Re-reading and Critiquing Ijtihād in Wahhabi Thought

Ijtihād constitutes one of the foundational pillars of dynamism in Islamic jurisprudence and has historically been governed by precise conditions and scholarly criteria. However, Wahhabism, by prioritizing a direct return to the Qurʾān and Sunnah and critiquing strict adherence to established madhhabs (taqlīd), has in practice tended toward reducing and simplifying the qualifications required for ijtihād. Within their intellectual framework, ijtihād is largely confined to familiarity with scriptural texts, the capacity for preference (tarjīḥ), and the ability to distinguish authentic ḥadīth. This article argues that the conditions for ijtihād in Wahhabi thought lack sufficient coherence and deviate from the established standards of disciplined juridical reasoning. The consequences of this approach include the issuance of conflicting fatwas, the proliferation of takfīr-based rulings, the potential for political exploitation, and ultimately, the weakening of Islamic unity. This study thus emphasizes the necessity of redefining ijtihād within a structured and principled framework—so that it may serve as a constructive tool for addressing the contemporary challenges of the Muslim world rather than as an instrument of division and misuse.