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

If a person enters a mosque and finds the congregation in the final tashahhud, which is more virtuous — joining them or waiting for a second congregation to catch the opening takbīr (takbīrat al-iḥrām)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a worshipper finds a congregation that is about to finish its prayer, and he hopes to catch the entire prayer from the beginning with another congregation, it is more virtuous for him to pray with this first congregation and then repeat the prayer with the second one — provided he does not intend to confine himself to a single prayer. If, however, he intends to perform only one prayer, then it is more virtuous for him to wait for the second congregation rather than joining the first, so that he may attain the reward of congregational prayer for every single rakʿah.
Al-Khaṭīb al-Sharbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "If members of a congregation enter the mosque while the imam is in the final tashahhud, al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn held that it is recommended for them to join him in prayer, and that they should not delay in order to form a second congregation. Al-Mutawallī, however, affirmed the opposite view, and al-Qāḍī's own statement elsewhere supports this latter position, which is the relied-upon view. In fact, it is more virtuous for a person who has missed part of the prayer with one congregation, and who hopes to catch another congregation with whom he can attain the entire prayer within its proper time, to delay so that he may catch it in full with them. This applies when he intends to confine himself to a single prayer; otherwise, it is more virtuous for him to pray with the first group and then repeat the prayer with the others." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj,Vol. 3/P.186] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the ruling on making up missed prayers during prohibited times?

 

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to make up (qada’) missed prayers at any time, even during the periods when prayer is generally prohibited. The prayers that are forbidden and considered invalid during these times are 'absolute voluntary prayers' (nafl mutlaq)—which have no specific cause—and voluntary prayers whose cause follows the prayer itself, such as the Sunnah of entering Ihram or the Sunnah of the Istikharah prayer. Furthermore, no prayer is considered disliked (makruh) during these prohibited times when performed within the Meccan Sanctuary (Makkah al-Mukarramah).
 
It is stated in Bushra al-Karim (Vol.1/P.181), one of the Shafi’i texts: 'It is not forbidden to perform prayers that have a cause that is not delayed (i.e., the cause is preceding), such as making up a missed prayer (fa’itah)—even if it was a voluntary one—and the funeral prayer (janazah); or a cause that is simultaneous, such as the prayer for rain (istisqa’) or the eclipse prayer (kusuf)... and the Sunnah of wudu, the greeting of the mosque (tahiyyat al-masjid), the Sunnah of circumambulation (tawaf), the Sunnah of arrival, and the prostrations of recitation (tilawah) or thankfulness (shukr). These mentioned prayers and their like are not forbidden provided that one does not specifically intend (ta'ammud) to perform them during the disliked time because it is a disliked time. If one does so intentionally, it becomes forbidden, even if it is a mandatory makeup prayer that is due immediately; because in that case, one is acting in defiance of the Sharia. This is in contrast to when one does not specifically seek out that time, even if the prayer happens to fall within it, or if one seeks it for another purpose—such as delaying a funeral prayer to that time so that a larger number of people may pray over the deceased; in such cases, it is permissible and valid... And it is forbidden to perform prayers with no cause at all, like absolute nafl, or those with a delayed cause, such as the Istikharah prayer, the prayer for Ihram, the prayer for a need (hajah), the prayer before leaving the house, or the prayer before execution; because their causes occur after the prayer itself.' And Allah the Exalted knows best."

What is the ruling on wiping the front of the head beneath the ḥijāb, and is it permissible to wipe over the ḥijāb if it was put on while in a state of purification (wudu`)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is permissible to wipe the front portion of the head (nāṣiyah) with the fingertips. It is likewise sufficient to place a wet hand over a head covering (ḥijāb), provided the moisture actually reaches the hair beneath it — if it does not, it does not suffice. A head covering is not treated in the same manner as leather socks (khuff) and may not be wiped over in lieu of the head itself.
Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Majmūʿ (Vol.1/P.407): "If a person is wearing a turban and does not wish to remove it — whether for a valid reason or otherwise — he should wipe the entire front portion of the head... The same ruling applies to whatever a woman wears on her head. If, however, he confines himself to wiping over the turban without wiping any part of the head itself, this does not suffice — and there is no disagreement among us on this point." He further states: "A woman is like a man in the manner of wiping the head... She should insert her hand beneath her head covering so that the wiping falls upon the hair itself. If she places her wet hand over her head covering, our scholars stated: if the moisture does not reach the hair, it does not suffice her." And Allah the Almighty knows best.