Parewa Saraq: Journal of Islamic Law and Fatwa Review

Constructing the Framework for Robotics Waqf Fatwa

Hamza Abed Alkarim Hammad — Wed, 04 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0700

The rapid integration of artificial intelligence technologies within the global medical landscape has precipitated significant discursive tensions in contemporary Islamic jurisprudence, particularly concerning the ethical boundaries and legal legitimacy of using anthropomorphic robots for highly complex therapeutic purposes. Robotic technologies, such as the NAO model, have been shown to play a crucial role in clinical interactions for children with autism. However, current muʿāmalah (Islamic transactional and social law) literature shows a profound analytical deficit concerning the validity of waqf (charitable endowment) for movable assets that visually intersect with the prohibition of showing animate beings, or taṣwīr (the representation or depiction of living beings). Therefore, this study aims to reconstruct legal reasoning that systematically synchronizes classical philanthropic doctrines with cutting-edge medical technology innovations through a Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah (the objectives of Islamic law) approach and a comprehensive uṣūliyyah (principles of Islamic legal methodology) analysis of contemporary fatwā (authoritative legal opinions) consensuses. The results showed that the procurement and waqf ofanthropomorphic robots are Sharīʿah-compliant, based on the extension of qiyās (analogical reasoning) to pedagogical instruments and the principle of maṣlaḥah mursalah (unrestricted public interest), particularly in the protection of intellect and life. These considerations are prioritized over classical textual constraints, thereby offering a transformative legal-ethical framework capable of accommodating rapid medical-technological advancement to achieve sustainable human welfare in the digital era.

Fatwa and Legal Reasoning on Inheritance in Temporary Marriage

Zahra Mehrabi, Hossein Saberi, Mohammad Hasan Haeri — Tue, 10 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0700

The issue of inheritance in nikāḥ al-munqaṭiʿ/mutʿah (temporary marriage) has long occupied a significant position in both classical and contemporary Islamic jurisprudential discourse, generating diverse and often conflicting legal opinions (ārāʾ) among Muslim jurists. At the core of this debate lies the issue of whether spouses in a temporary marriage are entitled to mutual inheritance, given the contractual, time-bound, and non-permanent nature of the unions. The dominant juristic view generally denies the existence of inheritance in nikāḥ al-munqaṭiʿ unless such rights are explicitly stipulated within the marriage contract. In contrast, a less widely adopted position, most particularly attributed to Sayyid Murtaḍā, affirms the establishment of mutual inheritance between spouses in temporary marriage, provided no contractual clause explicitly negates inheritance. This view has been both supported and criticized within the juristic tradition, largely due to divergent interpretations of scriptural evidence, contractual principles, and the legal consequences arising from the marriage relationship. Therefore, this study aims to systematically examine the theoretical foundations of inheritance in temporary marriage through the analytical framework of the general theory of ʿaqd al-nikāḥ (the marriage contract). The four major juristic theories concerning inheritance in nikāḥ al-munqaṭiʿ were identified and critically mapped, outlining the doctrinal bases and methodological assumptions. An in-depth analysis of Sayyid Murtaḍā’s view was then conducted, including coherence and legal plausibility in light of the essential elements, objectives, and normative implications of marriage as a binding juridical institution. The results showed that Sayyid Murtaḍā position is closely consistent with the general contractual logic of marriage, particularly the presumption of shared marital rights and obligations unless explicitly excluded, thereby reinforcing the theoretical robustness and jurisprudential defensibility within Islamic family law.

Negotiating Worship Priorities

Mahroof Athambawa, Abd. Rauf Muhammad Amin — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0700

Legal tensions between qurban and aqīqah under contemporary socio-economic constraints require a systematic reorientation of worship priorities that balances personal devotional obligations with collective social responsibility. Although classical fiqh literature has discussed the legal status of both rituals, scholarly attention to how authoritative fatwa institutions operationalize methodological tools to reconcile normative texts with modern economic realities remains limited. Therefore, this study aims to examine official fatwa issued by Al-Azhar, a leading reference institution in the Muslim world, focusing on how it formulates priority judgments when Muslims face financial limitations. Using a qualitative design, discursive content analysis was applied to selected Al-Azhar fatwa, which integrate the framework of Fiqh al-Awlawiyyat (jurisprudence of priorities) and the Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah approach to identify the ratio legis (ʿillat al-ḥukm), supporting Al-Azhar prioritization logic. The results showed that Al-Azhar consistently prioritizes qurban over aqīqah. This is reflected through istislāḥī reasoning that emphasizes qurban as a muwaqqat (time-bound) ritual whose benefits extend beyond the individual to broader communal welfare. The prioritization is further reinforced by the ritual strong association with public distribution, poverty alleviation, and social solidarity, making it more consistent with maṣlaḥah ʿāmmah (public interest) in contexts of economic disparity. The results contribute to contemporary Islamic legal studies by clarifying how Al-Azhar negotiates worship conflicts through priority-based reasoning and proposing a practical normative model for lower-middle-class urban Muslim communities in managing competing devotional practices under financial pressure.

Triple Divorce in a Single Utterance in Libyan Dar al-Ifta Fatwas

Mowafg Masuwd, Nahid Ayad, Safa Alrumayh, Naser Abdulghani — Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0700

This study examines how the Libyan Dar al-Ifta (2012-2016) implements ahkam on triple divorce pronounced in a single utterance (ṭalāq al-thalāth bi-lafẓ wāḥid) or closely related patterns which related to divorce counting. Using a qualitative, document-based design method and juristic content analysis, the study examines a purposive corpus of published fatwas addressing (1) explicit numerical pronouncements “by three”, (2) repeated utterances (ṭāliq / hiya ṭāliq) framed as emphasis versus multiple enactments, and (3) conditional divorce and divorce oaths. Results show that the majority juristic position and authoritative transmissions are used to enforce the fatwa (explicit-number and conditional “three”). Repetition treated as emphasis under constrained intention. Moreover, the study reveals an institutional duality in Libya in which fatwas often enforce conditional or oath-based triggers and count explicit-number pronouncements as three if the awareness is present. On the other hand, Law No. 10 of 1984 limits the effect of numbered divorce to one, prevents conditional divorce and divorce-oath effects. This contradiction between the fatwas and the law is interpreted as a distribution of Maqāṣid across institutions, where prevention and safeguarding the seriousness of divorce language are emphasized in fatwa practice, while harm reduction and family stability are institutionalized through legal policy and procedure. This study, empirically, contributes the ongoing discussions of fatwa reasoning in society and clarifies how the tension between Ibn Abbas hadith and the majority pathway is managed and understood as evidence or an exception rather than a rule.

Re-evaluating Islamic Banking Fatwas in Indonesia

Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0700

The rapid expansion of Islamic finance has intensified scrutiny of how religious authority is institutionalized within modern regulatory systems, particularly in Indonesia where fatwas issued by the Dewan Syariah Nasional – Majelis Ulama Indonesia (National Sharia Board - Indonesian Council of Ulama) become binding only after incorporation into regulations issued by the Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK) or Financial Services Authority. This study aims to re-evaluate Indonesia’s Islamic banking fatwa framework by examining its institutional translation mechanisms, degree of alignment with international standards issued by the Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions and the Islamic Financial Services Board, and its impact on substantive maqasid realization. Using a qualitative institutional-regulatory design, the research analyzes 42 DSN-MUI fatwas, 27 OJK regulations, 18 AAOIFI standards, 12 IFSB standards, and Islamic banking portfolio data from 2015 to 2024. The findings indicate that Indonesia’s hybrid model ensures procedural legal certainty and structured fatwa-to-regulation incorporation but exhibits only partial global harmonization and a persistent dominance of debt-based contracts, reflecting a gap between formal compliance and outcome-based governance. Theoretically, the study introduces the concept of regulatory theology to explain how religious interpretation becomes embedded within the regulatory state, extending norm diffusion theory by incorporating epistemic sovereignty as a mediating variable. Practically, the research recommends stronger institutional independence, clearer codification, measurable maqasid performance indicators, and phased harmonization strategies. The originality of this study lies in reframing Islamic banking fatwa analysis from doctrinal validity toward governance-centered institutional performance grounded in empirical regulatory and portfolio evidence

Halal Certification for Non-Muslim-Owned Restaurants in Brunei Darussalam

Hafini bin Mahmud, Cecep Soleh Kurniawan, Hajah Mas Nooraini binti Haji Mohiddin — Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0700

Halal certification is a central institutional mechanism for strengthening Muslim consumer confidence in restaurants and food premises within Brunei Darussalam. Although halal logo is widely perceived as an assurance of lawful consumption, a critical legal and juristic question of whether halal certification requires the restaurant owner to be a Muslim remains. Therefore, this study aims to examine the practical implementation of halal certification for non-Muslim-owned restaurants in Brunei Darussalam relative to State Mufti opinions and the juristic reasoning attributed to Imam al-Nawawī within the Shāfiʿī legal tradition. A library-based method was used with a qualitative design. Data were collected from classical fiqh texts, contemporary fatwa, national legislation, administrative regulations, and relevant policy documents. The collected materials were then analyzed through content analysis to identify normative arguments, regulatory standards, and points of legal tension. The results showed that Brunei current administrative practice allows halal certification for restaurants owned by non-Muslims under specific procedural and supervisory conditions. However, a significant inconsistency was found between the operational policy and the State Mufti juristic position, particularly concerning ownership, authority over food preparation, and the reliability of compliance. By integrating regulatory analysis with classical jurisprudence, the results contribute to the broader discourse on halal governance, Islamic legal authority, and contemporary policy implementation in Muslim-majority states. In conclusion, this study underscores the need for clearer regulatory harmonization between state fatwa institutions and halal certification agencies to ensure legal coherence and sustained public trust.