Harm, which is the injury that befalls a person, may be sensory harm, such as physical harm, such as cutting off or damaging a limb, or it may be moral harm, such as an accusation, violation of honor, or insult in public or similar acts.
As for the first type [physical harm], there is no disagreement about the permissibility of seeking compensation for it. Allah Almighty said: ‘And whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you.’ [Al-Baqarah, 2:194] And He said: ‘And We ordained therein for them: A life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution.’ [Al-Ma’idah, 5:45] It is known that the rightful party may move on from physical punishment and accept material compensation, by accepting the payment of blood money (diyya), which is a type of compensation.
As for the second type [moral harm], which is the harm that arises from various forms of injury, there is a difference of opinion among scholars:
1- Some have stated that compensation for moral harm is not permissible as it is not mentioned in Islamic law. They refer to Allah’s saying in the case of the accusation of adultery: “And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses – lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.” [An-Nur, 24:4] They argue that this verse specifies physical punishment but does not mention any financial compensation.
The truth is that this argument is weak because the Quran specifies physical punishment but does not mention financial compensation. However, it does not prohibit it, so it is permissible for the judge to consider what results from the crime and rule for financial compensation. For example, in the case of someone accused of adultery but not proven guilty, and their spouse leaves them as a result of the accusation, the judge may punish by requiring the accuser to pay a fine or provide a guarantee until the accused can remarry, as the harm goes beyond just the accusation.
Similarly, in Islamic law, there is the punishment for theft, in which the Quran specifies the amputation of the thief’s hand but does not mention the return of stolen property. However, there is no disagreement among scholars that it is obligatory to return the stolen property to its rightful owner, regardless of whether the thief is wealthy or poor, and regardless of whether the prescribed punishment has been carried out or not. It also does not matter whether the stolen property is found in the possession of the thief or with someone else. It is narrated that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) returned Safwan’s garment to him and carried out the punishment of amputation on a thief. He (peace be upon him) also said: “Whatever the hand takes, it must be returned.” [Reported by Abu Dawud, Ahmad, and Ibn Majah.] They use as evidence Allah’s saying: “And if you punish [an enemy, O believers], punish with an equivalent of that with which you were harmed.” [An-Nahl, 16:126]. The principle of equivalence requires similarity, which is acceptable in matters of physical harm, but in matters of moral harm, it can lead to indecency. For example, if someone accuses another of adultery, they should not be accused of the same crime in return because it involves indecency, which we have been prohibited from.
This is also a weak argument, because equivalence does not require exact similarity in every aspect, but rather similarity in some characteristics is sufficient. Our evidence for this is:
• Allah’s saying: “Allah warns you against returning to the likes of this [conduct], ever, if you should be believers.” [An-Nur, 24:17] And it is not understood from it that the act itself is prohibited, but rather the prohibition includes everything related to it, including its preconditions and consequences. The meaning is, do not do anything that resembles it.
• The saying of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him): “Whoever builds a mosque for Allah, then Allah will build for him a similar place in Paradise.” [Muttafaqun Alayhi]. The similarity referred to here is not in terms of quantity or quality, as what is in Paradise is greater, more beautiful, and more magnificent than anything that a human being can build in this world. Rather, the similarity is in the fact that each of them is a building. Otherwise, the act of Allah is different from the act of His creation, as Allah says: “There is nothing like Him.” [Ash-Shura, 42:11].
2- Some scholars have concluded that it is permissible to seek compensation for moral harm and have argued as follows:
• The permissibility of seeking compensation in the case of khul’ for moral harm, and some may say: rather compensation for the material harm that he suffered, including the material obligations that resulted from it.We say: this is valid if it is said, “he can take what he paid,” but the text came in absolute terms: “So there is no blame upon them for that which the wife ransoms herself.” [Al-Baqarah, 2:229], and this includes what he paid and more than what he paid, which may be considered as psychological compensation.
• Abu Said Al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him) reported that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “There should be neither harm nor reciprocating harm.” This is a Hasan Hadith narrated by Ibn Majah, Ad-Daraqutni, and others in a Marfu form. Malik also narrated it in Al-Muwatta’ in a Mursal form from Amr ibn Yahya from his father from the Prophet (peace be upon him), dropping Abu Said’s name, and it has supporting chains of transmission. It has become a complete legal principle, and harm here is general and includes both material and moral harm, and if someone wants to specify it, they need evidence for that specification.
• Zadhan Abi Umar reported: “I visited Ibn Umar and he had just freed a slave. He took a piece of wood from the ground and said, ‘There is no reward for this except that I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) say: “Whoever slaps his slave or beats him, then the expiation for it is to free him.” So here, freeing the slave is compensation for the moral harm caused, as the punishment for physical harm is that the person who inflicted it can be retaliated against, as Allah says: “And the retribution for an evil act is an evil one like it.” [Ash-Shura, 42:40]. And when the Prophet made the punishment for slapping a slave greater, which is freeing them, it was due to the severity of the physical and psychological harm caused.
There is no doubt that the evidence supports the permissibility of compensation for moral harm, with the ruling being left to the judge or the customary arbitration council. This is beneficial for society because it calms minds, restores balance, and deters people from harmful behavior. So, if someone suffers physical or psychological harm, they have the right to seek compensation, and compensation in all its forms is permissible and good.
And Allah knows best.
Fatwa by Dr. Khālid Naṣr