This Q&A addresses the situation where both a father and son die around the same time, and there is uncertainty about who died first. It discusses the rules of inheritance in such cases according to Islamic law.
🤖
AI Notice: This translation was generated by AI and is currently awaiting human verification.
1 Answer
Peace be upon you.
Ayatollah Al-Uzma Sayyid Sistani (may Allah protect him):
If two heirs die and there is uncertainty about the order of their deaths, whether one preceded the other or they died simultaneously, the ruling depends on the cause of their deaths. If they died due to drowning or collapse, each inherits from the other. However, if the cause was something else, such as burning, being killed in battle, or being attacked by a wild animal, there are differing opinions on whether they inherit from each other, similar to the case of drowning and collapse. The correct view is that they do inherit from each other, and this ruling applies even if they died naturally without any external cause, although it is advisable to settle the matter amicably, especially in the latter case.
The method of inheritance from both sides is to assume that each was alive at the time of the other's death, and they inherit from what each owned at the time of death, not from what they inherited from the other. For example, if a husband and wife drowned and it was unclear who died first, and they had no children, the husband would inherit half of the wife's estate, and the wife would inherit a quarter of what the husband left behind. The husband would then distribute the inherited half to his heirs along with three-quarters of the remaining estate after giving the wife her quarter, and the wife would distribute her quarter along with half of her remaining estate after giving the husband his half to her heirs.
This is the ruling for their mutual inheritance. As for the inheritance of others who are alive from the original estate of either or both, it is based on the assumption that the deceased's death occurred first, allowing the living third party to inherit accordingly. For instance, if the wife and her daughter drowned, the husband would inherit a quarter from his wife, even if the wife had no children other than the daughter, and he would not inherit half. Similarly, the daughter's inheritance would depend on her death occurring first. If she had no heirs other than her father, her mother, who drowned with her, would receive a third, and the father would receive two-thirds. This applies similarly if the father and daughter drowned and he had no other children, in which case his wife would receive one-eighth.
As for the inheritance of others who are alive from the inherited wealth of either or both, it is based on the assumption that the deceased's death occurred after the other, allowing the heir to inherit accordingly, without considering the possibility of the deceased's death occurring first, unlike the original estate. If there are three or more deceased, the assumption is based on the life of the others at the time of each one's death, and they inherit from each other as any other living heirs would. The deceased's inheritance is divided among their living heirs, not the deceased ones, and the method of inheriting the original and inherited wealth is as previously mentioned.
Ayatollah Al-Uzma Sayyid Khamenei (may Allah protect him):
- If two people die and there is doubt about whether their deaths were simultaneous or if one preceded the other, and the date is unknown: If the cause of their deaths was drowning or collapse, there is no issue regarding each inheriting from the other. If the cause was something else, or if one died naturally or there were differing causes, should it be resolved by drawing lots, amicable settlement, or does it follow the ruling for drowners and those who died in collapses? There are several opinions, the strongest being the latter, although it is advisable to settle amicably, especially if one or both died naturally. This ruling also applies to cases involving more than two deceased.
- If they died and it is known that one preceded the other, but there is doubt about which one it was and their dates are unknown, the stronger opinion is to resort to drawing lots, regardless of whether the cause was drowning, collapse, or otherwise, or if one or both died naturally.
- The method of inheritance from both sides is to assume that each was alive at the time of the other's death and inherits from their estate at that time, then the living heir inherits what they received. However, neither inherits from what the other inherited from them. For example, if a son and father died and it is unknown who died first, and the father had a daughter (not the deceased son), and the father's estate was nine hundred, while the deceased son had a son with an estate of six hundred, it is first assumed that the father died and the son was alive, so the son inherits six hundred (two-thirds of the estate), which is the right of his son (the deceased's son), and the remainder is the right of his sister. Then it is assumed that the son died and the father was alive, so he inherits one hundred (one-sixth of the estate) and gives it to his daughter, with the remainder being the right of his grandson.
May you be successful in all good.