عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No. (117): "The Avoidance of Patient Positioning on Life Support Equipment as regards Hopeless Cases"

Date Added : 28-10-2015

Resolution No.(117): "The Avoidance of Patient Positioning on Life Support Equipment as regards Hopless Cases"

Date: 18/9/1427 AH, corresponding to 11/10/2006 AD.

 

The board received the following question:

 

Is it permissible for a medical team not to place a cancer patient on life support equipment, or a respirator, or to carry out renal dialysis for him/her if it has confirmed with certainty that such procedures are hopeless?

 

Answer: All success is due to Allah

 

The Board is of the view that it is permissible not to position a cancer patient on life support equipment, or a respiratory system, or dialysis machine if the treating team has confirmed and is certain that such procedures are hopeless (1) This is if this decision is backed by a report of an expert medical team comprising from three specialized, honorable, and trustworthy doctors, at least.

This is because patient positioning on the above system, or administering direct renal dialysis doesn`t help in his recovery, and neither hasten nor delay his death, because death is in the Hands of Allah Alone.  Allah The Almighty Says (what means): "But never will Allah delay a soul when its time [of death] has come. And Allah is acquainted with what you do." [Al-Munafiqun/11]. 

 

Evidence on the permissibility of refraining from treating such hopeless cases is what happened to Umar Bin Al-Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him) when he was stabbed in the mosque.  A drink made from dates was brought to him (2), which he drank, but it came out of a wound in his abdomen, then milk was brought to him, which he drank, and it came out of a wound in his abdomen as well, and then the people knew that treating him was hopeless because he was considered dead, and so they gave up on him. This indicates that when a patient is in a state of clinical death, he takes the ruling of a dead person. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Iftaa` Board

Head of the Iftaa` Board

                  Chief Justice / Dr. Ahmed Muhammad Hilayil

             Sheikh Abd al-Kareem al-Khusaawinah    

       Dr. Yusuf Ali Ghaythan

             Sheikh Saeed Abd al-Hafiz al-Hijawi        

Dr. Wasif al-Bakri

     Dr. Yaser al-Shamali

 

 

 

(1) The patient himself has the right to abstain from treatment if he is content with what Allah has decreed for him (namely, death), and prefers patience to treatment, but it is not permissible for a doctor to withhold treatment from a patient under the pretext that it is useless, since life and death are in Allah's hand.

(2) Wine: is a sweetened water with some dates for the purpose of being tasteful similar to juice, but not an intoxicated wine.

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

If someone starts the day sick or traveling while fasting, is it permissible for them to break their fast?

● A sick person who finds fasting difficult is allowed to break their fast, whether they began the day fasting or not.
● As for a traveler:
○ If they were still at home at dawn and then traveled after Fajr (dawn), they must continue fasting unless they experience extreme hardship, in which case they may break their fast.
○ However, if they were already traveling when dawn broke—meaning they had left their town before Fajr—then they are permitted to break their fast. This is what the Prophetﷺ did during the year of the conquest (of Makkah).

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on working in hotels?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible to work in hotels, restaurants, and shops in jobs that involve no direct handling of forbidden things and do not assist in them, such as administrative work.
As for jobs in which one directly handles forbidden things or assists in them, such as serving, transporting, or purchasing alcohol, receiving payment for it, or agreeing to buy it, working in them is forbidden, based on the saying of Allah the Mighty and Majestic: “And cooperate in righteousness and piety, but do not cooperate in sin and aggression. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.” [al-Māʾidah/2]
The basic nature of the work of hotels and restaurants is permissible, and the sin of any forbidden element that arises incidentally in some of what takes place in a hotel or restaurant is borne by those who run it.
The scholars have also permitted dealing with one whose lawful wealth is mixed with unlawful wealth, as previously explained in Fatwa no. (2697). And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on one who vows to fast a specific or non-specific year? Are the two Eids, the days of Tashreeq, Ramadan, and the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding included in them? And do these days break the consecutiveness if it was intended?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If someone makes a vow (Nadr) to fast a specific, designated year, this vow does not include the days of Eid, the days of Tashreeq (the three days following Eid al-Adha), Ramadan, or the days of menstruation (Hayd) and postnatal bleeding (Nifas). Furthermore, there is no requirement to make up (Qada) these specific days.
 
However, if someone vows to fast a year that is not specifically designated (i.e., any twelve-month period) and stipulates that the fasting must be consecutive, they are bound by that condition. They must not fast on the days of Eid, during Ramadan, or during menstruation, but they are required to make up these days afterward—with the exception of the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, which do not need to be made up.
 
It is stated in Hashiyat al-Bajuri ‘ala Sharh Ibn Qasim ({Vol.2/P.606): 'If one vows to fast a specific year, the Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, and days of menstruation or postnatal bleeding are not included. This is because Ramadan does not accept any fast other than its own, and the others do not accept fasting at all. Therefore, they do not enter into the vow, and no makeup is required for them because they are legally excluded—contrary to Al-Rafi’i regarding menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
 
If one vows to fast a non-designated year: if they stipulated consecutiveness (Tatuabu’) in their vow, they must fulfill it; otherwise, they are not bound to it. Consecutiveness is not broken by the days that do not enter into the specific year vow (Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, menstruation, and postnatal bleeding). However, one must make up the days missed—excluding the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding—immediately following the end of the year. As for the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, it is not made up, contrary to Ibn al-Rif’ah, who argued that it must be made up just like Ramadan.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

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.

See More