Two Shi'i Jurisprudential Methodologies to Address Medical and Bioethical Challenges: Traditional Ijtihād and Foundational Ijtihād. Issue 2 (June 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mavani, Hamid
• Is Part Of: Journal of religious ethics. Volume 42:Issue 2(2014)
• Page Start: 263
• Page End: 284
• Publication Date: 2014-06
• Subjects: Ethics -- Periodicals; Religious ethics -- Periodicals; Morale religieuse; Religion; Théologie; 205
• DOI: 10.1111/jore.12056
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0384-9694

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>The legal‐ethical dynamism in Islamic law which allows it to respond to the challenges of modernity is said to reside in the institution of <italic>ijtihād</italic> (independent legal thinking and hermeneutics). However, jurists like Mohsen Kadivar and Ayatollah Faḍlalla have argued that the "traditional <italic>ijtihād</italic>" paradigm has reached its limits of flexibility as it allows for only minor adaptations and lacks a rigorous methodology because of its reliance on vague and highly subjective juridical devices such as public welfare (<italic>maṣlaḥa</italic>), imperative necessity (<italic>ḍarūra</italic>), emergency (<italic>iḍtirār</italic>), need (<italic>ḥāja</italic>), averting difficulty (<italic>'usr</italic>) and distress (<italic>ḥaraj</italic>), hardship (<italic>mashaqqa</italic>), and harm (<italic>ḍarar</italic>) without interrogating the fundamentals (<italic>uṣūl</italic>) of <italic>ijtihād</italic>. In contrast, in the "foundational <italic>ijtihād</italic>" model theology, ethics, intellect, epistemology, linguistics, hermeneutics, modern sciences, history, cosmology, anthropology, and the sources of Islamic legal theory (<italic>uṣūl al‐fiqh</italic>) interact with one another to obtain resolutions that are just and non‐discriminatory.</p> </abstract>