[SHARIAH]: A brother asked me about shariah. Here is an easy-to-digest conclusive summary on my thoughts and questions involved in the text (literal application) v context (progressive approach) discussion: - I want to first highlight some background information. Fiqh is always divided into two parts: ibadaat and muamalaat. Ibaadat (e.g. five pillars) are rights we owe Allah, muamalaat are rights we owe (e.g. marriage, business, social settings, capital punishment etc.) to creation (muslims, non-muslims, animals and environment). BOTH are stipulated by Allah, but TO WHOM they are stipulated to differ. - Secondly, generally ibadaat are transcendent over time and space, i.e. they are NOT context sensitive and can never be changed unless in extreme situations (e.g. in Iceland where its daylight for 6 months - how do you pray there?). Muamalaat, however ARE context sensitive and thus are POSSIBLY dynamic with regards to injunctions mentioned in Quran. - Thirdly, here is the split: are the muamalaat STATICALLY fixed or they AMENABLE. Scholars, obviously, have a spectrum on this issue. Some take the literal command as transcendent over space and time. Some, however, believe in its amenability. This amenability comes down to two things: historical context and maqasid, The question we need to understand is do we extrapolate the literal word OR the context/purpose behind the word when extrapolating them for various times and place. - Fourthly, with the distinction between the textual application v the contextual application, a further question that is probed if we apply the contextual approach is how much can we modify? When is too much flexibility too much? What are the limits of extrapolating by context? You see this is why the textual approach is preferred for its comfortable position in its application. This progressive concern is not there with the contextual approach. You can see how scholars fear and worry about this contextual approach. Sometimes its fear out of piety and sometimes refusing to abandon the textual approach. - Fifthly, if we apply just the textual approach then how can we progress with new advancements either in science/technology and new social structures that exist today? Are we really stuck in a 1400 year old social structure? You can see how some people might find this problematic as it cuts a flexible and dynamic approach to growth and evolution. The concern is dogmatic rigidity here. Now with those five points understood you can see how nuanced this discussion is and requires serious study to reach a sturdy conclusion. Hopefully this will help everyone to research and study further. IsA may Allah help us with a thorough and rich understanding of our deen, ameen.
Posted on: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 16:51:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015