Two Theories of Ijtihad
As tensions between the Muslim and Western worlds continue to grow, there is one largely overlooked area of activity that may play a role in building bridges: ijtihad. While ijtihad can be a tool for understanding Islamic principles in a way that fits the needs and challenges of individuals and societies, there is no universal agreement on its proper role. To read more click here.
9 Comments:
Assalam-o-Alaikum,
i am just posting here to say that please move Bismillah pic on the top
it means i start by the name of Allah.. so you should start your page with Allah's name not place it where it fits,
Allah Hafiz,
-Salman
WS. Dear Br. it is not placed where it fits, it is placed where the eye reaches first when you visit the page.
Very interesting article. Please keep doing a good word. May Almighty Allah continue to shower his bountiful blessing upon you, your progenies, and all your household! Ammen
Question: What is ijtihad?
Is there anyone in Paradise now?
Why do we have so many different Fiqh?
What is the ruling on Apostate?
Did the Prophet endorse suicide bombing?
What's makes an Hadith Sakhi, daif, hassana, mutawatir?
Which Hadith were the Sahabah ikram following?
Is it incumbent on us to follow the Hadith?
Did Bilal (rta) write any Hadith?
Why was the Black Stone Black?
Why are we so divided Secretarianism?
When shall we all unite and become one?
Why have we got so many school of thoughts?
Why are muslims following madhabs? When the prophet said we should adhere to Qur’an and the Sunnah?
Does Islam allows us to divide ourselves into castes?
What is God?
What is life?
Why is there Poverty in the world?
Is there a life after life?
What’s ihsan?
What’s Eeman?
Was any one present to witness when the prophet was receiving the prophetic revelation on the mount of Jabal Nuur?
Are we going to be able to recognize our Parent’s and relatives and friends on the day of Yaomal Kiyamat? Evidence from the Qur’an and Hadith, Sunnah?
Ma Salam
with relation to your article on ijtihad.i belive it is agreed that there is no ijtihad as regard to the tex of quran and the hadith hence there authenticity has been proved.it is only in understanding there contents thats is where ijtihad comes in most cases with relation to the quran and sunnah.As oppose to fugaha there thereindependent ijtihad is totally open to acritical or rational analysis.whats ourcomments?
Abu Alie, AA.
I agree that there is no disagreement about the authenticity of the text of the Quran, but I think that the matter of the authenticity of hadith is always open [while acknowledging that the Quran it self is a form of Hadith-e-qudsi].
I am of the opinion that the meaning of the text of the Quran, the determination of which verses constitute ahkam Sharai and which are allegorical is also open to discussion. I reject the idea of abrogation and would rather reclassify verses as allegorical rather than abrogated, who knows in a different time and place the same verses may become key sources of the shariah [Wallahu Alam].
As far as hadith literature are concerned i believe that they should be treated as a secondary source not sufficient to constitute law by themselves without support either from the Quran or from reason [maslaha, darurah...]. I also believe that every generation of Muslims must have the right to reexamine the isnad and verify the authenticity and also have the right to accept or reject hadith purely on matan even when isnad is verified.
Dear Sir,
I have been doing some degree of thinking recently, and found your article on moderate Muslims very interesting. When I think of it, people would be upset with the label "moderate Christians". And it does imply that bin Laden and his ilk are merely practicing the logical conclusions of Islam.
Personally, I think in terms of the civilised and the barbaric. A civilised man is one who is willing to accept the two foundation stones of civilised thought:
Firstly, the non-initiation of violence. No man can claim to serve reason when his final argument is a gun.
Secondly, the reason as the only method of communication and decision between men. A man who demands that you must blindly obey his whims, and offers no explanation, is unworthy of the title of civilised man.
Interestingly, this site seems to fulfill both, with the second falling under the heading of "Ijtihad". I believe Thomas Jefferson said that God would prefer the homages of reason and not blindfolded fear.
Perhaps the title "reformist Muslim" might be more appropriate. I mean, Martin Luther was a reformist Christian and none could doubt his faith.
Nonetheless, I am wondering about your comments on the desirability of a state in which Islam is the guiding principle. I should like to ask about that.
1) You have spoke well about the People of the Book. Yet, what would be the fate of atheists, such as myself, or members of non-Abrahamic religions in such a state?
2) Would the rights of those living under such a state to convert out from Islam be respected, even if it meant becoming an atheist?
There is a great deal of hostility towards Islam at the moment, and I fear that it will only grow. These recent riots are the main cause. Regardless of ones view of the cartoons, brandishing signs saying "Prepare for the real holocaust" and "Behead those who Insult Islam" are far, far worse. It is this which is causing the perceptions of Islam to be so negative.
yours Sincerely,
Fanusi Khiyal
Your theory of ijteehad forgets to mention the continued and widespread use of ijtihad in the Shi'a circles. It is very established. Maybe you do not agree with their version but it has been ever so strong and lasting. I know you hate and despise Shi'a ulema and mujtahids like Sistani (see: http://thenlightenment.whatheblog.com), but you should address that issue
Mr. Khan should go back to the basics of Islam and look for reason and Aql and I am sure he will find so many historical issues that it would be mind boggling. For example in Sifeen, it is the ijtehad of scholars later on that revealed that both Ali and Muavia were right and they both will go to heaven. It was ijtehad that they both reached different conclusions. Now if you use aql and reason, you will find that fighting against a Khalifah was a major sin according to my jurists and they also outline appropriate punishment. The same goes for Jamal where approximately 10,000 muslims were killed and it was first civil war in Islam. I am not sure if it was the equity and justice for women or ijtehad by ummul momineen or revenge of murder of khalifah but no one takes the responsibility of so many lives. Ironically both Ali and Ayesha will end up in Heaven! Although, Ayesha Siddiqa was not an immediate relative of Khalifah Uthman to take Qisas and wasn’t required to go to battlefield accroding to 'revealitions and sunnah'.
It should now be obvious to all muslims that ijtehad of women praying together with men or leading prayer as happened in NY comes from the very reasoning, qiyas ijma and shura.
Prophet of Islam said" I am leaving the Quran any my itrat and you won't be misguided if you hold on to them. They won’t separate until they reach to me at Kauthar." The statement is not confusing and also does not give room for any individual interpretation. Muslims have been facing all the problems because of this very mistake and the multiple layers of confusing ijtehad by later scholars to save some personalities from embarrassment.
Mr. Khan should go back to the basics of Islam and look for reason and Aql and I am sure he will find so many historical issues that it would be mind boggling. For example in Sifeen, it is the ijtehad of scholars later on that revealed that both Ali and Muavia were right and they both will go to heaven. It was ijtehad that they both reached different conclusions. Now if you use aql and reason, you will find that fighting against a Khalifah was a major sin according to my jurists and they also outline appropriate punishment. The same goes for Jamal where approximately 10,000 muslims were killed and it was first civil war in Islam. I am not sure if it was the equity and justice for women or ijtehad by ummul momineen or revenge of murder of khalifah but no one takes the responsibility of so many lives. Ironically both Ali and Ayesha will end up in Heaven! Although, Ayesha Siddiqa was not an immediate relative of Khalifah Uthman to take Qisas and wasn’t required to go to battlefield accroding to 'revealitions and sunnah'.
It should now be obvious to all muslims that ijtehad of women praying together with men or leading prayer as happened in NY comes from the very reasoning, qiyas ijma and shura.
Prophet of Islam said" I am leaving the Quran any my itrat and you won't be misguided if you hold on to them. They won’t separate until they reach to me at Kauthar." The statement is not confusing and also does not give room for any individual interpretation. Muslims have been facing all the problems because of this very mistake and the multiple layers of confusing ijtehad by later scholars to save some personalities from embarrassment.
Post a Comment
<< Home