Freedom in Islam by Islamic Modernist Discourse
Many people utter this phrase while intending its correct meaning, which is the necessity of disc... more Many people utter this phrase while intending its correct meaning, which is the necessity of discussing ideas, criticizing them, demonstrating their areas of strength and weakness, and refuting them by presenting more robust counter ideas. These people would say, "The correct view must be presented together with the proofs and evidence supporting it so that the deviant ideas can be refuted. In this way, there will be a positive effect on people's understanding, and many wrong ideas will be corrected." This is correct, and it shows the importance of confronting false ideas with correct ones and the necessity of presenting a compelling discourse based on arguments and evidence. This is because many false ideas may attract some youth due to how they are presented. How many false ideas have gained currency because of fascinating rhetoric, good presentation, and the attractiveness of their explanation, yet they are not supported by sufficient proof and evidence for their validity? Therefore, the critical and accurate idea comes along to demonstrate the falseness of this popular idea by removing its façade, presenting reality as it is. However, we must be aware that this phrase is also used to advance another meaning. Some utter this phrase intending it to mean that no ideas should be made binding upon others. So when they say, "Ideas must only be confronted by other ideas," they are in fact conveying that there is no point in making any ideas binding or prohibited as they would be ineffectual and that the only way to deal with ideas is through discussion and dialogue, not prohibition and obligation. This statement is said, for example, when people are prohibited from publicizing matters which malign the Sharī'ah, or when they are forbidden from committing apostasy, or when there is a prohibition of incitement to immorality and sins or the stoppage of false ideologies that are contrary to Islam and proliferation of deviant books. Then the proponent of this idea will then say, "An idea is only confronted by another idea, and only a good idea can repel a bad idea. So, let ideas confront each other, and the good idea will become
One of the important maxims in the field of Islamic politics, which is even considered an effecti... more One of the important maxims in the field of Islamic politics, which is even considered an effective instrument in political jurisprudence, is the principle of restricting the mubāh (what is Islamically permissible). This maxim is intended to empower the ruler in restricting some of what the Sharī'ah deems permissible for some or all of the people for a given period and based on a considered benefit. Here, the question that naturally follows is to ask: how is it permissible for the ruler to prohibit what Allah had made permissible? Response: Restricting the mubāh does not nullify the default rule of permissibility, and neither does it contradict it, for two reasons:
Political freedom in Islam consists of two equally important components: (i) establishing the rig... more Political freedom in Islam consists of two equally important components: (i) establishing the right of the Muslim community to choose its ruler, (ii) and allowing the Muslim community to choose the system it finds best to administrate its political life and serve its best interests so long as it does not violate the rulings of Islam. That being said, political freedom can be defined as the situation in which the Muslims can choose their ruler while being able to hold him accountable and remove him from his position and be able to choose a political system that corresponds to the demands of their time. With this conceptualization in mind, it is clear that the notion of political freedom in Islam is not merely limited to countering tyranny. It also considers the removal of the barriers in order to empower the Muslim community to find a suitable political system that helps it advance and progress. The concept of political freedom in Islam does not only focus on managing the relationship between the Ummah and its ruler and defining his responsibilities. It also enables the Muslims to work flexibly to develop regulations and laws that can assure people justice and prosperity. Political freedom is all-inclusive and enjoys a high level of flexibility in Islam because it did not emerge as a result of inter-denominational strife or the oppression of people, nor did it arise as a result of a political conflict or sectarian war. It is divinely ordained and is resilient to all external factors that could potentially influence it negatively. Unfortunately, contemporary Muslim researchers and writers focused their work on one aspect: the relationship between the ruler and the Ummah. Despite their focus on the same aspect, they produced different definitions and looked at it differently. One group coined a definition that revolves around countering tyranny. For example, 'Abdul Ḥakīm Al-'Ailī says:
The topic of freedom has occupied the interest of contemporary thinkers, as evidenced by their pr... more The topic of freedom has occupied the interest of contemporary thinkers, as evidenced by their produced work and literature. This extends far beyond the district of thinkers and has become one of the keen interests of learners and knowledge seekers.
Maqāṣid & Maṣlaḥa by Islamic Modernist Discourse
Issue 1: The Basis of Taking Jizyah under Another Name The basis of this issue lies in the treaty... more Issue 1: The Basis of Taking Jizyah under Another Name The basis of this issue lies in the treaty of 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) with Banū Taghlib on the terms that they shall pay twice the amount of ṣadaqah, 1 in contrast to what was acquired from others upon whom Jizyah was obligatory. The ruling on this issue shall be made clear in the following sections: First: The Opinions of Scholars on Taking Twice the Amount of Ṣadaqah from the Christians of Taghlib Scholars have disagreed regarding taking twice the amount of ṣadaqah from Banū Taghlib instead of the prescribed Jizyah. Their opinions could be summarized-without consideration upon whom its payment is compulsory and the views that arise from it-in two opinions: First Opinion: The amount of ṣadaqah should be doubled for the Christians of Banū Taghlib, and the prescribed Jizyah must not be taken from them. Doubling of ṣadaqah here means that the person in charge of collecting Zakāh will collect from them the double of what he collects from any Muslim upon whose wealth Zakāh has become obligatory So, he will acquire from their dinars, dirhams, and other financial assets: 5% of its total worth; from every 40 sheep: two sheep; from every five camels: two sheep; from every thirty cows two tabīʻ 2 and similarly, anything from the wealth of a Muslim upon which Zakāh is due, the Christians of Banū Taghlib will pay double like it.
Let us carefully examine this statement frequently attributed to Imām Mālik. We should note, firs... more Let us carefully examine this statement frequently attributed to Imām Mālik. We should note, first and foremost, that this statement is neither a verse of the Qur'ān nor an authentic Ḥadīth. In fact, it is not attributable to any of the pious predecessors. The story behind this statement started with Al-Juwaynī (d. 487 A.H.
From among the moral values upon which there is a consensus concerning its goodness is justice. P... more From among the moral values upon which there is a consensus concerning its goodness is justice. Past divine laws, the natural disposition, and intellect agree on the virtues of justice. All nations and religions give great regard to justice. However, they differ about what the internal constituents of justice are. Even though the intellect may comprehend many issues pertaining to justice and injustice, can distinguish between them, it can also be confused about many things. It is part of Allah's mercy that He sent us revelation to explain and differentiate between right and wrong when and where such confusion occurs.
The policies of 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) are an exceptional example of political lea... more The policies of 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) are an exceptional example of political leadership. He is the one who was able to combine the strength of rule, justice, good policy, humbleness, asceticism, and robust impartiality in matters. This makes his policy a treasure of incidences and a store of wonderful examples in good governance. This governance is distinct in that it had ample ijtihād pertaining to the public good through which he sought to attain benefit and avert evil in light of the Islamic texts. This resulted in many instances of ijtihād in different areas. This is an example of precise fiqh contemplation and balancing between the consideration of the benefits which are regarded in the SharÊ'ah, all while abiding by the limits of the SharÊ'ah. The areas to which he applied ijtihād included the following: 1-Taking One-fifth of the Property Possessed by a Person Who Kills the Enemy The proof concerning the spoils of war is the ÍadÊth of the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) which states: "Whoever kills a fighter, his goods are his." So, the goods of the person who was killed are taken by the person who killed him. These goods were not treated as the spoils of war, and one-fifth of them were not taken away. Instead, the person who killed the enemy took all of them. However, during the era of 'Umar ibn al-KhaÏÏÉb, al-BarÉ' ibn MÉlik challenged the Persian general, al-MarzabÉn, killed him and took his belongings which were valued at thirty thousand dirhams. 'Umar was informed about this and said: السلب، نخمس ال كنا إنا خامسه إال أراني وال ، ً كثيرا ً ماال بلغ قد البراء سلب وإن I used not to take one-fifth of the property possessed by a person who kills an enemy. However, al-BarÉ' has got a lot of money, and I will definitely take one-fifth of it. 1 *Translator's note: This piece was originally written in Arabic and could be found in Dr. Fahad al-'Ajlān's book, Al-Moḥarrar fī as-Siyāsa ash-Shar'īyyah, pp. 155-185. So, this was 'Umar's ijtihād for the sake of public benefit in an instance which was addressed by an Islamic text. So, this ambiguity about the issue must be addressed. However, before precisely identifying the ambiguity, we should identify the fiqh issues in this case. The scholars mentioned a number of responses clarifying this issue, and these can be summarized as follows: The first response: If 'Umar considered the possessions of al-BarÉ´ to be part of the booty, he would have taken one-fifth from them. However, if he did not take one-fifth of al-BarÉ´'s possessions, he would not have considered them to be part of the spoils of war. AÏ-ÙaÍÉwī said: كان إنما تخميسها، تركهم وأن يخمسوها، أن ولهم األسالب، يخمسون ال كانوا أنهم عمر فأخبر الغنيمة من سهمانهم لهم تجب كما للقاتلين، وجبت قد األسالب ألن ال ذلك، بتركهم So, 'Umar stated that they were previously not taking one-fifth of the property gained by the person who had killed an enemy fighter. Rather, they were leaving it to the victorious fighter, even though they had a right to take one-fifth of it. It was not because this property was a right due to the fighter who had killed the enemy, similar to how fighters have a right to a share from the booty. 2 However, this is a farfetched interpretation of the situation. The actions of 'Umar apparently indicate that previously the issue of taking a fifth of the nafil (an additional reward on top of the share of booty) was non-existent, and not that the fifth was not taken because there was no nafil. The second response: According to some jurists, a fifth of the property gained by the fighter who kills an enemy is taken by the state. 3 Therefore, it can be said that 'Umar took a fifth of what was due in the base rulings of the SharÊ'ah. 1 Transmitted by 'Abd ar-RazÉq in his MuÎannaf, no. 9467; ´AbË 'Ubayd in al-AmwÉl, no. 389; and al-BayhaqÊ in as-Sunan, no. 12787. 2 SharÍ Ma'ÉnÊ al-ÓthÉr, vol. 2, p. 231. 3 The jurists differed about the property of a killed enemy fighter. Some said that it is part of the spoils of war, and the state should not take a fifth of it. This is the view of the Shāf'īs and Ḥanbalīs. Other scholars said: "It is part of the property from which the state takes one-fifth, and it is not part of the spoils of war." Some scholars stated: "It is part of the booty after one-fifth of it is taken by the state." This was the view of
Uploads
Freedom in Islam by Islamic Modernist Discourse
Maqāṣid & Maṣlaḥa by Islamic Modernist Discourse