digital-waqif/scholarly-review-log.md

Nur Falah — Scholarly Review Log

Tracks product/content claims requiring sign-off from a named qualified Shariah advisor, per Horizon 1 PRD §9. An item stays OPEN until a named advisor's determination is recorded here. This log gates the Family Waqf Designator (Horizon 1 PRD §8.5) and must be checked before any copy change to disclaimers or default logic in any module.

---

OPEN-01: Is a healthy-state (non–marad al-mawt) waqf subject to the one-third cap?

Status: OPEN — blocks Family Waqf Designator (Horizon 1 PRD §8.5)

Severity: High — this is a load-bearing fiqh default, not a UI detail; it directly determines how much of a user's estate the Family Waqf Designator will let them lock into waqf while healthy.

The conflict:

• chapters/Clause_10.md ("The Perpetuity"): "You may not assign more than one-third of your net estate to Waqf or Sadaqah Jariyah unless all adult heirs consent after your death." — states a blanket 1/3 cap applying to all waqf, regardless of the endower's health state.
• chapters/Clause_03.md ("The Three Exits of Wealth"): frames only Wasiyyah as capped at one-third; Waqf and Hibah are listed as separate, structurally uncapped exits (inter vivos transfers of ownership) — implicitly disagreeing with Clause 10.
• Horizon 1 PRD §8.5 (Family Waqf Designator, functional requirements): the 1/3 cap and heir-exclusion rule are applied only when the marad al-mawt (terminal-illness) flag is triggered, identical to the Hibah Tracker's guardrail (PRD §9, "Marad al-mawt detection logic"). A healthy user's family waqf designation is currently specified as uncapped in the product.

So there are three positions in the existing material, not two: Clause 10 (always capped), Clause 3 (never capped, only wasiyyah is), and the PRD (capped only under marad al-mawt). These cannot all ship as-is.

What needs a scholar's determination:

1. Under the madhhab(s) this product intends to support (see PRD1 §9, "Mixed-madhhab handling"), is an inter-vivos waqf made in health treated like hibah (uncapped, full ownership transfer) or like wasiyyah (capped at 1/3 absent heir consent)?
2. If capped, does the cap apply to the waqf corpus value alone, or against total net estate the same way the wasiyyah meter is calculated (Asset Registry total, PRD §8.3)?
3. Does the answer change based on whether the waqf beneficiaries include the endower's own heirs (waqf ahli/zurri) versus non-heir causes — i.e., is the concern here really about disinheriting an heir (Clause 3's language) rather than the 1/3 threshold itself?

Downstream dependency: Clause_02.md's sibling-share model (flat 1/6 / 1/3 for "siblings" generically) is a separate but related open item — it currently applies the uterine-sibling rule to siblings without distinguishing full/consanguine/uterine, which Horizon 1 PRD §8.1 acceptance criteria already requires the calculator to distinguish. Tracked here as OPEN-02 since it also touches the shared calculation core referenced by the waqf cap calculation (PRD §11).

Action required before Family Waqf Designator development proceeds:

• Route this determination to the named qualified Shariah advisor referenced in Horizon 1 PRD §8.5's gating condition.
• Once resolved, reconcile Clause 3 and Clause 10 to state a single, consistent position, and update PRD1 §8.5's functional requirements if the product's current "marad al-mawt only" cap logic needs to change.
• Record the advisor's name, determination, and date below.

Resolution (pending):

• Advisor: [not yet assigned]
• Determination: [pending]
• Date: [pending]

---

OPEN-02: Sibling share model does not distinguish full / consanguine / uterine siblings

Status: OPEN — blocks Faraid Calculator hardening (Horizon 1 PRD §8.1)

Source: chapters/Clause_02.md gives a flat 1/6 (single sibling) / 1/3 (multiple siblings) share for the kalala case without distinguishing sibling type — this is the uterine-sibling rule applied as if general. PRD1 §8.1 acceptance criteria already commit to extending the model to full, consanguine, and uterine siblings with correct share and blocking rules per type; content needs to catch up to that commitment before the CI classical-case test suite (PRD §8.1) can be considered complete against the clause library.

Resolution (pending):

• Advisor: [not yet assigned]
• Determination: [pending]
• Date: [pending]