This book, Shari’ah Intelligence, has been divided into 2 parts, and this is the second part of the series. The first part covered Usul al-Fiqh (The Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence) and comprises sections 1-4. It outlined the evolution of a consistent methodology of Islamic jurisprudence from the period of the Prophet’s Companions to the period of the Followers of the Successors of the Prophet’s Companions. It also discussed similarities and differences between the major Schools of Jurisprudence with regards to the evidence and tools each School considered or ‘considers’ valid for legal deductions. It similarly elaborated on the degree of certainty that needs to be obtained on both the level of the authenticity or credibility of texts or “sources” and on the level of the meanings or implications of those “sources” of law. Lastly, it demonstrated how jurists may consider the various acts of Sunnah with different degrees of legal relevance.

This Book 2 shall focus on Qawa’id al-Fiqhiyyah (the Islamic Legal Maxims) and Maqasid al-Shari’ah (the Higher Intents of Islamic Law) and is composed of Sections 5 – 8. This shall focus on some of the most important maxims of Jurisprudence (Qawa’id al-Fiqhiyyah) as well as disagreement among scholars over the concept of blameworthy innovation (bid’ah). Then, it shall discuss what the Maqasid are, their authority and importance in jurisprudence, and the extent to which they may be applied in both devotional worship and social dealings. It also ties previous sections together by providing guidance for the reconciliation or management of different opinions; re-affirming the importance of humility and curiosity in seeking answers to the Truth, and of respecting dissent. Lastly, it advocates the need to maintain ties of fellowship and brotherhood that reach across divergent methods and opinions as contemporary scholars strive to find solutions to the various challenges facing humanity, thereby respecting the wise and compassionate flexibility of Islamic legal thought.

“The relationship between reason and revelation is similar to that between the eyes and light. To insist on using one’s’ intellect or reason without the aid of revelation is similar to a person moving around with their eyes open but in the dark. In a similar vein, to insist on following the guidance of revelation without the assistance of reason, is similar to a person moving around in broad daylight, with their eyes shut.”

Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali