Pendapat-pendapat para ulama berkenaan Al-Istishaab - Al-Waadih Fee Usool ul-Fiqh | Quran Course

Pendapat-pendapat para ulama berkenaan Al-Istishaab - Al-Waadih Fee Usool ul-Fiqh | Quran Course

Kedua: Kebanyakan golongan Mutakallimin dan sebahagian ulama Hanafiyah berpendapat bahawa Al-Istishaab bukanlah suatu Hujjah. Ini kerana mereka berpandangan bahawa kekekalan Hukum pada keadaan asalnya memerlukan Daleel untuk menyokongnya. Hal ini kerana Daleel yang menetapkan Hukum bagi suatu realiti daripada realiti-realiti itu ialah Daleel bagi kewujudan Hukum dan penetapannya, bukan bagi kesinambungan dan kekekalannya. Kesinambungan dan kekekalannya, pada pandangan mereka, memerlukan Daleel lain selain Daleel bagi kewujudannya. Contohnya, lelaki yang hilang dalam contoh yang telah disebut sebelum ini, memerlukan, selepas tempoh tertentu, bukti yang menunjukkan bahawa dia masih hidup. Maka ia ialah Hujjah bagi penafian (Nafy) dan bukan Hujjah bagi penetapan (Ithbaat). Ini bermakna keadaan yang ditetapkan melalui Istishaab menafikan apa yang bertentangan dengannya, tetapi ia tidak menetapkan Hukum baharu yang tidak ditetapkan oleh Daleel. Oleh itu, jika para waris menuntut pembahagian harta lelaki yang hilang itu, kita menolak tuntutan mereka sebagaimana kita menolak permintaan isterinya untuk berkahwin semula. Itu kerana terdapat Ghalabat Azh-Zhann mengenai keadaannya yang masih hidup melalui Istishaab, dan keadaan itu berterusan sehingga yang bertentangan dengannya terbukti secara realiti (Haqeeqatan) atau pada Hukum. Namun, dari sudut lain, haknya untuk menerima pusaka daripada orang yang mewarisinya tidak ditetapkan jika dia mati, yang bertentangan dengan pandangan mereka yang mengatakan bahawa Al-Istishaab ialah Hujjah bagi (kedua-dua) penafian dan penetapan sebagaimana yang telah kami sebutkan sebelum ini. Itu kerana orang yang hilang, pada pandangan mereka, dilayan dan diuruskan sebagaimana orang yang masih hidup dari segi hak-haknya yang menjadi miliknya dan kewajipan-kewajipan yang dikenakan ke atasnya.

Secondly: Most of the Mutakallimeen and some of the Hanafiyah held that Al-Istishaab does not represent a Hujjah. This is because they viewed that the remaining of the Hukm upon what it is needs a Daleel to support it. That is because the Daleel establishing the Hukm for a reality from the realities is a Daleel for the existence of the Hukm and its establishment but not for its continuance and its remaining. Its continuance and remaining, in their opinion, requires another Daleel other than the one for its existence. So for instance, the missing man in the previously mentioned example, requires after a certain period, an evidence indicating that he is still alive. It is therefore a Hujjah of negation (Nafy) and not a Hujjah for affirmation (Ithbaat). This means that the established condition by way of Istishaab negates that which is contrary to it but it does not establish a new Hukm that the Daleel has not established. Therefore, if the inheritors demand the division of the missing man’s wealth and property we refuse their request just as we refuse the request of his wife to remarry. That is due to the Ghalabat Azh-Zhann in respect to him being alive through Istishaab and that continues until contrary to that is proven in reality (Haqeeqatan) or in respect to the Hukm. However, from another angle, his right to receive inheritance from the one he inherits from is not established if he dies which is contrary to the view of those who say that Al-Istishaab is a Hujjah for (both) the negation and the affirmation which we mentioned earlier. That is because the missing person, in their opinion, is treated and dealt with in accordance to the one who is living in respect to his rights that are his and the obligations that are upon him.