The Objectives of Islamic Law and the Effect of Lexical Polysemy Upon their Derivation: Qur'anic Marriage Terminology as a Case Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51699/cajlpc.v7i4.1638Keywords:
Objectives of Islamic law, lexical polysemy, homonymy, marriage terminology, nikah, ihsan, purposive exegesis, Ibn 'AshurAbstract
This study examines the relationship between lexical polysemy in the vocabulary of the Qur'an and the derivation of the objectives of Islamic law (maqasid al-shari'a), taking the terminology of marriage as its applied field. It opens with a concise account of the objectives — their definition, kinds and divisions — as established by al-Ghazali, al-Shatibi and Ibn 'Ashur, and then applies a uniform five-step procedure to the principal marriage terms: nikah, zawj, saduqat together with nihla, ujur, ihsan, and al-mithaq al-ghaliz. For each term it cites the Qur'anic verse, establishes its meaning from the classical Arabic lexicons, consults the commentaries that attend to the objectives of the law — chiefly Ibn 'Ashur's al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir — derives the legal objective and states the rank of its establishment, and concludes by setting out the effect of polysemy upon that objective and upon the juristic ruling founded on it.The study concludes that polysemy in the terminology of marriage is not a defect of expression but a resource for purposive derivation. Its effect follows four patterns: a complementary polysemy that constructs a composite objective, as in saduqat with nihla and in al-mithaq al-ghaliz; a contested polysemy settled by the clarification of the Sunna, as in nikah and ujur; a dual polysemy, contested in its particular rulings yet complementary at the level of the overarching objective, which is then derived from what the senses share, as in ihsan; and a polysemy whose two senses realise the objective equally, so that preference falls outside the competence of the objective and reverts to linguistic and transmitted indicators, as in qur'. It further establishes that the derivation of objectives from terms proceeds along a three-stage path that may not be reordered — lexical, contextual, then purposive — and that preference by the objective is conditional upon the two senses differing in realising it and upon its being supported by context or by the Sunna.
References
Ibn al-Jawzi, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Ali, Nuzhat al-A‘yun al-Nawazir fi ‘Ilm al-Wujuh wa al-Naza’ir, ed. M. ‘Abd al-Karim Kazim al-Radi. Beirut, Lebanon: Mu’assasat al-Risala, 1404 AH/1984.
H. Qasim, “The homonymous term and its effect on the divergence of jurists,” Al-Janan, vol. 16, pp. 191–213, 2022.
B. Bin Zayd, “Homonymy and its effect on the divergence of Qur’anic exegetes,” Majallat al-Hikma li-l-Dirasat al-Islamiyya, vol. 11, pp. 121–133, 2018.
M. ibn Mukarram Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-‘Arab, 3rd ed. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Sadir, 1414 AH.
A. ibn Faris, Mu‘jam Maqayis al-Lugha, ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Muhammad Harun. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Fikr, 1399 AH/1979.
M. al-Tahir Ibn ‘Ashur, Maqasid al-Shari‘a al-Islamiyya, ed. M. al-Habib Ibn al-Khoja. Doha, Qatar: Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, 1425 AH/2004.
I. ibn Musa al-Shatibi, Al-Muwafaqat, ed. Mashhur ibn Hasan Al Salman. Al-Khubar, Saudi Arabia: Dar Ibn ‘Affan, 1417 AH/1997.
‘A. al-Fasi, Maqasid al-Shari‘a al-Islamiyya wa Makarimuha, 5th ed. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Gharb al-Islami, 1993.
A. H. al-Ghazali, Al-Mustasfa min ‘Ilm al-Usul, ed. M. ‘Abd al-Salam ‘Abd al-Shafi. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1413 AH/1993.
A. al-Raysuni, Nazariyyat al-Maqasid ‘Inda al-Imam al-Shatibi, 4th ed. Herndon, VA, USA: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1416 AH/1995.
N. ‘Abduh Khaled Qa’id and R. Jamal Yusuf al-Atrash, “The Qur’anic context and its impact on Ibn Ashur’s Maqasid approach to tafsir,” Islamiyyat al-Ma‘rifah, vol. 19, no. 73, pp. 13–40, 2013.
M. ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Jami‘ al-Bayan ‘an Ta’wil Ay al-Qur’an, ed. Ahmad M. Shakir. Beirut, Lebanon: Mu’assasat al-Risala, 1420 AH/2000.
M. ibn Ahmad al-Qurtubi, Al-Jami‘ li-Ahkam al-Qur’an, 2nd ed., ed. A. al-Bardouni and I. Atfaysh. Cairo, Egypt: Dar al-Kutub al-Misriyya, 1384 AH/1964.
M. ibn Isma‘il al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, ed. M. Zuhayr al-Nasir. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Tawq al-Najat, 1422 AH.
A. W. M. ibn Ahmad Ibn Rushd al-Hafid, Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid. Cairo, Egypt: Dar al-Hadith, 1425 AH/2004.
A. B. M. ibn ‘Abd Allah Ibn al-‘Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur’an, 3rd ed., ed. M. ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Ata. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1424 AH/2003.
M. ibn al-Hajjaj al-Naysaburi, Sahih Muslim, ed. M. Fu’ad ‘Abd al-Baqi. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi, n.d, 1 ed, 1955.
S. Jab Allah and Y. Bulahmar, “The purposive dimension of the rulings of the family system in Shaykh Muhammad al-Tahir Ibn ‘Ashur through his exegesis, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 261–283, 2017.
M. al-Tahir Ibn ‘Ashur, Al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir. Tunis, Tunisia: al-Dar al-Tunisiyya li-l-Nashr, 1984.
‘A. al-Haqq ibn Ghalib Ibn ‘Atiyya, Al-Muharrar al-Wajiz fi Tafsir al-Kitab al-‘Aziz, ed. ‘Abd al-Salam ‘Abd al-Shafi Muhammad. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1422 AH.
