HERMENEUTIKA HUKUM ISLAM KHALEED ABOU EL FADL DAN FATWA MUI TENTANG JILBAB

Abstrak

Contestation over interpretation in contemporary Islamic law often produces claims of authoritative truth that can lead to interpretive authoritarianism. This phenomenon appears when a particular reading is presented as the definitive will of God, thereby closing off dialogical space and plural interpretive possibilities. This article analyzes Khaled M. Abou El Fadl’s negative hermeneutics as a framework to resist interpretive authoritarianism and tests its relevance for reading the Indonesian Ulema Council’s (MUI) fatwa on the jilbab. The study employs a qualitative, critical-analytical approach to Abou El Fadl’s writings, especially Speaking in God’s Name: Islamic Law, Authority, and Women, and to MUI documents and discourses regarding the jilbab. The findings show that negative hermeneutics positions text, author, and reader in a balanced dialogical relation that prevents any single party from monopolizing meaning. Through the concepts of competence, meaning determination, and representation, Abou El Fadl distinguishes legitimate authority from authoritarianism that forecloses alternative interpretations. In the context of the jilbab fatwa, this approach indicates that while fatwas have normative authority, they are not absolute; they must consider social context, the moral objectives of the Shari‘a, and the principles of honesty, diligence, comprehensiveness, reasonableness, and self-restraint. The article’s main contribution is to apply negative hermeneutics as an analytical instrument for religious fatwas in Indonesia, offering a more dialogical, contextual, and maqasid-oriented reading of Islamic law without diminishing the authority of the Qur’an and Sunnah.