Chapter Two

Factors causing exclusion of an heir from receiving any share of the legacy, are three: (a) Rejecting one's religion (ISLAM). (b) Murdering the benefactor.

 (C) Slavery.

CR # (1707) A non-Muslim does not inherit a Muslim even though he or she is a close relative, regardless, a non-Muslim is a tax-payer or in the state of war or an apostate of ( Fitry ) whose one parent is a Muslim during conception or none of whose parents is a Muslim during conception (called an apostate of Milly ) or that the Muslim is a Shia or a non-Shia.

CR # (1708) A non-Muslim near-relative is not considered an obstacle to a Muslim relative to inherit, thus, if the deceased Muslim leaves a non-Muslim son and a Muslim grandson, the grandson inherits the grand father but not the son. If a Muslim dies and leaves no Muslim heirs, the IMAM is the heir of such person.

CR # (1709) A Muslim inherits non-Muslim relatives and with a Muslim heir existing the non-Muslim relatives are not entitled to receive any thing from the legacy, regardless of the categories and sexes the same rule applies to Muslim guarantor and Muslim slave master.

However, if there is no Muslim heir from any of the categories except the IMAM, in such case, the non-Muslim heirs, inherit, if such non-Muslim heir is originally a non-Muslim but if the heir is an apostate of one or no parent a Muslim at his conception. The IMAM (a.s) is the heir according to the famous view, but it is not far from reality to consider an apostate as an originally non-Muslim especially if he is an apostate of no Muslim parent.

CR # (1710) If a non-Muslim heir becomes a Muslim before the legacy is distributed, he or she receives his/her share like the rest, however, if the new Muslim is of the category of closer heirs than those of the existing category, he is considered the only heir but if he becomes a Muslim after the distribution he is not entitled to anything from the legacy the same rule applies if he becomes a Muslim during the distribution process, regardless, in the above cases the deceased is a Muslim or a non-Muslim. This is when the heirs are numerous, but if the new Muslim is the only heir, such heir does not inherit, however, if such relative is a wife and becomes a Muslim before distribution the legacy is divided between her and the IMAM (~S.)(?).

CR # (1711) If an heir becomes a Muslim only after some of the legacy is distributed, there are several views about such case: (a) It is said that such heir receives his share from the whole legacy. (b) That he does not inherit anything at all. (c) That he inherits from what is not yet distributed only and such a view is more close to the reality.

CR # (1712) The Muslims inherit their relatives, regardless, of the difference in their schools of thought and laws and the same rule applies to the non-Muslims, (they too inherit their relatives).

CR # (1713) The Muslim and non-Muslim in the above rules, whether as a heir or a benefactor as excluding someone from the heirs or as being excluded are Muslims and non-Muslims in general; like an originally non-Muslim or as subordinate to a non-Muslim like the children and mentally-ill people. Thus, any child whose one parent is a Muslim during his conception as a baby is considered a Muslim and excludes other heirs from inheriting his parents and non-Muslims do not inherit him, only the IMAM (~S.) inherits him if he does not have any Muslim heir.

Any child whose both parents are non-Muslims at the time of his conception as a baby is considered a non-Muslim, he cannot inherit a

Muslim at all as well as a non-Muslim who has a Muslim heir other than the IMAM (a.s). However, if one of his parents becomes a Muslim before he reaches the age of maturity, he is considered a subordinate of the new Muslim parent, thus, all rules applicable to Muslims become applicable to him.

CR # (1714) There are two kinds of apostate: (a) Natural. (b) National. An apostate naturally is the one whose one parent at the time of his conception as a baby is a Muslim but later he (born of such parent) apostatizes. Whether or not it is necessary that he should be a Muslim after his reaching maturity and then apostatizes to consider him an apostate, there are two views in it; according to the one closer to reality such condition is not required. According to the law he is executed at once and his wife from the time of his apostatizing starts a waiting period like that of a widowed woman and his legacy is distributed among his heirs. The above rules about him do not change even if he repents. However, his repenting, according to strong reason is accepted in reality but not for legal purposes, even, in fact, legally also his repenting is accepted for the rules other than those mentioned above. Thus, his body is considered clean his new marriage lawful even with his previous wife. The apostate called herein national (Milly) is asked to repent, if he refuses to repent he also is executed, his marriage is abrogated and his wife becomes stranger to him if no sex is had with her and she begins the waiting period like that after a divorce starting from the time of his apostatizing if sex is had with her. His legacy is not distributed before his death by execution or without it. If he repents and apostatizes again, executing him without asking him to repent after his apostatizing for the third or fourth times is objectionable. An apostatizing woman is not executed nor her property is transferred to her heirs before her natural death, but her marriage is abrogated and if sex is had with her she begins a waiting period like that of after a divorce, if no sex is had with her she become stranger to her husband soon after her apostatizing.

She is kept in confinement and is pressured and made to pray until she repents and her repenting is accepted, regardless, she is an apostate by nature or what is herein called 'national' apostatizing.

CR # (1715) To apply rules of apostatizing to one, these conditions must be observed; the person must be:

(a) Mature.

(b) Not mentally ill and free from compulsion.

If one is forced to apostatize and he does so, it will not be of any effect, the same rule applies if one is not aware or has forgotten or it is a slipping of tongue or because of anger beyond control or due to not knowing the meaning. The second reason excluding one from heirs is murdering the legator.

CR # (1716) A murderer does not inherit his victim when it is planned and unjust killing, if it is killing by mistake it does not have such effect, like when one shoots at birds and his legator, instead, is shot, or is a justified execution or in one's self defense or in the defense of one's property or dignity, it does not have the effect of excluding one from the heirs of one's legator. If the killing is similar to that by mistake like when one hits another person with an object that does not usually kill and one intended to hit but not kill him but he is killed, there are two views about it according to the one based on a stronger ground it is like killing by mistake and it does not exclude one from one's legator's heirs but it is like planned killing as regards the payable of blood money due on the perpetrator not on his relatives consisting of fathers, children, brothers from the latter side and their children and uncles and their children, as contrary to killing by mistake in which case the blood money is due upon the above mentioned relatives of the killer and if these people are not able to pay some of it or the whole the perpetrator pays it and if he is not able to do the IMAM pays it. Choosing the kind of commodity out of six categories to be paid is up to the recipient of the blood money not the payer. The six categories are 1 One hundred camels. 2 Two hundred cows.

3 1000 sheep.

4 1000 Dinars.

5 10,000 Dirhams

6 200 Dresses called Hully.

These are for men. The blood money for women is as much as half of the above. In the case of Planned murder, it does not matter whether it is a direct hit like that of a sword or indirect like throwing a person in front of a killer beast or ordering a child or a mentally ill person to kill, and thus, the victim is killed. If one orders a free person of normal mental condition and an adult who then agrees freely without being compelled and kills the victim, no doubt the commander has committed a crime and is jailed for life, except that he is not considered a murderer deliberately or by mistake. If two people purposely kill their legator, both are denied to inherit their victim, the guardian of the victim can execute capital punishment against the killers and half of the blood money is given back to each of them. If one person kills two of his legators he is denied to inherit any of the two and the guardians of the victims can execute capital punishment on the perpetrators; when one is executed for one of the victims the blood money for the other victim becomes due on the legacy of the perpetrator.

CR # (1717) In case of killing the legator by mistake the perpetrator is not denied to inherit from the legacy other than blood money as mentioned before, but his inheriting from the blood money is objectionable.

CR # (1718) The killer does not inherit nor he causes to prevent a relative farther than him from the legator to inherit, thus, if one kills his father who has no other son but the purposely killer has a son, the latter inherits his murdered grand-father and if the victim's parents are surviving they and the grandson inherit the victim.

CR # (1719) If out of the first category of heirs the only survivor is a son of the killer, the legacy goes to the second category of heirs, consisting of grand-parents, brothers and sisters, and in case none out of this category exists, the legacy goes to the third category consisting of uncles and aunts from both parents' sides and if there is no heir except the IMAM, the legacy goes to IMAM (a.s).

CR # (1720) If the mother aborts her child, she must pay the blood money to the father or the other heirs, and the amount of such blood money is twenty Dinars when the baby is in the first stage called; 'Nutfa' 40 Dinars for the second stage called `alaqa, 60 Dinars for the third stage called 'Muzgha', 80 Dinars for the fourth stage when bones appear, 100 Dinars when the shape and body is complete and for the last stage when the baby becomes a living being the amount is equal to that payable for a living person. If the father is the perpetrator, the blood money goes to the mother. There are different views in specifying the different stages mentioned, according to a more clear view; stage 1-3 each consists of 40 days.

CR # (1721) The blood money is subject to the same rules applicable to the victim's properties, his debts can be paid off out of the blood money and his will can be executed on such property, regardless, the victim is killed by mistake or it was a planned murder, and that the blood money is received on the basis of a settlement or that because executing capital punishment is not possible due to the perpetrator's deal or hiding away etc. All the heirs can inherit, regardless, one's being an heir is because of blood relation or some other reason, like the spouses who do not inherit the right to execute capital punishment. The blood relatives from the side of the mother only like brothers and sisters and their children or the grandfather and grandmother and uncles from the mother's side do not inherit anything out of the blood money.

CR # (1722) If one inflicts a wound on someone from which the victim dies but before his death he forgives the perpetrator, the blood money is still payable by the perpetrator, regardless, the wound is caused by mistake or a planned hit.

CR # (1723) If one who is purposely murdered has no surviving heirs except the IMAM, the matter is referred to him who demands capital punishment or blood money through mutual settlement. If the heirs are other than Imam, they may forgive the perpetrator without money but if they forgive him with the condition of receiving money, capital punishment is not waived and there is no blood money due unless the perpetrator agrees.

CR # (1724) If some heirs waive executing capital punishment it is said that it is not lawful for the heirs other than those waiving to collect blood money, it is also said that collecting is lawful but the collecting party is responsible for the share of those who have not endorsed collecting. The second view is based on a more clear ground.

CR # (1725) If the victim is one already condemned to death legally, like already married fornicator or one who has committed sexual act with a male, is killed without the permission of the IMAM, it is said that in such case executing capital punishment is of no ground as well as blood money nor even expiation or ransom but it is objectionable, such view is valid if killing is in one's self-defense or the defense of one's dignity or the killing of abuser of the holy prophet or the IMAM's (A S.) etc.

CR # (1726) If the victim is indebted and has no legacy to pay off such debts, the guardian can choose to execute capital punishment (instead of blood money) and the creditor cannot stop him from execution.