The fact that some of the Companions sacrificed themselves to protect the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) from being killed: does this not indicate the permissibility of a Muslim volunteering his kidney?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner: Well, another thing, our professor. Abu Talhah (may Allah be pleased with him), in one of the battles with the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), was sacrificing himself for the sake of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). They say this is *ithar* (preferring others over oneself); he preferred the Messenger (peace be upon him) over himself and sacrificed himself.
Another questioner: This is part of the perfection of faith.
The questioner: Is it not valid to apply this *ithar* by giving a person his kidney to his brother, or his eye if he is about to die, or something like that, in the sense of *ithar*, just as Abu Talhah did?
The questioner: Just as Abu Talhah did?
The Shaykh: No, my dear. First of all, this was between the Messenger and one of his Companions. Is there a Prophet after the Messenger?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh: Well, if *qiyas* (analogical reasoning) were permissible, we would need to find someone close to the Prophet and someone close to Abu Talhah to say that this case is permissible by analogy to that case. Even so, what kind of *qiyas* is this? As some jurists, meaning the witty literati, say, this is a *qiyas* of comparing blacksmiths to angels, a *qiyas* with a difference. What is this *qiyas*? And especially since you know very well that these matters—the subject of them—are not in the category of *ithar* at all.
The questioner: Not in the category of *ithar*?
The Shaykh: No, it has become a profession, a matter of buying and selling, and so on.
The questioner: ... by *ithar*, our professor.
The Shaykh: I gave you an answer, but I am telling you, especially, yes, otherwise.
The questioner: The comment ... Do we analogize to what came before in that issue—which is organ transplantation? Do we analogize blood transfusion from one patient to another in the same way?
The Shaykh: No; because blood transfusion—meaning—is compensated for by some food, yes.
The questioner: The effect
The Shaykh: It is renewed and compensated for, meaning.
The questioner: Well, if kidney transplantation does not affect—meaning—the life of the person who ... .
The Shaykh: The doctor himself cannot say what you are saying now. The doctor himself does not guarantee that he will say it will affect or it will not affect.
The questioner: We have learned that one-third of the kidney, one-third of just one kidney, if it functions, is sufficient for a person's life.
The Shaykh: Well, I said to some people a few days ago who spoke about this kind of thing, I have reached this age and I have no knowledge, despite many tests, that this right kidney is non-functional except in the last period. So if I were—God forbid—one of those who
The questioner: volunteered
The Shaykh: got involved—haha—and volunteered the left kidney ... what would have happened to us? We would have dug our own grave with our own hands. So the doctor—my brother—the doctor who does a general checkup for you can tell you: the kidneys are healthy, but he does not guarantee that after a week has passed, a disease will appear in one of the kidneys, or in the remaining kidney if he donated the other one.
The questioner: That is, without doubt, and this is the same one he donated ... because a disease may appear in it.
The Shaykh: No problem, we are talking about the person who wants to volunteer, as for the recipient, that is a second matter ... Praise be to Allah, yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh: *Ithar* is in what?
The questioner: In the recommended acts.
The Shaykh: No, *ithar* in recommended acts is disliked, and this is a mistake people fall into. This is a mistake people fall into, we say. For example, I would beThe Shaykh : in the second row, and his student preceded him, so he is in the first row. I would step back and say to him, "Please," andThe Shaykh : he would accept it with all gratitude. It is a mistake for the Shaykh and for the student both.
- They laugh -
The Shaykh: Why? Because standing in the first row—you know— is better than the second row. So *ithar* in recommended acts, in religious matters, in acts of worship, is disliked; because it indicates that this person who prefers others over himself has no concern for obedience and worship. As for the *ithar* that is praised, for which people are praised, it is like the saying of Allah the Exalted:[Al-Hashr 59:9] food and drink, and the whole of this world. This is the *ithar* for which a person is praised. As for acts of worship and obedience, it is not permissible. This issue should be noted, and a person should not volunteer to give up an act of worship for another. But if he can combine them, that is better, meaning he widens the row for him, that is better.
Another questioner: This is part of the perfection of faith.
The questioner: Is it not valid to apply this *ithar* by giving a person his kidney to his brother, or his eye if he is about to die, or something like that, in the sense of *ithar*, just as Abu Talhah did?
The questioner: Just as Abu Talhah did?
The Shaykh: No, my dear. First of all, this was between the Messenger and one of his Companions. Is there a Prophet after the Messenger?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh: Well, if *qiyas* (analogical reasoning) were permissible, we would need to find someone close to the Prophet and someone close to Abu Talhah to say that this case is permissible by analogy to that case. Even so, what kind of *qiyas* is this? As some jurists, meaning the witty literati, say, this is a *qiyas* of comparing blacksmiths to angels, a *qiyas* with a difference. What is this *qiyas*? And especially since you know very well that these matters—the subject of them—are not in the category of *ithar* at all.
The questioner: Not in the category of *ithar*?
The Shaykh: No, it has become a profession, a matter of buying and selling, and so on.
The questioner: ... by *ithar*, our professor.
The Shaykh: I gave you an answer, but I am telling you, especially, yes, otherwise.
The questioner: The comment ... Do we analogize to what came before in that issue—which is organ transplantation? Do we analogize blood transfusion from one patient to another in the same way?
The Shaykh: No; because blood transfusion—meaning—is compensated for by some food, yes.
The questioner: The effect
The Shaykh: It is renewed and compensated for, meaning.
The questioner: Well, if kidney transplantation does not affect—meaning—the life of the person who ... .
The Shaykh: The doctor himself cannot say what you are saying now. The doctor himself does not guarantee that he will say it will affect or it will not affect.
The questioner: We have learned that one-third of the kidney, one-third of just one kidney, if it functions, is sufficient for a person's life.
The Shaykh: Well, I said to some people a few days ago who spoke about this kind of thing, I have reached this age and I have no knowledge, despite many tests, that this right kidney is non-functional except in the last period. So if I were—God forbid—one of those who
The questioner: volunteered
The Shaykh: got involved—haha—and volunteered the left kidney ... what would have happened to us? We would have dug our own grave with our own hands. So the doctor—my brother—the doctor who does a general checkup for you can tell you: the kidneys are healthy, but he does not guarantee that after a week has passed, a disease will appear in one of the kidneys, or in the remaining kidney if he donated the other one.
The questioner: That is, without doubt, and this is the same one he donated ... because a disease may appear in it.
The Shaykh: No problem, we are talking about the person who wants to volunteer, as for the recipient, that is a second matter ... Praise be to Allah, yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh: *Ithar* is in what?
The questioner: In the recommended acts.
The Shaykh: No, *ithar* in recommended acts is disliked, and this is a mistake people fall into. This is a mistake people fall into, we say. For example, I would beThe Shaykh : in the second row, and his student preceded him, so he is in the first row. I would step back and say to him, "Please," andThe Shaykh : he would accept it with all gratitude. It is a mistake for the Shaykh and for the student both.
- They laugh -
The Shaykh: Why? Because standing in the first row—you know— is better than the second row. So *ithar* in recommended acts, in religious matters, in acts of worship, is disliked; because it indicates that this person who prefers others over himself has no concern for obedience and worship. As for the *ithar* that is praised, for which people are praised, it is like the saying of Allah the Exalted:
but give [them] preference over themselves, even though they are in privation
ويؤثرون على أنفسهم ولو كان بهم خصاصة
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.