Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan Entrance Exam Set

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study within Islamic universities like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. Specifically, it tests the ability to discern the appropriate methodology for deriving rulings when faced with novel situations not explicitly addressed in primary texts. The concept of *ijtihad* (independent legal reasoning) is central here. When a new issue arises, scholars must first attempt to find a direct ruling in the Quran and Sunnah. If none is found, they resort to analogical reasoning (*qiyas*), seeking a precedent with a common effective cause (*’illah*). However, for issues where the *’illah* is not readily apparent or where the complexity demands a broader consideration of public welfare and societal benefit, the principle of *maslahah mursalah* (unrestricted public interest) becomes a crucial tool. This principle allows for the consideration of general welfare, provided it does not contradict established Islamic principles. The other options represent either less direct methods or misapplications of jurisprudential tools. *Ijma’* (consensus) is only applicable when a consensus has already been formed. *Istihsan* (juristic preference) involves setting aside a direct analogy for a better ruling based on other juristic considerations, but *maslahah mursalah* is more directly applicable to novel public welfare concerns. *Sadd al-dhara’i’* (blocking the means to evil) is used to prevent potential harm, which is a related but distinct concept from promoting general welfare. Therefore, in addressing a modern issue like digital privacy, which directly impacts public well-being and has no explicit precedent, *maslahah mursalah* is the most fitting jurisprudential tool for deriving a ruling that balances individual rights with societal needs, aligning with the ethical and academic rigor expected at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan.

The question probes the understanding of the ethical framework governing Islamic finance, specifically how it addresses potential conflicts of interest in the context of a university endowment fund. The core principle here is the prohibition of *riba* (interest) and the emphasis on *sharia*-compliant investments. When a university endowment, like that of Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan, invests in a company that also engages in conventional (non-Islamic) financial activities, a potential conflict arises. The ethical imperative is to ensure that the *entirety* of the investment portfolio adheres to Islamic principles, even if the specific investment vehicle is designed to be *sharia*-compliant. This requires a rigorous due diligence process that scrutinizes not only the direct activities of the invested entity but also its broader financial dealings. The concept of *maslahah* (public interest) is also relevant, as the endowment’s purpose is to support the university’s mission, which is inherently aligned with societal good. However, the primary ethical consideration in this scenario is the avoidance of *haram* (forbidden) elements in the investment, particularly *riba*. Therefore, the most ethically sound approach for UNIKS Teluk Kuantan would be to divest from any entity whose core operations or significant revenue streams are derived from interest-based transactions, regardless of the specific fund’s compliance. This ensures the integrity of the endowment and its alignment with Islamic values, preventing any indirect participation in prohibited financial activities. The other options represent less stringent or misapplied ethical considerations. Focusing solely on the *fund’s* compliance without considering the *investee’s* overall operations overlooks the broader ethical implications. Similarly, prioritizing short-term financial gains over long-term ethical adherence would contradict the foundational principles of Islamic finance. Finally, seeking external legal opinions without a clear internal ethical framework for *sharia* compliance can lead to inconsistent or inadequate decision-making. The university’s commitment to Islamic principles necessitates a proactive and comprehensive approach to ethical investment.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, specifically within the context of Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan’s commitment to integrating faith with modern life. The scenario involves a community facing a resource scarcity issue, requiring a decision that balances immediate needs with long-term sustainability and adherence to Islamic ethical guidelines. The core concept being tested is *Maslahah* (public interest or welfare), a principle in Islamic law that allows for the consideration of broader benefits and the prevention of harm when interpreting or applying legal rulings. In this case, the decision to temporarily restrict access to a shared natural resource, even if it causes some inconvenience, can be justified by the principle of *Maslahah* if it prevents the complete depletion of the resource, thereby safeguarding the welfare of the entire community in the future. This aligns with the Islamic legal maxim: “Harm must be removed” (\( \text{الضرر يزال} \)). The other options represent less appropriate or incomplete applications of Islamic legal reasoning in this context. Prioritizing individual immediate benefit over collective long-term welfare would contradict the spirit of stewardship and social responsibility emphasized in Islamic teachings. A purely historical precedent without considering the current context and the principle of *Maslahah* would be insufficient. Relying solely on a literal interpretation of a general prohibition without considering the underlying purpose and potential harm would also be a misapplication of Islamic legal methodology, especially in a university like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan that encourages critical engagement with religious texts and their application. Therefore, the most robust justification for the community’s action, reflecting the academic rigor and ethical framework of Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan, is the principle of *Maslahah* aimed at preserving the collective good.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological advancement, a drone delivery service for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi. The ethical and legal permissibility of such a service, particularly concerning privacy, public welfare, and potential misuse, needs to be assessed through the lens of Islamic legal maxims and principles. The primary Islamic legal maxim relevant here is “Al-Maslahah Mursalah” (unrestricted public interest). This principle allows for rulings based on the general welfare of the community when there is no specific textual evidence from the Quran or Sunnah that directly addresses the issue, provided it does not contradict established Islamic principles. Drone delivery, if implemented responsibly, can significantly improve access to essential goods for underserved populations in Kuantan Singingi, thereby serving a clear public interest. Another relevant principle is “Dar’ al-Mafasid Awla min Jalb al-Masalih” (averting harm takes precedence over securing benefit). This principle requires careful consideration of potential negative consequences, such as privacy violations through aerial surveillance or the misuse of drones for illicit purposes. Therefore, any implementation must include robust safeguards and regulations. The concept of “Ijtihad” (independent legal reasoning) is also crucial, as scholars must engage in reasoned deliberation to derive rulings for novel situations. The question requires evaluating which approach best balances the potential benefits with the inherent risks, aligning with the academic rigor expected at UNIKS. Considering these principles, the most appropriate approach is to permit the drone delivery service under strict regulatory oversight that addresses potential harms, thereby maximizing the public benefit while mitigating risks. This aligns with the dynamic application of Islamic law to modern contexts, a hallmark of Islamic scholarship.

The question assesses the understanding of the core principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a key area of study within Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan’s programs. The scenario involves a community facing a novel ethical dilemma related to digital currency, which requires an understanding of how established Islamic legal maxims (Qawa’id Fiqhiyyah) are utilized to derive rulings for unprecedented situations. The principle of “Al-Mashaqqatu Tajlibu At-Taysir” (hardship begets ease) is central here. When faced with a situation that presents significant difficulty or inconvenience if a strict interpretation of existing rulings were applied, Islamic law permits a more lenient approach to alleviate that hardship. In the context of digital currency, which offers potential economic benefits and accessibility but also carries inherent risks and complexities not explicitly addressed in classical texts, applying this maxim allows for the exploration of permissible avenues for its use. This involves careful consideration of the currency’s underlying structure, its potential for exploitation, and its impact on the broader economic and social fabric, all within the framework of Sharia objectives (Maqasid al-Shariah). The other options represent principles that, while important in Fiqh, are not the primary basis for addressing novel hardships in this manner. “Al-Yaqin La Yuzalu Bi Al-Shakk” (certainty is not removed by doubt) relates to presumption of innocence or continuity. “Al-Dharar Yuzalu” (harm must be removed) is a broader principle that is encompassed by the ease-seeking maxim in this specific context of overcoming a novel difficulty. “Al-Hurriyatu Muqayyadah Bi Al-Adl” (freedom is conditioned by justice) is a fundamental concept but doesn’t directly address the mechanism for finding a solution to a new hardship. Therefore, the ability to navigate and adapt legal rulings to new circumstances through established jurisprudential tools like the hardship maxim is crucial for students at UNIKS Teluk Kuantan.

The question assesses understanding of the principles of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning in Islamic jurisprudence) and its application within the framework of Islamic legal methodology, a core concept for students at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a contemporary issue not explicitly addressed in foundational texts, requiring the application of established principles to derive a ruling. The correct answer, focusing on the consensus of contemporary scholars who have engaged in rigorous *ijtihad* using established methodologies, reflects the university’s emphasis on bridging traditional Islamic scholarship with modern challenges. This involves considering the *maqasid al-shari’ah* (objectives of Islamic law), analogical reasoning (*qiyas*), and the principle of public interest (*maslahah*). The other options represent less rigorous or methodologically unsound approaches, such as blind adherence to outdated interpretations without re-evaluation, prioritizing personal opinion over established scholarly consensus, or misapplying principles of analogy to unrelated contexts. The university’s academic environment encourages critical engagement with Islamic texts and the development of reasoned legal opinions that are both faithful to tradition and relevant to contemporary life in regions like Kuantan Singingi.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study within the Sharia programs at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological development, a decentralized digital currency, which raises questions about its permissibility (halal/haram) within Islamic finance. To determine the ruling, a jurist would employ established methodologies. The primary sources of Islamic law are the Quran and the Sunnah. However, for novel issues not explicitly addressed, secondary sources and interpretative principles are crucial. The concept of ‘urf’ (custom or prevalent practice) is a significant juristic tool, allowing for the consideration of societal norms and practices that do not contradict the primary texts. In the context of digital currencies, the prevailing understanding and acceptance within the community, alongside the absence of explicit prohibition in the Quran or Sunnah, would be weighed. Furthermore, the principles of ‘maslahah’ (public interest) and ‘mafsadah’ (harm) are paramount. If a digital currency demonstrably serves a public good and does not lead to significant societal harm or violate established Islamic economic principles (like prohibition of riba or excessive gharar), its permissibility is more likely. The concept of ‘qiyas’ (analogical reasoning) might be used to draw parallels with existing permissible or impermissible financial instruments, though the unique nature of digital currencies can make direct analogies challenging. The principle of ‘istihsan’ (juristic preference) could also be invoked if a particular ruling, while not strictly derived from analogy, is deemed more beneficial or less burdensome for the community. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis would involve examining the currency’s underlying technology, its economic impact, its alignment with Islamic ethical values, and its societal acceptance, all through the lens of Usul al-Fiqh principles. The most encompassing approach, therefore, is the application of ‘urf’ and ‘maslahah’ to assess the permissibility of such an innovation within the framework of Islamic finance, reflecting the nuanced approach taught at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan.

The question probes the understanding of the principles of *ijtihad* and its application within Islamic jurisprudence, a core tenet relevant to the academic environment of Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. *Ijtihad* refers to the independent reasoning of a qualified scholar to derive legal rulings from the primary sources of Islam (Quran and Sunnah) when a clear ruling is not found. The scenario describes a contemporary issue concerning environmental stewardship, a topic increasingly emphasized in Islamic discourse and relevant to UNIKS’s potential focus on sustainable development and ethical living. The challenge is to identify the most appropriate methodological approach for addressing this novel situation. The principle of *qiyas* (analogical reasoning) is a fundamental tool in *ijtihad*. It involves deriving a ruling for a new case by comparing it to an existing case for which a ruling is established, provided there is a common effective cause (*’illah*). In this scenario, the pollution of the Batanghari River by industrial waste presents a new challenge. However, there are established Islamic legal principles concerning the prohibition of causing harm (*dharar*) and the importance of preserving natural resources, which are considered essential for human well-being and are implicitly protected by Sharia. These principles can be traced back to clear injunctions in the Quran and Sunnah regarding the responsible use of God’s creation. Therefore, applying *qiyas* to derive a ruling on the permissibility and ethical obligations related to industrial waste disposal in the Batanghari River would involve identifying an existing case with a similar underlying cause of harm or transgression against established principles. For instance, historical rulings on preventing the dumping of harmful substances into public water sources or the prohibition of actions that lead to widespread damage can serve as analogies. The common *’illah* would be the act of causing significant environmental harm and jeopardizing public health and the ecosystem. This systematic application of analogical reasoning, grounded in established legal maxims and the overarching objectives of Sharia (*maqasid al-Shari’ah*), is the most robust method for generating a contemporary ruling on this environmental issue within an Islamic legal framework. Other methods like *istihsan* (juristic preference) or *urf* (custom) might be considered in conjunction, but *qiyas* provides the foundational logical bridge from established principles to the new situation.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary ethical dilemmas, a core area of study within Islamic studies programs at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a modern technological advancement, artificial intelligence (AI) in legal decision-making, and its potential conflict with established Islamic legal maxims. The correct answer, “The principle of ‘al-maslahah al-mursalah’ (public interest with no specific textual basis) can be invoked to permit AI in legal processes if it demonstrably serves the broader welfare and justice, provided safeguards against bias and error are rigorously implemented,” directly addresses how a flexible yet principled approach within Usul al-Fiqh can accommodate new realities. This maxim allows for the consideration of public good even in the absence of explicit Quranic or Sunnah injunctions, making it the most appropriate framework for evaluating novel situations like AI in law. The explanation emphasizes the critical condition of ensuring fairness and accuracy, aligning with the Islamic emphasis on justice (‘adl) and the avoidance of harm (‘darar’). Other options represent less fitting or incomplete applications of Usul al-Fiqh principles. For instance, relying solely on ‘qiyas’ (analogical reasoning) might be insufficient given the unique nature of AI. ‘Istihsan’ (juristic preference) could be considered, but ‘al-maslahah al-mursalah’ offers a more direct justification for adopting a beneficial innovation that serves the public good. The concept of ‘urf’ (custom) is relevant for societal norms but less directly applicable to the jurisprudential permissibility of a specific technological tool in a legal context. The core of the answer lies in balancing innovation with established Islamic ethical and legal frameworks, a key pedagogical goal at UNIKS.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study within Islamic universities like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario presents a situation where a new technology, a drone delivery service for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi, raises questions about its permissibility (halal) and ethical implications within an Islamic framework. To determine the correct answer, one must analyze the established methodologies for deriving Islamic rulings (hukm shar’i) for novel matters. The primary sources of Islamic law are the Quran and Sunnah. However, for issues not explicitly addressed, jurists employ secondary sources and methodologies. Ijma’ (consensus of scholars) and Qiyas (analogical reasoning) are crucial. Ijtihad (independent reasoning) by qualified scholars is also vital. The concept of Maslahah Mursalah (public interest where no specific text exists) is particularly relevant for modern innovations that benefit society. In this scenario, the drone delivery service aims to improve access to necessities, aligning with the principle of Maslahah. The permissibility would hinge on whether the drone’s operation violates any explicit prohibitions (haram) found in the Quran or Sunnah, such as causing harm, invasion of privacy, or facilitating illicit activities. If no such prohibition exists, and the service demonstrably serves a public good without contravening established Islamic ethical guidelines, then it would likely be considered permissible. The process of determining this involves a rigorous application of Usul al-Fiqh principles by qualified scholars. This would involve examining the potential harms and benefits, comparing it to analogous permissible activities, and considering the overall welfare of the community. Therefore, the most appropriate approach to ascertain the ruling is through a comprehensive scholarly deliberation that employs established jurisprudential tools, prioritizing the welfare of the community in Kuantan Singingi.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study within programs at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a modern technological advancement, digital currency, and its implications for Islamic financial ethics. To determine the most appropriate approach for UNIKS students, one must consider the established methodologies for deriving Islamic rulings. The primary sources of Islamic law are the Quran and the Sunnah. However, for novel issues not explicitly addressed in these primary texts, jurists employ secondary sources and methodologies. These include Ijma (consensus of scholars), Qiyas (analogical reasoning), Istihsan (juristic preference), and Maslahah Mursalah (public interest). In the context of digital currency, which is a recent phenomenon, direct textual evidence from the Quran and Sunnah is absent. Therefore, the ruling must be derived through reasoned interpretation and application of established principles. Qiyas, or analogical reasoning, would involve comparing digital currency to existing forms of currency or commodities that have established rulings in Islamic law. However, the unique nature of digital currency, particularly its decentralized and intangible characteristics, makes direct Qiyas challenging. Istihsan, while allowing for flexibility, is often applied when strict adherence to analogy leads to an undesirable outcome. Maslahah Mursalah, which focuses on securing public benefit and preventing harm, becomes a particularly relevant methodology. The potential benefits of digital currency, such as increased financial inclusion, efficiency in transactions, and economic development, align with the Islamic principle of promoting welfare (maslahah). Conversely, potential harms, such as volatility, lack of regulation, and potential for illicit activities, must also be considered. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment of the maslahah (benefit) versus the mafsadah (harm) is crucial. This approach allows for a nuanced ruling that can adapt to the evolving nature of digital currencies, ensuring that their use is consistent with the broader objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Sharia), which include the preservation of religion, life, intellect, lineage, and property. This aligns with UNIKS’s commitment to integrating Islamic teachings with modern knowledge to address societal needs responsibly.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) as applied to contemporary ethical dilemmas, a core area of study within the Faculty of Sharia at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a common contemporary issue: the use of digital platforms for disseminating religious discourse. The correct answer, “Ijtihad based on established Usul al-Fiqh principles,” reflects the process by which Islamic scholars derive rulings on novel matters. Usul al-Fiqh (principles of jurisprudence) provides the methodological framework for ijtihad (independent reasoning). Scholars analyze the Quran and Sunnah, consider consensus (ijma), analogical reasoning (qiyas), and other established sources to form judgments. In this case, the dissemination of religious content online requires careful consideration of its potential benefits (da’wah, education) and harms (misinformation, fitnah), necessitating a rigorous ijtihadi approach grounded in the established methodologies of Islamic legal reasoning to ensure adherence to Sharia. Other options are less appropriate. “Strict adherence to historical fatwas without contextual adaptation” would ignore the evolving nature of technology and its societal impact, failing to address the nuances of the digital realm. “Prioritizing popular opinion over scholarly consensus” directly contradicts the principles of Islamic legal authority, where scholarly consensus and reasoned deliberation hold precedence over mere popularity. “Reliance solely on anecdotal evidence from social media influencers” bypasses the rigorous scholarly methodology required for deriving Islamic rulings, as it lacks the systematic analysis and validation inherent in Usul al-Fiqh. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for a student at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan, particularly within a Sharia-focused program, would be to engage in ijtihad utilizing the established principles of Usul al-Fiqh.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied within the context of a contemporary Islamic university like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. Specifically, it tests the candidate’s ability to discern the primary source of legal reasoning when faced with a novel issue not explicitly addressed in the Quran or Sunnah. In Usul al-Fiqh, Ijma’ (consensus of scholars) and Qiyas (analogical reasoning) are secondary sources. Ijma’ refers to the unanimous agreement of Muslim jurists on a particular legal issue. Qiyas involves deriving a ruling for a new case by comparing it to an existing case that has a clear ruling in the primary sources, provided there is a common effective cause (illah). However, when a situation arises that is entirely unprecedented and cannot be directly analogized, and there is no existing consensus, the principle of Istihsan (juristic preference) or Maslahah Mursalah (unrestricted public interest) might be considered, but these are often debated in their application and hierarchy. The most direct and universally accepted method for deriving a ruling in the absence of explicit textual evidence and a clear analogical link is to refer to the underlying objectives and wisdom of Sharia (Maqasid al-Sharia) to infer a ruling that aligns with the broader spirit and purpose of Islamic law, which aims to protect faith, life, intellect, lineage, and property. Therefore, understanding the hierarchy and application of these sources is crucial for a student of Islamic studies.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied in contemporary contexts, particularly within an Indonesian Islamic university setting like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University (UNIKS) Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a novel ethical dilemma concerning digital asset inheritance, which requires the application of established jurisprudential methodologies. The core of the problem lies in determining the appropriate source and method for deriving a ruling. Islamic legal reasoning prioritizes the Quran and Sunnah as primary sources. When faced with new issues not explicitly addressed in these primary texts, scholars resort to secondary sources and analogical reasoning (Qiyas), consensus (Ijma’), or juristic preference (Istihsan) and public interest (Maslahah). In this case, digital assets, being intangible and modern, are not directly mentioned. Therefore, the most appropriate approach involves deriving rulings from the underlying principles of inheritance and property rights found in the Quran and Sunnah, and then applying established juristic methodologies to these new circumstances. This involves careful consideration of the nature of digital assets and their parallels with existing legal categories, such as movable property or rights, and then applying the rules of inheritance accordingly. The process necessitates a deep understanding of the objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Shari’ah) to ensure that the derived ruling serves the overall welfare and justice.

The question probes the understanding of Islamic jurisprudence concerning the ethical considerations of financial transactions within the context of modern economic practices, specifically as they might be applied at an institution like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The core concept revolves around the prohibition of *riba* (usury or interest) and the principles of *gharar* (excessive uncertainty or speculation) and *maysir* (gambling). When considering a scenario involving a digital currency, the primary ethical concern from an Islamic finance perspective, particularly relevant to the academic rigor expected at UNIKS, is the potential for excessive uncertainty and the absence of tangible underlying assets that could be construed as *gharar*. While the speculative nature of cryptocurrencies is often debated, the lack of a clear, Sharia-compliant underlying asset or a tangible economic activity that generates the value, coupled with the inherent volatility and the potential for it to be used in ways that resemble gambling (*maysir*), makes its permissibility highly questionable. Therefore, the most significant ethical hurdle, aligning with the scholarly traditions emphasized at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan, is the presence of excessive uncertainty and the potential for it to facilitate gambling-like activities, rather than simply the concept of interest itself, which is more directly addressed by traditional Islamic banking instruments. The other options, while related to financial ethics, do not capture the most salient and debated issue in contemporary Islamic finance regarding digital assets. The lack of a clear physical asset is a component of *gharar*, but the broader concept of excessive uncertainty encompasses more than just the physical backing. The potential for money laundering is a legal and ethical concern across all financial systems, not exclusive to Islamic finance’s core prohibitions. The volatility, while a characteristic, is a manifestation of the underlying uncertainty.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary ethical dilemmas, a core area of study within Islamic studies programs at institutions like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University (UNIKS) Teluk Kuantan. The scenario presents a situation where a new technology, while offering significant societal benefits, also carries potential risks. The task is to identify the most appropriate jurisprudential principle for guiding decision-making in such a context. The principle of *Maslahah* (public interest or welfare) is paramount in Islamic legal reasoning when dealing with novel issues where direct textual evidence from the Quran or Sunnah might be scarce or require interpretation. *Maslahah* involves considering the overall benefit and prevention of harm to the community. In this scenario, the technology’s potential to improve public health and economic stability represents a clear public interest. However, the associated risks, such as data privacy breaches or potential misuse, necessitate a careful balancing act. The other options represent related but less encompassing principles or are misapplications of jurisprudential concepts in this specific context. *Sad al-Dhara’i* (blocking the means to evil) is relevant for preventing harm, but it is often a secondary consideration to establishing a clear benefit. *Ijtihad* (independent legal reasoning) is the *method* used to derive rulings, not the principle itself that guides the decision. *Qiyas* (analogical reasoning) is applicable when a new case can be directly analogized to a precedent, which might not be the primary approach for a truly novel technological advancement. Therefore, *Maslahah* best captures the overarching ethical and legal framework for evaluating the introduction of such a technology, aligning with the emphasis on societal well-being that is central to Islamic scholarship at UNIKS Teluk Kuantan.

The question assesses understanding of the principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study within Islamic universities like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological development, a drone delivery service for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi. The core issue is determining the permissibility (hukm) of this service from an Islamic legal perspective. To arrive at the correct answer, one must consider the established methodologies within Usul al-Fiqh for deriving rulings on novel matters. The primary sources of Islamic law are the Quran and Sunnah. However, for new issues not explicitly addressed, jurists rely on secondary sources and principles. The concept of *maslahah* (public interest or welfare) is crucial here. Islamic jurisprudence emphasizes the preservation of life, intellect, lineage, religion, and property. Drone delivery directly addresses the need for accessibility and timely provision of essential goods, thereby serving the public interest and potentially safeguarding these fundamental objectives. The principle of *urf* (custom or prevailing practice) is also relevant, as technological adoption often becomes a societal norm. Furthermore, the concept of *istihsan* (juristic preference) allows for a departure from a strict analogy if it leads to a more beneficial outcome for the community. In this case, the benefits of efficient delivery in challenging terrains, improving quality of life, and ensuring access to necessities outweigh potential minor concerns that can be managed through regulation. The other options are less suitable. While *qiyas* (analogy) is a valid method, finding a direct, precise analogy for drone delivery might be challenging, and *maslahah* often takes precedence in cases of public welfare. *Ijma* (consensus) is not applicable as this is a new issue. Relying solely on *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) without grounding it in established principles like *maslahah* or *urf* would be insufficient for a robust legal determination. Therefore, the most comprehensive and appropriate approach is to consider the overall benefit and societal welfare, which is encapsulated by the principle of *maslahah*.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a novel technological advancement, the “Bio-Regenerative Organ Synthesis” (BROS) system, which raises ethical and legal questions within an Islamic framework. To determine the appropriate ruling, a jurist would first identify the relevant legal sources (Qur’an and Sunnah). Since direct textual evidence for BROS is absent, the jurist would then employ analogical reasoning (Qiyas) or consider established legal maxims (Qawa’id Fiqhiyyah). The principle of “Maslahah Mursalah” (public interest) is particularly relevant here, as it allows for rulings on matters not explicitly addressed in the primary texts, provided they serve a clear and substantial public benefit and do not contradict established Islamic principles. The BROS system, by potentially saving lives and alleviating suffering, aligns with the overarching objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Shari’ah), which include the preservation of life (Hifz al-Nafs). Therefore, assessing the permissibility of BROS would involve weighing its potential benefits against any perceived harms or contradictions with Islamic ethics, prioritizing the preservation of life and public welfare. The concept of “Ijtihad” (independent legal reasoning) is also crucial, as it empowers qualified scholars to derive rulings on new issues. The most appropriate approach, therefore, involves a comprehensive analysis of the technology’s implications through the lens of these established jurisprudential tools, with a strong emphasis on the principle of public interest and the preservation of life.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study within Islamic universities like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. Specifically, it tests the ability to discern the appropriate methodology for deriving rulings when faced with novel situations not explicitly addressed in primary texts. The principle of *maslahah mursalah* (public interest considered independently of a specific text) is crucial here. When a new issue arises, such as the ethical implications of digital currency transactions, scholars first consult the Quran and Sunnah. If no direct ruling is found, they then consider *ijma* (consensus) and *qiyas* (analogy). However, for issues where these are not directly applicable or sufficiently clear, *maslahah mursalah* allows for the consideration of general welfare and the prevention of harm, provided it does not contradict established Islamic principles. This method is particularly relevant in fields like Islamic finance and contemporary legal studies offered at UNIKS. The other options represent valid but less directly applicable or secondary principles in this specific scenario. *Istihsan* (juristic preference) is used to depart from a strict analogy when it leads to an undesirable outcome, but *maslahah mursalah* is more direct for establishing a ruling based on overall benefit. *Sad al-dhara’i’* (blocking the means to evil) is about preventing potential harm by prohibiting actions that could lead to prohibited acts, which is a preventative measure rather than a primary method for establishing a ruling on a new positive practice. *Ijtihad* is the general process of independent reasoning, but *maslahah mursalah* is a specific tool within that process for dealing with novel issues of public welfare. Therefore, understanding the hierarchy and application of these principles is key to navigating complex ethical and legal questions in modern Islamic scholarship, a hallmark of education at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied in contemporary legal and ethical discourse, particularly within an academic environment like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University (UNIKS). The scenario presents a conflict between a traditional interpretation of religious obligation and a modern societal need, requiring an analysis of how Islamic legal reasoning addresses such dilemmas. The core of the issue lies in the application of jurisprudential tools like *ijtihad* (independent legal reasoning) and the consideration of *maslahah* (public interest) when faced with novel situations not explicitly covered in primary texts. The principle of *istihsan* (juristic preference) can also be relevant, allowing for a departure from a strict analogy if it leads to a more beneficial outcome for the community, provided it doesn’t contradict clear textual evidence. The concept of *urf* (custom) is also crucial, as it acknowledges the role of prevailing societal norms in legal interpretation, provided they do not contravene Islamic principles. Therefore, a nuanced approach that balances textual fidelity with the pragmatic needs of the community, guided by established jurisprudential methodologies, is essential for resolving such conflicts in a manner consistent with the objectives of Islamic law (*maqasid al-shari’ah*). The correct answer emphasizes the dynamic application of these principles to ensure the relevance and efficacy of Islamic teachings in diverse contexts, a key aspect of legal scholarship at institutions like UNIKS.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario presents a hypothetical situation involving the ethical considerations of utilizing advanced artificial intelligence for judicial decision-making in a context that requires adherence to Islamic legal frameworks. The correct answer, “Ijtihad Mu’tabar,” refers to the rigorous and well-founded scholarly effort to derive legal rulings from primary sources (Quran and Sunnah) and secondary sources (Ijma and Qiyas) when faced with novel issues. This process is crucial for ensuring that new technologies and societal developments are addressed within the ethical and legal boundaries of Islam. The other options represent less appropriate or incomplete approaches. “Taqlid” (blind adherence to established opinions) would stifle innovation and the necessary adaptation of Islamic law to modern contexts. “Istihsan” (juristic preference) can be a valid tool but is often employed when a direct analogy leads to an undesirable outcome, and it is a secondary method compared to the comprehensive nature of Ijtihad. “Qiyas” (analogical reasoning) is a fundamental tool within Ijtihad, but the question requires a broader concept encompassing the entire process of deriving rulings for a complex, unprecedented issue, which is the essence of Ijtihad. Therefore, the most fitting approach for UNIKS, with its emphasis on integrating Islamic scholarship with contemporary relevance, is to engage in a robust and scholarly Ijtihad Mu’tabar.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological advancement, a drone delivery system for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi. The ethical and legal permissibility of such a system, particularly concerning privacy, public welfare, and the potential for misuse, needs to be evaluated through the lens of Islamic legal maxims (Qawa’id Fiqhiyyah). The maxim “Al-Mashaqqatu Tajlibu al-Taysir” (Hardship necessitates ease) is directly relevant. The drone delivery system aims to alleviate the hardship faced by communities in remote areas who have difficulty accessing essential goods. This maxim allows for the relaxation of strict rules or the adoption of innovative solutions when facing significant difficulties. The maxim “Dar’ al-Mafasid Awla min Jallb al-Masalih” (Averting harm is preferred over achieving benefit) is also crucial. While the drone system offers benefits, its potential negative consequences, such as privacy violations or misuse, must be carefully considered and mitigated. The Islamic legal framework prioritizes preventing harm. The maxim “Al-Umuru bi Maqasidiha” (Deeds are judged by their intentions) is applicable in assessing the purpose behind the drone deployment. If the intention is genuinely to serve the public good and alleviate hardship, it aligns with Islamic ethical principles. However, the maxim “La Darara wa la Dirar” (No harm and no reciprocal harm) is the most encompassing principle here. The implementation of the drone system must ensure it does not introduce new harms or exacerbate existing ones, especially concerning the privacy of individuals and the sanctity of private spaces, which are highly valued in Islamic tradition. Therefore, while the system addresses hardship, its implementation must be carefully regulated to prevent any form of harm or violation of rights. The question requires an understanding of how these principles interact to guide decision-making in novel situations, reflecting UNIKS’s commitment to integrating Islamic scholarship with modern challenges.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological development, a drone delivery service for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi. The ethical and legal permissibility of such a service, particularly concerning privacy, public safety, and economic impact on local couriers, requires careful consideration of Islamic legal maxims and sources of law. The primary source for deriving rulings in Islam, after the Quran and Sunnah, is Ijma (consensus of scholars) and Qiyas (analogical reasoning). However, when dealing with novel situations not explicitly addressed in the primary texts, the principles of Istihsan (juristic preference) and Maslahah Mursalah (unrestricted public interest) become crucial. Istihsan allows for a departure from a strict analogical ruling if it leads to a more beneficial or less burdensome outcome for the community. Maslahah Mursalah permits the derivation of rulings based on the general welfare of the community, provided they do not contradict established Islamic principles. In this drone delivery scenario, the potential benefits include improved access to goods for isolated communities, which aligns with the principle of Maslahah. However, concerns about privacy (surveillance potential of drones) and economic disruption (impact on local delivery personnel) must be weighed. The concept of “Dar’ al-Mafasid Awla min Jalb al-Masalih” (averting harm is preferred over securing benefit) is also relevant. A ruling that prioritizes the overall welfare, addresses potential harms through regulation, and considers the economic well-being of the local population, while still allowing for the benefits of the technology, would be the most aligned with Islamic legal methodology. This involves a nuanced application of Maslahah Mursalah, potentially tempered by Istihsan to ensure the ruling is practical and beneficial.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study within Islamic universities like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological development, a drone delivery system for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi, which presents novel legal and ethical considerations. To determine the permissibility (hukm) of such a system, scholars would typically employ a hierarchical approach to legal reasoning. The primary sources of Islamic law are the Quran and the Sunnah. If a direct ruling is not found, secondary sources and principles are utilized. In this case, the concept of *maslahah* (public interest) is paramount. The drone delivery system aims to serve a clear public good by ensuring access to necessities, thereby fulfilling the objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Shariah), specifically the preservation of life and well-being. The principle of *urf* (custom or prevailing practice) might also be considered if drone usage becomes a common and accepted practice, provided it doesn’t contradict established Islamic principles. Furthermore, the juristic maxim *al-ashl fi al-ashya’ al-ibahah hatta yadhurru al-tahrim* (the origin of things is permissibility until proven otherwise) suggests that new innovations are permissible unless there is a clear prohibition. However, this permissibility is contingent on the absence of harm or contravention of Islamic ethics. Potential harms could include privacy violations, misuse of the technology, or environmental impact. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment would involve weighing the benefits against potential harms, seeking expert opinions, and ensuring the implementation adheres to ethical guidelines that align with Islamic values. The most appropriate approach for Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan, with its emphasis on both traditional scholarship and modern relevance, would be to conduct a thorough *ijtihad* (independent legal reasoning) that integrates established jurisprudential methodologies with an understanding of the technological and social context. This process would involve consulting relevant texts, considering the *maqasid al-shariah*, and applying principles like *maslahah* and *urf* while mitigating any potential *mafsadah* (harm). The core of the decision-making process lies in the careful application of these established jurisprudential tools to a novel situation, demonstrating the dynamic nature of Islamic legal thought.

The question assesses the understanding of the principles of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) and *taqlid* (following precedent) within Islamic jurisprudence, particularly as applied to contemporary issues relevant to a university like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological development, the use of AI in generating Islamic legal opinions (*fatwas*). The core of the question lies in evaluating the permissibility and ethical considerations of relying on such AI-generated opinions within the framework of Islamic legal methodology. The most appropriate approach, aligning with the scholarly rigor and commitment to authentic Islamic teachings expected at UNIKS, is to view AI-generated *fatwas* as a tool that requires human oversight and validation by qualified scholars. This is because Islamic legal rulings are not merely algorithmic outputs; they necessitate an understanding of the broader context, the spirit of Sharia, the nuances of Arabic language, the historical development of Islamic law, and the specific circumstances of the questioner. While AI can process vast amounts of textual data and identify patterns, it lacks the embodied understanding, spiritual discernment, and the capacity for *ijtihad* that a human scholar possesses. Therefore, treating AI-generated *fatwas* as a preliminary resource that must be critically examined, verified, and ultimately approved by a qualified human jurist represents the most balanced and academically sound approach. This acknowledges the potential benefits of technology while upholding the established principles of Islamic legal authority and the indispensable role of human intellect and integrity in religious scholarship.

The question assesses understanding of the principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area for students at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological development, a drone delivery service for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi. The core issue is determining the permissibility (Hukm) of this service within Islamic law. This requires applying established legal maxims and principles. The primary principle to consider is the general permissibility of new things (Al-Asl fi al-Ashya’ al-Ibahah) unless there is a specific prohibition. However, this permissibility is contingent on the absence of harm (La darara wa la dirar). In this context, the drone delivery service must be evaluated against potential harms, such as privacy violations (e.g., unauthorized surveillance), public nuisance (e.g., noise pollution), or potential misuse that could lead to societal disruption. The concept of ‘Maslahah’ (public interest) is also crucial. If the drone delivery service demonstrably serves a significant public interest by improving access to essential goods, especially in underserved regions of Kuantan Singingi, and if the potential harms can be mitigated through regulation and ethical guidelines, then its permissibility is strengthened. The principle of ‘Sadd al-Dhara’i’ (blocking the means to evil) would also be relevant, requiring proactive measures to prevent potential negative consequences. Considering these principles, the most appropriate approach is to allow the service with strict regulations that address potential harms, thereby maximizing the benefit (Maslahah) while minimizing the risk of mischief (Mafsadah). This aligns with the dynamic and adaptive nature of Islamic legal reasoning, which seeks to provide guidance for evolving circumstances. Therefore, allowing the service under controlled conditions, with a focus on ethical operation and community welfare, is the most judicious Islamic legal stance.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a new technological development, a drone delivery service for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi. The ethical and legal permissibility of this service hinges on established Islamic legal maxims and methodologies. The core issue is whether the benefits of the drone service, such as improved access to medicine and food for underserved populations, outweigh potential concerns. Islamic legal reasoning, particularly the principle of *maslahah* (public interest or welfare), is paramount here. *Maslahah* dictates that rulings should consider the overall benefit to the community and the prevention of harm. In this context, the drone service directly addresses the *maslahah* of accessibility and well-being for remote communities. Furthermore, the concept of *urf* (custom or prevailing practice) can be considered, as drone technology is becoming a common mode of delivery. However, the primary consideration remains the adherence to Sharia principles. The permissibility of such a service would likely be determined by a careful application of *qiyas* (analogical reasoning) to existing rulings on transportation and trade, and by ensuring that the drone operation itself does not violate Islamic ethical guidelines, such as privacy or potential misuse. The ruling would also need to consider the *maqasid al-Shariah* (higher objectives of Islamic law), which aim to preserve faith, life, intellect, lineage, and property. The drone service, by facilitating access to necessities, aligns with the preservation of life and property. Therefore, a ruling based on the comprehensive consideration of *maslahah*, *urf*, *qiyas*, and *maqasid al-Shariah*, prioritizing the alleviation of hardship and the promotion of public welfare, would deem the service permissible, provided it adheres to ethical operational standards.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a novel technological advancement, a drone delivery system for essential goods in remote areas of Kuantan Singingi. The ethical and legal considerations of such a system, particularly concerning privacy, security, and the potential for misuse, must be evaluated through the lens of Islamic legal reasoning. The primary source for deriving Islamic rulings is the Quran and the Sunnah. However, for new issues not explicitly addressed in these primary sources, jurists employ secondary sources and methodologies. The principle of *maslahah* (public interest) is crucial here. If the drone system demonstrably serves a significant public good, such as ensuring timely delivery of medicine to underserved communities, its permissibility can be established. This aligns with the Islamic legal maxim that “disposal of public interest takes precedence over individual interests.” Furthermore, the concept of *urf* (custom or prevailing practice) can be relevant if drone usage for delivery becomes a widely accepted norm. However, *urf* must not contradict the fundamental principles of Sharia. The potential for privacy violations, for instance, would need to be mitigated through regulations that align with Islamic injunctions against unwarranted intrusion and spying. The principle of *sadd al-dhara’i* (blocking the means to evil) would also be applied to prevent potential misuse, such as unauthorized surveillance or the delivery of prohibited items. The question requires an understanding of how these principles are synthesized to arrive at a ruling. The correct answer emphasizes the careful balancing of benefits and harms, the reliance on established legal methodologies for novel situations, and the ultimate goal of promoting welfare and preventing mischief, all central tenets of Islamic legal scholarship at UNIKS. The other options present incomplete or misapplied reasoning, such as over-reliance on a single principle without considering others, or a misunderstanding of how secondary principles are integrated.

The question probes the understanding of the fundamental principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) as applied to contemporary ethical dilemmas, specifically within the context of financial transactions, a core area of study at Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a common financial practice that requires careful consideration of Islamic ethical guidelines. The core concept being tested is the prohibition of *Riba* (usury or interest) and the permissibility of profit derived from legitimate trade or investment. In the given scenario, the agreement to receive a fixed percentage of the total sales revenue, regardless of the actual profit or loss of the business, closely resembles a profit-sharing arrangement (*Mudharabah*) or a commission-based model, both of which are generally permissible in Islam, provided the underlying transaction is Halal. The key is that the return is tied to the activity of the business, not a predetermined loan amount with added interest. Therefore, the most aligned and ethically sound approach, consistent with the principles taught at UNIKS, is to structure the agreement as a form of profit-sharing or a mutually agreed-upon commission for services rendered, ensuring transparency and avoiding any element of guaranteed return on capital that would constitute *Riba*. This approach emphasizes the shared risk and reward inherent in Islamic finance, promoting fairness and ethical conduct in economic activities, which are central tenets of the university’s educational philosophy.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, a core area of study within Islamic universities like Kuantan Singingi Islamic University UNIKS Teluk Kuantan. The scenario involves a community facing a novel issue related to digital currency, which requires a jurisprudential approach that considers established sources of Islamic law (Qur’an and Sunnah) alongside principles of analogical reasoning (Qiyas), public interest (Maslahah), and scholarly consensus (Ijma). The most appropriate approach for addressing such an emerging issue, particularly one with potential economic and social ramifications, is to engage in ijtihad (independent reasoning) grounded in these established methodologies. This involves a thorough analysis of the digital currency’s characteristics (e.g., its nature as a medium of exchange, store of value, or commodity) and its alignment with or deviation from the underlying objectives (Maqasid al-Shari’ah) of Islamic law, such as safeguarding wealth and ensuring fairness. The process would involve consulting with qualified scholars who can apply these principles to the specific context, leading to a reasoned ruling that balances innovation with Islamic ethical and legal frameworks. This aligns with the academic rigor expected at UNIKS, which emphasizes the integration of traditional Islamic sciences with modern challenges.