Expediency and Its Role in Deriving Rulings for Emerging Issues

Abstract

The extensive social, scientific, and technological transformations of the present era have given rise to newly emerging issues, and consequently new questions, for many of which there is no explicit text in the Qur’an and Sunnah. This study aims to elucidate the special status of the principle of expediency (maslaha) in the process of deriving rulings (ahkam) for emerging issues (masāʾil mustahdatha) in Islamic jurisprudence, particularly within the Shiʿa school of thought. In this regard, while explaining the concepts of expediency (maslaha), juristic preference (istihsan), and blocking the means (sadd al-dhara’i), the research examines the theoretical and practical distinctions and boundaries between these concepts, clarifying that expediency—unlike istihsan and sadd al-dhara’i—is oriented toward public interests and the overarching objectives of the Shariʿa (maqasid al-shariʿa). By classifying emerging issues into novel topics with a traditional nature and entirely unprecedented topics, the study emphasizes the importance of precise identification of the subject matter and the use of contemporary and specialized sciences alongside the foundational principles of ijtihad. Based on this approach, deriving rulings for emerging issues depends on the interaction between reason (ʿaql), scientific expertise, customary rational practice (ʿurf ʿuqala’i), and principled ijtihad. Moreover, adherence to the criteria for validating expediency—such as non-contradiction with explicit texts, consensus (ijmaʿ), and the objectives of the Shariʿa—is presented as a safeguard for the authenticity of jurisprudence. The findings indicate that the principle of expediency, provided that definitive texts and the essential purposes of religion are respected, serves as a dynamic and reliable tool for deriving rulings for new issues. This enables the jurist to issue rulings that address contemporary needs while remaining in harmony with the values of the Shariʿa, through a proper understanding of new realities and the use of reason and experience. However, such an endeavor requires careful vigilance against potential risks, such as deviation from explicit texts or the intrusion of non-Sharʿi motives. Ultimately, it can be concluded that the dynamism and effectiveness of Imamiyyah jurisprudence depend on a methodical consideration of expediency, without departing from the authentic foundations of ijtihad.