The knowledge of purposes (‘Ilm al-Maqasid) embarked on fierce battle until it became an independent field of knowledge from the Science of Jurisprudence principle. Though they are both the same in some topics, concepts and functions, but they are independent different knowledge which belongs to the same field of knowledge, with distinction and independence between them; and it had gone through great scientific and historical stages.

Differences Between Jurisprudence Principles and the Knowledge of Purposes

The evidence which points to the differences between the two fields is the inclusion of knowledge of jurisprudence principles with many hypothetical topics, or almost hypothetical in its major topics, within even one origin which was agreed upon. This begins from the top rank of jurisprudence principle, which is the Noble Quran that has no differences of opinion in its authority because it is regarded as the word of Allah which was revealed to His servant Muhammad (pbuh) through Angel Jibril (pbuh); which begins with suratul Fatiha, and ends with suratun Nas.

It is the root of all foundations and on it all other roots depend. But if we examine the internal topics of the Qur’an, we will notice from it, differences among the jurists. Such examples are the permissibility of worship with the Quran in other language other than Arabic. Also, Is Bismillah a verse in Suratul Fatiha or was brought as the opening (for recitation)? Or is uncommon recitation (of the Quran) evidence or not? Also, are some explanations regarding the alphabets, recitations and others?

The Role of Sunnah and Hadith

Thereafter, is the Sunnah, which is the second position after the Quran and which is regarded as a supplement to the Quran. There are many differed topics in it. The most important of which are: The conditions of using hadiths among the four Imams in particular. And if a hadith is sound; is it valid to make use of it or are there any other exceptions? And what is the evidence of using an isolated hadith in the aspect of the Creed? And what is the evidence of using hadith al mursal? And what is the evidence of using a weak? And is it permissible to narrate hadith with meaning of not?

Also, are the differences among the scholars regarding the rules in identifying a sound or weak hadith. In fact, if we examine the rules in identifying a sound and weak hadith in hundreds, and even in thousands of hadith, we will see in it, difference of opinions of the traditionalists, ranging from the consideration of a hadith as sound, good or weak. Let alone in other evidences, such as the consensus of opinion and analogical deduction and the Quran and Sunnah that are considered as agreed evidences among the majority of the scholars. The differences are much regarding evidences that aren’t agreed upon. They differed in their evidences, as suggested, in the fundamentals.

The Certainty of the Knowledge of Purposes in Shariah

But the knowledge of purposes is mostly characterized by certainty as Al-Imam Ibnul Arabi Al-Maaliki says:

“there is no difference of opinions that Allah didn’t differentiate among the Shariah of Theology, morals and benefits, but made differences in between them in the branches according to His knowledge -Glory be to Him-‘ (ahkaamul quran for ibnul arabi 4/123

Even, Ash-shaatibi and others claimed that there is a concession on the major purposes among all sects and intellects. He said:

‘the Ummah, even all sects agreed that Shariah was established in order to protect the five necessities which are: the religion, the soul, the progeny, the wealth and the intellect. Their knowledge by the Ummah is necessary, though there is no direct evidence that established that and we have no specific origin that directed us to it. But its compliance with Shariah was known from many evidences that are not particular to one reference. (Al Muwaffaqaat 1/38).

Ash-Shatibbi even establishes that:

“the Shariah came for the benefits of mankind, the command, the prohibition, and the rights to make choice are all due to the protection of mukallaf and his benefits. This is because Allah is rich in fortunes and above all purposes (Al Muwaffaqaat 1/148).

This is the meaning of what Al-Izz bn Abdus Salaam suggested before him (Ash Shaatibi) when he said:

‘for that which is commanded, there is benefit of this world and hereafter or one of them, and for that which is prohibited, there is evil of either worlds, or one of them. Whatever brings benefits among our deeds is the best of acts and whatever brings evils from our deed is the worst of acts’ (qawaaidul ahkaam for al-izz bn Abdus salaam 1/17).

Contemporary Challenges: Oppression and Misinterpretation

The knowledge of purposes has gained its independence and stood as field of its own. It has many books, professionals and branches peculiar to it, only that the period we live has witnessed oppression and unfairness towards the knowledge of purposes, aimed to win at all cost. And this is coming from two opposing groups.

Two Opposing Groups in the Modern Era

The first group are those who are unprofessional and not among the scholars. They are among the free thinkers who belong to the secularist ideology or others. They believe that religion is absolute interest and that human beings determine his interest and no regard to sectional texts from the Quran or Sunnah in any issue. This is supported by the statement of Al-Imaam At-tuufyy: “anywhere there is interest that is where Allah’s law is” without clear definition of the principle behind it and what is actually meant. Then, who determines the interest and what are the rules guiding its execution?

The second groups are from among those who specialized in the knowledge of purposes from the contemporary scholars who believe in the knowledge of purposes as the determiner of religion, the Quran and Sunnah.

Reforming and Regulating the Knowledge of Purposes

This is what calls for a new stage in the field of knowledge of purpose which we call for. It is a stage of “regulation of the knowledge of purposes” or ‘reclining of the knowledge of purpose’. The map of knowledge of purposes needs reformation by returning the purposes to its origin, and knowing its position in the map of religious sciences and Shariah, and explaining its functions and limitation without exaggeration or negligence, but must be returned to its recognized origins. This is because any call for exaggeration beyond its scope is a demolition that serves it no purpose.

Then, at a time while a group is warning against the knowledge of purposes, claiming that it is a dissolution of religion and a way of going against the religious text, other group is trying to support it – but in real sense goes against it – due to its statement that the knowledge of purposes is the determiner of religion, the Quran and Sunnah. The truth however, is that it serves the Quran and Sunnah and explains both of them. It is also one of the tools for the understanding of the text in one part and that leads to the understanding of the text in the other.

Even though majority of the knowledge of purpose are certainty or closer to certainty, but whoever examines critically the ijtihad of the scholars of the knowledge of purpose will notice that there are parts of the knowledge of purpose that are assumption, and even sometimes illusion.

The Purpose will not be in a thing except that it beautifies it and protect it, and will not be excluded from a thing except that it spoils it.

By Masoud Sabri