Formulation of the claim
The old mechanisms of verification in usul al-fiqh have lost their coherence, and no longer suffice to perform their former function.
Explanation
Arkoun presents usul al-fiqh as a rational attempt to ground religious law in revelation. However, he notes that this methodological edifice, which long relied on specific mechanisms of verification and inference, no longer retains the same force it once had.
The point is not to deny the value of this heritage in itself, but to indicate that its tools are no longer able to contain modern questions or preserve their internal coherence as they were understood within their original historical conditions. Thus, speaking of its former sufficiency becomes a discussion of historical limits that have affected its procedural structure.
Its place in the book’s argument
This atom falls within Arkoun’s critique of forms of foundationalism that consider themselves self-sufficient and imagine that older systems remain valid without revision. It supports the broader thesis that Islamic thought needs to reconsider its tools and presuppositions, rather than merely reviving inherited forms as ready-made solutions.
Limits of the claim
This does not mean that usul al-fiqh has no value, nor that it rejects the entire legal tradition. Nor does it reduce Arkoun’s position to a final judgment on this discipline; rather, it only specifies that the mechanisms of verification on which it was based are no longer sufficient in their old form.
Brief evidence passage
“Usul al-fiqh was a rational attempt to ground religious law in revelation, but the old mechanisms of verification have today lost their coherence.”