What is the ruling on dedicating a social solidarity fund for a specific tribe, where 25% of the blood money (diyat) and compensations received by the family from other tribes are deducted for it? And what is the ruling on limiting the benefits of its services to those who are subscribed to the fund only?

The idea of cooperating for good is noble, and this fund is a good idea. However, for it to be in accordance with Islamic law, it must be based purely on donation without stipulating compensation. If the participant stipulates compensation, it ceases to be a donation and becomes an invalid exchange, because it would be for an unknown compensation.

As for the blood money (diyya) for accidental killing, it is borne by the killer's 'aqila (kinsmen), and it belongs to the heirs of the deceased. Nothing from it may be deducted for the benefit of the fund except with the permission of the adult heirs.

In summary, stipulating compensation in this fund transforms it from a form of cooperation and mutual support into a trade, an exchange, and a transaction involving gharar (excessive uncertainty), which makes it prohibited under those conditions. It is permissible for participants to exclusively benefit from the fund if it is based on donation, and if a person participates in it without stipulating compensation.