5:87
O ye who believe! make not unlawful the good things which Allah hath made lawful for you, but commit no excess: for Allah loveth not those given to excess.
Islamic legal thought maintains that the authority to declare matters lawful (ḥalāl) or prohibited (ḥarām) belongs exclusively to Allah, and not to religious leaders, political rulers, or scholars. Qur’anic verses such as 42:21 and 9:31 criticize communities that allowed rabbis or priests to legislate religious rulings without divine authorization, framing such obedience as a form of elevating human authority beyond its proper limits. A well-known report narrated by ʿAdī ibn Ḥātim explains that following religious figures who permit what God has forbidden—or forbid what God has permitted—constitutes a type of misplaced devotion, even if it is not outward worship. Additional verses (e.g., 10:59; 16:116) warn believers against attributing legal rulings to God without clear revelation, emphasizing that fabricating religious prohibitions or permissions is a serious theological violation (Qur’an, n.d.).
Classical jurists derived from these sources the principle that scholars do not possess independent legislative authority; rather, their role is interpretive and explanatory. They clarify divine rulings based on the Qur’an and the teachings of the Prophet, but they do not create new categories of lawful or unlawful. Early legal authorities therefore exercised caution in issuing definitive judgments. Reports cited in works such as al-Shāfiʿī’s al-Umm describe how leading jurists—including Abū Yūsuf, al-Rabiʿ ibn Khaytham, and Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī—preferred cautious expressions like “disapproved” or “there is no harm in it” instead of declaring something strictly ḥalāl or ḥarām without explicit textual proof. Later scholars, including Ibn Taymiyyah, similarly observed that early jurists avoided labeling actions as prohibited unless the evidence was unequivocal (al-Shāfiʿī, n.d.; Ibn Taymiyyah, n.d.).
This methodological restraint reflects a broader jurisprudential ethic: legal verdicts must remain grounded in revelation, and scholars must avoid overstepping into divine prerogatives. Historical examples, such as the gradual prohibition of alcohol in the Qur’an, illustrate that companions of the Prophet refrained from treating actions as strictly forbidden until clear and decisive revelation established the ruling. Consequently, major imams like Mālik, Abū Ḥanīfah, and Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal often expressed legal opinions cautiously, underscoring the gravity of declaring something lawful or unlawful in religious law. Overall, Islamic legal tradition presents legislative authority as belonging solely to God, while human scholars serve as interpreters who must exercise humility, textual fidelity, and restraint in their legal judgments (al-Shāfiʿī, n.d.; Ibn Taymiyyah).
References:
Al-Qaradawi, Yusuf (1960). The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam. (p. 11).