@phdthesis{digilib77903,
           month = {July},
           title = {MENGGABUNGKAN NIAT ?AQIQAH DAN QURBAN (STUDI KOMPARATIF IMAM AR-RAMLI DAN IMAM IBNU HAJAR},
          school = {UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA},
          author = {NIM.: 19103060001 M. Arif Wahyudi},
            year = {2026},
            note = {Husnul Khitam, LC. M.H.},
        keywords = {Aqiqah, Qurban, Imam Ramli, Imam Ibn Hajar Al-Haitami, Ijtihad Maqasidi},
             url = {https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/77903/},
        abstract = {This research discusses the legal status of combining the intentions of ?aq{\=i}qah and
qurb{\=a}n in a single sacrificial animal according to Imam Ar-Raml{\=i} and Imam Ibnu
{\d H}ajar al-Haitam{\=i} within the Shafi?i school. There is no explicit Qur?anic verse or
hadith that allows or forbids this combination, while the community needs a more
economically feasible form of worship. The study aims to describe the opinions of
both scholars, explain the legal reasoning they use, and analyze them through the
perspective of maq{\=a}{\d s}id{\=i} ijtihad by Imam al-Sy{\=a}{\d t}ib{\=i}.
This is a comparative descriptive-analytical library research with a normative
approach. The primary sources are Nih{\=a}yatul Mu{\d h}t{\=a}j il{\=a} Syar{\d h} al-Minh{\=a}j (Imam
Ar-Raml{\=i}) and Tuhfatul Mu{\d h}t{\=a}j bi Syar{\d h} al-Minh{\=a}j (Imam Ibnu {\d H}ajar al-Haitam{\=i}),
while secondary sources include fiqh books, hadiths, books, journals, and relevant
articles.
The results show that Imam Ar-Raml{\=i} permits combining the intentions of ?aq{\=i}qah
and qurb{\=a}n in one animal because both are considered similar acts, whereas Imam
Ibnu {\d H}ajar al-Haitam{\=i} rejects it due to their different objectives. This difference
stems from their ijtihad methods: Ar-Raml{\=i} emphasizes qiy{\=a}s (analogy) and
public benefit, while Ibnu {\d H}ajar emphasizes caution in preserving the specific
objectives of each worship. According to Imam al-Sy{\=a}{\d t}ib{\=i}?s maq{\=a}{\d s}id{\=i} ijtihad, Ar-
Raml{\=i}?s opinion aligns with facilitating ({\d h}{\=a}jiyy{\=a}t), while Ibnu {\d H}ajar emphasizes
maintaining the primary purpose ({\d d}ar{\=u}riyy{\=a}t). In conclusion, Ibnu {\d H}ajar?s view is
considered more in line with maq{\=a}{\d s}id al-shar{\=i}?ah in preserving the essential
objectives of ?aq{\=i}qah and qurb{\=a}n.}
}