Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 6 Documents
Search

ANALISIS PEMIKIRAN MOHAMMAD HASHIM KAMALI TENTANG PENGHAPUSAN HUKUMAN RAJAM DAN RELEVANSINYA DI INDONESIA Ilhami, Hanif A'la; Rosman, Edi
Ijtihad Vol. 17 No. 2 (2023): Ijtihad: Jurnal Hukum dan Ekonomi Islam
Publisher : Universitas Darussalam Gontor

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21111/ijtihad.v17i2.10281

Abstract

**English**The punishment of stoning (rajm) that agreed upon by Islamic scholars, now faces ongoing rejection particularly in modern times. Mohammad Hashim Kamali, a professor in Islamic law and usul al-fiqh, stands among those who oppose it. This piece aims to delve deeper into Kamali's understanding of the evidence behind stoning punishment, offering analysis and necessary critique. It's a qualitative study, a literature review type, gathering data from books, articles, and related works on Kamali's thoughts regarding stoning, analyzed using an inductive-deductive method. Kamali presents three approaches in rejecting stoning punishment. Firstly, by evaluating and testing the foundations of stoning laws, considering every stoning rationale as doubtful evidence. Secondly, he expands the meaning of doubt (syubhat) as an element found in trial proceedings, incorporating the perpetrator's personality and societal context. The third approach emphasizes repentance in the penal process, advocating for the state to make imposing the death penalty more challenging, providing the individual with an opportunity to improve and reform themselves. The author disagrees with Kamali's ideas. Upon analysis, it's found that Kamali's understanding of the evidence contains several errors. Regarding the expansion of the concept of doubt, it's concluded that Kamali leans towards a Western mindset emphasizing socio-historical approaches in interpreting Sharia law, prioritizing social realities over revelation. Similarly, in terms of repentance, Kamali tends to reject all forms of the death penalty, viewing it as a form of torture, whereas in Islam, such punishment is often symbolized as the highest form of repentance. Furthermore, fundamentally, Hudud punishment cannot be eliminated through repentance. Consequently, this piece concludes that stoning punishment still holds a strong legal **Indonesia**Rajam merupakan hukuman dalam Islam yang disepakati oleh para ulama. Namun, penolakan terhadapnya masih terus bermunculan terutama di zaman modern. Salah satu di antaranya adalah Mohammad Hashim Kamali, seorang profesor di bidang hukum Islam dan ushul fiqh. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk meneliti lebih lanjut bagaimana pemahaman dalil oleh Kamali terhadap hukuman rajam serta mengajukan analisa dan kritik yang diperlukan. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif, dengan jenis penelitian pustaka. Data dikumpulkan dengan cara  membaca buku, artikel dan karya lainnya yang berkaitan dengan pemikiran Kamali tentang rajam dan dianalisis dengan metode induktif-deduktif. Mohammad Hashim Kamali menyampaikan argumen penolakannya terhadap hukuman rajam dengan menggunakan tiga macam pendekatan. Pertama, dengan evaluasi dan pengujian terhadap dalil-dalil yang menjadi dasar hukum rajam. Beliau menilai bahwa setiap dalil rajam sebagai  doubtful evidence (dalil yang penuh keraguan). Pendekatan yang kedua, Kamali memberikan perluasan makna terhadap konsep syubhat sebagai unsur keraguan yang ditemukan dalam proses persidangan, dan bagaimana kondisi kepribadian pelaku dan bagaimana konteks masyarakat.. Pendekatan yang ketiga, adalah Kamali menekankan konsep repentance (pertaubatan) dalam setiap proses pemidanaan, di mana negara harus mempersulit penjatuhan hukuman mati dan memberikan kesempatan kepadanya untuk memperbaiki dan mereformasi dirinya sendiri. penulis tidak setuju dengan pemikiran Kamali. Setelah dianalisis, pemahaman dalil yang diajukan Kamali mengandung beberapa kekeliruan. Sedangkan dari aspek perluasan makna syubhat disimpulkan bahwa Kamali memiliki kecenderungan pola pikir Barat yang menekankan pendekatan sosio-historis dalam penafsiran hukum syariah, yang menundukkan wahyu kepada realitas sosial. Begitu pula dalam aspek pertaubatan, Kamali cenderung kepada penolakan segala bentuk hukuman mati dan menilai hukuman sebagai bentuk penyiksaan, padahal hukuman tersebut dalam Islam kerap dilambangkan sebagai bentuk pertaubatan tertinggi. Selain itu, pada dasarnya hukuman hudud tidak dapat dihilangkan karena taubat. Walhasil, tulisan ini menyimpulkan bahwa hukuman rajam tetap memiliki dasar hukum yang kuat sebagai bagian dari syariat Islam.
KOMPARASI ISTIHSAN ANTAR MAZHAB FIKIH DAN PENERAPANNYA DALAM PENETAPAN HUKUM ISLAM Ilhami, Hanif A'la; Ismail; Asasriwarni
Comparativa: Jurnal Ilmiah Perbandingan Mazhab dan Hukum Vol. 5 No. 1 (2024)
Publisher : Program Studi Perbandingan Mazhab, Fakultas Syariah, Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Datokarama Palu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24239/comparativa.v5i1.139

Abstract

The existence of differences regarding the validity of istihsan cannot be denied due to differences in understanding its essence. Even among scholars who accept istihsan, both within the Hanafi and Maliki schools, there exist diverse definitions of istihsan. This study attempts to comprehensively explain istihsan through a comparative lens across various schools of thought and how it's applied in establishing Islamic law. The research findings indicate that despite differing opinions among scholars concerning the validity of istihsan, substantively they all utilize it in deducing legal rulings. Hanafi, Maliki, and some Hanbali scholars support and employ istihsan in their ijtihad (independent legal reasoning); meanwhile, Imam Shafi'i and his followers reject istihsan as an evidentiary basis in Sharia law, yet they occasionally use similar methods, though not explicitly referred to as istihsan. The differences in the usage of terms are quite common. Just as in the Hanafi school of usul al-fiqh (principles of Islamic jurisprudence), specific terms are used, such as differentiating between "ijab" and "fardh," which aren't found in other schools of thought. Hence, the discrepancies among scholars in various schools regarding the validity of istihsan are primarily technical and related to nomenclature.
Proporsionalitas dalam Hisab: Pembacaan terhadap Fatwa Yusuf al-Qaradhawi Ilhami, Hanif A'la; Efendi, Zul
Astroislamica: Journal of Islamic Astronomy Vol. 4 No. 1 (2025): Astroislamica: Journal of Islamic Astronomy (Juni)
Publisher : Islamic Astronomy Department, Sharia and Law Faculty

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47766/astroislamica.v4i1.3350

Abstract

This study aims to explain the form of al-Qaradhawi's support for the use of astronomical calculations, revealing aspects of proportionality in it, and expressing his comments on the views of other scholars who also support calculations. This research is a qualitative research with a literature approach. Al-Qaradhawi supports calculations to be elevated to the status of a method that has legal power and validity. However, his support for calculation is not absolute, but proportional. The proportional aspect that he puts forward is illustrated by his suggestion to use calculation as a tool to deny moon sighting, namely if calculation finds that the moon is completely unobservable, then all moon sighting testimony must be rejected, even sighting does not need to be carried out from the beginning. Limited to this condition, the government can just base its decision on the results of calculation alone. In contrast, under normal conditions, moon sighting must still be carried out, and remains the main method in (itsbat) determining the beginning of the month. Both of these methods –calculation and sighting- have their portion of use according to their respective conditions. Both still have the power as a wasilah, and become a tool for the government to eliminate differences in welcoming the new month in the same country. Differences in the same country, according to al-Qaradhawi is a difference that ghairu maqbul, can not be tolerated. As for the views of Ahmad Syakir - the scholar cited by al-Qaradhawi as a supporter of calculations - al-Qaradhawi made some comments. These comments conclude that calculation must still consider the aspect of moon sighting and cannot stand alone. This shows the difference in views between Ahmad Syakir, a scholar who supports hishab absolutely, and al-Qaradhawi, who supports the use of hishab proportionally.
Politik Hukum Islam di Indonesia pada Masa Kolonial Jepang : Politisasi & Militerisasi A’la Ilhami, Hanif; Ilhami, Hanif A'la; Amin, Saiful; Fahmi, Khairul
JURNAL TAPIS Vol 20 No 2 (2024): Jurnal Tapis : Jurnal Teropong Aspirasi Politik Islam
Publisher : Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24042/tps.v20i2.23294

Abstract

Tulisan ini akan menguraikan berbagai bentuk kebijakan yang diambil oleh kolonial Jepang dalam mengatur Islam di Indonesia. Penelitian ini bersifat kualitatif dengan menjadikan sumber pustakan sebagai sumber datanya. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa Jepang pada dasarnya adalah sama dengan Belanda, dalam sama-sama bertujuan untuk mengeksploitasi berbagai sumber daya yang ada di Indonesia untuk kebutuhan mereka. Akan tetapikebijakan yang ditempuh keduanya kadangkala saling bertolak belakang, terutama terkait umat Islam. Jika Belanda berusaha untuk menjinakkan umat Islam dengan cara memutus, mengisolasi dan menghentikan gerakan Islam sebagai musuh, maka Jepang melakukan kebalikannya. Jepang berusaha menjinakkan umat Islam dengan mendinginkan suasan, merayu, dan merangkul gerakan Islam agar mereka dianggap sebagai kawan, atau minimal mereka tidak lagi dianggap lawan yang harus diperangi. Akibat kolonial Jepang, umat Islam memang tetap merasakan penindasan dan eksploitasi yang tak jauh berbeda dengan Belanda. Namun kali ini mereka mendapatkan kesempatan berharga untuk terjun dalam berbagai gerakan politik maupun pendidikan militer, dua hal yang sama sekali tidak pernah ada dalam masa kolonial Belanda.
DINAMIKA HUKUMAN RAJAM DI BEBERAPA NEGARA MUSLIM MODERN DAN RELEVANSI PENERAPAN DI INDONESIA Ilhami, Hanif A'la; Efendi, Zul
Jurnal AL-MAQASID: Jurnal Ilmu Kesyariahan dan Keperdataan Vol 10, No 1 (2024)
Publisher : UIN Syekh Ali Hasan Ahmad Addary Padangsidimpuan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24952/almaqasid.v10i1.10857

Abstract

This research aims to examine the implementation of stoning punishment in several Muslim countries and investigate the relevance of stoning punishment for implementation in Indonesia. This study is a qualitative research with a literature review approach by collecting books, articles, and legal documents related to the implementation of stoning punishment in modern countries. The research findings indicate that stoning punishment has been legislated in the laws of Brunei Darussalam. While Malaysia and Indonesia are still engaged in academic discourse and debates, Saudi Arabia and Iran, which initially acknowledged the existence of stoning punishment in their judiciary, are slowly abandoning it. Two factors reducing the enforcement of stoning punishment are identified. First, the increasing strength of discourse opposing the death penalty and even opposing the criminalization of adultery itself as it is considered a private matter. Second, the growing dominance of Western countries over the economy of Muslim countries resulting in their limited autonomy in determining their own laws. As for stoning punishment, from various approaches, it is relevant to be implemented in Indonesia because it can resolve various state budget issues and provide a more deterrent effect. Furthermore, stoning punishment is not exclusively Islamic law but also recognized in Judaism and Christianity, making it suitable for many religions in Indonesia.
DINAMIKA HUKUMAN RAJAM DI BEBERAPA NEGARA MUSLIM MODERN DAN RELEVANSI PENERAPAN DI INDONESIA Ilhami, Hanif A'la; Efendi, Zul
Jurnal AL-MAQASID: Jurnal Ilmu Kesyariahan dan Keperdataan Vol 10, No 1 (2024)
Publisher : UIN Syekh Ali Hasan Ahmad Addary Padangsidimpuan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24952/almaqasid.v10i1.10857

Abstract

This research aims to examine the implementation of stoning punishment in several Muslim countries and investigate the relevance of stoning punishment for implementation in Indonesia. This study is a qualitative research with a literature review approach by collecting books, articles, and legal documents related to the implementation of stoning punishment in modern countries. The research findings indicate that stoning punishment has been legislated in the laws of Brunei Darussalam. While Malaysia and Indonesia are still engaged in academic discourse and debates, Saudi Arabia and Iran, which initially acknowledged the existence of stoning punishment in their judiciary, are slowly abandoning it. Two factors reducing the enforcement of stoning punishment are identified. First, the increasing strength of discourse opposing the death penalty and even opposing the criminalization of adultery itself as it is considered a private matter. Second, the growing dominance of Western countries over the economy of Muslim countries resulting in their limited autonomy in determining their own laws. As for stoning punishment, from various approaches, it is relevant to be implemented in Indonesia because it can resolve various state budget issues and provide a more deterrent effect. Furthermore, stoning punishment is not exclusively Islamic law but also recognized in Judaism and Christianity, making it suitable for many religions in Indonesia.