died before the end of the term of the contract, his successorswere fuly entitled to his legal from deal. The declared Fatwa thoroughly that the a stake such a contract was at his be fully The the end of the contract money act. entitled to collect man would with the agreed rare of interest. If he had died, then his successors would be fully entitled to inherit the capital and proceeds in his place.
It is noteworthy that what was published in "A r-elIslam"
magazine about a
Mudäraba ' differs from that in "Almuhamah" magazine in the following aspects:
"Almuhamah"'
legally insurance life that as would act companies magazine stated
though they were' Mudäraba s' which are legal. In accordance with that premise, the life insurance system was considered to be legal as well. However, that contradicted the position which " ]lrbr-el 1släm" put forward: "The successorsor whomsoever authorised, have the ultimate right to benefit from the deal". interest from That including the the that means resulting sum whole of money, that, if the insured party died before the end of the payment of instalments he owed to the insurer, the successorswould be allowed to collect the total sum of money agreed insured his during by installments from interest the the paid on, with any accruing lifetime. 2Islam " the position outlined was different. It said: " If the In the magazine of "Nor insured died before the end of the proposed term, the successors or whomsoever authorised to benefit from that money after his death, are allowed to collect only the instalments he had paid in practice with the interest resulting from the deal ". What was published in "När-el-Islam" does not comply with the modern system of insurance. It was a kind of' Mudäraba ' in which the distribution of profit and loss was unclear. What " Almuhamah " magazine published was just the bare outline of insurance in the sense of how to regain the sum of money agreed on, even if the installments had not been paid in full. However, there was no clear evidence in the published material of either magazine of the legitimacy of the current insurance system. What was published in 'W r-el slam " had no connection with insurance. It was just a' Mudäraba 'which has no similarity 87