Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Preventing Pregnancy and Sterilization in Imami Jurisprudence (book): Difference between revisions
Created page with "{{Author |author = Morteza Karimzadeh |author2 = |author3 = |compiler = |editor1 = |editor2 = |editor3 = }} {{infobox book | title = Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Preventing Pregnancy and Sterilization in Imami Jurisprudence | image = Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Preventing Pregnancy.jpg | size image = | caption = | other names = | author = Fatemeh Mahzari | date of writing = | subject = Family Jurisprudence | style = Reportive | language = Per..." |
No edit summary |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
*'''Abstract''' | *'''Abstract''' | ||
'''Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Preventing Pregnancy and Sterilization in Imami Jurisprudence''' (in Persian: [[:fa:احکام_تکلیفی_و_وضعی_جلوگیری_از_بارداری_و_عقیمسازی_در_فقه_امامیه_(کتاب)|احکام تکلیفی و وضعی جلوگیری از بارداری و عقیمسازی در فقه امامیه]]) by Fatemeh Mahzari examines jurisprudential topics related to preventing pregnancy and sterilization. The author in various sections analyzes jurists' views on the permissibility, undesirability, or prohibition of withdrawal and sterilization and refers to the evidences of each group. Also, she examines the individual and social effects of these actions and addresses the fatwas of contemporary maraji' in this field. | |||
According to the author, the most important reason for the permissibility of withdrawal is the principle of permissibility and the permissibility of omitting intercourse and the permissibility of conditioning withdrawal, and the most important reason for the prohibition of withdrawal, besides the claimed consensus and narrations, is its opposition to the main wisdom of marriage, namely childbearing. The author in parts of the book has also reviewed the consequences of sterilization and preventing pregnancy. | According to the author, the most important reason for the permissibility of withdrawal is the principle of permissibility and the permissibility of omitting intercourse and the permissibility of conditioning withdrawal, and the most important reason for the prohibition of withdrawal, besides the claimed consensus and narrations, is its opposition to the main wisdom of marriage, namely childbearing. The author in parts of the book has also reviewed the consequences of sterilization and preventing pregnancy. | ||
| Line 78: | Line 78: | ||
# Consensus: According to the author, some have claimed consensus on prohibition of withdrawal, but this claim is flawed due to the opinion of most jurists and famousness of permissibility of withdrawal. Also, some believe that the mentioned consensus is on recommendation of omitting withdrawal, not its prohibition (p. 39). | # Consensus: According to the author, some have claimed consensus on prohibition of withdrawal, but this claim is flawed due to the opinion of most jurists and famousness of permissibility of withdrawal. Also, some believe that the mentioned consensus is on recommendation of omitting withdrawal, not its prohibition (p. 39). | ||
# Narrations: According to the author, proponents of prohibition of withdrawal have relied on several narrations, including a narration with the expression al-wad al-khafi (hidden killing) that have considered withdrawal a kind of hidden killing. The author in response to this claim, refers to weakness of narration's chain and its conflict with other narrations that explicitly have expressed permissibility of withdrawal, even without wife's consent. Also, expression of undesirability in some narrations shows that narration of prohibition must be interpreted as undesirability (p. 40). | # Narrations: According to the author, proponents of prohibition of withdrawal have relied on several narrations, including a narration with the expression al-wad al-khafi (hidden killing) that have considered withdrawal a kind of hidden killing. The author in response to this claim, refers to weakness of narration's chain and its conflict with other narrations that explicitly have expressed permissibility of withdrawal, even without wife's consent. Also, expression of undesirability in some narrations shows that narration of prohibition must be interpreted as undesirability (p. 40). | ||
Also, some have objected that this narration is among Isra'iliyyat and expresses Jewish belief. Moreover, from narration of Amir al-Mu'minin (AS) in a gathering of companions in interpreting | Also, some have objected that this narration is among Isra'iliyyat and expresses Jewish belief. Moreover, from narration of Amir al-Mu'minin (AS) in a gathering of companions in interpreting [[Qur'an 81:8]], it is understood that until sperm passes the seven evolutionary stages of pregnancy and fetal period, mu'udah does not apply. Therefore, withdrawal which is before sperm settlement in womb, is not considered burying alive (p. 40). | ||
=== Prohibition of Withdrawal from the Perspective of Obligation of Diyah === | === Prohibition of Withdrawal from the Perspective of Obligation of Diyah === | ||
| Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
=== Sterilization Is Changing Divine Creation === | === Sterilization Is Changing Divine Creation === | ||
The author says some with reliance on [[ | The author says some with reliance on [[Qurʾan 4:119]] and [[verse 30 of Surah Rum|'''Qurʾan 30:30''']], have ruled on prohibition of sterilization, because they consider sterilization as clear instances of changing divine creation and misleading and deceiving of Satan. | ||
The author in response expresses that sterilization is other than the case discussed in the verse and in jurists' words. Also, changing creations that are in the direction of Satan's false traditions is forbidden, but sterilization with rational motives and interest-seeking is excluded from this rule (pp. 58-60). | The author in response expresses that sterilization is other than the case discussed in the verse and in jurists' words. Also, changing creations that are in the direction of Satan's false traditions is forbidden, but sterilization with rational motives and interest-seeking is excluded from this rule (pp. 58-60). | ||
| Line 124: | Line 124: | ||
=== Consent of Husband and Wife in Methods of Preventing Pregnancy === | === Consent of Husband and Wife in Methods of Preventing Pregnancy === | ||
The author refers to the aspect of right to procreation and examines whether using methods of preventing pregnancy depends on consent of wife, husband or both. With reliance on [[verse 223 of Surah Baqarah]] and narration of Amir al-Mu'minin regarding diyah of fetus, the author considers proving this right for husband (p. 68) of course if wife does not consent to this, she cannot be forced, unless the religious ruler rules on this (p. 74). | The author refers to the aspect of right to procreation and examines whether using methods of preventing pregnancy depends on consent of wife, husband or both. With reliance on [[verse 223 of Surah Baqarah|'''Qurʾan 2:223''']] and narration of Amir al-Mu'minin regarding diyah of fetus, the author considers proving this right for husband (p. 68) of course if wife does not consent to this, she cannot be forced, unless the religious ruler rules on this (p. 74). | ||
=== Ruling of Touching and Looking in Methods of Preventing Pregnancy === | === Ruling of Touching and Looking in Methods of Preventing Pregnancy === | ||
| Line 137: | Line 137: | ||
The author in final summary expresses that one cannot present a general and universal rule in the issue of sterilization for every time and place. This ruling similar to harm varies according to conditions and characteristics. In cases where opposition to sterilization causes harm to society, its permissibility is doubtful. In cases where opposition to sterilization causes strengthening Islamic society against disbelief, its ruling is permissibility in broader sense. Also, initial conflict among some narrations and fatwas is answerable, because Islamic society needs more people. Of course, detecting this in societies where Islamic system is established, is governmental affairs and in the competence of the guardian jurist and governmental position holders. In societies where Islamic system is not established, detecting this will be the responsibility of religious rational people or individuals themselves (p. 101). | The author in final summary expresses that one cannot present a general and universal rule in the issue of sterilization for every time and place. This ruling similar to harm varies according to conditions and characteristics. In cases where opposition to sterilization causes harm to society, its permissibility is doubtful. In cases where opposition to sterilization causes strengthening Islamic society against disbelief, its ruling is permissibility in broader sense. Also, initial conflict among some narrations and fatwas is answerable, because Islamic society needs more people. Of course, detecting this in societies where Islamic system is established, is governmental affairs and in the competence of the guardian jurist and governmental position holders. In societies where Islamic system is not established, detecting this will be the responsibility of religious rational people or individuals themselves (p. 101). | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:Bibliography Articles]] | ||
[[fa:احکام تکلیفی و وضعی جلوگیری از بارداری و عقیمسازی در فقه امامیه (کتاب)]] | [[fa:احکام تکلیفی و وضعی جلوگیری از بارداری و عقیمسازی در فقه امامیه (کتاب)]] | ||