The polity and humankind on the island

The discussion in Islamic literature on how government might serve justice is remarkably similar to 17th-century Western discourses on the state of nature or the original condition of human beings.

Ibn Khaldun held that humans are both social beings as well as political by nature, and that humans are leaders by nature due to the istikhlaf (vicegerency) they were created for. Further, he held that the reality of kingship (mulk) is a communal necessity for humanity, and it entails dominance (taghallub) and force (qahr), which are the effects of anger and animalistic tendencies. Furthermore, given this state of being, a society, to Ibn Khaldun, needs a deter­rent as well as a ruler who can judge between the various competing claims that rise due to the multiplicity of interests among the inhabitants of society, without which there would be chaos and the extinction of humankind. He finds credibility for this by stating that protec­tion of humans is one of the necessities of the objectives of Islamic law.⁸³ That being said, he has also been attributed with the stance that if people could live by God’s law, then there would be no need for a leader, a view also expressed by the Mutazilis.⁸⁴

Al-Ghazali held the opinion that politics in itself does not hold the ability to undertake its stated objective except through a process of education and purification of the self. Further­more, the direction of a human in society and society as a whole towards goodness as well as the provision of security cannot be organized except with a sultan muta ' (an authority that is obeyed).

this life has been created as a means to the next, and thus had it been one where justice ran throughout [i.e. was the status quo], then no discord would occur, and the tasks of the jurists would cease. However, it is one where desires run throughout, and thus dis­cord was born and as such there was dire need for a sultan to manage their affairs, and the sultan was in need of a canon by which he could manage them with.⁸⁵

Competing with the above theories are al-Mawardi (d. 450/1058) and Ibn Abi al-Rabi' (d. 688/1289) who argued that God created human beings weak and in need so that they would cooperate due to necessity. Cooperation would limit injustice by restraining the strong and safeguarding the rights of the weak. Furthermore, they believed that God created human be­ings different from one another so that they would need each other to achieve their aims. In this school of thought, human beings by nature desire justice and will tend to cooperate in order to achieve it. Even if human beings exploit the divine gift of intellect and the guidance of the law of God, through cooperation, they are bound to reach a greater level of justice and moral ful­filment, and the ruler ascends to power through a contract with the people, pursuant to which he undertakes to further the cooperation of the people with the ultimate goal of achieving a just society.⁸⁶ However, al-Mawardi puts forward the theory that the ruler enjoys considerable discretion over ostensible legal issues that qualified jurists have come to by virtue of duties to uphold and carry out the law, ensure continued existence of the Muslim community, and preserve the sanctity of the public sphere.⁸⁷ The Mutazili qadi 'Abd al-Jabbar (d. 415/1025) held that a leader’s role was twofold, the first part relating to religion, the other to the matters of ‘worldly affairs’ (dunya), whereby the leader must bring benefit and mitigate harm in both.

On the human element of society, Islamic schools of thought held that the human ‘self’ (nafs) has the capacity for three spiritual levels: the nafs al-ammara bi-l-su (the self that invites to bad), the nafs al-lawwama (the self that is constantly blaming and disciplining itself), and the nafs al-mutma inna (the self that is tranquil). Each of these is attainable, and thus, human action can lean to good or bad or both, depending on the person’s spiritual state. With such a framing, the necessity of law may have been seen, in part, contingent on how many in society had achieved which levels. Many theories on policy began to be developed by al-Farabi (d. 339/950), Ibn Sina (d. 427/1037) and Ibn Taymiyya (d.728/1328), yet they remained largely theoretical.

In one case, al-Shatibi’s theories have influenced contemporary Muslim democrats, in a manner that shifts policy from one of dogma and ideology, to one that advocates for the achievement of the maqasid. They use the theories of law to be able ‘to serve the interests of hu­mankind’ to include the protection of life, religion, progeny, wealth and the intellect.⁸⁸ How­ever, many have taken a step further and widened the scope of maqasid to include ‘freedom’ and ‘environmental protection’ among others. Yet some have criticized this approach of not being true to the textually based locus used by al-Shatibi. However, defenders of the approach see the theory of maqasid as facilitating a widening in the scope of Islam beyond texts, to allow for its own development in a manner that is also of benefit to people — whether it is mentioned by the Shari'ah or not.⁸⁹ Indeed, the maqasid methodology, according to Andrew March, has allowed for a practicality in relation to concrete circumstances in which Muslims live, yet claim for this practicality on a traditional foundation.⁹⁰ In such constructs, terms do not matter as much as the content and the outcome (maal). A non-Muslim country that is just is more favourable than an unjust Muslim country.

Indeed, al-Shatibi has been seen to offer a more realistic philosophy of religion and law by some secular writers. This can be seen, for example, in the work of Aziz al-Azmeh who com­mends elements of the philosophy in such terms and in particular al-Shatibi’s deliberation and use of maslaha (benefit) in his discourse.⁹³ This formulation has, for al-Misiri, allowed for a relative depolarizing whereby focus is shifted to the outcome of laws that have universal appeal.⁹⁴ It has been suggested, however, that post-Westphalian models of state do not hold a compatibility with the premises of Islamic forms of governance.⁹⁵

Although Muslim jurists debated political systems, the Qur'an itself did not specify a particular form of government. However, it did identify a set of social and political values that are central to a Muslim polity. Three values are of particular importance: pursuing justice through social cooperation and mutual assistance (49:13; 11:119); establishing a non- autocratic, consultative method of governance; and institutionalizing mercy and compassion in social interactions (6:12, 54; 21:107; 27:77; 29:51; 45.20).⁹⁶

Yet while the Qur'an, when speaking on political matters such as shura (consultation), holds the process in high esteem, jurists, arguably, as a result of their contexts, began to consider exis­tential questions — those that were tied to the inevitable direction of the Muslim populous — in very legal terms instead of philosophical. With shura, there was an emergence of two ‘valid’ legal arguments, one determining it to be legally binding, the other not.⁹⁷ Given that power, at the time, was vested in a leader to choose any legal view considered valid, rarely did it become binding.

Had the approach to this been one that considered it in philosophical terms, based in rea­son, instead of fully textual in nature, that the prosperity of a community was contingent on shura, a position that is largely accepted today as a pre-condition for natural progress, stability and seamless transfer of power, the question of whether shura was binding or not need not have been answered given the existential repercussions of the omission of shura in the world. Therefore, it may be suggested that such omission was a factor in the approach to governance given at al-Ghazali’s time, whereby he saw the necessity, as alluded to earlier, of a sultan muta ' (an authority that is obeyed) to avoid bloodshed. Indeed, al-Mawardi, under certain conditions, recognized the legitimacy of usurpation as a means of coming to power in the provinces of Muslim lands. It is arguable that this thought began to institutionalize the idea that an unjust ruler was better than conflict. It may be suggested that the net effect this had over the centuries was to limit the possibility of civic change and institutionalize injustice, with tacit approval from many jurists.

These competing views on a divine command ethic largely remain until today. They present elements of Islamic jurisprudence — with which Islamic ethics are constructed — that are seemingly unresolved. This is in part due to the first principles upon which competing views have built their hermeneutics to approach the texts.

The epistemology that initially guided the development of the early ra’i jurisprudence pro­cess, a process that by its nature was welcoming of reason and new forms of knowledge and discovery, is now considered by some as largely lost, with one of the poignant consequences being the spread of trenchant authoritarianism in contemporary legal determinations.⁹⁹ It has been found that authority lends itself to a form of legal formalism, one where the law appears to the person holding this schema as complete and univocal.¹⁰⁰ Not surprisingly, it has also been found that those holding such attitudes, whereby law is seen as unchanging, exaggerate the role of the text and minimize the role of the human agent who interprets it.¹⁰¹ Nowhere can this be seen better than in the tensions today between two schools of thought.

While scholars, state actors, students and institutions continue to work within the field, with some attempting to adhere to authoritarian ideology and others taking more reasoned approaches, much of the discourse appears limited by a lack of consideration of first princi­ples, and their thorough development. Herein lies opportunity for new ideas.

Notes

1 Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, Al-Ashbah wa-l-Nadhdir, vol. 1 (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyya, 1990), 7, 50, 76, 90; Muhammad Hashim Kamali, ‘Legal Maxims and Other Genres of Literature in Islamic Jurisprudence’, Arab Law Quarterly 20(1) (2006): 77—101.

2 Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari (Darussalam, 2000), 4.

3 A. Kevin Reinhart, ‘Origins of Islamic Ethics: Foundations and Constructions’, in The Blackwell Com­panion to Religious Ethics, ed. William Schweiker (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2005), 244—53.

4 Wael B. Hallaq, The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 24.

5 Judging by the number of manuscripts, the story had wide readership, finding its way in trans­lation to Hebrew in the 13th and 15th centuries, Latin in the 15th century, English in the 15th and 17th centuries, Dutch in the 17th century and German in the 18th. It was thanks to its Latin translation and publication in Oxford in 1671 by the English Orientalist Edward Pococke that the story ‘The Younger’ entered into Western thought — most famously through Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe. See Gerhard Bowering, Patricia Crone and Mahan Mirza, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013), 241.

6 These verses either directly, or indirectly, refer to an 'lla (reason) for God’s creation of human­kind and the circumstances in which they find themselves in life.

7 The formulation comes from my own determination. It finds its parallels and precedent in early schools of thought such as the Matu ridi and Athari schools in addition to that expressed by classi­cal maqdsidian determinations as found in al-Alusi, al-Tabari, al-Razi, al-Qurtubi and Ibn Ashur.

8 Al-Tabari, al-Zamakhshari, al-Razi, al-Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Atiyya, Abu Hayyan, Al-Biqa'i, Abu al-Su'ud, al-Alusi, Ibn 'Ashur, al-Shinqiti. The collection includes the Athari, Mu'tazili, Ash'ari and Maturidi schools of theology.

9 Abu al-Qasim al-Zamakhshari, Tafsir al-Kashshaf (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyya, 1998), v. (2:150).

10 Tahir b. 'Ashur, Tafsir al-Tahrir wa-l-Tanwir (Tunisia: Al-Dar al-Tunisiyya li-l-Nashr, 1984), v. (2:150). Abu 'Abdullah al-Qurtubi, Al-Jam'i li-Ahkam al-Quran (Dar al-Kitab al-'Arabi, 2004), v. (2:150).

11 Muhammad Isma'il al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, 9.

12 Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad al-Imam Ahmed (Dar al-Hikma li-l-Tiba'a wa-l-Nashr, 1988), pt (21788).

13 Ibn 'Ashur gives theological credence to this by referring to the Maturidis and Hanbalis.

14 Abu al-Su'ud al-Amadi, Tafsir Abi al-Su'ud (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Riyadh al-Haditha, 1971), v. (6:165). Mahmud al-Alusi, Tafsir al-Alusi (Dar al-Fikr al-Islami al-Hadith, 2000), v. (40:26). Mu­hammad al-Biqa'i, Tafsir al-Biqai (Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-'Arabi, 2001), v. (30:24).

15 Muhammad al-Razi, Tafsir al-Razi (Dar al-Fikr, n.d.), v. (6:165).

16 Abu 'Abdallah al-Qurtubi, Al-Jami' li-Ahkam al-Qur'an, v. (40:26).

17 Ahmad al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari (Darussalam, 2007), v. (6:165).

18 Ibid., v. (6:168).

19 Tahir b. 'Ashur, Tafsir al-Tahrir wa-l-Tanwir, v. (6:165).

20 Ahmad al-Haytami, Al-Zawajir, vol. 1 (Beirut: Dar al-Ma'rifa, n.d.).

21 Abu 'Abdullah al-Qurtubi, Al-Jami' li-Ahkam al-Quran, v. (37:106).

22 Al-Haytami, Al-Zawajir, vol. 1, 2398.

23 Ahmad al-Tayib, Mawsu at al-Mafahim al-Islamiyya al-Amma, vol. 1 (Cairo: Al-Majlis al-A'la li-l- Shu’un al-Islamiyya, n.d.), 473.

24 Abd al-Jabbar al-Asdabadi, Al-Mughnifi Abwab al-Tawhid wa-l-Adl, vol. 6, n.d., 48.

Abu Mansur Al-Maturidi, Ta wilat Ahl al-Sunnah Tafsir al-Maturidi (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al- ‘Ilmiyya, 2005).

Muhammad b. Al-'Arabi, Al-Mahsul fi Usul al-Fiqh, ed. Husain Al-Badri, vol. 1 (Jordan: Dar al-Bayariq, 1999).

Muhammad Al-Zarkashi, Al-Bahr Al-Muhit, ed. Omar Al-Ashqar, Abd al-Sattar Abu Ghudda, and Muhammad al-Ashqar (Kuwait: Wazarat al-Awqaf al-Islamiyya, n.d.). Hasan al-Attar, Hashi- yat Al- Attar ‘ala Jam‘ al-Jawami n.d.

Anver M. Emon, Islamic Natural Law Theories (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 3.

Abi al-Ma'ali 'Abd al-Malik al-Juwaini, Al-Irshad ila Qawati ‘ al-Adillah fi Usul al- ‘Itiqad, ed. Mu­hammad Musa and Ali Abd al-Hamid (Egypt: Maktabat al-Khanji, 2002), 258. Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Al-Mustasfa min ‘Ilm al-Usul, ed. Muhammad Al-Ashqar, vol. 1 (Beirut: Muassasat al-Risala, 1997), 113.

Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, Fath al-Bari sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, ed. A. Ali, vol. 10 (Beirut: Dar al- Ma'rifa, 1959), 27.

Abdullah b. Bayyah, 'Ilaqat Maqasid al-Shari ‘a bi-Usul al-Fiqh (London: Al-Furqan Islamic Herit­age Foundation, 2013), 40.

Ahmad al-Qarafi, Al-Ihkamfi Tamyiz al-Fatawa 'an al-Ahkam wa-Tasarrufat al-Qadi wa-l-Imam, ed. Abd al-Sattar Abu Ghudda (Halab, Iran: Maktabat al-Matbu'at al-Islamiyya, 1995).

David R. Vishanoff, The Formation of Islamic Hermeneutics: How Sunni Legal Theorists Imagined a Revealed Law (Ann Arbor, MI: American Oriental Society, 2011), 26.

Khaled Abou El Fadl, Speaking in God’s Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women (London: One- world Publications, 2014), 27.

Wael Hallaq, The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law, 116.

Ibid., 145.

Ibid., 252.

Ahmad Al-Raysuni, Imam Al-Shatibi’s Theory of the Higher Objectives and Intents of Islamic Law (Herndon, VA: International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), 2005), 480.

Abu Is-haq al-Shatibi, Al-Muwafaqat, ed. 'Abdullah Diraz, vol. 1 (Beirut: Dar al-Ma'rifa, 1998), 81. Ibid.

Abdullah ibn Bayyah, 'Ilaqat Maqasid.

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Al-Mustasfa min ‘Ilm al-Usul, vol. 1, 139—40.

Ibid., 139-69.

Abdullah ibn Bayyah, 'Ilaqat al-Maqasid, 24.

Abu Is-haq Al-Shatibi, Al-Muwafaqat, 171-6.

Wael Hallaq, The Origins and Evolution of Islamic Law, 147.

Muhammad al-Shahrastani, Al-Milal wa-l-Nihal (Cairo: Muassast al-Halabi wa-Shurakauh, 1968).

Majid Khadduri, ‘The Maslaha (Public Interest) and Illa (Cause) in Islamic Law', New York Uni­versity Journal of International Law and Politics 12 (1979-80): 213.

Ahmad al-Sa'ati, Nihayat al-Wusul ila ‘Ilm al-Usul (Mecca: Umm al-Qura University, n.d.).

Ahmed al-Jassas and al-Nasamai, Al-Fusulfi al-Usul (Usul al-Jassas) (Kuwait: Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, 1994), 223.

Ibid.

John Makdisi, ‘Legal Logic and Equity in Islamic Law', The American Journal of Comparative Law 33(1) (1985): 63-92.

Hashim Kamali, ‘The Interplay of Revelation and Reason in the Shari’ah’, in The Oxford History of Islam, ed. John L. Esposito (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 112.

Abd al-Karim Zaidan, Al-Madkhal li-Dirasat al-Shari ‘a al-Islamiyya (Beirut: Muassasat al-Risala, 1995), 131.

'Iyad b. Musa, Tartib al-Madarik wa-Taqrib al-Masalik li-Ma‘rifat A 'lam Madh-hab Malik (Morocco: Wazarat al-Awqaf al-Islamiyya, n.d.), 90.

Ahmad ibn Taymiyya, Dar' Ta‘arud al- ‘Aql wa-l-Naql, ed. Muhammad Salim, vol. 9 (Riyadh: Jami'at al-Imam, n.d.), 49; Abdullah ibn Bayyah, Fatawa Fikriyya (Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Dar al-Andalus al-Khadra, n.d.), 80-3.

Devin Stewart, ‘Muhammad B. Däud Al-Zahirl's Manual of Jurisprudence', ed. Bernard G. Weiss, Studies in Islamic Legal Theory (Leiden: Brill, January 2002), 118.

Ibid.

Zafar Ishaq Ansari, ‘Islamic Juristic Terminology before Safi'i: A Semantic Analysis with Special Reference to KUfa’, Arabica 19(3) (1972): 255—300.

Makdisi, ‘Legal Logic and Equity in Islamic Law’.

Ahmad Mustafa al-Zarqa, Al-Madkhal al-Fiqhi al-Am (Damascus: Dar al-Qalam, 2012), 197.

Wael Hallaq, The Formation of Islamic Law, 470.

Ahmad ibn Taymiyya, Dar’ Ta‘ arud al- Aql wa-l-Naql, 9:49.

Abdullah ibn Bayyah, Tlaqat al-Maqasid, 50.

Khaled Abou El Fadl, Speaking in God’s Name, 35.

Bernard Weiss, ‘Interpretation in Islamic Law: The Theory of Ijtihad’, The American Journal of Comparative Law 26(2) (1978): 199—212.

Abdu 'Ali Al-Ansari, Fawatih al-Rahamut bi-Sharh Muslim al-Thubut, vol. 1 (Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al Turath al-'Arabi wa-Maktabat al-Muthana, n.d.), 61.

Jamal al-Din al-Isnawi, Nihayat al-Sul 'ala Minhaj al-Wusul lil-Baydawi, (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, n.d.), v. (1:59); Abu Bakr Ibn al-’Arabi, Al-Mahsulfi Usul al-Fiqh, v. (1:96).

Ibid., 1:25. Muhammad al-Zarkashi, Al-Bahr al-Muhit, 1:358. Ahmad ibn Taymiyya, Al-Fatawa al-Kubra, ed. M 'Ata and M 'Attar, (Cairo: Dar al-Raya lil-Turath, n.d.), v. (14:118).

Muhammad Imarah, Rasa’il Al 'adl wa-l-Tawhid, 2nd edn (Cairo: Dar al-Shuruq, 1988), 286. Abu Mansur al-Maturidi, Al-Tawhid, ed. Fat-hallah Khalif (Beirut: Dar al-Mashriq, n.d.), 221—4. Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Al-Mustasfa min 'Ilm al-Usul, vol. 1 (Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-'Arabi, n.d.), 61. Kiley Hamlin, ‘Moral Judgement and Action in Preverbal Infants and Toddlers: Evidence for an Innate Moral Core’, Current Directions in Psychological Science 22(3) (1 June 2013): 186—93; Steph­anie Sloane, Renee Baillargeon, and David Premack, ‘Do Infants Have a Sense of Fairness?’ Psychological Science 23(2) (1 February 2012): 196-204; Deborah Kelemen, Joshua Rottman and Rebecca Seston, ‘Professional Physical Scientists Display Tenacious Teleological Tendencies: Purpose-Based Reasoning as a Cognitive Default’, Journal of Experimental Psychology. General 142(4) (November 2013): 1074-83.

Taqi al-Din 'Ali ibn 'Abdul-Kafi Subki, Al-Ibhaj fi Sharh al-Minhaj, vol. 3 (Egypt: Dar al-Tawfiq al-Masriyya, n.d.), 43.

Ibid.

Mustafa al-Zarqa, Al-Madkhal al-Fiqhi al- Am, 132.

'Ismat Ahmad Fahmy Abu Sinna, Al- Urf wa-l- Ada fi Ray al-Fuqaha (Cairo: Dar al-Basa’ir, 2004), 91-8, 123.

Mustafa al-Zarqa, Al-Madkhal al-Fiqhi al- Am, 134.

Mu hammad ibn 'Abdin, Rad al-Muhtar, 1st edn, vol. 4 (Al-Amiriyya, 1955), 375.

Mustafa al-Zarqa, Al-Madkhal al-Fiqhi al- Am, 96.

Majallat al-Ahkam al-Shar iyya, n.d., 118-19, 403.

Ibn 'Abdin, Rad al-Muhtar, 4:187.

Ahmad Mustafa al-Zarqa, Al-Madkhal al-Fiqhi al- Am.

Khaled Abou El Fadl, Islam and the Challenge of Democracy: A ‘Boston Review’ Book (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2015), 19.

Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History, vol. 2 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni­versity Press, 1958), 155.

Bowering, Crone, and Mirza, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, 36.

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Al-Iqtisad fi al-I tiqad (Cairo, 1910), 96.

Khaled Abou El Fadl, Islam and the Challenge of Democracy, 22.

Bowering, Crone and Mirza, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, 198.

Azzam Tamimi, Power-Sharing Islam? (Liberty for Muslim World, 1993), 53.

Rached Ghannouchi, Al-Dimuqratiyya wa-Huquq al-Insan (Beirut: Arab Scientific Publishers, 2012), 29.

Andrew March, Islam and Liberal Citizenship: The Search for an Overlapping Consensus (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 264.

Ghannouchi, Al-Dimuqratiyya wa-Huquq al-Insan, 50.

Ibid.

Aziz Azmeh, Al- Almaniyya min Mandhur Mukhtalif (Beirut: Markaz Dirasat al-Wihda al-'Arabiyya, 2008), 62.

Abd al-Wahhab al-Misiri, Al-Almaniyya al-Juz’iyya wa-l-Almaniyya al-Shamila (Cairo: Dar al- Shuruq, 2001), 164.

95 Wael Hallaq, The Impossible State: Islam, Politics, and Modernity’s Moral Predicament (New York: Columbia University Press, 2012).

96 See also Khaled Abou El Fadl, Islam and the Challenge of Democracy, 4.

97 Bowering, Crone and Mirza, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, 200, 220.

98 Ibid., 116.

99 Khaled Abou El Fadl, Speaking in God’s Name, 1.

100 David Lyons, ‘Legal Formalism and Instrumentalism — A Pathological Study', in Evolution and Revolution in Theories of Legal Reasoning: Nineteenth Century through the Present, ed. Scott Brewer (Abingdon: Taylor & Francis, 1998), 258.

101 Khaled Abou El Fadl, The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam from the Extremists (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 2009), 98.

102 Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 14, 80.

Select bibliography and further reading

Azmeh, Aziz. Al- Almaniyya min Mandhur Mukhtalif (Lebanon: Markaz Dirasat al-Wihda al-Arabiyya, 2008).

Bayyah, Abdullah bin. ‘Ilaqat Maqasid al-Shari 'ah bi-Usul al-Fiqh (London: Al-Furqan Islamic Heritage Foundation, 2013).

El Fadl, Khaled Abou. Speaking in God’s Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women (London: Oneworld Publications, 2014).

Ghazali, Abu Hamid al-. Al-Mustasfa min 'Ilm al-Usul. Ed. Muhammad Al-Ashqar (Egypt: Mu’assasat al-Risala, 1997).

Hallaq, Wael Hallaq. The Impossible State: Islam, Politics, and Modernity’s Moral Predicament (New York: Columbia University Press, 2012).

Ibn Khaldun. The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1958).

Isnawi, Jamal al-Din al-. Nihayat al-Sawl 'ala Minhaj al-Wusul lil-Baydawi (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al- ‘Ilmiya, n.d.).

Makdisi, John. ‘Legal Logic and Equity in Islamic Law'. The American Journal of Comparative Law 33(1) (1985): 63-92.

March, Andrew. Islam and Liberal Citizenship: The Search for an Overlapping Consensus (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2009).

Misiri, Abd al-Wahhab al-. Al-Almaniyya al-Juz’iyya wa-l- Almaniyya al-Shamila (Cairo: Dar al-Shuruq, 2001).

Qarafi, Ahmad al-. Al-Ihkam fi Tamyiz al-Fatawa 'an al-Ahkam wa-Tasarrufat al-Qadi wa-l-Imam. Ed. Abd al-Sattar Abu Ghudda (Halab, Iran: Maktabat al-Matbu‘at al-Islamiyya, 1995).

Raysuni, Ahmad al-. Imam Al-Shatibi’s Theory of the Higher Objectives and Intents of Islamic Law (Herndon, VA: International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), 2005).

Reinhart, A. Kevin. ‘Origins of Islamic Ethics: Foundations and Constructions'. In The Blackwell Com­panion to Religious Ethics, ed. William Schweiker (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2005), 244-53.

Subki, Taqi al-Din ‘Ali b. ‘Abdul-Kafi. Al-Ibhajfi Sharh al-Minhaj (Egypt: Dar al-Tawfiq al-Masriyya, n.d.).

Suyuti, Jalal al-Din al-. Al-Ashbah wa-l-Nadha’ir (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1990).

Vishanoff, David R. The Formation of Islamic Hermeneutics: How Sunni Legal Theorists Imagined a Revealed Law (Ann Arbor, MI: American Oriental Society, 2011).

Zaidan, Abd al-Karim. Al-Madkhal li-Dirasat al-Shari 'ah al-Islamiyya (Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Risala, 1995).

Zarkashi, Muhammad al-. Al-Bahr Al-Muhit. Ed. ‘Umar Al-Ashqar, Abd al-Sattar Abu Ghudda, and Muhammad al-Ashqar (Kuwait: Wizarat al-Awqaf al-Islamiyya, n.d.).