Since Lynn Whites 1967 essay, The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,1 religion has often been

perceived as either the source of much of the modern environmental crisis, or at least as negatively impacting attitudes towards that crisis. However, criticism offered by White was directed not at religion as a whole, but rather at the Christian reading of the Biblical tradition and its appointment of man over the entirety of the universe as both a central and supreme figure, as well as the sole existent with inherent value. Leaving aside the question of the validity of Whites argument against Christianity, the same argument cannot be extended beyond that particular target with any degree of success, except perhaps onto Judaism, given that White draws a number of problems from the Old Testament. This is a point White himself was careful to note throughout his essay.2 In the present analysis, I wish to accomplish two specific goals, in regard to Whites argument and environmental ethics in general insofar as these elements relate to Islamic Environmental Ethics (IEE). First, I wish to demonstrate that Whites charge against Christianity cannot be carried over to IEE. Second, I wish to posit the tenants of IEE as an effective model from which to consider ethical solutions to modern environmental issues. It is my hope that this approach will provide the reader with a vista from which to consider the role and implementation of IEE in the contemporary setting. Lynn Whites essay considers the historical development of science and technology in the Judeo-Christian West, in order to arrive at the source of the human objectification and instrumentalization of nature, which he claims has led to the present ecological crisis. White

White, Lynn. The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis *with discussion of St. Francis; reprint, 1967+. Ecology and Religion in History. New York: Harper and Row, 1974. 2 Ibid. Pp. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

finds the source of the crisis in the Biblical notion of the human being as not only supreme in creation, but the sole creature endowed with intrinsic value, while the rest of the universe is created solely for human utility and pleasure.3 He further traces the roots of the crisis to the Church-sponsored destruction of animism, and the reduction of nature from a sacred to profane status; an object with the sole purpose of being used and discarded at whim.4 White posits that this irreverent view of nature was later coupled with the scientific and technological progress, where the Baconian notions of scientific knowledge as power over nature have led to the destruction of the environment through its instrumentalized treatment. He concludes that, in regards to the present crisis, [C]hristianity bears a huge burden of guilt.5 Although Whites argument focuses on the Western, Judeo-Christian religious worldview, his proponents have unfortunately, and quite indefensibly, extrapolated the conclusions to religion in general, and Western Abrahamic religions in particular. While Whites argument may be sound in regards to the Judeo-Christian worldview, the overgeneralized claims of his proponents erroneously include the Islamic worldview, despite Whites careful phrasing to the contrary. In response to these claims, several Islamic academics have mounted responses in defense of the Islamic worldview against the indictment of religion as the cause of the eco-crisis. Izzi Deen, in his Islamic Environmental Ethics, Law, and Society,6 lays the groundwork for the Islamic perspective of environmental ethics, its sources, and conclusions. However, the work fails to illuminate the full scope of differences offered by different religious perspectives, and thus, in
3 4

Ibid. Pg. 7 Ibid. Pp. 7-9 5 Ibid. Pg. 9. 6 Deen, Mawil Y. Izzi. Islamic Environmental Ethics, Law, and Society. In This Sacred Earth. Ed. Roger S. Gottlies. New York: Routledge, 1996. Pp. 164-172.

some respects, offers little more than the Christian responses, which fail to truly dismiss Whites claims. Whites charge against Christianity stems from two primary points. The first of these is the supremacy of man over the rest of the creation, and thus mans natural role as the lord and master over it.7 The second charge comes as a result of that notion, and zeroes in on the perceived idea that only man has inherent value, while the rest of creation has only value insofar as it serves man.8 For the sake of clarity, we will address these points from the Islamic perspective, in reverse order. Islamically, all of creation sentient or not is considered to be a product of the Creator,9 and serves a purpose (among others) of worshiping that creator by its very existence.10 Consequently, every atom has been created with a specific purpose, and has inherent value.11 Second, mans role within that creation is posited as one created being among many, differentiated only by the presence of intellect,12 which serves to grant man a greater number of obligations, and a somewhat increased number of rights.13 That is to say, man is not the supreme creation of the Creator, in the sense that the universe exists for his service; rather, mankind is the most advanced part of the creation, and as such holds a special place among it.

7 8

White, Lynn. Pg. 7. Ibid. 9 Malik, Muhammad Farooq-i-Azam. English Translation of the Meaning of Al-Quran: The Guidance for Mankind. Houston, TX: Institute of Islamic Knowledge, 2002. [Henceforth referred to as Quran] 1:2, etc. ALSO Deen, Mawil Y. Izzi. Pg. 165. 10 Quran. 2:116. ALSO Deen, Mawil Y. Izzi. Pg. 165. 11 Quran. 44:38-39. 12 Islamically, man is not the only creation that possesses a soul. Man is considered as the only creation with intellect and reason to the extent that they can intentionally overcome instinct, as well as grasp and deal with complex problems including those purely theoretical. By the possession of such intellect, and possesses free will. 13 Islamically, ones obligations are proportional to ones potential, while some rights may be based on fulfillment of obligations which all non-human creation does by default.

The story of mans creation itself, from the Christian and Islamic perspectives, offers a clear if subtle difference in the conception of man and his role. White notes, according to the Biblical account, that upon his creation, Adam named all things and thus established his mastery over them.14 Islamically, Adam was taught the names of all things by the Creator, and is thus established as a servant of the Creator, and given a place among the creation.15 In the Biblical account, man names all things, and in doing so, relates their existence to himself which necessarily entails the value-component of that relation, based on the (instrumental) value of the creation to man. By the Quranic account, man is informed (or educated) about the rest of creation, and is thus informed about the objective relation of all things both to himself as well as to the Creator. This necessarily entails that the value-component of the man-creation relation is found outside of man and his needs and desires. Given that the Islamic value of creation is independent of humanity, it negates Whites charge of instrumental use of nature by religion. It further ensures that creation is endowed with rights and values, protected and mandated by the same source that establishes human rights and values. This analysis bears out through the theological terminology employed in the two accounts. Biblically, man plays the role of a steward, which allows him the ability to independently administrate a notion further supported by the Catholic Churchs ability to declare laws valid on Earth and in Heaven. On the other hand, Islamically, man is granted the title of a Caliph (vicegerent), which limits the scope of his power, by inherently placing him under the sovereign authority of the Creator. This limitation is further supported by the religiously-legal inability of any Muslim or Islamic state to alter the rulings set down by the Creator, in any way whatsoever.

14 15

White, Lynn. Pg. 7. Quran.2: 31-33.

Consequently, given that Islamic notions of man, as such, fail to distinguish him as either the supreme creation, or as the only one imbued with a form of intrinsic value, Whites argument cannot be extended to Islamic conceptions of man and his relation to the environment. With Whites charge against Christianity deflected from the Islamic account, the analysis can now turn to Islamic notions of environmental ethics. Before we can fully delve into IEE, we must first briefly establish the predicates upon which IEE is built, namely Islam and Islamic Ethics. Unlike the more common Western philosophical approaches, where the particular elements are effectively atomized and considered as standalone wholes, Islamic philosophy relies on a holistic (bottom-up) approach building upon itself to produce a coherent whole. Islam, insofar as the primary sources are concerned, developed over a 23-year period (610632 CE). It considers itself to be the final word of God, revealed through the Messenger Muhammad. Islamic primary sources consist of the Quran16 and the Hadith.17 From these primary sources, there emerges a set of nu rulings (having a single possible interpretation and being of the clear Do and Dont variety), considered as immutable and universal, and very few in number.18 A broader reading of the combined primary sources provides general guidelines and limitations for the sum of human actions. This framework is what can be considered the core of the sharia, or Canonical Law of Islam.19 From the sharia framework emerges a set of legal

16

Islams Holy Book, and is considered to be the immutable word of God, and to have undergone no alteration since its initial revelation. 17 Hadith might best be understood as The Way of Muhammad, consisting of accounts his actions, sayings, th advice, rulings, etc. Since their composition into assorted collections in the 9 century, they too have remained unchanged. 18 Asad, Muhammad. The Principle of State and Government in Islam. Kuala Lumpur: Islamic Book Trust, 1980. Pg. 12. 19 Ibid. ALSO Asad, Muhammad. This Law of Ours and Other Essays. Gibraltar: Dar al-Andalus, 1987. Pp. 63-69.

rules regarding the implementation and of specific rulings in context, depending of the circumstances of the people and their environment. These rules provide an implementation framework for the particular adaptation of moral/legal rulings, known as usool ul fiqh (science of jurisprudence) or simply fiqh. The main importance of the notion of fiqh (jurisprudence) is the framework and logical analysis which it provides for the consideration of human actions, as well as the malleability it embodies. The understanding of the moral/legal scale, and its flexibility, will serve a key role in understanding Islamic ethics and its application on Islamic environmental ethics. To that extent, we will briefly note that all human actions fall on a quintet-partition moral scale as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Wjib (Mandatory actions on pain of punishment) Mandb (Desirable and supererogatory actions, but their omission is morally neutral) Mubh (Neutral actions)20 Makrh (Undesirable actions, morally neutral if committed, praiseworthy if avoided) Harm (Forbidden actions on pain of punishment)

However, any number of factors can affect the final position of the act on the moral scale. For example, drinking coffee is, by default, mubh (neutral). Drinking the same coffee so that one will be more alert and effective in performing some morally positive obligation, turns the action into mandb (desirable). On the other hand, drinking the same coffee so that one will be more alert and effective in performing some morally negative act makes the coffee makrh (undesirable) or even harm (prohibited). Islamic ethics, unlike more traditional religious ethics, and particularly those of Abrahamic origin, are not solely based on Divine command theory, though it is used extensively. The core of Islamic ethics is based on the distinction between right/good (marf) and wrong/evil
20

All actions are, by default, considered neutral. It is only in light of particular (primary source) rulings, or other pertinent information, that an action gains a positive or negative moral value.

(munker). The goal and obligation of Muslims is to act on and support marf (good), and act against and oppose munker (evil).21 These terms are understood to entail human reason, human decency, and to be in line with Divine command.22 As a result, the combination allows for a flexible understanding of right and wrong, based on the circumstances and the particular individual, or community, or a state, in question. For example, while lying is prohibited (harm), lying in order to save an innocent life is both obligatory (wjib), and counts as if the person who saves such a life has saved the entirety of mankind.23 Marf and munker are umbrella terms, and contain a great number of other (more specific) terms, which serve to more precisely delineate right from wrong within a general framework. For the purpose of the later IEE analysis, two such terms must be introduced. 1. ulm is a term that is commonly understood as injustice or oppression. However, its core meaning is To put a thing in a place other than its rightful place,24 and such acts are considered as severely prohibited (haram). 2. Adl is a term that commonly translates as justice, yet functions as not only the polar opposite to ulm, but opposes it in such a way that it necessarily takes into account the circumstances in which it acts.25 In this way, adl is not only inherently doing justice, but simultaneously doing justice to the object of justice, as well as the sum total of their circumstances. Thus, the application of adl (justice) in Islam is not merely a blind implementation of the existing law, but rather the result of careful analysis of ones circumstances, the particular actions of the individual in question, and the situation as a whole.

21 22

Quran. 9:71 Lane, Edward William. An Arabic-English Lexicon. Beirut: Librarie du Liban, 1968. Pg. 2850; ALSO Izutsu, Toshihiko. Ethico-religious Concepts in the Qurn. Montreal: McGill University Press, 1966. Pg. 215. 23 Quran. 5:32. 24 Lane, Edward William. Pg. 1920. 25 Ibid. Pg. 1974.

Rights of Humanity: Man occupies a specific role within the Islamic worldview; and is considered as the sole creation possessed with free will, which stems from the mans possession of rh (intellect).26 Since man is able to function beyond the level of mere instinct, he is assigned corresponding obligations. Islamic concept of Divine judgment is established on this premise, and is based entirely on a persons individual actions.27 Humanity, according to Islam, has been given a series of instructions since its inception. These can be broken down into two rough categories: 1) specific requirements and prohibitions that mostly pertain to mans relation with the Creator and, 2) the general and specific phrasing of the golden rule (do unto others), which mostly pertain to mans relation with the rest of creation. These instructions are then to be filtered through the aforementioned quintet of moral categories, in order to ascertain the manner and degree to which the commands ought to be applied, and finally arrive at the implementation on personal, communal, state, and global levels. However, fulfilling the rights of the Creator in no way serves to make up for the failure to fulfill the rights of all other beings. Moreover, the Creator may choose to forgive the sins against Himself, but not the sins against others as forgiveness belongs to the primary wronged party.28 Islamic primary texts are replete with aforementioned principles and they, perhaps, speak best about the relation of mankind towards the Creator and creation.29

26

Rh is commonly translated as soul, though the nuanced meaning of the term renders it closer to reason and intellect. 27 Quran. 35:18, 53:39, etc. 28 Al-Ghazali. Ghazl's Book of Counsel for Kings. Tr. F. R. C. Bagley. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964. Pg. 13. 29 El-Munziri, Zekijjudin Abdu-l-Azim Ed-Dimiki., comp. Muslimova Zbirka Hadisa: Izbor. 3 Vols. Translated by efik Kurdid. Zenica: Kuda Mudrosti, 2004. Vol. 3. #1836. Pg. 292. *Henceforth referred to as Muslim] He [Muhammad] said: The bankrupt among my followers, is the one who will arrive on the Day of Judgment with [obligatory] prayers, fasting, and alms, but he insulted one person, lied against another, ate [misappropriated] the

He [Muhammad] said: Who desires to save themselves from the fire [hell] and enter paradise Let him deal with others as he would wish them to deal with him.30 He [Muhammad] said: I swear by God, he does not believe whose neighbor is not free from their evil/harm.31

The rights of others are not limited only to ones immediate community or to ones immediate time directly or indirectly. In this sense, a Muslim has an obligation to all people, everywhere, and at all times. That is to say, any act which causes evil, regardless of the target and the time of the effect (immediate or in a 100 years), is prohibited. Further, all that man possesses is considered as a blessing and a gift of the Creator upon man, and as such does not belong to man. Consequently, some of the resources man commands are given to him for the specific purpose of extending them to others 32 whether by need or obligation. From this notion comes the Islamic mandatory tax (zekat), which is to be distributed to those in need. Rights of Flora: Plants, or rather flora in general, is addressed quite often in the Islamic primary sources. Flora is considered as existing for its own purpose, and with its own intrinsic value. Similarly, the use which humanity gets out of any type of plant and for any purpose be it food, medicine, firewood, etc. is considered a gift of the Creator upon man. 33 To that extent, the destruction of flora is prohibited even in warfare.34 Quran often describes the Earth (soil) as dead, and only by the will of the Creator does it give life, in conjunction with the rain etc., all controlled by the Creator. In that sense, even those things man plants do not grow and bear fruit by mans effort
possessions of a third, spilled the blood of a fourth, and harmed yet another. Then, his good deeds will be distributed to the wronged parties. And when his good deeds are gone, and he has not returned what he owes [them as their right], their bad deeds will be taken, and heaped onto him; and he will be thrown into the fire [hell]. 30 Muslim. Vol. 2. #1199. Pp. 313-14. 31 Ez-Zubejdi, Abdullatif, comp. Buharijina Zbirka Hadisa: Saetak. Translated by Mehmedalija Hadicd. Sarajevo: ElKalem, 2008. # 2022. Pg. 914. [Henceforth referred to as Bukhari) 32 Quran: 2:3 33 Ibid. 36:33-35 34 Ullah, Hamid. Muslim Conduct of State. Pg. 73-73.

alone, but obey the Creators will in doing so. In this way, the Quran uses the process of plant growth as a sign to people as a demonstration of the Divine presence, power, and knowledge.35 In a more metaphysical sense, the notion of plants, as well as environment, is constantly used in conjunction with the notion of Heaven the term which literally translates into garden. Given these elements, it is not hard to understand the importance of flora in the Islamic context; it constitutes a source of food, of enjoyment, of divine signs, and that which is necessary for human survival, yet remains beyond human power to control in any absolute sense. Furthermore, as noted above, man is answerable for all his actions which cease at the moment of death. However, several acts may continue to accumulate good deeds for the deceased. These include charitable trusts for the support of human beings or animals such as schools, hospitals, veterinary hospitals, grazing lands, orphanages, etc. Additionally, planted trees continue to accumulate good deeds, for as long as the trees provide any sort of benefit for man or animal by food, shade, or shelter.36 Rights of Fauna: Islamically, as we have noted, animals (fauna) are considered as created with a purpose in relation to their Creator.37 They are described as having value in and of themselves, to their respective communities, and in maintaining balance in creation.38 The notion of animal communities and their purpose in maintaining balance and harmony is rather similar to the modern discussion of the role each species plays a part in the local ecological systems.

35

Quran. 36:33, etc. ALSO Lane, Edward William. Pg. 131. 36 Bukhari. #2019.Pg. 914. 37 Ibid. 2:116 38 Ibid. 7:56, 26:149-152, etc. ALSO Deen, Mawil Y. Izzi. Pg. 167.

The relation of man to animals (particularly those domesticated) is posited in a way that is unambiguously one of the Creators blessings upon man, by mans ability to utilize some animals for his own benefit.39 At the same time, given that mans use is neither the sole purpose of animals, nor an inherent right of man, but rather that it is a favor of the Creator for man, the use of animals becomes a position of responsibility for humans. That is to say, humanity is given a loan a sort of right to use that which belongs to another and is expected to treat the things on loan with great care. To do otherwise would be to show ingratitude to the owner which is the literal translation of the term kufr the root word of the term infidel.40 The gratitude for this blessing amounts to righteous treatment of animals, whether domesticated or wild, and obligates man to extend his care, time, and resources to their benefit. Additionally, animals are protected from harm, even in warfare, where the destruction of enemy livestock might provide an advantage.41 In this way, Muslims (individually or communally) are supposed to pursue the good (marf), through the principle of adl, by doing justice to the creation. Even when man avails himself of the animal flesh, necessitating the animals death, there are a series of Hadith rules for the proper method of doing so (to take the life of an animal for sport is strictly forbidden)42. These rules, when followed, result in the least distress for the animal, and are in that respect, more humane than the modern slaughtering methods.43

39 40

Quran. 36:71-73 Lane, Edward William. Pg. 2620. 41 Ullah, Hamid. Muslim Conduct of State. Edited by Syed Mahmud-un-Nasir. Lahore: Mansoor Book House, 1973. Pp. 73-73. 42 Ozdemir, Ibrahim. An Islamic Approach to the Environment. 2002. Accessed from: http://www.islamawareness.net/Nature/environment_approach.html. Via: Nasai Hadith Collection. Muhammad said: If without good reason anyone kills a sparrow, or a creature lesser than that even, the living creature will put his plaint to God on the Day of Judgement, saying: So-and-so killed me for no purpose. 43 Schulze, W.; Schultze-Petzold, H.; Hazem, A. S.; Gro, R. Experiments for the objectification of pain and consciousness during conventional (captive bolt stunning) and religiously mandated (ritual cutting) slaughter

Rights of the Environment: With the relation of man-to-Creator, and that of man-to-animals and plants established, we can now turn to the notion of IEE in regards to the environment in general. Islam, unlike many Christian denominations, allows for the possibility of man-made destruction of the environment (such as global warming), rather than positing an eternally preserved stasis or balance. In this way, the notions of goodness and justice take on a concrete meaning in terms of the outcome of human actions. The destruction of plants and animals leads to the destruction of ecosystems, which damages the environment in which man resides, and thus damages the potential of the people and communities living in that area. Thus, such destruction harms others, and the world as a whole. This process, as noted, stands in complete opposition to the imperatives of action in the foregoing sections. The environment itself is considered as a sign (or proof) from the Creator of his presence, and includes not only the Earth and what is upon it, but also the universe as a whole.44 A number of verses in the Quran deal with the sun, the moon, and the stars as signs. The universe is Islamically posited as having been created in balance.45 The destruction of that balance, in any form, can be conceptually reduced to the notion of placing chaos in place of order, or dissonance in place of harmony. As such, it constitutes munker (evil) and ulm (injustice) which, as noted, is strictly prohibited.

procedures for sheep and calves. In. Deutsche Tieraerztliche Wochenschrift (German veterinary weekly) volume 85 (1978), pages 62-66 Tr. Dr Sahib M. Bleher. 1987. Accessed from: http://www.mustaqim.co.uk/halalstudy.htm 44 Quran. 36-37-40. 45 Ibid. 7:56.

At this point, it will be fruitful to note exactly what the notion of balance entails, in the Islamic context. The Islamic notions of natural balance are synonymous with the ecological notions of balance and sustainability. To begin with, balance relies on order and precise placement of all pertinent factors within the system. The Quran notes:
You do not see in the creation of the Most Merciful any inconsistency. So turn [your] vision [to the heavens]; do you see any faults? Then return [your] vision again and again. [Your] vision will return to you humbled [by its awe] and fatigued [from searching].46

In this sense, balance also carries the connotation of adl (justice), while negating zulm (injustice and misplacement). In terms of the environment, these implications further stress that all creation should be free and able to fulfill its role whether predator, prey, or otherwise. Human interaction should find a way to fit within this system, and can use it so long as it does not destroy it. Thus, hunting deer for food, or wolves for fur (clothing), is permissible but only within the limit which preserves the general ecological balance, as well as satisfying a legitimate need that cannot be otherwise met. Consequently, hunting a species to extinction is outright prohibited, as is any action which leads to the destruction of ecological balance whether by hunting, urban expansion, overuse of resources, etc. However, where the balance is already problematized, such as the extinction of top predators across much of the continental USA and the subsequent population expansion of other species in absence of predatory population control, human interaction must aim to reestablish the balance in the short and long term. Thus, in considering the expanding deer populations in absence of wolves, human role would Islamically include culling the deer population in the short term, and reintroducing wolves into the environment in the long term.

46

Ibid. 67:3-4.

Any abuse of the environment, whether of the living entities such as people, animals and plants, or non-living entities like water, is considered the creation of chaos where balance should reign. Consequently, it is a form of evil (munker). However, Islamic notions of what constitutes abuse are rather sensitive. The following Hadith will serve to clarify.
It is narrated that Gods Messenger [Muhammad] appeared while Sad was taking the ablutions. When he saw that Sad was using a lot of water, he intervened saying: What is this? You are wasting water. Sad replied asking: Can there be wastefulness while taking the ablutions? To which Gods Messenger replied: Yes, even if you take them on the bank of a rushing river.
47

It is important to note several things about this example. First, the ablutions are a necessary prerequisite of a mandatory act namely Islamic prayer. Second, Muhammads retort categorically prohibits the abuse of a resource, even where it is plentiful, free, and its use causes no harm to the resource, or the environment. Thus, the notion of abuse becomes redefined as the use of any resource beyond that which is necessary. Taken in the context of the preceding understanding of rights of humans, animals, and plants, it becomes clear that, if abuse in a way that causes no harm is prohibited, then any abuse in a way that may be harmful is significantly more problematic. Such an act would constitute a form of evil (munker) insofar as it harms the creation, and more specifically injustice (ulm) insofar as it displaces the rights of other beings, as well as disrupting the balance and harmony otherwise present. However, the IEE is concerned not only with the prevention of future harm. It is also engaged in all aspects of human activity through the use of the quintet of moral scale, as posited by the science of jurisprudence. The aforementioned flexibility of this approach makes IEE a highly useful tool in considering environmental management and the present environmental crisis.

47

Ozdemir, Ibrahim. An Islamic Approach to the Environment. Via: Musnad and Ibn Maja Hadith Collections.

IEE is applicable particularly to considering the development of science in general, of new technologies, or new understanding of the effects and scope of old technologies. Islamic ethics is able to reevaluate the moral validity of an ongoing or future project, by assimilating new information into the moral equation. In some cases, the new information will have no new bearing on the project, while in others it may either constrain the scope of the project in order to mitigate the negative effects to a manageable size, or even outright prohibit a project if the consequences are dire enough, or no methods of mitigating the effects to a manageable size are available. Similarly, new information may lead to green-lighting a project which had been sidelined, by providing either a means of management of the negative effects, or by uncovering a method which bypasses the effects altogether. Finally, in certain circumstances, it is possible that the new information would ordinarily lead to the prohibition of a project, yet the already present and ingrained aspects of that project cannot be simply abandoned, due to the necessary services the project provides. In such a case, the resolution is found in the principle of dharra (necessity), which stipulates that, when a thing becomes necessary for survival, even when it is otherwise morally prohibited, it becomes permissible but only in the absolutely necessary amounts. In this way, the consumption of alcohol and pork is permissible for Muslims under life-or-death duress, while it is otherwise explicitly prohibited. For example, the use of gasoline/diesel-powered vehicles has become so standardized that the information about the pollution they cause cannot be used to simply ban them. To do so would cripple economies, disable ambulances, fire response and police vehicles, and generally prevent the functioning of a society dependent upon those means of transportation to say nothing of energy production. Yet, simply going about using oil as before its dangers became

known is not an option, given the now-known destructive effects of such resources on the global ecosystem. In such cases, dharra allows for the continuation of the activity in this case the use of gasoline/diesel-powered vehicles but requires (makes wjib) two things in order to preserve the moral validity of the action. First, it requires that the harmful activity be reduced to a degree which is necessary, and so limit the negative effects of the activity as much as possible. Second, it requires that one turns their time, attention, and resources to finding either an alternative means of providing the same service (which will not be destructive), or finding ways to mitigate the destructive parts of the existing activity, in a way that will eliminate or reduce its harmful effects to manageable levels. Thus, Islamically, the correct course of action would be first to limit vehicle use so that at least the majority of their use would be for purposes which are categorized as necessary. Second, it would require research into alternative means of transportation, or non-pollutant fuels, or means of negating the pollutants in the fuel. As soon as the research yielded verifiable results, it would have to be implemented while at the same time discouraging or outlawing the use of polluting sources of transportation in a way that would be viable for the scale on which the project was taking place. Finally, the Islamically moral course would also demand that the Islamic community undertaking this project work on a global level, and in partnership with all other willing nations which utilize the same polluting methods, in order to achieve the maximum influence of the corrective process.48

48

This step is Islamically necessary, as Islam considers itself to be universal, and understands all evil everywhere to be a problem that Muslims should seek to address even more so when the impact of the action is global.

In summary, the foregoing analysis should clearly indicate that Islam does have an established environmental ethics. Beyond the general restrictions and obligations, the Islamic legal theory provides a means of incorporating modern scientific elements into a coherent framework for addressing environmental issues. In this way, Islamic Environmental Ethics are not bound by the timeframe of their introduction in the 7th century, and are able to adapt to the new developments, as well as provide a series of environmental guidelines going forward. They also offer a flexibility of approach, which enables them to tackle problems in progress, rather than merely laying out a series of preventative Dos and Donts. Finally, an observer of global environmental policies might rightly ask why the nations which consider themselves Islamic are failing to utilize this methodology, and are quite often some of the greatest producers of pollutants like oil and gas? The answer is both simple and complex. The simple answer is that, as Muhammad Asad points out, [T]here has never existed a truly Islamic state after the time of the Prophet [Muhammad] and of the Medina Caliphate headed by the Prophets immediate successors [ending in 661 CE.]49 The complex answer, in its entirety, is too great to tackle within these few pages. However, we can note that it has much to do with geo-politics, the fact that oil and gas are just about the only resource and source of income for many modern Islamic nations, and that for these nations the continued export of these resources can often mean the difference between peace, and sudden regime change.

49

Asad, Muhammad. The Principle of State and Government in Islam. Pg. v.

WORKS CITED
1. Al-Ghazali. Ghazl's Book of Counsel for Kings. Tr. F. R. C. Bagley. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964. 2. Asad, Muhammad. The Principle of State and Government in Islam. Kuala Lumpur: Islamic Book Trust, 1980. 3. Asad, Muhammad. This Law of Ours and Other Essays. Gibraltar: Dar al-Andalus, 1987. 4. Deen, Mawil Y. Izzi. Islamic Environmental Ethics, Law, and Society. In This Sacred Earth. Ed. Roger S. Gottlies. New York: Routledge, 1996. 5. El-Munziri, Zekijjudin Abdu-l-Azim Ed-Dimiki., comp. Muslimova Zbirka Hadisa: Izbor. 3 Vols. Translated by efik Kurdi. Zenica: Kua Mudrosti, 2004. 6. Ez-Zubejdi, Abdullatif, comp. Buharijina Zbirka Hadisa: Saetak. Translated by Mehmedalija Hadic. Sarajevo: El-Kalem, 2008. 7. Izutsu, Toshihiko. Ethico-religious Concepts in the Qurn. Montreal: McGill University Press, 1966. 8. Kamali, Muhammad Hashim. The Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence. 3rd. Ed. Cambridge: The Islamic Text Society, 2005. 9. Khadduri, Majid. War and Peace in the Law of Islam. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1955. 10. Lane, Edward William. An Arabic-English Lexicon. Beirut: Librarie du Liban, 1968. 11. Malik, Muhammad Farooq-i-Azam. English Translation of the Meaning of Al-Quran: The Guidance for Mankind. Houston, TX: Institute of Islamic Knowledge, 2002. 12. Ozdemir, Ibrahim. An Islamic Approach to the Environment. 2002. Accessed from: http://www.islamawareness.net/Nature/environment_approach.html 13. Schulze, W.; Schultze-Petzold, H.; Hazem, A. S.; Gro, R. Experiments for the objectification of pain and consciousness during conventional (captive bolt stunning) and religiously mandated (ritual cutting) slaughter procedures for sheep and calves. In. Deutsche Tieraerztliche Wochenschrift (German veterinary weekly) volume 85 (1978), pages 62-66 Tr. Dr Sahib M. Bleher. 1987. Accessed from: http://www.mustaqim.co.uk/halalstudy.htm 14. Ullah, Hamid. Muslim Conduct of State. Edited by Syed Mahmud-un-Nasir. Lahore: Mansoor Book House, 1973. 15. White, Lynn. The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis [with discussion of St. Francis; reprint, 1967]. Ecology and Religion in History. New York: Harper and Row, 1974.