Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(207): "Ruling on Testing Drugs on People for Money"

Date Added : 05-10-2015

Resolution  No.(207)( 17 /2014), by The Board of Iftaa', Researches and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Testing Drugs on People for Money"

Date 30/Zolqidah/1435AH, corresponding to 25/9/2014AD

 

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

The Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies reviewed, in its twelfth session held on Thursday(30/Zolqidah/1435 A.H)-(25/9/2014 A.D), the question submitted by one of the citizens and reads as follows: 

Some research and studies centers in Jordan produce certain medications which they experiment on some people in return for money, and before distributing them in the market. What is the ruling on cooperating with such centers for this purpose in return for money ?

After careful study and deliberation, the Board decided what follows:

Protecting one`s life is among the five necessities which the Islamic Sharia came to preserve, whether by prevention, or by cure as shown by the following verse: “Nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for verily God hath been to you Most Merciful!.” {An-Nisa/29}.

Protecting life is considered in its totality according to the Sharia maxim: the general interest is given precedence over the private interest. Also, Al-Izz Bin Abdusalaam (May Allah bless his soul) said: “The general interest is tantamount to the private necessity. “

Accordingly, testing a medication on a human being-if the doctors thought it was most probably useful- is a permissible act, provided that the following conditions are met:

First: The research centers should take all the necessary precautions and carry out all the experiments which indicate that the medication is chemically sound and doesn`t cause clear damage to the healthy, or the unhealthy persons.

Second: The research and the experiments should be conducted by the authorized  centers which adhere to the most elevated standards of methodical academic research under the supervision of qualified experts.

Third: The research centers should adhere to the laws and regulations that govern their work in a bid to avert suspicion, negligence, and competition among the manufacturing companies at the expense of people`s health. We call on the legislative and supervisory institutions to monitor this sector and address any shortage, or weakness in the legislations from which the defect is most likely to happen.

If the aforesaid conditions were met, then there is no harm, by The Will of Allah, and it becomes permissible for the citizen to make a sacrifice by trying the medication, even for money. This is because, in the past, the Muslim jurists permitted taking medications although they didn`t undergo any experimentations and no precautions were taken before trying them on people. Thus, the questioner should know that it is permissible for an individual to cooperate with such centers if they meet the above conditions. And Allah Knows Best.

 

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

Prof. Ahmad Helayel/ Member

Dr. Hayel Abdolhafeez/ Member

Dr. Yahia Al-Botoosh/ Member

His Eminence, Sheikh Sa`ied Hijjawi/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Essa/ Member

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

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Prof. Mohammad Al-Qodah/ Member

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakkri/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zou`bi/ Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on a person in a state of major impurity (junub) or a menstruating woman (ha'id) reciting the Quran from memory?

It is not permissible for a menstruating woman, a postpartum woman, or a person in a state of major impurity to recite anything from the Quran, whether from memory, from the Quran, from a phone, or a computer. It is also not permissible for them to touch the Quran, based on what was reported from Ali bin Abi Talib that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was not prevented from anything regarding the Quran except major impurity (janabah). (Reported by al-Tirmidhi who said it is a hasan sahih hadith). Menstruation and postpartum bleeding are analogous to major impurity (janabah) as they are all major impurities (hadath akbar).
For those mentioned, it is permissible to mention Allah and supplicate even with verses from the Quran, provided they do not intend them as recitation of the Quran, but intend them as remembrance (dhikr) or supplication (du'a). And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What should a person who was favored from Allah with a newborn, but couldn`t afford an Aqeeqah, do?

Aqeeqah (the sheep slaughtered on the seventh day from the child`s birth) is a desirable Sunnah for the financially able since Allah, The Exalted, charges not a soul beyond its capacity. Therefore, if the father couldn`t afford the Aqeeqah before the end of his wife`s confinement, then it isn`t due on him, and if he was able to afford it later on, then it is permissible, but if he didn`t until the child reached puberty, the latter can offer the Aqeeqah himself.

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 waiving a debt owed by a debtor and counting it toward zakāh?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Waiving a debt owed by a debtor, with the intention of counting it toward zakāh, does not fulfill the zakāh obligation. Rather, it constitutes an ordinary act of charity, for which Allah rewards the giver generously — since one of the conditions for the validity of zakāh is that the person paying it must form the intention of zakāh at the actual moment the wealth is paid out. In this case, the debt has already been established as a standing obligation upon the borrower, so it is not valid to simply redirect the intention toward zakāh after the fact.
It is preferable, instead, for the creditor to first collect the debt from the debtor, and then return to him the amount of money he is required to pay as zakāh — or a portion of it — if the debtor happens to fall under one of the eight categories that Allah, the Exalted, has commanded be given from zakāh.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone gives [money] to a poor person, stipulating that the recipient return it to him in payment of a debt owed to him, or says, 'I am making what you owe me into zakāh, so take it [as such]' — this is not valid. But if he gives it to him with the [unstated] intention that the recipient will use it to repay him, or says, 'Repay what you owe me, so that I may [then separately] give it to you as zakāh,' or the debtor himself says, 'Give it to me, so that I may [then] repay you with it' — this is valid, and there is no binding obligation for the recipient to actually fulfill this [informal understanding]." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.