<![CDATA[This study examines the differences in the ijtihad of Islamic legal schools (madhhabs) regarding zakat al-khalīṭain, which arise from varying interpretations of hadith ahkām concerning the partnership of zakatable assets. The research focuses on analyzing the methods of istinbāṭ (legal deduction) and the uṣūl al-fiqh approaches employed by different madhhabs, which have led to legal disagreements in determining the rulings of zakat al-khalīṭain. The objectives of this study are to explain the foundations of madhhab-based ijtihad, examine the influence of hadith interpretation on legal differences, and analyze the uṣūl al-fiqh methodologies utilized by classical jurists. This research is a normative legal study conducted through library research, employing uṣūl al-fiqh and comparative madhhab approaches. The findings reveal that the differences in the legal rulings of zakat al-khalīṭain are influenced by varying understandings of hadith terminology, the concept of khalṭah (asset partnership), and the methods of legal reasoning (istidlāl) adopted by each madhhab. The Shāfiʿī and Hanbalī schools tend to recognize the effect of asset partnership on zakat obligations, whereas the Hanafī school adopts a more restrictive approach. Meanwhile, the Mālikī school considers public welfare (maṣlaḥah) and social practices as important factors in legal determination. These differences demonstrate that juridical disagreement (ikhtilāf fiqhī) is a natural consequence of the diversity of ijtihad methodologies used by scholars in interpreting Islamic legal sources.]]>
