Divine-command ethics in mainstream Islam presupposes rather than suppresses individual moral autonomy.

Evidence

This conception is not to be understood, as it has invariably been, to mean that divine-command ethics must entail theistic tyranny and the absence of individual moral autonomy. Such an understanding may accurately apply to the ways in which Christian Europe conducted itself, and against which the Reformation and the Enlightenment constituted reactions. But this was not what Islam stood for, at least not what the dominant and mainstream Ashʿari School and generally the paradigmatic duo of Shariʿa and Sufism theorized and practiced. Aside from a miniscule body of rules directly stipulated in the body of revelation, God’s justice was the-world-as-his-creation, which is to say that it was not a specific divine will but one that infused the order of being as goodness (something quite reminiscent of Scheler’s world-as-ethical-order). — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 515 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Islamic predestination was read as denying human moral responsibility; Islam’s moral law was beyond any single agency’s or branch’s control; Precolonial Islamic economics fused ethics with material practice, resisting the fact-value split. (+11 more)

Broader Connections

• Divine-command ethics did not entail theistic tyranny in Islam #corroborates (0.95) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 515
• Islamic morality stems from performed faith rather than reasoned ethical judgment #complicates (0.72)