As regards what I shall term the Islamic fiqh of our times or simply put “the Islam of the time”, one principle that must be seriously contemplated is that of “arf” custom (common law). It is very clear that along with Quranic guidance, custom was a dominant principle in determining jurisprudence for the early Muslim community. Many customs and traditions that were familiar as practices in Arabia were maintained improved upon and systematized becoming what we will call Islamic laws and traditions. Of course to accomplish such requires reasoning and rationalizing with common practices within all societies and having local positions developed. The first two schools such as the Maliki and Hanafi absolutely respected custom and in the case of Hanafi not only respecting custom but also respecting the difference in customs. The Quran explicitly ask that the customs of people be respected so as not to cause difficulty and hardships for people. The Quran states clearly “there is no superiority of Arab over none Arab”. The clear and natural problem of disrespect of arf (local custom) came as a result of expansions of the Islamic empires. Islamic/Arab Colonization and imperialism spread quickly crushing many indigenous cultures in the process up to the point where at the end of the expansion periods it left clear cultural walls defining the so called Islamic world from that of Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism etc. So we now have the cultural blocks of the West, the Orient and the Middle East. Some parts of Africa were resistant to cultural imperialism and as a result many aspects of their indigenous culture survived and became assimilated with an Islamic spiritual infusion. Given that Islamic law and jurisprudence was generally derived in Arabia and Persia in the first few centuries and based on the common practices and customs of those times and places, in real terms the laws and fiqh can be revisited as inappropriate for the new times and new places because the customs in many places are completely different. There is the need for a Western Fiqh but who can be authorized to develop it? The next problem is that scholarship considered as the authorities has essentially been based on scholarship and custom stemming from the older jurist whose life and experience with custom is very different from the broader world of today. Some Muslims today make a call to a shayk in Mecca to deal with a situation in their Western environment. With all due respect for the Shayk in Mecca, but how could they truly evaluate a matter of custom in a place where they have no experience, without having cultural bias? The issue gets even larger, when we look at the conversions during the life of the prophet. While we do understand the resistance, essentially the conversions of his time were seamless because of cultural familiarity. The arguments were an intellectual exercise, the Quran had irrefutable arguments and culture was not an issue, unlike so many communities now in the West where people are being taught particulars of the faith by individuals and sources from an entirely different cultural background. The challenge for many Westerners is to decipher the essentials of Islam from that of Arab or Middle Eastern culture. The challenge for the West is to have a message that is relevant. Islam during the time of the prophet was a contemporaneous movement engaging every aspect of the peninsula. It was not an invasion of an ideology extraneous to their society or needs; it was quintessential to their needs. In order for there to be a real and true development of Islam in the West it would need similarly to be an answer to a call and cry from deep within the minds of the Western person social experience and struggles and a mercy to the environment. True Islam must be a native outgrowth and experience that comes out from the people and not an effect of colonization or something parachuted in.
Posted on: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 03:41:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015