Some “scholars” claim that there is no problem in changing the Fiqh due to the change in environment or circumstances. The proponents of this view give the following justifications:

A. Fiqh is human interpretation while the Shari‟ah is Hukm Shar‟i, which Allah (swt) revealed. The Shari‟ah is the Wahy (revelation) but Fiqh is open to different interpretations. Thus, Fiqh is not a revelation and can be changed.

B. Some rules in Islam are based on „Urf (traditions); the emergence of new traditions would trigger a change in the Fiqh.

C. The Sahabah (ra) have changed some rulings of the Prophet (saw). For example, if the camel was misguided the Prophet (saw) recommended leaving it because it will find its own way. On the other hand, Umar (ra) asked the people to bring the lost camels to the Islamic State where the camels can be kept for the owners to claim them.

D. Imam Shafi‟i changed his Madhab when he went to Egypt due to the new environment.

Some scholars went as far as to say that the Jizya can be cancelled because in the past the non-Muslims didn‟t participate in the Muslim army, but now they are participating in the army and defending the land; therefore, they no longer have to pay Jizya.

Others expressed that the unity of the Muslim Ummah is not a must, and the reason that 50+ states exist is because of life‟s complexity. They arrive at the conclusion that we are no longer in need of the Khilafah because rules are subject to change.

Islam has come to organise and regulate man‟s organic needs and instincts. The rules for this regulation cannot be changed. But as new problems arise, we need new rules, and this is the task of the Mujtahid. Carefully note that this is not considered changing the rules at all.

Fiqh is the totality of Hukm Shar‟i taken from the Islamic sources (Qur‟an, Sunnah etc). Thus, Fiqh is not a body of man-made laws because it is based on these sources. Ijtihad is the process of understanding, studying, and analysing the texts and extracting rulings.

Evidence from the sources of Shari‟ah to justify the extracted ruling is an indispensable part of Ijtihad. The human effort in Ijtihad does not produce man made laws. The Mujtahid cannot take two different rulings for the same issue at the same time; however, he may later discover the misunderstanding of his Daleel and choose another ruling. Thus, there is no difference between Fiqh and Shari‟ah.

The Sahabah (ra) did not change the Fiqh in any way whatsoever. What they did can be categorized as one of the following:

The Khaleefah has the responsibility for taking care of the Ummah‟s affair in any way he finds most effective. This may change from time to time. For example, Umar (ra) asked the people to bring the lost camel to the State authority. While, the Prophet (saw) said to leave the camel and it will find its own owner. During the days of Umar (ra) the State was growing and someone had to take care of this matter. Since the Khaleefah is the caretaker of the Ummah, Umar (ra) asked the people to bring the camel to the state.

What Imam Shafi‟i did was that he changed his methodology completely; this point was discussed earlier in the book.

If some rulings are connected with the „Urf (custom), the ruling may differ from one place to another but this is not changing the Fiqh because the ruling still exists. For example, a custom might dictate that the dowry should not be mentioned. This is acceptable because the ruling to pay the dowry must still be carried out. In other words, if dowry were not mentioned in the contract, then the judge would look at the „Urf (custom) of the city or village and compare the dowry of another woman with a similar status. Another example is of a worker employed without specifying the wage, then the judge would observe what the people paid for a similar job.