In the complex tapestry of Islamic jurisprudence and theology lies a profound concept known as iḥyāʾ, often translated as “revival” or “renewal.” Rooted deeply in the fields of faith, practice, and morality, iḥyāʾ holds a pivotal role in shaping religious life and thought within Muslim communities. This exploration unpacks the boundaries and implications of iḥyāʾ, delving into its origins, scope, execution, and evolving interpretations in modern contexts. The nuanced distinctions within Islamic legal categories and their relationship to iḥyāʾ provide a window into the dynamic interplay between tradition and modernity in Islamic renewal movements.
At the core of Sharīʿa lie rulings that govern belief, conduct, and ethics. The domain of practice, which affects the daily religious life of Muslims, is particularly expansive and intricate. Within this practical field, a critical distinction must be made between taʿabbudī rulings—those that are obligatory and fixed, grounded firmly in divine revelation—and ijtihādī rulings, which remain open to scholarly interpretation and inquiry. The former category, tightly bound by scriptural texts such as the Qurʾan and Sunnah and consensus (ijmā’), resists innovation, while the latter invites legal reasoning (ijtihād) and allows for renewal efforts to address changing circumstances without violating core principles.
Understanding this dichotomy is essential because iḥyāʾ directly engages with the tension between preserving the immutable foundations of Islam and adapting its practical applications through fresh scholarly insight. Renewal is thus largely confined to ijtihādī matters—issues subject to interpretation and where sociocultural developments might necessitate fresh perspectives. Conversely, revival in a broader sense can encompass both taʿabbudī and ijtihādī spheres, particularly when it involves reinvigorating neglected practices or strengthening communal ties to the faith.
Historically, Islamic renewal movements have frequently critiqued two interconnected concepts: taqlīd and ijtihād. Taqlīd, or strict adherence to established legal precedent without questioning, gradually became normalized in post-Ghazālī orthodox thought as a pragmatic way to maintain legal coherence across Islamic societies. This practice provided legal stability by positioning jurists as authorities whose rulings could be trusted without incessant reinterpretation. However, over time, taqlīd also came to symbolize intellectual stagnation and conformity, a view vigorously challenged by reformers such as Ibn Qayyim al-Jawzīyah, who contested the notion that the "gate of ijtihād" had closed permanently, urging Muslims to reclaim their agency in legal reasoning.
With the dawn of the modern era, taqlīd increasingly lost its legitimacy in intellectual discourse, being recast as a barrier to necessary reforms. Concurrently, ijtihād underwent a transformation from a purely methodological tool in Islamic jurisprudence to a rallying cry for renewal. The debates regarding the closure or openness of the ijtihād gate shifted from the scholarly arena to active social and political movements, notably within iḥyāʾ initiatives that sought to invigorate Muslim communities by appealing to a renewed sense of Islamic authenticity and adaptability.
Significantly, iḥyāʾ activities are not aimed at dismantling or reshaping the core tenets of the Islamic faith but rather at revitalizing its practice. The immutable and certain principles that form the foundation of the religion are understood to be impervious to reinterpretation and renewal efforts. To tamper with these essential tenets risks undermining the religion’s very identity and survival, an outcome that is fundamentally antithetical to the objectives of iḥyāʾ. Thus, revivalists operate within a framework that respects the sanctity of these basic tenets while seeking intellectual and practical reform in matters open to human judgment.
One of the most pressing challenges concerning iḥyāʾ is identifying the agents qualified to undertake such renewal work. On one hand, imposing excessively stringent qualifications may restrict revival efforts to a narrow elite, potentially stifling diversity and responsiveness. On the other hand, too lax criteria could result in uninformed or erratic reinterpretations, undermining the legitimacy and coherence of the renewal process. Striking a balance between these extremes is critical for the credibility and efficacy of iḥyāʾ.
Traditionally, the task of religious revival has been entrusted to religious scholars, whose authority is deeply rooted in Islamic tradition and the Hadith proclamation that “the scholars are the heirs of the Prophets.” This statement underscores the primacy of scholars in regulating religious life post-revelation, emphasizing their extensive knowledge and moral integrity. These scholars are charged with not only preserving knowledge but also engaging critically with new data and developments from diverse fields within the parameters of Islam’s foundational principles. Their unique position arises from their deep fear of God, superior knowledge, and commitment to the exhortation of good and forbiddance of evil.
The qualifications for scholars to engage in iḥyāʾ activities, particularly in the realm of practical jurisprudence, are well codified in classical scholarship. Among these qualifications, the ability to perform ijtihād stands paramount. This faculty demands both objective criteria—such as profound knowledge of the Qurʾan, Sunnah, consensus, analogical reasoning, and juristic principles—and subjective qualities including justice, morality, intelligence, and equanimity. These standards ensure that renewal is not only intellectually robust but also ethically and socially responsible.
The modern era, however, has witnessed significant advances across many scientific disciplines and the emergence of new fields of knowledge. These changes have sparked a reevaluation of who can legitimately participate in the process of iḥyāʾ. Contemporary interpretations of tajdīd increasingly advocate for a collective approach—one that involves not only religious scholars but also scientists, interdisciplinary experts, and administrators. This collective conceptualization recognizes the complexity of modern challenges and the need for diverse expertise in revitalizing Islamic thought and practice.
Periods of social upheaval, political transformation, and cultural shifts often intensify the call for iḥyāʾ, as communities seek immediate remedies for perceived religious decline. Yet, such urgency brings risks: impulsive or poorly deliberated revival efforts may exacerbate divisions or provoke backlash within societies. Moreover, iḥyāʾ movements that adopt coercive or dogmatic stances risk alienating communities they seek to renew, potentially transforming religious renewal into ideological schisms or radical activism disconnected from scholarly rigor.
To mitigate these risks, proponents of iḥyāʾ argue for a transformation in intellectual approaches—from reactionary activism to thoughtful, scientifically grounded renewal. Effective iḥyāʾ requires a synergy between intellectual depth and practical engagement, ensuring that reforms remain faithful to Islamic principles while responding adaptively to contemporary realities. This blend guards against the pitfalls of uninformed extremism or superficial conformity.
In sum, the enduring process of iḥyāʾ is a dynamic interplay between reverence for Islamic tradition and the imperative for intellectual renewal. It demands that qualified scholars and experts apply rigorous knowledge, ethical integrity, and contextual sensitivity to the task of guiding Muslim communities. Far from heralding theological rupture or innovation in core tenets, iḥyāʾ aspires to sustain Islam’s vitality, enabling it to thrive across diverse historical and cultural landscapes until the end of times.
The discourse surrounding iḥyāʾ offers a compelling model for religious renewal applicable beyond Islam, illustrating how tradition and modernity may coexist through thoughtful scholarship and inclusive engagement. The evolving understanding that collective renewal efforts, involving experts from multiple domains, can enrich Islamic practice points toward a pluralistic and resilient future for Muslim communities worldwide.
As such, iḥyāʾ continues to represent both a profound philosophical challenge and a practical necessity. By balancing respect for foundational religious principles with openness to informed reinterpretation and societal involvement, Islamic renewal movements navigate the complexities of sustaining faith in an ever-changing world. The robust intellectual tradition underpinning iḥyāʾ ensures its relevance and potency as a guiding force in contemporary Islamic thought and beyond.
Subject of Research: The study investigates the conceptual foundations and scope of renewal (tajdīd) within Islamic thought, specifically focusing on the collective practice of iḥyāʾ from the perspectives of philosophy of religion and Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh).
Article Title: Grounding the idea of renewal in Islamic thought, and collective iḥyā’: a study from the perspectives of the philosophy of religion and fiqh.
Article References:
Yıldırım, H., Gülengül, E. Grounding the idea of renewal in Islamic thought, and collective iḥyā’: a study from the perspectives of the philosophy of religion and fiqh. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 838 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05198-9
Image Credits: AI Generated
