اُصولِ فقہ کی روشنی میں فقہی مسائل کے استنباط میں استحسان کا کردار: ایک تحقیقی و تنقیدی مطالعہ

The Role of Istihsān in Jurisprudential Issues in the Light of Uṣūl al-Fiqh: An Analytical and Critical Study

Abstract

Istihsān, a distinctive principle of Islamic jurisprudence, occupies a crucial position in the methodology of deriving legal rulings. Derived linguistically from the Arabic root meaning "to consider something preferable," Istihsān refers to juristic preference, where a jurist departs from the strict application of analogy (qiyās) to achieve a ruling that better aligns with justice, equity, and public interest. Within the framework of Uṣūl al-Fiqh, Istihsān is not a subjective inclination but a structured tool employed by qualified jurists to resolve complex legal issues where rigid analogy may cause hardship or contradict higher objectives of the Sharīʿah (maqāṣid al-sharīʿah). Historically, Ḥanafī jurists have emphasized the significance of Istihsān, while other schools, such as the Shāfiʿī, have expressed reservations, considering it a potential gateway to arbitrary rulings. Nevertheless, its application has demonstrated practical flexibility, ensuring that Islamic law remains dynamic and responsive to changing circumstances. Modern scholars view Istihsān as a bridge between the literal interpretation of texts and the demands of contemporary realities. This paper explores the theoretical foundations of Istihsān, its different types, and its evidential basis in the Qur’ān, Sunnah, and juristic consensus. It further examines the critical debates among classical jurists and modern applications in areas like finance, medical ethics, and social legislation. The study concludes that Istihsān, when applied with scholarly precision, is a legitimate and necessary mechanism that safeguards the spirit of Sharīʿah while addressing the evolving needs of Muslim societies.