Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(187): "Stem Cells Law, 2013"

Date Added : 17-11-2015

Resolution No.(187) (6/2013) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Stem Cells Law, 2013"

Date: (25/8/1434 A.H) (4/7/2013 A.D)

 


All praise is due to Allah, peace and blessings be upon Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family

and companions.

On the aforementioned date, the Board reviewed the stem cells law for the year 2013, sent by His Excellency the Chairman of the Legislation Bureau, to clarify the ruling of Sharia regarding it:
After careful study and deliberation, the Board decided what follows: 
First: The proposed draft-law pertaining to the regulation of the medical and research-based work has focused on two types of stem cells, which are: Human Embryonic Stem Cells and Somatic, or Adult Stem Cells. Little attention was given to the three other types: The Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (IPSCs), The Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer Stem Cells and The Hybrid Stem Cells.
An example on the aforesaid  is in article (Seven), where the word (Adult) should be deleted in order for the article to include all sources of the five types  of stem cells mentioned in Article (Three) because all of them contain a human source. Therefore, it must be ascertained that there is a need to obtain them for therapeutic use, or research purposes, and then it becomes insufficient for article (Seven) to be concluded with: “According to the medical protocol in use “; rather, it is imperative to restrict  it to that which goes in line with the rulings of  the Islamic Sharia.
The same applies to article (Nine/A), where we deem necessary that the word (Embryonic) should be deleted in order for the article to include all sources of stem cells so as for the General Iftaa` Department to consider the Sharia ruling regarding  the zooblast which can be used for producing hybrid stem cells. This is also to make sure that the stem cells resulting from somatic cell nuclear transfer aren`t misused since article (Three) doesn`t provide adequate precautions in this regard, rather, it sufficed with the condition that” It is not to be cultured in the womb and not to be used for the reproduction of human beings.”
Second: Article (Four/B/4) made the condition: “An insurance contract is to be concluded between the bank and one of the licensed insurance companies in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to insure the stored stem cells.” The Board recommends that the insurance should be restricted to the joint-cooperative kind which is based on donation rather than commutative and gambling contracts.
Third: We recommend nominating an employee from the Iftaa` Department  to be a member in (The National Committee of Stem Cells), as stipulated in article (Four). His Grace, The Mufti-General is to nominate this member in order for the latter to make sure that the Islamic rulings are observed.
Fourth: The Board recommends drawing up vindicatory sanctions on whoever breaks the provisions of this law. And Allah Knows Best.

 


Chairman of the General Iftaa` Department, His Grace, Sheikh Abdulkareem Khasawneh.

Prof. Abduln`nassir Abu-Albassal/ Member
Sheilkh Sai`ed Hij`jawi/ Member
Prof. Mohammad Al-Qodah/ Member
Dr. Mohammad Khair E`ssa/ Member
Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member
Dr. Wasif Al-Bakri/ Member
Dr. Mohammad Al-Zo`bi/ Member

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

 
What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks while uncertain about the arrival of dawn, then later finds out that dawn had not yet broken?

If a person does this, their fast remains valid, as it is confirmed that they ate during the night. Similarly, if someone eats while uncertain and remains unsure whether they ate before or after dawn, their fast is still valid. This is based on the maxim of Sharia Law, which states: "Certainty is not removed by doubt." Certainty, here, is the presence of night, and the doubt concerns the arrival of dawn. Therefore, one relies on certainty and disregards doubt.

Is a person who is in a state of Janabah (major ritual impurity due to having a marital intercourse, ejaculation, menstruation, and post-delivery impurities) sinful if he/she goes about his/her daily life activities in that state i.e. without making Ghusl (ritual bath)?

It goes without saying that a Muslim should always be in a state of ritual purity so as to be able to perform prayers and recite Quran. It is from Sunnah (Prophetic tradition) that a Muslim hastens to make Ghusl from Janabah, but he/she is not sinful in case he/she delayed that provided that he/she doesn`t miss prayers. However, it is permissible for him/her to go about their daily activities while in a state of Janabah, but had better bathe in order not to miss any prayer.

Where should a woman following her husband or another man in prayer stand?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If a single woman prays with a man—whether she is his wife or a non-mahram (Ajnabiyyah)—the Sunnah is for her to stand behind the Imam and be shielded by him. If the Imam is leading both a man and a woman, the man should stand to the Imam's right, and the woman should stand behind the male follower (Muqtadi). In this way, she is shielded from the Imam by the male follower and remains at a distance from the follower and his line of sight. And Allah the Exalted knows best.