Encyclopedia of Contemporary Jurisprudence

Human Cloning

  • abstract

Human cloning (in persian: شبیه‌سازی انسان) is the creation of a human being through an unusual way, through preparing human cells in a laboratory environment. Organ cloning, embryo cloning, and complete human cloning are three different types of cloning that have separate and sometimes common rules. Sunni jurists have unanimously declared human cloning to be illegitimate. In Shia jurisprudence, however, there is no uniform view on this matter. According to Sayyid Muhammad Sa‘īd Ḥakīm, ‘Abdulkarīm Mūsavī Ardibīlī, Sayyid Ali Sistani and Muhammad Mu’min, complete human cloning is considered permissible; while Sayyid Abulqāsim Khū’ī, Mīrzā Javād Tabrīzī and Ja‘far Subḥānī have considered it to be haram based on the primary ruling. Also, Nāṣir Makārim Shīrāzī has issued a fatwa on its forbiddance based on the secondary ruling. Those jurists who consider complete human cloning to be allowable have cited the principle of permissibility (ibāḥa). On the other hand, among the most important reasons for the forbiddance of complete human cloning in the words of jurists, the forbiddance of changing God's creation, disorder in the system (Ikhtilāl-i Niẓām), the forbiddance of exploiting the womb of a stranger woman and the mixing of lineages can be mentioned. Determining the lineage of a cloned human being is among the most challenging declarative laws (Aḥkām-i Vaḍ‘ī) in the issue of human cloning, such that some jurists consider the owner of the womb, some consider the owner of the cell, and some consider the owner of the egg to be the mother of the cloned human being. According to the fatwa of some jurists, the woman in whose womb the sperm has grown is considered the child’s foster mother. In contrast, Javād Tabrīzī believes that the rules of lineage and inheritance do not apply to such human beings.

Explanation of the issue and its position

Human cloning[1] (Arabic: الاستنساخ البشری) refers to the creation of a human being through a way that is not usual, with the use of human cells in a laboratory environment. Cloning is an emerging jurisprudential and legal issue[2], and is carried out in three ways: organ cloning, embryo cloning and complete human cloning. Many advantages and disadvantages have been named for human cloning. The advantages include the possibility of making infertile couples fertile, contributing to the health of future generations, and utilizing and increasing the excellent traits of individuals. On the other hand, there are disadvantages such as mixing or confusion of genealogies (Ikhtilāṭ Ansāb), feeling that there is no need for marriage, the possibility of destruction of societies, encouraging abortion, and the possibility of abuse of this method by criminals[3].

Previous literature

The first cloned animal was born in 1996 in Scotland, and in 2002 some researchers in Italy claimed to have successfully cloned three human embryos and implanted them in human wombs[4]. Human cloning raised various political and religious reactions[5]. Most religious authorities of the world banned human cloning, with the difference that some considered it inherently forbidden, while others believed that although human cloning is not wrong in itself, it is not permissible because of its consequences[6]. The Catholic Church declared human cloning to be immoral and forbidden[7]. Protestants and Jews also condemned cloning, except in some rare cases (such as helping infertile couples to have children)[8]. Also, Sunni scholars unanimously declared human cloning to be illegitimate and contrary to Islam[9]. Shiite jurists, however, have presented various views, ranging from absolute permissibility to absolute forbiddance[10].

Various types of cloning

There are three types of cloning: organ cloning, human cloning, and full human cloning, and this article will focus on the last type. The characteristics of the other two types are as follows:

  • Organ cloning is the practice in which a human cell is cultivated in specialized devices to develop into one of the body’s organs. Since the outcome of this process does not result in the complete replication of a human being, some consider this type to lie outside the scope of human cloning[11].
  • Human cloning or embryo cloning[12] is a method in which human cloning is carried out using reproductive cells[13].

Human cloning

Human cloning refers to a method in which a human is cloned using a non-reproductive cell[14]. For this purpose, a woman’s egg is split open before fertilization, and its central nucleus is removed. The nucleus from a body cell of a man or woman (even of the woman from whom the egg was taken) is then placed into the egg, so that a human being may be born from it[15]. In this method, the resulting human being will, in all respects, resemble the individual from whom the cell was taken[16].

The view of Shia jurists

Apart from certain forbidden preliminaries or methods used in cloning (such as touching or looking at the body of a non-mahram person[17]), Shiite jurists do not unanimously agree on the ruling regarding human cloning, and their views range from permissibility to absolute forbiddance[18]. Various scenarios can be proposed in cloning that influence the jurisprudential ruling; such as whether the cell owner is known or unknown, whether the cell is taken from a living person or a deceased one, and whether a marital relationship exists between the cell owner and the egg owner or the owner of the womb[19]. ‘Abdulkarīm Mūsavī Ardibīlī and Sayyid Ali Sistani consider this to be allowable[20], and according to Sayyid Muhammad Ṣādiq Rouḥānī, there is no evidence to support the prohibition of human cloning[21]. Also, Muhammad Mu’min, Muhammad Ibrāhīm Jannātī and Muhammad Ali Girāmī believe cloning to be permissible in itself, and only consider some types of it to be forbidden[22]. Sayyid Muhammad Sa‘īd Ḥakīm not only believes human cloning to be allowable, but also views it as using God’s tradition and a method to realize the divine power[23]. On the other hand, some jurists do not consider human cloning permissible, neither based on the primary ruling (Ḥukm al-Avvalī) nor based on the secondary ruling (Ḥukm al-Thānavī). Sayyid Abulqāsim Khū’ī, Mīrzā Javād Tabrīzī and Ja‘far Subḥānī regard human cloning as forbidden under the primary ruling[24]. Also, Makārim Shīrāzī believes that although this act is permissible based on the primary ruling, it is not permissible based on the secondary ruling because of its consequences[25]. Hossein-Ali Montazeri holds that, given the uncertain consequences of human cloning, caution should be exercised in this matter[26].

The view of Sunni scholars

By the unanimous opinion of Sunni scholars, human cloning is considered an illegitimate act and contrary to Islam[27]. In the tenth conference of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy, held in Mecca, the issue of human cloning was discussed, and the final statement of the academy emphasized the forbiddance of human cloning[28]. The only case in which some Sunni scholars considered the possible permissibility of human cloning was cloning for infertile couples; however, even this case was deemed forbidden in Sunni scholarly circles[29]. Sunni jurists have argued for the forbiddance of human cloning using theological (kalāmī), jurisprudential, ethical, social, and scientific reasons[30]. Among their arguments are the following:

  • Theological reasons: challenging (taḥaddī) the Creator, changing God’s creation and violating the tradition of marriage[31];
  • Jurisprudential reasons: mixing of lineages, ambiguity in kinship relations and the possibility of formation of illegitimate relationships[32];
  • Ethical reasons: violation of human dignity, instrumental use of human beings and destruction of unwanted embryos[33];
  • Social reasons: disruption of gender balance, lack of identity for cloned individuals and destruction of the foundation of family[34];
  • Scientific reasons: premature aging and increase in genetic diseases[35].

Reasons for the forbiddance of cloning

According to the principle of permissibility, all human actions and modifications (taṣarrufāt) are permissible. They only become forbidden when there is evidence proving their prohibition[36]. Therefore, to consider cloning permissible, it is not necessary to provide evidence for its permissibility; rather, responding to the reasons presented for its prohibition is sufficient to justify its permissibility.

Forbiddance of changing God’s creation

Ja‘far Subḥānī has considered human cloning as interference (taṣarruf) in God’s creation and, for this reason, has deemed it forbidden[37]. It has been said that this argument also applies to embryo cloning. In explaining this argument, it is stated that since in verse 119 of surah an-Nisa', altering the creation of God is described as a satanic act, and since, on the other hand, cloning and embryo cloning are examples of altering God's creation, this act is forbidden. Muhammad Mu’min has considered this argument to be very weak and believes that, based on interpretive hadiths[38], this verse refers to changing the religion of God and introducing heresy into religion. However, what happens in the process of embryo cloning is similar to planting seeds of plants and trees, all of which occur by the will of God[39].

Disruption of the system (Ikhtilāl-i Niẓām)

According to Javād Tabrīzī and Ja‘far Subḥānī, human cloning leads to disorder in the system, and for this reason, it is considered forbidden based on the primary ruling[40]. Although this argument is only raised regarding cloning in the statements of scholars, it can also be applied to certain cases of embryo cloning. In explaining this argument, it is said that human cloning ultimately leads to chaos in the society; because, it may result in errors in identifying criminals or may cause criminals to never be identified[41]. In response, it has been stated that this argument is raised only if human cloning is carried out on a large scale; but it does not provide a reason for the forbiddance of cloning in limited cases[42]. Also, some researchers object to the minor premise (Ishkāl-i Ṣughravī) of this argument, believing that human cloning does not result in one hundred percent identical individuals, and so it never leads to chaos[43].

Forbiddance of utilizing the womb of a stranger woman

It might be argued that, based on verse 5 of surah al-Mu’minūn and verse 31 of surah an-Nūr (regarding guarding the private parts from other than the spouse), women must protect their private parts from being utilized by strangers. This is because there is no reason to believe that guarding one’s private parts is limited solely to protecting them from sexual intercourse. Therefore, considering the generality of these verses, it can be said that human cloning using a woman’s womb is not permissible, as placing the cell of a stranger man into the womb and egg of a non-mahram woman is a clear instance of utilization by strangers[44]. In response to the argument based on these verses, Muhammad Mu’min has said that, first, the contents of these verses specifically refer to sexual utilization, and do not include cases such as the cultivation of a cell in a woman’s womb. Second, such an argument only implies the forbiddance of human cloning inside the womb of a stranger woman; but other instances of human cloning, such as utilizing the womb of another wife of the man or his maid for cloning is permissible[45].

Mixing of genealogies

Javād Tabrīzī and Ja‘far Subḥānī believe that human cloning leads to the mixing of lineages and is therefore forbidden[46]. This is because the owners of the cells may not be known, and it may not be clear from which cell the resulting human was created, making it impossible to determine the parents. Muhammad Ibrāhīm Jannātī, however, considers this argument insufficient. According to him, human cloning leads to the mixing of lineages only if it is done on a very large scale using a cell bank; but in case of a limited utilization, mixing of lineages will not occur[47].

The lineage of a cloned human being

One of the jurisprudential challenges in the issue of human cloning is the determination of lineage, as numerous jurisprudential matters such as inheritance, financial support (nafaqah), and mahramiyyah (those with whom marriage is forbidden for someone) depend on it. Shia jurists have differing opinions on who the parents of a cloned human being are[48]. Some consider the owner of the womb, others the owner of the egg, and some consider the owner of the cell to be the mother of the cloned human being[49]. Javād Tabrīzī believes that the rulings related to parenthood, filiation, brotherhood, sisterhood, and inheritance do not apply to children born through this method[50]. It has also been said that in some scenarios, two individuals could simultaneously be the mother of the cloned human being; such as if the nucleus of a cell from one woman is transferred into the nucleus-lacking egg of another woman and grown in her womb[51].

Owner of the cell

Muhammad Ibrāhīm Jannātī believes that the cloned human being follows the original cell. If the initial cell is taken from a man, that man will be the father, and if it is taken from a woman, she will be the mother of the child. Also, similar to other children, this child will inherit from that man or woman[52]. Sayyid Kāẓim Ḥā’irī is also of this opinion[53]. Sayyid Muhammad Sa‘īd Ḥakīm and Hasan Javāhirī reject this viewpoint and believe that, according to custom, merely being the owner of the sperm or the egg is not enough to be considered as the father or the mother. Therefore, in human cloning, the individual who owns the initial cell is not the father or the mother of the child[54]. Sayyid Muhammad Sa‘īd Ḥakīm cites verse 8 of surah as-Sajdah (ثُمَّ جَعَلَ نَسْلَهُ مِنْ سُلَالَةٍ مِنْ مَاءٍ مَهِينٍ) and believes that descendant only refers to someone originating from an individual’s semen[55]. Also, Hasan Javāhirī believes that the owner of the cell has no relationship with the cloned human being; rather, the individual owning the egg (egg with the nucleus removed) is considered as the mother[56].

Owner of the womb

Sayyid Abulqāsim Khū’ī and Muhammad Āṣif Muḥsinī cite verse 2 of surah al-Mujādalah (إِنْ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ إِلَّا اللَّائِي وَلَدْنَهُمْ) to argue that, based on the Sharia, the owner of the womb is the mother of the cloned human being. They believe that the attribution of the egg to a woman cannot be the basis for recognizing the legal mother; rather, the child’s legal mother is the woman in whose womb the embryo develops and who gives birth to the child[57]. Sayyid Kāẓim Ḥā’irī, however, rejects this argument and believes that verse 2 of surah al-Mujādalah is not a devotional (ta‘abbudī) definition of the mother; rather, according to custom, the true mother is the woman who owns the egg. The intellectuals find this clear as well. Therefore, those human beings who are born through embryo cloning are not different to the twins or multiples who are born naturally, and their mother is the woman who owns the egg, not the woman in whose womb the embryo develops[58].

Owner of the womb as the foster mother

Some jurists believe that the woman who does not own the egg and who only grows the embryo in her womb is considered as the child’s foster mother[59]. In explanation of this viewpoint, it is said that fosterage results from the effect of the mother’s milk on the growth of the child’s flesh, blood and bone. While the effect of the mother whose womb has been the place of the child’s growth is definitely more than that of the foster mother[60]. Sayyid Kāẓim Ḥā’irī, however, rejects this argument and believes that the effect of the mother’s milk is not the only criterion for becoming a foster mother; rather, other devotional criteria should be considered as well[61]. An example is the authentic hadith narrated by Yūnis ibn Ya‘qūb, in which it is said that when a woman has milk without giving birth to a child and her milk results in the growth of a baby, this does not make her the baby’s foster mother[62].

Study resources

Template:Main Dozens of books, articles, and dissertations have been written on the subject of human cloning. However, it has been said that the Shia works written on this subject are much fewer than the works written by Sunnis[63]. Among these works we can mention the books al-Istinsākh bayn al-Taqnīyah va at-Tashrī‘, written by Ali Mūsavī Sabzivārī, and Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, written by Sayyid Hasan Islāmī, and Jarrāḥī-yi Pilāstīk va Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān az Nigāh-i Fiqh, written by Sayyid Aṣghar Nāẓimzādih Qumī.

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Sultānī va Nāṣirī, Masā’il Mustaḥdithi-yi Pizishkī, p. 19
  2. ↑ Mu‘īnī-far and Ḥājī-Ali, Nasab-i Ṭifl-i Shabīhsāzī Shudih dar Niẓām-i Ḥuqūqī-yi Islām, p. 110
  3. ↑ Taskhīrī, Nigāhī bi Muḍū‘-i Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān bi Kumak-i Tiknulujī-yi Jadīd, pp. 65-66
  4. ↑ Āqāyān and Arjmand, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, Tārīkhchi va Nigāh-i Dīnī
  5. ↑ Islāmī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, pp. 55-65
  6. ↑ Șādiqī, Hamānand-Sāzī-yi Insān …, p. 56
  7. ↑ Islāmī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, p. 109
  8. ↑ Șādiqī, Hamānand-Sāzī-yi Insān …, pp. 42-43
  9. ↑ Islāmī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, p. 200
  10. ↑ Muḥaqiq-Dāmād, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān az Manẓar-i Fiqh va Akhlāq, p. 15
  11. ↑ Ḥā’irī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, p. 30
  12. ↑ Javāhirī, Taqsīm-i Janīnī va Shabīhsāzī, p. 82
  13. ↑ Nāẓimzādih Qumī, Jarrāḥī-yi Pilāstīk va Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān az Nigāh-i Fiqh, p. 174
  14. ↑ Ibid
  15. ↑ Ibid, p. 179
  16. ↑ Ḥā’irī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, p. 33
  17. ↑ Ḥakīm, Fiqh al-Istinsākh al-Basharī va Fatāvī al-Ṭibbīyyah, p. 23; Ḥā’irī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, p. 35
  18. ↑ Muḥaqiq-Dāmād, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān az Manẓar-i Fiqh va Akhlāq, p. 15
  19. ↑ Mūsavī Sabzivārī, Al-Istinsākh bayn al-Taqnīyah va at-Tashrī‘, pp. 44-45
  20. ↑ Mūsavī Ardabīlī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān Chi Ḥukmī Dārad?; Sīstānī, https://www.sistani.org/, Persian questions, Shabīhsāzī
  21. ↑ Ruḥānī, Istiftā’āt, vol. 2, p. 226
  22. ↑ Mu’min, Shabīhsāzī, pp. 50-80; Jannātī, Guftugū bā Ayatollah Jannātī, p. 17; Girāmī, Istiftā’āt, vol. 1, p. 291
  23. ↑ Ḥakīm, Fiqh al-Istinsākh al-Basharī va Fatāvī al-Ṭibbīyyah, p. 22
  24. ↑ Khū’ī and Tabrīzī, Aḥkām-i Shar‘ī-yi Bānuvān, p. 359; Tabrīzī, Șirāṭ al-Najāt, vol. 7, p. 230; Subḥānī, Istiftā’āt, vol. 2, p. 256
  25. ↑ Makārim Shīrāzī, Aḥkām-i Gharb-Nishīnān, p. 153
  26. ↑ Muntaẓirī, Pāsukh bi Pursishhā-yi Dīnī, p. 427
  27. ↑ Islāmī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, p. 200
  28. ↑ Mūsavī, Qarārāt-i Majma‘ al-Fiqh al-Islāmī, p. 282
  29. ↑ Islāmī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, pp. 207-208
  30. ↑ Ibid, p. 209
  31. ↑ Ibid, pp. 211-233
  32. ↑ Ibid, pp. 263-280
  33. ↑ Ibid, pp. 321-326
  34. ↑ Mukhtārī and Āqā-Muhammadī, Barrisī-yi Ārā-yi Fiqhī-yi Farīqayn dar Masā’il-i Ijtimā‘ī-yi Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, pp. 44-47
  35. ↑ Islāmī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, pp. 420-425
  36. ↑ Taskhīrī, Nigāhī bi Muḍū‘-i Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān bi Kumak-i Tiknulujī-yi Jadīd, p. 60
  37. ↑ Subḥānī, Istiftā’āt, vol. 2, p. 256
  38. ↑ See for instance: Baḥrānī, al-Burhān, vol. 2, p. 175
  39. ↑ Mu’min, Shabīhsāzī, p. 52
  40. ↑ Tabrīzī, Șirāṭ al-Najāt, vol. 7, p. 230; Subḥānī, Istiftā’āt, vol. 2, p. 256
  41. ↑ Ḥā’irī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, p. 36; Javāhirī, Buḥūth fī al-Fiqh al-Mu‘āṣir, vol. 2, p. 302
  42. ↑ Ibid
  43. ↑ Javāhirī, Taqsīm-i Janīnī va Shabīhsāzī, p. 108; Islāmī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-I Shī‘I; Barrisī-yi Chāhār Dīdgāh, p. 64
  44. ↑ Mu’min, Shabīhsāzī, pp. 53-54
  45. ↑ Ibid, pp. 54-55
  46. ↑ Tabrīzī, Șirāṭ al-Najāt, vol. 7, p. 230
  47. ↑ Jannātī, Guftugū bā Ayatollah Jannātī, p. 17
  48. ↑ Mu‘īnī-far and Ḥājī-Ali, Nasab-i Ṭifl-i Shabīhsāzī Shudih dar Niẓām-i Ḥuqūqī-yi Islām, pp. 112-121
  49. ↑ Ibid, p. 115
  50. ↑ Tabrīzī, Șirāṭ al-Najāt, vol. 7, p. 230
  51. ↑ Javāhirī, Taqsīm-i Janīnī va Shabīhsāzī, p. 96; Zanjānī, Pursish va Pāsukh az Maḥḍar-i Ayatollah Sayyid ‘Izzuddīn Zanjānī, p. 34
  52. ↑ Jannātī, Guftugū bā Ayatollah Jannātī, p. 17
  53. ↑ Ḥā’irī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, p. 44
  54. ↑ Ḥakīm, Fiqh al-Istinsākh al-Basharī va Fatāvī al-Ṭibbīyyah, pp. 25-26; Javāhirī, Taqsīm-i Janīnī va Shabīhsāzī, p. 99
  55. ↑ Ḥakīm, Fiqh al-Istinsākh al-Basharī va Fatāvī al-Ṭibbīyyah, p. 25
  56. ↑ Javāhirī, Taqsīm-i Janīnī va Shabīhsāzī, p. 97
  57. ↑ Khū’ī, Masā’il va Rudūd, vol. 2, p. 320; Muḥsinī, al-Fiqh va Masā’il Ṭibbīyyah, vol. 1, p. 409
  58. ↑ Ḥā’irī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, pp. 39-40
  59. ↑ Jannātī, Guftugū bā Ayatollah Jannātī, p. 21
  60. ↑ Ḥā’irī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, p. 41
  61. ↑ Ibid
  62. ↑ Kulaynī, al-Kāfī, vol. 5, p. 446
  63. ↑ Islāmī, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, p. 472

References

  1. Āqāyān, Ḥamīd-Riḍā, and Arjmand, Bābak, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, Tārīkhchi va Nigāh-i Dīnī, on https://eime.tums.ac.ir/, uploaded on 22nd Khurdād 1402/12th June 2023, retrieved on 17th Urdībihisht 1403/6th May 2024
  2. Islāmī, Sayyid Hasan, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Shī‘i; Barrisī-yi Chāhār Dīdgāh, Kāvushī Nu dar Fiqh-i Islāmī journal, No. 44, 1384 SH/2005-2006 AD
  3. Islāmī, Sayyid Hasan, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insānī az Dīdgāh-i Āyīn-i Kātulīk va Islām, Qom, Markaz-i Muṭāli‘āt va Taḥqīqāt-i Adyān va Maḏāhib, 1386 AH/1966-1967 AD
  4. Baḥrānī, Sayyid Hāshim bin Sulaymān, al-Burhān fī Tafsīr al-Qur’ān, Qom, Bi‘that institute, 1374 SH/1995-1996 AD
  5. Tabrīzī, Mīrzā Javād, Șirāṭ al-Najāt fī U’jūbat al-Istiftā’āt, Qom, Dār al-Ṣiddīqat al-Shahīdah, 1436 AH/2014-2015 AD
  6. Taskhīrī, Muhammad-Ali, Nigāhī bi Muḍū‘-i Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān bi Kumak-i Tiknulujī-yi Jadīd, Fiqh-i Ahl-i Bayt journal, No. 52, winter 1386 SH/2007-2008 AD
  7. Jannātī, Muhammad Ibrāhīm, Guftugū bā Ayatollah Jannātī, Fiqh journal, No. 46, winter 1384 SH/2005-2006 AD
  8. Javāhirī, Hasan, Taqsīm-i Janīnī va Shabīhsāzī, Kāvushī Nu dar Fiqh-i Islāmī journal, No. 47, Spring 1385 SH/2006 AD
  9. Javāhirī, Hasan, Buḥūth fī al-Fiqh al-Mu‘āṣir, Beirut, Dār al-Ḏakhā’ir, no date
  10. Ḥā’irī, Sayyid Kāẓim, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, Fiqh-i Ahl al-Bayt journal, No. 55, Autumn 1387 SH/2008 AD
  11. Ḥakīm, Sayyid Muhammad Sa‘īd, Fiqh al-Istinsākh al-Basharī va Fatāvī al-Ṭibbīyyah, Qom, Dār al-Hilāl, 1392 SH/2013-2014 AD
  12. Khū’ī, Sayyid Abulqāsim, Masā’il va Rudūd, Beirut, Dār al-Zahrā, 1416 AH/1995-1996 AD
  13. Khū’ī, Sayyid Abulqāsim, and Tabrīzī, Mīrzā Javād, Aḥkām-i Shar‘ī-yi Bānuvān, Qom, Dār al-Ṣiddīqah al-Shahīdah, 1391 SH/2012-2013 AD
  14. Ruḥānī, Sayyid Muhammad-Șādiq, Istiftā’āt, Qom, Ḥadīth-i Dil, 1383 SH/2004-2005 AD
  15. Zanjānī, Sayyid ‘Izzuddīn, Pursish va Pāsukh az Maḥḍar-i Ayatollah Sayyid ‘Izzuddīn Zanjānī, Fiqh journal, No. 46, winter 1384 SH/2005-2006 AD
  16. Subḥānī, Ja‘far, Istiftā’āt, Qom, Imam Ṣādiq (AS) institute, 1389 SH/2010-2011 AD
  17. Sultānī, ‘Abbās-Ali, and Nāṣirī, Hussein, Masā’il Mustaḥdithi-yi Pizishkī, Qom, Būstān-i Kitāb, 1386 SH/2007-2008 AD
  18. Sīstānī, Sayyid Ali, https://www.sistani.org/, Persian questions on Shabīhsāzī, retrieved on 7th May 2024
  19. Sheikh Șadūq, Muhammad ibn Ali, Man lā Yaḥḍuruh al-Faqīh, Qom, Daftar-i Intishārāt-i Islāmī, 1413 AH/1992-1993 AD
  20. Ṣādiqī, Maḥmūd, Hamānand-Sāzī-yi Insān (Murūrī bar Dīdgāh-hā-yi Marāji‘-i Adyān-i Āsimānī va Barrisī-yi ān az Naẓar-i Fiqh-i Islāmī, Mudarris-i ‘Ulūm-i Insānī journal, No. 34, Autumn 1383 SH/2004 AD
  21. Ṣāni‘ī, Yūsif, Chikīdi-yi Andīshi-hā, Qom, Miytham Tammār, 1387 SH/2008-2009 AD
  22. Kulaynī, Muhammad ibn Ya‘qūb, al-Kāfī, Tehran, Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmīyyah, 1407 AH/1986-1987 AD
  23. Girāmī, Muhammad-Ali, Istiftā’āt, Qom, Ayatollah Girāmī’s office, 1382 SH/2003-2004 AD
  24. Mu’min, Muhammad, Shabīhsāzī, Fiqh journal, No. 4, winter 1384 SH/2005-2006 AD
  25. Muḥsinī, Muhammad-Āṣif, al-FIqh va Masā’il Ṭibbīyyah, Qom, Būstān-i Kitāb, 1426 AH/2005-2006 AD
  26. Muḥaqiq Dāmād, Sayyid Muṣṭafā, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān az Manẓar-i Fiqh va Akhlāq, Ḥuqūq-i Pizishkī journal, No. 1, Summer 1386 SH/2007–2008 AD
  27. Muḥammadī Qā’īnī, Muhammad, al-Mabsūṭ fī Fiqh al-Masā’il al-Mu’āṣirah (al-Masā’il al-Ṭibbiyyah), Qom, Markaz-i Fiqhī-yi A’immi-yi Aṭhār (AS), 1427 AH/2006–2007 AD
  28. Mukhtārī, Muhammad-Hussein, and Murtiḍā Āqā-Muḥammadī, Barrisī-yi Ārā-yi Fiqhī-yi Farīqayn dar Masā’il-i Ijtimā‘ī-yi Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān, Fiqh-i Muqārin journal, No. 12, Autumn and Winter 1397 SH/2018–2019 AD
  29. Mu‘īnīfar, Muḥaddithi, and Ḥājī-Ali, Farībā, Nasab-i Ṭifl-i Shabīhsāzī Shudi dar Niẓām-i Ḥuqūqī-yi Islām, Fiqh va Ḥuqūq-i Khānivād journal, No. 52, Spring and Summer 1389 SH/2010–2011 AD
  30. Makārim Shīrāzī, Nāṣir, Aḥkām-i Gharb-Nishīnān, Qom, Imām Ali ibn Abī Ṭālib (AS) school, 1395 SH/2016–2017 AD
  31. Makārim Shīrāzī, Nāṣir, Kitāb al-Nikāḥ, Qom, Imām ’Alī (AS) school, 1380 SH/2001–2002 AD
  32. Muntaẓirī, Hussein-Ali, Pāsukh bi Pursish-hā-yi Dīnī, Qom, Ayatollah Muntaẓirī’s office, 1394 SH/2015–2016 AD
  33. Mūsavī Ardabīlī, Sayyid ’Abdulkarīm, Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān Chi Ḥukmī Dārad?, http://www.ardebili.com/, uploaded on 12th Khurdād 1401 SH/1 June 2022 AD, retrieved on 18th Urdībihisht 1403 SH/7 May 2024 AD
  34. Mūsavī Sabzivārī, Ali, al-Istinsākh bayn al-Taqnīyyah va al-Tashrī‘, no place of publication, Chāpkhāni-yi Kuthar, 1423 AH/2002–2003 AD
  35. Mūsavī, Muhammad-Kāẓim, Qarārāt-i Majma‘ al-Fiqh al-Islāmī ma‘a Muqārinatihā bi Ārā’ al-Imāmīyyah al-Ithnā ‘Asharīyyah, Tehran, al-Markaz al-‘Ālī lil-Dirāsāt al-Taqrībīyyah, 1433 AH/2011–2012 AD
  36. Nāẓim-Zādih Qumī, Sayyid Ali-Aṣghar, Jarrāḥī-yi Pilāstīk va Shabīhsāzī-yi Insān az Nigāh-i Fiqh, Qom, Būstān-i Kitāb, 1402 AH/1981–1982 AD.
Retrieved from "https://ency.feqhemoaser.com/en/index.php?title=Human_Cloning&oldid=337"