Al-Ahkam: Kategori dan Implementasi

Shari'a law is an order from Allah Swt that is related to the actions of mukallaf, whether in the form of demands, choices, or making something as a cause, condition, barrier, valid, null, rukhsah, or 'azimah. The law revealed by Allah Swt to humans aims for the benefit and safety of humans both in this world and in the hereafter. We will get this salvation if we obey Allah's laws consistently. The laws of Allah Swt that must be obeyed are in the nature of definite and undefined orders, orders to leave work with certainty and orders to leave work uncertainly such as whether to leave or not, and sometimes Allah SWT's law is optional. Sharia law 'is divided into taklifi law and wadh'i law. Taklifi law is a law that contains orders to be done or to be abandoned by mukallaf or which contains a choice between being done and left. There are five taklifi laws, namely obligatory, sunnah, permissible, makruh, and haram. While wadh'i law is a law that makes something as a cause for another, or a condition for something else or as a barrier for something else. Which includes the wadh'i law there are seven, namely cause, condition, barrier (mani'), rukhsah, azimah, and valid (al-Shihhah) and null (al-Buthlan). The judge (shari') is Allah Swt. Therefore all Muslims agree that the judge (source of law) is Allah Swt, so the applicable law is the law of Allah Swt.

The Sokoto Caliphate

The Sokoto Caliphate, prior to 1964 generally referred to in print as the Fulani Empire, was Africa’s largest pre-colonial state and lasted for a century, coming into being in 1808 through a four-year jihad and finally in 1903 being conquered by Britain. As an Islamic state, it was run as a decentralized confederation of emirates under the supervision of the caliph and his bureaucracy in Sokoto. Though almost all the emirs initially were scholars chosen for their piety, they could be identified ethnically as Fulani/Fulbe (hence the “Fulani Empire”) whereas the majority of the population were Hausa-speakers. There was a very large number of slaves (at times over 50 percent), serving the elite or working as labor on farms, which supplied food to large households and markets in the cities. There was no standing army, but borders were closed by strategically sited ribats or strongholds. Conflicts were resolved by local administrators, with the courts using Shari‘a law; servants of local officials acted as police. The chapter’s argument is that the Sokoto Caliphate is more accurately categorized not as an “imperial” polity but as an Islamic state modeled as a confederation on Abbasid practice.

Implications of spirituality and Islamic Shari’a law for workers’ well-being in luxury hotels: A eudaimonic view

This article explores the extent to which luxury hotels operating in Jordan (Dead Sea) follow Islamic Shari’a law and offer spiritual facilities, and it aims to understand how this obligation (or otherwise) may enhance or adversely affect employees’ psychological well-being (PWB). This article draws on Ryff’s theory of PWB and Stephenson’s model of Islamic-spiritual hotels. Eighteen managers who were working in five-star hotels participated in this study, which follows a qualitative-inductive method. The results show that five-star hotels operating in Jordan (Dead Sea) do not adhere to the Islamic guidelines with the exception of serving halal food and not allowing gambling machines. However, they offer spiritual facilities for workers, and these facilities enhance Ryff’s six dimensions of well-being for workers. The findings show that compliance with Islamic Shari’a law and the availability of spiritual facilities enhance workers’ PWB. The importance of this article lies in presenting a fresh understanding of the linkages between spirituality in the workplace and employees’ PWB.

The Interrelation between Islamic Law and Regional Regulations in Jember (Examining the Maqāṣid al-Sharī‘at-based Reasoning in Istinbāṭ al-Ahkām)

This study reviews the dichotomous concept of secular and shari’a laws. Such concept has led to new discourses: first, shari’a can influence national (modern) law without mentioning the Islamic framework in the formulation process. Second, the shari’a can stand on its own for particular religious groups who believe in its truth and place it in a higher position than the secular law. Third, the substance of shari’a and modern laws is integrable. This study uses an anthropological-sociological approach with Maqāṣid al-Sharī‘at framework. As a result, the study shows both national and regional legal products, on the one hand, are considered as the shari’a law as long as they are beneficial to and protect all people. On the other hand, the shari’a, which substantially reflects equality and fairness, can be claimed as modern law. AbstrakStudi ini mengkaji konsep dikotomis hukum sekuler dan shari’a. Konsep tersebut melahirkan wacana-wacana baru: pertama, shari’a dapat mempengaruhi hukum nasional (modern) tanpa menyebutkan kerangka Islam dalam proses perumusannya. Kedua, shari’a dapat berdiri sendiri bagi kelompok agama tertentu yang meyakini kebenarannya dan menempatkannya pada posisi yang lebih tinggi dari hukum sekuler. Ketiga, substansi shari’a dan hukum modern terintegrasi. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan antropologis-sosiologis dengan kerangka Maqāṣid al-Sharī‘at. Studi ini menyimpulkan bahwa produk hukum nasional dan daerah di satu sisi dianggap sebagai hukum shari’a selama bermanfaat dan melindungi semua orang. Di sisi lain, shari’a yang secara substansial mencerminkan kesetaraan dan keadilan dapat diklaim sebagai hukum modern.

A Comparative Study of Shi’a Public Shari’a Law and Sunni Public Shari’a Law (Administrative Law and Governance in Islam)

Public law notions seen from shari’a law perspective have not been duly discussed in Islamic countries. In the discourse of rule of law in Islam we are confronted with a dilemma , moral values of a religion are not compatible with the coercive legislative measures . Thus the authentic application of shari’a rules is feasible only if a scientific hermeneutic of shari’a law is adapted to the exigencies of today’s modern life, while the outlook on the boundaries of hermeneutic remains obscure. Regarding the public finance in Islam and State owned banking system, in many Islamic countries both Shi’a concept banks and Sunni concept banks, while prohibiting usury have worked out a well established shari’a law compliant loan system in favor of the customers. Also economic democracy from shari’a law point of view finds its way through other means provided in shari’a rules (Shi’a or Sunni). The notion of an Islamic administrative law is rather misperceived. The actual polemic on governance and administrative law in Islam is considered as being an outcome of the conflict between shari’a based concepts and notions asserted by faquihs and jurists and the legal practices and usages of Islamic States since the expansion of Islamic territories (700 AD).

Legal Origin, Institutional Quality, and Islamic Finance Development: Does Shari’a Matter?

Previous studies on financial development have shown that differences in the legal origin explain differences in financial development. Using historical comparisons and cross-country regressions for 40 countries observed for the period from 2005 to 2018, our research assesses how different legal origins have affected the development of Islamic finance worldwide. More particularly, our research assesses empirically why and how the adoption of Shari’a, wholly or partially (combined with common or civil law), could explain the level of development of Islamic finance in different jurisdictions. Our primary results show that countries adopting a Shari’a legal system have a very well-developed Islamic financial system. Moreover, countries adopting a mixed legal system based on common law and Shari’a law have sufficient flexibility within their legal systems to make changes to their laws in response to the changing socioeconomic conditions, and this has helped the development of the Islamic financial industry. However, countries adopting a mixed legal system based on both civil law and Shari’a law appear less flexible in making changes to their old laws and this thwarted the development of the Islamic financial industry in these countries. Furthermore, we have found that the concentration of a Muslim population (the percentage of Muslim population) along with the level of income have both had a positive effect on the development of Islamic banking assets and on the development of Islamic banking as a whole.

Shari’a Law and Its Impact on the Development of Muslim and Non-Muslim Business Relations in the United Arab Emirates

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is situated near the Persian Gulf in the North Eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula. Established in 1971 by the late Sheikh Zayed Al Nahyan, the UAE forms a federation of seven Emirates consisting of Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman, Umm Al-Quwain, Ras Al Khaimah (The Emirate of Ras Al Khaimah had officially joined the federation on the 11th of February 1972.), and Fujairah. Because of its diversity and cosmopolitan nature, the country has always been a crossroad and prime location for people and trade. As Islam and Islamic principles have influenced Gulf societies in the very core of its existence, the Islamic way of conduct in trade relations and dispute resolutions are an element of paramount significance. This Article explores the role of Shari’a Law and its impact on the economic development of Muslim and non-Muslim business relations in the UAE and in particular in the Emirate of Dubai. The law and development from an Islamic perspective introduces a new vision on the theories of law and development by addressing the influence of Shari’a Law in economic development. In international trade relations and dispute resolution mechanisms such as formal contract enforcements in the Dubai International Finance Centre (DIFC) and the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) the plurality of laws leads to the adoption of Shari’a Law over the Civil and Common Law regimes.

IKHTILAF AL-MUFASSIRIN: MEMAHAMI SEBAB-SEBAB PERBEDAAN ULAMA DALAM PENAFSIRAN ALQURAN

All Muslims agree that the Qur’an is the first and main source of Islamic law. Nevertheless, this scripture does not guarantee the same result of interpretation, given that the background of life surrounding of the interpreter is different. This paper will review the forms of ikhtilaf al-mufassirin and the causes that bring it up. In examining the causes of ikhtilaf al-mufassirin, there are at least two causes; (1) a common cause, such as the occurrence of ikhtilaf in the case of qira’at, i’rab, musytarak, hakakat-majaz, ‘am-khas, mutlaq-muqayyad, mujmal-mubayyan, amr-nahi, nasikh-mansukh, and ikhtilaf in positioning reason as the source of shari’a law; (2) special causes, such as ikhtilaf in criticism of sanad and matan, ikhtilaf in taking a source of law, and ikhtilaf in the case of aqidah and madhhab. While the forms of ikhtilaf al-mufassirin there are also two forms; (1) ikhtilaf tanawwu’, ie dissent of opinion which is all aimed at the same intention; (2) ikhtilaf taddad, that is, differences of opinion which is conflicting and can not be united.