Anyone else surprised by how illegitimate children are described here?

[confusedandannoyed]

Salam everyone,

Like most people, I stumbled upon Al-Islam.org website one day, looking to find information on illegitimate children and their rights in Islam.

This document was written by Naser Shirazi, who upon further search, turns out is a Shia marja.  Turns out illegitimate children are disqualified from certain posts because of their illegitimate status. "Okay, let's read more as to why," was my response. 

Here is what he had to say about illegitimate children and their rights: https://www.al-islam.org/philosophy-islamic-laws-nasir-makarim-shirazi-jafar-subhani/question-15-why-illegitimate-children

Quote

Illegitimate children inherit bad manners, breaking of laws and sins from their parents. For them the ground for sins and crime is more feasible. As compared to others they are more prepared for sins and if they personally get wrong training or if the environment is not good, then it is enough for them that their polluted soul, like sparks beneath the ash become fire and burn their good fortune.

Additionally,

Quote

In other words those children who are illegitimately born are like those children who are born to the parents having diseases (T.B, and sexual disorders). These children have more chances of contracting these diseases and if they are not cured as early as possible they are more likely to get these diseases. This is the reason that to protect the interest of the people, those children who are possible to contract the disease of T.B. should not be given whatever food and other things are available.

Like the ill parents, illegitimate children are also prepared to break the laws and fall into crime if their training and studies are not provided in the right environment and healthy intentions. It is possible they may fall into a great depth and ally with the criminals. For those reasons, in order to protect the social cause, precautions should be taken that they remain away from some posts.

With all due respect to the marja, I find it quite astonishing that he would say that an illegitimate child is more prone to committing crimes, because of the sin that produced him/her in the first place. More specifically, I find it even more astonishing that pre-marital sex is compared to a physiological disease, where the likelihood of contracting such disease (in this case, sinful behaviour) is passe down from parents.

I understand the seriousness of pre-marital sex and having a child out of wed-lock, but I found it quite surprising that a child born out of wed-lock cannot enjoy the same positions and rights that legitimate children are able to, simply because of the sins committed by their parents. 

Any thoughts on this?

[habib e najjaar]

On 5/8/2020 at 12:23 AM, confusedandannoyed said:

Salam everyone,

I understand the seriousness of pre-marital sex and having a child out of wed-lock, but I found it quite surprising that a child born out of wed-lock cannot enjoy the same positions and rights that legitimate children are able to, simply because of the sins committed by their parents. 

Any thoughts on this?

Wa alaykum salaam,

What part do you have a problem with?

1. The plausibility of such children being inherently more likely to sin; or

2. The justice (if any) of such children carrying the weight of their parents mistakes.

[confusedandannoyed]

5 minutes ago, habib e najjaar said:

Wa alaykum salaam,

What part do you have a problem with?

1. The plausibility of such children being inherently more likely to sin; or

2. The justice (if any) of such children carrying the weight of their parents mistakes.

Both, I believe, but especially number 2.

[habib e najjaar]

1 minute ago, confusedandannoyed said:

Both, I believe, but especially number 2.

Ok, so let us start with that. 

1. Is it just for a child of an adulterous parent who contracted AIDS and passed it on to them to be born and live with it, and have the health and social complications that come with it?

2. Is it just for a child to live comfortably and happily off his parents who acquired their wealth in dubious/haraam means despite having no part in their doing haram or even being aware of it?

[habib e najjaar]

P.s you will be answering this doubt that has arisen in your mind, not me.

[confusedandannoyed]

6 minutes ago, habib e najjaar said:

Ok, so let us start with that. 

1. Is it just for a child of an adulterous parent who contracted AIDS and passed it on to them to be born and live with it, and have the health and social complications that come with it?

2. Is it just for a child to live comfortably and happily off his parents who acquired their wealth in dubious/haraam means despite having no part in their doing haram or even being aware of it?

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand the questions. Do you mind rephrasing it?

Are you asking if the information on the site is applicable to these two circumstances?

[Zaydism]

Many scholars even those who reached a status of being a marj3 are prone to error and some of their conclusions may in some cases not be in accordance to Islam. I would presume such conclusions were made based on a particular instance and circumstance which would warrant them to be as such, or perhaps a presupposition that was raised by the scholar pertaining to the high statistical likelihood of the child being deviated due to negligence. What seems to be emphasized is the necessity for increased attention to these neglected children as those born out of wed-lock, especially in his province (the middle east) are subject to great evident mistreatment by a mother who disregards the importance of the marital institution and is instead swayed by her selfish emotions and inclinations. Many times we see these children thrown into garbage bins and if that is not the case then they are severely abused by the parent(s) and I have seen/heard cases where such children are used to go beg for money and do other acts which are considered unprecedented here in the west. If we examine the ideas stated with consideration of the cultural and social paradigm of the middle east it will make more sense. In the west we see many cases where certain individuals enter a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship and then have an illegitimate child, while perhaps contemplating marriage later on; even so this adds complication. However, in the context where such relationships are mainly a one time encounter fueled by an insatiable desire possessed by the man and the promiscuous nature of the woman there will no doubt be complication much more heavier and severe then that of the west. 

As for them being inherently sinful this goes against the teachings of Islam as we are all born pure and Muslim irrespective of the household we are born into.

[confusedandannoyed]

1 minute ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

Many scholars even those who reached a status of being a marj3 are prone to error and some of their conclusions may in some cases not be in accordance to Islam. I would presume such conclusions were made based on a particular instance and circumstance which would warrant them to be as such, or perhaps a presupposition that was raised by the scholar pertaining to the high statistical likelihood of the child being deviated due to negligence. What seems to be emphasized is the necessity for increased attention to these neglected children as those born out of wed-lock, especially in his province (the middle east) are subject to great evident mistreatment by a mother who disregards the importance of the marital institution and is instead swayed by her selfish emotions and inclinations. Many times we see these children thrown into garbage bins and if that is not the case then they are severely abused by the parent(s) and I have seen/heard cases where such children are used to go beg for money and do other acts which are considered unprecedented here in the west. If we examine the ideas stated with consideration of the cultural and social paradigm of the middle east it will make more sense. In the west we see many cases where certain individuals enter a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship and then have an illegitimate child, while perhaps contemplating marriage later on; even so this adds complication. However, in the context where such relationships are mainly a one time encounter fueled by an insatiable desire possessed by the man and the promiscuous nature of the woman there will no doubt be complication much more heavier and severe then that of the west. 

As for them being inherently sinful this goes against the teachings of Islam as we are all born pure and Muslim irrespective of the household we are born into.

Salam! Thank you for your response. I completely agree with you about the differences between Middle Eastern society's view of illegitimate children and that of Western societies. I believe it is these views that ultimately shape one's sense of self.

I actually skimmed over a study about the correlation between illegitimate children and crime, and it stated there was a positive correlation, though in the analysis, it was mentioned that illegitimate children might go on to engage in crimes simply because of the mistreatment illegitimate children received by the hands of their parents. I do agree with that -- parental love and societal support is important for one's sense of self and self-esteem. I can also understand why stigma might prevent an illegitimate child in M/E or South Asia from receiving the love and care normally given by parents.

[habib e najjaar]

Before the two of you conclude that this is an "eastern" thing, you should know that it has not even been 100 years since children born out of wedlock in western societies would not be baptised, not be buried in the cemetery unless it was a prison graveyard for criminals etcz as well as a host of other "unfair" treatment. So at some point until very recently in the west, this was about morality just as it still is in the East.

Perhaps after immorality became rife and illegitimate children increased came the need to normalise it, somewhat akin to what is happening with the LGBTQ movement now. Soon it will be/maybe already is normal in the west to have two parents of the same gender.

[habib e najjaar]

6 hours ago, confusedandannoyed said:

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand the questions. Do you mind rephrasing it?

Are you asking if the information on the site is applicable to these two circumstances?

The two questions are exactly related to what I sense is your "root cause" concern about this question, and answering these questions may help you identify that so that you can resolve that if you wish.

1. Is it fair/just for a child to be born with a life threatening and socially stigmatizing disease like AIDS which was contracted as a result of his or her parent engaging in pre or post marital adultery/fornication?

2. Is it fair for a child to inherit or live off and advance his life and social status using the financial proceeds his parent has acquired through haraam means for example embezzlement or theft?

[Zaydism]

14 minutes ago, habib e najjaar said:

Before the two of you conclude that this is an "eastern" thing,

The conclusion was that the context in which the Sayed was addressing it was that from his own eastern paradigm. To take a conclusion reached from such a context and place it equally to that of a modern western one will without doubt lead to confusion. That was the conclusion is it problematic?

[Zaydism]

4 hours ago, habib e najjaar said:

1. Is it fair/just for a child to be born with a life threatening and socially stigmatizing disease like AIDS which was contracted as a result of his or her parent engaging in pre or post marital adultery/fornication?

2. Is it fair for a child to inherit or live off and advance his life and social status using the financial proceeds his parent has acquired through haraam means for example embezzlement or theft?

You are answering a general matter with something particular.

[confusedandannoyed]

47 minutes ago, habib e najjaar said:

Before the two of you conclude that this is an "eastern" thing, you should know that it has not even been 100 years since children born out of wedlock in western societies would not be baptised, not be buried in the cemetery unless it was a prison graveyard for criminals etcz as well as a host of other "unfair" treatment. So at some point until very recently in the west, this was about morality just as it still is in the East.

Perhaps after immorality became rife and illegitimate children increased came the need to normalise it, somewhat akin to what is happening with the LGBTQ movement now. Soon it will be/maybe already is normal in the west to have two parents of the same gender.

I never once said that having illegitimate children should be normalized, and neither did I say this was my issue from the above link. I know it is a sin and I appreciate that Islam forbids premarital sex and having children out of wedlock.  Rather, my issue springs from how illegitimate children are described in the above link by a Marja

[confusedandannoyed]

44 minutes ago, habib e najjaar said:

The two questions are exactly related to what I sense is your "root cause" concern about this question, and answering these questions may help you identify that so that you can resolve that if you wish.

1. Is it fair/just for a child to be born with a life threatening and socially stigmatizing disease like AIDS which was contracted as a result of his or her parent engaging in pre or post marital adultery/fornication?

2. Is it fair for a child to inherit or live off and advance his life and social status using the financial proceeds his parent has acquited through haraam means for example embezzlement or theft?

How does this have ANYTHING to do with having an illegitimate child?
Your first question talks about AIDS, and I’m assuming your implication is that children born out of wedlock are “diseased,” which is exactly the issue that I have with the above link. It treats illegitimate children as having a physiological, genetic illness passed down from their parents. 

Your second question has nothing to do with the issue. Illegitimate children aren’t benefitting from their parents’ sins??

[habib e najjaar]

3 minutes ago, confusedandannoyed said:

I never once said that having illegitimate children should be normalized, and neither did I say this was my issue from the above link. I know it is a sin and I appreciate that Islam forbids premarital sex and having children out of wedlock.  Rather, my issue springs from how illegitimate children are described in the above link by a Marja

Do you have a problem with our ahkaam not allowing such children to be marjas, lead prayers or become judges?

[habib e najjaar]

1 minute ago, confusedandannoyed said:

How does this have ANYTHING to do with having an illegitimate child?
Your first question talks about AIDS, and I’m assuming your implication is that children born out of wedlock are “diseased,” which is exactly the issue that I have with the above link. It treats illegitimate children as having a physiological, genetic illness passed down from their parents. 

Your second question has nothing to do with the issue. Illegitimate children aren’t benefitting from their parents’ sins??

No, it seems you did not understand my question at all and it will be difficult to communicate effectively so I will leave it at that as per my signature.

[habib e najjaar]

37 minutes ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

You are answering a general matter with something particular.

Humor me. What is your response to these two questions.

[Zaydism]

11 minutes ago, habib e najjaar said:

Humor me. What is your response to these two questions.

Humble yourself sister 

[habib e najjaar]

2 minutes ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

Humble yourself sister 

Ok I shall exit the discussion then. Thank you for the reminder if it is related to my akhlaq on the thread.

[Guest]

Just like there are physical illnesses there are also diseases of the soul for example lying, back biting, hasd etc and if physical diseases can be hereditary it's possible that the diseases of soul can also be passed from one generation to another like diabetes or asthma or from mother to baby like AIDS. So just like a child who is born with Asthma is sometimes not fit for sports like football so people with certain diseases of soul for example, if someone is not considered trustworthy then he isn't for to be a witness in Shia fiqh. So its quite possible that a person who was conceived as a result of haram act has acquired some defects of soul that make him unfit to hold certain positions like leading a prayer. It might sound unfair but then so was the baby who was born with fetal alcohol syndrome. 

There are several narrations from Ahlulbayt(عليه السلام) which tell us that it's not permissible for someone of an illegitimate birth to lead prayer. 

Imam ʿAli that he said: “Do not perform your prayers [behind a prayer leader] who i s mentally unstable or one who is from an illegitimate birth. - Wasail us Shia.

Imam Muḥammad al-Bāqir said: “There are five groups of people who are not permitted to be chosen as the leader for a congregational prayer … one of them is a person who was of illegitimate birth - Mun la yahddrul faqih

Here is something which I found very interesting. This will clarify how diseases of soul are passes from generation to generation.

Imām al-Ṣādiq that he said:

والممراز لا يطيب إلى سبعة آباء وقيل اي شئ الممراز” فقال الرجل يكتسب مالا من غير حله

“Al-Mimrāz is not spiritually purified [nor is it removed from a person’s lineage] until seven generations pass.” It was asked of the Imām: “What is al-Mimrāz ?” The Imām replied: “A person who gains illicit wealth [and through this unlawful wealth, marries lawfully however produces a child with wealth which was forbidden] Al-Kafi

[hasanhh]

l have skipped down to post after only reading the first few posts so far.

My thinking complicates this issue further.

What about foundlings, some orphans and such where the birth status is not known?

[Cool]

Salam,

What is Islamic understanding of legitimate children of kuffar? 

Surah Nuh, Verse 27:
إِنَّكَ إِن تَذَرْهُمْ يُضِلُّوا عِبَادَكَ وَلَا يَلِدُوا إِلَّا فَاجِرًا كَفَّارًا

For surely if Thou leave them they will lead astray Thy servants, and will not beget any but immoral, ungrateful (children)
(English - Shakir)

And what would be their status after accepting Islam?

[habib e najjaar]

3 hours ago, starlight said:

 

Here is something which I found very interesting. This will clarify how diseases of soul are passes from generation to generation.

Imām al-Ṣādiq that he said:

والممراز لا يطيب إلى سبعة آباء وقيل اي شئ الممراز” فقال الرجل يكتسب مالا من غير حله

“Al-Mimrāz is not spiritually purified [nor is it removed from a person’s lineage] until seven generations pass.” It was asked of the Imām: “What is al-Mimrāz ?” The Imām replied: “A person who gains illicit wealth [and through this unlawful wealth, marries lawfully however produces a child with wealth which was forbidden] Al-Kafi

This was the discussion I was expecting to come up with my questions, but seems it was taken very differently. Perhaps my akhlaaq in communication gave off a wrong message.

[habib e najjaar]

4 hours ago, confusedandannoyed said:

How does this have ANYTHING to do with having an illegitimate child?
Your first question talks about AIDS, and I’m assuming your implication is that children born out of wedlock are “diseased,” which is exactly the issue that I have with the above link. It treats illegitimate children as having a physiological, genetic illness passed down from their parents. 

Your second question has nothing to do with the issue. Illegitimate children aren’t benefitting from their parents’ sins??

It may have been unreasonable of me to expect the discussion to take the direction it took when this topic came up at a part time hawza class I was attending, and our teacher/instructor asked these two questions (there was one more but I have forgotten it now) and it led us to analyse the issue in what the class generally found a productive and enlightening manner. If I came off as disrespectful or displayed bad akhlaq towards you on the thread as has been expressed on the thread by asking these questions, I apologize for that.

[Mzwakhe]

12 hours ago, confusedandannoyed said:

I understand the seriousness of pre-marital sex and having a child out of wed-lock, but I found it quite surprising that a child born out of wed-lock cannot enjoy the same positions and rights that legitimate children are able to, simply because of the sins committed by their parents. 

Any thoughts on this?

illegitimate children is something else as compared to these children from the narration below.

Satan returned and said, “O Abul Hasan, why do you reproach me? My seed never mingles with that of your friends, but in the case of your enemies, my seed always reaches the wombs of their mothers through the loins of their fathers.”

any thoughts on Genesis 6:4 '...when the sons of God came into the daughters of man and they bore children to them.'

how did they come into them?

[hasanhh]

48 minutes ago, Mzwakhe said:

any thoughts on Genesis 6:4 '...when the sons of God came into the daughters of man and they bore children to them.'

how did they come into them?

As Quran and scholarship both reveal, this was re-written a few times. As to this passage in particular, l figure this refers to Neanderthals.

[Northwest]

13 hours ago, habib e najjaar said:

Ok, so let us start with that. 

1. Is it just for a child of an adulterous parent who contracted AIDS and passed it on to them to be born and live with it, and have the health and social complications that come with it?

2. Is it just for a child to live comfortably and happily off his parents who acquired their wealth in dubious/haraam means despite having no part in their doing haram or even being aware of it?

@habib e najjaar

The Nazis made similar eugenicist arguments about the children of criminals, mentally incapacitated (“insane”) individuals, and other undesirable dregs of society. They argued that the biological-spiritual defects of the parents would be genetically and spiritually transferred into the bodies of their offspring. As you have mentioned below, the Christian West also would ostracise the products of illicit and immoral relations until recently. Of course, this does not mean that the Islamic approach is wrong, but it should be pointed out that there is an element of eugenics involved.

11 hours ago, habib e najjaar said:

Before the two of you conclude that this is an "eastern" thing, you should know that it has not even been 100 years since children born out of wedlock in western societies would not be baptised, not be buried in the cemetery unless it was a prison graveyard for criminals etcz as well as a host of other "unfair" treatment. So at some point until very recently in the west, this was about morality just as it still is in the East.

Perhaps after immorality became rife and illegitimate children increased came the need to normalise it, somewhat akin to what is happening with the LGBTQ movement now. Soon it will be/maybe already is normal in the west to have two parents of the same gender.

It is also noteworthy that many of the people who decry the normalisation of sin also “normalise” the use of postmodernist jargon such as “gender” to describe biological sex.

11 hours ago, habib e najjaar said:

No, it seems you did not understand my question at all and it will be difficult to communicate effectively so I will leave it at that as per my signature.

Pardon me, but this statement presupposes that the other person is mentally incapacitated due to some degree of spiritual impurity.

6 hours ago, habib e najjaar said:

This was the discussion I was expecting to come up with my questions, but seems it was taken very differently. Perhaps my akhlaaq in communication gave off a wrong message.

No, it was not taken differently, at least as I see it. Please stand your ground and do not try to “paint over” with an unnecessary apology.

10 hours ago, starlight said:

Just like there are physical illnesses there are also diseases of the soul for example lying, back biting, hasd etc and if physical diseases can be hereditary it's possible that the diseases of soul can also be passed from one generation to another like diabetes or asthma or from mother to baby like AIDS. So just like a child who is born with Asthma is sometimes not fit for sports like football so people with certain diseases of soul for example, if someone is not considered trustworthy then he isn't for to be a witness in Shia fiqh. So its quite possible that a person who was conceived as a result of haram act has acquired some defects of soul that make him unfit to hold certain positions like leading a prayer. It might sound unfair but then so was the baby who was born with fetal alcohol syndrome.

There are several narrations from Ahlulbayt(عليه السلام) which tell us that it's not permissible for someone of an illegitimate birth to lead prayer. 

Imam ʿAli that he said: “Do not perform your prayers [behind a prayer leader] who is mentally unstable or one who is from an illegitimate birth. - Wasail us Shia.

Imam Muḥammad al-Bāqir said: “There are five groups of people who are not permitted to be chosen as the leader for a congregational prayer … one of them is a person who was of illegitimate birth - Mun la yahddrul faqih

Here is something which I found very interesting. This will clarify how diseases of soul are passes from generation to generation.

Imām al-Ṣādiq that he said:

والممراز لا يطيب إلى سبعة آباء وقيل اي شئ الممراز” فقال الرجل يكتسب مالا من غير حله

“Al-Mimrāz is not spiritually purified [nor is it removed from a person’s lineage] until seven generations pass.” It was asked of the Imām: “What is al-Mimrāz ?” The Imām replied: “A person who gains illicit wealth [and through this unlawful wealth, marries lawfully however produces a child with wealth which was forbidden] Al-Kafi

@starlight

In addition, there are also narrations that mention a link between sins and hereditary physiological diseases. So various illnesses and disabilities might be related to generational effects of sin, including diabetes and autism. (As an aside, here in the West, people have used similar arguments to support euthanasia of mentally disabled/retarded people, to not mention sinful and impure elements such as thieves, prostitutes, et al.) Since Islam prescribes capital punishment for unbelievers, and also marginalises the offspring of sinful and impure relationships, then one might wonder whether euthanasia of mentally disabled/retarded people might be permissible under Islam, given the probable link between sin and physiological disease, along with the fact that these people also inherit undesirable physiological as well as spiritual traits and thus become a hindrance to Islam and the Islamic order of society. I know that Islam prohibits the suicide of believers, but the offspring of unbelievers might be a different story. Given that I, having been born to a family of unbelievers, have autism and associated bad spiritual traits, should I consider suicide, given that my existence merely adds more impurity to the world, and I have been a rebellious, lazy, and jinni-possessed child since the age of two, when I received my first vaccine? (I have a vivid memory.)

@GD41586

Edited May 8, 2020 by Northwest
Personal

[Guest]

Giving up hope in the mercy of Allah isn't permissible in islam. This is why aborting a baby is not allowed even if the baby has congenital malformations. 

If you consider suicide it would be similar to thinking that God CAN NOT change your life for the better which is shirk because according to islam there is nothing that God cannot do.

Life might be unfair but Allah isn't. Leading  prayers and being a judge is more of a responsibility than privilege. Just like the mentally disabled will be spared from answering about religious obligations and poor won't be held to account for Hajj in the same way Allah has spared those of illegitimate birth from being responsible about other people's namaz. Personally,I look at it as being absolved of a responsibility because Allah doesn't burden a soul more than it can carry. 

Nowhere is it written that someone born to non Muslim parents cannot attain high status. Salman born to zoroastrian parents, Bilal revert born to non believers, these are two of the closest companions of Prophet Muhammad(عليه السلام) and Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

Neither Allah nor Ahlulbayt(عليه السلام) kindness was limited to born Muslims or even reverts. In the time of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) there was a Christian couple who could not have children. They went to Imam for dua and Allah blessed them with a son and later that Christian man died fighting with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) in Karbala! Do you think he was an 'impurity to the world?' 

Just the fact that a 'rebellious child' is here reflecting upon these things is a sign of goodness. 

[Northwest]

1 hour ago, starlight said:

Giving up hope in the mercy of Allah isn't permissible in islam. This is why aborting a baby is not allowed even if the baby has congenital malformations. 

If you consider suicide it would be similar to thinking that God CAN NOT change your life for the better which is shirk because according to islam there is nothing that God cannot do.

Yes, I am familiar with this truth. That is why I presented my statement in the form of a question, not an assertion.

I have long conducted research on Islam both here and elsewhere and am attempting to resolve ambiguities.

1 hour ago, starlight said:

Life might be unfair but Allah isn't. Leading prayers and being a judge is more of a responsibility than privilege. Just like the mentally disabled will be spared from answering about religious obligations and poor won't be held to account for Hajj in the same way Allah has spared those of illegitimate birth from being responsible about other people's namaz. Personally, I look at it as being absolved of a responsibility because Allah doesn't burden a soul more than it can carry.

Ah, that makes sense. Some of the contributors here seemed to imply otherwise. Clarification can certainly facilitate productive communication.

1 hour ago, starlight said:

Nowhere is it written that someone born to non Muslim parents cannot attain high status. Salman born to zoroastrian parents, Bilal revert born to non believers, these are two of the closest companions of Prophet Muhammad(عليه السلام) and Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

Neither Allah nor Ahlulbayt(عليه السلام) kindness was limited to born Muslims or even reverts. In the time of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) there was a Christian couple who could not have children. They went to Imam for dua and Allah blessed them with a son and later that Christian man died fighting with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) in Karbala! Do you think he was an 'impurity to the world?'

I was speaking of unbelievers in relation to physiological and spiritual illnesses that are inherited from birth. I did not have companions of the Prophet in mind.

1 hour ago, starlight said:

Just the fact that a 'rebellious child' is here reflecting upon these things is a sign of goodness.

I appreciate your kindness. Some of the other contributors here, unfortunately, lend to an opposite aspect, or can be interpreted as such.

[realizm]

I feel such ahkam should be related to the `urf of what is considerded adultery country. 

I have many non muslim friends here who had children out of wedlock, and judging by the love, education, social standards they are given, I am convinced they are much lesser prone to feel any social stigma than children born of Muslim parents, who despite being shari`i legitimate, have the worst akhlaq and have made prisons full for the last three decades because of their indulging in criminal behaviour.

It is because the `urf here is that a family should provide good standards and akhlaq to a child, teach him to set the table for dinner,help him with homework and help him get a summer job. On the contrary, performing Nikah, reciting adhan in baby's ears and taking him to the mosque, holds no weight and will not give value to the child except amongst his peers i.e. neighbours, fellow Muslims etc... So ironically his condition might turn into a stigma for him because he does not fit the `urf of the country and might lead him to crime and sins.

[Ashvazdanghe]

20 hours ago, hasanhh said:

l have skipped down to post after only reading the first few posts so far.

My thinking complicates this issue further.

What about foundlings, some orphans and such where the birth status is not known?

Salam we recognize & raise them as legitimate children that in case of adopting by new parents they consider as legitimate children with all of  the rights of other legitimate  children that their parents are known even if we find solid proof that proves that they are illegitimate but it doesn't affect anything about having same rights like legitimate  children .

[Diaz]

Someone asked a question about illegitimate child leading prayers, sayid Musawi gave a really good example. https://www.al-islam.org/ask/is-it-true-that-someone-of-illegitimate-birth-is-not-allowed-to-lead-congregational-prayers-even-if-he-is-otherwise-qualified-to-do-so-and-that-he-would-not-be-a-lover-of-the-ahle-bait-a-if-so-how-is-it-fair-on-the-person-who-did-not-commit-any-sin

Edited May 10, 2020 by Diaz

[Gaius I. Caesar]

Quote

Illegitimate children inherit bad manners, breaking of laws and sins from their parents. For them the ground for sins and crime is more feasible. As compared to others they are more prepared for sins and if they personally get wrong training or if the environment is not good, then it is enough for them that their polluted soul, like sparks beneath the ash become fire and burn their good fortune.

^ This is pretty much the same justification and reasoning for Original Sin in Christianity, except in their case, Adam (عليه السلام) sinned, so therefore all of humanity is impure and sinful. Therefore, they claim that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) came in the human form of Jesus (عليه السلام) and had to sacrifice Himself for humanity to be cleansed and purified of the Original Sin, naudobillah! 

This is very disconcerting to read, this is not a small mistake or a difference of  opinion. We are Muslims, not Christians.

We should never, ever accept or tolerate this kind of thinking. All people as someone said on this thread are born free, innocent and Muslim, regardless of parentage. Again, this is against the Qur'an.

Quote

Since Islam prescribes capital punishment for unbelievers, and also marginalises the offspring of sinful and impure relationships, then one might wonder whether euthanasia of mentally disabled/retarded people might be permissible under Islam, given the probable link between sin and physiological disease, along with the fact that these people also inherit undesirable physiological as well as spiritual traits and thus become a hindrance to Islam and the Islamic order of society. I know that Islam prohibits the suicide of believers, but the offspring of unbelievers might be a different story

No, it never will be, the pre Islamic act burying of daughters was cautioned against and forbidden by the Qur'an (82:8-9) also, (49:13) "O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted." 

If an Islamic society were to euthanize non-Muslims born out of wedlock. It would strain and hinder relations with the many different nations and tribes. It would be especially ignoble and unrighteous if this was done by force. 

"Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely..." (5:32)

A newborn as we know, is the epitome of innocence and sinless; Everyone is born a Muslim, so every time that "Islamic" society euthanizes  a mentally disabled child because their parents were non-Muslim and therefore a potential "hinderace", they stray further and further away from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) They forsaken His Mercy and Generosity over a fear of spiritual impurities.

[Ali bin Hussein]

So direct your face toward the religion, inclining to truth. [Adhere to] the fitrah of Allah upon which He has created [all] people. No change should there be in the creation of Allah . That is the correct religion, but most of the people do not know. 30:30

Allah burdens not a person beyond his scope. He gets reward for that (good) which he has earned, and he is punished for that (evil) which he has earned 2:286

[Ashvazdanghe]

13 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

^ This is pretty much the same justification and reasoning for Original Sin in Christianity, except in their case, Adam (عليه السلام) sinned, so therefore all of humanity is impure and sinful. Therefore, they claim that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) came in the human form of Jesus (عليه السلام) and had to sacrifice Himself for humanity to be cleansed and purified of the Original Sin, naudobillah! 

This is very disconcerting to read, this is not a small mistake or a difference of  opinion. We are Muslims, not Christians.

Salam it's just about that they can't lead prayers & become Marja that needs Justice factor that even majority of  legitimate children don't have such factor but in rest fields specially religious rights they have same right like other legitimate children that they can be head of all Mujtahids as one step before becoming Marja.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Ashvazdanghe