Note: The term “male jurisprudence” has entered Islamic jurisprudential discourse in recent years. Advocates of this view contend that many jurisprudential rulings—especially those perceived as discriminatory between men and women—arise from male jurists’ masculine perspective on the discipline. They argue that if women occupied positions of jurisprudential authority, this perspective would shift, yielding different fatwas. According to them, male jurisprudence has, in effect, contributed to violence against women. Contemporary Jurisprudence discussed this issue with Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Mohammad Mahdi Karimi-Nia, faculty member at the University of Quranic Sciences and Teachings. He maintains that Islam has never hindered women’s pursuit of knowledge or jurisprudential authority; rather, historical circumstances have largely prevented women—with rare exceptions—from reaching such positions. Nonetheless, he emphasizes that since jurisprudence relies on religious evidence free from personal bias, women’s assumption of jurisprudential authority would not substantially change jurisprudential propositions. The complete text of this exclusive interview with the Qom Seminary professor and researcher follows:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Has the historical predominance of male jurists—and the relative scarcity of female jurists—influenced fatwas, particularly those concerning women’s rulings and rights?

Karimi-Nia: The question of male jurisprudence and its effect on fatwas, especially regarding women’s rulings and rights, has been debated throughout Islamic jurisprudential history.

Broadly speaking, examining human history reveals that women’s participation in political, military, administrative, cultural, scholarly, and social spheres has consistently been overshadowed by male dominance across all eras and regions. Even today, amid loud proclamations of gender equality in Europe and America, one need only observe the proportion of women among statesmen, politicians, military personnel, executives, scientists, researchers, inventors, and explorers in so-called civilized nations. In general, women’s existential constitution has, across time and place, placed them under men’s shadow without external barriers to their advancement in these domains. Contemporary Western reality testifies truthfully to this observation.

No female prophet appears among the prophets or their successors. This objective historical fact across all periods and cultures points to women’s inherent physical and psychological limitations in attaining the positions men have historically occupied.

The Shiʿi institution of marjaʿiyyat al-taqlīd follows a similar pattern: no one has barred women from religious study or jurisprudential advancement; the path to scholarship and the stages of ijtihād has always been legally open equally to both genders. Yet in practice, women have not reached this rank, and even those who have achieved ijtihād have not gained societal acceptance—neither from women nor men—as religious authorities.

The noble religion of Islam equally enjoins men and women to seek knowledge: “Seeking knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim man and Muslim woman” (Biḥār al-Anwār, vol. 67, p. 68). Historically, however, women have not widely embraced this call—not because religion or men obstructed their scholarly progress or jurisprudential attainment. Anyone with basic familiarity with Islamic jurisprudence knows that a marjaʿ or leader of the ummah must be just and may not issue fatwas based on personal preference, desire, or prejudice. The jurist’s duty is to derive religious rulings solely from the Qurʾān, authenticated ḥadīths, and statements of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and the Guiding Imams (peace be upon them).

Thus, a male mujtahid who fairly extracts God’s ruling from the Qurʾān without personal bias will conclude that a daughter’s inheritance share is half a son’s. A female mujtahid, committed to the same sources, would likewise be compelled to rule that a son’s share is double a daughter’s.

In short, the just mujtahid—male or female—deduces God’s, the Prophet’s, and the Imams’ rulings from the Qurʾān and ḥadīths without personal interference. Consequently, the fatwa’s outcome remains identical regardless of the jurist’s gender.

A thorough examination requires considering multiple dimensions, including Islam’s social, historical, and jurisprudential structures.

Historical and Social Structure of Jurisprudence

As noted, historical, social, and cultural factors have resulted in most prominent jurists being men, owing to men’s societal roles, greater scholarly engagement, and era-specific constraints on women. Early Islamic societies saw more limited female participation in these fields, contributing to male predominance among jurists.

This should not, however, obscure women’s contributions to Islamic jurisprudential history. Many historically recognized women excelled in jurisprudence and ḥadīth. Female Companions such as Lady Fāṭima al-Zahrāʾ (peace be upon her), Lady Zaynab, ʿĀʾisha, and Umm Salama exerted significant influence, with numerous narrations transmitted through them. Still, the overwhelming majority of historical jurists and authorities have been men.

Evolution of Jurisprudence in Relation to Women’s Rights

Shiʿi jurisprudence has continually evolved and adapted to changing times. Contemporary authorities such as Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei have issued progressive fatwas advancing women’s rights beyond earlier views, addressing education, employment, and political-social participation. These developments reflect jurisprudence’s ongoing effort to better comprehend and uphold women’s rights.

The Qurʾān and Ahl al-Bayt narrations establish general principles affirming women’s human dignity and justice. Numerous verses emphasize men’s and women’s equal humanity and spiritual path.

For example, Sūrat al-Aḥzāb (33:35) states: “Indeed, the Muslim men and Muslim women, the believing men and believing women… Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a great reward.”

This verse clearly affirms equality in many moral, devotional, and social domains.

Ijtihād and Women’s Participation

Greater female participation in ijtihād could positively influence fatwas on women’s rights. Contemporary women scholars have produced significant works in women’s legal studies through ijtihād.

Given appropriate conditions, women’s active role in ijtihād and fatwa issuance could profoundly enhance women’s rights within Islamic jurisprudence, which embraces evolution.

Conclusion:

• Textual Emphasis: Jurisprudence rests on the Qurʾān, Sunna, reason, and consensus. The mujtahid—male or female—deduces rulings therefrom. Gender should not affect deduction, which prioritizes explicit texts and definitive evidence.
• Female Jurists’ Existence: Though fewer, their presence shows ijtihād capacity is not gender-exclusive.
• Fatwa Evolution: Historical changes in fatwas demonstrate jurisprudence’s dynamism; gender has not been a determining factor.

Islamic jurisprudence’s principles—justice, equality, mercy, human dignity—guard against violence and oppression.

The gender question in women-related fatwas is multifaceted. While not easily resolved, its exploration deepens understanding of jurisprudence and women’s Islamic status.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Do you agree that because jurists have historically been male, jurisprudence has become male-dominated and women’s rights undervalued?

Karimi-Nia: The proposition is initially appealing and widely resonant, yet requires nuanced analysis.

Rather than broad claims, specific instances of male fatwas allegedly violating women’s rights or favoring men would allow precise focus on problematic rulings. It appears overlooked that justice and mastery over desire are prerequisite for jurists, who are not legislators enacting self-serving laws but deducers of rulings from scripture and tradition.

God’s explicit Qurʾānic directive on inheritance (4:11)—a son’s share equaling two daughters’—binds every jurist, male or female. No mujtahid may contravene it for personal or gender interest.

Similarly, men’s jihad obligation versus women’s exemption is a burden, not privilege. Were self-interest operative, male jurists would have reversed such rulings over fourteen centuries.

The jurist must remain strictly within Qurʾānic and authentic ḥadīth bounds, never issuing arbitrary or self-serving fatwas.

Conclusion:

Differences in inheritance, blood money, and testimony derive directly from scriptural sources, not jurists’ societal views of gender roles. A female jurist would reach identical conclusions.

Islamic jurisprudence is fundamentally justice-centered, affirming human equality before God and women’s dignity. Verses such as al-Aḥzāb 35 and al-Naḥl 97 underscore spiritual and legal parity.

While particular historical fatwas may warrant review, this does not render jurisprudence inherently “male.” Rulings trace to scriptural evidence, not gender bias.

Jurisprudence remains dynamic; women have historically contributed to interpretation, and contemporary jurists increasingly address gender justice.

Though fewer, female jurists have existed in certain periods and regions, albeit with lesser overall participation.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: If women undertook jurisprudence, beyond revising women’s rights and rulings, would the methodology of deduction—and possibly its precision and subtlety—also change?

Karimi-Nia: Women’s jurisprudential engagement would impact not only jurisprudence but society and culture, potentially shifting traditional attitudes and introducing fresh approaches.

Women’s lived experiences may reveal dimensions of religious-legal issues less apparent to male jurists, fostering novel approaches, heightened precision, and distinctive subtlety.

Consider rulings permitting women—but forbidding men—gold, silk, and brocade adornment. Were male self-interest influential, jurists would long ago have reversed these over centuries.

Likewise, men’s obligations—dowry, full family provision—while women bear no financial responsibility, constitute burdens rather than privileges. Self-interested male jurists would have shifted these duties onto women.

The verse declaring men family guardians (al-Nisāʾ 4:34) cites divine preferment and financial responsibility. No jurist—male or female—may override this and accompanying narrations to appoint women as guardians.

Conclusion:

Women’s participation could enrich jurisprudence and improve rights-related rulings while enabling more comprehensive deduction.

Yet core rulings, anchored in the Qurʾān and Sunna, remain stable. Diversity among female jurists is also possible.

Recent discourse on women’s role in jurisprudence and interpretation has grown prominent. Whether female jurisprudence alters deductive methods merits serious attention.

• Precision and Subtlety: Women’s traditional involvement in care and relationships may yield greater attentiveness to human complexities.
• Education: Effective participation requires specialized training and support.
• Cooperation: Male-female collaboration advances the field.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Drawing from the claim that male jurists have rendered jurisprudence male-biased and inattentive to women’s rights, can we infer similar neglect of children’s, animals’, and plants’ rights? What remedy exists?

Karimi-Nia: Your question raises a profound philosophical-jurisprudential issue concerning gender, jurisprudence, and rights—human and non-human—demanding careful analysis.

The male-jurist neglect argument cannot be straightforwardly extended to children, animals, or plants. Evidence shows Islamic jurisprudence has addressed these:

• Animal Rights: Highly valued; some jurists classify them as divine rights. Texts mandate sustenance even for unproductive animals.
• Plant Rights: Harm to trees and vegetation is prohibited.
• Human Dignity: Encompasses children’s rights.

The original argument specifically concerns women due to perceived male perspective dominance, not universally applicable to all beings or the environment.