One of our readers has sent me a letter with many questions, some of which have been dealt with on several occasions. Therefore I am dealing with only three points which are more frequently asked. The first point is euthanasia, or what is sometimes called, “mercy killing”. This is practiced in some Western countries in cases of incurable illness where the patient may feel that death is a much better choice than endless suffering. It is done either by denying the patient the treatment that keeps him alive, or stopping it, or giving him something to bring about his death. Calls have been raised in recent years advocating that euthanasia should be made legal, within certain conditions. Even in the West, with its heavily materialistic philosophy, the question has raised many ethical worries, with arguments defended strongly on both sides.
In the Muslim world, the question has not raised anything like the sort of controversy that Western countries have seen. That is because Islam gives us an outlook on life and death that leaves little to controversy. No one may do anything to bring about the death of any patient, even though his illness is terminal and incurable. Death is caused only by God at the time He determines.
No one may interfere with it, except in the situations God has allowed, as in the case of enforcing the capital punishment on a proven murderer. Any precipitation of God’s action is tantamount to murder. That is forbidden. Hence no patient may be given any medication or denied any treatment in order to bring about his death. The only possibility is for the patient not to seek treatment for his illness. If this means his death sooner, this is not caused by anyone.
Artificial insemination is permissible only when a woman’s egg is fertilized with her husband’s sperm. No third party may be involved. No other situation is permissible. This means that all the practices of sperm bank, surrogate motherhood, etc. are forbidden in Islam.
The third point raised by the reader is how to reply to a non-Muslim should he greet us with the Islamic greeting of Assalamu alaikum. Although this greeting means, “Peace be to you,” the word, salam, is also an attribute of God. Hence, the Islamic name of Abdussalam, which means “servant of God”. Hence people say we must not use this word when greeting a non-Muslim. But what if such a person uses it first to greet us? The answer is found in the Qur’an, which requires us to return any greeting with a better one, or at least the same greeting. “When you are offered a greeting, reply to it with something better, or at least return it. God reckons everything”. (4: 86)
This is a very clear instruction that applies in all situations and with all people. God has not said, “When you are offered a greeting by a fellow Muslim.” He gives a general statement without any restriction on the source of greeting. He commands us to at least return the same greeting if we do not offer a better one, as it is preferable to do so.
The form of supplication the reader has sent me has no solid evidence. In fact, many scholars say that it is not appropriate.
Validity of verbal marriage contract
Mr. N. Ansari of Riyadh is worried about the validity of his marriage because the formalities of the marriage contract were done verbally, without signing any papers. This is unusual in his place of origin. He managed to obtain a marriage certificate after his wife had signed certain forms. He would like some reassurance.
The marriage contract is the same as any contract. It is valid when done verbally in front of witnesses. In fact, the majority of contracts in daily life are done verbally, particularly in business transactions. They are no less valid for that. As long as the two parties to a contract are making their commitment seriously, then the contract is valid. A marriage contract is also done verbally. Both parties express their commitment and acceptance verbally. They do this in front of witnesses, who must not be less than two. The bride has her father or guardian acting for her, on the basis of a power of attorney she gives him, also verbally and in front of witnesses. He expresses his commitment on her behalf and the bridegroom accepts that. The marriage is valid on this basis. Whatever documentation made on paper is merely to confirm and document the fact of the marriage that has already taken place by the verbal contract. This means that the verbal action is the basis, and the written one is merely for documentation.
I reassure my reader of the validity of his marriage. However, he needs to have it registered and documented so that he does not run into trouble of proving a marriage of which the authorities in his country have no record.