Approach to General Cmprehension of the Religious Text
Yahya Mohamed
In the last chapter of the book (The Realistic System النظام الواقعي), we presented a new course of religious understanding, which we called the General Comprehension, in contrast to the Detailed Comprehension of the religious text as is the practice of all Islamic sects.
Every linguistic text is plagued by an ambiguous general of indistinct, no matter how clear it is. Therefore, it cannot fully define the essence of things in terms of understanding and judgment. The religious text does not go beyond this linguistic fact. To treat this deficiency, we need to disassemble the text according to the objectives and their relationship to both rational intuition and reality.
In the folds of our research for General Comprehension, we divided the general into distinct and indistinct, and each of them has its sub-divisions, and what concerns us - here - is the last, as it is divided into three types, which are accidental, inductive and original, as follows:
A – accidental general
The advantage of this type is that the general is generated by accidental factors. It is distinct in some parts and not in its general, and the indistinct in its general is not subjective in terms of origin but rather the result of external factors. For example, when the Sharia rulings (detailed rulings) are characterized by clarity and explicit, whether they denote the lawful, unlawful, or obligatory, they become general rulings of the accidental type. In some of its aspects related to the situation or the particular reality, it is distinct, but in others, it becomes a general indistinct. The general or indistinct arises about whether these rulings pertain to that situation and reality or whether they include anything else. Thus, there are two probability hypotheses for this general: comprehensiveness and specificity. The latter is one of the distinct details, as it is what the ruling applies to, and comprehensiveness is the source of doubt and probability.
B - Inductive general
It has two peculiarities that distinguish it from other generals. One of which is that the distinction is inferred by the inductive method, or at least that the distinct results from a large number of what is indicated by the probabilistic clues. The distinct in this regard is not subjective according to the linguistic speech. It also possesses another complementary feature: the distinction is verified despite the indistinct in all its details. Rather, the credit for generating this distinct general is due to the same indistinct details. For example, the necessary objectives of the Shari’a are extracted from many examples, It is thus verified, but not every one of them can indicate this verified matter. Likewise, if we suppose that every Qur’anic apparent about the infallibility of the prophets lacks sufficient clarification to negate the absolute infallibility, yet we find that the multitude of clues indicated by dozens of verses leads to the formation of the comprehensive distinct to negate this type of infallibility.
C - the original general
Its advantage is that it is distinct in its general in terms of the original or the text, and the source of the indistinct in its details is due to the text as well. Sometimes all its details are indistinct, and at other times, some are characterized by indistinct, while others are characterized by distinct. Accordingly, it is of two types: simple and compound. For example, issues of public worship, such as prayer, fasting, zakat, and others; Each of them expresses the complex distinct general because of the details it bears, in turn, which are generals of the subsections beneath them.
***
Based on the previous, it is possible to take a position appropriate to religious understanding that differs from the position agreed upon between Islamic sects and scholars, as they practiced the research process in detail and exaggeration in the text, which leads to more indistinct; Whether the detail and exaggeration are within the distinct or indistinct texts, or even within the analogies and diligences that branch from them, which do not take the principles of religious understanding of objectives, reason, and reality into account. Therefore, we call this behavior the Detailed Comprehension approach to distinguish it from the corresponding approach based on the General Comprehension. The differences between them can be diagnosed according to the following points:
1- The two previous concepts differ according to their relation to the objectives. The General Comprehension is consistent with it without opposition, while the Detailed Comprehension deepens the state of separation and conflict with it. This point is one of the most important problems facing the latter understanding, as it does not leave room for the objectives, As long as the adherence to one of them leads to conflict with the other. This explains how the position of the theoreticians of objectives is characterized by justification, not legislation. Those who theorized about the objectives admitted the purposes of the distinct details; however, they restricted the work to the distinct details and concealed the significance of the objectives meaning of dominance and rulership over these details, including those characterized by the opposition with it.
The fixed work in the detail is not consistent with the objectives as long as the variations, in reality, do not end with a certain limit. While this is not the case when relying on the General Comprehension, As long as it has more than one side, which accepts the direction as dictated by the objectives theory without conflict. Thus, the General Comprehension avoided a lot of sources of disagreement and opposition in terms of diligence (ijtihad) in reality and its relationship to other principles of religious understanding.
Thus, working with a General Comprehension eliminates the state of contradiction between the text on the one hand and, reality, objectives and reason on the other. When we encounter a conflict of this kind, we know or expect that there is confusion and indistinctness about our understanding of the text, which requires resolving it through reality or rational intuition.
2- The previous two understandings differ according to the method of addressing reality issues. The general course attaches great importance to reality for treatment, influence, and detail. It is the subject of research, check, and review without interruption, in contrast to what a Detailed Comprehension works with, which limits the impact of reality and does not give it much consideration.
They also differ in terms of the cognitive status that the text occupies for them. The text concerning the general path has the attribute of directing thought, and for the detailed path, it has the attribute of forming the thought. That is, the first deals with the text as a guide rather than a component, unlike the other, which deals with it as a component rather than a guide. Undoubtedly, the difference between the two cases is reflected in the position on reality. The one who gives the text the attribute of composition does not make reality a place, and who gives it the attribute of guidance needs a formative knowledge block on which the attribute of guidance is exercised, and it does not find it rich except in reality. With the note of the relative matter between guidance and formation, guidance is not without formation, no matter how weak it seems, just as the formation is the other, not without guidance in turn, even if it is less.
They also differ according to the mitigation of cognitive and scientific disagreement cases. According to the Detailed Comprehension, the cognitive dispute is almost the same without diminishing but often increases as the recourse to the linguistic checks and their possibilities increases, and this is not the case with the General Comprehension, as the recourse to reality. However, it does not usually eliminate the dispute; it can be mitigated and perhaps removed over time.
3- The two previous understandings differ according to the conferring of holiness on their judgmental results.
The General Comprehension makes holiness loom over the generals inspired by the texts and does not give such consideration to the suspicious details. It is the opposite of what a Detailed Comprehension does of making holiness apply to the known generals and suspicious details without a radical difference between the two groups.
Likewise, to the extent that the General Comprehension narrows the boundaries of the circle of the text and the sanctity it entails, As much as it opens up to reality under the guidance of objectives. On the contrary, Detailed Comprehension works, as much as it opens up to the text and inspires holiness from it even in suspicious details, As far away from reality and its considerations. The diligence in the Detailed Comprehension is in the text, While the diligence in the General Comprehension is in the open reality.
Thus, through the General Comprehension, the heretical priesthood can be eliminated based on the Detailed Comprehension approach, which attributes everything diligence to the divine rulings and then dresses it in a holy dress. Of course, This holiness and the nature of the priesthood based on it may vary. In contrast, people converge in their understanding of religious issues according to the general approach, Just like it was at the time of the Message.
4- The two previous understandings differ according to their relationship to the Islamic nation. The general path is monotheistic, in contrast to the detailed path, which works to separate and conflict due to its connection with the sacred, even at the level of suspicions emanating from the details. The matter in which the suspicious sanctities contradict, and disputes and conflicts arise over the connection with these claims.
They also differ in terms of mitigating, tightening, and Limiting individual obligations in matters of rulings and acts of worship. The general course tends to reduce and decrease, in contrast to the detailed course, which tends towards tightening and expansion.
The reference
https://www.fahmaldin.net/index.php?id=2577