Browsing by Author "Ansary, Mir Riaz"

It is contended that the laws of the Shariah are intended to secure benefit for and repel harm from humanity. In certain cases with unusual features, even though the general wording of a relevant text apparently applies to them on the basis of purely linguistic considerations, a particular law may not achieve the objectives for which it was legislated. In such circumstances a mujtahid needs to consider the probable consequences of applying a given rule before delivery of any judgment that that rule is the Shariah law for that situation. The validity of this proposition needs to be investigated and, if it is found to be endorsed by the Shariah in general, the methodology for its application has to be precisely identified in order to prevent its haphazard application or its manipulation by parties with hidden agendas. The research was conducted by reading classical Arabic texts in usul al-fiqh as well as contemporary Arabic and English texts in the field and, in addition, English works on the relevant methodologies of the social sciences. The research reached the following conclusions: The laws of the Shariah have a rational basis, i.e., to secure human benefit and repel harm. This theme is indisputably established through inductive reading of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Inductive reading of the Qur’an and Sunnah further reveals that provision is made in the texts for exceptions to general rules when their application leads to consequences different from those intended by their legislation. Recognition of this principle is amply evident in the ijtihad of the sahabah. Prohibiting what is normally lawful cannot be justified unless the act in question leads to unlawful consequences in a majority of cases. Pressing needs (darurat) can override any text, but intermediate needs (hajat) can only override secondary prohibitions that have been legislated to protect primary prohibitions or weak general texts. Social sciences can be of some use in assessing the consequences of acts and policies, but their conclusions regarding the future are usually too speculative to justify overriding established Shariah laws. Their conclusions are more reliable for assessing existing conditions.

Muslims consider the Qur'an to be the Word of God dictated to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) by Angel Gabriel. The Qur'an itself provides a criterion for testing its source, saying, "Will they not then ponder on the Qur'an? If it had been from anyone other than Allah they would have found much inconsistency in it" (al-Qur'an, 4:82). This research focuses upon a type of exegesis known as tafsir mushkil al-Qur'an that developed over the course of Islamic history to respond to perceived inconsistencies and other difficulties in the Qur'anic text. The objective of the research is to identify and evaluate the methodology developed by Muslim scholars to deal with perceived contradictions within the Qur'an itself and between Qur'anic statements and established empirical facts. In order to do so, the concept of contradiction and its implications for propositions was examined from the point of view of logicians and the scholars of usul al-fiqh. Muslim scholars' methodology for dealing with perceived contradictions between Shari'ah texts was examined by reading classical and contemporary works of usul al-fiqh. Three classical and two contemporary tafsirs of the mushkil al-Qur'an genre were studied in detail. It was found that they tended to focus heavily on linguistic issues, which they handled capably. They paid far less attention to perceived contradictions between Qur'anic verses. Their treatment of the latter employed the tools of usul al-fiqh methodology, but some exegetes who wrote more general tafsirs sometimes dealt with the same issues more capably. These works were found to be of little use in addressing contemporary challenges to the empirical accuracy of Qur'anic statements. However, the usul' methodology for dealing with internal contradiction was found to be robust and useful, and it provides a foundation for a methodology of addressing empirical issues. Finally, the importance of this issue calls for the establishment of an institute in the Muslim world to deal with claims of inconsistencies in the Qur'an and challenges to the empirical accuracy of its statements and its incompatibility with so-called universal values.