One phenomenon marking Muslim behavior is the transformation of religious rules into traditions. People adopt these traditions just like regional or national ones. They defend them as they defend their traditional sanctities.
A question must be asked about the effectiveness of the juristic ruling: Is this transformation a positive step or a negative one?
At first, transforming a religious ruling into a tradition seems useful. It enhances the individual's accord with it more than a mere religious ruling would. Overstepping traditions is difficult. It signifies overstepping the status and will of society. Over time, traditions become part of a society's character and life. Rebelling against them is like rebelling against the nation's entity and sanctity.
However, if the issue is a mere juristic ruling, it is not so hard. It becomes subject to one's religious awareness and internal deterrence. This internal element prevents disobedience and propels obedience. It protects man from crime and makes him follow the path destined by Allah. This unravels the difference. The difference is between rulings that become traditions and rulings that remain mere commands and forbiddances.
Yet, another aspect must be emphasized. Traditions based on juristic rulings must stay correlated with their juristic bases. They must not be separated from their main pillars, or they become meaningless. The way the nation practices traditions is often not based on awareness. It is not from understanding their need or their connection to original principles.
Those principles might be completely forgotten. They might seem ridiculous to a society. The emergence of traditions is often subject to natural factors in society's life. This includes the forcefulness of the incident from which they emanated. It includes their social impact, which makes their recurrence natural. Or the power of an authority that wanted to instill a tradition. Other factors cause an act to recur until it becomes a tradition practiced automatically.
Since this is often an unaware course of action, it can face shocks. At certain stages of social development, some may try to uproot it. The nation might wake up to revolutionary situations. These incite feelings against all traditions through a revolutionary method. They analyze the tradition and subject it to intellectual standards. This renders its existence unjustified. The operation of eradicating it from society then starts. It can happen gradually or instantly until the tradition becomes unfamiliar.
Moreover, some individuals might feel intellectual repulsion. They feel a sense of naivety when obliged to carry out acts they do not understand. They do not know their uses and benefits. It is like larking about without any personal motivation. They might understand traditions negatively from not knowing their authentic sources. When a part is taken from its context, it loses most of its internal characteristics.
This drives us to focus on the legislative nature of these traditions. We must consider them part of the overall general line. This line achieves the big goals of legislation. It provides man with two motivations. The social motivation makes overstepping traditions a violation of the nation's sacred aspects. The religious motivation makes rebelling against them a revolt against Allah's will. On the other hand, traditions ought to remain in people's minds and conscience as a habit with a philosophy. They should be interconnected with a plan, not something abstract. Practicing them should not be unaware or rigid. It should be an aware act related to a meaning that man comprehends as reasonable and sacred.
Such concentration on traditions prevents rebelling against them. It leaves rebels without justification. It makes their revolt a revolt against Allah's will. This strengthens the role of tradition in the toughest circumstances.
Source: Extracted from the book “Steps on the road to Islam”, p: 309-312
One phenomenon marking Muslim behavior is the transformation of religious rules into traditions. People adopt these traditions just like regional or national ones. They defend them as they defend their traditional sanctities.
A question must be asked about the effectiveness of the juristic ruling: Is this transformation a positive step or a negative one?
At first, transforming a religious ruling into a tradition seems useful. It enhances the individual's accord with it more than a mere religious ruling would. Overstepping traditions is difficult. It signifies overstepping the status and will of society. Over time, traditions become part of a society's character and life. Rebelling against them is like rebelling against the nation's entity and sanctity.
However, if the issue is a mere juristic ruling, it is not so hard. It becomes subject to one's religious awareness and internal deterrence. This internal element prevents disobedience and propels obedience. It protects man from crime and makes him follow the path destined by Allah. This unravels the difference. The difference is between rulings that become traditions and rulings that remain mere commands and forbiddances.
Yet, another aspect must be emphasized. Traditions based on juristic rulings must stay correlated with their juristic bases. They must not be separated from their main pillars, or they become meaningless. The way the nation practices traditions is often not based on awareness. It is not from understanding their need or their connection to original principles.
Those principles might be completely forgotten. They might seem ridiculous to a society. The emergence of traditions is often subject to natural factors in society's life. This includes the forcefulness of the incident from which they emanated. It includes their social impact, which makes their recurrence natural. Or the power of an authority that wanted to instill a tradition. Other factors cause an act to recur until it becomes a tradition practiced automatically.
Since this is often an unaware course of action, it can face shocks. At certain stages of social development, some may try to uproot it. The nation might wake up to revolutionary situations. These incite feelings against all traditions through a revolutionary method. They analyze the tradition and subject it to intellectual standards. This renders its existence unjustified. The operation of eradicating it from society then starts. It can happen gradually or instantly until the tradition becomes unfamiliar.
Moreover, some individuals might feel intellectual repulsion. They feel a sense of naivety when obliged to carry out acts they do not understand. They do not know their uses and benefits. It is like larking about without any personal motivation. They might understand traditions negatively from not knowing their authentic sources. When a part is taken from its context, it loses most of its internal characteristics.
This drives us to focus on the legislative nature of these traditions. We must consider them part of the overall general line. This line achieves the big goals of legislation. It provides man with two motivations. The social motivation makes overstepping traditions a violation of the nation's sacred aspects. The religious motivation makes rebelling against them a revolt against Allah's will. On the other hand, traditions ought to remain in people's minds and conscience as a habit with a philosophy. They should be interconnected with a plan, not something abstract. Practicing them should not be unaware or rigid. It should be an aware act related to a meaning that man comprehends as reasonable and sacred.
Such concentration on traditions prevents rebelling against them. It leaves rebels without justification. It makes their revolt a revolt against Allah's will. This strengthens the role of tradition in the toughest circumstances.
Source: Extracted from the book “Steps on the road to Islam”, p: 309-312