Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T17:48:20.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transformative Vision of Islamic Jurisprudence and the Pursuit of Common Ground for the Social Good in Pluralist Societies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2019

Ezieddin ELMAHJUB
Ezieddin ELMAHJUB*
Affiliation:
Swinburne University of Technology, Australiaeelmahjub@swin.edu.au
Get access

Abstract

Notions of the social good including rights, fairness, and economic efficiency influence our choices of law and policymaking. The discussion on social good is normally a heated one in pluralistic societies with multiple worldviews on the right thing to do. This article brings a novel Islamic perspective on the social good in pluralistic societies. In doing so, it makes and defends three propositions: first, religious notions of the social good, including those derived from the Islamic worldview, should not be excluded from public justifications when making moral and policy choices. There is no good reason for plural/secular societies to reject the benefits of religious presence in public discourse given the overwhelming evidence on religious precepts being a mobilizing force to promote co-existence and social cooperation. Second, Islamic notions of social good can contribute to that end. The article criticizes the common perception of Islamic ethics that views Islamic doctrine as a rigid positivist system which imposes inflexible moral codes limiting the influence of independent human intellect and agency. I show that Islamic notions of the social good are dynamic and adaptable to change. The third part of the article shows that the social good in Islamic doctrine has always been defined with reference to essential human needs, including the promotion of life, intellect, social cooperation, and justice. At their core, Islamic notions of the social good exhibit an overarching deontological orientation towards moral choices. They broadly overlap with comparative and influential frameworks on human flourishing, including the ‘Human Development Paradigm’ and the ‘Capabilities Approach’.

Type
Article
Information
Asian Journal of Comparative Law , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , December 2019 , pp. 305 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © National University of Singapore, 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Lecturer, Swinburne University of Technology. The research for this article was funded by a research fellowship with the Asian Law Institute (ASLI) and the Centre for Asian Legal Studies (CALS) at the National University of Singapore (NUS). The author is grateful to Professor Ismail Albayrak and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and feedback.

References

1. Cohen, Joshua, ‘Moral Pluralism and Political Consensus’, in Copp, David et al. (eds), The Idea of Democracy (Cambridge University Press 1993) 274–275Google Scholar.

2. ‘Scripture’ in this article refers to all written texts that Muslims consider to be sacred when making moral choices. This primarily includes the Qurʾān and also reports of Sunna that are known to be authentic.

3. See eg Sen, Amartya, Development as Freedom (Anchor Books 2000)Google Scholar; Nussbaum, Martha, Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach (Harvard University Press 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4. al-Fāsī, ʿAllāl, Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿa al-Islamiyya wa-Manakibuha [The Objectives of Islamic Shari'a and Their Importance] (Maktabat al-Wahda al-ʿArabiyya 1963) 3–7, 41Google Scholar.

5. Audi, Robert, Religious Commitment and Secular Reason (Cambridge University Press 2000) 169CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6. Rawls, John, Political Liberalism (Columbia University Press 1993) xviii–xixGoogle Scholar.

7. ibid xxi.

8. Habermas, Jurgen, ‘Religion in the Public Sphere’ (2006) 14 European Journal of Philosophy 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9. Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice (rev edn, Harvard University Press 1999) 15Google Scholar.

10. ibid 52.

11. See generally Sandel, Michael, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (2 ed, Cambridge University Press 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12. Rawls, Political Liberalism (n 6).

13. ibid xiv, xviii.

14. ibid xvi (emphasis added).

15. The Qur’ān, 11:118.

16. ibid, 60:8.

17. Rawls, Political Liberalism (n 6) xi.

18. ibid pxlii; Rawls, John, ‘The Idea of an Overlapping Consensus’ (1987) 7 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 1, 8CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In expounding his vision of public reason, Rawls suggests that ‘given the fact of pluralism, there is, I think, no better practicable alternative than to limit ourselves to the shared methods of, and the public knowledge available to, common sense, and the procedures and conclusions of science when these are not controversial.’

19. Rawls, Political Liberalism (n 6) 8.

20. ibid 10.

21. Jurgen Habermas et al, ‘The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article (1964)’ (1974) New German Critique 49, 50.

22. Habermas, ‘Religion in the Public Sphere’ (n 8) 9.

23. ibid 10.

24. ibid.

25. ibid 11.

26. ibid.

27. Jamal, Arif A, ‘Addressing Religious Plurality: A Consideration of Four Models’ (2013) 2 Oxford Journal of Law and Religion 330, 348CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28. Raḥmān, Fazlur, Islamic Methodology in History (Central Institute of Islamic Research 1965) 17Google Scholar.

29. ibid.

30. Zahra, Muhammed Abū, Usūl al-fiqh [The Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence] (Dār al-Fikr al-ʿArabī 2006) 105Google Scholar.

31. Kamali, Mohammad Hashim, Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence (Pelanduk Publications 1989) 79Google Scholar.

32. Wahba al-Zuḥili, Uṣūl al-fiqh al-islāmī [The Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence] (Dār al-Fikr 1986) 460 et seq.

33. Al-Amidi, , al-Ihkām fi Usūl al-Ahkām [The Comprehensive Guide on Legal Rules] (Dār al-Sumai’ī 2003) 262Google Scholar.

34. al-Zarqa, Mustafa, al-Madkhal al-Fiqhi al-ʿāl [A General Introduction to Islamic Jurisprudence] (Dār al-Qalam 1998) 78Google Scholar.

35. Kamali, Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence (n 31) 248.

36. Zidan, Abd al-karim, al-Wajīz fi Usūl al-Fiqh [The Concise Summary of the Principles of Jurisprudence] (Mu'assasat Qurtaba 1976) 196Google Scholar.

37. The Qur’ān, 5:90.

38. See generally Emon, Anver M, ‘Natural Law and Natural Rights in Islamic Law’ (2004–2005) 20 Journal of Law and Religion 351, 354CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39. Raḥmān, Islamic Methodology in History (n 28) 71.

40. ʿAlī ibn Aḥmad (Ibn Ḥazm), al-Iḥkām fī uṣūl al-aḥkām [The Comprehensive Guide on Legal Rules] (Muḥammad Aḥmad ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ed, Maktabat ʿĀtif 1978).

41. Fakhry, Majid, A History of Islamic Philosophy (Columbia University Press 1983) 47Google Scholar.

42. Emon, ‘Natural Law and Natural Rights in Islamic Law’ (n 38) 356.

43. ibid.

44. ibid.

45. Esposito, John L, The Oxford History of Islam (Oxford University Press 2000) 281Google Scholar.

46. ʿAbd al-Malik bin ʿAbdallāh al-Juwaynī, al-Burhān fī usụ̄l al-fiqh [The Proof in the Principles of Jurisprudence], vol 2 (Salah bin Muhammad ʿAwida ed, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya 1997) 1–10.

47. Hallaq, Wael, An Introduction to Islamic Law (Cambridge University Press 2009) 15CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48. Kerr, Malcolm, Islamic Reform: The Political and Legal Theories of Muhammad ‘Abduh and Rashid Rida (University of California Press 1966) 107 et seqGoogle Scholar.

49. Muhammad al-Ṭāhir ibn ʿĀshūr, Treatise on Maqāṣid Al-Shari'ah (Mohamed El-Mesawi tr, The International Institute of Islamic Thought 2006) 63.

50. ibid 81–85.

51. ʿIzz al-Dīn ibn ʿAbd al-Salām, Qawāʿid al-aḥkām fī maṣāliḥ al-anām [The Rules of Lawmaking in the Pursuit of the Common Good] (Ṭāhā ʿAbd al-Raʾūf Saʿd ed, Maktabat al-Kulliyyāt al-Azhariyya 1991) 10.

52. Yūsuf al-Qaraḍāwī, al-Siyyāsa al-Sharʿiyya [Shari'a-based Policy] (Maktabat Wahba 2011) 103.

53. ʿAllāl al-Fāsī, Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿa al-Islamiyya (n 4) 3–7, 41.

54. Opwis, Felicitas, Maṣlaḥa and the Purpose of the Law (Brill 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55. Abū Hamid Al-Ghazālī, al-Mustaṣfā [The Purified Book of Legal Theory], vol 2 (Ḥamza bin Zuhayr Ḥāfiẓ ed, Sharikat al-Madīna al-Munawwara lil-Ṭibāʿa) 481.

56. ibid.

57. Hallaq, Wael, A History of Islamic Law and Legal Theories (Cambridge University Press 1997) 67CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58. Ibn ʿĀshūr, Maqāṣid (n 49) 14 et seq.

59. Al-Ghazālī, al-Mustaṣfā (n 55) 481.

60. Ibn ʿĀshūr, Maqāṣid (n 49) 56.

61. Muhammad Abū Zahra, Tanzīm al-Islām lil-Mujtamaʿ [An Islamic-based Structure of Society] (Dār al-Fikr al-ʿArabi) 57.

62. Ahmed Al-Raysuni, Nazariyyat al-Maqāṣid ‘ind al-Imam al-Shatibi [Imam al-Shatibi's Theory of the Objectives of Islamic Law] (The International Institute of Islamic Thought 1995) 229–240.

63. ibid.

64. Auda, Jasser, Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿa as Philosophy of Islamic Law: A Systems Approach (The International Institute of Islamic Thought 1995) 90Google Scholar.

65. See eg ibid.

66. ibid 52.

67. ibid 6.

68. The Qur’ān, 2:256.

69. Jamalu al-Din ʿAṭiyya, Naḥwa Tafʿil Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿa [Activating the Objectives of Islamic Law] (The International Institute of Islamic Thought 1995) 98.

70. The Qur’ān, 57:27.

71. Jamalu al-Din ʿAṭiyya, Naḥwa Tafʿil Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿa (n 69) 98.

72. Opwis, Maṣlaḥa and the Purpose of the Law (n 54) 136.

73. Al-Ghazālī, al-Mustaṣfā, (n 55) 477 et seq.

74. ibid 488.

75. Shihāb al-Dīn al-Qarāfī, al-Dhakhīra [The Stored Treasure (of Jurisprudence)] (Dār al-Gharb al-islāmī 1994) 151.

76. There is no evidence showing that the companions of the Prophet considered social good-based analysis of emerging situations as prohibited bidʿa (forbidden innovation in matters of religion). The prohibition on bidʿa is based on a famous reported saying of the Prophet warning Muslims against creating novel religious norms that do not have support in the Qur’ān and Sunna. However, the majority of jurists narrowed the scope of bidʿa to innovations that lead to corrupt behaviour (bidʿa madhmūma), while permitting innovations that benefit the community (bidʿa ḥasana). It is highly likely that the companions of the Prophet treated innovation that led to making new rules advancing the social good of the community as bidʿa ḥasana that is not included in the Sunna ban against innovation in religion. For more on the classifications of bidʿa and its scope, see ʿIzz al-Dīn ibn ʿAbd al-Salām, Qawāʿid al-aḥkām (n 51).

77. Shihāb al-Dīn al-Qarāfī, Sharḥ Tanqīḥ al-fuṣūl [Explaining the Principles of Jurisprudence] (Dār al-Fikr 2004) 351.

78. Al-Shāṭibī, al-Iʿtiṣām [The Refuge], vol 3 (Maktabat al-Tawhīd) 319.

79. Al-Qaraḍāwī , al-Siyyāsa (n 52) 103 et seq.

80. Al-Zarqa, al-Madkhal al-Fiqhi al-A'am (n 34) 114.

81. Muhammad Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, al-Mahsul fi 'Ilm al-Usul [The Harvest in the Science of Legal Principles] (Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya 1988) 194.

82. Bentham, Jeremy, An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (Batoche Books 2000)Google Scholar.

83. Kerr, Islamic Reform (n 48) 187–208.

84. ibid.

85. Abū Zahra, Tanzīm al-Islām lil-Mujtamaʿ (n 61) 54–55.

86. ibid 55–56.

87. Abd al-Wahhāb Khallāf, Maṣādir al-tashrīʿ al-islāmī fīmā lā naṣṣ fīh [The Sources of Legislation in Textually Unqualified Situations] (Dār al-Qalam 1993) 92.

88. Muhammed Sa’īd al-Būti, Dawābit al-maslaha fi al-shari'a al-islamiyya (PhD Thesis, Al-Azhar University 1965) 23–60.

89. Ibn ʿĀshūr, Maqāṣid (n 49) 98.

90. Abū Zahra, Tanzīm al-Islām lil-Mujtamaʿ (n 61) 28.

91. The Qurʾān, 59:7.

92. Ya‘qub Abu Yusuf, al-Kharaj [Taxes] (al-Maktaba al-Amiriyyah 1886) 14.

93. Al-Ghazālī, al-Mustaṣfā (n 55) 489.

94. ibid 490.

95. cf Emon, ‘Natural Law and Natural Rights in Islamic Law’ (n 38) 374.

96. The Qur’ān, 2:256.

97. ibid 5:2.

98. Sen, Development as Freedom (n 3) 5, 63; Haq, Mahbub ul, Reflections on Human Development (Oxford University Press 1995) 4, 15Google Scholar.

99. United Nations Development Program, ‘Human Development Report 1990’ (United Nations 1990), 10 <http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr1990> accessed 26 Sep 2019.

100. ibid 10.

101. ibid.

102. Ibn ʿĀshūr, Maqāṣid (n 49) 65, 302.

103. Nussbaum, Creating Capabilities (n 3) 32–35.

104. ibid.

105. ibid.

106. ibid.

107. Yūsuf al-Qaraḍāwī, al-Takaful al-Ijtimaʿi fi daw’ al-Shari'a al-Islamiyya [Social Cooperation in Light of Islamic Shari'a] (Maktabat Wahba 2009) 7–40.

108. Nussbaum, Creating Capabilities (n 3) 33–34.