Hubbry Logo
AhkamAhkamMain
Open search
Ahkam
Community hub
Ahkam
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Ahkam
Ahkam
Ahkam
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Part of a series on
Principles of
Islamic jurisprudence
(Usul al-Fiqh)
Fiqh
Ahkam
Legal vocations and titles

Ahkam (Arabic: أحكام, romanized: aḥkām, lit. 'rulings', plural of ḥukm, حُكْم) is an Islamic term with several meanings. In the Quran, the word hukm is variously used to mean arbitration, judgement, authority, or God's will. In the early Islamic period, the Kharijites gave it political connotations by declaring that they accept only the hukm of God (حُكْمُ اللّهِ). The word acquired new meanings in the course of Islamic history, being used to refer to worldly executive power or to a court decision.[1]

Ahkam commonly refers to specific Quranic rules, or to the legal rulings/judgements/decisions derived using the methodology of fiqh.[1] Sharia rulings fall into one of five categories known as "the five decisions" (al-aḥkām al-khamsa): mandatory (farḍ or wājib), recommended (mandūb or mustaḥabb), neutral/permissible (mubāḥ), disliked (makrūh), and forbidden (ḥarām).[2] [Note 1]

Five ruling types

[edit]

Sharia rulings fall into one of five categories known as “the five rulings” (الأحكام الخمسة, al-aḥkām al-khamsa):[2]

  1. farḍ/wājib (واجب / فرض) – compulsory, obligatory
  2. mustaḥabb/mandūb (مستحب) – recommended
  3. mubāḥ (مباح) – neutral, not involving God's judgment
  4. makrūh (مكروه) – disliked, reprehensible
  5. ḥarām/maḥzūr (محظور / حرام) – forbidden

It is a sin or a crime to perform a forbidden action or not to perform a mandatory action.[2] Reprehensible acts should be avoided, but they are not considered to be sinful or punishable in court.[2][4] Avoiding reprehensible acts and performing recommended acts is held to be subject of reward in the afterlife, while allowed actions entail no judgement from God.[2][4] Jurists disagree on whether the term ḥalāl covers the first three or the first four categories.[2] The legal and moral verdict depends on whether the action is committed out of necessity (ḍarūra).[2]

Examples of each ruling

[edit]

General considerations

[edit]

The ḥukm shar‘ī (aḥkām) in its literal sense carries the meaning of a rule of Islamic law. Thus aḥkām (rules) is the plural form of ḥukm (rule), which means rule, command, the absolute, order, judgment, injunction, prescription, and decree. This rule could be a rule of any kind; it is to command one to delegate an order to another whether approval or disapproval. You could say that the moon is rising or the moon is not rising, or that fire burns.[5] Technically, it is considered a rule of Islamic law. Āmidī (d. 631/1234) defines adillah as the science of the proofs of fiqh and the indications that they provide with regard to the aḥkām of the sharī‘ah.[5] The ḥukm shar‘ī consists of four fundamental elements. These elements are: the Ḥākim (Lawgiver), the maḥkūm alayh (the subject), the maḥkūm fīh (the act of the mukallaf), and the ḥukm (ruling).[5]

Emergency conditions

[edit]

Religious precepts may be relaxed under certain extraordinary conditions. For example, although Muslims are required to fast during Ramadan, it is recommended for an ill man to break his fast if fasting will worsen his illness.

Fatwa

[edit]

Ahkam are similar to, but not the same as, a fatwa,[6] which is a legal opinion or ruling issued by a qualified Islamic scholar (mufti) in response to a specific question or issue posed by an individual or community. Fatwas are based on the scholar's interpretation of Islamic sources and jurisprudential principles.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Ahkam

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

Ahkam (: أَحْكَام, plural of ḥukm, meaning "judgment" or "ruling") constitute the body of legal prescriptions and injunctions in Islamic that regulate the conduct of accountable individuals (mukallafīn), derived through systematic interpretation of primary sources including the , the , scholarly consensus (ijmāʿ), and analogical deduction (qiyās). These rulings encompass directives for (ʿibādāt), interpersonal transactions (muʿāmalāt), family matters, and penal sanctions, forming the practical framework of , or Islamic jurisprudence. Ahkam are broadly divided into taklīfī rulings, which impose obligations on human actions—classified as wājib (obligatory), mandūb (recommended), mubāḥ (permissible), makrūh (reprehensible), or ḥarām (forbidden)—and waḍʿī rulings, which declaratively address validity, causation, conditions, and exemptions without direct obligation. This categorization enables precise application across diverse contexts, with taklīfī ahkam prioritizing moral and legal accountability rooted in divine intent. The derivation of ahkam relies on uṣūl al-fiqh, the methodological principles for extracting rulings from revelatory texts, ensuring fidelity to scriptural evidence over speculative or culturally influenced interpretations. While ahkam provide comprehensive guidance for societal order and individual piety, divergences among jurisprudential schools (madhāhib) arise in secondary applications, reflecting interpretive pluralism within bounded textual constraints.

Etymology and Core Concept

Linguistic and Historical Origins

The term ahkām (أَحْكَام) constitutes the intensive plural of ḥukm (حُكْم), stemming from the Semitic triliteral root ḥ-k-m (ح-ك-م), which fundamentally denotes the act of rendering judgment, exercising restraint, or establishing governance through decisive authority. This root encapsulates connotations of wisdom in adjudication and the prevention of disorder, as evidenced in classical Arabic lexicography where ḥukm aligns with issuing decrees (al-qadāʾ) or verdicts that bind parties. In pre-Islamic Arabic poetry and oratory, derivatives of ḥ-k-m appeared in contexts of tribal arbitration and equitable resolution of disputes, reflecting a cultural emphasis on authoritative mediation to maintain social order. Within the Quranic corpus, the root ḥ-k-m manifests 210 times across 13 morphological forms, primarily signifying divine , prophetic , or God's unassailable (ḥikma), as in verses prescribing (ḥakama) between truth and falsehood (e.g., Quran 4:105). Here, ḥukm transcends mere human ruling to embody God's sovereign will, often contrasted with fallible personal opinions (ahwāʾ), thereby laying the terminological foundation for later juristic applications. Post-revelation, during the Prophet Muhammad's era in the 7th century CE, ahkām began denoting specific legal prescriptions derived from revelation, evolving from prophetic decisions into systematized norms amid the Medinan community's expansion. Historically, the doctrinal crystallization of ahkām as a category in Islamic (uṣūl al-fiqh) emerged in the 8th-9th centuries CE, amid the compilation of prophetic traditions (ḥadīth) and the interpretive efforts of early scholars like Mālik ibn Anas (d. 795 CE), who integrated Quranic imperatives with customary practices (ʿamal ahl al-Madīna). This period marked a shift from fluid, revelation-driven rulings to formalized extraction methods, influenced by encounters with Byzantine and Sassanid legal traditions, though prioritizing revelatory primacy to avert anthropocentric distortions. By the time of systematizers like al-Shāfiʿī (d. 820 CE), ahkām encapsulated the spectrum of obligatory, recommended, and prohibitive divine commands, distinguishing Islamic norms from pre-Islamic ḥukm by their purported universality and immutability.

Definition in Islamic Jurisprudence

In Islamic jurisprudence, known as usul al-fiqh, ahkam (plural of hukm shar'i) refers to the divine legal rulings that address the actions of accountable persons (mukallafun), who are individuals who have reached puberty and possess sound intellect. These rulings prescribe the moral and legal valuation of human conduct, classifying acts as obligatory (wajib), recommended (mandub), permissible (mubah), discouraged (makruh), or forbidden (haram). Derived from primary sources such as the Quran and Sunnah, ahkam form the practical framework of Sharia, distinguishing it from doctrinal beliefs (aqaid). The core definition of hukm shar'i, as articulated by classical scholars of usul, is "the address of the Lawgiver () pertaining to the actions of the servants, in terms of demand (taklif), option, or enactment (wad')." This encompasses both prescriptive rulings (ahkam taklifiyyah), which impose obligations or permissions on human actions, and declaratory rulings (ahkam wadi'iyyah), which establish facts, causes, or conditions without direct obligation, such as the definition of ritual purity. The prescriptive category is primary in , guiding ethical and legal behavior through reward, punishment, or indifference. Fiqh, the science of , is fundamentally the knowledge and extraction of these ahkam from revelatory texts via methodological principles. Unlike general commands or judgments, ahkam shar'iyyah are specifically tied to divine legislation, enforceable in the hereafter and, where applicable, in worldly courts through or ta'zir penalties. This system ensures actions align with human capacity, as does not burden beyond it ( 2:286).

Classification of Rulings

The Five Primary Categories (Al-Ahkam al-Khamsa)

In , al-ahkam al-khamsa represent the five primary categories into which all human actions are classified based on their legal and ethical status under . These categories—wajib, mandub, , , and —originate from interpretations of the and , providing a structured framework for determining , , neutrality, discouragement, or . This system ensures that every conceivable act falls into one category, facilitating practical guidance for believers while emphasizing accountability in the hereafter. The categories reflect a deontic logic where divine commands and prohibitions dictate moral valence, with wajib actions demanding compliance for salvation, and haram acts entailing severe repercussions if undertaken. Jurists like Ibn Qudamah in Rawdat al-Nazir articulate these as encompassing compulsory duties, supererogatory acts, indifferent matters, reprehensible behaviors, and outright bans, respectively.
CategoryArabic Term(s)Definition and ExamplesConsequences of Action/Inaction
ObligatoryWajib/FardMandatory acts explicitly commanded by Allah, such as performing the five daily prayers, fasting in Ramadan, paying zakah, and undertaking Hajj if able.Reward for fulfillment; punishment for deliberate neglect.
RecommendedMandub/MustahabbEncouraged acts not required but rewarded, including voluntary night prayers (Qiyam al-Layl), optional Sunnah prayers, and fasting three days per month.Reward for performance; no sin for omission.
PermissibleMubahNeutral acts neither encouraged nor forbidden, like eating permissible foods, engaging in trade, or traveling for non-religious purposes; context may elevate them to obligatory or prohibited.Neither reward nor punishment.
DislikedMakruhDiscouraged acts permissible but frowned upon, such as eating garlic before prayer or using the left hand for eating/giving; avoidance is praiseworthy.No punishment for commission; reward for avoidance.
ForbiddenHaramStrictly prohibited acts, including adultery, consuming alcohol, usury (riba), and shaving the beard without necessity.Sin and punishment for commission; reward for avoidance.
These classifications are not rigid absolutes but allow for contextual nuances across jurisprudential schools, though the core delineations remain consistent in Sunni and Shia traditions as derived from revelatory texts. The system prioritizes empirical adherence to textual imperatives over subjective interpretations, underscoring causal links between actions and .

Subdivisions and Nuances Within Categories

Within the category of obligatory rulings (fard or wajib), jurists distinguish between fard al-ayn and fard al-kifaya. Fard al-ayn imposes a personal duty on every capable individual Muslim, such as performing the five daily prayers or , with failure incurring personal if neglected without excuse. In contrast, fard al-kifaya entails a communal obligation sufficient if fulfilled by a qualified subset of the community, relieving others of liability; examples include leading funeral prayers or scholarly pursuits like study to meet societal needs. Some schools, particularly Hanafi, further nuance obligatory rulings by evidence strength: derives from definitive texts (e.g., or mutawatir ), rendering denial disbelief, while wajib stems from probable evidences (ahad ), where denial is sinful but not kufr. Recommended actions (mandub, mustahabb, or sunnah) subdivide into emphasized and non-emphasized types, reflecting the Prophet Muhammad's consistency in practice. Sunnah mu'akkadah comprises acts he performed regularly and urged, such as the two rakats before Fajr prayer or four before Zuhr; omission is blameworthy and may approach sin in stricter views, though no fixed punishment applies. Sunnah ghayr mu'akkadah includes less consistent prophetic practices, like four rakats before Asr; performing yields reward, but skipping incurs no sin. These distinctions prioritize emulation of prophetic example, with mu'akkadah carrying greater normative weight across Sunni schools. Permissible acts (mubah) lack inherent subdivisions but admit nuances based on context or intention: neutral in themselves (e.g., eating permissible food without excess), they may elevate to mandub via good intent or degrade to if wasteful, underscoring fiqh's emphasis on situational over absolute stasis. Disliked rulings (makruh) bifurcate primarily in Hanafi and Maliki schools into tahrimi and tanzihi. tahrimi approaches , established by speculative evidence (e.g., weak ), rendering persistence sinful akin to wajib omission, as in consuming certain without clear Quranic ban. tanzihi involves mild aversion without sin, rewarded only upon avoidance, such as optional divorce pronouncements; Shafi'i and Hanbali traditions often collapse these into a single category, treating as non-punishable but discouraged. Forbidden acts () subdivide into intrinsic (li-dhatihi, e.g., , inherently evil) and extrinsic (li-ghayrihi, e.g., via exploitative contracts), with the former universally punitive and the latter contextually so; both demand avoidance, but nuances affect ancillary permissions like testifying against haram. School-specific variances persist, such as Hanafi allowance for certain tahrimi where evidence equivocal, prioritizing textual probability over consensus uniformity.

Derivation and Sources

Primary Revelatory Sources

The Quran, as the verbatim revelation from Allah to the Prophet Muhammad over approximately 23 years (610–632 CE), constitutes the foundational and most authoritative source for deriving ahkam in Islamic jurisprudence. It contains explicit legal injunctions, termed ayat al-ahkam, numbering around 500 verses that address matters such as worship (ibadat), transactions (mu'amalat), family law, and penal sanctions (hudud), including prohibitions on usury (Quran 2:275–279), requirements for prayer and zakat (Quran 2:43, 2:110), and evidentiary rules for contracts (Quran 2:282). These rulings are considered definitive (qat'i) when unambiguous in wording and meaning, binding all Muslims without alteration, as the text has been preserved through mass transmission (tawatur) since its compilation under Caliph Uthman (r. 644–656 CE). Jurists extract ahkam through linguistic analysis (tafsir bi-al-ma'thur) and rational inference, prioritizing its supremacy over all other sources, as affirmed in verses enjoining direct recourse to divine revelation (Quran 75:19). The Sunnah, encompassing the Prophet Muhammad's sayings (aqwal), actions (af'al), and tacit approvals (taqrir), serves as the secondary revelatory source, clarifying, detailing, and exemplifying Quranic injunctions. Authenticated through rigorous chains of transmission (isnad) and content scrutiny (matn), it includes hadiths classified by reliability, with sahih (sound) collections like those of al-Bukhari (d. 870 CE) and Muslim (d. 875 CE) containing over 7,000 narrations each deemed mutawatir or ahad in strength. The Sunnah's authority derives from Quranic mandates to obey the Prophet (Quran 4:59, 59:7), establishing practices such as the five daily prayers' modalities (e.g., Hadith: "Pray as you have seen me praying" – Sahih al-Bukhari 631) and hudud penalties like stoning for adultery, absent explicit Quranic detail but inferred from prophetic precedent. In usul al-fiqh, Sunnah rulings supersede personal opinion if they abrogate (naskh) or specify (takhsis) Quranic generalities, ensuring comprehensive application across obligatory (fard), recommended (mandub), and other categories of ahkam. Disagreements arise over hadith authenticity, with Sunni schools relying on prophetic exclusivity while Shia traditions incorporate Imamic narrations as extensions of revelatory guidance.

Methodological Tools for Extraction

The methodological tools for extracting ahkam from the primary revelatory sources—Qur'an and Sunnah—are systematized in usul al-fiqh, the principles of Islamic jurisprudence, which equip qualified scholars (mujtahids) with structured methods for interpretation and deduction during ijtihad. These tools encompass transmitted proofs like ijma' (scholarly consensus) and rational extensions such as qiyas (analogy), alongside supplementary principles including istihsan (juristic preference), istislah (consideration of public interest), and 'urf (custom). They ensure rulings align with divine intent while addressing emergent circumstances, prioritizing textual fidelity over unsubstantiated opinion. Ijma', ranked as the third primary source after Qur'an and , constitutes the unanimous agreement of mujtahids from a given era on a legal ruling, rendering it binding and definitive even for matters silent in . This consensus elevates speculative evidence to certainty, as exemplified by the Sahabah's agreement on compiling the Qur'an into a single under in 632 CE and standardizing it under around 650 CE. Conditions for validity include universality among qualified scholars, absence of dissent, and basis in or rational proof; once established, it precludes contradictory . Qiyas extends an established ruling (hukm) from an original case (asl) to a subsidiary one (far') via a shared effective cause ('illah), such as applying the prohibition of wine to other intoxicants like drugs based on the common 'illah of intoxication. Valid qiyas demands a Shar'i origin for the asl, a discernible and relevant 'illah (e.g., evident from text rather than purely speculative), and alignment with broader Sharia objectives; it cannot override explicit texts (nass). Varieties include qiyas al-musawi (equal cases) and qiyas al-awla (stronger analogy), historically pivotal in rulings like deeming all parental disrespect impermissible. All major Sunni schools accept qiyas, though Shi'a emphasize intellect ('aql) over it in some derivations. Supplementary tools provide equitable adjustments: , endorsed primarily by Hanafis, permits overriding strict with a preferable ruling grounded in superior evidence, necessity, or equity, as in validating perpetual endowments () despite analogous restrictions on perpetuity in contracts. Istislah (or masalih mursalah), favored by Malikis, derives rulings from unlegislated public benefits that safeguard Sharia's essentials—religion, life, progeny, wealth, and intellect—provided they contradict no definitive text, such as Caliph Umar's 7th-century suspension of on horse exports to prevent economic harm. 'Urf, recurrent local customs not opposing Sharia, qualifies general texts, like determining maintenance amounts in contracts via prevailing norms. These principles, while facilitating adaptability, remain subordinate to primary sources and vary in acceptance across schools, with Shafi'is restricting to ijma' and .

Practical Application

Illustrative Examples by Category

Obligatory (Fard or Wajib): These rulings require performance, with punishment for omission in the hereafter and, in some cases, worldly penalties. Canonical examples include the five daily ritual prayers (), established through Quranic injunctions like "Establish prayer" in Surah Al-Baqarah 2:43 and prophetic traditions detailing their times and forms. Another is , the 2.5% almsgiving on eligible wealth held for one lunar year, derived from verses such as Surah At-Tawbah 9:60 specifying recipients. similarly qualifies, as commanded in Surah Al-Baqarah 2:183 for able-bodied adults, with exemptions for travelers or the ill. pilgrimage once in a lifetime for those with means is obligatory per Surah Al-Imran 3:97. Hanafi scholars distinguish wajib (e.g., certain expiations) as nearly obligatory but lacking prophetic specification, yet all schools enforce these as binding duties. Recommended (Mandub or Mustahabb): Such acts yield reward if performed but no sin if omitted. Supererogatory prayers, like the two rak'ahs before Fajr or Witr after Isha, exemplify this, based on hadiths such as the Prophet's practice recorded in Sahih Bukhari. Voluntary fasting on Mondays and Thursdays, or the six days of Shawwal, also falls here, supported by narrations in Sahih Muslim where the Prophet stated rewards for extra devotion. Sadaqah beyond zakat, such as feeding the poor without obligation, is encouraged via general Quranic praises of charity in Surah Al-Baqarah 2:261-262. Across madhhabs, these emphasize emulation of prophetic sunnah without compulsion. Permissible (Mubah): Neutral acts carry neither reward nor punishment, allowing free choice. Consuming foods like permissible meats or grains, absent excess, qualifies, as the default in permits enjoyment of pure provisions per 5:88. Entering lawful contracts, such as buying permissible goods or non-prohibited travel, exemplifies this, provided no elements like intrude. Sleeping or basic self-maintenance, when not obligatory or excessive, remains , reflecting Sharia's baseline allowance for human needs. Jurists note mubah can shift to other categories by context, but inherently lacks moral weight. Disliked (Makruh): These warrant avoidance for reward, but commission incurs no . Eating or onions before communal is , as the advised against it in a in to preserve pleasantness. Initiating without grave cause is disliked in major schools, drawing from prophetic disapproval in , though permissible if necessary. Minor preferences, like undue extravagance in lawful attire or choosing inferior over superior options without reason, illustrate tanzihi (mildly disliked). Schools differentiate tahrimi (near-prohibited, with blame) from tanzihi, but consensus holds avoidance as praiseworthy. Prohibited (Haram): Acts forbidden with sin for commission and potential penalties. Consuming intoxicants like alcohol is , per explicit Quranic ban in 5:90-91 linking it to Satan's work. () and false accusation thereof carry severe prohibitions and punishments under An-Nur 24:2-4. () in transactions is outlawed by Al-Baqarah 2:275-279, equating it to war against . Theft merits hand amputation for quantified values in certain conditions, as in 5:38. All madhhabs uphold these as invariant, with evidentiary thresholds for enforcement.

Guiding Principles for Implementation

The implementation of ahkam in Islamic relies on practical principles (usul al-amaliyyah) that guide the application of rulings when primary sources yield or when situational factors arise, ensuring adherence to Shari'ah without undue . These principles, developed through scholarly consensus and derived from Qur'anic injunctions and prophetic traditions, prioritize , ease, and continuity to facilitate practical observance. They apply across categories of rulings, from obligatory acts like to permissible transactions, emphasizing that deviation from established norms requires explicit evidence. A foundational maxim is that certainty (yaqin) is not overruled by doubt (shakk), meaning an established permissible or pure state persists unless contradicted by definitive proof; for instance, if ritual purity is confirmed before an act of , mere suspicion of impurity afterward does not invalidate it without revealing otherwise. This , rooted in rational avoidance of perpetual disruption and supported by prophetic guidance against obsessive , prevents in daily application and is invoked in scenarios like completing ablution amid unfounded misgivings. Similarly, the of continuity (istishab) upholds a prior legal status—such as ongoing or ritual validity—until of change emerges, providing stability in mu'amalat (transactions) and ibadat (). Ease and removal of hardship (taysir al-mashaqqah) form another core guideline, drawn from Qur'an 2:185 ("Allah intends for you ease, and does not intend for you hardship") and extended to interpretive flexibility where strict application would cause undue burden without violating essentials; scholars apply this to permit approximations in timings during travel or exemptions in for the ill, provided core obligations remain intact. (niyyah) underpins validity, particularly for devotional acts, as per the : "Actions are [judged] by intentions, and every person will have what they intended," requiring conscious resolve before commencement to distinguish from habit. Custom ('urf), when consonant with Shari'ah, influences implementation in non-worship matters, such as contractual norms varying by region, allowing jurists to validate local practices absent textual prohibition. These principles operate within the bounds of fulfilling arkan (pillars) and shurut (conditions) specific to each hukm—for example, sequential recitation and in salah—ensuring comprehensive yet pragmatic observance. Non-mujtahids follow qualified scholars' derivations via to apply them correctly, avoiding personal conjecture that could nullify rulings. Empirical application in historical caliphates, such as calibrated tax enforcements under ibn al-Khattab, demonstrates their role in balancing textual fidelity with societal function.

Exceptions and Contextual Adjustments

Necessity and Emergency Overrides (Darura)

In Islamic jurisprudence, darūra (necessity) denotes a compelling circumstance that temporarily renders prohibited acts permissible to safeguard the five essential objectives of the Sharīʿah (maqāṣid al-sharīʿah): religion (dīn), life (nafs), intellect (ʿaql), lineage (nasl), and property (māl). This principle, formalized in the maxim "al-darūrāt tubīḥ al-maḥzūrāt" (necessities render the prohibited permissible), addresses extreme hardship where harm to these fundamentals is imminent and unavoidable absent intervention. It derives evidentiary support from Qurʾānic texts emphasizing relief from undue burden, such as exemptions for the ill or travelers from ritual fasting (Qurʾān 2:184–185) and permissions to consume otherwise forbidden foods under duress (Qurʾān 2:173, 5:3). Prophetic traditions further reinforce prioritization of life preservation, as in reports permitting aid to the endangered even at minor normative costs (e.g., Sahīh al-Bukhārī, hadīth no. 39). Application of darūra demands fulfillment of rigorous conditions to prevent abuse: the hardship must be genuine, certain or highly probable, and objectively verifiable; no permissible alternative can exist; the prohibited act must be proportionate, limited strictly to averting the threat; efficacy must carry high probability (per Hanafīs) or certainty (per Shāfiʿīs); expert validation, such as from qualified physicians in medical cases, is typically required; and the intervention must not inflict equal or greater , particularly to others' . These constraints align with broader objectives of averting (dafʿ al-ḍarar) and public welfare (maṣlaḥah mursalah), extending darūra beyond individuals to communal threats like widespread or socio-political pressures (e.g., restrictions endangering livelihoods). Post-emergency resumption of prohibitions is mandatory, underscoring darūra as a concession rather than a license for . Illustrative cases include consuming carrion, , or to prevent by , as explicitly sanctioned (Qurʾān 2:173); administering alcohol-based medications or transfusions when curative certainty exists and substitutes fail, as in fatwas from Majlis-e-Sharʿī (2000, Fatwa no. 12); or exposing the ʿawrah (private parts) for essential medical examination without alternatives. In extremis, acts like limited of the deceased or amputating limbs to save life have been permitted by major schools, though with disputes (e.g., Hanafīs restricting to non-mutilated bodies). Limitations preclude darūra from sanctioning irremediable violations of absolute rights, such as or , or overriding higher-ranked necessities (e.g., over ) without universal benefit, as argued by al-Ghazālī. It distinguishes from lesser ḥājah (need), which relaxes but does not fully suspend prohibitions, and (widespread affliction), applicable to collective but not individual overrides. Scholarly variances include scope debates—al-Shāṭibī viewing it as inherent to Sharīʿah objectives versus narrower personalist interpretations—and modern extensions to , urging jurist-expert collaboration to assess probability in novel therapies. Misapplication risks undermining normative structure, prompting calls for case-specific ijtihād grounded in textual fidelity.

Variations Across Sunni and Shia Schools

Both Sunni and Shia schools of recognize the five primary categories of ahkam (al-ahkam al-khamsa)—wajib/ (obligatory), mandub/ (recommended), (permissible), (disliked), and (forbidden)—as the foundational framework for classifying human actions under . However, variations emerge primarily from divergent usul al-fiqh (principles of ), with Sunni schools relying on , , ijmaʿ (consensus), and (analogy), while the Jaʿfari school (predominant in Twelver Shia) incorporates narrations from the Imams, ijmaʿ of the Imams, and ʿaql (reason) as independent proofs. These methodological differences result in distinct classifications for specific acts, even when the categorical structure remains consistent. Within Sunni schools, subtle variations exist in subdividing the obligatory category. The distinguishes (obligations established by definitive Quranic or mutawatir evidence, denial of which constitutes disbelief) from wajib (obligations based on or less definitive evidence, denial of which is sinful but not kufr), applying this to acts like reciting certain verses in . In contrast, the Maliki, Shafiʿi, and Hanbali schools do not maintain this distinction, treating all clear obligations as without probabilistic gradations. For instance, Hanafis classify reciting Surah al-Fatiha in every as wajib, while other Sunni schools deem it . These intra-Sunni differences stem from varying emphases on authentication and evidentiary thresholds but rarely alter core classifications across categories. The Jaʿfari Shia school expands the scope of obligatory acts beyond the Sunni five pillars (, , , sawm, ), enumerating ten furuʿ al-din (branches of religion) as wajib ʿayn (individual obligations), including (20% levy on annual savings and gains), (striving in God's path), amr bil-maʿruf wa-nahi ʿanil-munkar (enjoining good and forbidding evil), tawalli (loyalty to ), and tabarri (disavowal of their enemies). Sunni schools classify as applicable only to war spoils (ghanima) rather than personal , rendering Shia khums a broader wajib; similarly, enjoining good is viewed as a general communal ( kifaya) in Sunni , not an individual annual obligation as in Jaʿfari rulings. In , Jaʿfari designates core elements like rukuʿ and as (Quranic-based) and others like takbirat al-ihram as wajib, allowing for more flexible rectification if omitted. Specific rulings illustrate categorical divergences: temporary marriage (mutʿah) is classified as mubah (permissible with fixed duration and mahr) in the Jaʿfari school, based on non-abrogated prophetic permission and Imam narrations, whereas all Sunni schools deem it haram, citing its abrogation during the caliphate of ʿUmar ibn al-Khattab and later hadith. Combining zuhr and ʿasr or maghrib and ʿisha prayers is mandub or mubah daily in Jaʿfari fiqh for convenience, supported by narrations from Imam Jaʿfar al-Sadiq, but restricted to travel or hardship (thus exceptional mubah) in Sunni schools, where separate timings are wajib based on the Prophet's practice. These examples highlight how source prioritization—Sunni emphasis on early companions' consensus versus Shia reliance on Imamic tradition—yields opposing ahkam without altering the five-category schema itself.

Authority and Issuance

Processes of Ijtihad and Taqlid

constitutes the methodical exertion of a qualified jurist's intellectual capacity to derive specific ahkam from the , , and ancillary evidentiary principles when primary texts lack explicit guidance on a novel issue. This process demands rigorous textual analysis, linguistic precision in , and application of usul al-fiqh methodologies such as (analogical reasoning) or istislah (public interest consideration) only after exhaustive search for direct revelatory evidence. Historically, early mujtahids like (d. 767 CE) and (d. 795 CE) exemplified this through case-by-case deduction, prioritizing causal links between established rulings and emerging circumstances over unsubstantiated conjecture. To qualify as a mujtahid capable of independent , an individual must possess comprehensive mastery of the and its interpretive traditions, the authenticated corpus, principles of and to avert misinterpretation, and the corpus of alongside scholarly consensus (ijma'). Additional requisites include sound judgment (rushd), piety to mitigate bias, and familiarity with logical chains, ensuring deductions align with verifiable prophetic precedent rather than personal inclination. These stringent criteria, outlined in classical usul texts like al-Shafi'i's al-Risala (d. 820 CE), limit the pool of true mujtahids, with recognizing figures such as the eponyms of the four major schools—Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali—as exemplars up to the 10th century CE. The operational steps of commence with delineating the legal question (mas'ala) and its factual underpinnings, followed by systematic scrutiny of Quranic verses and mutawatir (mass-transmitted) hadiths for applicable nass (definitive texts). Absent such, the mujtahid employs by identifying an original case ('illah) with shared effective cause (illah) to an established ruling, or rarer tools like (juristic preference) to avert hardship, always subordinating reason to textual primacy. This sequential rigor, as practiced by (d. 644 CE) in adapting distributions to conquest spoils, underscores ijtihad's empirical grounding in historical precedents over speculative theory. Taqlid, conversely, denotes the non-mujtahid's adherence to the derived rulings of a qualified scholar or established without probing evidentiary bases, functioning as a delegated to maintain communal adherence to amid widespread scholarly variance. In Sunni praxis, the process involves selecting a reliable mujtahid or school based on evidentiary reliability and prevalence—such as opting for the Hanafi in regions like the —then applying its positions uniformly to personal conduct. Obligatory for the muqallid (lay adherent), taqlid precludes self- to avert erroneous innovation (), with classical scholars like (d. 1111 CE) arguing it preserves doctrinal unity by channeling diverse ijtihad outputs into verifiable chains of transmission. The interplay between and delineates authority hierarchies: mujtahids innovate rulings for unprecedented scenarios, while taqlid ensures scalable implementation, though post-classical Sunni discourse debated the "closing of ijtihad's gate" around 950 CE, citing exhaustive codification in madhhabs as sufficient for most contingencies. Empirical observation reveals 's dominance in contemporary Muslim societies, where few meet mujtahid thresholds, correlating with interpretive stability but occasional rigidity in adapting to modern exigencies like technological advancements.

Role and Limitations of Fatwas

A constitutes a non-binding rendered by a qualified Islamic , known as a , in response to a specific inquiry concerning the application of principles to a particular circumstance. These opinions draw upon primary sources such as the and , supplemented by methodological tools like (consensus) and (analogical reasoning), to offer guidance on , personal, or social matters where textual requires interpretation. Historically, fatwas have played a pivotal role in the evolution of Islamic by articulating practical rulings that influence customary practices and contribute to the substantive content of doctrines, often serving as a bridge between abstract legal theory and lived reality in diverse Muslim societies. In this capacity, they enable lay Muslims to navigate ambiguities in ahkam, fostering adherence to divine injunctions without necessitating direct recourse to independent by each individual. Despite their interpretive authority, fatwas lack statutory or coercive force, distinguishing them from enforceable judicial verdicts (qada) or state-enacted laws (qanun). Their non-binding nature stems from the mufti's role as an advisor rather than a , allowing recipients the to seek alternative opinions or disregard the fatwa if it conflicts with stronger evidence or personal conviction, provided such choice aligns with (emulation of established scholars) in non-mujtahid contexts. This flexibility underscores a key limitation: fatwas are contingent on the mufti's competence in and the accuracy of their evidentiary assessment, rendering them susceptible to error, obsolescence amid changing conditions, or divergence across madhabs due to varying interpretive methodologies. Further constraints arise from institutional and contextual factors; for instance, fatwas issued by solitary scholars may carry less weight than those from collective bodies, yet even institutional fatwas remain advisory unless explicitly incorporated into state mechanisms, as seen in selective modern applications for certification or . Classical sources emphasize that muftis must qualify through rigorous scholarly attainment, and unqualified issuance undermines legitimacy, while practical limitations include the inability to address novel issues without analogous precedents, potentially leading to overly cautious or restrictive rulings. In Sunni traditions, this advisory status preserves doctrinal pluralism, whereas Shia frameworks may accord greater deference to living marja' , though still without inherent compulsion. Ultimately, the efficacy of fatwas hinges on the recipient's voluntary acceptance, highlighting their role as persuasive tools rather than infallible mandates in the broader architecture of ahkam.

Modern Contexts and Controversies

Empirical Outcomes in Contemporary Muslim Governance

In countries where ahkam—the specific rulings derived from —constitute the foundational legal framework for governance, such as , , and under Taliban rule since August 2021, empirical indicators reveal persistent challenges in political freedoms, economic performance, and . Freedom House's 2023 assessments classify these states as "Not Free," with scoring 12 out of 100 overall (1/40 in political rights and 11/60 in ), at 8/100 (0/40 political rights, 8/60 ), and at 8/100 following the Taliban's imposition of strict ahkam enforcement, including punishments like and . These low ratings stem from systemic suppression of , arbitrary detentions, and restrictions on assembly, where clerical or monarchical authorities derive legitimacy from interpreting ahkam to override electoral processes or . Economically, the institutionalization of ahkam in legal systems correlates with underperformance relative to secular Muslim-majority states like or , which apply selectively or not at all in core . A 2022 study found that formal adoption of Sharia-based codes imposes material costs, including reduced foreign and due to inflexible enforcement and rules favoring familial over merit-based allocation. Muslim-majority countries with comprehensive Sharia implementation average lower GDP per capita; for instance, Iran's real GDP per capita has stagnated around $5,000–$6,000 (PPP) since 2010 amid theocratic policies exacerbating sanctions and mismanagement, while Saudi Arabia's oil-dependent yielded 1.7% real GDP growth in 2023 despite Vision 2030 reforms diluting some ahkam applications. In contrast, non-theocratic peers like the UAE, with partial Sharia in personal status but secular , achieved 3.4% growth in the same period. Kuran's analysis attributes this gap to Sharia's historical impediments, such as endowments locking capital and rigid bans hindering financial intermediation, persisting in contemporary theocracies. Gender outcomes under strict ahkam governance show marked disparities, with women's labor force participation averaging below 20% in (16.6% in 2022) and (35.6% post-2018 reforms, but still below global averages), constrained by guardianship laws requiring male permission for travel or work. Enforcement of ahkam on dress, mobility, and (valued at half a man's in some cases) contributes to lower female education attainment in , where female secondary enrollment dropped to near zero post-2021, per data. Cross-national data indicate that intense Sharia adherence correlates with poorer women's social rights, including higher rates of honor-based violence and limited autonomy, though variations exist; Tunisia's secular family codes, diverging from classical ahkam, yield higher female empowerment indices. These patterns hold despite claims of cultural compatibility, as empirical metrics prioritize verifiable access to , , and over doctrinal intent. Human development indices further underscore these trends, with Sharia-central states lagging in the UN's (HDI); Afghanistan ranks 180/191 (HDI 0.478 in 2022), 78/191 (0.774), and 40/191 (0.875), below secular Muslim comparators like (62/191, 0.807) despite resource advantages. While proponents invoke Islamic HDI variants emphasizing (objectives like preservation of faith), standard metrics reveal correlations with rigidity, where ahkam's prioritization of ritual compliance over adaptive policy impedes , and income gains. Stability metrics are mixed: reports low homicide rates (0.8 per 100,000 in 2022), attributable to deterrence via ahkam-derived punishments, but this coexists with elevated execution rates (196 in 2022, mostly for drug offenses and sorcery under ). Overall, these outcomes suggest that unmitigated ahkam application in fosters authoritarian resilience but at the expense of broader and expansion.

Secular and Human Rights Critiques

Secular critics argue that the categorical framework of ahkam—dividing human actions into obligatory (), recommended (mandub), permissible (), disliked (), and forbidden ()—prioritizes divine commands over and individual autonomy, rendering it incompatible with secular legal systems that derive authority from human consensus and rational deliberation. This rigidity, rooted in scriptural sources like the and , resists adaptation to modern contexts, such as technological advancements or social changes, unlike secular laws that evolve through legislative processes. Human rights organizations contend that certain ahkam rulings, particularly those enforcing haram prohibitions through punishments, violate international standards prohibiting , as outlined in treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). For instance, for —classified as a mandatory penalty in classical for safeguarding property rights—is applied in jurisdictions like northern Nigeria's courts, where documented at least one amputation in 2000 and ongoing floggings for offenses including alcohol consumption and . Similarly, Brunei's 2019 penal code revisions imposed for and for , both derived from haram classifications, prompting condemnation for contravening prohibitions on and the . Critiques extend to gender-related ahkam, where rulings on and —obligating females to receive half the share of males and valuing a woman's testimony as half a man's in financial matters—perpetuate inequality, conflicting with equality principles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). In , enforcement of obligatory veiling ( as for women) under Sharia-derived laws has led to arrests, fines, and lashings, with a 2024 amendment expanding punishments including property confiscation and travel bans, as reported by , exacerbating violations of bodily autonomy and freedom of expression. rulings, deemed haram and punishable by death in some traditional interpretations, further undermine and belief, with applications in countries like contributing to extrajudicial killings. In , , bylaws since 2014 have mandated public canings for haram acts like same-sex relations and , which and local advocates describe as humiliating and disproportionate, breaching dignity and non-discrimination norms. These implementations highlight a causal tension: ahkam's enforcement prioritizes communal moral order over individual rights, leading to documented disparities in application, such as harsher penalties for women in disputes. Secular analysts, including those from the , note that while not all ahkam are legally coercive (e.g., personal obligations like ), the framework's influence on state laws in Muslim-majority countries fosters systemic conflicts with secular pluralism.

Traditionalist and Islamist Defenses

Traditionalist scholars maintain that ahkam, as divinely ordained rulings derived from the and , must be implemented by to uphold the maqasid al-sharia—the higher objectives of preserving religion, life, intellect, lineage, and property. Classical texts such as Abu al-Hasan al-Mawardi's Al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyyah (c. 1035 CE) prescribe the caliph's duty to enforce these rulings, including penalties, as essential for societal order and defense against moral decay, arguing that human laws inevitably falter without divine guidance. They contend that hudud's severity, such as for ( 5:38), serves deterrence through public exemplarity and psychological restraint, while discretionary ta'zir allows flexibility for lesser offenses, ensuring justice over retribution. Contemporary traditionalists like Mufti Taqi Usmani defend against charges of cruelty by emphasizing their limited scope—confined to seven Quranically specified crimes—and rigorous evidentiary thresholds, such as four eyewitnesses for (), which result in rare application; for instance, no hadd punishments were imposed under Pakistan's Hudood Ordinances from 1979 onward in certain categories due to these safeguards. Usmani argues that penalties outperform by inflicting direct pain or humiliation to curb and societal costs, without fostering criminal subcultures, and aligns them with human where temptation requires proportionate severity to maintain equilibrium. He refutes claims, citing data from 1980–1984 showing balanced application (e.g., 30 women vs. 71 men punished, with acquittals in disputed cases like Safia Bibi in 1985), attributing implementation flaws to procedural corruption rather than the rulings themselves. Islamists extend these arguments by framing ahkam's comprehensive implementation as the antidote to —pre- or post-Islamic ignorance marked by secular sovereignty usurping God's hakimiyyah (rulership). , in works like Milestones (1964), posits as a "realistic " attuned to (innate ), enabling effortless moral order and freedom under divine , unlike secular systems that breed alienation and ethical relativism by separating governance from comprehensive guidance. Qutb advocates establishment of Islamic to apply ahkam holistically, drawing on the () as empirical proof of feasibility, where integration of and yielded stable, prosperous societies absent the moral pathologies of modern nation-states. Such defenses prioritize causal efficacy—ahkam's alignment with revealed truths over humanistic ideals—claiming historical caliphates demonstrated reduced corruption through enforced boundaries, though modern lapses stem from incomplete adherence rather than inherent flaws.

Reformist Adaptations and Debates

Reformist thinkers in Islamic jurisprudence have sought to adapt ahkam—Sharia-derived legal rulings—through renewed , arguing that rigid to classical impedes responses to technological, social, and economic changes. Pioneering figures like (1849–1905) and (1865–1935) advocated reinterpreting ahkam in light of modern education, constitutional governance, and scientific advancements, viewing as a tool to extract timeless principles from primary sources rather than literal applications frozen in medieval contexts. This modernist impulse, emerging in the late amid colonial encounters, emphasized compatibility between ahkam and rational inquiry, as seen in Abduh's defense of individual reasoning over uncritical emulation. Contemporary adaptations often center on maqasid al-sharia (objectives of Sharia), positing five core aims—preservation of faith, life, intellect, lineage, and property—as hierarchical guides to override subsidiary rulings when they conflict with broader welfare (maslaha). Scholars like Jasser Auda have applied this framework to justify suspending hudud penalties (e.g., amputation for theft) in resource-scarce environments, prioritizing life's preservation over retribution, akin to Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab's (r. 634–644 CE) historical moratorium on such punishments during famine. Similarly, the principle of urf (local custom) has been invoked to reform ahkam in family and commercial law, allowing customary practices to qualify as secondary evidence if they align with Sharia's spirit, as analyzed in post-2000 fiqh studies addressing urbanization and globalization. Debates persist between reformists and traditionalists, with the former, including Iranian cleric Mohsen Kadivar, proposing "structural " to extend independent reasoning to doctrinal foundations like usul al-fiqh, potentially revising ahkam on and . Traditionalists counter that such expansions erode divine textual , risking (innovation) and echoing 18th–19th century revivalist calls for purification over wholesale reformation. Empirical tensions arise in state implementations, as in Pakistan's 1979–2010 Hudood Ordinance reforms, where reformist pushes for evidentiary safeguards clashed with Islamist demands for stricter enforcement, highlighting causal links between interpretive flexibility and policy outcomes like reduced apostasy convictions. These exchanges underscore ongoing scrutiny of source reinterpretation, with reformists citing historical precedents like Umar's to affirm adaptability, while critics demand fidelity to transmitted ahkam to avert secular drift.

References

  1. https://en.islamway.net/article/20505/principles-of-fiqh-its-meanings-benefits
  2. https://mawdoo3.com/%25D8%25A3%25D8%25AD%25D9%2583%25D8%25A7%25D9%2585_%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25D9%258A%25D8%25B9%25D8%25A9
  3. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391890012_Mashadirul_Ahkam_As-Sunnah_As_A_Source_Of_Islamic_Law
  4. https://www.alukah.net/sharia/0/133967/%25D8%25A3%25D9%2582%25D8%25B3%25D8%25A7%25D9%2585-%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25D8%25AD%25D9%2583%25D9%2585-%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25D8%25B9%25D9%258A/
  5. https://www.msf-online.com/%25D8%25A3%25D8%25AD%25D9%2583%25D8%25A7%25D9%2585-%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25D9%258A%25D8%25B9%25D8%25A9-%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25D8%25A5%25D8%25B3%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2585%25D9%258A%25D8%25A9-%25D9%2588%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25A7%25D8%25AF%25D8%25A6%25D9%2587%25D8%25A7-%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584/
  6. https://www.academia.edu/27176470/Ahkam_e_shariat
  7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382645885_Hadith_Ahkam_and_the_Qualifications_for_Fiqh_Development
  8. https://pil.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Competing_Texts_by_Minrod_Hurvitz.pdf
  9. https://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=Hkm
  10. https://islamciv.com/2023/03/27/does-%25D8%25AD%25D9%258F%25D9%2583%25D9%2592%25D9%2585-hukm-mean-judging-or-ruling-or-both/
  11. https://www.academia.edu/89882732/Concept_of_Hukm_in_the_Quran
  12. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095949450
  13. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK500186/
  14. http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ma/works/ahkam.pdf
  15. https://ejournal.um.edu.my/index.php/RIS/article/download/53210/17768/159036
  16. https://darpdfs.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/al-Waraqat-in-Usul-al-Fiqh-al-Juwayni.pdf
  17. https://islamicsystem.blogspot.com/2009/12/chapter-6-legal-ruling-al-hukm-al-shari.html
  18. https://www.arriqaaq.com/usul-al-fiqh-made-easy-part-3-what-is-fiqh/
  19. https://islamqa.info/en/answers/180341
  20. https://ejournal.tamanlitera.id/index.php/ilrj/article/view/79
  21. https://www.islamiqate.com/3524/what-is-the-difference-between-fard-kifayah-and-fard-ayn
  22. https://livingislam101.com/islam-essential-beliefs/fard-ayn-fard-kifaya/
  23. https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/fard-kifayah-the-principle-of-communal-responsibility-in-islam
  24. https://islam.worldofislam.info/index.php/online-books/118-defense-of-muslim-lands/489-chapter-3-fard-ayn-and-fard-kifaya
  25. https://halaqa.home.blog/2021/02/12/types-of-hanafi-legal-rulings-ahkam/
  26. https://www.jibreel.app/islamqa/sunnah-muakkadah-and-ghair-muakkadah-list
  27. https://www.islamiqate.com/5581/what-are-sunnah-muakkadah
  28. https://www.albalagh.net/kids/understanding_deen/Salat.shtml
  29. https://questionsonislam.com/article/sunnah-ghair-muakkadah
  30. https://abjames.com/al-a%25E1%25B8%25A5kam-al-khamsa-the-five-decisions/
  31. https://daruliftaa.com/sacred-knowledge/what-does-makruh-mean-in-the-hanafi-madhhab/
  32. https://muftionline.co.za/node/22646
  33. https://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftionline/114992/difference-between-makrooh-tanzihi-and-tahreemi/
  34. https://seekersguidance.org/answers/shafii-fiqh/is-it-unlawful-to-persist-in-doing-disliked-actions-makruh/
  35. https://guides.law.columbia.edu/c.php?g=1221841&p=9280464
  36. https://www.arriqaaq.com/sources-of-al-hukm-quran-sunnah-ijmaa-and-ijtihaad-usul-al-fiqh-made-easy-part-7/
  37. https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/understanding-the-usul-the-foundation-of-islamic-sciences
  38. https://asimiqbal2nd.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/islamic-law.pdf
  39. https://iiit.org/wp-content/uploads/Source-Methodology-in-Islamic-Jurisprudence.pdf
  40. https://www.muslim-library.com/dl/books/English_Principle_of_Islamic_Jurisprudence.pdf
  41. http://ilmfruits.com/2006/five-categories-of-everything/
  42. https://daruliftaa.com/nikah-marriage/obedience-to-the-husband-in-mustahab-and-makruh-acts/
  43. https://www.darulfatwa.org.au/en/the-actions-of-the-person/
  44. https://al-islam.org/jurisprudence-and-its-principles-murtadha-mutahhari/principles-jurisprudence-usul-al-fiqh
  45. https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/10460/17/Ateeq2020PhD.pdf
  46. https://www.academia.edu/36359825/Delineating_Necessity_%E1%B8%8Car%C5%ABrah_in_Islamic_Jurisprudence_by_Dr_Adn%C4%81n_Mu%E1%B8%A5ammad_Um%C4%81mah
  47. https://mahajjah.com/the-roots-of-sunni-shii-differences-in-fiqh/
  48. https://www.al-islam.org/ask/topics/22839/questions-about-Fard
  49. https://www.sistani.org/english/book/48/2229/
  50. https://al-islam.org/muta-temporary-marriage-islamic-law-sachiko-murata/legitimacy-muta
  51. https://www.jstor.org/stable/839668
  52. https://journal.trunojoyo.ac.id/trunojoyo-law-review/article/download/21051/8670
  53. https://ojs.jssr.org.pk/index.php/jssr/article/download/343/278
  54. https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-answers-feeds/what-is-the-definition-and-categories-of-a-mujtahid/
  55. https://wimcanada.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Ijtihad-and-Mujtahid.pdf
  56. https://ahkaamislam.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/qualifications-for-performing-ijtihad/
  57. https://www.ajis.org/index.php/ajiss/article/download/370/2096/4826
  58. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311886.2023.2265522
  59. https://sunnahonline.com/library/fiqh-and-sunnah/777-ijtihad-and-taqlid
  60. https://sunnahmuakada.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/29/
  61. https://iiit.org/wp-content/uploads/Ijtihad-and-Renewal-red-1.pdf
  62. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/28121/chapter/212284005
  63. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391967075_The_Complementarity_of_Ijtihad_and_the_Maqasid_Al-Shariah_in_Islamic_Law_An_Analytical_Study
  64. https://fiqhcouncil.org/introduction-to-fatwa-methodology/
  65. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/fatwa-and-the-making-and-renewal-of-islamic-law/fatwa-and-the-formation-of-islamic-legal-discourses-institutions-and-society/1E312DB7599A72884D1DFEDCBD92E08E
  66. https://academic.oup.com/ojlr/article/11/2-3/314/6965701
  67. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313025641_The_limitations_of_the_institution_of_fatwa_and_the_need_for_Islamic_economic_think_tanks
  68. https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/articles/navigating-fatwa-governance-a-comparative-study-of-institutional-centralisation-and-religious-legitimacy/
  69. https://pomeps.org/a-dozen-questions-about-the-islamic-sharia-some-things-you-wanted-to-know-about-islamic-law-but-were-too-embarrassed-to-ask
  70. https://freedomhouse.org/country/iran/freedom-world/2023
  71. https://freedomhouse.org/country/saudi-arabia/freedom-world/2023
  72. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1566014122000358
  73. https://sites.duke.edu/timurkuran/files/2017/09/Islam-Economic-Performance-Kuran-JEL-in-press.pdf
  74. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26570576
  75. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0939362516300796
  76. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-women-in-society/
  77. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9720026/
  78. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/understanding-sharia-intersection-islam-and-law
  79. https://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/nigeria0904/1.htm
  80. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/05/22/bruneis-pernicious-new-penal-code
  81. https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/10/14/iran-new-hijab-law-adds-restrictions-and-punishments
  82. https://www.hrw.org/reports/1997/saudi/Saudi-03.htm
  83. https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/10/02/indonesia-acehs-new-islamic-laws-violate-rights
  84. https://www.dar-alifta.org/en/article/details/499/the-higher-objectives-of-islamic-law
  85. https://ia601208.us.archive.org/11/items/TheOrdinancesOfGovernmentAlAhkamAsSultaniyyah/TheOrdinancesOfGovernment-Al-ahkamAs-sultaniyyahByAbuAl-hasanAliIbnMuhammadIbnHabibAl-mawardi_text.pdf
  86. https://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/viewFile/3405/3169
  87. https://lib.zu.edu.pk/ebookdata/Law/Hudood%2520Ordinances-by%2520Mufti%2520Taqi%2520Usmani.pdf
  88. https://muslimskeptic.com/2024/03/07/answering-objections-hudud/
  89. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4284246
  90. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/taking-people-as-they-are-islam-as-a-realistic-utopia-in-the-political-theory-of-sayyid-qutb/3F2E9A0BE53FF51AEA36A47249A2C12A
  91. https://evolutionofsharia.org/islamic-political-theory/
  92. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/2C3B8DBB943B3E48FAA32E7698A1AA09/S0020743800000714a.pdf/div-class-title-islamic-modernism-its-scope-method-and-alternatives-div.pdf
  93. https://www.ajis.org/index.php/ajiss/article/download/405/2141
  94. http://ijtihadnet.com/wp-content/uploads/Maq%25C4%2581%25E1%25B9%25A3id-al-Shar%25C4%25AB%25CA%25BBa-and-Contemporary-Reformist-Muslim-Thought-2.pdf
  95. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/396673386_The_Instrument_of_%27Urf_in_the_Reform_of_Islamic_Legal_Rulings_An_Analytical_Study_on_Contemporary_Fiqh
  96. https://english.kadivar.com/2015/11/11/reforming-islamic-thought-through-structural-ijtihad/
  97. https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/khan
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.