This study examines the contrasting approaches to enforcing ḥudūd punishments during the time of the Prophet Muhammad and his companions. While Quranic texts and hadiths advocate for strict application, historical practices often reflect a reluctance to implement such penalties. This research investigates and highlights the critical role of the legal maxim idrau al-ḥudūd bi-al-shubuhāt (averting hudud punishments in cases of doubt) in shaping the actions of the Prophet and his companions. The study also critically evaluates the emergence and development of this legal principle during the Tābi’ūn period, focusing on the influence of jurists from Kufa. Scholars such as Joseph Schacht and Maribel Fierro have argued that these jurists played a crucial role in formulating the maxim, particularly mitigating punishments for influential individuals. Using a historical-analytical approach, the study draws from primary Islamic legal sources, hadith collections, and juristic texts alongside modern scholarship. The findings demonstrate that the principle of doubt profoundly impacted the application of ḥudūd punishments and gained prominence during the Tābi’ūn period, primarily due to its strategic use by Kufa jurists to mitigate the severity of penalties in certain instances.

Abstrak:

Penelitian ini mengkaji pendekatan yang berbeda dalam penerapan hukuman ḥudūd pada masa Nabi Muhammad dan para sahabatnya. Meskipun ayat-ayat Al-Qur'an dan hadits menekankan penerapan ketat hukuman ilahi ini, riwayat alternatif dan praktik para sahabat menunjukkan kecenderungan untuk menghindari penerapan hukuman tersebut kapan pun memungkinkan. Penelitian ini menyelidiki ketegangan ini dan menyoroti peran penting kaidah hukum "idrau al-ḥudūd bi-al-shubuhāt" (menghindari hukuman hudud dalam kasus-kasus keraguan) dalam membentuk tindakan Nabi dan para sahabatnya. Studi ini juga secara kritis mengevaluasi kemunculan dan perkembangan kaidah hukum ini selama periode Tābi’ūn, dengan fokus pada pengaruh para ahli hukum Kufa. Para sarjana seperti Joseph Schacht dan Maribel Fierro berpendapat bahwa ahli hukum ini memainkan peran penting dalam merumuskan kaidah tersebut, khususnya dalam mengurangi hukuman bagi individu-individu berpengaruh. Dengan menganalisis konteks sejarah dan penerapan kaidah ini, penelitian ini menangani kesenjangan signifikan dalam literatur terkait evolusi prinsip keraguan dalam penerapan ḥudūd. Menggunakan pendekatan historis-analitis, penelitian ini menggunakan sumber-sumber hukum Islam primer, koleksi hadits, dan teks-teks yuridis bersama dengan kajian modern. Temuan penelitian menunjukkan bahwa prinsip keraguan sangat mempengaruhi penerapan hukuman ḥudūd dan memperoleh ketenaran selama periode Tābi’ūn, terutama karena penggunaannya yang strategis oleh para ahli hukum Kufa untuk mengurangi tingkat hukuman dalam beberapa kasus.  

Abī Shaybah, ʻAbd Allāh Ibn Muḥammad Ibn Ibrāhīm. (2004). Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah (Vol. 5). al-Rushd.

Abī Shaybah, ʻAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad ibn. (1409). Al-Kitāb al-muṣannaf fī al-aḥādīth wa-al-āthār (Vol. 5). Maktabat al-Rushd.

Ābidīn, M. A. (1992). Radd al-muḥtār ʻalá al-Durr al-Mukhtār (Vol. 4). Dār al-Fikr al-ʻArabī.

Abū Dāwūd, S. ibn al-A. ibn I. (2009). Sunan Abī Dāwūd (Vol. 4). Dār al-Kitāb al-ʻArabī.

Al-Ḥamawī, A. ibn M. A. al-ʻAbbās S. al-Dīn. (1985). Ghmz ʻUyūn al-Baṣāʼir fī sharḥ al-Ashbāh wa-al-naẓāʼir (Vol. 1). Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah.

Al-Hindī, ʻAlāʼ al-Dīn ʻAlī ibn Ḥusām al-Dīn Ibn Qāḍī Khān. (1401). Kanz al-ʻUmmāl fī Sunan al-aqwāl wa-al-afʻāl (Vol. 5). Muʼassasat al-Risālah.

Al-Itlidi, M. B. (2004). Nawādir al-khulafāʼ al-mashhūr bi-« Iʻlām al-nās bi-mā waqaʻa llbrāmkh maʻa Banī al-ʻAbbās ». Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah.

Alhammadi, M.S. (2016). Ambiguity and Conflict in the Implementation of Evidence Law in Criminal Matters: a Study of the United Arab Emirates Jurisprudence. Asian Criminology 11, 155–178.

Al-Jawzīyah, M. ibn A. B. ibn S. S. al-D. I. Q. (2003). Al-Ṭuruq al-Ḥukmīyah. Maktabat Dār al-Bayān.

Al-Subkī, ʻAbd al-Wahhāb Tāj al-Dīn. (1991). Al-Ashbāh wa-al-naẓāʼir (Vol. 1). Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah.

Āmidī, ʻAlī ibn Muḥammad. (2003). Al-Iḥkām fī uṣūl al-aḥkām (Vol. 4). Maktabat al-Islāmī.

Aydın, A. (2014). Hanefî doktrininde hırsızlık suçunda şekil unsuru ve cezaî mesuliyete etkisi. İslam Hukuku Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24.

Aykul, A. (2022). İslam Ceza Hukukunda Taʻzīr “Suç ve Ceza Belirleme Siyaseti. Hikmetevi.

Azam, H. (2013). Rape as a variant of fornication (Zinā) Inislamic Law: An Examination of the Early Legal Reports. Journal of law and religion, 28(2), 441-466.

Bayhaqī, A. ibn al-Ḥusayn ibn ʻAlī. (2003). Sunan al-Kubrá (Vol. 8). Daru’l-kütübi’l-ilmiyye.

Bukhārī, A. ʻAbd A. M. I. I. I. (1422). Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (Vol. 4). Hamidiya Library.

Chibli, M. (2020). Mapping Saudi Criminal Law, The American Journal of Comparative Law, 836–892.

Dāraquṭnī, A. al-Ḥasan ʻAlī ibn ʻUmar ibn A. (2004). Sunan al-Dāraquṭnī (Vol. 4). Muʼassasat al-Risālah.

Ḍumayrīyah, J. ibn ʻUthmān. (2012). Naẓarīyat al-shubuhāt wa athrhā fī Darʼ al-ḥudūd. Majallat Al-Buḥūth al-Islāmīyah, 96.

Fetâvâ-yı Hindiyye (M. Efe, Trans.; Vol. 4). (1985). Akçağ Basım Yayım Pazarlama.

Fierro Bello & Isabel, M. (2007). Idrah’ū l-hudūd bi-l-shubuhāt: When Lawful Violence Meets Doubt. Journal of Women in the Middle East and the Islamic World, 5(2–3), 208–238. https://doi.org/10.1163/156920807782912517

Ḥanbal, A. ibn M. (2003). Musnad Aḥmad (Vol. 38). Muʼassasat al-Qurṭubah.

ʻUmarī, A. ibn Ḍiyāʼ. (2009). ʻAṣr al-khilāfah al-rāshidah muḥāwalah li-naqd al-riwāyah al-tārīkhīyah (Vol. 1). Maktabat al-ʻUbaykān.

Ibn Ḥazm, ʻAlī Ibn Aḥmad Ibn Saʻīd. (2001). Al-Muḥallá (Vol. 12). Dār al-Fikr.

Ibn Mājah, M. ibn Y. al-Rabʻī al-Qazwīnī. (2002). Sunan Ibn Mājah (Vol. 2). Dār Iḥyāʼ al-Kutub al-ʻArabīyah.

Ibn Taymīyah, A. ibn ʻAbd al-Ḥalīm I. ʻAbd A. T. al-Dīn. (1418). Al-Siyāsah al-sharʻīyah fī Iṣlāḥ al-Rāʻī wa-al-raʻīyah. Majmaʻ al-fiqh al-Islāmī.

İslam Hukukunda Örf ve Adet by Muhammed Hamidullah (Z. Aksu, Trans.). (2008). Hikmet Yurdu, 1(2).

Kadouf, H. A et al., (2015). Revisiting the Role of a Muftī in the Criminal Justice System in Africa: A Critical Appraisal of the Apostasy Case of Mariam Yahia Ibrahim. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 23, 1-18.

Katz, M. H. (2012). The Hadd Penalty for Zinā: Symbol or Deterrent? Texts from the Early Sixteenth Century. The Lineaments of Islam, 351-76.

Jaṣṣāṣ, A. B. al-Rāzī. (2010). Sharḥ Mukhtaṣar al-Ṭaḥāwī (Vol. 8). Dār al-Bashāʼir al-Islāmīyah.

Kāsānī, A. B. I. M. (1986). Badāʼiʻ al-ṣanāʼiʻ fī tartīb al-sharāʼiʻ (Vol. 7). Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah.

Khallikān, A. al-ʻAbbās S. al-D. A. (1978). Wafayāt al-aʻyān wʼnbāʼ abnāʼ al-Zamān (Vol. 6). Dār Ṣādir.

Mālik, A. ʻAbd A. M. ibn A. ibn. (1992). Muwaṭṭaʼ Mālik (1–2). Muʼassasat al-Risālah.

Māwardī, A. al-Ḥasan ʻAlī ibn M. (1999). Al-Ḥāwī al-kabīr (Vol. 9). Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah.

Mawṣilī, ʻAbd Allāh ibn Maḥmūd ibn Mawdūd. (1937). Al-Ikhtiyār li-taʻlīl al-Mukhtār (Vol. 4). Maṭbaʻat al-Ḥalabī.

Nasāʼī, A. ibn ʻAlī ibn S. A. ʻAbd al-Raḥmān. (2001). Sunan al-nisāʼī (Vol. 6). Dār al-Maʻrifah.

Nīsābūrī, A. al-Ḥusayn M. ibn al-Ḥajjāj. (1991). Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (Vol. 4). Daru’l-kütübi’l-ilmiyye.

Nujaym, Z. al-D. ibn I. ibn M. (1999). Al-Ashbāh wa-al-naẓāʼir ʻalá madhhab Abī Ḥanafīyah al-Nuʻmān. Daru’l-kütübi’l-ilmiyye.

Özen, Ş. (2006). Nehaî. In Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm Ansiklopedisi (Vol. 32). TDV Yayınları.

Özlü, Z. (2007). XVIII. ve XIX. Yüzyıllarda Osmanlı Devleti’nde Adli Mekanizmanın Analizi (Bolu Göynük örneği). Berikan Yayınları.

Qudūrī, A. al-Ḥusayn A. ibn. (1997). Mukhtaṣar al-Qudūrī. Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah.

Rabb, I. A. (2015). Reasonable Doubt in Islamic Law. Yale J. Int'l L., 40-41.

Rabb, I. A. (2009). Doubt’s benefit: Legal maxims in Islamic law, 7th-16th centuries. Princeton University.

Rabb, I. A. (2010). Islamic Legal Maxims as Substantive Canons of Construction: Ḥudūd-Avoidance in Cases of Doubt. Islamic Law and Society, 17.

Sadeghi, H. M. M. (2014). Filling the Gap in Favour of the Accused: The Approach of Islamic Criminal Law in Light of the Rule No Punishment in Case of Doubt. Tul. Eur. & Civ. LF, 29, 147.

Ramlī, S. al-D. M. ibn A. al-ʻAbbās A. (1984). Nihāyat al-muḥtāj ilá sharḥ al-Minhāj (Vol. 8). Dār al-Fikr.

Rushd, M. ibn A. ibn M. ibn A. (2004). Bidāyat al-mujtahid wa-nihāyat al-muqtaṣid (Vol. 4). Dār al-Hadis.

Sāmirī, A. B. M. ibn J. al-Kharāʼiṭī. (1999). Makārim al-akhlāq wa-maʻālīhā wa-Maḥmūd ṭarāʼiqihā. Dār al-Āfāq al-ʻArabīyah.

Ṣanʻānī, A. B. A. al-R. ibn H. (1401). Al-muṣannaf (Vol. 10). al-Majlis al-Ilmi.

Sarakhsī, A. B. M. I. A. I. S. al-Dīn. (1993). Al-Mabsūṭ (Vol. 9). Dār al-Maʻārif.

Schacht, J. (1967). The Origins of Muhammadan Jurispudence. Clarendon.

Suyūṭī, J. al-D. ʻAbd al-Raḥmān. (1990). Al-Ashbāh wa-al-naẓāʼir fī Qawāʻid wa-furūʻ fiqh al-Shāfiʻīyah. Dār al-Kutub al-ʻIlmīyah.

Tellenbach, S. (2014). Islamic criminal law. The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law, 248-268.

Yaʻqūb, A. Y. (1982). Kitāb al-Kharāj. Akçağ Basım Yayım Pazarlama.

Yektar, O. N. (2015). Hz. Peygamber’in suçlar hakkında uyguladığı temel prensipler. Namık Kemal Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, 1.

Zahrah, M. A. (1966). Falsafat al-ʻuqūbah fī al-fiqh al-Islāmī. Maʻhad al-dirāsah al-ʻArabīyah.

Zakariyah, L. (2012). Islamic Legal Maxims for Attainment of Maqasid-al-Shari‘ah in Criminal Law: Reflections on the Implications for Muslim Women in the Tension Between Shari‘ah and Western Law. In: Lovat, T. (eds) Women in Islam. Springer, Dordrecht.

Zarkashī, B. al-D. M. ibn ʻAbd A. (1985). Al-Manthūr fī al-qawāʻid al-fiqhīyah (Vol. 2). Wizārat al-Awqāf al-Kuwaytīyah.

Zaylaʻī, J. al-D. A. M. ʻAbd A. ibn Y. (1414). Takhrīj al-aḥādīth wa-al-āthār al-wāqiʻah fī tafsīr al-Kashshāf lil-Zamakhsharī (Vol. 2). Dār Ibn Khuzaymah.

Zuḥaylī, W. (1975). Al-Fiqh al-Islāmī wa-adillatuh (Vol. 4). Dār al-Fikr.