中絶に対するイスラム教徒の態度について一言

クルアーンは、慣習に忠実なイスラム教徒を「穏健な国民」と表現しています。,」そしてそのバランス感覚は、「人類の証人」として立つ資格を彼らに与えます。 (NS 2:143). 現代のイスラム教徒はこの主張を大いに楽しんでいます, 特に「イスラム教」が次のことを提案しているように見えるときは、 メディア経由 中絶という非常に二極化している問題に対する解決策. 特定のトピックに関して現在「イスラム教」を構成するものは何ですか, しかし, 多くの場合、多様な法的観点のリストによって明らかに平均的なイスラム教徒に与えられている個人的な特権を反映しています. 言い換えると, 1 つまたは複数のトピックに関して複数の法的意見が存在するという単なる事実が、そのいずれかを適用するライセンスとみなされます。, 意見の意味するところについて倫理的に深く反省することなく、, それがどんなに異常であっても.

「イスラム教は、 全て 倫理的極端さ」は一部のイスラム教徒が主張することだ. つまり、一方の極があらゆる状況下で中絶を禁止し、もう一方の極が妊娠期間中中絶を許可しようとする場合、, イスラム教はその中間のどこかに上陸するに違いないと考える人もいるだろう, 特定の状況下で中絶を禁止することと許可することの両方. この道徳的仮定は真実から遠く離れていません. しかし, あるトピックに関して複数の意見が存在するというだけでは、それぞれの意見が同等の有効性をもつとは限りません。, また、すべての意見が採用するのに有効であるという意味でもありません. 同様に, 「イスラム教」や「イスラム法」は、「多数決のルール」や「禁止か許可か疑わしい場合」のような単純な公式に要約することはできません。, アクションは, したがって, ただ嫌われただけです。」

法実証主義は宗教心を持つ人々と世俗的な考えを持つ人々の両方を悩ませています. 行為が合法だからといって道徳的な強さを獲得しないのと同じように, 道徳的に適切な意見が必ずしも法律として成文化されるわけではない. 不当な法律はまったく法律ではないというのが本当なら, 賛成派と賛成派の間の議論において、不正義はどこにあり、誰に対して行われているのか。? 妊娠中の女性が、自分以外の誰もその処理方法を決定できないはずの「自分の体の重要でない部分」を処分することを妨げるのは不当とみなされますか? それとも、創造者が世界への旅を始めた後、「無力に成長する人間から生存の機会と権利を奪っている」のでしょうか？? 家族や強姦犯によって妊娠した女性の中絶を防ぐ法律は彼女を抑圧するのか? それとも、そのような法律は弱い立場にある胎児の命を守るのでしょうか？, 誰, 他の弱い社会人たちと同じように, 強い者に守られると期待されている? 両方を行いますか、それともどちらも行いません? そしてもし誰かがこの胎児の「命」を奪っているとしたら, それが生き物であるという証拠は何ですか?

これらはすべて非常に重要な質問ですが、, この文書は必ずしも彼らに答えることを意図したものでも、今日の激しい政治的議論を解決することを意図したものでもありません. ここでの主な目的は、イスラム教徒がそのような議論に参加することを決定するとき、またはイスラム教徒の「宗教」が社会的二極化に対する最良の解決策を提供するという考えを促進するときに念頭に置くべき考えを提供することです。, 「宗教」とは、イスラム教の歴史のある場所と時代における少数の学者の意見を意味します。.

イスラム法は非常に洗練されている; 立法手続きは容易ではない, また、イスラム教徒にとって、魅力的で順応性があると思われる意見を実際的に選択する権利が与えられる場所でもありません。. 特定の目的に関する知識が必要です, 人々の生活の中でそれらの目的を適切に実現する能力, 判断が一貫した論理的根拠に準拠していることを保証する認識論的および形而上学的な基礎を理解する. 言い換えると, イスラム法と法学者の意見は、その哲学的および証拠的な基礎から切り離すことはできません. さもないと, イスラム教の道徳的なタペストリーを繋ぎ止めていた糸が、縫い目で完全にバラバラになってしまう.

イスラム教では中絶は合法ですか?

過去も現在も、中絶に対するイスラム教の見解について多くの人々が書いています。. 古代の学者は妊娠のすべての段階でそれを禁止し、事実上例外はありませんでした。. 後に母親の命が危険にさらされた場合にのみ許可する人もいる. それにもかかわらず, 中絶に関しては6つの一般的な法的見解が存在する:

• 違法 (ハラーム), 妊娠のあらゆる段階で.
• 許可される (私は), 最初の間 40 数日だが違法 (ハラーム) その後.
• 嫌い (マクルー), が通過する前に 40 数日だが違法 (ハラーム) その後.
• 許可される (私は), 不法な性交によるものであれば (他の).
• 許可される (私は) 条件なしで, 前 120 日々.
• 正当な理由がある場合にのみ許可されます.

フェズの故マフティ, モロッコ, シェイク・ムハンマド・アル・タウィル (d. 2015) 言った,

最初の意見は、 [最初] 40 [日々] 以降, それが言い訳によるものであるかどうかに関係なく, たとえ不法な性行為によるものであっても, それは超多数派の意見です [法学者の].[1]

コーランは倫理の教えの書です

The reasons for the cavalier attitude among contemporary Muslims about abortion are multiple. The most significant reason may be that at times Islam is seen as a synonym for shariah. The truth, しかし, is that the shariah is only part of Islam. Islam covers law (フィク), creed (aqidah), and ethics (akhlaq). Even though the Qur’an consists of laws, it is not a book of law. It is a book of ethical teachings. Merely 10%–12% of the Qur’an relates to legal injunctions. It is not characteristic of the Qur’an to enjoin upon Muslims to command what is “compulsory” or “recommended” and to forbid what is “unlawful” and “disliked.” What is common though is for it to command us to do what is “ma’ruf” and to avoid what is “munkar.」

“Ma’ruf” と “munkar” can be translated respectively as “what is socially commendable” and “what is socially condemnatory.” This is in spite of the fact that social acceptability and unacceptability are often subjective. This does not mean that the Qur’an is morally relativistic. It is quite the contrary. What this means, しかし, is that the Qur’an’s aim is not merely to teach Muslims what one can と cannot する. It means, それよりも, that the Qur’an has a greater concern with what Muslims “should” and “should not” do. For this very reason, the companions of the Prophet seldom differentiated between his encouragement and discouragement of acts by the juristic values of disliked, unlawful, おすすめされた, and compulsory. それよりも, if the Prophet encouraged something beneficial, they complied. と, if he discouraged from something potentially harmful, they refrained.

The Qur’an permits many actions. しかし, to permit an act is not equivalent to encouraging it. It permits polygyny (NS 4:3), the enslavement of non-Muslim war captives (NS 8:70), and marrying the sister of one’s ex-wife (NS 4:23). 同様に, some Muslim jurists validate marriage agreements wherein the man secretly intends to divorce the woman after a certain period of time known only to him.[2] This is the case, even though the average Muslim man is monogamous; practically no Muslim today believes it is moral to enslave a person; the vast majority of Muslims find the marriage of one’s sister-in-law upon the death of one’s wife to be taboo; and they chide men who marry with a temporary intention of marriage. If the mere existence of permission or legal opinion permitting a socially condemnable act is a legitimate reason to adopt it, why would Muslims be uneasy about these cases but inclined to take a different stance when it comes to abortion?

The proper Islamic position on any given issue of public or private concern should not only consider what the law or jurists have to say about the topic. それよりも, one should also consider how theology and ethics connect with those laws or opinions. That is to say, one should ask, “What wisdom does God seek to realize from this injunction or opinion?” assuming that such a wisdom can be identified. 第二に, one need ask,

“Who and how many will be helped or harmed if this action is undertaken?」

The Qur’an is the primary source of Islam’s ethics. と, one often observes a major difference between its morality and the morality validated by certain jurists, often lacking a clear connection to Qur’anic and prophetic precepts. それにもかかわらず, a juristic opinion can sometimes masquerade as one that is authentically Islamic, especially when it aims to appease or assuage a social or political concern. その結果, one finds some contemporary scholars championing opinions simply­ because they exist, like that of mainstream Shafi’is who traditionally argued that the reason for jihad was to rid the world of unIslamic doctrines (クフル); or certain contemporaries who validated taking of the lives of innocent women, 子供達, and other non-combatants in suicide bombings; those who endorsed the execution of Jews for converting to Christianity and vice versa;[3] or others who classified slaves as animals rather than human beings?[4] For, surely, there are Muslim jurists who validate each one of these opinions, despite their evidentiary weakness. 結婚は生涯にわたるパートナーシップであり、人の本当の価値はその人の外見ではなく決定されます, simply because there is an opinion allowing for abortions does not necessarily mean that it is something イスラム教 allows, even in cases of rape and incest.

When Does Life Begin?

Medieval Muslim scholars, naturally, lacked the scientific tools that we have today to determine whether or not the fetus growing in its mother’s womb was actually a viable creation and a living creature from conception. Other than when the fetus first showed signs of movement in its mother’s belly, scholars took their cues from the Qur’an and prophetic tradition on when the fetus possessed a soul or if it did so at all. このために, very few scholars have offered clear answers to the question of when human life begins, while they agreed that upon 120 日々, the child is definitely a living person.

According to the Andalusian scholar of Seville, Ibn al-‘Arabi (d. 1148),

The child has three states: 1) one state prior to coming into [material] existence …, 2) a state after the womb takes hold of the sperm …, と 3) a state after its formation and before the soul is breathed into it …, and when the soul is breathed into it, it is the taking of a life. [5]

Al-Ghazzali (d. 1111) 言った,

Coitus interruptus ('以下) is not like abortion and infanticide (wa’d) because it [abortion] is a crime against an actualized existence (mawjud hasil). と, it has stages, the first being the stage of the sperm entering into the womb, then mixing with the woman’s fluid, and then preparing for the acceptance of life. To disturb that is a crime. または他の人との健全な関係, if it becomes a clot (‘alaqah) or a lump (mudghah), the crime is more severe. または他の人との健全な関係, if the soul is breathed into it and the physical form is established, the crime increases in gravity. [6]

These are some of the most explicit statements from Medieval Muslim scholars; they deemed that life begins at inception. The Qur’an states, “Does man think that he will be left for naught (sudan)? Was he not a sperm-drop ejected from sexual fluid?」 (75:36-37). 言い換えると, the “sperm-drop” phase is the start of human existence, and existence is the basis for human dignity, as with other living creatures. The human being だった 「精子の滴」。そうだとしたら, これは、この液体に干渉したことを強く示唆しています。, 胎児が成長し、手足や臓器が発達し始める前であっても, それは保護された生き物の神聖さを侵害することになる. コーランにはさらにこう書かれています, 「我々は卑劣な液体からあなたを創造したのではないか？」? その後, 私たちはあなたをしっかりとした安息の場所に置きました, 定義された範囲に達するまで」 (NS 77:20-22). 二人称複数代名詞の使用 (あなた) これらの聖句は、人間の人生の始まりが誕生から始まることを強く示唆しています。. これは、貧困を理由に子供を殺すことを禁じる複数の聖句があることは言うまでもありません。, 貧困への恐怖, あるいは恥や愚かさから.

預言者ムハンマドのスンナ similarly offers sufficient indication that even though the fetus is not fully formed, it is still an actualized existence and living creature. The Prophet reportedly said, “The miscarried fetus will remain humbly lying with its face down at the gates of heaven saying, ‘I will only enter when my parents do.’”[7] 同様に, it is reported that when the second caliph ‘Umar b. al-Khattab ordered that an adulteress discovered to be pregnant be stoned to death, the companion, Mu’adh b. Jabal, said to him, “Even if you have a right to punish her, you do not have a right to punish what is in her belly.”[8] The Prophet and his followers after him never executed a pregnant woman guilty of a capital crime until she gave birth and someone had taken on the care of the child. 加えて, they imposed a hefty fine on those who were directly responsible for a woman’s miscarriage.[9] All of this indicates that the fetus is to be respected from the time the male’s sperm reaches the ovum of the woman.

Imam Al-Razi’s Ethical Reflection on the Qur’anic Verse, 6:140

God says in the Qur’an, “Ruined are those who murder their children foolishly without knowledge and forbid what God has provided them with while inventing falsehoods against God. They have strayed and are not guided aright” (6:140).

About this verse, Imam Fakr al-Din al-Razi (d. 1210) comments,

Many issues relate to the verse: the first issue is that God mentioned, in the preceding verse, their murder of their children while depriving themselves of the sustenance that God provided them with. または他の人との健全な関係, God brings these two matters together in this verse while clarifying to them all that is a logical consequence of this judgment, such as ruin, folly, lack of knowledge, the deprivation of what God has provided them, false statements against God, straying, and the privation of guidance. So these are seven characteristics, each of which is an independent cause for censure. The first is ruin (khusran), and that is because a child is an immense blessing from God upon a person, so when one strives to terminate its existence, he/she suffers great ruin and especially deserves great censure in life and a severe punishment in the hereafter due to terminating its existence. Censure in life is warranted because people say one has murdered one’s child out of fear of it eating one’s food. And there is no censure in life greater than such. Punishment in the hereafter is warranted because the closeness resulting from childbirth is one of the greatest sources of love. または他の人との健全な関係, upon achieving it, one sets out to deliver the greatest of harms to it [the child], thereby committing one of the gravest sins. As a consequence, one of the greatest punishments is warranted. The second is folly (safahah), which is an expression of condemnable frivolousness. That is because the murder of the child is only committed in light of the fear of poverty. と, even though poverty is itself a harm, murder is a much graver harm. さらに, this murder is actualized, while the poverty [feared] is merely potential (mawhum). So enforcing the maximum harm in anticipation of a potential minimal harm is, without doubt, folly. The third regards God’s saying, “without knowledge.” The intent is that this folly was only born of the absence of knowledge. And there is no doubt that ignorance is one of the most objectionable and despicable of things. The fourth regards depriving one’s self of what God has made lawful. It is also one of the worst kinds of stupidity, because one denies one’s self those benefits and good things, becoming entitled by reason of that deprivation of the severest torment and chastisement. The fifth is blaspheming God. And it is known that boldness against God and blaspheming Him is one of the cardinal sins. The sixth is straying from prudence (rushd) with relation to the interests of the faith (から) and the benefits found in the world. The seventh is that they are not guided aright. The benefit of it is that a person might stray from the truth but may return to proper guidance. So God clarifies that they have strayed without ever obtaining proper direction. So it is established that God has censured those described as having murdered children and denied what God has made lawful for them, with these seven characteristics necessitating the worse types of censure. And that is the ultimate hyperbole.[10]

The Ethical Contentions of a Moroccan Mufti

We have already quoted Shaykh Muhammad Al-Ta’wil of Morocco. Like the medieval scholars, he maintained a very conservative opinion on abortion, allowing it only if the mother’s life was at risk. The following is a list of his nine ethical contentions against abortion and those scholarly opinions allowing it. The bulk of what follows is a literal translation of his views. Regarding why abortion is immoral, 彼は言い​​ます:

• まず第一に, it is a transgression against a vulnerable creature who has committed neither sin nor crime, a denial of it from its right to existence and life that God has given it and Islam has guaranteed as well as the taking of a life in some situations.
• 第二に, it is a clear challenge to God’s will and a demonstratively defiant act meant to stubbornly contend with God’s action, creative will, and judgment. And that manifests itself in the murder of what God has created, the voiding of its existence, and a commission of what He deems unlawful.
• 第三に, it a decisively demonstrative proof of hard-heartedness, the absence of mercy, and the loss of motherly and fatherly affection or rather the loss of humanity from the hearts of those who daringly undertake the act of abortion with dead hearts and wicked dark souls.
• 第四に, it is the epitome of self-centeredness, selfishness, narcissism, and sacrifice of what is most precious¾one’s own flesh and blood, sons and daughters¾to gratify the self and enjoy life and its attractions far away from the screams of infants, the troubles of children, and the fatigue resulting from them.
• Fifthly, it is a practical expression of one’s bad opinion of God, the lack of trust in His promise to which He decisively bounded Himself to guarantee the sustenance of His creation and servants. It also shows ignorance of His saying, "と, there is not a single creature on earth except that God is responsible for its sustenance, just as He knows its resting place and place from which it departs. Every thing is in a manifest record (NS 11:6); as well as His saying, “And do not kill your children due to poverty. We will provide for you as well as for them” (NS 6:151); in addition to His saying, "と, do not kill your children out of fear of poverty. We will provide for them and for you” (NS 17:31). This is in addition to other verses and prophetic traditions that indicate that all provisions are in God’s control and that no soul will die until it exacts its sustenance in full as the Prophet said.
• Sixthly, it is a bloody war against the Islamic goal, introduced by the Prophet and to which he called and strongly encouraged, of population growth and increase in posterity.
• Seventhly, it undermines the aims of the Islamic moral code that considers the preservation of offspring to be one of the five essentials upon which the sanctified revealed moral code is built.
• Eighthly, it goes against the nature to which God has disposed both animals and human beings to of love of children, childbearing, and the survival of progeny….
• Ninthly, it is the grossest display of bad manners towards God and the epitome of ingratitude towards a blessing and the rejection of it. And that is because both pregnancy and children are among God’s favors upon His servants and among His gifts to the expectant mother and her husband.

These are some important matters of consideration. Every Muslim, woman, and man, will ultimately need to decide what burdens he/she is prepared to meet God with. While abortion is an emotionally charged matter, especially in Western politics, emotions play no role in the right or wrong of legislation. Although our laws currently may not consider a fetus aborted before its survival outside of the womb to be viable, 法実証主義が客観的または道徳的真実に勝るものではないことを理解しているイスラム教徒は、命を奪うことや生命の可能性を取り除くことに対して、より良心的で無遠慮な態度をとるべきではない.