Until this day, Islamic thought still believes that the idea of Islamic sharia, in its comprehensive and detailed dimensions, covers all life facilities. Any incident, event, or behavior that confronts a person in his life, individually or as a group, the Sharia has stipulated a reference whether is obligatory or otherwise.
Despite the complexities of life and the development of civil life, the emergence of many legal details and complications, and the intertwining of the networks of relationships between human beings in our modern era. Islamic jurisprudence still strongly holds this idea, and considers that the sources of knowledge and Ijtihad can provide us with a comprehensive coverage of all the facilities of life. The idea that this research wants to address is a criticism of this prevailing saying, that it says that the issue is not in this way, there is no detailed coverage of all life facts by Islamic sharia. And that the evidence that was based on the book, the Sunnah, or the mind is not accurate.
the Sharia is a series of higher values and a series of major rules, as well as a series of boundaries that the book called the limits of God, that govern human life. However, this does not mean that the boundaries within Sharia interfered with all these details and gave a reference to all facts.
The issue is not necessarily like that, there is a wide area of details in which the Sharia interfered and gave an opinion. But there are also many emerging issues in which the Sharia did not give a detailed opinion, but there is a Shari’a cover that was put in place.
Consequently, the Islamic mind must, on its own, as a result of human experience, lay down a series of laws that respond to those Islamic values and respond to those limits and not violate them. These laws fill this void in which there is no provision, which is expressed in the legislative void or silent region in the Sharia.
So the human mind must enact laws to regulate this circle of human life, in light of those higher values and in light of those major lines without penetrating God’s boundaries in that circle. This is the central idea that the research wants. Therefore, the Sharia does not lay down laws for all the details of daily life, it establishes laws for an important area, but leaves another important space for the person to set laws with his mind, while taking the values of Sharia and not violating its limits.
The context in which the research issue was born is originally a theological context, foundations for the concept of inclusiveness through (the idea of God’s intervention) in the world and managing its affairs and human affairs in it.
The research presented three philosophical and verbal trends in this context:
- The attitude of the Abrahamic religions towards the idea of God and his connection to the world. They assert that this link takes two forms, the ontological formative link, and the guiding link, and they express it through prophecies.
- The position of atheism that does not believe in the idea of the existence of God, then it does not mean that God intervenes in the world.
- Supporters of the deist philosophy, or the so-called natural doctrine, say that God does not interfere with the world, as they believe in God and disbelieve religions and prophecies.
So the idea of “God’s intervention” is the central idea in this debate, and through these contradictory visions, questions have been emerged that express the importance of this research through Sharia and the area of its intervention in managing human life. and who is the reference in political, economic and social life? To what extent is this human experience reliable and to what extent unreliable? And to what extent the text is the substitute for it? Or is the text not a substitute for it? The importance of this research also lies in its impact on the elements of fixed and variable Fiqh.
Who is making the laws? Is God alone or is there someone other than God who can set laws for human life? What is the nature of the relationship between the law and life? Does the law cover all the facts of life? To some extent, the research was able to answer all these questions through the four main aspects of the research, namely:
- The concept of legislative inclusion, its essence and evidence
- Fixed and variable and the issue of legislative inclusion
- The limits of religion and the ranges of Sharia, Abdul Karim Soroush as a model
- Islamic movements of political and the adoption of the inclusiveness of Sharia.
Through this perception and the views that we presented in the research, it becomes clear that the topic of the area of Sharia, its interventions and the size of the presented data compared to the size of the facts is a problematic topic that also reverts towards the relation of the text to the intellect (in its overall sense or in its relative individual meaning). As the area of religion expands – and the area of Sharia – the space of the mind will decrease then, and the size of the expected contradiction will be greater, and vice versa.
Against the background of the supposed relationship between religion on the one hand and reason, human experience and science on the other hand, we talked about the size of the relationship between religion and secularism, meaning the separation of religion from the state and the political and social administration. As the area of Sharia expands, the chances of compatibility between religion and secularism diminish (we mean by secularism that managing human life is a human and temporal affair, and power is a purely human affair). This research also attempted to define for us the identity of Sharia to a certain degree and the area of its activity, and to define for us – to a certain degree – our position on the mind and the human experience in managing life. It also designates the reference for us in enacting political, social, economic and other laws, and the nature of Sharia’s dealing with changes and developments in a way that establishes the Fiqh of variables and the Fiqh of calamities.
It has been shown through the research that there is no real evidence, that confirms the saying and idea of the universality of Sharia in its detailed meaning, as it is among the jurists, theorists of Islamic groups and even in the collective Islamic mind. Yes, Sharia covers an important area of people’s lives, but it does not cover all the facts and needs of legalization in detail until the Day of Resurrection. This is an illusion that is not approved by the Qur’an, the Sunnah, the mind, or the changing logic of life. from here it is necessary for the human mind to enter this area in the Sharia, to feed our religious, human and civilized awareness to not only reach a more peaceful, prosperous and just future for our societies but for all of humanity.
