Ahmad Zuhairuz Zaman
Unknown Affiliation

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Pengaruh 'Urf dalam Perubuhan Hukum Menerut Imam Ibn 'Abidin Ahmad Zuhairuz Zaman
Mabahits : Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam Vol 1 No 1 (2020): Mei
Publisher : Mabahits : Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (693.205 KB) | DOI: 10.36835/mabahits.v1i1.330

Abstract

This study examines the thought of Ibn ‘A<bidi>n in the discourse of the theory of Islamic law (us}ūl fiqh), particularly on the concept of‘ urf proposition and its implementation in Ibn ‘Ābidīn's fatwas. This study is focused on answering three important things: 1) how the concept of ‘urf proposition according to Ibn ‘Ābidīn; 2) how the variety of ‘urf and its division according to the view Ibn ‘Ābidīn; 3) how Ibn ‘Ābidīn applied the ‘urf proposition in some of his fatwas. The results of the study show that the concept of Ibn ‘A<bidi>n's urf theorem, both in terms of definition, the proposition of the h}ujjah's, the requirements, and the variety of divisions, is essentially nothing new in the activities of the law istinbat. He only tried to maximize the concept of ‘urf and related it in the formation of fiqh law that has been expressed by the previous fuqaha>’ and us}u>liyyi>n. However, Ibn ‘A<bidi>n did not only present the concept of ‘urf proposition specificly to absolute mujtahids, but also presented it in the concept of‘ urf which can also be used by mufti and judges who have not reached the level of absolute ijtiha>d. Ibn ‘A<bidi>n divided the‘ urf in four points of view. First, the division of ‘urf in terms of its laying resources. Second, the division of ‘urf in terms of its form. Third, the division of ‘urf in terms of its validity. Fourth, the division of ‘urf in terms of contradictions with other propositions, either in the form of shar‘i or za>hir's narration of al-madhhab. The first three divisions have been widely reviewed by previous fiqh experts. The final division, in the author's view, is not found from the jurists before Ibn ‘A<bidi>n who examines specifically the division of url contradictions with other such propositions. That is Allah a‘lam. According to Ibn ‘A<bidi>n, when in a situation contradictory to other propositions, ‘urf is sometimes a general ‘urf and special ‘urf. As for general ‘urf, if its use is precisely the consequence of leaving nas}s} shar‘i>, then its status is not considered. However, the general ‘urf is acceptable if the contradiction with nas}s} shar‘i> on some sides only, so it can be a mukhas}s}is} that takhs}i>s} nas}s} shar‘i>'s announcement. While the special ‘urf can be acknowledged if there is no contradiction with the nas}s} shar‘i> at all, the disagreements are evenly distributed on all sides as well as on some sides only. Strictly speaking, the special ‘urf can not be a mukhas}s}is} that takhs}i>s} the nas}s} shar‘i>'s announcement. Then if the general ‘urf and special ‘urf conflict with z}a>hir al-madhhab history, then both can be accepted as a proposition, only in the application of the law based on ‘urf, only specifically applicable locally to the region or place of the perpetrators only, universally applicable. The application of the theory of ‘urf, besides it is as the representation of taqli>d in manhaji> (methodology); it is also one form of activities of istinba>t} in using ijtiha>d intiqa’i> and ijtiha>d insha>’i>. The intiqa’i> method refers to the classical ulama> fatwas relevant to the development of the times. While insha>’i> is the method of ijtiha>d over new problems that are not in the nas}s} directly or in the ulama> classical fatwa. The method of ijtiha>d intiqa’i> applied by Ibn ‘A<bidi>n can be seen in his fatwa on the possible sale and purchase of fruit still in the tree. He took and searched the opinion of Abu Bakr Muh}ammad bin al-Fadl and al-H{alwa>ni who allowed the sale. The example of ijtiha>d insha>’i> is applied by Ibn ‘A<bidi>n in his fatwa concerning the prohibition of the practice of the su>karah contract if it is held in the jurisdiction of Islam, and can become lawful if the contract is held in the jurisdiction of the harb state. The practice of su>karah in today is popular with the term of expedition insurance. Even the fatwa contained in the book of H{a>shiyah Radd al-Mukhta>r is the only discussion of insurance coverage that can be found in the treasures of tura>th al-madhhab, although some contemporary fuqaha> disagree with Ibn‘A<bidi>n application on the practice of modern insurance.
THE CONTRADICTION OF HADITH AHAD WITH QIYAS AND ITS LEGAL IMPLICATIONS FOR GHAYR MUSAMMA DOWRY DEBTS AFTER THE HUSBAND'S DEATH BEFORE CONSUMMATION Ahmad Zuhairuz Zaman; Zaenal Abidin Mochamad Baqir
MAHAD ALY JOURNAL OF ISLAMIC STUDIES Vol 4 No 2 (2025): Ma'had Aly Journal of Islamic Studies
Publisher : AL-BAYAN INSTITUTE

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.63398/ntsezf85

Abstract

Hadith Ahad is a hadith whose number of rawi in each ţabaqah or one of them is limited. In using hadith ahad related to legal issues, according to the majority of ulama', it is obligatory to practice it. However, some others reject hadith ahad in several cases such as in the context of ’umum al-balwa or when it contradicts qiyas. This study is a library research with a qualitative approach and uses content analysis methodology. This study aims to reveal the contradiction of hadith ahad with qiyas and its impact on the law of dowry that has not been determined by the husband when the marriage contract takes place, and then the husband dies before having intercourse with his wife. This study concluded that if the ‘illat qiyas is extracted from the evidence that is qaţ'iy, while the hadith that contradicts qiyas is the category of hadith ahad, then there is a khilaf. And this difference of opinion has an impact on the issue of dowry that has not been determined by the husband when the marriage contract takes place, then the husband dies before having intercourse with his wife. The opinion of the majority of fuqaha’ is that the wife has the right to receive mitsil dowry and inheritance based on the hadith ahad narrated by Ibn Mas'ud. While the opinion of the Malikiyah is that the wife does not get mut’ah, and does not get a dowry but the wife gets an inheritance based on qiyas in the sale and purchase.