@phdthesis{digilib77484,
           month = {April},
           title = {HADIS {\d D}A?IF DALAM PRAKTIK KEAGAMAAN: ANALISIS PEMIKIRAN YUSUF AL-QARDAWI DAN ?ALI JUM?AH TERHADAP TRADISI Y{\=A}SINAN},
          school = {UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA},
          author = {NIM.: 21105050094 Ahmad Faza Fauzan},
            year = {2026},
            note = {Dadi Nurhaedi, S.Ag., M.Si.},
        keywords = {Hadis {\d d}a?{\=i}f; hujjah; Y{\=u}suf al-Qar{\d d}{\=a}w{\=i}; ?Al{\=i} Jum?ah; metodologi hadis},
             url = {https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/77484/},
        abstract = {This research comparatively examines the thought of Y{\=u}suf al-Qar{\d d}{\=a}w{\=i} and ?Al{\=i} Jum?ah regarding the status of weak ({\d d}a?{\=i}f) hadith as a valid source of evidence (hujjah) in Islamic law. The study departs from the classical scholarly debates concerning the legitimacy of employing weak hadith, particularly within the domains of practical jurisprudence, ethics, the merits of religious actions (fa{\d d}{\=a}?il al-a?m{\=a}l), and the establishment of legal rulings. Using a qualitative methodology based on library research, the author analyzes the primary works of both scholars, particularly Y{\=u}suf al-Qar{\d d}{\=a}w{\=i} Kaifa Nata?{\=a}mal ma?a al-Sunnah al-Nabawiyyah and ?Al{\=i} Jum?ah Al-Bay{\=a}n lim{\=a} Yusyghil al-Adzh{\=a}n, in addition to various relevant lectures, legal opinions (fatwa) and scholarly writings concerning the use of weak hadith.
The findings reveal that both Al-Qar{\d d}{\=a}w{\=i}and ?Al{\=i} Jum?ah acknowledge the admissibility of weak hadith, yet differ in scope and interpretive criteria. Al-Qaradawi permits the use of weak hadith exclusively in the context of Fa{\d d}{\=a}?il al-A?m{\=a}l, spiritual motivation, and matters unrelated to the establishment of binding legal rulings, provided that the degree of weakness is not severe and the content is supported by stronger Syar{\=i}?ah principles. ?Al{\=i} Jum?ah, on the other hand, presents a broader legitimization of weak hadith, even within certain areas of secondary jurisprudential rulings (fur{\=u}?), as long as the hadith does not contradict stronger evidence and is supported by classical scholarly tradition. He emphasizes the authority of transmission chains sustained by historical scholarly practice and the continuity of acceptance across intellectual traditions.
This comparison shows that Al-Qar{\d d}{\=a}w{\=i}tends to be more selective and methodological, while ?Al{\=i} Jum?ah is more inclusive and traditional in positioning weak hadith as a hujjah. This study produces findings that contribute to the development of contemporary hadith study methodology and enrich the epistemology of Islamic law by presenting two major approaches: the reformist approach and the traditional approach.}
}