Journal of Islamic Law https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current <p>The <em><strong>Journal of Islamic Law</strong></em><strong>&nbsp;</strong>is a peer-reviewed online Journal—published together with a regular <em><strong>Forum</strong></em>—that features new scholarship in Islamic legal studies. Focusing on historical, comparative, and&nbsp;law and society approaches to Islamic law, we&nbsp; also have a keen interest in featuring&nbsp;<em>data science tools</em> and <em>primary sources </em>that inform scholarly analysis. The&nbsp;<a href="https://beta.shariasource.com/">SHARIAsource Portal</a>&nbsp;houses both the tools and the sources, and it provides an opportunity for scholars to curate an <em>online companion</em> to their scholarly contributions to the <em>Journal </em>or the <em>Forum</em>. The&nbsp;<em>Journal</em>&nbsp;welcomes long-form articles, essays, book and tech reviews, and notes on cases and other new developments in the field. The more dynamic and slightly less formal&nbsp;<em>Forum</em> provides&nbsp;space for timely scholarly engagement and debate: invited roundtables on thematic issues of the day, essays on underexplored manuscripts or recent articles, and presentations of data science tools developed for or applied to the field. The&nbsp;<em>Journal&nbsp;</em>is on an annual schedule, and its related&nbsp;<em>Forum&nbsp;</em>will feature new content throughout the year. Our editorial board and peer reviewers select scholarship on the basis of excellence and novel contributions to the field. For submission details, see the&nbsp;<a href="https://hlspil.wpengine.com/journal-submission-guidelines/">submission guidelines</a>.</p> en-US pil@law.harvard.edu (Program in Islamic Law) pil@law.harvard.edu (Program in Islamic Law) Fri, 12 Jun 2026 17:44:07 +0000 OJS 3.1.1.4 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 Judicial Treatment of Religious-Only Marriages Under English Matrimonial Laws https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/abbasi1 <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">This article examines how judges of courts in England and Wales treat religious-only marriages, particularly Islamic marriages (</span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">nikāḥ</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">). It analyses how judges have approached </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">nikāḥ</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">-based unions under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, distinguishing between valid, void, and non-qualifying ceremonies. Drawing on leading judicial authorities from the 1960s to 2025, I trace the transformation of judicial reasoning from questions of formality and jurisdiction to issues of human rights, equality, and non-discrimination. I argue that the insistence of judges on legal formalities has produced a dual system: one that privileges state-sanctioned forms of Anglican Christian and civil marriages while leaving other religious-only and humanist unions without legal protection. The article concludes that the challenge is not merely one of doctrinal classification but of reconciling multiple legal norms within a secular framework that aspires to equality, inclusion, and neutrality regarding religious practices.</span></em></p> Muhammad Zubair Abbasi ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/abbasi1 Sun, 05 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000 The Islamic Doctrine of Takfīr (Excommunication) https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/nakissa <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">This article traces the long-term historical development of Islamic doctrine on </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">takfīr</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (excommunication, declaring a self-professed Muslim to be a disbeliever). I focus on a line of influential scholars associated with the </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">ahl al-ḥadīth</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> and the Ḥanbalī school—Ibn Ḥanbal (d. 241/855), Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328), and Muḥammad Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb (d. 1206/1792)—and examine how these scholars view </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">takfīr</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> in relation to three key topics: non-application of the </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">sharīʿa</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">, denial of Allah’s attributes (</span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">ṣifāt</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">), and </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">shirk</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (taking a being other than Allah as a god). In addition, I document the scholars’ varying approach to the “excuse for ignorance” (</span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">al-ʿudhr bi’l jahl</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">) that prevents </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">takfīr</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> for individuals who lack knowledge of relevant Islamic teachings and examine the role of historical events and politics in shaping the development of the </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">takfīr</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> doctrine, with the focus of scholars’ attention shifting according to the circumstances confronting them.</span></em></p> Aria Nakissa ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/nakissa Sun, 05 Apr 2026 21:51:01 +0000 Recalibrating Takāful’s Compass to Mālikī Sources https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/afridi <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">This article revisits the </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">tabarruʿ</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (donative) versus </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">muʿāwaḍa</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (onerous/reciprocal exchange) distinction in the Mālikī school—a widely invoked justificatory frame for </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">takāful</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (Islamic insurance)—and examines how far that distinction transposes to </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">takāful</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">’s constitutive contract. It traces the reception history and excavates its classical origins, bringing to light three overlooked insights: al-Qarāfī’s three-feature </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">gharar</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (uncertainty) test for exchange contracts, Mālik’s tripartite taxonomy of legal dispositions, and his rationale for tolerating </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">gharar</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> in gratuitous contracts. The argument starts with an orientation that surfaces the paradigm-level assumptions and disciplinary priorities often latent in </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">takāful</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">’s doctrinal-technical debates and clarifies the article’s scope and methodological limits. It then proceeds to a logical deconstruction of the received dichotomy, then to a reconstruction of its reception pathway, and finally to a close reading of its classical Mālikī sources. Engaging al-Qarāfī’s Distinction 24 (the standard reference point for the issue) together with the canonical Mālikī text </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">al-Mudawwana</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">, the article proposes a constructive recalibration: shifting discourse away from a rigid, label-driven </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">tabarruʿ–muʿāwaḍa</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> binary toward Mālik’s tripartite scheme, guided by al-Qarāfī’s three features and more faithful to the Islamic moral-juristic economy.</span></em></p> Habiba Afridi ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/afridi Sun, 05 Apr 2026 21:49:05 +0000 Beyond Consent https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/alazemi <p style="font-weight: 400;"><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">In this article, I examine how Mālikī jurists in the Moroccan Atlas confronted a recurring practice in which women renounced their Qurʾānic inheritance shares in favor of male kin through ostensibly voluntary transfers. I situate these renunciations within a moral economy of family cohesion, modesty, and communal landholding, in which women’s proprietary claims were reframed as threats to patrilineal solidarity. Against this background, I analyze how late Mālikī </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">nawāzil</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> developed evaluative tools for distinguishing formal compliance from legally operative </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">riḍā</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (genuine consent) under conditions of social pressure. The study centers on a </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">fatwā</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> by Shaykh al-Kīkī (d. 1185/1772), who invokes the </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">makhzan</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">/</span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">sība</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> divide to argue that consent produced in tribal settings marked by customary compulsion and weak judicial enforcement cannot be treated as legally dispositive. Through a close reading of al-Kīkī’s reasoning alongside earlier Mālikī discussions of </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">ikrāh</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (coercion) and consent, I show how Maghribī jurists rendered non-physical pressures legally salient. By foregrounding the jurisprudential significance of political geography and rural legal practice, I offer an internally grounded account of how Islamic law could accommodate custom while delimiting it when it undermined protected rights.</span></em></p> Abdulrahman Alazemi ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/alazemi Sun, 05 Apr 2026 21:52:01 +0000 Celebrating the Birth of the Prophet in British India https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/qazi <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">In nineteenth-century British India, the celebration of the birth of the Prophet or</span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> mawlid </span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">became a contested ritual amongst Muslim scholars. One such scholar, Aḥmad Raẓā Khān (d. 1340/1921), founder of the Barelwī movement and a Sufi shaykh of the Qādiriyya fraternity, advocated strongly for its permissibility. It was his understanding of the ritual that ultimately became a core differentiating factor between more than 200 million adherents of the Barelwī movement and the rest of the Muslims in the Indian subcontinent. Accordingly, this article examines the manner in which the </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">mawlid</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;"> was conducted in nineteenth- to twentieth-century British India, including the type of practices associated with its undertaking and key debates regarding the ritual amongst Muslim scholars (</span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">ʿulamāʾ</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">). Situating Aḥmad Raẓā’s views in the context of these debates, and against the backdrop of the political and communal environment of the time, I examine his thought on the legal status and significance of the mawlid celebration and associated practices. I also explore how he positioned his views within the broader Islamic tradition. I base my conclusions on a detailed qualitative and, to a certain extent, quantitative analysis of Aḥmad Raẓā’s complete </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">mawlid fatwā</span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">s and treatises, which were recently gathered into a thirty-volume compendium.</span></em></p> Osman Qazi ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://journalofislamiclaw.com/current/article/view/qazi Sun, 05 Apr 2026 21:53:05 +0000