UCIS/2100

International Seminar on Islamic Jurisprudence, its Principles, and the Challenges of the 21st Century

Objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Shari'ah) and Ways to Achieve Them in Contemporary Societies

14-16 Rajab 1427 AH / 2006 AD
Organized by: Department of Fiqh and Usul al-Fiqh in cooperation with the International Institute for Muslim Unity, International Islamic University Malaysia
Part One (Arabic Research Papers)

p. 161
International Seminar on the Objectives of Sharia and Ways to Achieve Them in Contemporary Societies

A Reading of Contemporary Challenges Facing Maqasidi Jurisprudence

Dr. Ruqayya Taha al-Alwani[^1]

Introduction

Interest in Maqasidi jurisprudence (the jurisprudence of Sharia objectives) in the present era is still in its early stages, necessitating further specialized studies across various branches and axes of knowledge. However, this interest has recently begun to be accompanied by real challenges that may prevent Maqasidi jurisprudence from reaching a stage of maturity and stability. These challenges have taken multiple forms: some have adopted the approach of seizing the term "Maqasid" to project it onto their preconceived ideas and ready-made agendas; others have built a massive pile of doubts and accusations around the Maqasid; and a third group has neglected research into Maqasid altogether. It is noteworthy that all these contradictory trends occasionally adopt issues of significant importance, such as the call to establish a "Maqasidi mindset," utilizing Maqasid in prioritizing and linking particulars to universals, reforming educational curricula, and resisting extremism, terrorism, stagnation, and fanaticism... and other issues the Ummah needs for its present and future.

This paper is an attempt to shed light on the most prominent of these challenges, which have received little attention in Maqasid studies, either due to the novelty of their presentation on the intellectual scene or due to a lack of anticipation regarding their inherent danger. In both cases, the matter requires a dedicated study of these challenges to attempt to abort their risks and negatives, while pointing out the importance of adopting rigorous scientific efforts to resolve ambiguities and clarify the foundations and criteria that should be relied upon to rectify the Maqasidi discourse and benefit from it in various possible branches and fields.

The study presents the most prominent of these challenges, represented by the infiltration of proponents of "New Readings" into the Maqasidi orientation, highlighting the methodological flaws in this claim—whether regarding the nature of the Maqasidi concept they hold or their employment of unscientific and non-Sharia mechanisms when attempting to apply the Maqasid. The paper also addresses another challenge that emerged as a violent reaction to the first, represented by an increasing attack on various Maqasidi orientations through an indiscriminate equation between sincere, authentic calls and other suspicious claims. This is a matter of extreme gravity that requires careful scrutiny and a refusal to—

p. 162
—continue in this illusion that harms Maqasidi jurisprudence in its entirety.

The study also proposes a third challenge arising from a quick survey of the status of Maqasidi studies in Islamic colleges and departments, specifically in the Arabian Gulf region, which revealed a general weakness and a noticeable delay in this field. The study employs a comparative methodology with what occurred in contemporary Jewish religious thought, where the Maqasidi orientation was co-opted in reading legal texts in an attempt to interpret them in a way that aligns with modernism and postmodernism, and even to abolish those rulings and texts at later stages. By adopting this approach, the study does not aim to claim that the latter was influenced by the former, but rather to identify the historical gaps that occurred in Jewish religious thought in an attempt to avoid their repetition in contemporary Islamic thought, especially since religious thought in general shares common features. The study also provides a vision for how to face these challenges, rather than sufficing with rejecting them without providing possible alternatives to rectify the Maqasidi thought and its path.

Section One: Infiltration of Proponents of "New Readings" into the Maqasidi Orientation

Some contemporary writers and thinkers have resorted to picking up certain Maqasidi trends and terminologies, proceeding to project them onto their intellectual claims and aspirations in an attempt to merge and synthesize them with their principles aimed at renewal and change according to what contemporary societies dictate, without regulation or foundational grounding. These orientations have been dominated by a secular character, whose proponents believe—in one way or another—that religion is a personal matter with no relation to society. These writers adopt new theories and perspectives in interpreting Quranic texts in particular, employing a number of means and mechanisms to reach these "new readings" of the Quranic text.

Hence, their celebration of the Maqasid (objectives), for which rulings were only legislated to achieve. Consequently, rulings—in their view—have no value in themselves; rather, their value lies in the objectives they achieve. One writer states: "Maqasidi interpretation is the most appropriate interpretation from a religious perspective. Research should not linger on analyzing words; rather, one must search behind literal meanings for the spirit of the Quran and handle every issue according to its position within the comprehensive divine objectives. This research requires integrating the factor of time; a rule may be valid for a specific time, but if it becomes unsuitable over time and due to changing conditions, we must be able to change it."[^2]

p. 163
This type of reading does not look at the Maqasid through the texts; rather, it approaches the text with ready-made objectives. However, the Maqasid are not detached from the scope of the texts nor outside of them. Considering these objectives requires looking into them according to consistent conditions and criteria that negate disorder and arbitrary control without evidence. Hence came the focus of some of these writers on the necessity of not being restricted to the concept of Maqasid defined by jurists and legal theorists, especially Imam al-Shatibi.[[^3]]

Consequently, this type of reading was driven toward dissolving Sharia rulings or suspending them under the pretext of observing the Sharia's objectives and interests. In this context, Dr. al-Raysuni says: "We can say the secular school raises the banner of Maqasid and takes it far, not only to interpret texts and rulings but to abolish and drop them."[^4]

The Maqasidi orientation has been employed by many proponents of these readings to bring a ready-made view to the text and transform the Sharia rulings derived from texts—according to their Maqasidi nature, as they see it—into mere disciplinary rules enacted by human societies. One contemporary writer says in the context of discussing Maqasid: "Searching for the objective through the accidental and the variable is what guarantees a legitimate reading of religious texts—an objective reading in the relative historical sense. This is because with the change of circumstances, contexts, and conditions... we need a new reading that starts from a fixed foundation, which is the essential objective of Sharia."[^5]

Another writer believes that relying on the goal, wisdom, and objective when looking at the Quran is sufficient to achieve harmony above the texts and jurisprudential commentaries, and to attempt to reach the scientific content of the text and its true spirit.[[^6]]

Proponents of these trends have also synthesized the ijtihad (independent reasoning) of Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) within the context of the sovereignty of Maqasid and their hegemony over Quranic texts; thus, the text revolves around the objective in existence or non-existence, or is paused or suspended if a conflict arises between them. Among the most famous examples relied upon by some of these writers is the issue of abolishing the share of "those whose hearts are to be reconciled" (al-mu'allafatu qulubuhum). These writers believe that Umar did not deal with the text mentioned in the Quran regarding the allocation of a share for them as a permanent authority; rather, he considered the objective of the text and placed it above all considerations, which ultimately led to the abolition of the ruling when its objective disappeared.

p. 164
One contemporary thinker says, commenting on this issue: "If Umar ibn al-Khattab—the first legislator in Islam after the Book and the Sunnah—considered the interest (maslahah) and the status of Sharia and placed them above all considerations... the revolving of rulings with interests is something that imposes itself as long as we decide that interest is the basis of legislation."[^7]

What Umar ibn al-Khattab did was not an abolition of the text according to the absence of the objective of its application; rather, it was because in his time, the conditions for this category were not met, so the money was diverted to the rest of the eligible recipients.[[^8]]

The reality is that these trends are what have begun to generate a type of increasing intellectual anxiety regarding the attempts of these thinkers to embody the concept of "Maqasid-Logos" in man, so that he becomes his own reference, and the objectives become subjective objectives that vary according to persons and times. What is meant by the "Objectives of Sharia" for these movements are specific objectives, or the objectives of specific groups to the exclusion of others. Furthermore, what is meant are objectives according to certain principles (secular rather than others). The matter does not stop at proposing limited, factional, and biased concepts about Maqasid that lack the general applicability imagined by those who hear the phrase "Objectives of Sharia"; rather, the danger lies in the intent and purpose behind this concept.

Dr. al-Raysuni points to this fact, emphasizing that what is happening today and being issued by some modernists or secularists—the call to Maqasid—is not the Objectives of Sharia, because they are not extracted from it. Sharia objectives are those extracted from the text itself. They call for ideas that came from Western thought, and despite their many positives, their existence or absence in the text must be examined. They also come with ready-made objectives in their minds and ready-made conceptions of justice, rights, man, and the lifestyle of society, imposing them on Sharia on the basis that they are part of it, while it is impossible for the Objectives of Sharia to be detached from the text. Sharia consists of texts, and from them we extract the objectives. The extraction process may be easy or may require research, but in all cases, there are no objectives for Sharia that are not extracted from it; there is a complete correlation between the text and the objectives.[[^9]]

The claims of these thinkers are based on the idea that Western ideas and values are human ideas and there is no harm in inserting them into Islam regardless of their presence or absence in the texts. They consider that under contemporary culture, Western ideas have become the refuge of modern man, and Muslims have no choice but to adopt them; if a problem is found, they search in religion and texts for an adaptation for them.

p. 165
In this regard, one writer says: "If there are eternal general necessities like those enumerated by our jurists yesterday, then every age has its necessities, needs, and complementaries. Thus, when we succeed in making the necessities of our age part of the objectives of our Sharia, we will have worked not only to open the door of ijtihad in the renewed and evolving events of our age; but we will also have begun work on grounding the foundations of our Sharia itself in a way that ensures a living response to every change that occurs or novelty that arises."[^10]

What the writer mentioned confirms an important reality evident in the attempts of this trend to adapt Sharia rulings to the spirit of the age and its developments by employing Maqasid, the spirit of legislation, the legalization of change, and other concepts that were not left in Islamic Sharia without a criterion or rule. However, these trends did not turn to these authentic concepts in Islam initially; rather, they came to them to adapt a reality that is already imposed and existing. These attempts appear in the arenas of religious thought in general during moments of weakness, projections of psychological defeat, and a sense of inferiority in the face of the other's dominance and authority—a matter that occurred in various circles of religious thought, such as Judaism.

The fixed Sharia rulings in Judaism based on Torah texts were transformed into disciplinary rules based on social deterrence at the hands of the Reform movement that first appeared among Jews living in Europe in the mid-nineteenth century. It employed Maqasid and the spirit of legislation to adapt divine commands and fixed Sharia rulings to the demands and changes of the age. The Jewish Reform movement announced its explicit approach in rejecting and rebuffing Mosaic and Rabbinic legislations, including the revealed Sharia and similar sanctities, while emphasizing the necessity of relying on the spirit of Jewish legislations and their objectives and elevating their status without being bound by their rituals and formalities.

"In recent years, the movement has reemphasised Jewish ritual, but encourages individuality in the expression of these rituals. The spirit of the law is more important than the ritual. For example, Shabbat should be a day of rest, but observance of Shabbat does not necessarily have to include abstaining from using electricity or writing. Reform Jews are encouraged to learn about Jewish ritual and to exercise individual choice in determining the way that they will incorporate these rituals into their lives."[^11]

The Reform movement in Judaism did not stop its demand for change at the level of transactions (Mu'amalat) only, but extended to include the system of worship and its rituals. Prayers were performed in German more than in Hebrew, and with great speed, violations of Sharia and laws in Judaism—Halachah—followed, which ultimately led the rabbis to publicly break from—

p. 166
—traditional customary teachings and the body of laws, considering them entirely an error in the sequence of history and events. They ended up abandoning even the Jewish Sabbath entirely in favor of Sunday under the pretext of considering the objective and spirit of legislation. The Reform movement considered those rituals and acts of worship as formalities with no justification, and therefore they could be changed or replaced entirely.[[^12]]

The Jewish thinker Grunfeld says in this regard:

"...the Jewish masses of the present day have become almost completely estranged from the Sabbath.......the Sabbath must be kept as a ordained day as defined by the Torah, undiminished by the demands of ignorance and undistorted by ideas gained from outside sources"[^13]

The only correct rulings are those that serve the philosophy of "Teleological Jurist," who is concerned with the goal of applying those rulings and how to direct these goals toward developing the rulings.

"The only authentic Halakhic approach must be that which approximates the philosophy of the teleological jurist. The teleological jurist asks: what are the ends of the law which God or nature ordained and how can we be guided by these ideal ends in developing the law?"[^14]

Here, the arbitrary interpretation of texts emerges, through which an external view of the text is taken based on the claim of achieving objectives and interests. The interpreter brings a ready-made view that does not see in the texts a reference frame that should be returned to. Thus, the Maqasidi nature of the texts according to what the interpreter alone sees becomes the central reference for all interpretations and understandings. Some Jewish thinkers have pointed to this decisive fact, clarifying the clear difference between the presentation of early Jewish scholars such as Moses Maimonides of Maqasidi jurisprudence and their emphasis on its importance in considering the reasoning of various Jewish legislations with universally acceptable reasons, and what Jewish Reformists today propose and their attempts to adapt Maqasidi jurisprudence to the variables of the age.

Rabbi David Novak says:

p. 167

"Maimonides attempts as much as he can to provide for Jewish laws reasons that are universally valid and universally intelligible, but without the sacrifice of revelation we saw in some of the modern Jewish thinkers"[^15]

The Maqasidi presentation adopted by some pens of the "New Readings" does not differ much from what happened among the Jewish Reformists in terms of their continuous attempts to present a contemporary Islamic thought under the influence of external pressures that urged keeping pace with the secular West in its propositions and ideas. Hence, the difference was clear between the presentation of the early imams of Maqasid who issued their interest in Maqasid from a position not afflicted by weakness in the self or defeatism in the interior and pressure in the exterior, and a miserable self that vainly tries to keep pace with the prevailing thought and pick up its justifications and excuses for existence from its heritage.[[^16]]

The analytical approach to the phrase "Objectives of Legislation" as promoted in the intellectual circles referred to shows that the meaning contained in its implications is not of the generality and absolute nature imagined, but is a meaning established on a specific principle and creed that aims to keep pace with modern Western secular thought since its inception in the eighteenth century AD until now. The concepts of "Objectives of Legislation," "Human Rights," and so on, which are now promoted in their diversity and details, are nothing but the security embodiment of Western secular thought. What is common now among those who raise the slogan of Maqasid from this trend is the claim that there is no conflict between the idea of Maqasid and the spirit of legislation and Islam. Rather, Islam is what laid the foundations of this idea, and calling for it is at the heart of legislation, just as promoting and defending it is in reality promoting and defending religion.

This presentation in reality relies on a deliberate obscuring of the partial, relative, historical character associated with Western secularism in the concepts promoted by these people. Then on a false claim that these concepts are universal, comprehensive, and human, which means the generality of their applicability, to legitimize the intellectual patching operations that aim to prove Islam's blessing of those concepts and even its establishment of them in an attempt to marry this thought with the teachings of Islamic Sharia. This thought, cloaked in claims of Maqasidi nature and consideration of historical circumstances and context... is nothing but a blatant expression of a specific, relative, partial, and historical creed that clashes with the authentic objectives of legislation and its clear teachings.

p. 168
Accordingly, Dr. Hassan Hanafi believes that some "secular" parties may be closer to the objectives of Sharia than "Islamic" parties...[^17] The proponents of "New Readings" have succeeded in attaching the Maqasidi path to their propositions despite the massive disparity between what they repeat and its authentic thought. This illegitimate attachment appeared in the description of a number of contemporary thinkers of their interpretations as "Maqasidi."[^18]

The proponents of "New Readings" have tried to pass their arbitrary interpretations in liberating themselves from the authority of texts on the shoulders of claiming Maqasidi nature, so they came to the texts with a preconceived view that does not see in them a reference frame that should be appealed to, so that Maqasidi nature (according to what they see) becomes the central reference for all their interpretations and understandings. Professor Ali Harb says: "Important readings of the Quran are not those that tell us what the text wanted to say, but rather those that reveal what the text is silent about, excludes, or forgets... Creative reading is that which transcends what is stated and spoken."[^19]

However, all of this should not lead us to pass this claim and confirm their ambitions in promoting their reading as "Maqasidi."[^20] For this reason, it was necessary to emphasize the following points in this context:

• The necessity of being keen on investigating the process of regulating the Maqasidi orientation. The inability to anticipate the distant results of delving and overindulging in the Maqasidi orientation without a regulator or link can lead to a deficiency or a major flaw that reaches the point of challenging the basic objectives themselves based on a flawed understanding or a deficient chaotic interpretation. Expanding in Maqasidi ijtihad without methodological criteria and Sharia constants can constitute a dangerous slope that ends in dissolving Sharia rulings or suspending them in the name of interests and objectives, so texts are besieged and Sharia rulings are paused in the name of achieving objectives and goals. It is worth noting in this context that the early imams of Maqasid researched the issue of criteria and dedicated chapters to them in their works. Among them are the expressions of al-Shatibi (may Allah have mercy on him) regarding criteria and means in uncovering Maqasid: "Whoever takes a path to a benefit other than its prescribed path is striving for the opposite of that benefit," "Induction through the total evidence of Sharia, the Book and the Sunnah, and it provides certainty because the universals of Sharia do not rely on a single piece of evidence but on a group of evidences that converged on one meaning and gave it the quality of certainty," and "The failure of some particulars to meet the requirement of the universal does not remove it from being a universal."[^21]

• Apprehension about over-reliance on the Maqasidi nature of texts or its misapplication with all its justifications and excuses does not necessitate wasting or abolishing the role of Maqasidi nature or diminishing its importance in achieving a sound understanding of texts in order to build and form criteria for acceptance and rejection of any interpretation or effort that aims to invoke the Maqasidi approach, nor should it lead to attaching the authentic Maqasidi method to a diseased method on the basis of some people being cloaked in it. This could lead to a trend of caution against every thought that calls for adopting the authentic objectives in religion.

Section Two: Other Regional Challenges

There are other challenges facing Maqasidi jurisprudence in some Arab countries, and these challenges have appeared within a social, intellectual, and political system that should not be bypassed so that the full picture of the size of these challenges and the circumstances of their appearance becomes clear, and then how to contribute to overcoming them or diminishing their significance. Among these challenges are the following:

The Increasing Attack on Maqasidi Orientations
The intellectual arenas in some Arab countries have recently witnessed the birth of new movements led by some thinkers calling for political reform in an Islamic democratic pattern. Many of these activists have begun to direct unprecedented criticism at many of the prevailing concepts in those societies, emphasizing the necessity of the correlation between political and religious reform. These thinkers have been able to establish alliances with elements of different trends and orientations. They classify themselves as proponents of moderation and reform,[^22] while Stephane Lacroix calls them "Libero-Islamists."[^23]

p. 170
These thinkers have called in many of their articles and writings for the adoption of the Maqasidi method, as it is the one capable of bringing about the desired change in thought and politics simultaneously. Dr. Abdullah al-Hamid—one of the most prominent pioneers of these trends—emphasizes that what he calls for simply consists of returning to the method of the righteous predecessors (Salaf) and not to their production, with a clear vision of what the objectives of Sharia should be. The goal of re-reading Quranic texts is to show that the Islamic religion essentially requires social as well as spiritual elevation.[[^24]]

These orientations—even if they seem intellectual at first glance—should not be extracted from the context in which they were generated. The call to Maqasid in the thought of these writers emerged through the presentation of their political project, which was formulated in several stages and mainly through statements and petitions in the wake of the Gulf War and the events of September 11.[[^25]] These writers focused in their claims on the importance of Maqasid and their necessity in the process of reform and renewal. Professor al-Nuqaidan says in the context of talking about reform: "What we desperately need is an enlightened understanding of Sharia and Quranic texts and their objectives, taking into account the great development and the winds of change blowing on nations and civilizations... There must be a real revolution of concepts; interests and objectives are what must determine our way of understanding the Quran and not the other way around."[^26]

Dr. Abdulaziz al-Qasim, who addressed in many of his writings the importance of modifying educational curricula in Islamic subjects, emphasizes the necessity of adopting and presenting Maqasidi jurisprudence on the Najdi scene. Religion cannot be explained to people except through a holistic reading of jurisprudence instead of partial views with which the holistic meaning of Sharia disappears, and the means of this reading is Maqasidi jurisprudence.[[^27]]

p. 171
This presentation coincided with the greatly increased talk about the subject of renewing religious discourse since September 11 in Arab media and intellectual circles, and it also coincided with external calls to reproduce this discourse and even Islamic concepts through reforming religious education in the Arab and Islamic world. Some Western thinkers and politicians have called in this context for what they called the process of "religion-building" similar to the idea of "nation-building." Many calls and demands for renewing religious discourse were also issued by different trends, including the secular trend and others. All of them demanded a reconsideration of many issues associated with religious discourse, including a reconsideration of education and teaching curricula.

Alongside all of this, programs of intellectual reform imposed on the Muslim mind by some Arab regimes appeared. This made it seem as if the Maqasidi orientation there was the executive wing of those political mobilization programs, especially since the Maqasidi orientation is considered a thought opposed to extremism and what resulted from it in terms of issues of takfir (excommunication), stagnation, and intellectual closure prevalent in many of our Muslim societies today—a matter that regimes and peoples generally aim to get rid of.

Despite the emphasis of a number of researchers interested in Maqasid on the importance of grounding Maqasid in the field of Sharia-based politics (Siyasa Shar'iyya) and addressing important issues in the life of the state and contemporary Islamic society with a Maqasidi mindset,[^28] this path that we referred to in the previous lines still needs a lot of effort to ground it and deepen studies in it. In addition to the necessity of exercising caution and prudence in the presentation away from employment and synthesis. The issue of Maqasid appeared in their presentation at some times attracting attention not in terms of the content of the ideas contained therein, but in terms of the diverse political goals and movements associated with it and those who present it. Thus, the Maqasidi presentation was viewed as if it were a political issue and an imposed external demand.

Based on those backgrounds, this orientation and its propositions and statements were met with strong opposition from most of the Salafi trends present on that scene, which appeared in an attacking orientation toward most of what the reformists propose, and the Maqasidi orientation had the lion's share of that attack. Indeed, the apprehension about the mere use of the word "Maqasid" was clear in a number of conservative and traditional writings.

p. 172
One contemporary writer says under the title: "Maqasid is a Fifth Taghut (Idol), So Who Will Smash It?"[^29]: "...Maqasid, the lethal poison, and the deception in it is more solid and perfected, and it is to them 'the spirit of Sharia'... and everything else is 'husks' and they do not want in reality except the invalidation of Sharia under the cover of taking by Maqasid, and the dropping of scholars who stand by the Sunnahs and traditions by saying they do not know the Maqasid in their fatwas. Therefore, I call upon my brothers, the scholars and students of knowledge, to smash this fifth Taghut."

Another writer says in the same attacking context: "Talk about Maqasid these days has begun to embolden against the texts and view them as followers not followed, and led not leading, and they are in the orbit of Maqasid like a millstone in the hand of the miller. This strange theory, no matter how much renewal it carries and bypassing the piecemeal approach in understanding Sharia rulings—as they claimed—is only believed by a few people."[^30]

The writer continues by saying: "And this group who were infatuated with the falsity of Western civilization may find in the Islamic heritage the anomalies with which they hide from people the reality of their falsity and their distance from the basis of the religion they pretend to profess... These people made the nonsense of al-Tufi—may Allah forgive him—and his interest-based view a refuge or an entry point to pass what we hear of humming around the saying of Maqasid, and that it is the Qibla (direction) that the mujtahid jurist should turn his face toward to treat the problems facing Muslims whatever they are... economic, political, or cultural. This call emboldened against the texts, cloaked in Maqasid, is correlated with other calls calling for the renewal of the jurisprudential foundations of Islam as is the famous Turabi call."[^31]

It is noted about the aforementioned attacking trends that they fall into a number of fallacies, including:

• Fallacies of Ambiguity: including equivocation and prevarication in using words and phrases with multiple meanings, amphiboly, lack of emphasis, and quoting out of context (accent), non-objective generalization, and applying the part to the whole.
• Fallacies of Relevance: this type includes personal attacks on the persons addressed by the discourse rather than on their arguments and sayings. It also includes reliance on stereotyping in formulating and presenting arguments and forming the vision of this discourse in general. Finally, the irrelevant conclusion.[^32] This is perfectly clear in the quotes we referred to earlier.

---

p. 173
In summary, talking about this challenge is like walking in a field of thorns, due to the process of ambiguity and overlap between what may be proposed in terms of holding the religious discourse and its various tributaries responsible for the emergence of extremist tendencies among a large number of Arab and Islamic youth, and what other pens propose about this matter. This may make the matter of self-review and reform attempts appear as if it were a repetition of the sayings and claims of the other discourse, and a contribution to the campaign hostile to Islam and Islamic movements today.

Professor Allal al-Fassi (may Allah have mercy on him) dedicated a large space to this issue, especially since his call to revive Maqasidi thought also coincided with the dominance of colonialism and its attempts to impose its legislations and apply them. He clarified the disastrous effects and destructive dimensions of colonial legislations imposed on Muslims and excelled in revealing the flaws of colonial legislation to the point that he put a title in his book Defense of Sharia called: "Some Objectives of Colonial Sharia."[^33]

From here, the responsibility falling on the shoulders of scholars in this region is very serious, in terms of clarifying the massive difference between practicing operations of criticism and review of religious discourse—with what this review may carry of acknowledgment and recognition of a set of errors and deviations that afflict many religious discourses at our current time on one hand—and what is imposed on the Ummah from outside it in terms of methods and intellectual reforms that are nothing more than a cause for more defeatism and intellectual submission on the other hand. If the two matters meet in some issues like interest in Maqasidi nature, this is not considered a justification for sacrificing the reform project in its entirety.

Interest in Maqasidi thought and the attempt to establish a Maqasidi mindset remains among the priorities of reform that can contribute to ridding the Ummah of tendencies of extremism, stagnation, and strictness in Muslim youth, specifically those who receive jurisprudence and Sharia sciences in many Sharia colleges in the Islamic world or institutes or educational mosque circles. Accordingly—

p. 176
(Pagination jump in original document scan)
—orientations, but rather challenging argument with argument and defining the objectives and means of uncovering them in an applied way in various emerging issues of the Ummah and society.[^34]

• The necessity of interest in grounding Maqasid and the means of uncovering them in various contemporary issues and not bypassing the characteristics of texts and their nature when uncovering those objectives under the pretext of employing modern mechanisms and the critical methods emerging upon them.
• The importance of standing on the contributions of the early imams of Maqasid and having sufficient knowledge of what they reached in terms of rules and criteria in uncovering and activating them. With the necessity of understanding the tools used to uncover them in context, especially inductive tools that start with broad and precise research at the level of particulars and then move to linking and synthesis to reach universal truths.[^35]
• The necessity of directing interest to the human sciences, including psychology, sociology, politics, and economics... etc., and teaching them on a Maqasidi basis, with the importance of ending the state of schizophrenia between the language of Sharia sciences and understanding the age and its variables, which relies heavily on human sciences.
• Taking executive procedural steps in introducing the subject of Maqasid into all study requirements for colleges of Sharia and Islamic studies, especially in the Arabian Gulf region where this type of study is almost rare.

Conclusion of the Study

This paper aimed to clarify some of the challenges facing Maqasidi thought in the present era. It addressed a general challenge represented by the infiltration by proponents of "New Readings" into Maqasidi thought, and it also addressed challenges described as regional, such as the indiscriminate attack on Maqasid, and the lack of interest in Maqasidi studies in Gulf and Eastern universities generally. The study clarified that Maqasid did not come to bestow legitimacy on any reformist or renewalist trend, and researchers in Maqasidi studies must realize this matter, avoid it, and distance Maqasidi nature from the negatives of dependency and impersonation.

---

Footnotes
[^1]: Assistant Professor in the Department of Arabic Language and Islamic Studies, College of Arts, University of Bahrain.
[^2]: Mohamed Charfi, Islam and Freedom: The Historical Ambiguity, Morocco, Le Fennec, undated. Quoted from Abdelmajid al-Najjar, The New Reading of the Religious Text: Presentation and Critique, Conference of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy in its 16th session, 2005, p. 17.
[^3]: Nasr Abu Zayd, Circles of Fear: A Reading in the Discourse of Women, Morocco, Arab Cultural Center, 2nd ed., 2000, pp. 68-69.
[^4]: Interview with Dr. Ahmed al-Raysuni, on Al-Majd TV channel, Sa'at Hiwar program, 2005/02/27.
[^5]: Nasr Abu Zayd, previous reference, p. 69.
[^6]: Muhammad Salim Ghanem, From the Realities of the Quran, Dar al-Farabi, Beirut, 2000, p. 58.
[^7]: Mohammed Abed al-Jabri, A Point of View: Towards Rebuilding the Issues of Contemporary Arab Thought, 2nd ed., Center for Arab Unity Studies, Beirut, 1994, p. 63.
[^8]: See what was written about this: Muhammad Beltaji, Umar ibn al-Khattab's Method in Legislation, Youth Library, Egypt, 1998, p. 189.
[^9]: Adapted slightly from: Ahmed al-Raysuni, Muhammad Jamal Barout, Ijtihad: Text, Reality, Interest (Dialogues for a New Century), 2000.
[^10]: Al-Jabri, previous reference, p. 68.
[^11]: (Source not fully specified in OCR beyond a general reference to Jewish reform movements).
[^12]: Irfan Abdul Hamid, Judaism: A Historical Presentation and Modern Movements in Judaism, Dar al-Bayariq and Ammar, Beirut, 1417/1997, Part Two, p. 149 onwards.
[^13]: Dayan Dr. J. Grunfeld, The Sabbath, 8th edition, Feldheim Publishers, New York, 1981, pp. 84-85.
[^14]: Jacob Neusner, Judaism in Modern Times, Blackwell Publishers, USA, 1995, p. 99.
[^15]: David Novak, Natural Law in Judaism, Cambridge University Press, 1998, p. 92. (Quoting Rackman, Emanuel, Sabbaths and Festivals in the Modern Age, Yeshiva University, New York, 1961 from Jacob Neusner, Ibid, p. 94).
[^16]: Adapted slightly from: Ruqayya Taha al-Alwani, The Impact of Custom in Understanding Texts: Women's Issues as a Model, Syria, Dar al-Fikr, 2003, p. 278.
[^17]: Hassan Hanafi, Islamic Parties Between Form and Content, March 17, 2006. http://www.arabrenewal.com/index.php?rd=AI&A10=6469
[^18]: Abdelmajid al-Najjar, previous reference, p. 17.
[^19]: Ali Harb, Critique of the Text, Arab Cultural Center, Morocco, 4th ed., 2005, p. 20.
[^20]: A number of papers of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy conference referred to above focused on the Maqasidi feature in the new reading, which suggests danger from continuing this talk and requires a reading that anticipates the future through this dangerous intellectual attraction. See for example the paper of Professor Dr. Muhammad bin al-Hadi Abu al-Ajfan, The New Reading of Revelation Texts and Discussion of Claims... mentioned previously, p. 15 of his research.
[^21]: See: Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi, Al-Muwafaqat fi Usul al-Fiqh, edited by Abdullah Daraz, Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, undated, vol. 2, p. 41. Ahmed al-Raysuni, The Theory of Maqasid According to Imam al-Shatibi, Riyadh, 2nd ed., International Islamic Book House, 1992, p. 187.
[^22]: This was stated by the well-known Saudi lawyer Abdulaziz al-Qasim in his various writings as will be explained.
[^23]: See his study titled "Between Islamists and Liberals: The New Libero-Islamist Reformers in Saudi Arabia," (Middle East Journal, 10-17/10/2004). Many sites have transmitted this study, including: IslamOnline, Rasid News, and others. http://www.rasid.com.
[^24]: An episode broadcast on Al Jazeera titled: "Renewal of Religious Thought," dated: 2002/05/26, and the transcript of the episode is on the Al Jazeera website.
[^25]: See for example the statement issued in April 2002 by 150 Saudi thinkers titled "On What Basis Do We Coexist" and the reform project titled: "Vision of the Present of the Nation and its Future: A Reform Covenant," August 2002.
[^26]: Mansour al-Nuqaidan, see his various writings, articles, and interviews on his website titled: http://www.saudinote.com/mansour/wa4.html
[^27]: An interview conducted with him by Al-Muhaid magazine on the magazine's website.
[^28]: Among them what was mentioned by Ismail al-Hasani, The Theory of Maqasid According to Imam Muhammad al-Tahir ibn Ashur, International Institute of Islamic Thought, USA, 1995, p. 407.
[^29]: Salih al-Kharshi. http://www.sahab.net/sahab/printthread. It has been referred to on other sites.
[^30]: Saad Muqbil al-Anzi, The New Maqasidists. http://www.saaid.net/arabic/81.htm
[^31]: Saad Muqbil al-Anzi, The New Maqasidists, previous reference.
[^32]: For more on these points see: Habib Arab, "Argumentation and Argumentative Reasoning: Elements of Theoretical Investigation," Alam al-Fikr, No. 1, Vol. 30, July-September 2001, pp. 97-133, and also: Mohamed Chawki Zine, Interpretations and Deconstructions: Chapters in Contemporary Western Thought, Beirut, Arab Cultural Center, 2002, pp. 84-85. Technology Co., 2001 David, Argumentation: On the study of effective reasoning, Chantilly, VA Zarefsky.
[^33]: Allal al-Fassi, Defense of Sharia, Rabat, Risala Press, 1966. See also Ahmed al-Raysuni, From the Figures of Maqasidi Thought, Dar al-Hadi, Beirut, 2003, p. 82.
[^34]: See what was pointed out by Professor Dr. Qutb Mustafa Sano, research The New Reading of the Quran and Religious Texts: A Methodological Vision, Islamic Fiqh Academy, 16th session, p. 2.
[^35]: Adapted from: Gamal Eldin Attia, Towards Activating the Objectives of Sharia, International Institute of Islamic Thought, USA, and Dar al-Fikr, Syria, 2003, pp. 20-21.