human
Write a summary that by Khaled Abou El Fadl examines the issue of moral authority in Islamic law by using a conceptual framework that highlights the key assumptions made throughout the book.
assistant
The essay by Khaled Abou El Fadl examines the issue of moral authority in Islamic law by using a conceptual framework that highlights the key assumptions made throughout the book. The author invites readers to become emotionally and intellectually involved as they savor the contents of this captivating read.
human
Write a essay that by Khaled Abou El Fadl examines the issue of moral authority in Islamic law by using a conceptual framework that highlights the key assumptions made throughout the book. Exapnd on the summary above.
assistant
#“””Speaking in God’s Name: Islamic law, Authority and Women”” by Khaled Abou El Fadl” Essay
##Chapters 1, 2, 3, and 4
In the first four chapters of the book, Khaled Abou El Fadl, the author, provides a conceptual framework, which can be used to question moral authority issues together with identifying tyrannical tendencies as an abuse of Islamic law. In the first chapter, which is titled “Induction”, the author highlights the central themes coupled with the key assumptions made throughout the book. The author invites readers to become emotionally and intellectually involved as they savour the contents of this captivating read.
Khaled achieves this goal by sharing personal intellectual dilemmas and posing several questions concerning the issue of authority in Islamic law. The second chapter is titled “The Authoritative”, and it is divided into three sections. The author discusses the concept of an authoritative being in Islamic law by examining the idea of the existence of Divine sovereignty, the function of compliance in the creation of authority, and the purpose of judges.
In the third chapter, named “A summary transition”, the author sums up some key concepts to introduce chapter four. Khaled defines and discusses issues surrounding the concepts of competence, determination, and authoritarianism within the context of Islamic law. Chapter 3 offers an overview of the author’s arguments, and it would be helpful for readers not interested in the finer details of the book. In chapter 4, the author explores the role of a text in determining the meaning.
He discusses the idea of the text in relation to the authority by using the Quran and Sunnah. The issue of unreasonableness when interpreting different texts is discussed in depth to highlight some of the abusive legal practices entrenched in contemporary Islam. When people are unreasonable, they interpret texts erroneously, which may lead to authoritarianism.
Chapter 5
In this chapter, the author explores how the concept of authoritarianism is created. According to the author, authoritarianism can be borne out of different scenarios. For instance, unreasonable or speculative interpretations of texts can be termed epistemological authoritarianism. Besides, in some cases, the source of the meaning of a text is tied to its authorial intent, thus limiting the associated instabilities, especially when interpreting the meaning. Similarly, in other cases, any governed interpretation of a text to derive meaning is rejected to allow self-directed versions, which is autocratic in nature. The author argues that in the Islamic context, authoritarianism has emerged due to the lack of self-restraint, which ultimately usurps the Divine Will through fraudulent claims.
In the process, the ontological reality of the Divine is marginalised, and the interpreter of a given text thus becomes self-referential. In this dynamic of authoritarianism, the line between the Divine and the agent or the interpreter becomes blurred, and thus the two are indistinct. Consequently, the will of the message from the Divine and the agent’s speech becomes the same thing as the latter’s interpretations superimpose the former’s instructions.
Therefore, the agent’s message becomes irrevocable and absolute because he or she presumably represents the Divine through textual or non-textual indicators. The problem with authoritarianism is that it negates the autonomy and integrity of such indicators. Therefore, the voice of the indicators is subject to the agent’s interpretation, and thus meaning cannot evolve within different communities.
The agent may interpret the instructions of the Divine recklessly, negligently, or dishonestly to assign meaning, which he or she follows religiously regardless of the availability of compelling evidence of a different meaning of the text. Therefore, the agent becomes despotic, hence the birth of authoritarianism.
The author divides this chapter into four sections to explore the issue of authoritarianism. The first section is for underlying principles that govern authoritarianism. On this issue, the author argues that agents tend to interpret texts from the Principal or the Divine by creating unchangeable and stable determinations. For instance, the author argues that the idea of Muslim women covering their entire bodies except hands and face is a function of an authoritarian interpretation of the Quran.
In the second section, the author argues that Islamic law is a work in the movement. To understand this concept, the author argues that the reader should distance himself or herself from the text in order to understand it without replacing it. The third section discusses the basics of religion and the associated burdens of proof.
The Islamic religion is based on the uṣūl or certain truths. However, the author questions how the uṣūl can be proved as the truth. In the last section, the author introduces the issue of moral objections to authoritarianism in Islam. The author argues that there has been a conflict between faith-based and reason-based arguments, especially when people’s assumptions lie outside the legal framework of Islamic law.
##Discussion Questions
 1. Should Muslim women wear the hijab if the Quran is interpreted without epistemological bias?
 2. How can the authenticity of Islamic law be established from a neutral standpoint using the Quran and Sunnah ?
 3. How can human knowledge, which is used in interpreting Divine texts, be separated from God’s knowledge?
 4. What is the authenticity of the uṣūl ?
 5. How true is the statement – “every mujtahid is correct?”
Chapter 6
In chapter 6, “The anatomy of authoritarian discourses”, the author discusses the evolution of authoritarianism in Islamic laws. The chapter is divided into four major sections. The first part is on the death of the juristic tradition in Islamic law. The author argues that Islamic law has evolved through investigation, exploration, and adjudication, and thus it had no place for inertia or settlement. The makers of Islamic law used methodological approaches and normative principles to develop it from the Common Law legal system. As such, jurists incorporated adjudications of judges into the normative legal system to develop Islamic law.
The author argues that if Islamic law is subjected to an epistemological process of searching and understanding, then it is dead. However, in modern times, Islamic law is taken to mean a set of settled and closed rules or aḥkām. Therefore, Islamic laws can only exist as aḥkām, but not as fiqh, which is the epistemological process.
The second section of this chapter explores the aspect of consistency by discussing the challenges associated with marital vows, high heels, and bras within Islamic laws. The idea of Muslim women wearing bras is only acceptable within a given context. For instance, if a woman wears a bra for health reasons, the practice is permissible. However, if the same woman wears the same bra to prop her breasts to appear younger, she is condemned.
The author questions the idea of determining the legality of a practice based on context because it introduces the element of inconsistencies when delivering justice. Therefore, the author argues that Islamic law has numerous grey areas that lack specificity on how people should conduct themselves. The author explores issues surrounding the wearing of high heels and marital vows using the same approach.
In the third section, the author talks for selectivity of evidence. In this context, selectivity is taken to mean using evidence that could potentially desecrate the principles of honesty, comprehensiveness, and diligence. For instance, an agent might be selective in looking for evidence to the extent of ignoring the meaning of the instructions from the Divine. As such, the agent may start looking for evidence from the instructions instead of reading and interpreting them with the intention of understanding. In such a case, the agent violates the principles of comprehensiveness, and the gathered evidence is selective. If the agent makes determinations based on such evidence, he or she is deemed to have used assumptions and a biased line of thought, which entrench the culture of authoritarianism in Islamic law.
The last section of this chapter explores the idea that interests can be balanced using discretion as to the founding principle of legal analysis. The author argues that while the process of determining a given issue is based on a set of rules, discretion is needed in a bid to make the right decision. However, to use discretion appropriately, competence is required. The author argues that the problem of such an approach to making a judgment under Islamic law is the assumption that the determination is God’s unwavering decree. However, this assertion cannot be true because discretion and the judge’s experience are part of the determination process.
##Discussion Questions
 1. What are some of the similarities between Islamic law and Common Law?
 2. What are the major differentiating characteristics of aḥkām and fiqh ?
 3. In the case of women’s bras, who is prohibiting what? Does the Divine give clear instructions on this issue?
 4. Is anyone obligated to accept determinations based on selective evidence?
 5. What was the competence of the agents who interpreted the Divine instructions in the making of Islamic laws?
 6. Why does Islamic law treat women differently from men?
Chapter 7
The last chapter of this book is divided into five sections discussing some of the faith-based assumptions and determinations that demean women under Islamic law. The majority of juristic determinations made under Islamic law against women are negligent or reckless. In the process of interpreting instructions from the Divine, the agent violates honesty, comprehensiveness, diligence, and self-restraint. As such, the agent makes analytically flawed determinations by failing to distinguish instructions from the Divine and constructs that evolve through the interpretive process of such texts. In other words, the agents are morally incompetent to make just determinations.
In the first section of the chapter, the author talks for issue of women prostrating before their husbands and licking their ulcers while at the same time struggling with Ḥadīth. In this context, women are expected to obey their husbands without asking questions. It does not matter whether the husbands are wrong, illogical, or unjust, they must be obeyed. However, these assumptions and laws are based on an epistemological error in the interpretation of the Quran. Besides, the Prophet allegedly commanded wives to submit to their husbands to the point of prostrating before them. However, these arguments denigrate the moral status of women in society.
In the second section of this chapter, the author continues to prove the inadequacy of the classical methodology of traditions that were used to make Islamic law. For example, the author questions the premise that for a woman to enter heaven, she has to make her husband happy. The author argues that patriarchal traditions played a major role in creating a system that demeans women. In most cases, jurists made determinations that excluded women and banished them from public places. These laws were made based on the construct of fitnah, which espouses the idea of opening doors for evil to enter.
The author debunks and deconstructs the myths surrounding this concept and concludes that it is flawed and it contradicts the core values of Sharī‘ah. At best, fitnah relies on dubious logic, and it enslaves women in many aspects.
Towards the end of this chapter, the author argues that some traditions desecrate the founding principles and ethical principles of the Islamic message. The author suspects that the principles used to demean women in Islamic law embody some elements of racism and sexism.
Patriarchy has been used to abuse and misuse God’s power by imposing suffocating chauvinistic rules on Muslim women. Besides, authoritarianism has infiltrated Islamic law whereby agents become small gods by making biased and self-serving determinations. The issue of gender-based discrimination in Islamic law is complex, and women have suffered its consequences for a long. Therefore, Muslim legal specialists should come together and think of amicable ways to address some of the issues that have been affecting the Islamic religion since it was founded.
##Discussion Questions
 1. Why did the Prophet order wives to prostrate before men even after acknowledging that no human being should bow to another? Was this a legal, cultural, or social issue?
 2. Did the instructions demeaning women in the Quran come from the Divine, or they are a creation of chauvinistic agents?
 3. Why is pleasing her husband part of a woman’s prerequisites to enter heaven?
 4. What were some of the social resistance aspects that affected early Islamic reforms concerning women?
 5. How can Muslim women be liberated from gender-based discrimination entrenched in Islamic law without destroying their faith in the Prophet and Allah?