Ijtihad encompasses not only the inference of rulings but also the identification of subject matters, which constitute an essential component of religious propositions. In political jurisprudence, the methodology for addressing subject matters not explicitly mentioned in religious texts is of particular significance, especially given that most of the issues in this domain fall outside the scope of direct textual reference. These subject matters can be classified into two categories: those inferred from reason and those inferred from transmitted texts. As each type entails distinct methodological considerations, a differentiated approach is necessary.

This study adopts a descriptive-analytical approach to explore the methodological requirements of ijtihad regarding subject matters—particularly those inferred from reason—that lack explicit mention in religious narrations within the realm of political jurisprudence. It concludes that subject identification in rational rulings is contingent on rule identification. This interdependence manifests itself in various challenges. The difficulty in identifying non-textual, rationally inferred subjects primarily stems from the inherent complexity of determining associated rulings. In political and social contextswhere variables are manifold, the rational discovery of Shar‘i rulings is intricate, making the discernment of subject constraints equally demanding. Hence, the application of reason in deducing both rulings and their relevant subject constraints must be exercised with high methodological precision.

In such cases, authority resides with reason itself, rather than with transmitted sources (naql) or custom (‘urf). Therefore, defining the scope of the subject, the conditions for the application of the ruling, and the characteristics of the referent of the ruling are determined rationally.

Ijtihad, in identifying non-textual subjects derived from reason in political jurisprudence, is inherently collaborative, requiring both expertise in jurisprudence and principles of jurisprudence (usul) to formulate rational criteria for inferring Shar‘i rulings, as well as interdisciplinary knowledge, particularly in the human sciences, for their application. The identification of subject constraints in this process is achieved through trial and error, necessitating a procedural and iterative approach in the formulation and revision of policies.