<![CDATA[The rapid expansion of digital economic transactions has given birth to legal divergences among scholars due to the contrast of the methodology of uṣūl al-fiqh. Although the contemporary Islamic legal literature is developing rapidly, the existing studies of maqāṣid al-sharī'ah are still generally abstract-generic and focused on the dichotomy of formal legality, thus failing to provide an operational instrument to resolve legal disagreements. In contrast to previous studies that primarily focused on determining the feasibility of digital assets, this article explicitly reconstructs Abdullah bin Bayyah's maqāṣid al-mu'āmalāt theory as an epistemological-operational framework for resolving legal disagreements. Bin Bayyah's thought deserves to be studied independently because it succeeds in integrating maqāṣid specifically into the verification of legal reasons (taḥqīq al-manāṭ al-shar'ī) and cyber reality (al-fiqh al-wāqi'ī). Applying a qualitative normative legal research design through conceptual and philosophical approaches, this study examines contemporary fatwas while separating juridical analysis of cryptocurrencies, NFTs, blockchain technology, and smart contracts. The results of the study show conceptually that legal disagreement stems from a rigid formalist-textualist approach that mixes contractual defects (gharar) and reasonable business risks (al-ghurm). Bin Bayyah's framework offers a graded approach that distinguishes between tolerable (gharar yasīr) and excessive (gharar fāḥish) uncertainty based on functional clarity and juridical certainty. Theoretically, this research contributes novelty in the form of an epistemological bridge that aligns textual ideality (naqlī) with empirical technological realities ('aqlī/wāqi'), while providing a methodological foundation for collective ijtihad in responding to future digital financial disruptions.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
