For several decades, scholars have engaged in a debate on the question of (the existence of) an Islamic natural law tradition. However, the debate lacks reflection of its very premises: hardly a participant discloses his or her particular understanding of what natural law is. If ever they do so, it is a rational–hierarchical notion of natural law as it was most famously outlined by Thomas Aquinas. This article contrasts the Thomistic natural law with an Aristotelian notion thereof. It argues that the natural law tradition discernible in uṣūl al-fiqh is reminiscent rather of an Aristotelian-teleological natural law theory than it is of a Thomistic-hierarchical one. This becomes particularly clear when analysing istiḥsān. Istiḥsān is rather more closely related to Aristotle’s epieikeia than it is to Thomas’ aequitas. It functions not as an extra-legal (rationality-)standard to be pursued but as an inner-legal means of systematisation.

中文翻译：

---

伊斯兰教的自然法概念：论uṣūl al-fiqh中的目的论自然法思维

几十年来，学者们一直在就伊斯兰自然法传统的（存在）问题进行辩论。然而，这场辩论缺乏对其前提的反映：几乎没有参与者透露他或她对自然法是什么的具体理解。如果他们这样做了，那就是自然法的理性-等级概念，正如托马斯·阿奎那 (Thomas Aquinas) 所概述的那样。本文将托马斯主义的自然法则与亚里士多德的概念进行对比。它认为，在 uṣūl al-fiqh 中可辨别的自然法传统让人联想到亚里士多德-目的论的自然法理论，而不是托马斯主义的等级理论。这在分析 istiḥsān 时变得特别清楚。Istiḥsān 与亚里士多德的 epieikeia 的关系比与 Thomas 的 aequitas 的关系更为密切。