Islamic Law and the Neoijtihadist Phenomenon
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many contemporary scholars claim that erstwhile juristic determinations were intertwined with the socio-political realities in the eighth and ninth centuries, the classical period of Islamic law. They also maintain that although the Qur’an is a divinely revealed and immutable text, the applicability of its verses is contingent on the needs and conditions of the times. This paper argues that there is a need to move beyond the current form of ijtihad to an era of neoijtihadism in Twelver Shi‘ism. The present ijtihad, which was developed in the medieval ages, has failed to produce a coherent legal system that can effectively respond to the needs of contemporary Muslims. The paper will focus on the neoijtihadist phenomenon and will argue that the traditional text-centered ijtihad has to be replaced with a new form of ijtihad which utilizes different forms of exegetical and epistemological principles to formulate rulings that will serve the Muslim community better. Neoijtihadism, as I call it, will entail a re-evaluation of classical juristic formulations and, based on the application of new exegetical and interpretive principles, can engender a divergent form of jurisprudence that is based on different epistemological parameters and universal moral values. Neoijtihadism will also entail revamping traditional Islamic legal theory (usul al-fiqh), which has hampered rather than enhanced the formulations of newer laws.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it