This chapter maps out the KHI’s basic framework: who is the deceased and who are the heirs, the conditions for inheriting, and the causes of being barred. Most of it aligns with classical fiqh; the differences are flagged.
Key definitions (Pasal 171)
The KHI opens with tidy definitions:
- The deceased (pewaris): a person who, at death, was a Muslim and left behind property and heirs.
- The heir (ahli waris): a person who, at the moment the deceased died, has a blood or marriage relationship with the deceased, is Muslim, and is not barred by law.
- The estate (tirkah): the deceased’s property after deducting the costs of caring for the body, debts, and bequests. (Compare: in the KHI, even before this, the harta bersama has already been separated first — see chapter 04.)
- Baldah/Baitul Mal: if there is no heir, the property is handed over to the Baitul Mal for religious purposes and the general welfare.
Conditions for inheriting
Three conditions, similar to classical fiqh:
- The deceased has genuinely died (or is declared legally dead).
- The heir is alive at the moment the deceased died.
- Being Muslim — both the deceased and the heir.
Grounds for inheriting
The KHI recognizes two main grounds (more concise than classical fiqh, which adds wala’):
flowchart TB
classDef a fill:#134e4a,stroke:#14b8a6,color:#ccfbf1
classDef b fill:#1e3a8a,stroke:#3b82f6,color:#dbeafe
P["Grounds for inheriting (KHI)"]:::a --> N["Blood relationship (nasab)"]:::b
P --> K["Marriage relationship (lawful husband/wife)"]:::b
Impediments (Pasal 173) — and how they differ from classical fiqh
This is where the first difference appears. Classical fiqh recognizes three main impediments: differing religion, killing, and slavery. The KHI formulates them differently:
| Impediment | Classical fiqh | KHI |
|---|---|---|
| Differing religion | A firm impediment (a non-Muslim does not inherit from a Muslim, and vice versa) | Not stated as a point of Pasal 173, but filtered out through the requirement of “being Muslim” in the definition of the heir (Pasal 171) |
| Killing | Killing the deceased forfeits the right to inherit | Barred if, by a court ruling with final binding force, one is found guilty of killing, attempting to kill, or committing grievous assault against the deceased |
| Grave defamation | Generally not made a separate impediment | Added: barred if found guilty of defaming the deceased with an accusation of a crime carrying a penalty of 5 years’ imprisonment or more |
| Slavery | A classical impediment | Not relevant (slavery has been abolished) |
Two things to note:
- The KHI requires a court ruling. In classical fiqh, unjustly killing the deceased automatically forfeits the right to inherit. In the KHI, the criminal impediment applies only once there is a verdict with final binding legal force — a natural consequence of a state legal system, but it means the standard is different.
- “Grievous assault” and “grave defamation” are added as impediments, something not usual in the classical list. This is part of the KHI’s ijtihad and has been a subject of study among experts.
In brief
- The overall framework (the deceased, the heirs, the tirkah, the grounds of nasab & marriage) aligns with classical fiqh.
- Impediments are the first difference: the KHI requires a court ruling for criminal impediments, and adds the categories of grievous assault and grave defamation.
- Differing religion still bars inheritance, but through the “requirement of being Muslim” route, not as an item of Pasal 173.
Sources: KHI Pasal 171 to 173; Hukumonline’s clinic on inheritance impediments; studies of KHI Pasal 173. Details in chapter 12.