عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No. (211): "Transplanting an Ovum Between Co-Wives is Impermissible"

Date Added : 05-10-2015

Resolution No. (211) (12/2010), by The Board of Iftaa', Researches and Islamic Studies:​

"Transplanting an Ovum Between Co-Wives is Impermissible"

Date: 6/Rabie Al-Awwal/1436A.H, corresponding to 28/12/2014A.D 

 

Praise be to Allah; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his Family and Companions.

The Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies reviewed in its fourteenth session, Sunday (6/ Rabie Al-Awwal/1436), (28/12/2014), the question delivered by one of the physicians and reads as follows:

What is the ruling on transplanting a fertilized ovum, from an insemination process between a man and his first wife, in the uterus of his second wife. Are there different cases in this regard, and what are its repercussions in terms of lineage (Maternal), inheritance..etc. ?

After careful study and deliberation, the Board decided the following:

It is impermissible to transplant a fertilized ovum of one wife in the uterus of her co-wife because this entails religious {Islamic Law} and legal repercussions as regards determining the true mother; is she the one who contributed with the ovum, or the uterus?. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Head of the Iftaa` Board, The Grand Mufti of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, His Grace Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Vice Head of the Iftaa` Board, Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

Dr. Yahia Al-Botoosh/ Member

Dr. Hayil Abdulhafeez/ Member

Sheikh Sa`ied Hijjawi/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Essa/ Member

Dr. Moh. Al-Qodah/ Member

Dr. Wasif  Al-Bakri/ Member

Dr. Abduln`nassir Abu Al Bass`al/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zou`bi/ Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is incumbent upon the one offering the sacrifice if, after slaughtering the animal, they discover that one of its internal organs is damaged or diseased?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The presence of disease or defect in the internal organs of a sheep does not affect the validity of the sacrificial animal, unless the disease leads to the animal becoming emaciated and its meat becoming corrupted.
 
It is stated in al-Iqnā' (2/590) by Imam al-Shirbīnī: "The third disqualifying condition: an animal with a manifest illness — meaning one whose illness visibly results in emaciation and corruption of its meat. However, if the illness is minor and does not produce such effects, it doesn`t affect the validity of the sacrificed animal." And Allah Almighty knows best.

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 of Islamic Law if the follower (maʾmūm) stands up for the third rakʿah out of forgetfulness while the imam has sat for the middle tashahhud?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If the imam sits for the tashahhud while the follower (maʾmūm), out of forgetfulness, stands up for the third rakʿah, he is obliged to return to his sitting position, since following the imam is obligatory. In this case, no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw) is required of him. If, however, he fails to return, his prayer is rendered invalid.
Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "If the follower stands up alone out of forgetfulness, he is obliged to return, since following the imam is obligatory... If he does not return, his prayer is rendered invalid, due to his departure from what is obligatory." [Asnā al-Maṭālib,Vol.1/P.190] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible for a woman to sit with her brothers-in-law?

It is impermissible for a woman to sit with her brothers-in-law, and it is also impermissible for a person to have a Khulwa (seclusion) with his sister-in-law.

See More