Note: Minimalist jurisprudence, as a serious discourse in contrast to maximalist jurisprudence, despite having no shortage of proponents and advocates, has rarely been explored as a theory in terms of its dimensions and nuances. Part of this shortcoming may stem from its opposition to the official stance of the country. Hassan Ejraei, a researcher at the Qom Seminary, in this exclusive article for Contemporary Jurisprudence, seeks to describe the dimensions of this theory, its implications, and the detailed perspectives that have emerged under its framework.
Minimalist Jurisprudence: The Convergence of Sharia and Reason
Minimalist jurisprudence, like a profound question arising from the complex issues of the modern era, redefines Islamic Sharia with an eye to temporal and social transformations. This approach, which distinctly diverges from maximalist jurisprudence, strives to view the principles of Sharia not as a fixed and unchangeable set of laws but as a dynamic and adaptable tool for humanity across all times and places. Minimalist jurisprudence holds that Islamic rulings should be interpreted in a way that aligns with the social, cultural, and philosophical changes of each era, thereby continuing to assist individuals in their ethical and spiritual journey. This approach not only draws on the power of human reason and ijtihad (independent juristic reasoning) but also, through critical re-examination of religious traditions, seeks to establish compatibility between Sharia principles and emerging social needs. Minimalist jurisprudence is not only concerned with addressing individual and religious matters but also aims to create a framework in which Sharia can meaningfully and effectively engage with the social, political, and ethical issues of the modern world. A key aspect of minimalist jurisprudence, particularly in the contemporary context, is that Sharia cannot and should not be viewed as a static and predetermined system; rather, it must engage in a continuous dialogue with human reason and social transformations. Minimalist jurisprudence seeks to move beyond the rigid frameworks of the past, thereby continuously reconstructing Sharia within the context of everyday life and human developments.
Definition and Nature of Minimalist Jurisprudence
From this perspective, minimalist jurisprudence views Sharia as a tool and guide for the spiritual and ethical life of humanity, rather than as a set of fixed and uniform laws for all societies and times. In this view, Sharia is not a rigid and immutable structure but a collection of ethical and religious principles that can be interpreted and re-examined in the context of historical, social, and cultural changes. According to this approach, human reason plays a fundamental role in understanding and implementing Sharia, and it must be continuously updated to align rulings with contemporary social and cultural needs. Minimalist jurisprudence particularly emphasizes the principle that no religious ruling can remain absolutely fixed and identical across all periods and places. In this perspective, religious texts serve as general principles that must be adapted to the realities of each era and condition. In essence, minimalist jurisprudence seeks to liberate Sharia from rigidity, enabling it to be meaningfully and effectively reinterpreted in response to the complexities of modern human life and social changes. In this approach, religion is not regarded as a legal and juridical system but as an ethical and spiritual guide that must evolve in tandem with humanity’s social needs over time.
Divergent and Contradictory Approaches: From Reforms to Conflicts
In the intellectual discourse surrounding minimalist jurisprudence, various opinions have been expressed, some emphasizing the importance of human reason and experience, while others stress the preservation of Sharia’s principles and foundations, even through revision. Some reformist thinkers, such as Mohammad Mojtahed Shabestari, argue in their analyses—particularly regarding the precedence of ethics over jurisprudence—that Sharia should not be viewed merely as a set of rigid, predetermined directives. Shabestari believes that Sharia should not only be seen as a collection of rulings governing religious rituals but as an ethical and human system that evolves in accordance with social conditions and needs. Shabestari’s perspective, particularly on the precedence of ethics, forms one of the core pillars of minimalist jurisprudence. From his viewpoint, Sharia should guide humanity toward perfection and justice, but this guidance must take into account human reason and social needs. Sharia should be understood in a way that is compatible with the realities of each time and place.
On the other hand, some thinkers, such as Mostafa Malekian, who base their views on ethical humanism, emphasize the importance of human and ethical principles. Malekian believes that for the interpretation of Sharia, priority should be given to human ethical and rational foundations. He views Sharia as a basis for social ethics that should serve human well-being and prosperity. Malekian’s views align with minimalist jurisprudence due to their emphasis on rationality and humanism.
Finally, the theory of convergence, particularly among those seeking solutions that bridge maximalist and minimalist jurisprudence, has been proposed. This theory, articulated by Seyed Sadeq Haghighat, seeks to connect religious principles with the evolving needs of society. Convergence refers to the integration of two seemingly opposing perspectives, simultaneously preserving religious principles while responding to contemporary changes and needs.
The Theory of Convergence: The Intersection of Reason and Sharia in the Contemporary Era
The theory of convergence is perhaps one of the most prominent and compelling theories in the realm of minimalist jurisprudence, particularly developed to address the needs of the contemporary world. Convergence refers to the interaction and synergy between two seemingly contradictory currents: religious tradition and human reason. This theory seeks to demonstrate how Sharia and human rationality can achieve harmony and synergy. The theory of convergence not only aims to preserve the fixed principles of Sharia but also seeks to interpret them within the context of contemporary social and philosophical developments. It holds that Sharia cannot be regarded as a static and predetermined set of rules but must engage in constant interaction with rationality and philosophical transformations. In this view, Sharia is presented as a dynamic and living phenomenon that must be continuously interpreted and re-examined through human reason and experiences. Furthermore, this theory emphasizes that neither of these two poles—Sharia nor reason—can be absolutely separated from the other; rather, they must engage in continuous interaction and synergy. Sharia can not only function as a religious system but must also be guided by human rationality toward the interests and well-being of humanity. The theory of convergence holds particular significance in areas such as social jurisprudence, Islamic governance, and human rights. It seeks to align Islamic and religious principles with humanistic, democratic, and human needs. This means simultaneously preserving Sharia’s ethical principles while adapting them to social changes and new human needs.
Minimalist Jurisprudence and the Issue of Islamic Governance: Challenges and Solutions
One of the greatest challenges concerning minimalist jurisprudence, frequently raised in jurisprudential and social discussions, is the issue of Islamic governance. While maximalist jurisprudence explicitly and definitively considers Sharia the basis of governance, viewing all social and political affairs under the framework of fixed and detailed Sharia laws, minimalist jurisprudence, particularly in the present era, faces serious doubts about the feasibility and manner of establishing Islamic governance. From the perspective of minimalist jurisprudence, Sharia can be regarded as an ethical and spiritual system, but it cannot definitively be implemented as a comprehensive and all-encompassing system for regulating social and governmental relations in the contemporary world.
The central question is: Can Islamic governance be established based on minimalist jurisprudence? Minimalist jurisprudence views Sharia as a system aligned with social needs and seeks to liberate it from the framework of fixed and unchangeable laws, interpreting it instead as an ethical, human, and social principle. In this perspective, Sharia should serve as a guide for humanity’s spiritual elevation, but in social and political domains, it must draw on rationality, societal norms, and human experience.
From the perspective of minimalist jurisprudence, in contemporary societies, it is not possible to define fixed and unchangeable laws based on Sharia for all aspects of governance. Given the complexities and transformations that human societies have experienced in recent centuries, relying solely on religious texts and their implementation in social, economic, and political spheres is not only impractical but may also lead to the imposition of an inefficient and incompatible system with modern conditions. Therefore, minimalist jurisprudence holds that the capacity of human rationality and ijtihad must be utilized to adapt Islamic rulings to the current state of society. In other words, instead of emphasizing Sharia as a fixed and eternal law in social matters, minimalist jurisprudence stresses the need for revising laws and addressing contemporary needs. In this view, Islamic governance should be built on the ethical and human principles of Sharia, with laws aligned with modern rationality and social experiences. This issue, particularly in areas such as civil rights, individual freedoms, political participation, and modern governance, requires reflection and ijtihad. Minimalist jurisprudence maintains that Sharia must be placed within a dynamic and adaptable framework that remains faithful to Islam’s lofty ethical principles while simultaneously addressing the emerging needs of human societies. This does not mean that Sharia should be eliminated from the realm of governance and politics; rather, it should be used as a source of ethical and human guidance, not as a rigid and static framework that covers all social and governmental issues. This approach emphasizes that religious systems cannot be imposed on society in a closed and fixed manner; instead, the capacities of human reason and experience must be utilized in interpreting and implementing Islamic rulings.
Seeking Balance Between Tradition and Modernity
In conclusion, minimalist jurisprudence, by raising fundamental questions and serious challenges regarding the interaction of Sharia with the needs of the contemporary world, seeks to establish a balance between religious tradition and modernity. This approach is particularly presented as a new intellectual framework in Muslim societies striving to align religious principles with social and political transformations. Minimalist jurisprudence not only aims to preserve Sharia’s principles but also views it as a dynamic and adaptable system capable of aligning with social and philosophical changes. While Sharia must remain a source of spiritual and ethical guidance for humanity, it should also be able to keep pace with societal transformations and needs. This alignment of Sharia with contemporary demands not only helps maintain religious authenticity but also paves the way for achieving social justice and human rights in the modern world. Minimalist jurisprudence, particularly in the areas of Islamic governance and social laws, seeks to use Sharia as a tool for ethical guidance while simultaneously drawing on human reason and experience. In this journey, efforts must be made to establish a sustainable balance between fixed religious principles and the transformations of the modern era, liberating Sharia from rigidity and stagnation while utilizing its authentic messages to build a just and humane society. Minimalist jurisprudence, with an eye to the future, can serve as a model for reconstructing Islamic Sharia in the contemporary world—a model in which Sharia continues to fulfill its guiding role while constantly reflecting and adapting to social and cultural transformations. In this path, the convergence and synergy between religious tradition and human reason can serve as a guiding light for Muslim societies on the path to progress and advancement.