Jurisprudential Disagreement in the Context of Contemporary Realities: اختلاف الفقهي في ظل الواقع المعاصرة

Idris Salihu Ahmad (Department of Islamic Studies, Faculty of Religion and Philosophy, Taraba State University, Jalingo)
Lawan Abdullahi Muhammad (Department of Islamic Studies, Faculty of Religion and Philosophy, Taraba State University, Jalingo)

Demak Universal Journal of Islam and Sharia
Vol. 4 No. 01 (2026): Demak Universal Journal of Islam and Sharia

Objective: The main purpose of this study is to clarify the foundational concept, underlying causes, distinct types, and essential legal regulations of juristic disagreement (ikhtilaf fiqhi), while thoroughly evaluating the profound impact of modern scientific, technological, and social developments on the growing diversity of contemporary Islamic legal opinions, fatwas, and scholarly rulings. Theoretical framework: The theoretical framework is firmly anchored in Maqasid al-Shariah (the higher objectives of Islamic Law) alongside established methodological principles of legitimate Ijtihad (independent legal reasoning) designed to effectively harmonize sacred textual authority with rapidly evolving contemporary realities. Literature review: The literature review systematically synthesizes foundational primary Islamic sources, including the Glorious Qur'an and Sunnah, with classical juristic discourses, traditional legal maxims, and formal contemporary resolutions established by prominent international Islamic Fiqh academies. Methods: The research methodology adopts an integrative combination of descriptive, analytical, inclusive, and comparative qualitative research approaches to systematically analyze and evaluate classical textual evidences alongside modern juristic decrees. Results: The research results reveal that qualified, legitimate juristic disagreement represents a dynamic manifestation of the inherent flexibility, vitality, and comprehensiveness of Islamic Law. Furthermore, ongoing scientific, technological, and social transformations continuously generate novel, complex issues that require highly adaptable, well-reasoned, and diverse juristic responses. Implication: The practical implication underscores the urgent necessity of institutionalizing collective Ijtihad, promoting respectful scholarly dialogue, and distinguishing legitimate opinions from invalid dissent to preserve Muslim communal unity while securing genuine public interests (maslahah) and effectively preventing widespread societal harm. Novelty: The key novelty of this study lies in its systematic recontextualization of classical ikhtilaf regulations within contemporary institutional fatwa mechanisms, offering an integrative scholarly framework that bridges traditional legal heritage with modern practical realities.