Abu Dawud

Benefits and Issues:
Benefit:
This issue has been highlighted separately in a distinct chapter only by Imam Abu Dawud.
The ahadith mentioned under this topic have also reached other hadith scholars through the chain of Imam Abu Dawud.
From these ahadith, it becomes clear that if an animal is on the verge of death,
all hope for its life has ended,
and the owner has abandoned it,
then whoever restores it to health through treatment and care, it will become his.
The basic principle is that if the life of a living being appears to be ending and the previous owner has abandoned it,
then whoever saves it from death and maintains its life,
he will be the one to use it in the future.
Regarding the issue of organ transplantation, people make bequests about their organs,
that after death, they should be given to other needy individuals; this is a subject of ongoing discussion and debate.
Most scholars are of the opinion that it is permissible.
However, this fatwa of permissibility is given on the basis of necessity and human benefit.
(Modern Fiqhi Issues, Maulana Khalid Yusuf Rahmani,
210 to 2149) As for its permissibility, no proper analogy (qiyas sahih) has yet been established.
It is only said that the eyes, kidneys, etc., of a person are certainly going to perish and mix with the earth after death.
If they are preserved in such a way
that other people can benefit from them, then it is a good thing.
Those scholars who oppose its permissibility raise the following points:

➊
How can a deceased person make a bequest to hand over his organ to another,
when he himself is not the owner of that organ?
A person is not even the owner of his own life, so he cannot take his own life.
A person also cannot, at his own discretion, cause harm to his own organs.
In this regard, the following narration from Sahih Muslim is presented:
That Hazrat Tufail bin Amr al-Dawsi radi Allahu anhu also offered to the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam
that he migrate from Makkah and come to the secure fortress of Banu Daws, but this honor was destined by Allah for the Ansar.
Therefore, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam did not accept the offer,
and migrated to Madinah.
After the Prophet’s sallallahu alayhi wa sallam migration, Hazrat Tufail bin Amr al-Dawsi radi Allahu anhu also migrated to Madinah with a companion from his tribe.
This companion became severely ill,
and unable to bear the pain, he took up a spear and cut the veins of both his hands; blood gushed from both hands and he died in that state.
Hazrat Tufail bin Amr al-Dawsi radi Allahu anhu saw him in a dream in a good state, but he had his hands covered. Hazrat Tufail bin Amr radi Allahu anhu asked, “What did your Lord do with you?” He replied,
“Because of my migration to the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, I was forgiven.”
Hazrat Tufail bin Amr radi Allahu anhu then asked, “I see that you have your hands covered.”
He replied, “It was said to me: What you yourself have ruined, We will not fix.”
Hazrat Tufail bin Amr radi Allahu anhu narrated this incident to the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam,
so the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam supplicated,
“O Allah! Forgive his hands as well.”
(Sahih Muslim, Book of Faith, Chapter: The evidence that one who kills himself is not a disbeliever, Hadith: 116) Apparently, this is a significant objection.
However, as far as ownership is concerned,
it is established that if any organ of a person is lost,
the blood money (diyah) for that organ is given to that person.
The blood money is also considered part of his estate.
Therefore, ownership of one’s organs is also granted to a person in the same way
as ownership of other blessings given by Allah is delegated to him.
The action of the companion of Hazrat Tufail radi Allahu anhu was not that, while facing death, he saved any of his organs.
Rather, it was the exact opposite: he cut the veins of his living hands, surrendering both his hands and himself to death.
Therefore, his action was wrong.
If a person’s action is the opposite—
that is, after death, by saving his organs, he allows their life to continue—
then it is hoped that this action will not be disliked, but rather will be considered commendable.

➋
The second point of those who declare bequeathing organs impermissible is based on this hadith: “Breaking the bone of a dead person is like breaking the bone of a living person in sin.” (Sunan Ibn Majah: Hadith: 1617)
All organs will be analogized to this.
And just as removing an organ from a living person is a sin,
similarly, removing an organ from a dead person will also be a sin.
There is no doubt that breaking the bone of a dead person, or mutilating the corpse by cutting out the eyes, nose,
or ears, is as great a sin as doing so to a living person.
This is a criminal act.
In this (whether in life or after death), the intention is to insult and, according to one’s perception, to cause pain to the other,
for which one is certainly deserving of severe punishment.
On the contrary, if, during life, any organ of a person becomes dead,
as in the case of gangrene (or similar diseases) where hands or feet become dead,
then separating the dead part from the living and burying the dead part, while saving the rest of the body, is necessary.
Because the purpose of this action is, contrary to insult or harm, to protect the living part.
Therefore, such removal of an organ is desirable,
and for this effort, there is reward and merit.
Separating such organs from the deceased that can be kept alive
is similar to this commendable and meritorious act.
It is not similar to the act of cutting an organ for the purpose of insult,
rather, it is a completely different act.

➌
In retribution (qisas), cutting off the criminal’s organ is exactly in accordance with the requirements of Islam,
because this is not for harm or insult, but as Allah says,
(“And there is life for you in retribution”)
This act, in its overall aspect, is for the protection of life,
and that is why it is required.
This proves that merely cutting an organ is not a crime, but cutting for a wrongful purpose is a crime, and cutting for a good purpose is commendable.
To inflict a wound on a person’s body is a crime,
but as the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said: “Healing is in three things... in the incision of the cupper...” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Medicine, Chapter: Healing is in three things, Hadith: 5680)
If the body is cut for treatment, then this is not a crime but a good deed.
With the noble objectives of protecting life, healing, etc., in view, removing organs from the dead body after death according to the deceased’s bequest, in order to keep them alive, cannot be analogized to the criminal act of removing an organ.
Rather, this act—separating the dead part and saving the organs that can be saved—should be analogized to the commendable act.
One form of organ transplantation is
that a living person donates a kidney to another,
and lives a normal life with one kidney.
If the decision is made with the right intention,
then this is not self-harm or self-inflicted injury,
but rather, by acting with the highest level of altruism, it is an extremely honorable act of saving a human life.
And according to Allah’s statement, (“And whoever saves a life, it is as if he has saved all mankind”) , it will, inshaAllah, be praiseworthy.