Typologizing Mazhab Argumentation on Wife’s Healthcare Maintenance: an Epistemological Study of Classical Fiqh

Tipologi Argumentasi Mazhab tentang Kewajiban Suami dalam Nafkah Kesehatan Istri: Analisis Epistemologis terhadap Literatur Fikih Klasik

Abstract

This study examines the epistemological construction of juristic argumentation within classical Islamic legal texts (kutub al-fiqh) concerning the husband's obligation to bear medical expenses for his wife. Employing a library research approach with a cross-mazhab meta-analysis method of classical fiqh literature, this study analyzes the ibārah texts of primary sources from the Ḥanafī, Mālikī, Shāfi'ī, Ḥanbalī, and Zaydī schools using the theoretical frameworks of Jean Piaget's knowledge construction theory, Lev Vygotsky's social constructivism, Muḥammad Naquib al-Attas's Islamic epistemology, and Wael B. Hallaq's theory of the mazhab tradition and legal authority. The findings reveal two structurally distinct epistemological patterns: first, the assimilative-tripartite pattern adopted by the four Sunnī schools, in which the established tripartite schema of food-clothing-shelter constitutes the epistemological boundary that situates medical expenses outside the scope of obligation—each school employing a distinct ta'līl: the concept of tamkīn in the Ḥanafī school, the analogy of 'aqd al-ijārah in the Shāfi'ī school, and the logic of personal physical restoration in the Ḥanbalī school; second, the accommodative-teleological pattern of the Zaydī school, which reconstructs the 'illat of maintenance as ḥifẓ al-ṣiḥḥah (preservation of health), thereby rendering medical expenses an organic component of the maintenance obligation. The divergence between the two patterns operates not at the level of textual evidence selection, but at the level of the 'illat upon which the entire argumentative structure rests: an instrumental 'illat in the Sunnī schools versus a teleological 'illat in the Zaydī school. These findings carry significant implications for contemporary Islamic family law reform, particularly in addressing the right to healthcare for women in marriage through a grounded epistemological framework rather than selective pragmatism.

Penelitian ini mengkaji konstruksi epistemologis argumentasi ulama mazhab dalam kitab-kitab fikih klasik mengenai kewajiban suami menanggung nafkah kesehatan (biaya pengobatan) istri. Menggunakan pendekatan kepustakaan (library research) dengan metode meta-analisis literatur fikih klasik lintas mazhab, penelitian ini menganalisis teks-teks ibarah dari sumber-sumber primer mazhab Hanafi, Maliki, Syafi'i, Hanbali, dan Zaidiyyah dengan kerangka teori konstruksi pengetahuan Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, epistemologi keilmuan Islam Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, dan teori tradisi mazhab Wael B. Hallaq. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan dua pola konstruksi epistemologis yang berbeda secara struktural: pertama, pola asimilatif-tripartit yang dianut keempat mazhab Sunni, di mana skema nafkah makanan-pakaian-tempat tinggal yang telah mapan menjadi batas epistemologis yang menempatkan biaya pengobatan di luar cakupan kewajiban—dengan ta'līl yang berbeda-beda: konsep tamkīn pada Hanafi, analogi 'aqd al-ijārah pada Syafi'i, dan logika pemulihan fisik personal pada Hanbali; kedua, pola akomodatif-teleologis mazhab Zaidiyyah yang merekonstruksi 'illat nafkah menjadi ḥifẓ al-ṣiḥḥah (pemeliharaan kesehatan), sehingga biaya pengobatan menjadi bagian organik dari kewajiban nafkah. Perbedaan keduanya beroperasi bukan pada level pilihan dalil, melainkan pada level 'illat tempat bangunan argumentasi diletakkan: 'illat instrumental pada mazhab Sunni versus 'illat teleologis pada mazhab Zaidiyyah. Temuan ini memiliki implikasi penting bagi pembaruan hukum keluarga Islam kontemporer, khususnya dalam merespons isu pemenuhan hak kesehatan perempuan dalam perkawinan secara argumentatif-epistemologis, bukan sekadar eklektis-pragmatis.