Are Islamic Rulings a Product of Arab Culture or an Extension of Divine Revelation?
Some people believe that Islam used Arab culture as foundational material for its rulings. According to this view:
✔ Islam only reformed the negative aspects of Arab society.
✔ It either retained or overlooked other elements as they were.
✔ Hence, Islamic rulings are considered specific to that historical context and environment, and can be modified today according to modern circumstances.
Those who hold this assumption make the following arguments:
① Since in Arab society women stayed at home and men earned livelihood, Islam assigned financial responsibility to men.
② For the same reason, the right of divorce was given to men.
③ But now that women also earn, equal rights in divorce should be granted to both genders.
④ Similarly, this argument is also extended to Hudood (Islamic penal laws), claiming their implementation today should differ from the past.
The claim that Islamic rulings were revealed in response to social realities is not proven by any clear textual evidence.
☑ Logically, it is equally possible that Islamic rulings were sent down to create a particular social order, not to merely conform to pre-existing Arab civilization.
☑ Allah revealed His commands to establish a unique and eternal framework that could be implemented in all societies and eras.
If Islamic rulings are made subject to social circumstances, then where does Ijtihad stop?
☑ If equality in divorce is to be adopted, then similar questions will arise regarding Nikah (marriage).
☑ Why not claim that marriage itself was just an Arab tradition that Islam adopted?
☑ In today's world, DNA testing can determine lineage, so why insist on marriage at all?
This line of thinking cannot answer such questions, and its ultimate conclusion is that Islam was only for past societies, not for today.
This theory selectively targets only those rulings that some individuals deem unsuitable for modern society, while ignoring the logical consequences.
☑ If divorce should have gender equality, then financial responsibility (Nafaqah) on men should also be abolished.
☑ But this is conveniently omitted, as it would then impose financial duties on women.
☑ Should men continue to bear the burden simply to serve a society that exploits them?
Islam did not use Arab traditions as raw material for its rulings. Rather, it upheld the legacy of the teachings of the Prophets:
✔ Practices that aligned with Prophetic teachings were retained.
✔ Practices that had been corrupted were reformed.
Therefore, Islam is not a new religion, but a continuation of the religion of the Prophets, and its rulings are neither temporary nor limited.
Islamic rulings are not influenced by Arab civilization, but are part of Divine Revelation—eternal and applicable in every time and society. Hence, humans are not authorized to alter them, and suspending fundamental rulings in the name of Ijtihad is contrary to Islamic teachings.
❖ The Assumption: “As the Society, So the Islam”
Some people believe that Islam used Arab culture as foundational material for its rulings. According to this view:
✔ Islam only reformed the negative aspects of Arab society.
✔ It either retained or overlooked other elements as they were.
✔ Hence, Islamic rulings are considered specific to that historical context and environment, and can be modified today according to modern circumstances.
❖ Claims Based on This Assumption
Those who hold this assumption make the following arguments:
① Since in Arab society women stayed at home and men earned livelihood, Islam assigned financial responsibility to men.
② For the same reason, the right of divorce was given to men.
③ But now that women also earn, equal rights in divorce should be granted to both genders.
④ Similarly, this argument is also extended to Hudood (Islamic penal laws), claiming their implementation today should differ from the past.
❖ Flaws in This Assumption
① Rulings Are Not Based on Social Conditions
The claim that Islamic rulings were revealed in response to social realities is not proven by any clear textual evidence.
☑ Logically, it is equally possible that Islamic rulings were sent down to create a particular social order, not to merely conform to pre-existing Arab civilization.
☑ Allah revealed His commands to establish a unique and eternal framework that could be implemented in all societies and eras.
② No Clear Limit to Ijtihad (Independent Reasoning)
If Islamic rulings are made subject to social circumstances, then where does Ijtihad stop?
☑ If equality in divorce is to be adopted, then similar questions will arise regarding Nikah (marriage).
☑ Why not claim that marriage itself was just an Arab tradition that Islam adopted?
☑ In today's world, DNA testing can determine lineage, so why insist on marriage at all?
This line of thinking cannot answer such questions, and its ultimate conclusion is that Islam was only for past societies, not for today.
③ Selective Reasoning
This theory selectively targets only those rulings that some individuals deem unsuitable for modern society, while ignoring the logical consequences.
☑ If divorce should have gender equality, then financial responsibility (Nafaqah) on men should also be abolished.
☑ But this is conveniently omitted, as it would then impose financial duties on women.
☑ Should men continue to bear the burden simply to serve a society that exploits them?
❖ The Real Question: Arab Civilization or Prophetic Teachings?
Islam did not use Arab traditions as raw material for its rulings. Rather, it upheld the legacy of the teachings of the Prophets:
✔ Practices that aligned with Prophetic teachings were retained.
✔ Practices that had been corrupted were reformed.
Therefore, Islam is not a new religion, but a continuation of the religion of the Prophets, and its rulings are neither temporary nor limited.
❖ Conclusion
Islamic rulings are not influenced by Arab civilization, but are part of Divine Revelation—eternal and applicable in every time and society. Hence, humans are not authorized to alter them, and suspending fundamental rulings in the name of Ijtihad is contrary to Islamic teachings.
