In the discussions about society, this point has amply been stressed that it was on account of the necessities of life and due to an individual’s inability to cope with its demands all alone, that the human being chose to lead a social existence.
Similarly, we often hear in juridical discussions that a society can genuinely satisfy the vital needs of its individual members only when it formulates a set of laws and regulations that correspond with their needs so that each member of society can obtain his genuine rights and benefit from the fruits of collective existence.
In the light of these two notions, the principal basis of social laws is the satisfaction of the basic needs of human life, without which a human being cannot, even for a moment, continue its existence.
It is this fulfilment of basic needs that directly results in the formation of a society and the formulation of laws and regulations.
Evidently, a society in which there is no collective effort for the fulfilment of basic needs, and where there is no interrelationship of activities among members, such group does not deserve to be called a ‘society’.
In the same way, laws and regulations whose existence and implementation have no effect on the fulfilment of the social needs of the people, are not worthy to be called ‘laws’, that is, a set of regulations that safeguard vital social interests.
The presence of laws which more or less satisfy the needs of society and which are, on the whole, acceptable to its members, is necessary even for the most barbarous and backward societies.
However, in primitive societies, the laws and regulations are products of custom and tradition, having gradually emerged from the irregular collective behaviour of the past.
At times, in such societies, laws are imposed upon the people through the extravagant will of one or more powerful individuals, resulting in the establishment of a well-defined base for the mainstream of social life acceptable to the majority.
Even today, we see such people in various corners of the world who conserve their customs, culture and traditions without losing the fabric of social life.
In an advanced society, if it is a religious one, the Divine Law prevails. If it is a secular society, the laws legislated through popular consent, exercised directly or indirectly, are implemented. No society exists, nor can exist, where the members are not bound to certain laws, obligations and duties.
Determining the needs of life
It is obvious that the main reason responsible for the legislation of laws and regulations is to meet the social needs of human life. But the question arises: What are these needs? How should they be determined?
These requirements should be, of course, directly or indirectly, susceptible to determination by man, however sketchy and general that determination may be.
By the way, we are also confronted with the question of whether or not the human being can occasionally make errors in determining his duties and his means of attaining happiness. Are we to accept his estimations and judgments at their face value?
The majority of people in the so-called progressive world of ours consider human will and wish as the genuine and sufficient basis for legislation of laws.
But since it is impossible that all individuals belonging to a nation should think in a similar manner, the consensus of the majority (i.e. 50 per cent +1) is, unavoidably, regarded as decisive. The opinions of the minority (i.e. 50 per cent -1) are ignored out of necessity, and it is deprived of any freedom of action altogether. It cannot, however, be denied that human resolution and will is directly related to conditions of life.
A wealthy person, who is provided with all necessities of life, cherishes a great number of fanciful desires that would never occur to the mind of a pauper. A hungry person who suffers from extreme hunger and who has lost his control only longs for food; whether it is delicious or not, whether it belongs to him or others, does not matter to him.
But an affluent person may be indifferent even when the most delicious foods are laid out on the table before him. During the period of prosperity, human beings conceive of more fancies than during hard times.
In this way, the pattern of needs changes because of civil progress; while the previous needs of people are satisfied with the march of civilization new needs are generated which replace the old ones. With this change in conditions, people outgrow certain laws and need new laws or demand amendments to the old ones. In this way, among the living nations of the world, new laws always replace worn-out laws.
As mentioned, it is the will and support of the majority of members of every nation which gives validity to the laws and stamps them with the seal of authority, even though the legislation may not be in the interest of the society.
For example, a Frenchman by virtue of his French origin is a member of the French society and whose will and opinion are honoured if it coincides with that of the majority. The French laws are designed to fashion him as a twentieth-century Frenchman; not like a contemporary Englishman nor as a tenth-century Frenchman.
Nevertheless, are there not any constant factors in the varying patterns of human needs which change with the march of civilization?
Aren’t there any common factors among human societies that have existed in various epochs of history? Has the basic substratum of humanness, to which a series of natural needs of life are related, undergone an irreversible, though gradual, change?
Have our human ancestors of the distant past been physiologically different from us? Did incidents such as war and blood-shed, or times of peace and harmony, have any significance other than what they mean to us today?
Did the effect of wine and the nature of intoxication in the past have a quality different from what it is today? Did the musical compositions of the past impart different types of pleasure than they give today?
In short, was the external and internal structure of the human beings of the past different from that of present-day mankind?
Obviously, the answers to all these questions are negative. We cannot say that humanity has gradually metamorphosed into something other than what it was in the past.
We, also, cannot say that the essence of humanness-which is the common factor between the white race and the black, between the wise as well as the fools, between the young and the old, Between the people living in the tropics and those living in the polar zones, and between the peoples of the past and the present has changed with respect to the pattern of common needs.
There are, definitely, certain needs which require a series of fixed and permanent rules and regulations that have nothing to do with the rules that are subject to alteration and change.
There is no nation in the world which would not choose to wage a war whenever its existence is decisively threatened by an enemy, and when the enemy cannot be repelled except through blood-shed, would not go for it.
There is no nation, for example, which would prohibit people from eating food or ban sexual association altogether. Many such examples can be given, and they all prove the necessity for unchangeable laws which are independent of laws subject to change.
The above statement throws light on certain issues:
1) The main reason responsible for the emergence of society, social laws and legislation, are the needs of life.
2) All nations of the world, even the barbarous ones, have their own laws and regulations.
3) The means of determining the needs of life, from the modern point of view, is through the will of the majority of the members of society.
4) The will of the majority is not always in accordance with reality and truth.
5) There is a class of laws that are subject to alteration with the passage of time; since they are related to specific conditions and circumstances. But there is another class of laws that are related to mankind’s ‘human essence”, which is a common factor among all human beings of all times, in all parts of the world and in all circumstances and environments.
These laws are unchangeable, enduring and fixed. Now that these issues have been clarified, let us see what the Islamic viewpoint is:
The Islamic Perspective
Islam is a system of universal laws which haven’t been formulated for any specific group of people or for a specific period of time. In its teachings, its focus is on the ‘ natural man”. That is, its attention is centred upon the natural structure of the human being and the conditions of a common individual, whether he is poor or rich, strong or weak, black or white, an Arab or a non-Arab, male or female, old or young, wise or foolish.
The “natural man” is a human being who carries the primordial, God-given nature along with pure consciousness and a will untainted by illusions or deviations. This is what we call a ‘natural man”.
It cannot be denied that the distinguishing characteristic which discerns the human being from other animals, lies in his intellect; whereas other animals do not enjoy this gift of God.
All activities of all living organisms, except the human being, are subservient to the dictates of their instincts. These animal instincts guide and motivate them towards the satisfaction of their vital needs.
Human beings are the only animals who, besides the drives motivated by diverse instincts, feelings and emotions-like love and hatred, friendship and enmity, hope and depression-are equipped with the faculty of judgment, which can decide between conflicting emotions and forces and select the right course of action despite obstinate opposition by emotion and passion.
Sometimes, this faculty decides against an action despite the pressure of instinct and emotion; at other times it recommends an action despite the unwillingness of instinct and passion.
Yet at other times, when the overall interests of the human being coincide with the demands of instinct and emotion, it ratifies their demand.
The Basis of Islamic Outlook
Since the education and training of every species of beings should be based on the cultivation and development of its distinguishing characteristics, Islam has based its teachings on the firm basis of the intellectual faculty of man, not on the unstable foundations of feelings and passions.
This is the basis of the Islamic invitation composed of certain sublime beliefs, higher morals and practical laws, whose truth and veracity are confirmed by the human being’s primordial nature, in conjunction with its God-given intellect free of illusions and deviations.
