Shariʿa made the legal subservient to an enveloping morality
Evidence
- Whenever the reference is to the Shariʿa, my use of the term “legal” connotes a concept, phenomenon, or category that must always be taken as subservient to the moral, this latter being an enveloping structure of norms that, conversely, both subordinates and commands the legal. In a system that did not differentiate between the moral and the legal, but was a comingled admixture of both (as the Shariʿa was for centuries before the onset of modernity), the segregated uses of the terms, including the “moral,” must be understood as conditioned by modernity’s inescapable conceptual-linguistic repertoire that insists on corralling the two terms into separate spheres. — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 947 (
#corroborates, via linked claim)
In brief, I submit that although the shari¯‘a does distinguish between “law” and “ethics,” neither term should be understood in its modern, secular sense. — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 1195 (
#complicates, via linked claim)
Categorization
- XREF: connects to: Islam’s moral law was beyond any single agency’s or branch’s control; Shariʿa’s pluralism of opinion enabled legal change and regional flexibility; In Islamic civilization, law served morality and science served religious inquiry. (+7 more)
Broader Connections
- Shariʿa blended moral and legal norms before modernity separated them.
#corroborates(0.93) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 947 - Sharia’s own distinction between law and ethics predates the secular split
#complicates(0.84) — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 1195