AlBaqir:


Should I give you another sahih hadith which says at the head of every 100 years, Allah will raise an Alim to reform teachings of Islam?

If Islamic understanding should be restricted with the understanding of 1400 sahabah, there won't be need for reformers at the head of every 100 years.

Wake up. Sahabah knows nothing about 14th century sorrugacy.

I Know the hadith but that does not apply here.

You are either missing the point or deliberately deviating from it. The reference to the Sahabah is in their unanimous understanding that every action require evidence from Allah before is undertaken. This was the reason they sought approval of the messenger of Allah before undertaking any action. And since surrogacy is an action it must have evidence before is allowed in Islam. Absence of that evidence means is not permissible. Hope is clear enough.

YakubuA:


I Know the hadith but that does not apply here.

You are either missing the point or deliberately deviating from it. The reference to the Sahabah is in their unanimous understanding that every action require evidence from Allah before is undertaken. This was the reason they sought approval of the messenger of Allah before undertaking any action. And since surrogacy is an action it must have evidence before is allowed in Islam. Absence of that evidence means is not permissible. Hope is clear enough.

Are you even sincere to yourself at all? A clear verse and a clear hadith has been given to you that whatever Allah and His Prophet did not ruled Haram or halal, no one has the right to do so. And everything they have left is never out of forgetfulness but it's a mercy for the Ummah. What else do you want? Are you an antagonist of Quran and authentic hadith?

Here, sahabah are not legislatures. Besides, they never heard of anything from this 21st century. Why did you adamantly keep on bringing them? That's insult to them.

tintingz:
Yes the baby can marry the real child of the surrogate mother I think. They don't share same gene.

To clarify you again, the gene of the surrogate mother does not pass to the baby, the baby still carries the intended parents gene/DNA since they collected the intended parents sperm and egg, even if some cell of the surrogate mother Is pass to the baby in the womb it will have no effect on the baby because they are minuscule to be a gene.

So a baby born out of surrogacy is still genetically related to the intended parents not the surrogate mother!

At this point, after reading some materials, I am off the opinion that surrogacy is not allowed in Islam.

Therefore, I'm in support of Rashduct4luv. I read articles from Western point of views on surrogacy. One said briefly just what your said here. Although you said surrogate mother's gene does not pass to the baby. The article suggest that 99% surrogate mother's DNA does not pass to the baby and that even if it passes to the baby it does little effect.

See, that one percent means a lot. There is no doubt that gene mixes since they aren't sure 100% it doesn't.

As for the second opinion from Western perceptive, that one suggests zero relation between the baby and intended mother. This is RED FLAG. This would make it Haram. Not only Haram but the artificial insemination itself. This makes surrogacy Haram from islamic perceptive.

Islam doesn't have to be specific whether it is Haram or not. We just need to study the conditions, procedure and outcome of it if they are in harmony with Sharia. The article further says married women seek surrogacy for different reasons not just infertility. It say some married women may have busy schedule with work and they don't want to carry pregnancy. So they seek alternative which is surrogacy.

Honestly this is not even legal excuse under Sharia. And their husband's sperm is used to fertilize surrogate mother's egg. Honestly, this is alien in Islam and comes under Haram. It also says homosexual couple also seek this alternative.


For now, I do not see satisfactory view point on surrogacy under Sharia. Therefore, I consider it Haram. This is not the only one I read. This is just heads-up. Note that we are not concerned about atheists or CHRISTIANs, freethinkers or Western opinion on this. They can do as they wish.

One thing is clear to me, there is mixtures of gene/DNA on this matter which I raised earlier. I understand if someone is presented this only option to procure baby as sarahade said but this is another topic and it doesn't in any way suggest permisibility. You accept this option out desperation. It doesn't make halal and it doesn't make a person hypocrite.

Empiree:
At this point, after reading some materials, I am off the opinion that surrogacy is not allowed in Islam.

Therefore, I'm in support of Rashduct4luv. I read articles from Western point of views on surrogacy. One said briefly just what your said here. Although you said surrogate mother's gene does not pass to the baby. The article suggest that 99% surrogate mother's DNA does not pass to the baby and that even if it passes to the baby it does little effect.

See, that one percent means a lot. There is no doubt that gene mixes since they aren't sure 100% it doesn't.

As for the second opinion from Western perceptive, that one suggests zero relation between the baby and intended mother. This is RED FLAG. This would make it Haram. Not only Haram but the artificial insemination itself. This makes surrogacy Haram from islamic perceptive.

Islam doesn't have to be specific whether it is Haram or not. We just need to study the conditions, procedure and outcome of it if they are in harmony with Sharia. The article further says married women seek surrogacy for different reasons not just infertility. It say some married women may have busy schedule with work and they don't want to carry pregnancy. So they seek alternative which is surrogacy.

Honestly this is not even legal excuse under Sharia. And their husband's sperm is used to fertilize surrogate mother's egg. Honestly, this is alien in Islam and comes under Haram. It also says homosexual couple also seek this alternative.


For now, I do not see satisfactory view point on surrogacy under Sharia. Therefore, I consider it Haram. This is not the only one I read. This is just heads-up. Note that we are not concerned about atheists or CHRISTIANs, freethinkers or Western opinion on this. They can do as they wish.

One thing is clear to me, there is mixtures of gene/DNA on this matter which I raised earlier. I understand if someone is presented this only option to procure baby as sarahade said but this is another topic and it doesn't in any way suggest permisibility. You accept this option out desperation. It doesn't make halal and it doesn't make a person hypocrite.

I think this Ignorance is still making you people reason illogically. You guys are still confusing this to traditional surrogacy. There is difference between traditional surrogacy and gestational surrogacy.

The gene in sperm and egg are collected from the intended parents is much compare to little blood passed to the baby from the surrogate mother, her egg is not used but the intended parent egg, that blood cannot become gene in the baby, the sequence is very low to be a gene. So yes there's no effect even if the surrogate mother passes any blood to the baby.

Whatever the reasons someone wants to have a child through surrogacy is their business, as long as there are consent and not harmful, it's non of anyone's business.

As for the image, that's not a professional surrogacy procedures.

Guest007:


It's not the same as the topic question anyway. I could see where surrogacy can be Haram, and I didn't even think about it so thanks for the reminder

Nope, you haven't demonstrated why it's Haram.

Sterope:
People come up with this opinion did it by simple reasoning and application of Quran.

If wet nursing is permissible, I really don't see why gestational surrogacy cannot be. The gestational surrogate does not share genes or DNA with the baby. The baby is formed with actual mother's egg and the father's sperm. However, traditional surrogacy may be haram because it involves the father's sperm and the surrogate's eggs.

Attacking Western civilization is quite silly. Every culture has contributed to it one way or the other. Arab civilization is not all that either. You could stop using internet etc to show your disdain for it.

I kind of fancy your angle.

OvaSabi1:


My believe is that they didn't tell you that they're atheists nor Shiite. You just used it to insult them.
Background reading on the fact that the first link you shared is of a woman who is a gestational carrier and not an ovary donor.

They told us they are what i called them. Mostly by actions and sometimes in writing here. Both Atheist and Shiites are well known.


We are talking about Surrogacy so what is amiss?

In Islam, if a lady sufficiently breastfeeds a baby which is not even her baby by birth then the baby inherits rights similar to the lady's baby!

Which includes the fact that:
The baby can not marry the lady's children.

But here we are still discussing birth mother!

OvaSabi1:


In gestational surrogacy, it's the fetus that goes into the carrier and not the sperm. Moreover, your first sentence negates the rest of your submission.

"Innovations of western civilization, which is a purely materialistic civilization which does not give any weight to moral values and principles."
Yen yen yen.
Why are you using a phone and on a website that is from a materialistic civilization?

Use of Phone can be good or bad. Good as i use it for good and bad if i use it for evil eg. duping others. Technology ain't evil in and of itself in most cases except for what it's used for.

In Islam, if a lady sufficiently breastfeeds a baby which is not even her baby by birth then the baby inherits rights similar to the lady's baby!

Which includes the fact that:
The baby can not marry the lady's children.

But here we are still discussing birth mother! But not only genetic issues matter in Islam.

I was wrong. Not for their reasons stated above I don't find them convincing. However, there is a clear verse,
Surah al-Mujadalah (58: 2) where the Qur'an refers to the mother as the birth mother. Besides, having children in Islam is a privilege not a right.

@tintingz

aadoiza:

I kind of fancy your angle.

tintingz:
I think this Ignorance is still making you people reason illogically. You guys are still confusing this to traditional surrogacy. There is difference between traditional surrogacy and gestational surrogacy.

The gene in sperm and egg are collected from the intended parents is much compare to little blood passed to the baby from the surrogate mother, her egg is not used but the intended parent egg, that blood cannot become gene in the baby, the sequence is very low to be a gene. So yes there's no effect even if the surrogate mother passes any blood to the baby.

Whatever the reasons someone wants to have a child through surrogacy is their business, as long as there are consent and not harmful, it's non of anyone's business.

As for the image, that's not a professional surrogacy procedures.

you are still saying the same thing they said. You said my attachment is not a professional surrogacy procedure?. Says who?. That attachment was not from muslim website. From the link I got it from they explained surrogacy is of two types, genetic and gestational. In genetic surrogacy, the ovum of the surrogate is artificially inseminated by the donor’s sperm (the father of the child). In gestational surrogacy, the ovum of a woman is fertilized by the sperm of a male in vitro and the resulting embryo is implanted in the uterus of the surrogate.

The couple may choose surrogacy over adoption because the child will be at least half-related to them (in genetic surrogacy). Sometimes, unmarried couples look for a surrogate mother although the practice is not very common.


I honestly don't trust it whether genetic procedure or gestational. This is not about ignorance. We have every right to be concerned.


From Islam perceptive, surrogate mother's is birth mother regardless of how she's conceived. It is like you were born in Nigeria. You migrate to US and become US citizen. Just because you are now US citizen doesn't automatically erases your country of birth. US authority inscribes your country of birth on your US passport to indicate your were born in Nigeria. So nothing erases the fact that surrogate mother is your birth mother even if DNA doesn't mix 100%

I don't undermine this phenomenon though. It is interesting.

Empiree:
you are still saying the same thing they said. You said my attachment is not a professional surrogacy procedure?. Says who?. That attachment was not from muslim website. From the link I got it from they explained surrogacy is of two types, genetic and gestational. In genetic surrogacy, the ovum of the surrogate is artificially inseminated by the donor’s sperm (the father of the child). In gestational surrogacy, the ovum of a woman is fertilized by the sperm of a male in vitro and the resulting embryo is implanted in the uterus of the surrogate.

The couple may choose surrogacy over adoption because the child will be at least half-related to them (in genetic surrogacy). Sometimes, unmarried couples look for a surrogate mother although the practice is not very common.


I honestly don't trust it whether genetic procedure or gestational. This is not about ignorance. We have every right to be concerned.

Again, there are two main types of surrogacy, traditional surrogacy and gestational surrogacy.

Here's from a Surrogate site.

The main difference between gestational and traditional surrogacy is simple: in traditional surrogacy, the surrogate’s eggs are used, making her the biological mother of the child she carries; in gestational surrogacy, the surrogate has no biological link to the baby.
https://surrogate.com/about-surrogacy/types-of-surrogacy/traditional-vs-gestational-surrogacy-whats-best-for-my-family/

From Islam perceptive, surrogate mother's is birth mother regardless of how she's conceived. It is like you were born in Nigeria. You migrate to US and become US citizen. Just because you are now US citizen doesn't automatically erases your country of birth. US authority inscribes your country of birth on your US passport to indicate your were born in Nigeria. So nothing erases the fact that surrogate mother is your birth mother even if DNA doesn't mix 100%

I don't undermine this phenomenon though. It is interesting.

A surrogate mother is just the carrier that is the deal she has with them, the baby has no biological link to her. If it's the traditional process then she's the mother since her egg was used.

Sterope:
I was wrong. Not for their reasons stated above I don't find them convincing. However, there is a clear verse,
Surah al-Mujadalah (58: 2) where the Qur'an refers to the mother as the birth mother. Besides, having children in Islam is a privilege not a right.

@tintingz

Not every mothers are biological mother and not every birth mother are biological mother(in this advanced age).

I am not arguing with you. I am stating what the Qur'an says. You are not a Muslim. It is not for you to worry about.

tintingz:
Not every mothers are biological mother and not every birth mother are biological mother(in this advanced age).

Sterope:
I am not arguing with you. I am stating what the Qur'an says. You are not a Muslim. It is not for you to worry about.

It's just a critique.

tintingz:
Again, there are two main types of surrogacy, traditional surrogacy and gestational surrogacy.

Here's from a Surrogate site.

The main difference between gestational and traditional surrogacy is simple: in traditional surrogacy, the surrogate’s eggs are used, making her the biological mother of the child she carries; in gestational surrogacy, the surrogate has no biological link to the baby.
https://surrogate.com/about-surrogacy/types-of-surrogacy/traditional-vs-gestational-surrogacy-whats-best-for-my-family/



A surrogate mother is just the carrier that is the deal she has with them, the baby has no biological link to her. If it's the traditional process then she's the mother since her egg was used.

I didn't tell you I don't understand what both mean.

That surrogate mother in gestational surrogacy is "just a carrier" means she's birth mother. This record can not be erased.


Perhaps, the most compelling evidence supporting my position is the ayah in Surah al-Mujadalah (58: 2) where the Quran says:


“…their mothers are only those who conceived them and gave birth to them (waladna hum).”


The baby was conceived and birth by surrogate mother. This is the meaning of the Ayah and the Ayah can not just be discarded just because of benefits derived from gestational surrogacy.

https://www.ilmgate.org/the-islamic-ruling-on-surrogate-motherhood/

In the article above from Islam's views, writer cited some facts using analogies. Now, I am not saying whoever wants to use surrogacy of any kinds can't. Anyone can do whatever they want. But as Muslims view this issue from Islamic standpoint. You need to understand this.

Again, definition of "mother" in Islam is a woman who conceived and birth a child.

Empiree:
I didn't tell you I don't understand what both mean.

That surrogate mother in gestational surrogacy is "just a carrier" means she's birth mother. This record can not be erased.


Perhaps, the most compelling evidence supporting my position is the ayah in Surah al-Mujadalah (58: 2) where the Quran says:


“…their mothers are only those who conceived them and gave birth to them (waladna hum).”


The baby was conceived and birth by surrogate mother. This is the meaning of the Ayah and the Ayah can not just be discarded just because of benefits derived from gestational surrogacy.

https://www.ilmgate.org/the-islamic-ruling-on-surrogate-motherhood/

In the article above from Islam's views, writer cited some facts using analogies. Now, I am not saying whoever wants to use surrogacy of any kinds can't. Anyone can do whatever they want. But as Muslims view this issue from Islamic standpoint. You need to understand this.

Again, definition of "mother" in Islam is a woman who conceived and birth a child.

In logical sense, a mother is not always the biological mother and a birth mother is not always the biological mother(in advanced age).

The premise of this argument is about the "biological link".

AlBaqir:



Are you even sincere to yourself at all? A clear verse and a clear hadith has been given to you that whatever Allah and His Prophet did not ruled Haram or halal, no one has the right to do so. And everything they have left is never out of forgetfulness but it's a mercy for the Ummah. What else do you want? Are you an antagonist of Quran and authentic hadith?

Here, sahabah are not legislatures. Besides, they never heard of anything from this 21st century. Why did you adamantly keep on bringing them? That's insult to them.

You are the one not sincere. The Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet not to you and the Sahabah spent all their lives together with him so they understand Allah's revelation better than you. Beside the messenger of Allah was with them always and they used to sought for his clarification on any matter that was not clear to them.
I said it earlier and I will repeat it again the Sahabah never undertook any action until they sought clarification from the Prophet regarding its permissibility. Surrogacy is an action hence require evidence for it to be permissible in Islam.
Between you and the Sahabah who understand the Qur'an better? Are you suggesting that the Sahabah were not aware of the Ayah and Hadith you quoted when they used to go to the messenger of Allah to sought permissibility before they undertook any action?

You think the Qur'an was revealed for you to interpret its Ayah the way you want? By Allah you are very wrong if you think that way. You are actually the antagonist of the Qur'an and Hadith because you antagonize the Prophet and his Sahabah by claiming to understand the revelation better than them. Allah has honoured them and anyone who refuse to honour them shall be disgraced in this world and hereafter.

Allah alone is the legislator. Why do you keep on bringing the issue of Sahabah not aware of 21st century? Who said they heard about or were aware of 21st century? You are rather the one insulting the Sahabah by assuming that you understand Islam better than them and by Allah you do not.

Surrogacy is an action like any action and hence require evidence before is permitted in Islam. In Islam actions are in 5 categories: Obligatory, Mandoub, Mubah, Makhrooh and Haram.

The Sahabah were fully aware of the Ayah you quoted and understood it very well, afterall the Qur'an was compiled by them and it is 100% authentic and error free, despite that Ayah the Sahabah used to seek permissibility from the Prophet before they undertook any new action.

So according to you any new issue that come up not mention in the Qur'an or Hadith is permitted because of the Ayah and the hadith you quoted?

Sorry it is not like that in Islam. May be that is what you Shi'a believe but is very wrong.

So stop claiming to know Islam better than the Sahabah otherwise Allah will disgrace you in this life and hereafter.

YakubuA:

So according to you any new issue that come up not mention in the Qur'an or Hadith is permitted because of the Ayah and the hadith you quoted?

Sorry it is not like that in Islam. May be that is what you Shi'a believe but is very wrong.

# According to that noble ayah and hadith, you have no right to declare something haram. In fact, there is a qaida in usul al-fiqh agreed upon by all Muslims (perhaps except the salafi like you ) and the qaida is, "everything is halal (in another report, pure is used) except what is specifically known (via Quran or hadith) to be haram (or impure).

The fact that there is no verse or hadith that made 21st century invention of sorrugacy haram, this is where fuqaha share their expertise. Majority of your Sunni scholars declared it "haram", and majority of Shia scholars declared it permissible.

All we ask is what are the evidences of your scholars making it "haram"? All of them keep on liken it to Zina as quoted by one of you on this same thread. And we challenged that it is not Zina as per Shari'i understanding.

What is your take? You are only here using sahabah excuses: Sahabah used to follow Quran, sahabah used to ask the Prophet, and

Please open your eyes wide. Ain't no sahabah or Prophet here to ask from. This is 21st century invention. Please give me a break.

AlBaqir:


# According to that noble ayah and hadith, you have no right to declare something haram. In fact, there is a qaida in usul al-fiqh agreed upon by all Muslims (perhaps except the salafi like you ) and the qaida is, "everything is halal (in another report, pure is used) except what is specifically known (via Quran or hadith) to be haram (or impure).

The fact that there is no verse or hadith that made 21st century invention of sorrugacy haram, this is where fuqaha share their expertise. Majority of your Sunni scholars declared it "haram", and majority of Shia scholars declared it permissible.

All we ask is what are the evidences of your scholars making it "haram"? All of them keep on liken it to Zina as quoted by one of you on this same thread. And we challenged that it is not Zina as per Shari'i understanding.

What is your take? You are only here using sahabah excuses: Sahabah used to follow Quran, sahabah used to ask the Prophet, and

Please open your eyes wide. Ain't no sahabah or Prophet here to ask from. This is 21st century invention. Please give me a break.

Can you please take time and read through the answer given here. I mean read the question that was asked and the reply given on this same topic via the link below: It was well analyzed.

https://www.ilmgate.org/the-islamic-ruling-on-surrogate-motherhood/


Personally, I so much love the conclusion part where he said "In summary, while having children is not a legal right for every married couple, pursuing the idea of conceiving children is a prerogative. Whether a couple begets or does not beget should not be left for the secular legal society to decide because they cannot perceive what is sinful or not sinful in the hereafter.[2] Muslims must follow the theological maxims of the Quran and Sunnah when addressing these types of phenomena and practitioners of Islamic law must ascertain whether or not there is sin or not in any act – as that is their primary agenda".

May Allah guide us all.

AlBaqir:


# According to that noble ayah and hadith, you have no right to declare something haram. In fact, there is a qaida in usul al-fiqh agreed upon by all Muslims (perhaps except the salafi like you ) and the qaida is, "everything is halal (in another report, pure is used) except what is specifically known (via Quran or hadith) to be haram (or impure).[b][/b]

The fact that there is no verse or hadith that made 21st century invention of sorrugacy haram, this is where fuqaha share their expertise. Majority of your Sunni scholars declared it "haram", and majority of Shia scholars declared it permissible.

All we ask is what are the evidences of your scholars making it "haram"? All of them keep on liken it to Zina as quoted by one of you on this same thread. And we challenged that it is not Zina as per Shari'i understanding.

What is your take? You are only here using sahabah excuses: Sahabah used to follow Quran, sahabah used to ask the Prophet, and

Please open your eyes wide. Ain't no sahabah or Prophet here to ask from. This is 21st century invention. Please give me a break.

Please go and do your research well the bolden part is only applicable to foods and drinks and clothing but not actions.

It seems you are deliberately diverting away from the issue.

All actions require Shari'a evidence of their permissibility before they are undertaken in Islam, surrogacy is an action hence require Shari'a evidence before is permissible.

The fact is there is no Shar'i evidence that permit surrogacy and if you have any present it here. The Ayah and the hadith you quoted do not apply to actions.

The reference to the Sahabah is only to present proof to you that all actions require evidence of their permissibility before they are undertaken in Islam.