THE QUR’ANIC FAMILY SYSTEM: A COMPARATIVE MAQĀṢIDĪ-EXEGETICAL STUDY OF AL-THANAWI (D. 1362 AH/1943 CE) AND IBN ‘ASHUR (D. 1393 AH/1973 CE)

Abstract

This study examines the Qur’anic family system through a comparative maqāṣidī reading of the Exegetical interpretations of Ibn ʿĀshūr (d. 1393 AH/1973 CE) and Ashraf ʿAlī Thanawī (d. 1362 AH/1943 CE). It seeks to explore the principles, rulings, rights, responsibilities, and objectives through which the Qur’an establishes and regulates family life, with particular attention to the relationship between specific legal rulings and their underlying legislative purposes and wisdoms. The study distinguishes between objectives explicitly identified by the exegete and those inferred analytically by the researcher. It addresses major dimensions of the Qur’anic family system, including the formation and objectives of marriage, guardianship, the marital contract, witnesses, dower, prohibited degrees, maintenance and mutual rights, marital conduct, polygyny, marital discord, arbitration, divorce, and its consequences. The comparative analysis draws primarily on selected passages from Ibn ʿĀshūr’s al-Taḥrīr wa-l-Tanwīr and Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, based on the teachings and interpretive tradition of Ashraf ʿAlī Thanawī. With regard to Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, the direct comparison is confined to selected passages from Sūrat al-Nisāʾ in the volume authored by Muḥammad Shafīʿ; the findings are therefore not generalized to all volumes of the work. The study demonstrates that both exegetes give substantial attention to the protection of marital and familial rights and to the preservation of family stability, although they may differ in their interpretation of the legal means through which these objectives are realized. This is particularly evident in their treatment of arbitration in cases of marital discord. The study further argues that identifying the legislative wisdom underlying a Qur’anic ruling does not, by itself, justify transforming that wisdom into a condition of legal validity where the jurist has not stipulated it as such. It concludes that a maqāṣidī approach and jurisprudential analysis can function complementarily in understanding the Qur’anic family system, provided that such complementarity is established through textual and analytical evidence rather than assumed as an absolute convergence between the two exegetical approaches.