Wednesday, 22 December 2010

Seafood (FINAL) - and your thoughts on the next set

In the last 10 blogs we have seen how Fadlallah derives rulings – what is most interesting is that even though his conclusion is radically different from everyone else, the general method he uses, is very similar to others.

The main difference has been in how he has dealt with contradictions in narrations. In general, we see that when there is a contradiction between sahih narrations (regardless of number), the options (in order of preference) are:

1. Try and harmonise them and find a ruling that all the narrations make sense for
2. Take that which is in line with the Qur’an where this can be done
3. Take that which is against the Sunni opinion
4. Ignore both sets of narrations and refer back to the Asl

Fadlallah believes that numbers 1, 2 and 4 all lead to his opinion (i.e. that it is allowed to eat all seafood) and he does not believe that 3 is applicable. Most other scholars believe that 1 is not possible, 2 is not relevant, 3 is correct, and 4 would lead to Fadlallah’s opinion if 3 was not correct. Therefore, most scholars believe that fish without scales are not allowed [and this is a huge simplification] because the Sunnis believe they are allowed (details are in previous blogs).

What needs to be understood, is that although there are scholars out there, who have suggested radically alternative methods of derivation of Islamic law using the ideas of contextualisation (Fazlur Rahman, Shahrur, Soroush), or the fact that Qur’anic principles can supersede even sahih narrations (Saanei perhaps), Fadlallah does not seem to fall into these categories. He seems to be using an adapted version of the general methodology rather than a new methodology entirely!

Regardless, hopefully this detailed set of blogs has given an insight into how scholars of fiqh, reach their conclusions, and how if you have a different conclusion, it does not really necessarily mean you are outside the mainstream.

In the next blogs, we will look at one of the following options:
1. Another similar ruling on fiqh to understand how rulings are derived (but this seems to be boring you guys!)
2. A brief overview of the “alternative” ideas out there e.g. the work being done by the “progressives”
3. A look at tafsir – perhaps looking at the suggestion: “Is the Qur’an's view on women/marriage sexist?”

One of the readers had suggested music (following what they heard from a lecturer during the first ten days of Muharram), but this will not be possible at the moment as the research required is too much! InshaAllah next year we can reach this area...

Your views would be appreciated!

No comments:

Post a Comment