COMMENTARY ON ABORTION IN RELATION TO ISLAMIC

SHARIAH LAWS

In Islam life is given sanctity and it is considered against the principles of Islam to
kill any human being. The source of the above sanctity can be found in the verses
of the Holy Quran:

“And kill not any one whom Allah has forbidden, except for a just cause” ( al-
Isra’ :33) Further more it states “ Hence, do not kill your children for the fear of
want(poverty) it is who shall provide substance for them as well as you. Verily
killing them is a great sin” (17:31)

The word fetus’s equivalent in the Arabic language is Janin and Ajinnah(plr) “He
Allah knows you well, when he brings you out of the earth and when you are
hidden in your mother’s womb” (53:32)

Different schools of Islamic law unanimously hold abortion to be a blameworthy

act, except it is for worthwhile reason. In the Hanafi school abortion is only
permitted when it is for a valid reason, is performed before 120 days or the
pregnancy is during the breast-feeding of a former child. The Maliki school of
thought states that after the consoulment abortion is absolutely prohibited
(Haram). According to the Hanbali school a pregnant woman who aborts after
using abortive drugs must recompensate for her deeds.

Abu Hurayah(R.A) narrates that two women of the tribe of Hudhayl quarreled.
One of them threw a stone at the other causing her to have miscarriage. The
apostle of Allah gave his verdict that the ghurrah be given in the form of
(manumitting) a male or a female. ( Sahih Al Bukhari)

Even among the modern Islamic Jurists there is a consensus that abortion
shouldn’t be allowed unless there is a strong medical reason. For example the
mother’s life is in danger)
 COMMENTARY ON SALE OF HUMAN ORGANS IN
RELATION TO ISLAMIC SHARIAH LAW
Islamic jurists unanimously agree upon the impermissibility and invalidity of
selling a free person. They do not consider man as a property. Some of them
ascribe the reason to the honor by Allah that is given to man.

Allah says “ And assuredly we have honored the children of Adam”.

As far as human organs are concerned, jurists unanimously agree that they should
not be subject to sale. Jurists do not disagree except on human milk. The
multitudes of jurists permit its sale whereas Abu Hanifa deems it impermissible.

The main reason as to why scholars restricted or issued statements with extreme
caution and conservatism in regard to human body parts transfer is due to the
value and sanctity that Islam places on human beings. Limited medical
advancements played a major role for the scholars to come up with such rulings
in a sense that, the transfer of organs as we are experiencing at this present day
was unknown to the ancient scholars.

They tackled in general the legal consequences of the sale of human parts, hair,
bones, skin and woman’s milk.

Nowadays however the matter has become extremely different. Some medical
and scientific innovations have taken place calling for the reconsideration of the
reasons given by previous jurists when they passed the ruling of the
impermissibility and invalidity of the sales of the human organs.

Hence no harm is inflicted upon human dignity if a human organ is sold to be used
for the purposes for which it was created, while asking for no material gain, but
with the aim of saving the life of a patient from perdition.

Perhaps a Selangor Fatwa in 1972 would be helpful as an explanatory here. It

approves organ transplant whether muslim or non-muslim in origin and whether
with permission or without. These organs are considered as “without ownership”.
However there are some conditions which must be satisfied. Firstly the transfer
must be for the preservation of life and the operation must be guaranteed as
successful. Also the donor must be dead and “killing for the purpose of obtaining
organs” for use is forbidden. Lastly permission should but not must be acquired
from the donor and his family.

The prophet is reported to have said:

He who kills himself with an iron, his iron will be in his hand poking his stomach
in the fire of hell, for all eternity, he who hath taken poison will continue to take
it for all eternity in the fire of hell and he who throws himself from a mountain
to kill himself will fall in the depths of hell fire for all eternity – reported by Al-
Bukhari

It should be understood from the onset that this topic needs further research
from both medical practitioners and jurists since its nature is still controversial.
The proponents are basing their arguments on the principle of necessity i.e
Dharura while those opposing maintain unanimously on its impermissibility and
its invalidity.