The Lens Through Which We See Rulings: How Dominant Culture Shapes Our View of the Shari'ah

Introduction: The Question That Imposes Itself

After we have established that Islam came to lead and reform human reality—not to submit to it or be drifted by it—and that its legal rulings are constant and firm, unchanging with the fluctuations of cultures or the shifting of times, an important question arises: Why do some see in the rulings of Allah Almighty that which contradicts justice and wisdom, while others see them as the pinnacle of wisdom, mercy, and justice? Why do some people denounce clear legal rulings while others accept them with total tranquility and certainty?

The answer lies in a truth of great importance, one that many overlook or ignore: a human being often sees things—including legal rulings—through a cultural "lens" shaped by various channels since childhood. Just as tinted glasses change the color of what the eye sees, turning white into black or red into green, so does cultural background change how we understand and perceive legal rulings. It can make us see justice as oppression, wisdom as backwardness, and mercy as cruelty.

The Cultural Shaping of Consciousness: How Are Minds Programmed?

From early childhood, a human receives a continuous, flowing stream of concepts, values, and ideas through multiple channels: family upbringing, school education, media in all its forms, society with its customs and traditions, and social media platforms, which have become today’s most powerful tools in shaping consciousness.

These concepts and values gradually take root in the subconscious, accumulating layer upon layer until they become "taken-for-granted" truths and "axioms" that are neither doubted nor debated. Instead, they become the standard by which everything else is measured.

A child raised in a Western environment absorbs specific concepts about individual freedom, absolute equality, and total independence since their youth, until these concepts become part of their intellectual and psychological makeup. Conversely, a child raised in an Islamic environment—if it is truly Islamic in its upbringing—absorbs different concepts about balance, responsibility, obedience to Allah, and the complementary nature of the genders.

This cultural "programming" occurs gradually and invisibly, to the point that a person eventually believes the ideas and convictions they hold are the product of their own free, independent thinking and mature mind. In reality, these ideas are often nothing more than an echo and reflection of what they received from their surroundings and culture, without them even realizing it.

Objection and Response: The Muslim is Also Influenced by Upbringing

Here, someone might object: "Is the Muslim not also subject to this cultural shaping? Is one who was raised to believe that the Qur’ān is entirely truth and good not influenced by their Islamic upbringing, just like someone influenced by a Western upbringing? What is the difference, then? Are they not both governed by their cultural backgrounds?"

The answer—which is very important—is: Yes, everyone is influenced by their upbringing and environment; this is a common trait among all humans that no rational person denies. However, the decisive difference is not in whether influence exists, but in the nature of the source to which these ideas, concepts, and values are referred.

The Muslim who believes in the rulings of Allah and commits to His Sharīʿah refers their ideas and concepts to a Divine Source that is infallible and free from error—a Revelation from the Creator of the universe who knows what reforms His creation and is Aware of what benefits or harms them. Others, however, refer their ideas and concepts—whether they admit it or not—to limited, deficient human sources: philosophers who erred and succeeded, thinkers influenced by their specific time and place, cultures that shifted and changed, and customs that appeared and vanished. All of these are products of limited, imperfect humans who are ignorant of many realities.

The difference between the two sources is like the difference between the heavens and the earth. The Divine Source is constant and does not change with time; it is just and does not favor one party over another; it is wise and does not err in its legislation; and it is All-Knowing of all circumstances and consequences. Human sources, however, are fluctuating, contradictory, and influenced by whims, interests, and conditions. They miss many facts and fail to perceive many consequences.

How can one who refers to the All-Wise, All-Knowing, and All-Aware Creator be equal to one who refers to the ignorant, limited, and deficient creature? How can the infallible Divine reference be equal to a human reference prone to error and distortion?

The significance, then—and this is a pivotal point—is not in the mere fact of being influenced by upbringing, as this is shared by all people. Rather, the significance is in the quality of the reference to which we appeal and upon which we build our convictions. Is it a reference built upon the infallible Revelation of Allah, or a reference originating from humans like us who have their own whims, interests, and mistakes?

Cultural Hegemony and Blatant Double Standards

In our present era, a specific culture—Western culture—dominates the tools of global consciousness-shaping almost completely: from the film and television industry to media of all kinds, educational curricula, and major social media platforms. This culture presents a specific value system that considers, for example, absolute individual freedom and total equality between the genders in every single thing as sacred, fundamental standards for judging everything else.

One who absorbs these concepts and is influenced by this culture—often without realizing it—inevitably looks at the rulings of Islam through this lens. Consequently, they see Qawāmah (guardianship/maintenance) as a blatant injustice to women, and they see the differentiation in certain rulings as scandalous prejudice and "discrimination." However, it is clearly observable that this alleged "principled" view is characterized by clear selectivity and blatant double standards.

For example, the differentiation in roles and responsibilities between man and woman in Islam is labeled "discrimination," "injustice," and a "violation of human rights." Meanwhile, hierarchical functional differentiation in corporations and institutions—where one person is a manager and another an employee, one commands and the other obeys—is viewed as an "administrative necessity" and "logical organization," and no one objects to it.

Obedience within the framework of the family—when a woman obeys her husband in that which is good—is viewed as "humiliation," "slavery," and a "diminishment of human dignity." Yet, obedience in governmental or private work environments, where the employee obeys the manager and the worker obeys the supervisor, is called "professional discipline" and "respect for the administrative hierarchy." This is despite the fact that both—marriage and work—are entered into by free choice, and in both, there is a natural variation in roles and responsibilities!

Sports provide another example of this double standard: completely separate championships are held for men and women in most sports. Indeed, the mere suggestion of merging competitions is considered a joke, and no one views this as injustice or discrimination. Rather, it is justified by the clear physical and biological differences between the genders. Yet, when Islam considers these same physical, psychological, and innate differences in certain legal rulings, it is fiercely attacked and accused of discrimination and injustice!

Even in the matter of clothing, we find this strange duality: Western governmental and private institutions impose strict rules for "professional" or "formal" dress, banning certain types of clothing in specific places. This is perfectly acceptable to them, and no one objects to it or considers it a "restriction of personal freedom." But when Islam sets standards and etiquettes for clothing that consider modesty and chastity, it is labeled a "restriction of freedom," "oppression," and a "violation of women's rights"!

These clear examples—and many others—plainly indicate that the standards used to judge Islamic rulings are not constant, objective, or fair, but are selective, biased, and dualistic. The issue, then, is not about absolute, constant principles regarding equality, freedom, or justice. It is about the biased cultural lens through which these issues are viewed—a lens that makes restrictions coming from a dominant culture seem "natural, logical, and acceptable," while making restrictions brought by Islam seem "problematic, backward, and rejected"!

The Necessity of Impartiality and Objectivity: A Methodology for Reaching the Truth

To truly understand the rulings of Allah Almighty, and to do justice to the Islamic Sharīʿah (Divine Law) by judging it fairly, one must make a sincere and serious effort to be impartial—stripping away the cultural presuppositions and preconceived notions that obscure correct vision and distort sound judgment.

This impartiality is not easy or simple. A human being is, to a large extent, a product of their environment and culture, whether they like it or not. Breaking free from this influence requires significant psychological and intellectual effort. However, it is possible to varying degrees and is absolutely necessary for anyone who sincerely desires to reach the truth and judge with fairness. The following points must be considered on this path:

First: Awareness of Cultural Influence

Most people live in the illusion of absolute objectivity. They believe their opinions, positions, and judgments are the result of free, independent, and mature thinking. In reality, these are often nothing more than a reflection and echo of what they have absorbed—consciously or unconsciously—from Western media and the dominant culture. This happens either directly by following their channels or indirectly through those of our own people who have been influenced by them.

Have you ever seriously considered the possibility that some of your deeply held concepts about justice, freedom, progress, and equality are merely products of the dominant culture of today? And that if another culture held global dominance, you might view these very same concepts as backward, barbaric, or unjust?

This awareness is undoubtedly painful; it shakes the constants you are accustomed to and requires you to reshape your thinking away from common and prevailing ideas—ideas whose challengers are often labeled with repulsive terms and ugly descriptions. Nevertheless, it is an essential step to liberate oneself from illusions and arrive at the truth. Just as a patient cannot be treated until they first admit their illness, true intellectual liberation from cultural hegemony cannot occur without first admitting that one has fallen under its influence.

Second: Critical Questioning of "Taken-for-Granted" Assumptions

After becoming aware of the influence of the dominant culture, a more important and difficult stage follows: examining the assumptions and "axioms" we carry and subjecting them to serious critical questioning.

Why is absolute, total equality between the genders in everything considered "justice"? Who said that? On what logical or scientific basis? Does justice mean total mathematical equality, or does it mean giving every right-holder their due in a way that suits them?

Is absolute individual freedom a supreme value above all considerations, or are truth, justice, and the public interest higher values? If truth and justice are supreme values, what concept of freedom is consistent with them and does not contradict them?

Take another example of a cultural assumption that needs a critical look: the contemporary issue of "human rights." These are presented today as a sacred axiom and absolute justice that is beyond debate. However, it is our right—indeed, our duty—to ask and discuss, since the authors of these rights are humans like us:

Who exactly established these rights? Who gave them the authority to impose upon other humans—their equals in humanity—what is obligatory and what is not? Why these specific rights and not others? Why this particular phrasing and not another? Is it because this phrasing serves their political, cultural, and economic hegemony?

These are legitimate and necessary questions that must be asked boldly, simply to place human ideas in their proper station after scrutiny. It is never correct to treat human ideas and man-made laws as religious creeds or Divine legal rulings, nor is it correct to place human sources on the same level as Divine sources.

Third: Understanding the Comprehensive Islamic Perspective

Islamic rulings cannot be understood correctly if isolated from the comprehensive, holistic vision from which Islam originates. This vision includes major fundamental truths that form the framework through which all detailed rulings are understood. Here are the most prominent of these truths:

The Life of the Hereafter: Islam emphasizes with total clarity that this worldly life is neither the end nor the goal. It is a place of passage and a station for testing and trial; the true, permanent, and eternal life is the Ākhirah (the Hereafter). Thus, legal rulings do not aim solely at achieving immediate worldly happiness, but primarily at achieving eternal happiness in the next life. A ruling might seem "harsh" or "restrictive" by narrow worldly standards, but it is a great mercy when considering the eternal consequences.

Trial and Tribulation: The world is a place of testing. Lusts, temptations, and desires are a fundamental part of this test. Islam does not seek to achieve the maximum possible pleasure for a human in this world; rather, it seeks to achieve a wise balance between what Allah wants from His servant and the human's instinct and nature—between fleeting, immediate pleasure and lasting, future happiness. This trial also serves to distinguish the sincere from the insincere in seeking the pleasure of Allah.

Truth Above Whim: Islam prioritizes Divine truth and justice over what the soul desires and craves. Not everything a human desires is good or beneficial for them, and not everything they dislike is evil or harmful. Allah said: “But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is evil for you. And Allah knows, while you know not.” [al-Baqarah: 216].

Integration, Not Competition: Islam views the relationship between man and woman as one of integration, cooperation, and mutual support, not one of competition, conflict, or war. The difference and differentiation in certain legal rulings between them is a wise consideration of the nature, Fiṭrah (innate disposition), and role of each in the integrated system of life. This will be explained in detail in future articles, if Allah wills.

One who looks at Islamic rulings without invoking this comprehensive context and holistic framework is like someone judging a great painting by looking at only a tiny part of it without seeing the full picture. The beauty and harmony of the whole can only be perceived by looking at all its parts in their global context.

For instance, the ruling of inheritance cannot be understood correctly in isolation from the comprehensive system of financial maintenance and the distribution of financial responsibilities in Islam. The Hijab (modest covering) cannot be understood if viewed apart from the comprehensive moral system Islam establishes. The Ḥudūd (prescribed legal punishments) cannot be understood in their wisdom and mercy if the system of justice, mercy, and deterrence in Islam is not kept in mind.

Conclusion: The Path to Reaching the Truth

What has been presented in this article leads us to a pivotal conclusion: understanding Islam and its rulings in a correct, sound, and fair manner requires a great deal of serious impartiality from the cultural influences that shape our consciousness and our gaze without our realization.

Whether we like it or not, we have all received a flowing stream of concepts and values through education, media, and social media since childhood. These have become an inseparable part of our intellectual and psychological makeup; we see them as "natural," "self-evident," and "logical," forgetting that they are merely the product of a specific culture at a specific time in human history.

This cultural shaping—which could be called a hidden "soft power"—deeply affects how we understand and evaluate legal rulings. One who has absorbed certain concepts of absolute freedom and total individual independence will inevitably look at Islamic rulings through these preconceived notions. They may see in them what contradicts "human values" as they understand them, failing to realize that their understanding of these values is relative, limited, and influenced by a specific culture, rather than being absolute or objective.

In truth, stripping away these deep cultural influences is a difficult and arduous task. it requires great intellectual and psychological effort, and a rare kind of moral courage. Humans naturally incline toward what they are familiar with and find it difficult to review their deep-seated convictions—especially if those convictions form the mindset of the dominant masses.

However, for one who sincerely wants to reach the truth, and truly seeks to understand the religion of Allah in a correct and fair way, this great effort must be made, while constantly seeking the help of Allah Almighty, who guides whom He wills of His servants to a Straight Path.