka-muqtassin wa imamin wa qadin wa jalladin … wa shahidin wa muzakkin” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya al-Kuwaytiyya, entry “Irth” §15, mawani‘ al-irth — “wa mawani‘u al-irthi al-muttafaqu ‘alayha bayna al-a’immati al-arba‘ati thalathatun: al-riqqu, wa’l-qatlu, wa’khtilafu al-din”, with three more disputed (apostasy, difference of territory, the circular case); and “wa ‘inda al-Malikiyyati mina al-mawani‘i jahlu ta’akhkhuri mawti al-warithi ‘an mawti al-muwarrith” — the Malikis alone counting ignorance of the order of death as an impediment in its own right (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, entry “Qatl al-Khata’” §10, “al-hirman min al-mirath” — the four schools side by side on ACCIDENTAL killing: “dhahaba al-Hanafiyyatu wa’l-Shafi‘iyyatu ila anna al-qatla al-khata’a sababun min asbabi al-hirmani mina al-mirath, li-qawli al-nabiyyi ‘al-qatilu la yarith’, wa li-anna al-qatla qata‘a al-muwalata wa hiya sababu al-irth. Wa dhahaba al-Malikiyyatu ila anna man qatala muwarrithahu khata’an fa-innahu yarithu mina al-mali wa la yarithu mina al-diya. Wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu ila anna al-qatla al-madmuna” — continued on the next page — “bi-qisasin aw diyatin aw kaffaratin la irtha fihi, fa-in kana ghayra madmunin … fa-yarithuhu, li-annahu tarattaba ‘an fi‘lin ma’dhunin fih” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mughni, fasl 4944 — the Hanbali definition of the barring killing: “wa’l-qatlu al-mani‘u mina al-irthi huwa al-qatlu bi-ghayri haqq, wa huwa al-madmunu bi-qawadin, aw diyatin, aw kaffaratin ka’l-‘amdi, wa shibhi al-‘amdi, wa’l-khata’i, wa ma jara majra al-khata’i; ka’l-qatli bi’l-sababi, wa qatli al-sabiyyi, wa’l-majnuni, wa’l-na’imi. Wa ma laysa bi-madmunin bi-shay’in mimma dhakarna lam yamna‘ al-miratha; ka’l-qatli qisasan aw haddan, aw daf‘an ‘an nafsihi, wa qatli al-‘adili al-baghi”; also the earlier passage naming al-Shafi’i and ashab al-ra’y with Ahmad on barring the accidental killer, against those who let him take the property but not the blood-money (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) — al-Dardir with al-Dasuqi directly; the Mawsu’a gives the same as the stronger Maliki view and records the internal dispute.

Anyone with a hand in the death is barred — even a lawful killing. The Shafi’i rule is the widest of the four and al-Shirbini states it without hedging: the bar applies “whether the killing was deliberate or not, whether it carried liability or not, whether by direct act or not, whether he intended the victim’s benefit — as with a father, a husband or a teacher administering a beating — or not, whether he was coerced or not”. Worked out in the Mawsu’a, that catches the man who carries out a lawful retaliation, the ruler, the judge, the executioner acting on their order, and even the witness and the character-witness whose evidence produced the sentence; and it catches the sleeper, the insane person and the infant, and the father who beat his son to discipline him or opened a wound to treat him. The illustration the school gives is exact: two relatives fall from a height, one landing on the other; if the lower dies, the upper does not inherit from him, because he killed him; if the upper dies, the lower does inherit, because he did not. A minority Shafi’i view would let a killer inherit where the killing carried no liability — retaliation or a hadd — “because he killed by right”, but that is reported as the weaker position. The school does draw some lines: no bar on a mufti even if his fatwa was wrong, nor on one who merely transmits a hadith, nor on one who kills by the evil eye. Their textual ground is the hadith “the killer has nothing of the inheritance”, read as covering anyone with a part in the killing.

Sources: Mughni al-Muhtaj, Kitab al-Fara’id, mawani‘ al-irth — one page carrying two of the impediments. THE KILLER, at his widest: “wa sawa’un akana al-qatlu ‘amdan am ghayrahu, madmunan am la, bi-mubasharatin am la, qasada maslahatahu ka-darbi al-abi wa’l-zawji wa’l-mu‘allimi am la, mukrahan am la”, with the minority “wa qila in lam yudman … waritha”; the two grounds being the fear that an heir will hasten his inheritance and that killing severs the bond which causes inheriting; and the note that the victim DOES inherit from his killer, on which “la khilafa fihi”. UNCERTAINTY AS TO THE TIME OF DEATH: “wa law mata mutawarithani bi-gharaqin aw hadmin aw fi ghurbatin ma‘an aw juhila asbaquhuma lam yatawaratha wa malu kullin li-baqi warathatihi”, with al-Shirbini’s five cases — known simultaneity, known order with a known first, ignorance of both, ignorance of which was first, and confusion after the first was known — the last suspended “ila al-bayani aw al-sulh”, the second divided normally, and the other three giving each estate to his own remaining heirs, because “fa-yuqaddaru fi haqqi kulli mayyitin annahu lam yukhallif al-akhar” (al-Khatib al-Shirbini (d. 977 AH)) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Irth” §17 cont. — the four-way split set out: for the Hanafis the accidental killer is barred “idha lam yakun al-qatlu bi-haqq”, but “idha kana al-qatlu bi’l-sababi duna al-mubasharati … aw kana al-qatilu sabiyyan aw majnunan fa-la hirmana ‘inda al-Hanafiyya”; “wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu wa’l-Malikiyyatu fi’l-arjahi ila anna al-qatila ‘amdan mubashiran aw mutasabbiban yumna‘u mina al-mirathi mina al-mali wa’l-diyati wa law kana sabiyyan aw majnunan”, with the other Maliki view that a child’s or madman’s deliberate act counts as accidental “fa-yarithu mina al-mali duna al-diya”; killing by way of qisas, hadd or self-defence barring nobody for the Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis; and for the Shafi’is “anna kulla man lahu madkhalun fi’l-qatli yumna‘u mina al-mirathi, wa law kana al-qatlu bi-haqqin ka-muqtassin wa imamin wa qadin wa jalladin … wa shahidin wa muzakkin” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Irth” §17 cont. — the Shafi’i extension worked out (two people falling from a height, the upper not inheriting from the lower because he killed him, the lower inheriting from the upper because he did not); the Hanafi argument that one who kills by causation is not literally a killer and that a child or a madman cannot be described as doing something forbidden; and the Shafi’i reading of the hadith “laysa li’l-qatili min al-mirathi shay’” as meaning anyone with a hand in the killing (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Irth” §17 end — the rationale: the fear that an heir will hasten his inheritance, “‘amalan bi-qa‘idati: man ista‘jala bi-shay’in qabla awanihi ‘uqiba bi-hirmanih”, and the closing of the door in the remaining cases where there was no intent at all — the sleeper, the insane, the infant; with the Shafi’i exclusions (no bar on the mufti even if his fatwa was wrong, nor on the transmitter of a hadith, nor on one who kills by the evil eye) (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, entry “Qatl al-Khata’” §10, “al-hirman min al-mirath” — the four schools side by side on ACCIDENTAL killing: “dhahaba al-Hanafiyyatu wa’l-Shafi‘iyyatu ila anna al-qatla al-khata’a sababun min asbabi al-hirmani mina al-mirath, li-qawli al-nabiyyi ‘al-qatilu la yarith’, wa li-anna al-qatla qata‘a al-muwalata wa hiya sababu al-irth. Wa dhahaba al-Malikiyyatu ila anna man qatala muwarrithahu khata’an fa-innahu yarithu mina al-mali wa la yarithu mina al-diya. Wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu ila anna al-qatla al-madmuna” — continued on the next page — “bi-qisasin aw diyatin aw kaffaratin la irtha fihi, fa-in kana ghayra madmunin … fa-yarithuhu, li-annahu tarattaba ‘an fi‘lin ma’dhunin fih” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mughni, fasl 4944 — the Hanbali definition of the barring killing: “wa’l-qatlu al-mani‘u mina al-irthi huwa al-qatlu bi-ghayri haqq, wa huwa al-madmunu bi-qawadin, aw diyatin, aw kaffaratin ka’l-‘amdi, wa shibhi al-‘amdi, wa’l-khata’i, wa ma jara majra al-khata’i; ka’l-qatli bi’l-sababi, wa qatli al-sabiyyi, wa’l-majnuni, wa’l-na’imi. Wa ma laysa bi-madmunin bi-shay’in mimma dhakarna lam yamna‘ al-miratha; ka’l-qatli qisasan aw haddan, aw daf‘an ‘an nafsihi, wa qatli al-‘adili al-baghi”; also the earlier passage naming al-Shafi’i and ashab al-ra’y with Ahmad on barring the accidental killer, against those who let him take the property but not the blood-money (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) — Mughni al-Muhtaj on al-Nawawi’s Minhaj, with the Mawsu’a’s Shafi’i section (footnoted to al-Tuhfa al-Khayriyya) and Ibn Qudama independently naming al-Shafi’i as barring the accidental killer.

Every killing that carries legal liability bars — and no killing done by right does. Ibn Qudama gives the rule as a single test, and it is the tidiest of the four: “the killing that bars inheritance is killing without right, that is, the killing that carries liability to retaliation, or blood-money, or expiation — deliberate killing, quasi-deliberate killing, accidental killing, and what runs as accidental killing does, such as killing by causation, and killing by a child, by an insane person, or by a sleeper. And whatever carries none of those does not bar the inheritance — such as killing as retaliation, or as a hadd, or in self-defence, or the killing of a rebel by one fighting justly”. So the Hanbalis reach further than the Hanafis (causation, the child, the insane person all bar) and stop well short of the Shafi’is (a lawful execution bars nobody). Ahmad’s express ruling is that one who justly kills a rebel in war inherits from him; that where four brothers testified against their sister for adultery and then took part in stoning her with the crowd, they inherit, “they are not her killers”; and that a man who lances a boil or cuts a growth at the request of a competent adult who then dies inherits, on the apparent madhhab. A second narration from Ahmad, from his sons Salih and ‘Abdullah, would bar the killer in every case. The school also confirms that a barred killer excludes nobody: al-Buhuti, “his existence is as his non-existence”.

Sources: al-Mughni, Kitab al-Fara’id, mas’ala 4943 — al-Khiraqi: “wa’l-qatilu la yarithu al-maqtula, ‘amdan kana al-qatlu aw khata’an”; Ibn Qudama: “ajma‘a ahlu al-‘ilmi ‘ala anna qatila al-‘amdi la yarithu min al-maqtuli shay’an” save a shadhdh report from Sa‘id b. al-Musayyab and Ibn Jubayr; on ‘Umar’s award of the blood-money of Ibn Qatada al-Madhhiji to his brother and not to his father, who had struck him down, and ‘Umar’s report of the Prophet’s words “laysa li’l-qatili shay’” (Malik in the Muwatta’, and Ahmad with his chain); and Ibn ‘Abbas: “man qatala qatilan fa-innahu la yarithuhu, wa in lam yakun lahu warithun ghayruhu, wa in kana walidahu aw waladahu, fa-laysa li-qatilin mirath” (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) · al-Mughni, fasl 4944 — the Hanbali definition of the barring killing: “wa’l-qatlu al-mani‘u mina al-irthi huwa al-qatlu bi-ghayri haqq, wa huwa al-madmunu bi-qawadin, aw diyatin, aw kaffaratin ka’l-‘amdi, wa shibhi al-‘amdi, wa’l-khata’i, wa ma jara majra al-khata’i; ka’l-qatli bi’l-sababi, wa qatli al-sabiyyi, wa’l-majnuni, wa’l-na’imi. Wa ma laysa bi-madmunin bi-shay’in mimma dhakarna lam yamna‘ al-miratha; ka’l-qatli qisasan aw haddan, aw daf‘an ‘an nafsihi, wa qatli al-‘adili al-baghi”; also the earlier passage naming al-Shafi’i and ashab al-ra’y with Ahmad on barring the accidental killer, against those who let him take the property but not the blood-money (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) · Kashshaf al-Qina’, Kitab al-Fara’id — “wa man la yarithu li-mani‘in fihi min riqqin aw qatlin aw ’khtilafi dinin, lam yahjub” anyone, neither wholly nor partially, “bal wujuduhu ka-‘adamih” (Mansur b. Yunus al-Buhuti (d. 1051 AH)) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Irth” §17 cont. — the four-way split set out: for the Hanafis the accidental killer is barred “idha lam yakun al-qatlu bi-haqq”, but “idha kana al-qatlu bi’l-sababi duna al-mubasharati … aw kana al-qatilu sabiyyan aw majnunan fa-la hirmana ‘inda al-Hanafiyya”; “wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu wa’l-Malikiyyatu fi’l-arjahi ila anna al-qatila ‘amdan mubashiran aw mutasabbiban yumna‘u mina al-mirathi mina al-mali wa’l-diyati wa law kana sabiyyan aw majnunan”, with the other Maliki view that a child’s or madman’s deliberate act counts as accidental “fa-yarithu mina al-mali duna al-diya”; killing by way of qisas, hadd or self-defence barring nobody for the Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis; and for the Shafi’is “anna kulla man lahu madkhalun fi’l-qatli yumna‘u mina al-mirathi, wa law kana al-qatlu bi-haqqin ka-muqtassin wa imamin wa qadin wa jalladin … wa shahidin wa muzakkin” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, entry “Qatl al-Khata’” §10, “al-hirman min al-mirath” — the four schools side by side on ACCIDENTAL killing: “dhahaba al-Hanafiyyatu wa’l-Shafi‘iyyatu ila anna al-qatla al-khata’a sababun min asbabi al-hirmani mina al-mirath, li-qawli al-nabiyyi ‘al-qatilu la yarith’, wa li-anna al-qatla qata‘a al-muwalata wa hiya sababu al-irth. Wa dhahaba al-Malikiyyatu ila anna man qatala muwarrithahu khata’an fa-innahu yarithu mina al-mali wa la yarithu mina al-diya. Wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu ila anna al-qatla al-madmuna” — continued on the next page — “bi-qisasin aw diyatin aw kaffaratin la irtha fihi, fa-in kana ghayra madmunin … fa-yarithuhu, li-annahu tarattaba ‘an fi‘lin ma’dhunin fih” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Qatl al-Khata’” §10 cont. — the Hanbali sentence completed: killing that carries liability “bi-qisasin aw diyatin aw kaffaratin la irtha fih; fa-in kana ghayra madmunin, ka-man qasada mawlahu mimma lahu fi‘luhu min saqyi dawa’in aw rabti jirahatin fa-mata fa-yarithuhu, li-annahu tarattaba ‘an fi‘lin ma’dhunin fihi, wa hadha ma dhahaba ilayhi al-Muwaffaq. Qala al-Buhuti: wa la‘allahu aswabu li-muwafaqatihi li’l-qawa‘id”; and §11, the separate dispute over whether a BEQUEST to the killer is valid (permitted on the azhar of the Shafi’is and by Ibn Hamid of the Hanbalis; refused by the Hanafis and by Abu Bakr of the Hanbalis) (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) — al-Mughni mas’ala 4943 and fasl 4944, with Kashshaf al-Qina’ and the Mawsu’a’s Hanbali sections.