<![CDATA[Contemporary Islamic legal philosophy confronts persistent epistemological and normative challenges arising from the fragmented relationship between justice, reason, and revelation. This study aims to critically examine their philosophical interrelationships and develop an integrative framework for coherent, ethical, and contextually responsive Islamic jurisprudence. Employing qualitative library research, the investigation integrates critical literature review, reflexive thematic analysis, and normative-philosophical interpretation of contemporary scholarship and relevant jurisprudential sources. The findings identify three fundamental challenges: epistemological fragmentation, normative inconsistency, and inadequate contextual responsiveness. Revelation provides foundational normative authority, reason facilitates critical interpretation and epistemological justification, while justice constitutes a substantive criterion for evaluating legal legitimacy. The study proposes an integrative philosophical framework comprising four interconnected dimensions: revelatory-normative grounding, rational-epistemological evaluation, justice-oriented normative assessment, and contextual reconciliation. Its principal theoretical contribution lies in establishing reciprocal normative justification that reconciles scriptural authenticity, rational defensibility, and substantive justice without privileging rigid textualism or unrestricted moral subjectivism. The framework offers conceptual implications for Islamic family law, particularly marital justice, gender relations, and family welfare. Although its practical effectiveness requires further empirical examination, the proposed model advances a systematic philosophical foundation for strengthening interpretative accountability and ethical coherence within contemporary Islamic legal thought..]]>
