Natural Law in Islam

A. Emon
{"title":"Natural Law in Islam","authors":"A. Emon","doi":"10.1017/9781108525077.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter will introduce the basic, theoretical architecture of competing Islamic natural law theories from the pre-modern period (ninth to fourteenth centuries). Specifically, it will outline juristic debates in the usul al-fiqh genre on reason as a source of law, where revelation is silent. Thereafter it will reflect on a range of doctrinal debates inwhichmany of those same pre-modern jurists came to a legal determination without reference to scriptural (or any other) texts. Drawing on a curious heuristic they labelled huquq Allah and huquq al-ʿibad (the claims of God and the claims of individuals), I will show that despite not invoking (expressly or otherwise) any natural law account of Islamic law, jurists nonetheless developed law based on a mode of rationality that could be called anything from ‘rational’ to ‘common-sense’ to ‘pragmatic’. Whether or not the huquq Allah/huquq al-ʿibad heuristic is proof positive of natural law in Islam is less important than recognising the scope of questions that have yet to be examined. But as I will suggest in the third and concluding part, there are political reasons (some of which enjoy disciplinary cover) that help explain why some questions are not asked, and why some answers are deemed naïve, if not impolitic.","PeriodicalId":144597,"journal":{"name":"The Cambridge Companion to Natural Law Ethics","volume":"91 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Cambridge Companion to Natural Law Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108525077.010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This chapter will introduce the basic, theoretical architecture of competing Islamic natural law theories from the pre-modern period (ninth to fourteenth centuries). Specifically, it will outline juristic debates in the usul al-fiqh genre on reason as a source of law, where revelation is silent. Thereafter it will reflect on a range of doctrinal debates inwhichmany of those same pre-modern jurists came to a legal determination without reference to scriptural (or any other) texts. Drawing on a curious heuristic they labelled huquq Allah and huquq al-ʿibad (the claims of God and the claims of individuals), I will show that despite not invoking (expressly or otherwise) any natural law account of Islamic law, jurists nonetheless developed law based on a mode of rationality that could be called anything from ‘rational’ to ‘common-sense’ to ‘pragmatic’. Whether or not the huquq Allah/huquq al-ʿibad heuristic is proof positive of natural law in Islam is less important than recognising the scope of questions that have yet to be examined. But as I will suggest in the third and concluding part, there are political reasons (some of which enjoy disciplinary cover) that help explain why some questions are not asked, and why some answers are deemed naïve, if not impolitic.
伊斯兰教的自然法
本章将介绍前现代时期(9至14世纪)相互竞争的伊斯兰自然法理论的基本理论架构。具体来说,它将概述通常的伊斯兰教流派中关于理性作为法律来源的法律辩论,其中启示是沉默的。此后,它将反思一系列教义辩论,在这些辩论中,许多前现代法学家在没有参考圣经(或任何其他)文本的情况下得出了法律决定。利用他们标记为huquq Allah和huquq al- taibad(上帝的主张和个人的主张)的一种奇怪的启发式,我将表明,尽管没有(明确或以其他方式)援引伊斯兰法的任何自然法解释,法学家仍然基于一种理性模式发展了法律,这种模式可以被称为从“理性”到“常识”再到“实用主义”。是否huquq Allah/huquq al- al- ibad启发式是伊斯兰教自然法的肯定证据,比认识到尚未研究的问题的范围更重要。但正如我将在第三部分(也是结论部分)提出的那样,有一些政治原因(其中一些享有纪律保护)有助于解释为什么有些问题没有被问到,为什么有些答案被认为是naïve,如果不是不明智的话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信