|
Writers Articles And Opinions |
|
|
|
Islamic Rulings -
Living Shariah Verdicts
Islamic Questions & Answers
What is the evidence for
commercial insurance being haraam?.
Praise be
to Allah.
Commercial
insurance which is offered by most insurance companies
is a kind of haraam contract, whether it is insurance
covering one's life or possessions or anything else.
The fact that it is haraam is indicated by a number of
texts and shar’i principles, such as:
1.
Insurance is a transaction that involves ambiguity,
and transactions that involve ambiguity are forbidden
according to sharee’ah.
Muslim
(1513) narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be
pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allah be upon him) forbade gharar
(ambiguous) transactions.
Gharar in
Arabic means a risk which is not certain; it may
happen or not, such as selling fish in the water or
birds in the air, because the purchaser may or may not
get it.
Al-Azhari
said: Gharar transactions include any transactions in
which something is not known.
Mu’jam
Maqaayees al-Lughah (4/380-381); Lisaan al-‘Arab
(6/317).
Al-Khattaabi
(may Allah have mercy on him) said:
The root
meaning of the word gharar (ambiguity) is that which
is wrapped up and concealed from you. Any transaction
which is based on ambiguity or on inability to achieve
something is gharar. There are many kinds of
ambiguity, which all involve not knowing exactly what
the transaction involves. End quote.
Al-Nawawi
(may Allah have mercy on him) said:
With regard
to the prohibition on ambiguous transactions, this is
a very important principle with regard to commercial
transactions, and includes many issues, such as
selling things that are not present or are unknown,
and so on. All of these are invalid transactions
because there is ambiguity with no reason for that.
Some kinds
of ambiguity may be tolerated when engaging in a
transaction if there was a reason for it, such as not
knowing about the foundations of the house; this
transaction is still valid because the foundations
belong to what can be seen of the house, and because
there is a reason for this, as it is not possible to
see the foundations.
They are
unanimously agreed that it is invalid to sell foetuses
that are in utero and birds in the air. The scholars
said: The reason for it being invalid is because of
ambiguity. End quote.
The
scholars are agreed that a great deal of ambiguity is
not permissible, but a little of it may be overlooked.
They differed as to what constitutes a little or a
great deal.
Bidaayah
al-Mujtahid, 2/187; al-Nawawi said something similar
in Sharh Muslim.
Insurance
policies are among the contracts that involve a great
deal of ambiguity; even lawmakers themselves have
affirmed that insurance contracts are based on
probabilities, which means ambiguous, because neither
the insurer nor the insured can know at the time of
entering into the contract what he will give or take.
The person who takes out insurance may pay one
instalment, then an accident may happen and the
insurer is obliged to give what he agreed to give to
him, or perhaps nothing will happen at all, so he will
pay all the installments and not take anything.
2.
Insurance contracts are a kind of gambling
Gambling is
haraam, as it was forbidden by Allah, when He said
(interpretation of the meaning):
“Intoxicants (all kinds of alcoholic drinks), and
gambling, and Al‑Ansaab (stone altars for sacrifices
to idols etc), and Al‑Azlaam (arrows for seeking luck
or decision) are an abomination of Shaytaan’s
(Satan’s) handiwork. So avoid (strictly all) that
(abomination) in order that you may be successful”
[al-Maa’idah
5:90]
What is
meant by gambling is when a person pays something of
his own money and takes a risk: either he will gain
more than it or he will lose the money that he paid.
See the
answer to question number
89746
and
106601.
Insurance
is a transaction that is connected to a risk that may
or may not happen, so it is, in effect, gambling,
because the person who takes out insurance is taking
the risk by paying the premium. Either he will take
more than it or he will lose it if the risk against
which he is insured does not happen.
The person
who is insured may pay twenty and take one thousand,
or he may pay one thousand and take one thousand, or
he may pay one thousand and not take anything if the
risk against which he was insured does not happen.
Is this not
taking risks and gambling?
3.
Insurance involves riba al-nasee’ah and riba al-fadl,
in the event that compensation is paid
Muslim
(1587) narrated that ‘Ubaadah ibn al-Saamit (may Allah
be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Gold
for gold, silver for silver, wheat for wheat, barley
for barley, dates for dates, salt for salt, like for
like, same for same, hand to hand. But if these
commodities differ, then sell as you like, as long as
it is hand to hand.”
This hadith
indicates that if a person sells gold for gold, it
must be equal amounts and the exchange completed in
the same sitting.
So it
should be sold gram for gram, with nothing added, and
the exchange must be completed in the same sitting. It
is not permissible for the two parties to separate
without each of them having taken what is due to him.
If a person
sells gold for gold with a difference in the amount,
then they have fallen into riba al-fadl. If the
exchange is not completed then they have fallen into
riba al-nasee’ah, i.e., interest charged when
hand-to-hand exchange is delayed.
If gold is
sold for silver then the exchange must be completed in
the same sitting, and it is permissible for there to
be a difference in the amounts. So a gram of gold may
be sold for 10 g of silver, for example, but it is not
permissible for them to separate without the exchange
having been completed.
Currency
comes under the same ruling as gold and silver in this
regard. It is not permissible to exchange one currency
for another unless the exchange is completed in the
same sitting. If the currency is all the same, then it
must be like for like and the exchange should be
completed, just as if gold were being exchanged for
gold.
Insurance
includes riba of both types: riba al-fadl and riba al-nasee’ah.
What that
means is that what the insurance gives to the person
who takes out insurance, or to his heirs, if the risk
defined in the contract happens, will be one of three
things: either it will be less than what he paid or
more than that or equal to it.
In all
these cases what the company gives to the insured
person happens after he pays the insurance
installments during a period of which the end is in
fact unknown.
So the
reality of the transaction is that it is paying money
for money to be given at a later date.
If the
amounts are equal, then this is riba al-nasee’ah; if
more [or less] is paid, then it is riba al-fadl and
al-nasee’ah, both of which are haraam on their own so
how about if they are combined?
4.
Insurance is consuming people's wealth unlawfully
Consuming
people's wealth unlawfully is haraam.
Allah says
(interpretation of the meaning): “O you who believe!
Eat not up your property among yourselves unjustly
except it be a trade amongst you, by mutual consent”
[al-Nisa’ 4:29].
What is
invalid is every way which is not permitted by
sharee’ah, and which involves stealing, betrayal,
robbery, gambling, riba-based contracts and corrupt
transactions. This was stated by Abu Hayyaan in his
commentary on this verse.
What is
meant by insurance involving consuming people's wealth
unlawfully is if the money paid by the insurance to
the person who is insured is more than he paid -- such
as if the risk occurs after paying just one
installment -- then on what basis is he entitled to
this money? And if the risk does not occur, then on
what basis is the insurance company entitled to the
payments made by the person who was insured without
anything in return?
Statistics
by a German expert have proven that the ratio of
payments made by insurance companies in compensation
to individuals is equivalent to no more than 2.9% of
the total amount of payments made.
On what
basis is the insurance company entitled this money,
and in return for what?
5.
Insurance contracts make obligatory things that are
not obligatory according to sharee’ah
Insurance
contracts oblige the insurance company to pay
compensation, if the risk against which insurance was
taken happens. On what basis is this made binding? The
insurance company did not cause the danger or make it
happen; it did not commit any acts of aggression or
shortcoming, so how can it be forced to pay
compensation for something for which it is not liable
according to sharee’ah?
6.
Insurance harms both individuals and society
In addition
to what is mentioned above, insurance is not free of
other harmful effects, among the most important of
which are the following:
Taking
things lightly: it makes the people insured careless
about protecting their property against calamity; they
may even go further than that and cause accidents or
make accidents worse. This causes a great deal of harm
to individuals. For example, some drivers whose lives
and cars are insured may become careless and not pay
heed to traffic laws and regulations, which exposes
individuals to harm caused by accidents and car
crashes.
Each one of
these reasons is sufficient to indicate that
commercial insurance is haraam and that insurance
contracts are invalid contracts which are not
permitted by sharee’ah, and that it comes under the
heading of consuming people's wealth unlawfully. So
how about when all these reasons are combined?
Hence the
majority of contemporary scholars have ruled that all
forms of commercial insurance are haraam. Statements
have been issued by the Council of Senior Scholars in
the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries and by the
Islamic Fiqh Councils in Jeddah and Makkah, that
commercial insurance is haraam according to consensus,
and not one member of the Council disagreed.
We have
quoted a great deal of these statements and fatwas in
the answers to various questions on our site.
See a
lengthy discussion of commercial insurance in Abhaath
Hay’at Kibaar al-‘Ulama’, 4/33-315.
And Allah
knows best.
EsinIslam.Com
|