this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2026
8 points (72.2% liked)
Opensource
6040 readers
117 users here now
A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!
⠀
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Freedom in the west is a goal in and of itself that acts as a moral compass when judging tools and products. Islam values freedom, but it is not a end goal, nor is it a moral precept to base your ethics on. It's important, and Islam values freedom of religion, freedom of speech, etc., but not to the full maximizing extent that you see in western countries.
The five classical objectives of Sharia are:
Both in the community sense (laws) and the personal sense (halal/haram)
From an Islamic perspective, More Freedom does not always equal better protection of above. For example, freedom for sperm donations can harm lineage, where people don't know who their fathers are and vice versa; this can cause potential scenarios where half-siblings marry without knowledge. As such, Sharia prioritizes other needs over freedom when a tension emerges between the two. In the same vein, the goals of FOSS and OSI are noble and can help society on many levels, but is not a direct objective for scholars. There are positive side effects for sure, but to label something as Haram or obligatory is a very tall order for scholars to achieve and requires strong precedent from the Qur'an and Sunnah.
For me personally as a Muslim Software Developer, I see this as part of my Ihsan (excellence) tool kit in my profession. We should be taking the lead to create ethical businesses that help societies and improve people's lives. We should help our non-techie friends and family members to gain control in their digital space. And we should help build FOSS / OSI tools.
With that being said, please take my opinion as an opinion as I'm not educated as a scholar. Who knows though, I know of a few Mufti Software Engineers out there that could offer a professional opinion on this :)
This is the kind of hubris that started in the Ta'weel era (a good equivalent English word escapes me. In Arabic: "عصر التأويل") after the rashidun period and the Tanzeel era, and accumulated in the full abandonment/replacement era ("عصر التبديل").
The whole point of true monotheism is to be only subject to Allah and no one else. No kings. No clergy (itself an anti-islamic concept). No "intellectuals"....etc. In other words, "freedom" is at the core of Islamic creed, it's not even something to be discussed at the jurisprudence level.
The whole point of finality of religion including sharia, is that no one can add/append to it. This relates to additional restrictions even more than additional allowances (read about the limits of restricting what's allowed if you wish "تقييد المباح", although that's a luxury subject nowadays since there are no legitimate states or heads of states around).
The rest of your comment is also full of the same hubris and incoherence common in the two downfall eras, especially the abandonment/replacement one (still ongoing). The maqsidi approach immediately gives that away (the modern abandonment/replacement take, which al-Shatibi is not responsible for).