Ask Qul - Medical Issues - Organ donation

Pearl of Wisdom

A person whose [foul] tongue people dread is in the Fire [i.e. his place is the Fire].'

Imam Ja'far ibn Muhammad al-Sadiq [as]

al-Kafi, v. 2, p. 327, no. 3

Latest Answers

Sexual Ethics & Morals

# 824 - looking for someone in edda mu

Salaat / Prayers

# 709 - Passing wind from the rear

Business / Investment

# 808 - Masjid or Imam Bargah

Sexual Ethics & Morals

# 807 - penetration during period

# 806 - Female masturbation

Divorce / Talaq

# 798 - Divorce

Miscellaneous

# 797 - Kiss

# 792 - hidden buried treasure

Interfaith Dialogue

# 781 - Jesus death

Fasting / Sawm / Roza

# 776 - Husbands permissn

Receive Qul Updates

Ask Qul - QA

Question : #384

Category: Medical Issues

Subject:	Organ donation
Question:	Are we allowed to donate our organs upon our death? For example our heart, liver, kidneys? Is the soul still attached to the body once we are dead, or is that not true?
Answer:	It is permissible, but it is not permissible, as a measure of precaution, to cut an organ of a dead Muslim if he bequeathed, unless a Muslims life is in danger.

Follow Up
Question:

to have have been written aruond 90 CE and Luke aruond 100 CE (though the error bars on Luke are pretty big). John is generally dated at aruond 120 CE, 70 years after Jesus's death. There is, of course, some disagreement on the dating of all these books, much of which runs along the lines one would expect (ie, evangelicals tend to date them earlier). I think one thing that puts these dates into some perspective is the fact that they all the canonical gospels were written (compiled) after the genuine Pauline epistles, as Paul of Tarsus died c. 67 CE. The canonical gospels are indeed the oldest gospels we have available, but it doesn't follow that they are the oldest gospels that have existed. For instance, the lost Q Document, which is one of two major sources for Matthew and Luke, has been dated as early as 40 CE and could conceivably have relied on first-hand accounts. I've also read at least one account that holds that early versions of the Gospel of Thomas could predate Mark. This should in no way be taken as a refutation of your general point. The New Testament is certainly confused, contradictory, and inconsistent, and was without doubt created and revised for centuries to political ends. Indeed, Dr. Jones seems to behold the mote in his brother's eye while he considers not the beam that is in his own.Peace.JB

Developed by B19 Design.