The Idea
This idea states that Maliki dominance contributed to entrenching a jurisprudential structure inclined toward closure, where inherited opinions become a fixed reference and the tendency toward new ijtihad weakens. The issue here is not a particular school as an absolute error, but rather the effect of dominance when it turns into a barrier to a direct return to the text and a rethinking of rulings.
Concise Formulation
The dominance of the Malikis: closes ijtihad
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This claim occupies an important place in the book’s argument because it links legal history to the narrowing of the possibility of renewal. It explains how an epistemic authority is formed that makes ready-made solutions a substitute for questioning. In this way, it serves the book’s central idea: that the crisis of religious thought is not textual only, but also concerns the institutional structure surrounding the text.
Why It Matters
The importance of this idea lies in the fact that it explains why ijtihad becomes difficult when the authority of a single interpretation settles in. It helps us understand Arkoun as a critic of the mechanisms of epistemic monopoly within the heritage. It also reveals that his struggle for renewal begins with reclaiming the right to question, not with repeating what jurisprudence has already settled.
Reading Questions
- How does doctrinal dominance become an obstacle to ijtihad?
- What is the relationship between interpretive authority and the possibility of returning to the text?
Degree of Documentation
Moderate: the claim is composed from more than one place within the book’s material.