<![CDATA[This study examines the dialectical relationship between irādah (divine will) and reason (human reasoning) in the interpretation of āyāt al-aḥkām and ḥadīth al-aḥkām. Although this dialectic occupies a central place in Islamic legal theory, existing scholarship has addressed it largely in normative or macro-institutional terms, leaving its operation in local fatwa practice empirically underexamined. The study therefore aims to analyze how textual authority and rational reasoning interact in the formulation of fatwas by the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI) of Wajo Regency. It employs a qualitative field study design. The data consist of in-depth interviews with members of the Wajo MUI Fatwa Commission, fatwa documents, and institutional materials, collected through interviews, documentation, and observation of institutional practice. The data were analyzed through systematic coding, thematic categorization, and interpretive analysis grounded in uṣūl al-fiqh, qawāʿid fiqhiyyah, and maqāṣid al-sharīʿah. The findings show that ijtihad at Wajo MUI involves a dynamic interplay between irādah and reason: irādah is not accessed directly but approached through textual indications and interpretive mediation, while reason functions as an epistemic instrument for operationalizing normative meaning under specific sociocultural conditions. Three patterns emerge: text-dominant, reason-supported, and context-based, with the reason-supported pattern predominating. Ijtihād jamāʿī and ʿurf function as institutional mediators in this process. The study contributes an empirically grounded account of local ijtihad to the epistemology of Islamic law, showing how the adaptability of Islamic law operates through interpretive mechanisms rather than textual rigidity. Conceptually, the study distinguishes irādah from maqāṣid al-sharīʿah, qaṣd al-shāriʿ, and textual semantics, and traces how these conceptual layers are negotiated in local fatwa-making.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
