<![CDATA[This study examines the limits of customary authority in restricting marriage permissibility from the perspective of ‘urfi maqasidi, focusing on the prohibition of same-clan marriage in Minangkabau society. The study employs a qualitative approach combining field and library research. Primary data were obtained through semi-structured interviews with four informants consisting of three traditional leaders and one member of the Minangkabau community, while secondary data were obtained from relevant literature on Minangkabau customary law, ‘urf, maqasid al-shari‘ah, and Islamic family law. The findings show that the prohibition of same-clan marriage is maintained as a customary rule because it is considered beneficial for preserving kinship relations, clan honor, social order, and the continuity of the matrilineal system. From an ‘urfi maqasidi perspective, the practice may be categorized as a living ‘urf because it contains elements of social benefit and is related to hifz al-nasab. However, customary authority has limits: although adat may regulate social relations and establish ethical norms, it cannot transform a marriage that is permissible under Islamic law into an absolute religious prohibition. Same-clan marriage remains permissible under Islamic law as long as no prohibited mahram relationship exists. Therefore, the prohibition is more appropriately understood as a customary social and ethical regulation rather than an absolute prohibition under Islamic law.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
