Is the social security imposed by the state in exchange for a pension for heirs permissible or forbidden, and what is the difference between it and life or property insurance?
The insurances imposed by the state in return for a pension for heirs have two scenarios:
1. If the state insures the employee with a commercial insurance company: This is impermissible due to the presence of usury (riba), gambling (qimar), and uncertainty (). If this occurs, the heirs are only allowed to take what was deducted from the employee's salary, and they have no right to any additional amount. 2. If the state does not insure its employees with insurance companies, but rather provides a pension to the heirs after the employee's death in return for what was deducted from their salary: In this case, there is no objection for the heirs to take this pension, as it is part of the deceased's salary, and because the state is obligated to look after the interests of its citizens.
As for other insurances, they are either religiously forbidden due to containing impermissible elements, or they are doubtful because they do not implement the model of cooperative insurance.
Summarized from the full answer at Ftawy · imported
Read the full answer on Ftawyhttps://ftawy.com/en/questions/34589
Where this answer came from
- Source platform
- Ftawy
- Original fatwa ID
- 34589
- Imported
- Translation status
- Source text, unreviewed
- Read the full ruling
- Read the full answer on Ftawy