The Impact of Argumentation on the Development of Islamic Urban Jurisprudence

Abstract

This research explores the impact of argumentation as a communicative approach on the development of Islamic urban jurisprudence. It presents the relationship between argumentation and Islamic urban jurisprudence, identifies its sources, and examines their role in shaping it. It examines the disputed argumentation-related issues, clarifying their ranks and domains and highlighting the primary active parties involved. The study discusses the impact of disputes among residents in regulating urban development rules and rationalizing architectural practices, and reviews the causes of these disputes, the tools for resolving them, and their outcomes, as well as the influence of residents’ argumentation on shaping urban rights, developing social norms, and promoting higher values in architectural behavior. Finally, the research highlights the role of juristic argumentation in innovating an exceptional model for juristic reasoning, advancing architectural patterns and urban forms, and establishing legislation aligned with the objectives of Islamic law. The study adopts a critical-analytical and hermeneutic approach to examine classical texts of Islamic urban jurisprudence, employing qualitative tools such as the analysis of historical documents, anuscripts, fatwas, and urban legal cases (nawāzil). Core sources include Kitāb al-Jidār by Ibn al-Imām, al-Iʿlān bi-Aḥkām al-Bunyān by Ibn al-Rāmī, and Riyāḍ al-Qāsimīn by al-Adirnawī. The research explores how discursive argumentation (ḥijāǧ) shaped the principles of urban regulation and architectural ethics, fostering a maqāṣid-oriented framework that reconciles authenticity with innovation. The findings reveal that argumentation served as a civilizational mechanism for generating creative architectural and legal solutions that safeguarded rights, reduced harm, and supported an integrated urban system balancing ethical, aesthetic, and human dimensions.