Historicity, Normativity, and the Double-Movement: Evaluation of Faz̤l̤ur Raḥmān Contextual Qur’anic Hermeneutics

الملخص

Contemporary Qur’ānic hermeneutics has undergone a significant paradigmatic transition, shifting from classical atomistic exegesis toward historically grounded, reader-inclusive interpretive frameworks. This article critically examines the rise of the “contextual approach,” particularly as articulated by Fazlur Rahman, whose double-movement theory positions the Qur’ān as a historically embedded text requiring reciprocal movement between its original socio-moral milieu and contemporary ethical challenges. Contextualists argue that traditional tafsīr, rooted in taqlīd, linguistic literalism, and decontextualised legalism, impedes the Qur’ān’s transformative moral intent—especially regarding social justice, legal reform, and universal ethical principles. Through a critical analysis of Rahman’s theories of prophecy, revelation, Sunnah, and historicity, this study assesses how contextualism reframes the Qur’ān as a dynamic moral discourse rather than a fixed legal code. The article further interrogates the consequences of subjectivist and reader-response trends within modern Qur’ānic interpretation—especially the tension between universal norms and historically contingent rulings, the challenge of distinguishing normative from accidental teachings, and the risk of relativism inherent in postmodern hermeneutics. By analysing the epistemological, methodological, and theological claims of contextualist scholars, this study demonstrates how modern hermeneutical models simultaneously expand interpretive possibilities while destabilising long-established exegetical boundaries. Ultimately, the article argues that contextual hermeneutics provides important tools for engaging contemporary socio-ethical questions but also raises unresolved concerns regarding textual authority, interpretive limits, and the preservation of normative religious meaning within Islamic thought.