عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(69): “Ruling of Sharia on the Definition of Reproductive Health“

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(69): “Ruling of Sharia on the Definition of Reproductive Health“

Date: 5/8/1424 AH corresponding to 1/10/2003 AD.

 

The Board has received the following question:

What is the opinion of the Iftaa` Board as regards the following definition of reproductive health?

Reproductive health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its functions and processes. Reproductive health therefore implies that people are able to have a satisfying and safe sex life and that they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so. Implicit in this last condition are the right of men and women to be informed and to have access to safe, effective, affordable and acceptable methods of family planning of their choice, as well as other methods of their choice for regulation of fertility which are not against the law, and the right of access to appropriate health-care services that will enable women to go safely through pregnancy and childbirth and provide couples with the best chance of having a healthy infant. {The International Conference on Population Development}.

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

After reviewing the above definition, the Board made the following remarks:

1- The statement: “Reproductive health therefore implies that people are able to have a satisfying and safe sex life and that they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so” contradicts with the rules of Islamic Sharia, so it must read  as follows: “Reproductive health therefore implies that both spouses are able to have a satisfying and safe sex life and that they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so, in line with the rules of Islamic Sharia.“

2- The above definition includes legal and illegal relationships between men and women, and this violates the principles of Islam, which only permits relationships through legal and valid marriage since Allah, the Almighty Says in this regard {what means}: “It is He Who has created man from water: then has He established relationships of lineage and marriage: for thy Lord has power (over all things).” {Al-Furqan/54}. Scholars stated about the interpretation of this verse: {Lineage is the mixing of water (sperm) between a male and a female legally; otherwise, it becomes neither a lineage nor a marriage.} Allah Says {what means}: “And among His Signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that ye may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): verily in that are Signs for those who reflect.” {Ar-Rum/21}.

3- The statement: “Which are not against the law “isn`t in line with the rules of Islamic Sharia, so it must read as follows: “Which aren`t against the rules of Islamic Sharia.” This is because it is an obligation on every Muslim man and woman to abide by the rules of Sharia, and not to commit any act that violates them, for Allah Says {what means}: “But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.” {An-Nisa`/65}. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Iftaa` Board

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izz Al-Deen Al-Tamimi

                Dr. Mohammad Abu Yahia               

    Dr. Yousef Gheezaan

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri

   Sheikh Saeid Hijjawi

        Sheikh Na`eim Mujahid

                 Sheikh Mahmoud Shwayyaat

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

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.

What is the ruling on I‘tikaf in Ramadan?

I‘tikaf is Sunnah in Ramadan, and it is even more emphasized in the last ten nights, in the hope of witnessing Laylat al-Qadr.

I broke my oath and am now obligated to pay the expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn). Would it be valid to fulfill this by inviting the poor and needy to a meal for them to eat from?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn) is given to the poor (fuqarā') and needy (masākīn), and it must be given in the form of ownership (tamlīk) transferred to them of the required amount — namely, one mudd of the staple food of the locality, or its equivalent monetary value. It isn`t valid to invite the poor or needy to a meal prepared for them to eat from, as this does not constitute "ownership" (tamlīk) but merely "permission to partake" (ibāḥah).
Imam al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What is intended is that ownership be transferred to them; therefore, providing them with lunch or dinner [as a meal to eat from] isn`t valid." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muhtāj,Vol. 5/P.50]. 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.

See More