عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(27): “Ruling on Medical Students` Participating in Delivery Procedures “

Date Added : 02-11-2015

Resolution No.(27) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

“Ruling on Medical Students` Participating in Delivery Procedures“

Date: 26/6/1413 AH corresponding to 20/12/1992 AD

The Board has received the following question:

What is the ruling of Sharia as regards the participation of medical students in delivery procedures? Whereas; each ten or more would join an expert doctor in conducting this procedure and some of them may be Christians. In addition, they receive training on conducting internal examination for these women?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

After extensive discussions, the Board has agreed upon the following:

Juristic maxims stipulate the following:

Necessity knows no rules and necessity is assessed by its degree.

Necessity here refers to what is crucial to man`s life.

In line with these maxims, it is an obligation to observe the following when treating women:

A Muslim woman should be examined by a Muslim female doctor, if not possible, then by other female doctors because this involves less harm from the view point of Islamic Law. However, if the Muslim female doctor wasn`t capable of treating a certain illness, then there is no harm in referring her (sick woman) to a Muslim male doctor. If there wasn`t any, then it is permissible to refer her to a non-Muslim male doctor.

As regards teaching students of the medical school:

In principle, gynecology should be restricted to female doctors as we have mentioned earlier, and faculties of medicine are responsible for fulfilling this end. If not possible, then male doctors should make up for the shortage in this field, provided that the maxim: "Necessity is assessed by its degree” is taken into consideration.

Therefore, it is evident that exposing women to medical students in the aforementioned manner isn`t permissible since it violates the juristic maxims mentioned above. And Allah Knows Best.

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice Dr.Nooh Al-Qodaat
Mufti General of the Jordanian Armed Forces: Mhamood Shwayat
Dr. Abdassalam Al-Abbadi
Dr. Ahmad Hilayel
Dr. Ali Al-Faqheer
Dr. Yaseen Daradkeh

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on giving Zakah (obligatory charity) to one`s relatives?

It is impermissible to pay Zakah to one`s origins (parents and grandparents) because providing for them is an obligation on their branches (sons and daughters) if they were poor, but it is permissible to give some of the Zakah money to relatives whose provision isn`t due on the giver of the Zakah.

What is the ruling if hemorrhoid blood exits after completing ablution?

If this blood is exiting from outside the anus (due to the hemorrhoid protruding), it does not invalidate ablution, because blood exiting from the body from other than the two orifices does not invalidate ablution. If it exits from the anus (meaning from inside it), it invalidates ablution, and one must perform istinja' from it, wash the area of impurity, and repeat the ablution.
However, if this blood exits continuously such that no time remains sufficient for purification and prayer without it flowing, then it takes the ruling of urinary incontinence (sals al-bawl). One then cleanses from it after the time for each prayer enters, performs ablution immediately thereafter, and performs the obligatory prayer immediately. There is no liability upon him after that if something of it flows, and he may pray as many voluntary prayers as he wishes. If he wants to pray another obligatory prayer, he must cleanse himself and perform ablution. 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