Abstract
During the 8th and 9th centuries AH, the Islamic West witnessed numerous famines caused by successive years of drought. As a result, people’s need for the jurists’ guidance intensified regarding the legal issues facing the Muslim community in relation to these disasters; some of these issues had rulings established by textual evidence open to interpretation, whilst others lacked explicit textual rulings. To ascertain the ruling of Islamic law in such matters, it is essential to establish a method of deduction in which the jurist takes into account the reality of the disaster and its effects on that reality. This research aims to shed light on a collection of fatwas in which the jurists issued rulings that, at first glance, appear to contradict the principles of jurisprudence ; yet, in reality, they constitute the application of definitive general principles, as opposed to texts subject to interpretation or subsidiary issues within the school of thought. The jurists adopted a specific methodological approach, utilising the principles of harm prevention and the objectives of Sharia ; they considered the consequences of rulings, applied customary practice, and applied the Maliki school’s principle of taking differences of opinion into account... In doing so, they established a sound methodological approach from which we can draw benefit in studying the new issues arising from environmental disasters.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Faculty of Letters and Human Sciences of Rabat Journal
