Articles

Contemporary Fatwas and Human Rights
Author : Dr. Hassan Abu_Arqoub
Date Added : 18-09-2022

Contemporary Fatwas and Human Rights

 

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was created on 10 December 1948. This preamble states: "The inherent dignity of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world."

The foundation upon which the Universal Declaration was built is that human dignity is shared by all people, no matter who they are or where they live. This exact meaning is reflected in the Message Islam came with and called people to. Here, Allah The Almighty Says (What means): "We have honoured the sons of Adam; provided them with transport on land and sea; given them for sustenance things good and pure; and conferred on them special favours, above a great part of our creation." [Al-Israa`/70]. A person deserves to enjoy human dignity because he/she is a human being, regardless of any differences.

Sharia has established its rules upon this solid foundation of respecting a human being and honoring him/her. This was and still is the basis of the Jurists` Fatwas.

One example in the old Fiqh is that the Hanfi jurists ruled that it isn`t permissible to sell human hair and bone despite the fact that they are pure. The Illah (the effective or operative cause behind a law) is, as reflected in the texts of Sharia, a dignified human being.

If we take a close look at the contemporary, Fatwas delivered by the General Iftaa` Department, we will notice that they respect human rights and take them into consideration. This is reflected in the following examples:

The Department has issued Fatwas addressing several issues. One Fatwa prohibited discharging guns in celebration of different occasions. Another forbade taking a life under the pretext of honor and forbade suicide to preserve life.

A Fatwa prohibited chastising with fire, opposing torture because it violates human dignity. It also banned filming people injured or killed in accidents to stop violating their privacy and dignity. Moreover, a Fatwa was issued allowing a Muslim to work for organizations concerned with protecting the rights of the vulnerable and war prisoners to support such groups.

There is a Fatwa prohibits the surgical removal of the uteri of the mentally challenged girls since this constitutes an act of aggression against human body through unnecessary surgery and incision. 

The Department has also delivered several Fatwas forbidding the right hand possession to preserve and respect human dignity. For instance, it forbade taking Yazidi women as war prisoners. It also called for claiming rights through the proper legal channels to be granted the right to a fair trial.

The Department has also confirmed that the wife is financially independent, none has the right to take her money without her consent, and has the right to inherit and it is forbidden to deny her that right.

The Department permitted giving Zakah to the poor student to encourage learning as an inherent human right. As a right to participate in cultural life, the Fatwa of the Department confirmed the rights of intellectual property and creativity.

At the practical level, the Department has organized a discussion session on human rights within the Iftaa` Cultural Forum under the heading "Human Rights: Concepts and Roots" delivered by the Commissioner General for Human Rights Dr. Mousa Braizat. 

In collaboration with the Ministry of Environment, the Department established a training course for its staff entitled "Media and the Environment" to train them to spread environmental awareness because a sound environment is a human right. This is in addition to the training workshop entitled (How to Deal with Disabled Persons). Another training workshop entitled "Learning Sign Language" was established for the staff of the Department to facilitate dealing with the deaf and mute. This is in addition to many Fatwas and activities that go in line with human rights in Islamic and international law, which indicates that Department pays attention to human aspects and isn`t far from the legislation that guarantees human rights and preserves human dignity.

 

 

The published article reflects the opinion of its author

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

Does using a gargling medicine break the fast?

If the medicine reaches the body cavity (jauf), the fast is invalidated. However, if it does not enter the body cavity, the fast remains valid.
Therefore, it is advisable to avoid using it during the day in Ramadan.

Is it permissible to offer an Udhiyah on behalf of the deceased?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) on behalf of a deceased person is permissible. This is the official position of the Hanbali school (as stated in Kashshaf al-Qina’ by al-Bahuti,Vol.6/P.428) and was also upheld by the prominent Shafi'i scholar Al-’Abbadi (mentioned in Bidayat al-Muhtaj by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah,Vol. 4/P.358). It has likewise been narrated as a valid view among some Maliki and Hanafi scholars.
 
In fact, Imam Abu Dawud dedicated an entire chapter in his Sunan collection entitled, "Chapter on Sacrificing on Behalf of the Deceased." In it, he recorded a narration from Hanash, who said: "I saw 'Ali sacrificing two rams, so I asked him, 'What is this?' He replied, 'The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded me to offer a sacrifice on his behalf, so I am sacrificing on his behalf.'"
 
Imam Abu Dawud also narrated from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "O Allah, this is from You, for You, and on behalf of Muhammad and his Ummah (community). In the Name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest," and he then slaughtered the animal.
 
The textual evidence here lies in the fact that our Master, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), offered a sacrifice on behalf of his entire community—and it is well-established that his community includes those who have already passed away.
 
Furthermore, there is an abundance of sacred texts demonstrating that the rewards of righteous deeds reach the deceased. For instance, it is permissible to fast on behalf of a deceased person who passed away with missed obligatory fasts, and it is equally permissible to perform Hajj on their behalf, both of which are firmly established in authentic Hadiths. Therefore, if the reward of fasting (which is a purely physical act of worship) and Hajj (which is a joint physical and financial act of worship) can reach the deceased, then the reward of an Udhiyah reaches them with greater reason (by way of A Fortiori argument). This is because it is a purely financial act of worship, falling under the general category of charity (Sadaqah).
 
Additionally, scholars have reached a consensus (Ijma') that the rewards of charity reach the deceased, and since the Udhiyah is inherently an act of charity, it falls under the same ruling. Consequently, based on all the aforementioned evidence, we hold the view that offering a sacrifice on behalf of the deceased is entirely permissible. And Allah the 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 on wudu (ablution) when there is an adhesive substance on the hand that is difficult to remove?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general principle is: if what is applied to the limbs of wudu' (ablution) does not form a barrier substance preventing water from reaching the skin, then the wudu' is valid despite its presence. However, if these substances prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudu' is not valid with their presence, and they must be removed so that water reaches the hair or skin without any barrier.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "If there is wax, dough, henna, or similar substances on some of his limbs [of wudu'], and this prevents water from reaching any part of the limb, then his purification (tahara) is not valid — regardless of whether the amount is much or little. But if there remains on the hand or elsewhere only the trace and color of the henna, without its substance [i.e., the physical residue itself], or the trace of a liquid oil such that the water touches the skin of the limb and flows over it, though it does not remain [as a barrier] — then his purification is valid." [Al-Majmu' , Vol.1/P.529]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.