Reality, and Fiqh of reality Dr. Ihsan Baadarani

When the scholars and narrators lost touch with reality and its jurisprudence, each group focused on secondary aspects. For instance, the scholars were preoccupied with the branches of worship jurisprudence concerning its external forms and appearances, while the narrators focused on transmitting hadiths and their chains of narration, etc. Both groups tended to avoid clashing with reality, accepting it as it was, and delved deeply into their respective fields. This led people to fall into four categories:

1. A group that isolated themselves and turned to mysticism, focusing on the soul, personal development, and purification, which sometimes led to innovation and supernatural acts.
2. A group that lived with reality, accepted it and everything in it, and changed nothing to preserve their state and gains.
3. A group that criticized reality but was only able to reject and mistrust others.
4. A group that wisely critiqued reality with good advice, attempted reform and renewal based on the principle of good assumptions being part of good understanding, and upheld the principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty. However, this group was not favored by the people.

Al-Hasan al-Basri said about a thief being taken to the judge, “Subhanallah, the secret thief is taken to the public thief!”

Al-Shafi’i pointed out that the Sunnah is inseparably linked to the understanding of reality, saying, “The Sunnah is the Prophet’s understanding of the Quran, fully connected to his life in both its apparent and hidden aspects.”

Ibn ‘Aqeel argued in ‘Al-Funun’ that engaging in politics through legitimate Islamic policy is wisdom, and no scholar would disagree. A Shafi’i scholar said, “There is no policy except what conforms to the Sharia,” to which Ibn ‘Aqeel added, “Politics is any action that brings people closer to righteousness and further from corruption, even if the Messenger did not prescribe it or receive revelation about it.” He used the example of ‘Uthman burning the Qurans to demonstrate this principle, indicating this is a slippery slope where many fail, reducing the Sharia to being insufficient without additional measures, despite it never contradicting the Messenger’s teachings even if it contradicts their understanding due to their shortcomings.

We need the jurisprudence of reality just as we need the jurisprudence of Sharia; they are intertwined and essential for achieving the three levels of people’s needs: necessities, needs, and enhancements. Without the necessities, life’s system breaks down, leading to chaos and loss of benefits. Without the needs, people face hardship and difficulty, and without the enhancements, people fall short of complete human refinement and what naturally sound minds consider good.

Harm should be legally removed, and private harm should be endured to prevent public harm. The least harmful option should be chosen to avoid the greater harm. Necessities allow for what is normally prohibited, and difficulties call for ease. This dual jurisprudence is vital for the welfare of the people, away from dreams and fantasies, and beyond superficial and theoretical matters lacking in rigorous scientific study.