Argument from Islamic Jurisprudence

INTERPRETATION OF THE ISLAMIC MISSION requirement only expresses the demands of Islamic law regarding politics, just as a ruling concerning worship reveals the requirements of Sharia related to worship. However, the issue at hand pertains to the justification of the entire Sharia. How can an opinion be formed about the entire framework from a specific ruling? Is the entire Sharia merely the name of this particular part? While presenting this argument, the individual seems to have forgotten that they are citing a purely political ruling to support their objective, despite their own claim that this objective relates to all the demands of the religion, not just its political aspect. Finally, another type of argument emerges. These are people who, after realizing their weakness in reasoning, try to justify their position with a strange kind of logic: that their claim requires no proof at all. They say: “You have unnecessarily dragged us into the ‘circle of argument.’ Otherwise, this matter is so self-evident that one can understand it through reason alone. What need is there for a proof from the religious sources for it? It is merely the result of historical circumstances that Muslims now find it hard to believe that it is also obligatory upon us to change existing conditions.” For this reason, they add: “We now look for such clear verses of the Quran in which we are directly commanded that—the revolution of leadership is obligatory upon Muslims—and since no