State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin Entrance Exam Set

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, specifically within the context of higher education at State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario involves a university policy decision regarding the integration of digital learning platforms. The core of the question lies in identifying the most appropriate method of legal reasoning (istinbath al-hukm) for addressing such a novel issue, considering the established sources of Islamic law. The primary sources of Islamic law are the Quran and the Sunnah. When dealing with matters not explicitly addressed in these primary sources, jurists employ secondary sources and methodologies. Ijma’ (consensus of scholars) and Qiyas (analogical reasoning) are crucial tools. However, for issues that are entirely new and lack direct precedent, the principle of Istihsan (juristic preference) or Maslahah Mursalah (consideration of public interest) becomes highly relevant. Istihsan allows for a deviation from strict Qiyas when it leads to a more beneficial or equitable outcome, often based on custom or public welfare. Maslahah Mursalah, on the other hand, focuses on securing a benefit or preventing a harm that is not explicitly supported or contradicted by the primary texts, provided it aligns with the general objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Shariah). In the context of implementing advanced digital learning platforms at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which represents a modern technological advancement with significant implications for educational delivery, accessibility, and student engagement, a juristic approach that prioritizes the overall welfare and benefit of the students and the institution, while ensuring compliance with Islamic ethical principles, is paramount. While Qiyas might be applicable to certain aspects of digital platforms by drawing parallels to existing educational methods, its application might be limited for entirely novel features. Ijma’ on such a specific, modern technological implementation would be difficult to achieve universally. Istihsan and Maslahah Mursalah, however, are particularly well-suited for evaluating the permissibility and optimal implementation of such innovations. Maslahah Mursalah, in particular, allows for the consideration of the broad public interest in enhanced education and accessibility, which are core objectives of any Islamic university. The decision to adopt and integrate these platforms should be guided by their potential to serve the greater good and advance the educational mission, provided they do not contradict established Islamic principles. Therefore, Maslahah Mursalah, which directly addresses the welfare of the community in the absence of explicit textual guidance, is the most fitting methodology.

The question probes the understanding of the Islamic concept of *ijtihad* and its application within contemporary legal and ethical frameworks, particularly as relevant to a university like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which integrates Islamic scholarship with modern disciplines. The scenario involves a new technological advancement, gene editing, and its ethical implications. *Ijtihad*, as a process of independent legal reasoning by a qualified scholar, is crucial for addressing novel issues not explicitly covered in primary Islamic texts. The core of the question lies in identifying the most appropriate method for deriving an Islamic ruling on gene editing. * **Option 1 (Correct):** Engaging in *ijtihad* through a collective effort of qualified scholars (e.g., a fatwa council) is the most appropriate method. This acknowledges the complexity of the issue, the need for diverse expertise (Islamic jurisprudence, science, ethics), and the established mechanism for addressing contemporary challenges in Islamic law. The process would involve analyzing the principles of *maqasid al-shari’ah* (objectives of Islamic law), considering potential harms and benefits, and drawing parallels with existing rulings where applicable. This aligns with the academic rigor and commitment to scholarly discourse expected at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. * **Option 2 (Incorrect):** Solely relying on a literal interpretation of historical texts without considering the context and advancements of gene editing would be insufficient. While historical texts provide foundational principles, they cannot directly address the specifics of modern biotechnology. * **Option 3 (Incorrect):** Prioritizing secular scientific consensus above all else, while important for understanding the technology, neglects the distinct ethical and jurisprudential framework of Islam. Islamic ethics often introduces considerations beyond purely utilitarian or scientific perspectives. * **Option 4 (Incorrect):** Delegating the decision entirely to a single, unqualified individual, regardless of their piety, would undermine the rigorous and scholarly nature of Islamic legal deliberation. *Ijtihad* requires specific qualifications and often a collective approach for complex matters. Therefore, the most fitting approach for UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which fosters a synthesis of Islamic tradition and contemporary knowledge, is to engage in a structured, scholarly *ijtihad* process.

The scenario describes a student at State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin grappling with the integration of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) principles into contemporary scientific research methodologies. Specifically, the student is examining the ethical implications of genetic editing technologies. The core of the question lies in identifying which foundational principle of Islamic legal reasoning (Usul al-Fiqh) would be most directly applicable to navigating the permissibility and ethical boundaries of such advanced scientific interventions, considering the overarching goal of preserving human well-being and upholding divine creation. The principle of *Maslahah* (public interest or welfare) is paramount here. Maslahah, as elaborated in Usul al-Fiqh, allows for the derivation of rulings based on what serves the general welfare of the community and prevents harm. In the context of genetic editing, the potential benefits (e.g., curing genetic diseases) must be weighed against potential harms (e.g., unintended consequences, exacerbating social inequalities, altering the natural order). The application of Maslahah requires a careful assessment of these competing interests, guided by the higher objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Shari’ah), which include the preservation of life, intellect, lineage, religion, and property. Therefore, a scholar or student at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, committed to an Islamic ethical framework, would primarily invoke Maslahah to analyze the permissibility of genetic editing, ensuring that its application aligns with the broader welfare of humanity and the sanctity of life as understood within Islamic tradition. Other principles, while important in Islamic jurisprudence, are less directly applicable to this specific ethical dilemma of scientific advancement. *Qiyas* (analogical reasoning) might be used to draw parallels with existing rulings on medical treatments, but the novelty of genetic editing presents significant challenges for direct analogy. *Ijma* (consensus of scholars) is a powerful source but may not yet be firmly established on such a cutting-edge scientific issue. *Istihsan* (juristic preference) could be considered if a ruling based on strict analogy leads to hardship, but Maslahah provides a more direct framework for evaluating the overall benefit and harm of a new technology.

The question probes the understanding of the ethical framework governing Islamic scholarship and its application within an academic institution like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. Specifically, it addresses the concept of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) in Islamic jurisprudence and its relationship to adhering to established scholarly consensus (*ijma’*) and the foundational texts of Islam (Quran and Sunnah). A candidate’s ability to discern the appropriate balance between innovative thought and fidelity to tradition is crucial. The correct answer emphasizes that while *ijtihad* is encouraged for addressing contemporary issues, it must remain firmly grounded in the established principles and methodologies derived from the primary sources and the consensus of earlier scholars. This ensures that new interpretations do not deviate from the core tenets of Islam, a principle vital for maintaining academic integrity and the religious character of UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The other options represent potential misunderstandings: one might overemphasize strict adherence to past interpretations, stifling intellectual progress; another might promote *ijtihad* without sufficient grounding, leading to potentially unorthodox conclusions; and a third might conflate *ijtihad* with mere personal opinion, disregarding the rigorous scholarly methodology required.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, specifically concerning the ethical considerations of digital information dissemination within the context of UIN Antasari Banjarmasin’s academic environment. The core of the issue lies in balancing the imperative of spreading knowledge and public good with the potential for misinformation and its detrimental effects. The principle of *maslahah* (public interest) is central here. Islamic legal theory posits that rulings should aim to secure benefits and prevent harm. When considering the rapid spread of information online, the potential for *maslahah* is immense, facilitating access to education and diverse perspectives. However, this must be weighed against the potential for *mafsadah* (harm), such as the propagation of falsehoods, defamation, or incitement to hatred, which directly contradicts the ethical framework emphasized at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The concept of *ijtihad* (independent legal reasoning) is also relevant, as scholars must continually engage with new phenomena using established methodologies to derive rulings. In this digital age, *ijtihad* is crucial for addressing how traditional Islamic ethical guidelines apply to novel situations like viral misinformation campaigns. The principle of *hurmah al-ghibah* (the prohibition of backbiting and slander) and *namimah* (calumny) are directly implicated when false information is spread, as it can damage reputations and sow discord. Furthermore, the emphasis on seeking truth and verifying information, as alluded to in Quranic injunctions (e.g., Surah Al-Hujurat, verse 6: “O you who have believed, if there comes to you a righteous person with news, investigate, lest you afflict people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful”), underscores the need for critical evaluation of sources. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for an institution like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, committed to both Islamic scholarship and societal well-being, is to foster a culture of critical digital literacy and ethical information sharing, which aligns with the broader Islamic emphasis on truthfulness and the prevention of harm. This involves educating students and the wider community on how to discern credible information and to be responsible digital citizens, thereby maximizing the *maslahah* of digital platforms while mitigating their *mafsadah*.

The core of this question lies in understanding the principles of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) and *taqlid* (adherence to established legal interpretations) within Islamic jurisprudence, particularly as they relate to contemporary societal challenges. UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, with its emphasis on integrating Islamic studies with modern disciplines, would expect its students to grasp the nuanced application of these concepts. The scenario presents a situation where a new technological advancement (AI-driven legal analysis) intersects with traditional Islamic legal frameworks. The most appropriate approach for a scholar at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, aiming for both scholarly rigor and societal relevance, would be to engage in a critical evaluation of the AI’s output through the lens of established Islamic legal principles and the methodologies of *ijtihad*. This involves not blindly accepting the AI’s conclusions (*taqlid* to technology) nor completely dismissing its potential utility. Instead, it requires a discerning application of human intellect and scholarly expertise to verify, refine, and contextualize the AI’s findings within the broader corpus of Islamic legal thought. This process aligns with the university’s commitment to fostering critical thinking and responsible innovation in the application of Islamic knowledge. The other options represent less nuanced or potentially problematic approaches: blindly accepting AI output would be a form of *taqlid* without critical oversight; solely relying on historical *fatwas* might ignore the evolving nature of contemporary issues; and outright rejection would forgo a potentially valuable tool for scholarly advancement. Therefore, the synthesis of AI analysis with human *ijtihad* represents the most academically sound and ethically responsible path for a student at an institution like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin.

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 State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario involves a community facing an environmental crisis, specifically a severe drought impacting agricultural livelihoods. The task is to identify the most appropriate Islamic legal methodology for addressing this situation, considering the principles of public welfare (maslahah) and the avoidance of harm (darar). In Islamic legal reasoning, when faced with novel situations or crises not explicitly addressed in primary texts, jurists employ various methodologies. The principle of *maslahah mursalah* (unrestricted public interest) allows for the consideration of benefits that serve the general welfare, even if not explicitly supported by a specific textual precedent, provided they do not contradict established Islamic principles. This is particularly relevant in situations affecting the broader community, such as environmental sustainability and economic stability. Conversely, *qiyas* (analogical reasoning) is used when a new case shares a common effective cause (*’illah*) with a case found in the Quran or Sunnah. While qiyas is a fundamental tool, its application here might be less direct than maslahah mursalah, as the specific cause of drought and its mitigation might not have a clear, direct analogy in historical legal rulings. *Istihsan* (juristic preference) involves setting aside a direct analogy for a more favorable ruling based on public interest or other juristic considerations, which is related to maslahah but often involves a preference over a strict analogical deduction. *Ijma’* (consensus of scholars) is a definitive source but is unlikely to be the primary method for addressing a specific, localized environmental crisis unless a broad scholarly consensus has already been formed on such matters. Given the widespread impact of drought on the community’s well-being and sustenance, the principle of *maslahah mursalah* is the most fitting methodological approach. It allows for the consideration of innovative solutions and policies that promote the public good and alleviate hardship, such as water conservation measures, drought-resistant crop research, or community-based resource management, all aimed at preserving life and livelihood, which are paramount objectives in Islamic law. The university’s emphasis on applying Islamic principles to modern issues makes this understanding crucial.

The core of this question lies in understanding the principles of *ijtihad* (independent legal reasoning) within Islamic jurisprudence and its application in contemporary contexts, particularly relevant to institutions like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which emphasizes the integration of Islamic studies with modern disciplines. The scenario presents a situation where traditional interpretations of financial transactions might clash with the evolving economic landscape. The correct approach, therefore, would involve a rigorous application of *ijtihad* principles. This includes identifying the underlying *maqasid al-shari’ah* (objectives of Islamic law) relevant to the transaction, such as facilitating trade, ensuring fairness, and preventing harm. It also necessitates the use of established methodologies like *qiyas* (analogical reasoning), *istihsan* (juristic preference), and consideration of *urf* (customary practice), provided they do not contradict fundamental Islamic principles. The goal is to derive a ruling that is both legally sound and practically beneficial in the current socio-economic environment, reflecting the dynamic nature of Islamic legal thought. The other options represent either an overly rigid adherence to past rulings without considering contemporary relevance, an abdication of scholarly responsibility by solely relying on pre-existing fatwas without critical engagement, or an approach that prioritizes external economic models over Islamic legal frameworks.

The core of this question lies in understanding the principles of *ijtihad* and its relationship with the foundational sources of Islamic jurisprudence (*usul al-fiqh*) within the context of a modern Islamic university like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. *Ijtihad* is the intellectual endeavor of deriving legal rulings from the Quran and Sunnah, often involving analogical reasoning (*qiyas*), consensus (*ijma*), and consideration of public interest (*maslahah*). When faced with novel socio-economic issues, such as the ethical implications of digital currency transactions, a scholar must engage in a rigorous process. This process begins with identifying the relevant scriptural principles that address wealth, exchange, and fairness. Then, they must analyze the nature of the digital currency itself, comparing its characteristics to established legal categories of money or commodities. The application of *qiyas* would be crucial here, drawing parallels to existing rulings on financial instruments. Furthermore, the concept of *maslahah* becomes paramount, evaluating whether the adoption of such currency serves the broader welfare of the community and aligns with the objectives of Sharia (*maqasid al-Shariah*). The scholarly consensus (*ijma*) on such emergent issues is often difficult to achieve initially, making the individual scholar’s reasoned deduction (*ijtihad*) the primary driver. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for a scholar at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, committed to both tradition and contemporary relevance, would be to meticulously analyze the digital currency through the lens of established *usul al-fiqh* principles, prioritizing *maslahah* and *qiyas* to arrive at a sound, contextually relevant ruling.

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 State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario involves a new technological development, a virtual reality platform simulating historical Islamic events. The ethical dilemma presented is the potential for misrepresentation or distortion of sacred narratives within this immersive environment. To address this, a jurist would need to consider the established methodologies for deriving Islamic rulings. The principle of *maslahah* (public interest) is paramount, but it must be balanced against the preservation of religious integrity and the prevention of *mafsadah* (harm or corruption). The concept of *sadd al-dhara’i’* (blocking the means to evil) is crucial here, as the potential for misuse or misinterpretation of the VR simulation could lead to negative consequences, such as the erosion of respect for historical figures or the propagation of inaccurate theological viewpoints. Therefore, a cautious approach that prioritizes safeguarding the sanctity of religious narratives and preventing potential societal harm through strict oversight and adherence to scholarly consensus on historical accuracy would be the most prudent. This aligns with the rigorous academic standards and ethical considerations emphasized in Islamic studies programs at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which encourage critical engagement with technology while upholding religious values. The other options, while touching upon relevant concepts, do not fully capture the nuanced application required in this specific scenario. Focusing solely on innovation without considering potential negative repercussions, or prioritizing individual interpretation over established scholarly frameworks, would be contrary to the principles of responsible Islamic scholarship.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, specifically within the context of a university like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which integrates Islamic studies with modern academic disciplines. The scenario describes a situation where a new technology, ‘Bio-Harmony,’ promises significant agricultural yield increases but raises ethical concerns regarding its potential impact on natural ecosystems and human well-being, viewed through an Islamic ethical lens. To determine the most appropriate approach for evaluating Bio-Harmony within an Islamic framework, we must consider the core methodologies of Usul al-Fiqh. These include the primary sources: the Quran and Sunnah, followed by secondary sources and reasoning methods such as Ijma’ (consensus), Qiyas (analogical reasoning), Istihsan (juristic preference), and Maslahah Mursalah (public interest). The scenario highlights potential harm (Mafsadah) to the environment and indirectly to human health, alongside potential benefit (Maslahah) in increased food production. Therefore, an approach that prioritizes the prevention of harm and the realization of broader public good, while adhering to the spirit of the primary sources, is paramount. Option a) emphasizes the comprehensive assessment of both benefits and harms, aligning with the principle of balancing Maslahah and Mafsadah, and the broader objective of preserving the natural order (Nizam al-Kawn) as ordained by Allah. This involves scrutinizing the technology against the overarching principles of Islamic ethics, which prioritize justice, welfare, and the avoidance of corruption (Fasad). It necessitates a deep understanding of how the Quran and Sunnah guide human interaction with the environment and technological advancement. This approach is most aligned with the holistic and ethical framework that UIN Antasari Banjarmasin aims to foster. Option b) focuses solely on the immediate economic benefits, neglecting the potential long-term ethical and environmental repercussions, which is contrary to the Islamic emphasis on stewardship (Khalifah) and accountability. Option c) relies exclusively on analogical reasoning from existing rulings on agricultural practices, which might not adequately address the novel aspects and potential unforeseen consequences of Bio-Harmony, thus potentially overlooking unique considerations. Option d) prioritizes individual technological adoption without a systematic ethical or jurisprudential evaluation, which fails to uphold the collective responsibility for environmental protection and societal well-being inherent in Islamic teachings. Therefore, the most robust and Islamically sound approach is a comprehensive evaluation that weighs all potential benefits against all potential harms, guided by the principles of Usul al-Fiqh and the overarching Islamic ethical framework.

The question probes the understanding of the Islamic concept of *ijtihad* and its application within contemporary Islamic jurisprudence, particularly in the context of a modern university like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. *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. This process is crucial for addressing new issues and challenges that arise in society. The scenario presented involves a new technological development, a sophisticated AI chatbot designed to provide religious guidance. The core of the question lies in determining the appropriate Islamic legal approach to such an innovation. Option a) correctly identifies *ijtihad* as the primary method. The development of an AI chatbot that offers religious interpretations necessitates a rigorous process of *ijtihad* by qualified Islamic scholars. They must analyze the AI’s capabilities, its underlying algorithms (if transparent), its potential biases, and the reliability of the information it disseminates, all in light of Islamic legal principles and ethical considerations. This involves assessing whether the AI’s output aligns with the established objectives of Islamic law (*maqasid al-shari’ah*) and whether it poses any risks to the integrity of religious knowledge or the spiritual well-being of individuals. The scholars would need to engage in a deep jurisprudential analysis to determine the permissibility, conditions, and limitations of using such technology for religious guidance. Option b) is incorrect because *taqlid* (blindly following a particular school of thought or scholar without independent verification) is generally discouraged when dealing with novel issues that require critical assessment. While *taqlid* has its place, it is insufficient for evaluating a complex technological innovation like an AI religious advisor. Option c) is incorrect because *ijma’* (consensus of scholars) is typically formed after extensive deliberation and agreement on an established matter. While *ijma’* might eventually be reached on the use of such technology, it is not the initial step for evaluating its permissibility and application. The initial assessment requires individual scholarly effort. Option d) is incorrect because *qiyas* (analogical reasoning) is a method of deriving rulings by comparing a new case to an existing one with a common effective cause. While *qiyas* might be employed within the broader *ijtihad* process, it is not the overarching framework for addressing the entirety of the AI chatbot issue. The complexity of the AI’s nature and its potential impact demand a more comprehensive approach than simple analogy. Therefore, *ijtihad* is the most appropriate and fundamental jurisprudential tool for addressing the ethical and legal implications of an AI chatbot offering religious guidance, aligning with the academic rigor expected at institutions like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin.

The question probes the understanding of the philosophical underpinnings of Islamic education as envisioned by institutions like State Islamic University (UIN) Antasari Banjarmasin, particularly concerning the integration of faith and reason. The core concept tested is how UIN Antasari, as a modern Islamic university, approaches the synthesis of traditional Islamic scholarship with contemporary scientific and secular knowledge. This involves recognizing that such integration is not merely additive but transformative, aiming to produce scholars who are both deeply rooted in Islamic principles and capable of engaging critically with diverse intellectual traditions. The correct answer emphasizes the holistic development of the individual, fostering intellectual curiosity within an ethical framework derived from Islamic teachings, which is a hallmark of UIN Antasari’s educational philosophy. Incorrect options might focus on a superficial or compartmentalized approach, such as prioritizing one domain over the other, or viewing the integration as a purely methodological exercise without considering the ethical and spiritual dimensions central to Islamic scholarship. The university’s commitment to producing graduates who can contribute meaningfully to society, grounded in both faith and knowledge, necessitates this nuanced understanding of intellectual synthesis.

The question probes the understanding of the Islamic concept of *ijtihad* and its application within contemporary legal and ethical frameworks, particularly as relevant to a university like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which integrates Islamic scholarship with modern disciplines. *Ijtihad* is the independent reasoning of a qualified scholar to derive legal rulings from the primary sources of Islam (Quran and Sunnah) when there is no clear textual evidence. It is a dynamic process that allows Islamic jurisprudence to adapt to changing circumstances. The scenario presented involves a new technological advancement, artificial intelligence (AI), and its ethical implications in decision-making, specifically in areas like judicial proceedings or financial advisement. When faced with novel issues not explicitly addressed in classical Islamic texts, the methodology of *ijtihad* becomes crucial. A qualified scholar would analyze the AI’s capabilities, its potential biases, its impact on societal welfare (*maslahah*), and its alignment with the overarching principles of Islamic law (*maqasid al-shari’ah*). The process involves identifying the relevant principles, drawing analogies (*qiyas*) where applicable, considering scholarly consensus (*ijma’*) on related matters, and employing juristic preference (*istihsan*) or public interest considerations (*maslahah mursalah*) if necessary. The ultimate goal is to arrive at a ruling that is both consistent with Islamic values and practical in the modern context. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, committed to both Islamic tradition and contemporary relevance, would be to engage in rigorous *ijtihad* that considers the ethical dimensions and societal impact of AI, grounded in the foundational texts and scholarly methodologies. This involves a deep understanding of both Islamic legal theory and the technical aspects of AI.

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 State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario involves a new technological development, a virtual reality platform simulating historical Islamic events, and its potential impact on religious education and public perception. The core issue is how to derive rulings (hukm) for such novel situations within the framework of Islamic law. The process of deriving a ruling for a new issue involves several steps. Firstly, identifying the problem and its characteristics. Secondly, searching for relevant primary sources in the Quran and Sunnah. Thirdly, if direct evidence is absent, employing secondary sources and established legal maxims (qawa’id fiqhiyyah). The principle of *maslahah* (public interest) and *mafsadah* (harm) is crucial in evaluating the permissibility and desirability of new phenomena. *Istihsan* (juristic preference) and *urf* (custom) can also be invoked when appropriate. In this specific case, the virtual reality simulation of historical Islamic events requires careful consideration. While it offers a novel educational tool, it also presents potential risks. The simulation might inadvertently distort historical facts, misrepresent religious figures, or lead to misinterpretations of Islamic teachings. Therefore, a ruling would need to balance the potential benefits of enhanced learning and engagement with the potential harms of misinformation and misrepresentation. The most appropriate approach, aligning with the rigorous methodology of Usul al-Fiqh and the academic standards of UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, is to prioritize the preservation of religious integrity and accurate historical understanding. This involves a thorough examination of the content of the simulation, its pedagogical design, and its potential to mislead or cause spiritual harm. The principle of *sadd al-dhara’i’* (blocking the means to potential harm) would be highly relevant. A ruling would likely necessitate strict oversight, verification of content by qualified scholars, and clear disclaimers about the nature of simulation versus historical fact. The emphasis would be on ensuring that the technology serves as a tool for genuine understanding and not as a source of distortion or innovation that undermines established religious principles. Therefore, the most prudent and Islamically sound approach is to establish clear guidelines and scholarly oversight to ensure the fidelity of the simulation to Islamic teachings and historical accuracy, thereby safeguarding against potential misinterpretations and upholding the integrity of religious education. This involves a careful weighing of benefits against potential harms, guided by established legal principles.

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 State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. Specifically, it tests the candidate’s ability to discern the most appropriate method for deriving legal 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 engage in *ijtihad* to determine its ruling. This process involves utilizing established methodologies. *Qiyas* (analogical reasoning) is a primary tool, where a new case is compared to an existing one with a known ruling based on a shared effective cause (*’illah*). *Istihsan* (juristic preference) allows for a departure from a strict analogical ruling if it leads to a more beneficial or just outcome, often considering public welfare (*maslahah*). *Ijma’* (consensus of scholars) is a definitive source, but it applies to issues where consensus has already been reached. *Urf* (custom) can be a secondary source, but its application is contingent on not contradicting established religious principles. Given the scenario of a new digital financial instrument, which is a modern innovation, the most direct and methodologically sound approach to establishing its permissibility is through *ijtihad* that employs *qiyas* to find an analogous existing financial transaction with a clear ruling, and potentially *istihsan* if the analogy is imperfect or if public interest dictates a specific approach. However, the question asks for the *most* appropriate method for initial determination in a novel context. While *urf* might eventually play a role in how the instrument is used, it’s not the primary method for establishing its *halal* or *haram* status. *Ijma’* is unlikely for a brand-new, un-debated issue. *Istihsan* is a refinement or exception to *qiyas*. Therefore, *qiyas*, as the primary method of extending existing rulings to new cases based on shared characteristics, is the most fundamental and appropriate starting point for determining the Islamic legal status of a novel financial instrument.

The core of this question lies in understanding the nuanced relationship between Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) and the evolving socio-cultural landscape, particularly as it pertains to the educational mission of an institution like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The question probes the candidate’s ability to synthesize principles of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) and *maqasid al-shari’ah* (the higher objectives of Islamic law) within the context of modern educational challenges. Specifically, it examines how a university committed to Islamic values can adapt its curriculum and pedagogical approaches to remain relevant and impactful without compromising its foundational principles. The correct answer emphasizes the dynamic application of Islamic legal reasoning to contemporary issues, recognizing that the spirit and purpose of Islamic teachings, rather than rigid adherence to historical interpretations in isolation, should guide educational development. This involves critically assessing existing methodologies and proposing innovative solutions that align with the broader goals of knowledge dissemination, character building, and societal welfare, which are central to UIN Antasari Banjarmasin’s vision. The other options represent less comprehensive or potentially anachronistic approaches, such as solely relying on historical precedents without considering contemporary needs, or prioritizing external secular models over an integrated Islamic framework, or adopting a purely passive stance that neglects the proactive role of Islamic scholarship in shaping education.

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 State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario involves a new technological advancement, a digital currency with decentralized governance, and its implications for Islamic financial ethics. To determine the most appropriate approach from an Islamic legal perspective, one must consider the established methodologies for deriving rulings (Ijtihad) and the principles governing financial transactions (Muamalat). The core issue is the permissibility (Hukm) of this new digital currency. Islamic finance emphasizes principles like the prohibition of Riba (interest), Gharar (excessive uncertainty), and Maysir (gambling), and the requirement for tangible underlying assets or services. Decentralized digital currencies, while offering innovation, often present challenges regarding transparency, regulatory oversight, and the nature of the underlying value. The process of determining the ruling would involve several steps: 1. **Identification of the issue:** The emergence of a new form of currency. 2. **Gathering relevant evidence:** Consulting the Quran, Sunnah, Ijma (consensus), and Qiyas (analogical reasoning). 3. **Applying Usul al-Fiqh principles:** Examining concepts like Maslahah (public interest), Istihsan (juristic preference), and Urf (custom). 4. **Considering the nature of the currency:** Is it a commodity, a medium of exchange, or something else? Does it have intrinsic value or is its value purely speculative? 5. **Assessing potential risks:** Riba, Gharar, and impact on economic stability. Given the novel nature of decentralized digital currencies, a cautious and analytical approach is paramount. The principle of “Al-Aslu fil-Ashya’ al-Ibahah” (the origin of things is permissibility) is a starting point, but it is qualified by the need to avoid prohibited elements. The concept of “Sadd al-Dhara’i” (blocking the means to evil) is also relevant, considering potential misuse or negative societal impacts. The most prudent approach, reflecting the rigorous methodology taught at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, would be to conduct a thorough analysis based on established Usul al-Fiqh principles, seeking expert consensus and considering the potential benefits and harms to the community. This involves a deep dive into the currency’s mechanics, its underlying value proposition, and its alignment with Islamic economic objectives. The emphasis is on a systematic and evidence-based derivation of a ruling, rather than a hasty acceptance or rejection. Therefore, a comprehensive scholarly inquiry that prioritizes the safeguarding of Islamic financial ethics and the welfare of the community is the most appropriate response.

The core of this question lies in understanding the epistemological foundations of Islamic scholarship as practiced at institutions like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which integrates traditional Islamic sciences with modern academic disciplines. The concept of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) is central to Islamic jurisprudence and intellectual tradition. It refers to the exertion of effort by a qualified scholar to derive legal rulings from the primary sources of Islam (Quran and Sunnah) when a clear ruling is not readily available. *Ijtihad* is not a static concept; it evolves with changing societal contexts and the development of new knowledge. For a university like UIN Antasari, which aims to produce scholars capable of addressing contemporary challenges through an Islamic lens, fostering an environment that encourages rigorous and responsible *ijtihad* is paramount. This involves engaging with diverse methodologies, understanding the historical development of Islamic thought, and critically evaluating contemporary issues against Islamic principles. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for UIN Antasari to cultivate intellectual dynamism and relevance is to promote a robust engagement with *ijtihad* that is informed by both classical Islamic scholarship and contemporary academic discourse, ensuring that its graduates are equipped to contribute meaningfully to society. This approach directly aligns with the university’s mission to be a center of Islamic knowledge that is both deeply rooted in tradition and responsive to the modern world.

The core of this question lies in understanding the principles of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) and *taqlid* (following established legal opinions) within Islamic jurisprudence, particularly as they relate to contemporary challenges faced by institutions like State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario presents a situation where a new technological advancement, a bio-engineered food additive, raises questions about its permissibility (*halal* status). To determine the correct approach, one must consider the methodologies employed in Islamic legal reasoning. *Ijtihad* is the process by which qualified scholars derive rulings on new matters not explicitly addressed in the Quran or Sunnah. This involves utilizing established legal principles, analogical reasoning (*qiyas*), consensus of scholars (*ijma*), and consideration of public interest (*maslahah*). In this case, the scholars at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin would need to analyze the composition of the additive, its production process, and its potential impact on human health and the environment. *Taqlid*, on the other hand, involves adhering to the rulings of recognized jurists. While important for consistency and accessibility, an over-reliance on *taqlid* might hinder the ability to address novel issues effectively. The question asks for the *most appropriate* approach for a university with a mandate to engage with contemporary issues. The scenario specifically mentions the need to ensure the additive aligns with Islamic ethical and legal standards. This necessitates a rigorous examination that goes beyond simply finding a pre-existing ruling. The development of new technologies often presents unprecedented situations, requiring scholars to exercise *ijtihad*. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, as an academic institution dedicated to Islamic scholarship and its application in modern society, is to engage in a comprehensive *ijtihad* process. This involves forming a specialized committee of experts in Islamic law, food science, and bioethics to thoroughly investigate the additive’s properties and implications, thereby arriving at a well-reasoned and justifiable ruling that reflects both tradition and contemporary understanding. This process ensures that the university contributes meaningfully to the discourse on *halal* certification in the face of evolving scientific landscapes.

The core of this question lies in understanding the principles of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) within Islamic jurisprudence and its application in contemporary contexts, particularly as emphasized by institutions like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which fosters critical engagement with religious texts and societal needs. The scenario presents a modern dilemma: the ethical implications of artificial intelligence in legal decision-making. To address this, a scholar would need to engage in *ijtihad* by drawing upon foundational Islamic legal principles (*usul al-fiqh*), such as the objectives of Sharia (*maqasid al-Shariah*), the concept of public interest (*maslahah*), and analogical reasoning (*qiyas*), while also considering the technological realities and potential consequences. The question probes the candidate’s ability to synthesize these elements. The correct approach involves a nuanced consideration of how AI’s deterministic nature might conflict with the human element of justice, the potential for bias embedded in algorithms, and the ultimate responsibility for legal outcomes. It requires an understanding that while AI can be a tool for efficiency, its role in dispensing justice must be carefully evaluated against the higher purposes of Islamic law, which prioritize fairness, equity, and the preservation of human dignity. The explanation would detail how *ijtihad* allows for the adaptation of Islamic legal principles to new circumstances, ensuring that religious guidance remains relevant and beneficial. It would highlight the importance of scholarly deliberation and the potential for AI to assist, rather than replace, human judgment in sensitive areas like jurisprudence, aligning with UIN Antasari’s commitment to intellectual rigor and the integration of faith and reason.

The core of this question lies in understanding the principles of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) within Islamic jurisprudence and its application in contemporary contexts, particularly relevant to the academic environment of State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which emphasizes both tradition and modernity. The scenario presents a hypothetical situation where a new social phenomenon, the widespread use of digital currencies, requires a ruling. The question probes the candidate’s ability to identify the most appropriate methodology for deriving such a ruling. The process of *ijtihad* involves several stages and considerations. Firstly, it requires a deep understanding of the primary sources of Islamic law: the Quran and the Sunnah. Secondly, it necessitates knowledge of secondary sources and methodologies, such as *qiyas* (analogical reasoning), *ijma* (consensus of scholars), and *maslahah mursalah* (consideration of public interest). When faced with a novel issue not explicitly addressed in the primary texts, scholars must engage in a rigorous process of interpretation and deduction. In this scenario, digital currencies are a modern development. While not directly mentioned in classical texts, their economic function and potential societal impact can be analyzed through established legal principles. The most fitting approach would involve examining the underlying *maqasid al-shari’ah* (objectives of Islamic law), such as the preservation of wealth and the facilitation of transactions, and then applying analogical reasoning to the characteristics of digital currencies. This would involve comparing digital currencies to existing forms of wealth or currency, considering their underlying value, utility, and potential risks. Furthermore, the concept of *maslahah mursalah* is crucial, as the ruling should aim to serve the public interest and address the needs of the community in a rapidly evolving technological landscape. Therefore, the most appropriate approach is to engage in *ijtihad* that prioritizes the foundational principles of Islamic finance and law, utilizing *qiyas* to draw parallels with established concepts and considering the broader societal implications through *maslahah mursalah*. This comprehensive approach ensures that the derived ruling is both legally sound and practically relevant, aligning with the academic rigor expected at State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin.

The question probes the understanding of the foundational principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as applied to contemporary societal challenges, specifically concerning the ethical considerations of technological advancement within an Islamic framework. The scenario presented involves the development of an AI-driven system for personalized religious guidance. To determine the most appropriate approach for evaluating such a system’s permissibility (hukm), one must consider the core methodologies within Usul al-Fiqh. The primary sources of Islamic law are the Quran and Sunnah. When dealing with novel issues not explicitly addressed in these primary sources, jurists employ secondary sources and methodologies. Istihsan (juristic preference) allows for a departure from a strict analogy (Qiyas) if it leads to a more beneficial or less burdensome outcome for the community, provided it aligns with the broader objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Sharia). Maslaha Mursalah (unrestricted public interest) permits deriving rulings based on general welfare when there is no specific textual evidence, as long as it does not contradict established Islamic principles. Urf (custom) can also be considered if it does not violate Sharia. In the context of an AI system for religious guidance, the potential benefits for accessibility and personalized learning are significant. However, there are also potential harms, such as the risk of misinterpretation, over-reliance, or the AI developing biases that conflict with Islamic teachings. Therefore, a cautious yet progressive approach is needed. Evaluating the AI system’s permissibility would involve: 1. **Identifying the core purpose:** Is it to assist or replace human guidance? 2. **Assessing its alignment with Maqasid al-Sharia:** Does it promote the preservation of religion, life, intellect, lineage, and property? 3. **Examining its output:** Does it accurately reflect Islamic teachings and avoid innovation (bid’ah) or deviation? 4. **Considering the potential for harm:** What are the risks of misuse or misguidance? Istihsan, by allowing for a departure from strict analogy if a better outcome is achieved, is particularly relevant here. If a direct analogy to existing forms of religious guidance (e.g., fatwas from scholars) proves insufficient or leads to undesirable outcomes in the context of AI, Istihsan provides a mechanism to permit the technology if its overall benefit, when weighed against potential harms and in alignment with Sharia objectives, is demonstrably positive. Maslaha Mursalah is also relevant as it addresses the general welfare, but Istihsan offers a more direct framework for navigating the nuances of permissible innovation when established analogies might be problematic. The development of such a system necessitates a careful balancing act, prioritizing the preservation of religious integrity while leveraging technological advancements for the betterment of the Muslim community, a core tenet of Islamic legal reasoning.

The core of this question lies in understanding the principles of *ijtihad* (independent legal reasoning) within Islamic jurisprudence, particularly as it relates to contemporary societal challenges and the academic mission of an institution like State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario presents a hypothetical situation where a new technological advancement, a sophisticated AI capable of generating legal opinions, emerges. The question probes how a student at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, grounded in Islamic scholarly traditions, would approach this development. The correct answer emphasizes the necessity of rigorous, methodologically sound *ijtihad* that integrates traditional Islamic legal sources (*usul al-fiqh*) with an understanding of modern contexts and the ethical implications of the technology. This involves critically evaluating the AI’s output against established jurisprudential principles, ensuring its alignment with the broader objectives of Islamic law (*maqasid al-shari’ah*), and recognizing that human intellect and ethical discernment remain paramount in legal decision-making. The AI, in this context, is a tool, not a replacement for human scholarly engagement. Incorrect options would either over-rely on the AI without critical evaluation, dismiss it entirely without exploring its potential benefits, or misinterpret the role of *ijtihad* by suggesting a purely mechanical application of existing rulings without considering the nuances of the new technology and its societal impact. For instance, one incorrect option might suggest simply adopting the AI’s pronouncements, ignoring the need for human oversight and the established methodologies of Islamic legal reasoning. Another might propose outright rejection due to its artificial nature, failing to acknowledge the potential for technology to serve Islamic legal discourse when properly guided. A third might suggest a superficial engagement, focusing on the AI’s efficiency without delving into the substantive jurisprudential validity of its outputs. The academic environment at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin encourages a balanced approach, fostering critical engagement with both tradition and innovation.

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 like Sharia and Law at State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario presents a modern dilemma involving digital information dissemination and its potential impact on public discourse and individual reputation. To determine the most appropriate legal recourse within an Islamic framework, one must consider the established methodologies for deriving rulings. The principle of *maslahah mursalah* (public interest) allows for the consideration of general welfare when no specific textual evidence directly addresses a novel issue. In this context, the rapid spread of unverified information online, potentially causing harm, directly relates to the preservation of societal order and individual dignity, which are paramount objectives (*maqasid al-shari’ah*). Therefore, applying *maslahah mursalah* to develop guidelines for responsible online conduct and to address the consequences of misinformation aligns with the broader aims of Islamic law to promote justice and prevent harm. Other principles, while important, are less directly applicable or would require more complex interpretations for this specific scenario. *Qiyas* (analogy) might be difficult due to the unique nature of digital information. *Ijma’* (consensus) is unlikely to exist on such a novel issue. *Istihsan* (juristic preference) could be invoked, but *maslahah mursalah* offers a more direct and comprehensive framework for addressing the public interest aspect of the problem. The correct answer is the application of *maslahah mursalah*.

The question probes the understanding of the principle of *ijtihad* within Islamic jurisprudence, specifically in the context of contemporary challenges faced by institutions like State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. *Ijtihad* is the independent reasoning and judgment of a qualified scholar to derive legal rulings from the primary sources of Islam (Quran and Sunnah) when a clear ruling is not found. This process is crucial for adapting Islamic principles to evolving societal needs and technological advancements. The scenario of developing ethical guidelines for AI in a university setting necessitates a rigorous application of *ijtihad*. The core of *ijtihad* involves several conditions and methodologies. A *mujtahid* (one who performs *ijtihad*) must possess deep knowledge of the Quran and Sunnah, Arabic language, principles of jurisprudence (*usul al-fiqh*), and the context of the issue at hand. The process typically involves identifying the problem, searching for relevant texts in the primary sources, analogical reasoning (*qiyas*) if necessary, considering scholarly consensus (*ijma*), and weighing public interest (*maslahah*). In the context of UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which integrates Islamic studies with modern disciplines, the application of *ijtihad* is vital for ensuring that technological advancements align with Islamic ethical frameworks. For instance, when addressing AI bias, a *mujtahid* would examine verses related to justice and fairness, prophetic traditions emphasizing equitable treatment, and the broader principles of *maqasid al-shari’ah* (objectives of Islamic law). The goal is to derive rulings that are both rooted in tradition and relevant to contemporary issues, fostering responsible innovation. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for UIN Antasari Banjarmasin to develop these guidelines is through a structured and comprehensive *ijtihad* process, engaging qualified scholars who understand both Islamic law and the technical aspects of AI. This ensures that the resulting guidelines are legally sound, ethically robust, and practically applicable within the university’s academic and research environment.

The core of this question lies in understanding the epistemological foundations of Islamic scholarship as practiced at institutions like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which integrates traditional Islamic sciences with modern academic disciplines. The concept of *ijtihad* (independent reasoning) within Islamic jurisprudence, when applied to contemporary socio-scientific issues, requires a methodology that respects both divine revelation (*wahy*) and empirical observation. *Ijtihad* necessitates a rigorous process of deriving rulings and understanding principles from primary sources (Quran and Sunnah) and then applying them to new contexts. This application is not arbitrary; it is guided by established legal maxims (*qawa’id fiqhiyyah*) and a deep understanding of the underlying objectives of Islamic law (*maqasid al-shari’ah*). When engaging with, for instance, the ethical implications of artificial intelligence or environmental sustainability, a scholar must first grasp the scientific or technological advancements through empirical study and then engage in *ijtihad* to determine their Islamic permissibility and guidance. This involves careful consideration of the potential benefits and harms, aligning with the preservation of faith, life, intellect, lineage, and property – the core *maqasid*. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for a UIN Antasari Banjarmasin student engaging with such a topic would be to synthesize empirical knowledge with Islamic legal reasoning, ensuring that the derived conclusions are both scientifically informed and theologically sound. This synthesis is crucial for producing scholarship that is relevant and impactful in the modern world while remaining rooted in Islamic tradition.

The question probes the understanding of the integration of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) with contemporary social issues, specifically concerning the ethical considerations of digital information dissemination within the context of Indonesian Islamic universities like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The core of the issue lies in balancing the Islamic principle of safeguarding public interest and preventing harm (maslahah and mafsadah) with the rapid evolution of digital media. The concept of *ijtihad* (independent legal reasoning) is crucial here, as it allows for the derivation of rulings on new issues based on established Islamic legal principles. When considering the spread of misinformation, the principle of *tabayyun* (verification and seeking evidence before accepting information) becomes paramount. This aligns with the Islamic emphasis on truthfulness and avoiding slander or defamation (*ghibah* and *buhtan*). Furthermore, the concept of *amanah* (trust and responsibility) applies to the creators and disseminators of information, obligating them to ensure accuracy and avoid causing societal discord. Therefore, the most appropriate approach for a student at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which fosters an environment of critical inquiry grounded in Islamic tradition, would be to analyze the digital information through the lens of *tabayyun* and *amanah*, seeking to discern truth from falsehood to uphold societal well-being, thereby applying *ijtihad* to this modern challenge. This approach directly addresses the ethical dimensions and the responsibility of individuals in the digital sphere, reflecting the university’s commitment to producing knowledgeable and ethically grounded graduates.

The question probes the understanding of the integration of Islamic principles with contemporary academic disciplines, a core tenet of State Islamic Universities like UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario of a student engaging with historical Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) to inform a modern ethical dilemma in artificial intelligence development requires a nuanced approach. The student’s task is to bridge the gap between classical legal reasoning and novel technological challenges. This involves identifying the most relevant methodological framework from Islamic legal tradition that can be adapted. Classical Islamic jurisprudence employs various methodologies for deriving rulings (istinbath al-hukm). Among these, *qiyas* (analogical reasoning) is a primary tool, but its application to AI ethics is complex due to the unprecedented nature of the technology. *Istihsan* (juristic preference) allows for setting aside a strict analogical ruling for a more beneficial or equitable one, which could be relevant. *Maslahah mursalah* (unrestricted public interest) is particularly potent when dealing with emergent issues where no direct precedent exists, focusing on the welfare of the community. *Sad al-dhara’i’* (blocking the means) aims to prevent potential harm by prohibiting actions that could lead to it, a concept highly applicable to AI’s potential negative consequences. Considering the novel and potentially impactful nature of AI, and the need to ensure its development serves the public good while mitigating unforeseen harms, *maslahah mursalah* emerges as the most fitting primary methodology. It allows for the consideration of the overall welfare and prevention of widespread harm, which is paramount in AI ethics. While other principles might play a supporting role, the broad scope of public interest and the need to address issues without explicit textual precedent make *maslahah mursalah* the most comprehensive and adaptable approach for this specific challenge at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin, which emphasizes the relevance of Islamic scholarship to contemporary issues.

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 State Islamic University UIN Antasari Banjarmasin. The scenario involves a new technological development, a virtual reality platform for religious education, and requires evaluating its permissibility (hukm) based on established Islamic legal methodologies. The core of the analysis lies in identifying the most appropriate legal maxim (qawa’id fiqhiyyah) or principle that governs novel situations. The permissibility of new matters in Islamic law is generally determined by their adherence to the overarching objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Shari’ah) and the absence of any explicit prohibition. When faced with a new phenomenon, jurists often employ principles such as “The original ruling on matters is permissibility until proven otherwise” (\(الأصل في الأشياء الإباحة حتى يدل الدليل على التحريم\)). This principle, known as \(al-asl fi al-ashya’ al-ibahah\), is fundamental in Islamic legal reasoning for dealing with innovations. Considering the virtual reality platform for religious education, its permissibility hinges on whether it serves a beneficial purpose without causing harm or contravening established Islamic tenets. If the platform is designed to enhance understanding of Islamic teachings, promote piety, and is free from morally objectionable content or practices, then it aligns with the objectives of Sharia. The principle of “preventing harm takes precedence over bringing benefit” (\(درء المفاسد أولى من جلب المصالح\)) is also relevant, but in this case, the potential benefits of enhanced religious education, if realized without significant harm, would likely outweigh any speculative harms. However, the most direct and encompassing principle for assessing a novel, potentially beneficial technology is the presumption of permissibility. This allows for the adoption of new technologies and practices as long as they do not fall into categories explicitly forbidden by the Quran and Sunnah, or do not lead to prohibited outcomes. Therefore, the initial assessment of the virtual reality platform’s permissibility would be based on this principle, followed by a detailed examination of its content and potential impacts. The question tests the candidate’s ability to apply this fundamental legal maxim to a modern context, reflecting the forward-looking approach to knowledge integration at UIN Antasari Banjarmasin.