|
Summary of the interview with
the Religious Authority Sayyed Muhammad Hussein Fadlullah with Al-Raiy
Al-A’am Daily on cloning .
Shawwal 28 1423h- January 2 2003A.D.
we must let
science directs its advantages in the best interest of human beings:
The common trend showing nowadays amongst all
Muslims, Sunnites and Shiites, which keeps delivering accusations of
unbelief emanates from a state of backwardness rather than a state of
faith. And we uphold the thought, which confirms the mind that is
opened to inspiration because we do believe in the mind as an inner
messenger.
The edicts of the Shiite religious authority, Sayyed Muhammad Hussein
Fadlullah, often represent an advanced conception in the way Islam
approaches prevalent cases. Certainly, it would not be an exaggeration
to say that most of his edicts give rise to rich and controversy
debates and discussions at both jurisprudential and intellectual
levels. Those edicts obtain the enthusiasm of the enlightened persons
and are ‘lapidated’ by ‘the people of caves and caverns’ as he
calls them, as an indication to their feeble-mindedness.
The attitudes of this religious authority - whose knowledge in
jurisprudence, whose stupendous culture, and whose sobriety in dealing
with cases of philosophy, life and the challenges facing Islam are
unquestionable and indisputable - appear to be unfamiliar sometimes
such as his recent opinion regarding the subject of cloning.
Sayyed Fadlullah considered cloning as a scientific event that does
not defy the religious doctrine believing in God as the One and Only
Creator. He, moreover, pointed out to the fact that “scientists have
discovered the divine law in creating living beings; and all the
discoveries and inventions of human beings could not make a law, they
only arrived at the laws deposited in the universe, and the human
being does not possess the secrets and principles to create the
law.”
In an interview with “Al-Ra’y Al-‘Aam” (The Public Opinion),
his Eminence emphasized the idea that “science is God’s gift for
human beings. The problem does not lie in science itself; it rather
lies in misusing it” and that “breaking away with established
customs [or procedures] does not represent a human disaster. Islam
regards the mind as the basis of responsibility and the foundation of
the sane thinking. Nonetheless, the problem is that some people still
live in the caves of backwardness and the caverns of the past; they do
not understand the ground principle of Islam and so they lapidate
everything new, accusing it of disbelief, atheism and deviation.”
Fadlullah, furthermore, clarified that he supports neither the
universalization nor the undermining of the cloning phenomenon. After
having explained the advantages and disadvantages of cloning, he said
that “this phenomenon will remain within its scientific limits and
will not be allowed to become widely spread. Consequently, no danger,
originating from these experiments, is threatening humanity. And it
ought to be said that Islamic legislation maintains that once evil
vanquishes good in any subject, transgression prevails, and vise
versa.”
The Shiite religious authority disagreed with the Vatican and Al-Azhar
that saw cloning as an abuse of the human being and an offense to his
dignity; he wondered “why don’t we consider taking an eye, a
kidney or a heart from a human being and transplant it in another as
an abuse of the human being’s organs?”
On the contrary, Sayyed Fadlullah said that if cloning turned out to
be a solution or a remedy for some of the human being’s problems, it
would then redound to the benefit of preserving his dignity. He, then,
called people to consult sociologists, psychologists and jurists
rather than jurisprudents in order to identify the positive as well as
the negative consequences of cloning. His Eminence explained further
that “cloning does not cancel the individual human evolution in what
the human being’s thinking can move towards new directions and
emotions; and in consequence, there is no need to clone a new Hitler
or a new Nero, etc… because the natural way of reproduction and the
objective circumstances will make for us, in one way or another,
examples [and examples] of them.
|