Indonesian Islam - TEXT PAGES 15/7/03 3:14 PM Page 54
54
INDONESIAN ISLAM
analogy from one case to another case and so on in infinite regression. The classical jurists were well aware of this and introduced the rule that a result by analogy, once achieved, cannot be extended. The second and hitherto unsolvable problem is how one identifies >illa. Is it a cause or merely a signifier? And what, precisely, are the conditions for identification? It cannot be a mere likeness (for example, if wine and whisky, why not an extreme patriotism, which is also a form of intoxification?). One is on quite difficult ground, and even the possibility of definition remains controversial.157 We can see the argument for identifying an >illa to achieve a benefit, but the benefit may not be the same as the objective (˙ikmah) of the original rule. If this is allowed, we are coming close to rewriting naßß; we are in fact leaving qiyås for isti˙sån. (d) Isti˙sån, juristic preference for the ‘good’. This is the next step for the Muhammadiyah fatwå method. Isti˙sån is perhaps the nearest to something like ‘rational natural law’: that is, the right principle can be found by reason. In the Muhammadiyah the source still remains in the Qur’ån and Sunna— Taking maßla˙a as the basis, the Muhammadiyah tend to look to the established objectives of Qur’ån and Sunnah—that is, ∂ar¥riyyåt (protection of necessities), ˙ajiyyåt (requirements) and ta˙s•niyyåt (embellishment). These are criteria decreasing in value. (e) Isti˙låh, public interest. This is also known as al-maßla˙a mursalah and is associated particularly with the Målik• madhhab. It is confined to matters outside dogma and ritual and is not mentioned in Revelation. Public interest includes benefits and also the prevention of harm. Both must be in harmony with objectives (maqåßid) of the Syariah. Classically speaking it is in fact quite restricted in fatwå, but its use in the Muhammadiyah fatåwå is extensive (see example below on organ donation). (f) Sadd al-Dharå’i>, ‘blocking the means [to wrong acts]’. The principle is to prevent an evil (mafsadah) before it occurs by classifying actions as (i) those which will definitely lead to evil, (ii) likely to lead to evil, (iii) frequently but not inevitably leading to evil, and (iv) those acts which possibly but rarely lead to evil. One can easily see the problems in definitions of actions which must, by the nature of things, be highly circumstance-specific. The principle has one further aspect: it also covers the case where that which is forbidden (˙aråm) may be turned into that which is permissible (mubå˙) so as to prevent a greater evil. The lesser is tolerated. This use of the principle is common now in Indonesian fatåwå in the field of medical ethics, for example permitting transplants (see chapter 4). Maßla˙a is always the context. The idea of context is the crucial element in the Muhammadiyah ideology of religion. It gives a workable scheme within which one can attempt to distinguish the sacred and the worldly. This is not without its difficulties (see above on Harun Nasution and Nurcholish Madjid) but an exact use of classical terminology defined for contemporary Indonesian circumstances may be not wholly unachievable. The fact that contradiction