Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Preventing Pregnancy and Sterilization in Imami Jurisprudence (book)
The book “Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Preventing Pregnancy and Sterilization in Imami Jurisprudence” 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.
| Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Preventing Pregnancy and Sterilization in Imami Jurisprudence | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Book Information | |
| Author | Fatemeh Mahzari |
| Subject | Family Jurisprudence |
| Style | Reportive |
| Language | Persian |
| Pages | 114 |
| Publication Information | |
| Publication Place | Tehran |
| Publication Date | Barz Afarin |
- Abstract
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.
The author finally concludes that the ruling of sterilization and preventing pregnancy varies according to the conditions and interests of society, and in Islamic societies, its detection is the responsibility of the governing system or the religious rational people.
Introduction and Structure Report
The book “Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Preventing Pregnancy and Sterilization in Imami Jurisprudence” by Fatemeh Mahzari, with 114 pages, has been published by Barz Afarin Publications.
Book Structure
In the first section, the author addresses preliminary discussions and defines and explains concepts related to preventing pregnancy and sterilization from the perspective of Imami jurisprudence. The research issue, reason for choosing the topic, its importance and benefit, as well as the history and research background are also reported in this section. The second section is dedicated to jurisprudential analysis of this issue and is presented in two chapters. In the first chapter, jurists' views on preventing pregnancy and sterilization are expressed, and in the second chapter, jurisprudential analysis of obligatory and situational rulings related to sterilization is mentioned. In the third section, the effects and consequences of individual and social preventing pregnancy and sterilization are analyzed at two individual and social levels. The book ends with a summary of the presented contents and a general conclusion. The author has also presented suggestions for improving jurisprudential and social approaches related to the topic.
Conceptualization
In the second chapter of the first section, the author has defined and explained concepts related to the research. At the end, she has defined 'aqim in lexicon as fruitless and barren, and sterilizing as making barren, castrating, and making fruitless. In jurisprudential terminology, sterilization applies to any kind of preventing sperm formation by any man and woman who prevent sperm formation (pp. 19-23).
Views of Imami Jurists on Permissibility of Withdrawal
The author in the second section of the book has examined preventing pregnancy and sterilization jurisprudentially. In the first chapter of this section, she has expressed jurists' opinions without mentioning their evidences. These opinions include absolute permissibility of withdrawal, permissibility with absolute undesirability, permissibility without undesirability with wife's permission, permissibility with condition in marriage contract, and undesirability in the case of permanent free wife (pp. 27-32).
Evidences of Proponents of Permissibility of Withdrawal
The author in continuing the first chapter of the second section refers to evidences that according to the author, the famous have presented for permissibility of withdrawal (p. 32).
- Narrations: The author in expressing the first reason refers to narrations that proponents of permissibility of withdrawal have relied on. From these narrations, absolute permissibility of withdrawal, even without permission of free wife, is used and its discretion is completely delegated to man (pp. 33-35).
- Non-Obligation of Intercourse More Than 4 Months and Analogy of Priority: In expressing the second reason, the author has said since intercourse and sexual intercourse more than 4 months is not obligatory on man, therefore withdrawal a fortiori is unobjectionable (p. 35).
- Principle of Permissibility: The author considers the third reason that withdrawal based on principle of permissibility is ruled permissible, unless a reason for its prohibition is presented (p. 36).
Evidences of Undesirability of Withdrawal
The author in expressing the evidences of the second category of scholars, refers to evidences of proponents of undesirability of withdrawal; this category of scholars rely on narrations that consider withdrawal with free wife undesirable, unless with wife's permission or condition of withdrawal in marriage contract (p. 36). The author in this regard expresses that perhaps the criterion of prohibition and undesirability of withdrawal is due to the rights that woman has, not due to the act of withdrawal itself. In a narration, the reason for undesirability of withdrawal is mentioned that free woman has right to child, therefore withdrawal from her is not permissible unless with her permission. But regarding slave woman, there is no objection and her permission is not considered (p. 36).
The author continues that some consider withdrawal contrary to the purpose of marriage, because the wisdom of marriage is childbearing. The author in summarizing narrations, becomes proponent of undesirability of withdrawal and expresses that the word akrah in Sahihah Muhammad ibn Muslim, means terminological undesirability, not prohibition. Also, permissibility of conditioning withdrawal in marriage contract shows that if the meaning of undesirability was prohibition, conditioning withdrawal in contract was not permissible, because condition opposed to God's book and Prophet's Sunnah. Moreover, if withdrawal was forbidden, jurists in case of wife's consent or conditioning withdrawal in contract, would not become proponents of its permissibility. This shows that childbearing is not obligatory and withdrawal is permissible, even if it leads to non-childbearing (p. 38).
Views of Imami Jurists on Prohibition of Withdrawal
In continuing the first chapter of the second section, the author addresses the evidences of proponents of prohibition of withdrawal.
- 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).
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 verse When the girl [who was] buried alive is asked, 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
The author has brought that some with reliance on obligation of diyah in case of withdrawal have ruled on prohibition of withdrawal. According to the author, apparently the reason for obligation of diyah in case of withdrawal is consensus that Shaykh Tusi in Khilaf has claimed or a sahih narration from Imam Ali (AS). In this narration, diyah of withdrawal in case where man during intercourse has feared and led to withdrawal, is mentioned. The author in response expresses that opinion on obligation of diyah in narration of Imam Ali (AS), has no implication with prohibition of withdrawal, because withdrawal and diyah are independent subjects each needing its specific reason (p. 41).
Prohibition of Withdrawal from the Perspective of Its Conflict with Wisdom of Marriage
The author says some believe that since the wisdom of marriage and its main purpose is childbearing, withdrawal conflicts with this purpose and is forbidden. The author in response to this reasoning expresses that this reason is based on these two hypotheses that childbearing is the fundamental purpose of marriage, and also withdrawal negates Islam's encouragement to childbearing, and prevents procreation and reproduction which conflicts with the philosophy of legislating marriage.
The author in response says that withdrawal conflicts with the purpose of marriage only if the purpose of marriage is exclusively childbearing, while this exclusivity does not exist. Regarding wasting generation, we have no reason that it is forbidden in general, because omitting marriage and omitting intercourse is also permissible. Even evidences of prohibition of masturbation is due to specific reason and does not extend to non-case. Finally, if insistence is on that childbearing is wisdom of marriage, one must refer to operational principle which here is religious exemption and withdrawal will be permissible (p. 42).
Fatwas from Contemporary Maraji'
In continuing the first chapter of the second section of the book, the author has mentioned fatwas from contemporary maraji' on the following topics: (1) principle of preventing pregnancy, (2) ruling of placing IUD device, (3) ruling of tubal ligation for women and men, and (4) population control in case of permanent sterilization (pp. 44-51).
Prohibition of Sterilization and Its Reasons
According to the author in the second chapter of the second section, she has analyzed sterilization jurisprudentially from the perspective of obligatory and situational rulings. At the beginning of the second chapter, the author has mentioned 3 reasons from the evidences of opponents of sterilization.
Sterilization Is Harming the Self
According to the author, opponents of sterilization for its prohibition have relied on this reason that sterilization is harming the self and harming the self is also forbidden. The author in critiquing this theory expresses that the claimed absoluteness is not accepted and the rule of no harm has referral only to cases where harm is inflicted on another, not on oneself. In confirmation of this claim, the author relies on narration of Zurarah and expresses that even if from the restriction “on the believer” in the rule of no harm, absoluteness of prohibition of harm on self is used, the phrase appears in harming non, not self. The author also refers to reasons from jurists on non-inclusion of harm on self (pp. 54-56).
Some believe that reason obliges repelling harm from self, therefore enduring harm is prohibited both rationally and religiously. Also, harming the body is an instance of injustice and injustice is rationally ugly and prohibited. Based on this, according to the rule of implication, harming the body is also ugly and prohibited.
The author in response to this reason says that if sterilization is out of choice and desire of husband and wife and with rational motives and based on society's and family's interests, it is not considered harming the self. Therefore, from the perspective of prohibition of harming the self, sterilization will not be forbidden (pp. 57-58).
Sterilization Is Changing Divine Creation
The author says some with reliance on verse 119 of Surah Nisa' and verse 30 of Surah Rum, 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).
Sterilization Is Instance of Mutilation
According to the author, some have claimed consensus on prohibition of mutilation and considered sterilization as clear instances of mutilation. The author rejects this claim in general and with reliance on scholars' opinion expresses that such consensus does not exist (p. 60).
Permissibility of Sterilization and Prevention and Its Reasons
Sterilization Based on Principle of Negating Difficulty and Distress
The author in continuing the second chapter of the first section addresses the view of proponents. She says proponents of sterilization believe that having many children may cause difficulty and distress. This is an instance of intolerable obligation which is negated in Islamic Sharia (p. 62).
Foresight and Future Thinking
The author has brought that some researchers consider verse 9 of Surah Nisa' as expressing the principle of foresight regarding children, meaning that parents must act in a way that after their death, they do not leave poor and incapable children (p. 63).
Spiritual Upbringing
The author expresses that spiritual rights of children are the responsibility of father and mother and this requires that parents have sufficient opportunity to attend to upbringing their children. Realizing this conflicts with multiplicity of children (p. 64).
Rational Reason
According to the author, when a person does not have the ability to manage life and his children, reason rules to suffice with fewer children so as not to suffer poverty and hardship (p. 66).
Obligatory and Situational Rulings of Sterilization and 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).
Ruling of Touching and Looking in Methods of Preventing Pregnancy
The author continues that from jurisprudential view, looking and touching foreign man and woman in normal state and without necessity is not permissible. Regarding preventing pregnancy, if we consider it as instances of treatment, with wife's consent it is permissible. Based on Sahihah Abu Hamzah Thumali from Imam Baqir (AS), this act in case of necessity is permissible and in this direction there is no difference between organs. Therefore, treatment of woman by man in cases of necessity is permissible. But if we do not consider preventing pregnancy as treatment, touching and looking only in cases where pregnancy has life danger for woman, is permissible. Finally, the author considers preventing pregnancy inherently permissible, unless it causes another prohibition (pp. 69-76).
Individual Effects of Preventing Pregnancy and Sterilization
In the third section of the book, the author addresses individual effects and consequences, including medical complications and psychological complications in men and women. This section mostly has medical aspect and no particular jurisprudential point is raised in it (pp. 79-83).
Social Effects and Consequences of Sterilization
In the second chapter of the third section, the author of the book addresses consequences of sterilization from the view of proponents and opponents. Among negative consequences of population multiplicity in family dimension, such as economic damages, educational damages and spiritual and psychological damages, and also negative consequences of population multiplicity in national dimension are referred. Continuing, she addresses the view of opponents of preventing pregnancy and sterilization and among colonial and imported culture of population control, low population and reduction of production, and hedonism of generation are examined. Also, to consequences such as weakening Iran's position as the only Shia country is referred (pp. 85-100).
Final Summary
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).