← Back Published on

Durkheim and Weber: Sharia Law Interpretation

Durkheim and Weber: Sharia Law Interpretation

Overview of Sharia Law

Sharia, often regarded as the cornerstone for Islam’s legal system, serves as a guiding framework for Muslims and Islamic law. Rooted in the Quran, Islam’s sacred text, and the sayings of Prophet Muhammad in Hadith and Sunnah, Sharia is a representation of the divine counsels’ word, shaping Muslim observance to be in alignment with God’s wishes (Dupret, 2018). When direct answers are elusive within Sharia, scholars are frequently left to interpret them, offering guidance to Muslims on specific matters (Robinson, 2021). Acting as a code for which Muslims are expected to adhere to gain God’s approval, it primarily stands as a collective source for which they should lead their lives according to God and His divine principles (Dupret, 2018). As a religious concept, Sharia underpins the derivation of Islamic law and is viewed as God’s proclamation and a manifestation of a divinely ordained path of behavior and customs (Dupret, 2018). Today, Sharia stands as a contentious concept and legal framework (Robinson, 2021). As a primary resource for social, political, and ethical guidance amongst Muslims, the explanations of Sharia from a macro-perspective by sociologists Durkheim and Weber remain relevant and offer insight despite the age of their theories. For comprehension purposes, the Sharia Law requiring women to cover their head for modesty will be used as a brief example, but the explanations will be based upon a macro-encompassing perspective of Sharia Law as a whole.

Émile Durkheim’s Explanation

Durkheim focused his studies on the division of labor, solidarity, anomie, and functionalism (Milovanovic, 2022). He would examine the bonds of Islamic society through religion and its ultimate attraction through sameness. He would state that Sharia Law focuses on mechanical solidarity where there is little division of labor, a collective understanding, and an internalized bond of sameness (Van Gundy, 2024). For example, Durkheim would say the Sharia Law requiring women to cover their heads is built upon a consensus amongst Islamic leaders, religious scholars, and Muslims that a woman covering her head is necessary for modesty purposes and God’s commands. This is a sense of uniformity and homogeneity (the conscience collective) between all Muslims (Lukes & Scull, 2017). Deviants from these rules would be considered immoral and face repressive law (Milovanovic, 2022).

However, Islamic communities today are evolving away from this viewpoint. Modernists and feminists argue it should not be mandated based upon the few interpretations of scholars and authority figures who are often men of privilege (Robinson, 2021). Durkheim would explain that Islamic societies are moving towards organic solidarity (division of labor, heterogeneity, individualism) where differing viewpoints exist amongst many and not just one individual (Lukes & Scull, 2017). As a result, if Sharia Law does not adapt alongside that of society, society will reach anomie: a state of normlessness and lawlessness (Milovanovic, 2022). Sharia Law then becomes divisive, forcing a division of labor and individual functions are distributed in ways from which they are deprived of fulfilling activities and functions (Van Gundy, 2024). The conscience collective is weakened, social density becomes greater, and individuals are released from the bonds of Sharia Law’s shared morality (Lukes & Scull, 2017). Durkheim would also state Sharia Law is based upon a solemn contract of exchange with a divine being (God is a third party and guarantor of the declaration between two individuals). As Islamic society advances, however, the divine’s authority in the contract weakens and it becomes a consensual contract instead (Lukes & Scull, 2017). If Sharia Law does not mutually adjust alongside the elements of Islamic organic solidarity changes, it will reach abnormal forms of normlessness (Milovanovic, 2022).

Max Weber’s Explanation

Weber’s explanation of Sharia Law would be that it is externally guaranteed by the probability that coercion, to bring about conformity or avenge violations, will be applied by a staff of people (Sharia scholar interpreters and governments created “under god”) holding themselves ready for said purposes. Sharia Law produces predictability and stability amongst behaviors of Islamic communities (Van Gundy, 2024). He would state that Islamic followers obey Sharia Laws out of habit, expediency, and tradition. Sharia’s legitimate domination is tied to tradition and obedience because of the belief that it has validity from the customs, habits, and traditions of the Quran and Islamic religion (Huff & Schluchter, 1999).

Weber would explain Sharia Law by stating Islamic governments apply it through coercion to bring conformity and prevent violation (Huff & Schluchter, 1999). It is a rule of conduct that people consciously or unconsciously follow because it is the commonly accepted assumption or rule of behavior for all Muslims. They orient their behavior to Sharia Law (a normative order) and see it as obligatory and binding, as seen with the specific Sharia Law that requires women to cover their faces. Islamic society also orients themselves to Sharia Law emotionally (affectual), ethically (value-rational), and obediently for salvation (religiously) (Milovanovic, 2022). Therefore, while coercion can exist within Sharia Law, it is not necessary because these orientations make individuals perceive the law as legitimate.

Weber would additionally explain Sharia Law as a formally irrational law where decision making rests upon an oracle and prophetic interpretations (Sharia scholars) (Milovanovic, 2022; Huff & Schluchter, 1999). Formal rules (although it could be argued they are informal in some Islamic communities) about procedures exist for deviation (arresting a woman not covering her face), but its results, decisions, and predictability are not logically understandable to outsiders (Milovanovic, 2022). Overall, Weber would explain Sharia Law as a system of rules of conduct and standards created and enforced through coercion by governmental authority figures and prophetic interpretations that Muslims feel obligated to accept despite its unpredictability and difficult understandability to outsiders.

Most Appropriate Explanation of Sharia Law

I feel Durkheim’s viewpoint is the best explanation of Sharia Law because it more accurately coincides with Islam’s current transformation to organic solidarity over mechanical. His application additionally touches upon the importance of Islamic government and law coinciding with these changes or unlawfulness and anomie will thrive. While I think both explanations are accurate, Durkheim’s is more applicable and relevant to current changes within Islamic communities and societies. Weber’s explanation provides a reasoning for why Muslim communities obey such laws, but Durkheim provides further analysis on why the law should adapt alongside with them.

References

Dupret, B. (2018). What is the Sharia?. Oxford University Press.

Huff, T. E., & Schluchter, W. (Eds.). (1999). Max weber and Islam. Transaction Publishers.

Lukes, S., & Scull, A. (2017). Durkheim and the Law. Bloomsbury Publishing. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=myBIEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=emile+durkheim+theory+of+law&ots=aPgPR-AFbi&sig=PPlYUH1hviQcE4P_y3Zu6utdqew#v=onepage&q=emile%20durkheim%20theory%20of%20law&f=false

Milovanovic, D. (2022). An introduction to the sociology of law (4th ed.). Carolina Academic Press. https://read.amazon.com/?_encoding=UTF8&asin=B0BLHZYBD9&consumptionLimitReached=false&hasMultimedia=false&requiredCapabilities=EBOK_PURCHASE_ALLOWED&ref=yb_qv_ov_kndl_rn_rw&yourBooksUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fyour-books%2F%3F_encoding%3DUTF8%26ref%3Dyb_ip_ksf_d%26ccs_id%3Da71fb2a0-f890-4dd0-a814-fcd86b6cffbe%26ref_%3Dyb_ip_kwf_rn_a

Robinson, K. (2021). Understanding Sharia: The intersection of Islam and the law. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/understanding-sharia-intersection-islam-and-law

Van Gundy, A. (2024). Sociology of law: Chapter three – Emile Durkheim [PowerPoint].

Van Gundy, A. (2024). Sociology of law: Chapter four – Law in economy and society [PowerPoint].