A Conflict Between Divine texts and Human Legal Needs?

This paper presents excerpted translations from a longer text by the Moroccan jurist, Ahmad al-Raysuni, which highlight a key facet of contemporaneous Muslim legal debates about law and religion. They especially focus on the thorny question of whether textual sources are liable to conflict with pure...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteur principal: Meiloud, Ahmed (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
En cours de chargement...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publié: Brill 2016
Dans: Islamic Africa
Année: 2016, Volume: 7, Numéro: 1, Pages: 81-89
Sujets non-standardisés:B ḥudud
B istidlal
B furu‘
B istiḥasan
B shar‘
B maslaḥa
B ‘urf
B maqasid
B Ijtihad
B ḥijab
B Usul
Accès en ligne: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Résumé:This paper presents excerpted translations from a longer text by the Moroccan jurist, Ahmad al-Raysuni, which highlight a key facet of contemporaneous Muslim legal debates about law and religion. They especially focus on the thorny question of whether textual sources are liable to conflict with pure rational legal considerations and hence must be sidestepped to protect personal or public interests. In these excerpts Raysuni defends his position, and that of many of the so-called ‘moderate’ Islamists, who–while decry the rigid literalism of other traditionalists—maintain that explicit textual injunctions could never conflict with rationality. They believe, as Raysuni asserts here, that any conceived contradiction between texts and rationality is either a misconception of rationality or a misunderstanding of texts.
ISSN:2154-0993
Contient:Enthalten in: Islamic Africa
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/21540993-00701006