Question
In response to a vaccination query, a Mufti issued the following fatwa: "If medical treatment is refused at government hospitals on the basis that one hasn't been vaccinated (and one is left with no choice but to utilize government hospitals), then, on the basis of such necessity one may be vaccinated in terms of Shariah. The principle of the jurists state, "Necessities warrant prohibitions". Similarly, if one is required to travel abroad for business purposes, then, too, one is permitted to be vaccinated based on the above principle, as such travelling will be considered a necessity. In conclusion, one is permitted to be vaccinated on the basis of necessity as understood from the above explanation." (End of the fatwa) Please comment. Is this fatwa correct?
Answer
No, the fatwa is not correct. The Mufti has erred by wrongly applying the principle of "Necessities warrant prohibitions". In the scenario stated in the question there is no such necessity (dharoorah) to compel acting in accordance with the Necessity principle. Even the rubbish government hospital does not believe that admission for the unvaccinated patient is necessary, hence they refuse admission. If the patient has valid Imaan, he/she should make dua for shifa' (cure) and seek for alternate remedies for the sickness. But to be injected with filth and poison is not permissible.
The argument of travelling for business is excessively stupid. It is never permissible to commit haraam for the sake of travelling merely for business. One is not compelled to vaccinate. The choice is simply not to travel and be contented with one's local earnings. Rizq is provided by only Allah Ta'ala Who has pre-ordained our Rizq. Whatever has been pre-destined for us, will reach us.
- Source
- themajlis.co.za
- Published in
- The Majlis Vol 26 No 05
- PDF page
- 2
Appears under HARAAM VACCINATION (approximate).