Sayyid Farid Ghohestani
Abstract
Imāmī (jurisprudence) in the contemporary era—particularly after the Islamic Revolution of Iran—has undergone a paradigmatic transformation, centered on a shift from individual-centered to system-building or civilizational . This transformation responds to the complexities of the modern world and the change in the scale of social life from micro, individual-based interactions to macro, structural dynamics. This article explicates the identity and necessity of this new approach, and analyzes its presuppositions, challenges, and methodological requirements. The core argument is that contemporary does not merely refer to addressing al-masāʾil al-mustaḥdatha (novel issues), but denotes an epistemic logic requiring a redefinition of the mukallaf[1] (from the natural person to the legal person and institution), a shift in the analytic focus from “action” to “process and structure,” and a methodological expansion of ijtihād[2] through an interdisciplinary paradigm. Through deepening “subject analysis” by integrating human and social-scientific knowledge, this approach seeks to offer a realistic and effective mode of ijtihād for governing complex social, economic, and political systems. The conclusion surveys the emerging academic institutions within the Qom Seminary that have assumed responsibility for this strategic transformation.
Keywords: Contemporary Fiqh, System-Building Fiqh, Civilizational Fiqh, Subject Analysis, Interdisciplinary MethodApproach, Ijtihād
Introduction
Contemporary Fiqh (jurisprudence), or civilizational-system fiqh, today encompasses a spectrum of approaches extending from authenticity of Jawāhirī[3] tradition to innovative horizons. At its core lies the Jawāhirī approach, which laid the foundations of Shīʿī ijtihād and preserved the scholarly legacy of earlier ḥawza (seminary) scholars. Over recent decades, efforts within the rubric of “dynamic jurisprudence” or “contemporary fiqh” have sought to revisit the methodology of ijtihād. This trend, relying on reason, temporality and engagement with the human sciences, aims to present a more effective interpretation of the Sharīʿa. Yet Imam Khomeini, while affirming the need for dynamism, insisted on preserving the authenticity of the Jawāhirī method, situating this dynamism within the boundaries of classical ijtihād.
Another effort is, the legislative-legal approach to contemporary fiqh, which seeks to translate fiqh into the language and culture of statutory law and governmental-executive structures, facilitating its societal implementation without altering its foundational principles. A deeper transformation has occurred in the social-governance paradigm, wherein fiqh transcends individual rulings and enters the realm of designing social systems and governance frameworks. Concurrently, fiqh tarbawī (pedagogical fiqh), with deep historical roots, understands the purpose of rulings as cultivating moral and communal character, even reinterpreting governmental duties through ethical and human-centered objectives.
In the sphere of scholarly interaction, fiqh muqāran (comparative fiqh) and fiqh maqāṣidī (objectives-based fiqh) represent two complementary faces of Shīʿī engagement with the broader Islamic legal tradition: the former facilitates intra-faith dialogue and reinforces the identity of Shīʿī ijtihād within Islamic fiqh, while the latter investigates the objectives (maqāṣid) of the Sharīʿa—although within Imāmī thought, it retains an advisory rather than generative role. Finally, the interdisciplinary approach, by extending fiqh into fields such as law, economics, and applied ethics, smooths the pathway for transferring fiqh-based knowledge into contemporary lawmaking and governance.
The Identity of Contemporary Fiqh or Civilizational-System Fiqh
Contemporary fiqh, or civilizational-system fiqh, may be understood as a discipline entrusted with determining the actions of the mukallaf in the contemporary world; that is, its mission is to provide Sharīʿa-based regulations for human conduct within the conditions and structures of the modern age. Contemporary life differs from earlier eras not merely through the emergence of masāʾil mustaḥdatha (novel juridical subjects), but through a fundamental transformation in the nature and scale of human relationships and actions. The most important marker of this transformation—also emphasized in studies of modernity—is the transition from individual-centered to structure-centered modes of social existence. In this transition, social, economic, and cultural relations are no longer centered on natural persons; rather, institutions, structures, and processes become the primary bearers of action and decision-making.
Civilization is an interconnected totality of worldview, ideology, ethical principles, behavioral obligations, habits, and epistemic, cultural, social, economic, and political structures. The realization of any civilization requires both “society” and “government.”
Population growth, the complexity of relations, and increased institutional density have shifted the scale of social life from the micro to the macro level. Consequently, it is no longer possible to govern the legal-religious needs of society at this scale by relying on fiqh prescriptions formulated for micro-social settings. This reality underscores the necessity of reconstructing and updating fiqh in the form of contemporary fiqh.
If contemporary fiqh is tasked with determining the action of the mukallaf for the modern world, and the primary characteristic of modern life is the shift from the micro to the macro scale, then without altering the scale of the mukallaf’s action, fiqh cannot address the real needs of contemporary mukallafs. In other words, adapting fiqh to the modern world requires redefining the scale of the mukallaf and the domain of fiqh’s operative action.
Accordingly, a more precise definition of contemporary fiqh emerges: “Contemporary fiqh is the discipline dedicated to discovering and deriving religious rulings concerning the actions of contemporary social processes and structures.”
Here, the analytical focus moves from isolated and specific topics to the processes and systems that generate them. Although addressing masāʾil mustaḥdatha (e.g., fiqh of technology, medical fiqh, or cyber-fiqh) is necessary, one must not overlook that such topics are typically products of deeper macro-level processes. True juridical analysis therefore arises when these processes and mechanisms—rather than merely their visible consequences—become the subject of jurisprudential judgment.
Within this framework, the mukallaf in contemporary fiqh shifts from the natural individual (shakhṣ ḥaqīqī) to the legal person (shakhṣ ḥuqūqī). The legal mukallaf is not an identifiable individual but an institution operating based on standards, laws, and regulations. In such a domain of action, changing individuals does not alter the nature of obligation, because the criteria lie in “behavioral structures and indicators,” not the identity of actors. For example, in an urban educational system, when a teacher or principal changes, the school continues to operate due to established regulations and governing frameworks. Similarly, in contemporary fiqh, the subject of obligation must be structures and mechanisms rather than merely individual acts.
Thus, what was traditionally examined as the “acts of the natural mukallaf” must now be expanded to include the “actions of institutions, organizations, and collective processes.” A renewed understanding of fiqh’s subject matter therefore requires interdisciplinary knowledge, familiarity with social systems, and deep comprehension of how modern structures emerge.
To achieve civilizational-system fiqh, seven analytical layers must be developed:
Macro analysis of rulings: identifying forms of rulings appropriate to structural settings
Systematic subject analysis: precise study of social, economic, and political structures
• Application analysis: examining how fiqh rules apply to institutions (e.g., qualifications of rulers or judges in a state system)
Theory construction: developing macro-fiqh theories (e.g., theories of justice or security)
Sharīʿa studies: addressing fundamental questions regarding religion’s efficacy in social domains
• School analysis: distinguishing authentic fiqh schools and methodological tendencies
Renewed ijtihād methodology: rearticulating the mission of uṣūl al-fiqh (principles of jurisprudence) for macro-level inquiry
The Necessity of Contemporary Fiqh
Thus, contemporary fiqh seeks not only to provide individual rulings regarding new topics but to systematically normativize and scale Sharīʿa guidance for collective behavioral systems. Such an approach requires transformation in the logic of istinbāṭ (derivation) and a renewed understanding of the “action of the mukallaf” and “subject of fiqh,” enabling fiqh to legislate and guide at the macro level—where governance, technology, global economics, and institutional relations operate.
In summary, contemporary fiqh aims to elevate the action of the mukallaf from the individual level to the institutional and processual levels, producing corresponding fiqhī rules and indicators for governing complex socio-economic and cultural systems.
This requires transcending atomistic juristic analysis in favor of systemic thinking, designing new frameworks of ijtihād, and redefining fiqh’s subject matter at the macro scale—conditions essential for fiqh to address the modern world and realize its civilizational role.
Among the necessities ensuring contemporary fiqh’s urgency are:
Specialization in fiqh research and education (realism, methodological rigor, systemic coherence, agile training, collaborative and technology-assisted research)
Clarifying prerequisites for fiqh’s entry into social systems (domain philosophy, general and specific fiqhī–uṣūlī rules)
Enhancing effective methods for ruling analysis (addressing generalities, strengthening textual research, textual analysis principles)
Developing the principles and techniques of subject analysis (complex, technological, multi-layered and interdisciplinary issues)
Monitoring global developments in jurisprudential reasoning and deduction
Strengthening cohesion in fiqh scholarship and increasing societal influence
Structuring the relational architecture between fiqh and other sciences (horizontal and vertical epistemic relations)
Structure and Disciplines of Contemporary Fiqh
Today, numerous advanced-level jurisprudential lectures (dars-i khārij) in the Qom Seminary focus on contemporary fiqh or civilizational-system fiqh, reflecting the dynamism and maturation of this new ijtihād. Hundreds of scholars actively conduct content production, theory construction, public engagement, and subject analysis in the following emerging subfields:
Social fiqh; fiqh of public-rights revival; ethical fiqh; administrative fiqh; security fiqh; fiqh of finance and securities markets; insurance fiqh; medical fiqh; monetary fiqh and money-laundering fiqh; educational fiqh; demographic fiqh; privacy fiqh; human-rights fiqh; governance fiqh; state fiqh; family fiqh; media fiqh; crypto-fiqh; international-relations fiqh; astronomical fiqh; fiqh of legal persons and joint-stock corporations; justice fiqh; fiqh of novel contracts; cyber-fiqh; legal fiqh; intellectual-property fiqh; environmental fiqh; sports fiqh; fiqh of administrators; Islamic economic systems; and artificial-intelligence fiqh.
These can be categorized into five major domains:
Fiqh of rites and acts of worship with a social orientation
Fiqh of family and health
Fiqh of property and transactions with focus on economic systems
Fiqh of governance and law
Fiqh of culture and communication
It should be noted that part of the advancement in specialized fiqh fields has been facilitated by progress in the philosophy of fiqh and related disciplines. Falsafat al-uṣūl (philosophy of principles) is a meta-rational examination of supra-disciplinary and supra-problematic rulings within uṣūl al-fiqh. Although attention to such inquiries existed from the earliest periods of uṣūl, independent engagement dates primarily to innovators such as Muḥammad-Ḥusayn Gharawī Iṣfahānī in the last century.
Following the Islamic Revolution of Iran, the flourishing of the philosophy of fiqh owed not only to leading scholars such as Āyatullāh ʿAlī-Akbar Rashād and Āyatullāh Ṣādiq Āmulī Lārījānī, but also to institutional support from centers like the Research Institute for Culture and Islamic Thought and the Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy.
Alongside philosophical developments, another distinguishing feature of contemporary fiqh is the transformation of lifestyle and emergence of new, rapidly evolving subjects across life domains—requiring systematic and independent attention to subject analysis. Accordingly, the Qom Seminary over the past century has witnessed three stages of development in fiqhī subject analysis:
Initial attention to novel issues
Production of independent works on novel issues
Formation of contemporary fiqh literature
Foundational Premises of Contemporary Fiqh or Civilizational-System Fiqh
In discussions surrounding contemporary fiqh or civilizational-system fiqh and its challenges in the modern world, at least three foundational premises are accepted:
Fiqh is a human discipline grounded in revelatory sources.
Therefore, in every historical period, it must update and adapt itself—based on its own sources—while remaining attentive to related intellectual developments and methodological advances in its surrounding context.
Fiqh operates interactively with other fields of knowledge.
In other words, fiqh is a “consuming” discipline: many of its premises, assumptions, and methods are not internally generated, but drawn from other sciences. This point does not imply any deficiency in fiqh; many other conventional disciplines function in the same manner.
In contemporary fiqh, addressing the macro scale and shifting focus from individuals to systems is imperative.
The modern world operates through processes and systems, not isolated individuals. Institutions—such as the state, banks, universities, corporations, media, and hospitals—now act as “new mukallafs.” Thus, contemporary fiqh must determine obligations for institutions and structures just as it does for individuals. This requires the jurist to move beyond issuing rulings for individual acts (such as sale or lease) and toward designing macro-level political, economic, cultural, and civilizational systems grounded in fiqh.
Challenges Facing Contemporary Fiqh or Civilizational-System Fiqh
The challenges confronting fiqh can be examined in three domains:
Challenges to foundational premises (uṣūl mawḍūʿa)
These relate to assumptions concerning anthropology, cosmology, and theology. Any fundamental disturbance at this foundational level will inevitably affect fiqh as a superstructure.
Challenges to the sources
These concern the Qurʾān, Sunna, ijmāʿ (consensus), and reason. The challenge pertains both to their hierarchy and to the extent of their role in juristic derivation.
Methodological challenges
Most of these issues are treated within uṣūl al-fiqh, rather than within fiqh itself.
Transitioning from micro-fiqh to macro-fiqh is not achieved merely by adding new topics; it requires a revolution in understanding and methodology. Three fundamental prerequisites are:
Experiential and conceptual grasp of macro-scale realities and their distinction from micro-scale phenomena
Internalizing strategic reasoning and system design based on fiqhī principles
Transforming ijtihād from an unconscious process into a conscious, structured methodology
If realized simultaneously, these elements can constitute a turning point in the evolution of fiqhī knowledge—producing a fiqh capable not merely of micro-level prescriptions, but of designing and guiding civilizational systems.
To elaborate further, one of the most profound challenges facing contemporary fiqh in the Qom Seminary—is the inability of the juristic mind to grasp and distinguish between micro and macro scales. This cognitive limitation prevents the jurist from perceiving the structural requirements and real consequences of large-scale social transformations, resulting in an ijtihād that remains confined to the level of “individual acts of obligation.”
In what follows, the issue is analyzed and three foundational axes are proposed for overcoming this challenge and transitioning toward macro-level jurisprudence: “understanding the macro- scale,” “developing strategic design capacity,” and “strengthening self-aware methodological rigor in the process of ijtihād.” Yet the core obstacle in conceptualizing the macro form of contemporary fiqh lies in the inability to imagine the difference between micro and macro scales. Most jurists and thinkers, lacking experiential and perceptual familiarity with large-scale social structures, approach the analysis of relations and rulings with a micro-oriented mindset.
However, the macro domain differs essentially from the micro domain, as the implications and requirements of action at the macro scale are managerial and systemic in nature—not merely individual and prescriptive. At the macro level, a change in a single micro element produces cascading effects across other subsystems—an outcome that holds no meaning within the micro scale.
To overcome this, the jurist must be placed within the experiential context of macro-scale decision-making—witnessing systemic effects of collective actions. Concepts such as ʿāmm majmūʿī, qaḍiyya ḥaqīqiyya, and the theory of khiṭābāt qānūniyya emphasized by Imam Khomeini can serve as intellectual bridges between classical fiqh and systemic fiqh.
Other practical challenges include:
Structural resistance and traditional attitudes against new domains and system-building
Weak institutional linkage between fiqh bodies and legal–executive systems in Muslim countries
Absence of comprehensive programs for training interdisciplinary jurists
Traditional resistance within the seminary toward innovation
Gaps between theory and implementation
Practical alignment of fiqhī outputs with international legal systems
The need for stronger participation in comparative law and legislation
Practical Responses of Contemporary Fiqh to Theoretical Challenges
Contemporary Shīʿī fiqh represents a practical response to these theoretical challenges. Particularly in the Qom Seminary, the past decades have witnessed an unprecedented transformation in theoretical, functional, and institutional dimensions. This transformation stems not only from global scientific, technological, and social developments, but also from juristic necessity to address emerging issues in economics, law, politics, philosophy of social sciences, and biotechnology.
Modern students of fiqh must master traditional uṣūl and fiqh while also acquiring interdisciplinary knowledge, policy-analysis methodologies, and awareness of modern technologies to produce responsive ijtihād. This necessitates expanding specialized education and dars-i khārij programs focused on emerging issues.
Ultimately, contemporary fiqh is not merely a historical period, but an epistemic paradigm that seeks to harmonize the knowledge system of fiqh with contemporary realities. It is rooted in the Jawāhirī tradition, yet oriented toward constructing modern Islamic civilization. “Contemporaneity” here does not imply superficial modernism, but rather deep engagement with real-world complexities.
Accordingly, contemporary fiqh exhibits four principal features:
It is multidimensional: addressing not only new subjects but also methodological innovation, institutional restructuring, and fiqh’s societal purpose.
Its contemporaneity is conceptual, not merely historical: A “contemporary fiqh” is one that can methodologically address the issues of its time in any era.
It prioritizes system-building over individual fatwā issuance: The trajectory in Qom Seminary has shifted from individualistic rulings to system-oriented jurisprudence, requiring renewed conceptual foundations—especially regarding manṭaqat al-farāgh,[4] tazāḥum,[5] and governmental rulings.
It emphasizes interdisciplinary method-building: A hallmark of contemporary fiqh is synthesizing classical uṣūl methodologies with insights from the human sciences to achieve realistic ijtihād.
Specific Three-Fold Strategies to Overcome These Obstacles
A) Understanding the Macro Scale as an Epistemic Foundation
Developing a macro-level worldview in the jurist requires realizing that the macro scale is not merely a wider version of the micro scale, but a domain with its own logic and requirements. At this level, fiqh must aim to design systems and mechanisms rather than merely determining the ruling of individual acts. Accordingly, grasping the macro scale represents the epistemic foundation for civilizational fiqh; without it, no systematic transformation is possible.
B) Cultivating Strategic Thinking and System-Design Skills
The second strategy is cultivating strategic-thinking abilities among seminarians and jurists. Strategic understanding means the capacity to envision optimal pathways within a system—an endeavor fundamentally connected to the process of ijtihād. In reality, the jurist is an “epistemic strategist,” tasked with uncovering the general and foundational rules of religion in order to manage the multiplicity of cases and circumstances The statement of Imām al-Riḍā, “ʿalaynā ilqāʾ al-uṣūl wa ʿalaykum al-tafrīʿ” (It is upon us to lay down the foundational principles, and upon you to derive the branches) reflects this strategic role: the jurist must derive universal principles (strategic rules) and apply them to dynamic realities.
As long as the jurist limits his perspective to the micro scale and focuses only on individual duties, he will not perceive the macro-structural and process-oriented implications embedded in the sources.
For example, the Prophetic statement “iqnaʿ taʿizz” (“practice qanāʿa to attain dignity”) at the micro level seems like a simple ethical recommendation for contentment; yet, at the macro-strategic level, it reveals a systemic logic: qanāʿa signifies consumption optimization, and dignity signifies superiority in a competitive environment. Thus, the narration points to a macro-level economic–cultural strategy: optimizing consumption is the key to collective dignity. Such an inference is only possible through strategic thinking.
C) Awakening Methodological Consciousness in Juristic Derivation
The third area of transformation is reviving methodological awareness within ijtihād. As long as jurists lack explicit consciousness of the internal stages and logic of ijtihād, transitioning toward system-centred fiqh will remain unattainable.
At present, much juristic reasoning occurs subconsciously. The texts of uṣūl are typically approached as purely jurisprudential literature, whereas they are in essence manuals of legal methodology. Neglecting this dimension has reduced fiqh education from a methodological discipline to a procedural one, weakening juristic rigor and historically delaying the emergence of macro-fiqh.
It is therefore proposed that the process of ijtihād be reconstructed scientifically and sequentially—an approach that may be termed the “algorithm of ijtihād,” meaning a step-by-step intellectual pathway from identifying the subject to determining evidence and drawing systemic implications. Making this algorithm explicit will shift ijtihād from subconscious to conscious action, clarifying the transition points from micro-fiqh to macro-fiqh.
7. The Necessity of Interdisciplinary Method-Formation
A key characteristic of contemporary fiqh is its tendency to combine classical uṣūl methodologies with insights from the human sciences in order to achieve reality-oriented ijtihād. In this approach, ijtihād evolves from a purely “text-driven” process into one that is simultaneously text-driven and reality-driven.
This can be elaborated in three dimensions:
A) Rationale: The Complexity of Emerging Issues
Traditional fiqh dealt with matters that were comprehensible through common social perception (ʿurf), such as water, land, or sale. Contemporary fiqh, however, faces phenomena that are complex and systemic, requiring specialized knowledge:
Economics: Concepts such as inflation, credit-based money, banking, the stock market, and cryptocurrencies cannot be analyzed solely through common-sense understanding; they require the insights and analytical tools of modern economics.
Sociology & Psychology: Issues such as the structure of the modern family, children’s rights, organized crime, and mental health possess sociological and psychological dimensions.
Political Science & Law: Concepts such as the nation-state, citizenship, international law, and social contracts require specialized analyses within these fields.
Thus, reality-oriented ijtihād requires rulings grounded not in abstract reasoning or simple lexical definitions, but in the actual functional nature of such phenomena.
B) Mechanism: Deepening “Subject Analysis” in Uṣūl al-Fiqh
This integration does not replace uṣūl al-fiqh with the human sciences; instead, it augments the ijtihād process. Specifically, it enhances the crucial phase of identifying the subject:
Traditional approach: the jurist relied primarily on ʿurf and personal understanding
Integrated approach: the jurist, as the expert in determining legal rulings, draws on experts in the human sciences as experts in identifying subjects
Human sciences provide precise, systematic descriptions of the subject, enabling accurate legal assessment.
C) Outcomes of This Approach
Integrating uṣūl methods and human-science findings yields significant results, most importantly:
Greater alignment with socio-civilizational realities and avoidance of abstraction
Enhanced capacity to resolve complex social, economic, and political issues
Improved realization of maqāṣid al-Sharīʿa, as the jurist becomes able to assess real-world consequences and issue rulings closer to the higher objectives of the law.
Ultimately, this shift transforms fiqh from a science of individual rulings into a discipline concerned with managing and guiding collective human life based on revelatory principles—thereby activating the civilizational potential of religion.
8. Institutional Commitment to Contemporary Fiqh
The growth and flourishing of contemporary fiqh courses and activities in Qom have been both genuine and rapid. From only four or five classes at the outset, the number has now exceeded one hundred courses in recent years. Given the significance of this paradigm, numerous academic centers and research institutes have dedicated themselves to the production of scholarship in applied fiqh domains (fiqh al-muḍāf), contemporary fiqh, and related fields. Key institutions include:
1. Research Institute for Contemporary Fiqh Studies
This institute specializes in addressing time-sensitive juristic issues, compiling comparative studies, and producing encyclopedic works on contemporary fiqh. It regularly organizes expert meetings and specialized training programs, and its official profile and activities are publicly available on its institutional portal.
2. Department of Fiqh and Law — Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy
It is a structured research body focused on emerging fiqh-legal issues, academic article production, and specialized symposia in applied fiqh and religious legal studies.
3. Office of Contemporary Fiqh —Qom Seminary
With the aim of a principled, ijtihād-based transformation of the seminary, and in line with the strategic objectives of the Ḥawza Vision Document, contemporary juristic issues deeply intertwined with modern human life have been integrated into seminary curricula. This ensures that students become familiar with such issues, their branches, and evidentiary foundations at the intermediate level, leading to their natural expansion in advanced dars-i khārij courses.
4. Research Institute of Hawzah and University
It is an institutional bridge between seminary scholarship and university research, undertaking joint projects in contemporary fiqh, methodology, and social applications of fiqh. It publishes related academic journals and works toward operationalizing religious scholarship within the humanities.
5. Higher Institute of Fiqh and Islamic Sciences
It is an educational-research institute tasked with training specialized jurists and developing innovative theories in social, political, and economic fiqh. Through advanced programs and thematic research initiatives, it addresses topics such as governance fiqh and fiqh of innovation.
6. Al-Mustafa International University (Department of Fiqh and Contemporary Studies)
It is a global seminary university offering programs in contemporary fiqh and international juristic challenges. It emphasizes cross-cultural education and prepares scholars for transnational Islamic legal engagement.
7. Informal Seminary Education Sector
In accordance with the traditional seminary model, a significant portion of contemporary fiqh activity occurs not within formal institutions but through independent and group scholarly initiatives. These efforts are typically characterized by deep ijtihādī rigor and are manifested primarily in advanced dars-i khārij sessions devoted to contemporary fiqh themes.
[1] The legally responsible agent in Islamic fiqh.
[2] Independent juristic reasoning in Islamic fiqh.
[3] A jurisprudential methodology based on the monumental work Jawāhir al-Kalām by Shaykh Muḥammad Ḥasan Najafī, which combines traditional structures of ijtihād with the flexibility to address contemporary legal and social challenges. It is widely regarded as a benchmark for precision, systematic reasoning, and comprehensive treatment of fiqh issues in the Shīʿa tradition.
[4] Manṭaqat al-Farāgh is a foundational concept in Shīʿī jurisprudence articulated by Sayyid Muḥammad Bāqir al-Ṣadr in Iqtiṣādunā. It denotes spheres of social life for which no specific Sharīʿa rulings exist, thereby enabling the legitimate Islamic authority to enact context-responsive regulations and policy-based rulings. In this framework, the Sharīʿa grants conditional and purpose-oriented discretion to the Islamic governance system to legislate in matters of public welfare according to the evolving needs of society.
[5] Taẓāhḥm, in technical usage, refers to the conflict between two rulings that both possess valid grounds, occurring at the level of compliance, due to the mukallaf being unable to perform both simultaneously.
