Friday, 25 July 2014

Bahaar-e-Shariat Volume 16 Blog Page 46

Chapter 38: Regarding Circumcision

Khatna[1] is Sunnat and it is from amongst the Symbolic Islamic Practices, as it is a means of distinguishing Muslims from non-Muslims. It is for this reason that in the common terminology it is also known as ‘Musalmani’. It is in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim from Abu Hurairah رضی اللہ تعالٰی عنہ that Rasoolullah  صلَّی اللہ تعالٰی علیہ وسلَّم said, ‘Hazrat Ibraheem Khaleelullah علیہ الصلاۃ وا لسلام performed his own circumcision and he was 80 years old at that time.’
Law: The stipulated time frame for circumcision is from the age of seven up to the age of twelve, and some Ulama have mentioned that it is also permissible to perform the circumcision from after the seventh day from birth. [Alamgiri]
Law: If a boy was circumcised and the entire foreskin was not cut off, (then) if more than half of the skin has been removed then the circumcision is regarded as valid. It is not necessary to cut off the remaining skin, and if half or less than half of the skin is still remaining, then the circumcision has not been done properly, and should be repeated. [Alamgiri]
Law: If a child was born without the skin, which needs to be cut off in circumcision, then there is no need for circumcision. If there is some skin that can be pulled away, but by doing so it will cause immense pain and the head of the penis is visible, then it should be shown to those who perform the circumcision. If they say that it cannot be done, then it should be left alone. The child should not be caused to suffer unnecessary discomfort. [Alamgiri]
Law: We have heard of incidents, where if a child is born without this (fore) skin, the father and other elders of the family invite relatives and other elders to partake in a traditional ceremony and instead of circumcision, a seasoned beetle leaf rolled like a pyramid is cut, making it seem as if the custom of circumcision is being fulfilled. This is an absurd and foolish practice which has no benefit or basis.
Law: If an old man accepts Islam but does not have the strength to have his circumcision done, then he has no need to be circumcised. If a person who has reached the age of puberty accepts, and he is able to perform his own circumcision, then he should do it by himself otherwise not. If there is a female who knows how to perform circumcision, then such a woman may perform his circumcision after she has made Nikah to him. [Alamgiri]
Law: If the circumcision has already been performed, but the foreskin has grown back, and is causing the head of the penis to be hidden, then the circumcision should be repeated. If it has not grown to this extent (of covering the head of the penis), then it should not be repeated. [Alamgiri]
Law: To have the child circumcised is the responsibility of the father. If he is not present, then the one whom he appoints should have it done, thereafter the right is that of the paternal grandfather and thereafter is the right of his appointed representative. This is neither the responsibility of the maternal uncle nor that of the paternal uncle, or that of their appointed representatives. However, if the child is being brought up by them and is amongst their dependants, then they may have it done. [Alamgiri]
Law: There is no harm in piercing the ears of women and there is also no harm in piercing the ears of young girls, because they used to have their ears pierced in the time of Rasoolullah صلَّی اللہ تعالٰی علیہ وسلَّم  and there was no objection to this. [Alamgiri] Actually, this practice of piercing the ears of the females has continued up to this day. Only a few people have suspended this practice in their emulation of the Christian (i.e. western) women, regarding whom there is no credibility.
Law: It is Haraam to castrate (i.e. to sterilize and desexualize) human beings. The same applies to become eunuch. There is a difference of opinion in regards to castrating horses. The correct view is that it is correct. If there is benefit in castrating other animals, such as if (castration) will allow its meat to be better, or if the animal is not castrated it will be mischievous, or if it will cause harm to people. Based on such appropriateness, goats and oxen etc. are castrated. This is permissible. However, if there is no benefit in doing so and if it is not done to alleviate any harm, then to castrate is Haraam. [Hidaya, Alamgiri]
Law: It is disallowed to allow a servant (slave) who has been castrated to be of service to you, just as such people serve the wealthy leaders and kings, and they are also famously known as Khaja Sar[2]. The harm in having them serving is that it encourages others to have the audacity to castrate thus becoming liable for committing this haraam act, and if the people abstain from using the services of such servants, then the practice of castrating will be completely eradicated. [Hidaya]
Law: There is no harm in impregnating a female horse (i.e. a mare) with a donkey, which causes a mule to be born. It has been mentioned in Sahih Hadith that ‘Baghla’, the animal which Nabi  صلَّی اللہ تعالٰی علیہ وسلَّم used as a mode of conveyance was white (i.e. a mule) and if this practice was not permissible, then Huzoor-e-Akram  صلَّی اللہ تعالٰی علیہ وسلَّم would have not kept such an animal for his conveyance. [Hidaya]


[1] Khatna refers to circumcision.
[2] Khaja Sar generally refers to an emasculate person put in-charge of the affairs a harem etc.


0 comments:

Post a Comment