Does killing for which no liability (Qisas, Diyya, or Kaffara) is due prevent inheritance?
Chapter on Distant Kindred (Dhawu al-Arham)
Al-Mughni
Book of Inheritance Shares (Farā'id)
Primary text
Killing for which no liability is due, such as killing in lawful retribution (Qisas), lawful penalty (Hadd), self-defense, or the killing of a rebel (Baghi) by a just ruler, does not prevent inheritance. This also applies when someone acts to fulfill a duty to their superior, such as administering medicine or binding a wound, resulting in death. Similarly, if a mature, sane person orders another to drain a boil or remove a growth, and the person dies as a result, the one who ordered it inherits, according to the apparent position of the Madhhab. Evidence supporting this includes the principle that if the act was permissible, it does not invalidate inheritance, analogous to feeding or giving drink willingly which leads to death. Furthermore, prohibiting inheritance in instances where it is otherwise agreed upon would lead to the facilitation of unlawful killing, whereas in these specific cases, denying inheritance might hinder the implementation of established penalties or the fulfillment of legitimate rights, which contradicts the established principle.
Supporting text
There is an alternative report from Ahmad, narrated by his two sons, that killing prevents inheritance in all circumstances. This view suggests that even a just ruler killing a rebel, or a rebel killing a just ruler, should not inherit. This position aligns with the apparent meaning of the Hadith text and equates the killer with someone like a child, an insane person, or a sleeper, as they are all killers. This view is also attributed as the apparent position of Imam Al-Shafi'i.