3 4 S p i r i t ua l i t y S t u d i e s 6 - 2 Fa l l 2 0 2 0 The following chronological overview of the most famous fatwas , issued by the Egyptian Fatwa Committee illustrates just in what radical or even antagonistic fashion a fatwa can change in terms of its content (Zaviš 2013a, 47): • 28 May 1949: Fatwa stating that it is not a sin to reject female cir - cumcision. • 23 June 1951: Fatwa stating that female circumcision is desirable because it curbs the female nature. Medical concerns over the practice are unfounded. • 29 January 1981: Great Sheikh of Al-Azhar, the scholar of the most famous university of the Islamic world stated that parents must follow the teachings of Muhammad and not listen to medical authorities because they later often change their minds. Parents must perform their duties and have their daughters circumcised. • 24 June 2007: The Mufti of Egypt, Ali Gum, announced that this custom is prohibited. Since there was a recurring theme in the Egyptian history that fatwas , as religious rulings, were issued by the incompetent scholars [2], who would also publish their statements in the media, the Parliament’s Religious Committee in Egypt approved the new fatwa law , announced on 7 July 2018. The law stipulates that “ Al-Azhar’s preachers, scholars, teachers, instructors and clerics are only permitted to guide people in general issues, but cannot issue fatwas,” and that “issuing fatwas via media outlets is regulated and limited to only accredited entities listed by the law ” (Sayed 2018). In terms of regional or district validity of fatwas , knowing where the fatwawas issued is essential. For instance, in Bosnia and Herzegovina (the former republic of Yugoslavia) with most Muslims of Hanafimadhhab , the fatwa is very clear on the rules concerning the physician who will examine and treat the Muslim woman. When it is necessary for her to expose her genital area, she should choose a physician accord - ing to the following order and demand examination by: • a Muslim female physician; • a non-Muslim female physician; • a Muslim male physician; • a non-Muslim physician. In the case of a woman’s visit to the emergency department with only one doctor on duty, who happens to be a man, religious or not, the woman is excused for exposing her private parts in front of him, since there was no female doctor available. However, she must expose as small an area as necessary. Islam teaches that Allah’s servers should seek medical treatment for their illnesses and not kill themselves by not seeking any medical assistance. What is otherwise forbidden is allowed in case of necessity (Kuduzović 2015, 304–305). The Iranian government tends to take the doctor-patient gender relationship even further with an intention to ban the training of male gynecologists. Mahmoud, however, determined that Iranian and Egyptian women living in Cairo do not attach any importance to gender of the physician who examines them. “ What is also relevant is that the doctor-patient gender relationship no longer appears to be contentious in Cairo or Iran, illustrated by the fact that in this study only 4% of those surveyed in Egypt and 15% in Iran requested a female physician. The large numbers of women not having any sex preference for their medical provider, though enlightening, is against the tide of current opinion among Islamic scholars ” (Mahmoud 2012, 86–87). In his fieldwork, Tappan attempted to determine the reality of following the fatwas in Iranians fertility clinics. His findings revealed that clinicians in practice do not equate their decisions solely with the fatwasbut consider a wide range of bio - ethical sources: civil law, Western bioethical notions and ijti - had ; it means that they go beyond the framework of Islamic law. The religious rulings of the jurists limited to saying that concrete procedure is either permitted or not, simply does not suffice in the clinical practice (Tappan 2012, 107–110). Inhorn, Patrizio and Serour compared different approaches to third-party donation in countries with different religion of majority population, more precisely in Sunni Egypt, Catholic Italy and multi-sectarian Lebanon. They published their find - ings in 2010 (Inhorn, Patrizio and Serour 2010, 848–853). d) Opinions of Authorities . Chosen authorities are competent to present their opinions on certain issues in various expert interdisciplinary boards for bioethical issues, e.g. their different, often even entirely contrasting views, for instance, on cloning. Such discrepancies in opinions on cloning make it rather complicated for a lay believer to clarify his or her own personal stance on this matter since each group of experts puts forward their arguments that are presented as being in line with Allah’s will, hence credible. On the other hand, the believers are very reserved and rather disapproving of radical reproductive interventions intending to assume power over life, which cloning certainly is. They believe that only Allah has the supreme power over the individual life, which in Islam is coupled with dignity and inviolability. No person, although well educated, has the right to meddle with this authority.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=