Javed Ahmed Ghamidi explains that the real objective of Din must be defined by Din itself and its authentic sources. If these sources are not silent on the matter, then there is no need to infer the broader objectives of the Shariah through human reasoning. He argues that the Maqasid-e-Shariah (objectives of Islamic law) framework tends to focus primarily on the worldly implications of Islamic law.
According to Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, the primary objective of Din is Tazkiyah al-Nafs—that is, the purification of the soul. This encompasses the purification of every aspect of one’s being across all roles and domains of life. As human beings, we are required to purify our bodies, our nourishment and sustenance, our family life, social interactions, and spiritual pursuits. He believes that the Maqasid-e-Shariah framework does not fully incorporate this central goal of Tazkiyah al-Nafs, and instead emphasizes the worldly benefits and underlying wisdom behind certain legal rulings based on human reasoning.
He also points out that the Maqasid-e-Shariah are not fixed. While earlier scholars such as Imam al-Shatibi and Imam al-Ghazali limited the list to five core objectives, contemporary scholars like Nejatullah Siddiqi have proposed expanding the list in view of modern socio-political realities.
Javed Ahmed Ghamidi maintains that such a discussion is more appropriate in the context of Muslim legal discourse—particularly with respect to laws enacted by Muslims in their own regions and time periods. He contends that the Maqasid-e-Shariah approach implicitly seeks to present religion as a complete code of life.
One implication of his critical stance is that, in the absence of explicit guidance (nass) and when analogical deduction (ijtihad bil-qiyas) is not applicable, there may still be room for Shariah-inspired rulings by appealing to the framework of Maqasid-e-Shariah.
In light of this summary of Javed Ahmed Ghamidi’s views, the following humble observations are offered to promote better mutual understanding.
In Islamic legal discourse, Maqasid-e-Shariah refers to the framework used to derive the deeper wisdom, rationale, and underlying objectives behind Shariah rulings. The five foundational Maqasid outlined in the works of classical scholars such as Imam al-Shatibi and Imam al-Ghazali are:
1. Hifz al-Din (Protection of Religion)
2. Hifz al-Nafs (Protection of Life)
3. Hifz al-Aql (Protection of Intellect)
4. Hifz al-Nasl (Protection of Lineage)
5. Hifz al-Maal (Protection of Wealth)
When examining Shariah rulings through this framework, one can uncover their deeper purpose and wisdom. For example, migration becomes obligatory when a person is unable to fulfill the Faraʾid-e-Ayn (individually binding religious obligations) in a particular region. This reflects the primacy of protecting one’s religious practice.
Similarly, the permissibility of consuming otherwise haram (forbidden) food in a state of idtirar (necessity) is based on the principle of protecting human life (Hifz al-Nafs).
Consider the injunctions surrounding iddah (waiting period) for divorced or widowed women, and the prohibition of intimate relations outside of marriage. These rulings serve to uphold Hifz al-Nasl, the protection of lineage.
The prohibition of alcohol is rooted in Hifz al-Aql. Intoxication impairs one’s mental state, undermining both Huqūq Allah (duties toward God) and Huqūq al-Ibad (duties toward fellow human beings).
Finally, the prohibition of theft and other means of illegitimately acquiring wealth (akl al-amwal bi’l-batil) serves the objective of Hifz al-Mal—the protection of private property and economic justice.
Key Clarifications Regarding Maqasid-e-Shariah First, it is important to note that Maqasid-e-Shariah is not considered an independent source of Shariah. It does not substitute the primary or secondary adillah (sources of legal derivation), such as the Qur’an, Sunnah, ijma, or qiyas.
Second, the Maqasid framework does not undermine the central objective of Tazkiyat al-Nafs (purification of the soul). In fact, this objective is embedded within Hifz al-Din, along with its operational rulings.
Third, in situations where there is no explicit nass (explicit guidance), and where ijtihad bil-qiyas is not directly applicable, the Maqasid framework offers a valuable method for enriching one’s understanding and guiding the formulation of appropriate responses to contemporary issues.
For instance, when viewed in isolation, certain financial contracts may appear not to fall under the scope of Riba (interest) prohibition—such as Bay al-Inah (sale and buy-back transactions) and hybrid modes of financing that guarantee a fixed rate of return based on par value, such as preferred stock.
In a Bay al-Inah arrangement, a person sells an asset for Rs. 10,000 and simultaneously buys it back from the same party for Rs. 11,000. In this scenario, the buyer in the first transaction—who becomes the seller in the second—has no genuine need for the asset. The sole intention is to extract a risk-free gain of Rs. 1,000 through the use of liquid capital. This transaction effectively mirrors a loan contract in which a lender provides Rs. 10,000 on the condition that Rs. 11,000 will be repaid, thereby generating a fixed interest of Rs. 1,000.
Similarly, in the case of preferred stock, the profit rate is predetermined and linked to capital rather than to actual profit generation. The only distinction is that if the dividend (representing profit) is skipped in a particular period, it must be paid in subsequent periods on a cumulative basis—covering both the current and all previously missed payments.
However, a deeper analysis reveals that Bay al-Inah can replicate the effects of an interest-based transaction, especially when the two contracts are executed conditionally and involve the same counterparties. Fiqh may employ legal stratagems (hiyal) to eliminate formal elements of prohibition—such as structuring the contracts as two separate, unconditional transactions or involving a third party to simulate separation. However, when such arrangements are executed in an organized, pre-agreed manner purely to mimic the cash flows of an interest- bearing loan, they fail to meet the ethical and spiritual standards of a legitimate Islamic financial transaction.
The Maqasid al-Shariah framework allows scholars and jurists to focus on the substance and implications of financial rulings, rather than becoming overly absorbed in formalistic legal constructs that may be navigated through hiyal. From this perspective, the Maqasid approach serves as a critical filter—preventing rulings that, although legally constructed, may contradict the broader spirit and ethical intent of the Shariah.
Fourth, it must be emphasized that what is not outlined in the Qur’an and Sunnah cannot be elevated to the status of an Islamic imperative solely on the basis of its perceived goodness, virtue, or benefit. The Maqasid-e- Shariah framework is not a rulings-oriented approach. Rather, it serves as a supplementary paradigm that enriches Islamic discourse. It opens the door for engagement from experts in diverse disciplines, thereby fostering a transdisciplinary perspective on Islamic legal and ethical matters.
In contrast, the Fiqh-based approach is primarily focused on the derivation of specific legal rulings. At times, mainstream Islamic scholarship struggles to decouple Fiqh rulings—derived from secondary sources—from Shariah rulings that are rooted directly in the primary sources: the Qur’an and Sunnah. The Maqasid framework, by offering a broader analytical lens, helps avoid errors that may result from the narrow application of secondary sources or from a rigid, linguistically literal interpretation of sacred texts. In this regard, Maqasid-e-Shariah provides the “big picture” that must not be overlooked in legal reasoning.
Fifth, the real-world implications of Islamic rulings—on both individuals and society—must not be ignored or treated as irrelevant. Within the Al-Mawrid discourse, for instance, Zakat is not seen merely as an act of ʿibadah (worship), but as the only fiscal tool explicitly available to the Islamic state for public welfare spending, whether direct or indirect. Thus, Zakat should also be viewed as a foundational instrument in public finance, development economics, and fiscal policy in a Muslim economy.
Similarly, Jihad bil-Qital is not solely an act of ibadah, but one with direct implications for security strategy and foreign policy. The prohibition of Riba (usury) necessitates a financial system that can mediate funds without relying on interest-based loans. Merely stating the prohibition of Riba is insufficient without addressing the need for viable, ethical alternatives and institutional frameworks.
Hence, while the ultimate aim of Din is Falah (success) in the afterlife, this does not negate the importance of understanding and managing the temporal and societal consequences of Shariah rulings. It becomes essential to engage these implications with comprehensive and practical alternatives.
In this broader domain—beyond the technical scope of Fiqh—the Maqasid-e-Shariah framework serves as a vital tool for enriching Islamic discourse and guiding policy development in ways that align with the spirit of the Shariah.
Finally, there may arise situations where a conflict or paradox appears between different objectives (maqasid), necessitating a prioritization among them. In such cases, Hifz al-Din (protection of religion) takes precedence over other maqasid. As previously noted, Hifz al-Din is inclusive of Tazkiyat al-Nafs (purification of the soul) and encompasses all operational rulings in the Qur’an and Sunnah that constitute Din.
Below are some examples where prioritization among objectives becomes relevant:
1. Land reforms to protect the livelihood of poor farmers: This may justify prioritizing Hifz al-Nafs (protection of life) over Hifz al-Mal (protection of wealth), as ensuring basic physiological survival takes precedence.
2. Ending religious persecution through armed struggle (as a last resort after meeting all conditions): In this case, Hifz al-Din is prioritized over Hifz al-Nafs.
3. Prohibition of infanticide or neglect of abandoned infants whose parentage is unknown: Here, Hifz al-
Nafs (saving life) may take precedence over Hifz al-Nasl (protection of lineage).
4. Abortion of a fetus diagnosed with severe conditions such as autism or Down syndrome: It could be argued, controversially, that Hifz al-Nafs (maternal or societal well-being) may be prioritized over Hifz al-Aql (intellectual or mental preservation), though this would demand nuanced ethical analysis.
5. Punishment for the destruction of an AI robot: Capital punishment would not apply here, as the sanctity of human life (Hifz al-Nafs) would take precedence over the protection of property (Hifz al-Mal) or intellect (Hifz al-Aql) if AI is considered a form of stored knowledge.
6. Gradual rehabilitation of drug addicts: In such cases, Hifz al-Nafs may be prioritized over Hifz al-Aql, emphasizing patience and compassion over punitive enforcement.
In all such paradoxes of choice, Hifz al-Din remains central, as it forms the ethical compass guiding the interpretation and prioritization of other maqasid. The Maqasid al-Shariah framework thus serves as a valuable tool to assess complex moral and social dilemmas, offering a method for principled prioritization.
As previously stated, this framework is not a substitute for the Adillah al-Shariah (primary sources of Islamic legal evidence), nor is it an independent source of rulings. Rather, it is a supplementary tool for enriching legal and ethical discourse. In many contemporary contexts, it is a widely accepted and useful framework that helps maintain focus on the “big picture” rather than becoming overly entangled in minute fiqh related technicalities.
The table below outlines the core maqasid and their practical implications for social policy. It demonstrates how Islamic ethical and legal paradigms—through the maqasid lens—align closely with modern frameworks such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) standards.
Maqasid-e-Shari’ah and their Implications in Policy Design and Approach
Maqasid-e-Shari’ah Implications in Policy Design and Approach
Spirituality (Hifz e-DIn)
Belief and value system emphasizes moderation, responsibility and justice.
Physiology (Hifz e-Nafs)
Emphasis on action to end hunger, malnourishment and stunting and to ensure cleanliness and sanitation.
Intellect (Hifz e-Aqal)
Emphasis on human capital including education and innovation.
Sustainability
(Hifz e-Nasl)
Emphasis on resource conservation, biodiversity and ecosystem sustainability.
Economy (Hifz e-Maal)
Emphasis on employment, need fulfilment, economic opportunities and equitable distribution.
This is one of many examples that illustrate how engagement with contemporary realities can be enriched through a Maqasid al-Shariah-oriented response. Unlike Fiqh, which often functions as a mechanical, rule-generating system grounded in legal formalism, the Maqasid framework offers a more dynamic and purposive approach. It is particularly valuable for informing policy and guiding ethical direction in response to modern social, political, ecological, economic, and technological challenges. In this regard, Maqasid al-Shariah serves as a vital tool for broadening and deepening Islamic discourse in the contemporary context.