Abstract: Cryonics, the process of preserving a human being for the purpose of reconstructing or reviving it, is a topic that has attracted everyone's attention and explains important questions in the fields of jurisprudence and law. Jurisprudence, there are two views of those in favor and those against regarding the permissibility or non-permissibility of freezing a human being. Those who believe in the permissibility of freezing cite the principle of the obligation to save a human life and treat an illness, the permissibility of using forbidden things in case of emergency, the permissibility of using beneficial changes in creation, citing the principle of Allowed and innocence and verse 32 of Surah Al-Ma'idah. Those who believe in the permissibility of freezing cite the prohibition of suicide, the obligation to respect the dead Muslim, making changes to God's creation, the prohibition of harming oneself and the obligation to ward off possible harm, the prohibition of the patient's actions in a disease connected to death and the rule of Corruption, with the view of those who believe in the permissibility of cryonics being preferable. From an ethical point of view, this method is consistent with the principles of biological ethics, namely “self-respect”, “justice”, “benefit” and “doing no harm”. The consent of the frozen person, the need for treatment and support for prolonging life are among the reasons that morality approves of it. The freezing process is a step in the interest of the frozen person and its goal is not to harm or to provide a solution to help them. The freezing method is a scientific technique and the treatment is not futile and does not contain false hope.