SHARIAsource

Diniyah Takmiliyah Awwaliyah education is a non-formal Islamic religious education stream, led by the Diniyah head, the purpose of which is to provide participants with the opportunity to advance their lives as good, devout, practising Muslims (art 3 and 4). The overall duration of study is four years (art 6), and is designed for students in grades 3-6 of their primary schooling (art 7). The curriculum comprises:

1. Qur'anic-Hadith study;
2. worship (ibadah syari'ah);
3. creed and morals (aqidah - akhlaq);
4. Islamic cultural history (Tarikh Islam);
5. Arabic; and
6. practical worship (praktik ibadah) (art 17).

This regional regulation states that Diniyah Takmiliyah education is based on the Pancasila ('five principles' - Indonesian state ideology) and the 1945 Constitution (art 2). It defines Diniyah Takmiliyah education as non-formal Islamic religious education (art 3), that operates to meet the Islamic religious educational needs of primary school students (art 4), intended to provide religious competency to students in order that they develop into knowledgable, God-believing, God-mindful, practising and noble Muslims (art 5). The duration of Diniyah Takmiliyah is four years (art 6), and the curriculum comprises:

1. Qur'anic-Hadith literacy;
2. creed-morals (aqidah-akhlak);
3. legal understanding-worship (fiqih-ibadah);
4. Islamic cultural history;
5. Arabic; and
6. practical worship (praktek ibadah) (art 13).

The purpose of this regional regulation, which obliges students to attend Madrasah Diniyah Awaliyah, is to provide those students with Islamic religious competencies to develop their lives as devout, God-mindful, pious, and noble Muslims (art 3(1)). The regulation defines Madrasah Diniyah Awaliyah as a religious education unit outside of school that administers Islamic religious education at the primary level and its teaching, both classical and non-classical (art 1(7)). The duration of Madrasah Diniyah Awaliyah education is four years, for students aged 6 to 12 years (art 4), and the curriculum, at a minimum, includes:

1. the Qur'an;
2. Hadith;
3. creed and morals (aqidah akhlak);
4. legal understanding (fiqih);
5. Islamic cultural history;
6. Arabic langauge; and
7. worship practice (praktek ibadah) (art 9(1)).

This fatwa states that there are two conflicting opinions regarding divorce (pronouncement of talak). The first is that the pronouncement of talak three times at once is akin to the third talak. This opinion was held by the Companions of the Prophet (Sahaba), the Tabi'in (the next generation), and imams of all four schools (mazhab) of Sunni Islamic thought. The counter opinion is that pronouncement of talak three times at once is only akin to the first of three pronouncements of talak. This opinion was held by Thawus, the Imamiyah school (mazhab) of Shi'a Islamic thought, Ibnu Taimiyah, and Ahlu az-Zahir. The fatwa states that the Committee finds the former opinion to be more sound. It also notes that marriage and divorce is regulated for Muslims in ss 10 and 31 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and ss 14-18 of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975.

The fatwa states that efforts must be made to prevent three pronouncements of talak at once occurring again. Moreover, that if state marriage laws are implemented correctly, there will be no more incidents of three pronouncements of talak at once in Indonesia. The fatwa also acknowledges the significance of the role of the religious courts (pengadilan agama) in preventing such incidents occurring in the future.

This is a reference to how Mālik b. Anas (the eponym of the Mālikī school of law) remembered Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq: exceptional in his manners and religious devotion.

This source is part of the Online Companion to Hossein Modarressi, Text and Interpretation: Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq and His Legacy in Islamic Law (Harvard University Press, 2022).

This is a reference to how Mālik b. Anas (the eponym of the Mālikī school of law) remembered Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq: exceptional in his manners and religious devotion.

This source is part of the Online Companion to Hossein Modarressi, Text and Interpretation: Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq and His Legacy in Islamic Law (Harvard University Press, 2022).

This is a reference to how Mālik b. Anas (the eponym of the Mālikī school of law) remembered Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq: exceptional in his manners and religious devotion.

This source is part of the Online Companion to Hossein Modarressi, Text and Interpretation: Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq and His Legacy in Islamic Law (Harvard University Press, 2022).

The applicant sought dispensation to enable his 15 year old son (Nasri bin Sampara) to marry his 21 year old girlfriend (Sasmita binti Idris). The applicant's son was 15 years and four months, had completed primary school, and was unemployed. The applicant claimed that all relevant requirements to conduct an Islamic marriage had been met, other than that his son was not yet 19 years of age (the required age at law). The applicant emphasised the urgency of the matter given that his son and his girlfriend had already displayed signs that they intended to become physically intimate, something prohibited under Islam if out of wedlock. While the Office of Religious Affairs had dismissed his application to register their proposed marriage, the applicant submitted that there were no legitimate reasons that they should not be married.

The court acceded to the application, stating that the two had an inseparable bond, and that they would otherwise be unable to abstain from contravening morality and Islamic norms if they remained unmarried. Moreover, they were not being coerced into marriage, they were not siblings, nor had they ever shared a wet-nurse, and their engagement had been assented to by both their parents. The court saw no other reason to prevent the marriage, as envisaged in art of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and arts 39 and 40 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, and therefore, pursuant to art 7(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974, granted dispensation to marry.

The parties were married on 22 October 2000 at the Office of Religious Affairs (Kantor Urusan Agama) in West Bekasi, and had one child. After marrying, they lived in a rental property in Solo for approximately six years, before moving to Banda Aceh. The plaintiff alleged that, since 2010, the parties had begun to quarrel regularly because the defendant had failed to provide sufficiently for his family. Family members had sought to reconcile the parties, but to no avail. On 30 September 2010, the defendant orally divorced the plaintiff (declared talak), and in January 2011, the defendant left the plaintiff and their child (then-aged 2) never to return. Since then the defendant had failed to provide the defendant with any financial or emotional support, and had only provided the defendant with a modest amount of money after their child had started school. Accordingly, the plaintiff sought a judicial divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

The court acceded to the plaintiff's request, pursuant to art 70(1) of Law No. 7 of 1989, in conjunction with art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, on the grounds of irreconcilable differences and ongoing conflict.

This regional regulation states that Muslim dress is to show that a person or society is devoted to Allah Subhanahu wa ta'ala by practising Islamic teachings (art 2). The purpose of Muslim dress is to:

1. engender the attitude of a good and noble Muslim;
2. familiarise Muslim dress with everyday life, and for the sake of Islamic symbolism;
3. create a society that loves Islamic and Minangkabau culture; and
4. preserve customary values and Minangkabau culture in accordance with the adage 'Syarak Mangato Adat Memakai' (art 3).

The regulation also states that Muslim dress operates to guarantee respect and the identity of the Islamic ummah, as well as Minangkabau customary culture (art 4). It makes Muslim dress obligatory for workers, university students, as well as public and Islamic school students (art 5). Muslim dress, for men, is long trousers and a short- or long-sleeve shirt (art 8(1)(a)), while for women it is a long-sleeve shirt that covers the hips and reaches the knees, a skirt that reaches the ankles, and a headscarf (kerudung) that covers the hair, ears, neck, nape, and chest (art 8(1)(b)).

This is a reference to Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq's position on the consequences of ignorance of the law, especially among new converts. Hossein Modarressi cites this reference as an example of one of the legal presumptions of al-Ṣādiq's legal school: the effect of ignorance.

This source is part of the Online Companion to Hossein Modarressi, Text and Interpretation: Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq and His Legacy in Islamic Law (Harvard University Press, 2022).

While this regional regulation does not specifically refer to religion (agama) or Islam, it aims to provide legal certainty for the community and law-enforcers in the monitoring and controlling of the distribution of alcoholic beverages. It is also concerned with societal behaviour and curbing crime resulting from alcohol abuse. It categorises alcoholic beverages in accordance with their alcoholic content (A - 0-5%; B - 6-20%; C - 21-55%) and qualifies that they may only be distributed and sold by direct sellers in: 

1. 3-, 4-, or 5-star hotels; and
2. certain fine-dining restaurants (Tanda Talam Kencana dan Talam Seloka).

Alcohol of types B and/or C sold in the above designated places may be consumed in hotel rooms on the condition that containers contain no more than 187 ml. If the region does not have such designated places, the regulation permits the regent to designate such places, after considering the tourist activities conducted in the area. The regulation places a blanket prohibition on beverages with an alcoholic content in excess of 55%.

Retailers are only permitted to sell alcohol in packaging, in designated areas, away from places of worship, schools, hospitals, or other places stipulated by the regent. The regent is also required to assemble a team comprising specialists in trade, industry, health, tourism, security and social order. The regulation also regulates the storage of alcoholic beverages, obligates alcohol vendors to submit official quarterly reports of their alcohol sales to the Kepala Dinas, and obliges society to assist in the monitoring and controlling of the distribution of alcoholic beverages.

The parties were married on 28 July 2001 and had two children. At the beginning of their marriage, they had agreed to live in a home owned by the applicant in Bogor. When the respondent was seven-months pregnant with their first child, however, the parties agreed to move to the respondent's parents' home in Bekasi. Initially, when the parties would have a disagreement, the applicant thought it was fleeting and merely part and parcel of domestic life. The applicant preferred to concede defeat, rather than perpetuate further disagreement and quarrelling. Since their third year of marriage, however, the applicant submitted that the parties quarrelled regularly and were no longer compatible. The applicant submitted that this was due to:

1. a difference of opinion between the parties;
2. the respondent not being able to adopt the lifestyle of the applicant, as required in order for the applicant to earn a living;
3. the respondent not fulfilling the applicant's requests to meet his physical needs while their first child was between the age of 4-18 months;
4. the respondent not fulfilling the applicant's requests to meet his physical needs for 12 months after she was four-months pregnant with their second child;
5. after a while, the applicant himself no longer wanting to be physically intimate with the respondent because he no longer loved her;
6. the applicant having suggested to the respondent after the birth of their first child that they no longer live with the respondent's parents so that they could become more independent, and so that the applicant could feel more comfortable and free to do as he pleased without the respondent's parents present;
7. the applicant finally being able to convince the respondent that they should purchase their own home not too far from her parents' home; and
8. having their own home meant the applicant could invite family and relatives to their home whenever he chose.

The applicant conceded that as the parties' children were under the age of 12 (not yet mumayyiz), they should remain in the custody of the respondent, but that he would provide financial support for their schooling and living expenses. The applicant was also prepared to provide the respondent with IDR 6 million for iddah (100-day period after divorce has been granted) and IDR 1 million in mut'ah (divorce compensation). The applicant also specified as joint assets of the parties a house in Bekasi and a 2010 Proton Exora vehicle.

The respondent conceded many of the points of the applicant's claim, but submitted that the applicant had been duplicitous, by engaging commercial sex workers and other women for sex (zina), since 2003. The respondent also submitted that one month into her first pregnancy she had been ordered by her obstetrician to stay in bed for two weeks after she had experienced some bleeding associated with the pregnancy. This had caused her to want to avoid being physically intimate with the applicant, rather than any desire not to value her husband. At the time of giving birth to their first child, the respondent had also experienced trauma and further bleeding, which had continued to haunt her. When the respondent had begun to overcome this physical and psychological trauma, the applicant was no longer interested in being physically intimate with the respondent. Moreover, at the time, the respondent would never have guessed that the applicant was being duplicitous.

The court found that ongoing conflict between the parties satisfied the sufficient reason requirement to grant the applicant a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i), per art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

This is a reference to unusual sexual behaviors that were espoused by the school of Medina based on the idea that a wife's entire body was available for her husband's pleasure. Hossein Modarressi cites this reference to show that, along with other schools and jurists, Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq strictly forbade such sexual relations.

This source is part of the Online Companion to Hossein Modarressi, Text and Interpretation: Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq and His Legacy in Islamic Law (Harvard University Press, 2022).

This regional regulation makes provision for the obligation on all Muslim high school students and workers in Bulukumba, South Sulawesi (Sulawesi Selatan) to wear Muslim dress (arts 5 and 6). In preambular statement (c), the regulation states that covering one's aurat (modesty) in Islam is obligatory during ibadah (worship). The regulation states that the meaning of Muslim dress is to show that one is God-mindful and pious, and that they are putting Islam into practice (art 2). Meanwhile, the aim of Muslim dress standards is to form Muslim attitudes that are good and noble (art 3(1)), to make Muslim dress in daily life the norm, both in family life and public life (art 3(2)), and to create a society that observes and carries out its religion (art 3(3)).

Specifically, male workers must wear trousers or shorts that reach their knees, as well as a short- or long-sleeved shirt, while female workers must wear a long-sleeved shirt that covers their hips, a skirt or trousers that reaches their ankles, and a headscarf (kerundung) that covers their hair, ears, neck, nape, and chest (art 7(1)). Male students are to wear shorts and either a short- or long-sleeved shirt, while female students are to wear a shirt that covers their hips and chest, a skirt or trousers that covers their ankles, and a headscarf (kerundung) that covers their hair, ears, neck, nape, and chest (art 8(1)).

A Toledan man named Ibn Ḥātim was accused of being a heretic by sixty witnesses on the initiative of a fellow Toledan called Ibn Labīd al-Murābiṭ. The judge consulted with the local jurists, and following their legal opinions, he sentenced the accused to death. However, he granted the accused the right to challenge the witnesses (iʿdhār). Ibn Ḥātim escaped from Toledo and found refuge in the neighboring kingdom of Badajoz. Ibn Labīd went after him, carrying a copy of the judge’s sentence (tasjīl) along with the legal opinions of a number of non-Toledan jurists. In Badajoz, the ruler withdrew his support from Ibn Ḥātim, who fled again, this time to Cordoba. While in Cordoba, the “moral” police arrested Ibn Ḥātim, and the judge imprisoned him, giving him two months to prove his innocence. Unable to do so, Ibn Ḥātim was crucified alive. A number of legal issues arise in the course of this case: should the process of iʽdhār—the right to challenge witnesses—be granted to those accused of heresy (zandaqa)? Should refuge be granted to them? What happens with the estate or inheritance of an executed zindīq? Can a judge reverse a sentence given by another judge? The source is a collection of court cases by Andalusi scholar Ibn Sahl (d. 486/1093), and it is based on information directly available to the compiler, who was also a witness of most of the events described.

Represents the territory of the Umayyads and the Emirate in Spain, the time when the Mālikī school flourished and came to dominate in the region.

This source is part of the Online Companion to the print edition al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, the Royal Moroccan Edition: The Recension of Yaḥyā Ibn Yaḥyā al-Laythī (Harvard Series in Islamic Law), edited and translated by Mohammad Fadel and Connell Monette (PIL/HUP, 2019).

Represents the extent of the Umayyads in Spain, under whom the Mālikī school came to flourish and dominate in the region.

This source is part of the Online Companion to the print edition al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, the Royal Moroccan Edition: The Recension of Yaḥyā Ibn Yaḥyā al-Laythī (Harvard Series in Islamic Law), edited and translated by Mohammad Fadel and Connell Monette (PIL/HUP, 2019).

This is a reference to an alleged meeting that took place between Abū Ḥanīfa (the eponym of the Ḥanafī school) and Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq in the presence of the Abbasid caliph Manṣūr (r. 136-58) where Abū Ḥanīfa acknowledges Jaʿfar as being the most knowledgable person in religious law. Hossein Modarressi employs this reference to show how other Muslim scholars recognized Jaʿfar's mastery of Islamic law.

This source is part of the Online Companion to Hossein Modarressi, Text and Interpretation: Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq and His Legacy in Islamic Law (Harvard University Press, 2022).

This is a reference to an alleged meeting that took place between Abū Ḥanīfa (the eponym of the Ḥanafī school) and Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq in the presence of the Abbasid caliph Manṣūr (r. 136-58) where Abū Ḥanīfa acknowledges Jaʿfar as being the most knowledgable person in religious law. Hossein Modarressi employs this reference to show how other Muslim scholars recognized Jaʿfar's mastery of Islamic law.

This source is part of the Online Companion to Hossein Modarressi, Text and Interpretation: Imam Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq and His Legacy in Islamic Law (Harvard University Press, 2022).