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

Is it correct that everything dry is pure even if it has impurity on it?

If something impure becomes dry, it remains impure and is not purified by drying. However, the impurity does not transfer by touching it if the one touching it is also dry. And Allah the Almighty 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.

I vowed to give a specific charity if a certain matter came to pass — what is the ruling on giving that charity before the matter is realised?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Fulfilling a vow (nadhr) is obligatory, in accordance with the word of Allah the Almighty: "And let them fulfil their vows." [Al-Ḥajj/ 29] And the saying of our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: "Whoever vows to obey Allah, let him obey Him; and whoever vows to disobey Him, let him not disobey Him." (Reported by al-Bukhārī.)
The Shāfiʿī scholars distinguished between a financial vow (nadhr mālī) and a bodily vow (nadhr badanī). They permitted the fulfilment of a financial vow to be brought forward — before the stipulated condition is met — but did not permit the same for a bodily vow, which may only be fulfilled after the condition has actually been realised.
Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is permissible to bring forward the fulfilment of a financial vow before the condition stipulated in it is met — such as saying: 'If I am healed, I vow to free a slave' or 'to give such-and-such in charity' — just as it is permissible to pay zakāh in advance. This is unlike a bodily vow, such as fasting." [Asnā al-Maṭālib, vol. 4/P.246]
Imām al-Bājūrī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Like expiation other than fasting, a financial vow — such as saying: 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave for the sake of Allah,' or 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave on the Friday following the recovery' — it is permissible to bring it forward before the recovery in the first case, and before the Friday following the recovery in the second case." [Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā Sharḥ Ibn Qāsim, Vol.2/P.596] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on forgoing the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) for one who is financially able to offer it?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is disliked (makrūh) for one for whom the uḍḥiyah (sacrifice) is recommended (Sunnah) to forgo offering it, on account of the scholarly disagreement regarding whether it is obligatory. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

See More