‌Context & Objective: The classical conception of property, defined primarily as an absolute individual right based on the owner's dominion and liberty, has faced critical re-evaluation in modern legal systems, especially within the United States. In response to this, the Human Flourishing Theory (HFT) has emerged as a novel approach, attempting to place the institution of property outside the exclusive domain of liberal individualism and redefining it to serve the broader purpose of human flourishing. This theory moves beyond focusing solely on individual interests to emphasize concepts such as capabilities and social commitment, asserting that property is an institution with inherent social and ethical capacity that must operate in alignment with human excellence and social felicity (sa'ādat). The present research aims to conduct a comparative analysis of HFT in U.S. property law with the perspectives found in Islamic Law (Fiqh). The core purpose is to determine the possibility of congruence between these two legal systems in the realm of property rights and to explore whether the central HFT concept of social obligation can be identified within Islamic legal institutions. The analysis seeks to clarify the role of property as an instrument for the advancement of both individual and communal good.
 ‌Method & Approach: This study employs a comparative and theoretical analysis method. The concepts and data utilized were systematically gathered through the investigation of philosophical theories, legal interpretations, and jurisprudential (Fiqhī) sources, and subsequently evaluated using a doctrinal approach. The research addresses a noticeable gap in existing scholarship by providing an analytical comparative comparison of foundational concepts in property law between the Western legal system (specifically the U.S.) and the Islamic legal system. The analytical trajectory involves establishing the conceptual foundation of HFT in U.S. law by scrutinizing its primary elements: Property, Flourishing, Social Obligation, and Social Interdependence. Following this, an attempt is made to map these HFT concepts onto analogous concepts and principles present within Islamic Law, thereby clarifying the relationship between these two intellectual systems regarding the regulation of property.
 ‌Findings: The analysis reveals that although property is traditionally recognized as a respected and absolute right in U.S. law, mechanisms exist through which property operates under the norm of social obligation (ta'ahhud ijtimā'ī). HFT’s core components are manifested in U.S. law through mechanisms such as Eminent Domain (compulsory acquisition), historical preservation regulations, and environmental regulations, which act as intrinsic limitations on property rights rather than external impositions, justifying state intervention for public welfare and human flourishing. Conversely, Islamic Law views property as a right inherently coupled with social and religious duties (takālif shar'ī). The ultimate goal of property in the Islamic intellectual system is the realization of human felicity, an overarching concept recognized in Islamic philosophy that parallels HFT. While property may be viewed from a fiqhī perspective as a sovereign right, it is continuously constrained by the oversight of the sharī'ah. Crucial Islamic principles supporting this social orientation include the foundational doctrine of vicegerency (khilāfah), which posits that human ownership is fiduciary or representative; the principle of cooperation (ta'āwun); and mandatory financial obligations such as alms (zakāt) and one-fifth tax (khums), alongside the prohibition of monopolistic practices (iḥtikār). These mechanisms collectively provide a framework for property to be directed toward the common good.
 ‌Conclusion: HFT attempts to shift the paradigm of property from a purely individualistic right to a social institution geared toward the advancement of human flourishing, grounded in the necessity of recognizing social interdependence and mutual responsibility. Although HFT requires a significant conceptual redefinition of property's traditional nature, Islamic Law achieves a similar outcome—guiding property toward social and ethical excellence—without needing to fundamentally change the essence of the right itself. Instead, Islamic Law utilizes pre-existing religious mandates (such as zakāt and khums) and ethical principles (khilāfah and ta'āwun) to ensure that private property is managed in a way that respects public interest (maṣāliḥ 'umūmī) and prevents the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few. The common thread linking both the American theory and Islamic principles is the emphasis on balance between individual rights and social obligations. This comparative analysis confirms the theoretical capacity within both systems to develop a balanced approach to property that transforms it from a simple individual right into an ethical and social commitment, thereby reinforcing its role as an instrument for both individual and communal felicity and flourishing.