Abstract This study aims to explore the Bontowon Kon Bui’an marriage tradition practiced by the Bolaang Mongondow community in Indonesia, in which symbolic severance of kinship is required prior to endogamous marriage. While locally accepted as a means to maintain social harmony, the practice has raised theological concerns, particularly in light of Islamic teachings that emphasize the sanctity of family ties. The main objective is to assess whether this tradition qualifies as ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ a sound customary practice in Islamic law or stands in contradiction to Sharia principles.
Using a qualitative fieldwork
approach, data were gathered through participant observation, semi-structured
interviews with customary and religious leaders, and document analysis. The
analysis is framed by Islamic legal theories on ‘Urf and maqāṣid al-sharī’ah,
alongside the concept of living law in customary jurisprudence.
The findings reveal that the symbolic
act is not perceived as an actual breach of kinship but as a ritualized
mechanism to reconcile social norms with religious expectations. Religious
authorities demonstrate contextual tolerance, provided the ritual is understood
as cultural, not theological. Viewed through the lens of maqāṣid
al-sharī’ah, the tradition supports communal stability and the
prevention of familial discord objectives aligned with Islamic legal ethics.
This study contributes to Islamic
legal discourse by illustrating how local customs, when interpreted through
appropriate normative frameworks, can coexist with Sharia. It highlights the
adaptive and negotiated character of Islamic law in culturally plural settings.
Keywords: Bontowon
Kon Bui’an, Endogamous marriage, Islamic legal theory, Cultural ritual and
religion, Custom and Sharia integration
INTRODUCTION
Indonesia is a country rich in
cultural diversity and customs, including in terms of marriage practices.
Almost every region has its own unique form of wedding procession, reflecting
the social, spiritual, and historical values of its community. These traditions
are not merely cultural heritage but also play a significant role in regulating
social norms and shaping the collective identity of a community. One example is
the Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition found in the Bolaang Mongondow community in
North Sulawesi. This tradition is applied in the context of endogamous
marriage, which is a marriage between two individuals who still have a certain
kinship relationship. In practice, this procession requires a symbolic severing
of the family relationship between the two prospective spouses as a social
condition for the marriage to be permitted according to the prevailing customs.
This traditional procession is led by traditional elders and carried out from
generation to generation by the local community.
The existence of traditions such as
Bontowon Kon Bui’an shows that customary law still plays a significant role in
Indonesian society, even in aspects of family law that are often associated
with religious provisions. However, within the context of Muslim society, this
tradition has sparked debate as it is considered problematic from an Islamic
legal perspective. Specifically, the symbolic severing of family ties performed
in this customary ritual contradicts Islamic principles that emphasize the
importance of maintaining family ties. The Qur’an explicitly condemns the act
of severing family ties, as stated in Surah Muhammad, verses 22–23. Therefore,
there is a normative tension between the living and socially binding values of
customary law and the religious norms that serve as spiritual guidelines for
Muslim communities.
Previous studies have shown that the
debate between customary law and Islamic law in marriage practices is not new.
For example, Alzagladi studied the practice of Yoko in the Bolaang Mongondow
community and concluded that this practice can be categorized as a valid custom
according to Islam or ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ
because it does not contradict the principles of sharia[1]. Prayoga studied the practice of Doi’ Menere’
in the Bugis community and showed that although it is not part of the marriage
ceremony, the practice is accepted as a form of traditional gift[2].
Another study by Saladin on Merari, or elopement in Lombok, also shows that as
long as the Islamic marriage requirements are met, customary practices remain
religiously valid[3].
However, there are no studies that
specifically analyze the Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition within the framework of
Islamic law and the concept of ‘Urf in depth.
The main problem with this tradition lies in the symbolism of
severing family ties, which, if interpreted literally, contradicts Islamic
teachings. However, indigenous communities interpret this action not as a
substantial severing of ties, but as a symbolic act that serves to maintain
social harmony. The tension between indigenous symbolism and religious doctrine
is the crucial point that must be examined. Can this tradition be categorized
as ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ, which is
acceptable under Islamic law, or is it a form of ‘Urf fāsid that must be rejected because it
contradicts the basic principles of sharia?
A common solution to this tension in Islamic
legal studies is through a contextual approach to the concept of ‘Urf as a secondary source of law. In fiqh, ‘Urf
is understood as a custom of society
that has been widely accepted and does not contradict the principles of sharia.
Scholars distinguish between ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ, customs that are acceptable in
Islamic law, and ‘Urf fāsid,
customs that must be rejected because they contradict religious texts or
principles[4].
Using this approach, customary practices can be assessed fairly and
proportionally in accordance with their social context.
Furthermore, understanding the position of
customary law in Indonesian society can also be explained through the theory of
living law developed by Eugen Ehrlich and reinforced by the thoughts of Van
Vollenhoven and Ter Haar. This theory states that the law that actually lives
in society is not always written in legislation, but is manifested in social
customs that are practiced daily[5].
In the Indonesian context, customary law is considered to have normative power
even though it is not codified, and this is important to consider when
analyzing practices such as Bontowon Kon Bui’an, which continue to be carried
out by local communities from generation to generation.
In various similar studies, such as Paputungan’s
research on traditional marriage customs in Bolaang Mongondow [6],
It was found that customary law remains subject to the principles of Islamic
law as long as it does not conflict with the pillars of marriage. This was also
confirmed by Zulhadi and Mohsi in their study of endogamy practices in Sade,
Lombok, which showed that Islam does not reject all forms of marriage within
close relatives as long as it does not violate the principle of nasab[7].
Therefore, a contextual approach based on maqāṣid al-syarī’ah is
important in assessing the legitimacy of customary practices within the
framework of sharia.
In various similar studies, such as
Paputungan’s research on traditional marriage practices in Bolaang Mongondow,
it was found that customary law remains subject to the principles of Islamic
law as long as it does not conflict with the pillars of marriage. This is also
emphasized by Zulhadi and Mohsi in their study on endogamy practices in Sade,
Lombok, which shows that Islam does not reject all forms of marriage within
close relatives as long as they do not violate the principle of nasab.
Therefore, a contextual and maqāṣid al-syarī’ah-based approach is
important in assessing the validity of customary practices within the framework
of sharia.
However, there has been no study
that explicitly highlights the practice of severing family ties as the main
substance of Bontowon Kon Bui’an. The majority of previous studies have focused
more on the economic or ritualistic aspects of customary marriage practices,
such as dowry and customary payments, rather than theological and normative
aspects. The absence of critical studies on this aspect indicates a research
gap that needs to be filled in order to gain a more complete understanding of
the relationship between customary law and Islamic law in religious social
practices.
This study aims
to fill this gap by critically analyzing the Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition from
the perspective of Islamic law and customary law. This study attempts to
examine whether this tradition can be categorized as ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ, or whether it contradicts Sharia
norms. In this context, this study not only offers a normative analysis but
also considers the sociological and historical aspects of the local community.
The scope of the study covers the practice of symbolization in customary law,
the perceptions of religious and customary leaders, and the integration of
customary norms with the principles of maqāṣid al-syarī’ah. This study
also offers scientific justification for the hypothesis that the practice of
Bontowon Kon Bui’an is a form of cultural accommodation that is acceptable in
Islam, as long as it does not substantially contradict religious teachings.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The
study of local traditions in Indonesian Muslim society, especially those that
intersect with Islamic law and customary law, requires a comprehensive
conceptual approach. One of the main theoretical frameworks used to assess the
legitimacy of social practices is the concept of ‘Urf in Islamic law. In Usul Fiqh literature, ‘Urf
is understood as a social custom
that is accepted by common sense and practiced from generation to generation,
as long as it does not contradict Islamic law[8]. Al-Khallāf divides ‘Urf into two categories: ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ, which are customs that are in
accordance with Islamic principles, and ‘Urf fāsid, which are customs that
contradict them[9]. This understanding opens up space to assess
traditions such as Bontowon Kon Bui’an not only from a literal interpretation
of religious texts, but also from the surrounding socio-cultural context.
Furthermore, Wahbah Zuhaili emphasizes that ‘Urf
that does not contradict the Qur’an,
Sunnah, and maqāṣid al-syarī’ah can be used as a reference in Istinbath
law. Contemporary approaches such as those developed by Jasser Auda even
emphasize that Islamic law must be reformulated systematically in order to
respond to the needs of local communities without losing its essence[10].
This is where an important debate arises
between the textual-normative and contextual-substantive approaches in
assessing the validity of local customs such as the symbolic severing of family
ties in the Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition.
On the other hand, in the context of customary
law, the theory of living law contributes greatly to understanding the
continuity of local legal practices. Eugen Ehrlich stated that the law that
lives in society is not merely written law, but rather the law that is actually
practiced and obeyed by the community in their daily lives. This idea was later
adopted by Van Vollenhoven and B. Ter Haar in the Indonesian context, who
emphasized that customary law has normative power even though it is not
codified[11].
Therefore, the position of Bontowon Kon Bui’an as a tradition that continues to
be practiced consistently shows that it is part of the living law of the
Bolaang Mongondow community.
However, the relationship between customary law
and Islamic law in Indonesia is not always linear. As Hooker points out, there
is a process of negotiation between the two, in which communities often adapt
Islamic teachings to local values without eliminating the substance of Sharia
law[12].
In this context, the practice of Bontowon Kon Bui’an emerged as a local
strategy to circumvent the customary prohibition on endogamous marriage through
symbolic means, while still attempting to remain within the confines of Sharia
law.
The debate then escalated when the theological
aspects of this practice were examined. QS Muhammad verses 22–23 explicitly
prohibit severing ties of kinship, which is considered a form of corruption on
earth[13].
Al-Ghazālī even places silaturahmi as part of the essential ethical obligations
of Islam in maintaining the cohesion of the ummah . However, Yusuf al-Qaradawi
provides a more flexible interpretation by stating that silaturahmi/
social
gathering should not be understood as merely a
genealogical bond, but rather as a social relationship that upholds the values
of humanity and harmony. Thus, the symbolism in Bontowon Kon Bui’an can be
interpreted not as a true severance, but as an instrument of social mediation.
In social observation, the role of
symbolization in traditions such as this is not an unfamiliar phenomenon.
Clifford Geertz shows that traditional symbols often function as social glue
that maintains the stability of the community[14].
Therefore, the practice of Bontowon Kon Bui’an cannot be viewed merely as a
textual violation, but also as a sociocultural response to the tension between
kinship structures and religious norms.
To assess this more deeply, maqāṣid al-syarī’ah
provides a very useful normative framework. According to al-Syatibi, maqāṣid
includes protection of religion, life, reason, lineage, and property[15].
If symbolism in Bontowon Kon Bui’an is interpreted as an effort to avoid family
conflict and maintain social stability, then it does not contradict maqāṣid,
but may even support it. This is reinforced by Jasser Auda’s systemic approach,
which emphasizes the flexibility of Islamic law in the context of social
pluralism[16].
In practice, previous studies have shown variations
in how communities adapt Islamic law to local customs. Saladin (2013) concluded
that the practice of elopement in Merari, Lombok, remains valid under Islamic
law if it fulfills the requirements of marriage[17].
Meanwhile, Alzagladi (2018) considers that the Yoko tradition in Bolaang
Mongondow, which involves customary payments, is a form of ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ because it does not contradict
sharia law[18].
Paputungan (2020) also found that customary law in marriage is still accepted
by the community as long as it does not violate the principles and requirements
of marriage[19].
Prayoga’s (2016) research on Doi’ Menere’ in
Bugis society and Zulhadi and Mohsi’s (2019) research on endogamy in Lombok
confirm that local practices are often accepted as long as they do not violate
the principles of nasab or maqāṣid[20].
Meanwhile, Husaini and Ridhwan (2021) in their study of Mapparola in Bugis
state that post-marriage ritual practices are acceptable as long as they are
interpreted symbolically, not dogmatically[21].
Hasbi (2020) also shows that symbols in the Mapasari tradition of the Mandar
people are accepted flexibly because they are not considered to violate Islamic
principles. [22].
Outside the local context, Syahrin Harahap
(2005) explains that Islam in Indonesia has undergone a dialectical process
with local culture, resulting in a unique form of Islamic expression[23].
This idea is in line with Zainal Abidin Bagir’s concept of interlegality, which
explains that Indonesian society does not live under a single legal system, but
rather under overlapping legal systems (religious, state, customary) that are
negotiated in practice[24].
In a global context, Michael Peletz (2002)
states that Southeast Asian Muslim societies demonstrate the power of Islamic
law through dynamic interactions with local cultures, rather than through the
literal adoption of Arab norms[25].
Sally Engle Merry (2006) also states that law will always be interpreted within
a social context through symbolic practices that can strengthen social
legitimacy.[26].
Finally, Abdullahi An-Na’im (2008) emphasizes
that a rigid interpretation of Islamic law will hinder its ability to respond
to social realities. He encourages a contextual reinterpretation of Islamic law
so that it remains relevant to the dynamics of modern society[27].
Within this framework, Bontowon Kon Bui’an can be interpreted as a legitimate
form of negotiation between traditional values and Islamic principles, not as a
form of deviation, but rather as a form of living legal articulation.
METHODOLOGY
1. Approach and Type of Research
This study uses a qualitative approach with
field research aimed at exploring the meaning, social practices, and community
interpretations of the Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition in the Bolaang Mongondow
indigenous community. A qualitative approach was chosen because it is suitable
for conducting in-depth research on social and cultural phenomena in a natural
context. As stated by Denzin and Lincoln, this approach allows researchers to
understand the subjective and symbolic meanings formed through social
interactions in society[28].
This type of research is exploratory-analytical
in nature, as it not only seeks to describe existing customary practices, but
also analyzes them within the framework of Islamic law and customary law. Thus,
this method is not only descriptive, but also interpretive and normative.
2. Research Location and Subject
The research location is in the Bolaang
Mongondow region of North Sulawesi, which is a cultural center where the
Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition is still actively practiced. The location was
selected purposively, based on the consideration that the region is an
authentic representation of the customary practices being studied. A purposive
approach is highly relevant in qualitative research to obtain in-depth
information from sources who understand the practices directly[29].
The research subjects consist of three main
groups, namely 1). Traditional leaders, who lead or understand the structure
and meaning of the Bontowon Kon Bui’an procession; 2). Religious leaders, who
have religious authority in the community and can provide an Islamic legal
perspective on this traditional practice; and 3). Residents or practitioners of
the tradition, who are individuals or families who have undergone the
procession and can provide direct empirical experiences.
3. Data Collection
Techniques
Data collection was conducted using three main
techniques: participatory observation, in-depth interviews, and documentation.
a.
Participatory Observation
Observation is used to record the process of
carrying out traditional ceremonies directly, including the symbols used and
the sequence of rituals performed. This observation technique allows
researchers to capture the nonverbal dimensions of social practices that are
often overlooked in formal interviews[30].
b. In-depth interviews
The interviews were conducted in a
semi-structured manner to give informants the freedom to express their views
and experiences. These interviews allowed for the exploration of the
perceptions, values, and arguments of traditional and religious leaders
regarding the meaning and legality of traditions. This technique is in line
with Patton’s suggestion that in-depth interviews are the primary tool for
qualitative data collection because they explore life experiences in a
reflective manner.[31].
c.
Documentation
Documentation techniques were used to collect
data from local archives, traditional records, photographs of ceremonies, and
other relevant written documents. This documentation served as supporting data
and triangulation for the results of interviews and field observations.
4. Data Analysis Techniques
The collected data was analyzed descriptively
and qualitatively using the stages of data reduction, data presentation, and
conclusion drawing, as formulated by Miles and Huberman[32].
a. Data Reduction
This process involves selecting, focusing,
simplifying, and transforming raw data into a more meaningful form. Reduction
is carried out continuously during and after data collection.
b. Data Presentation
Data is presented in a systematic narrative
form to reveal general patterns, differences in perception, and symbolic
meanings in the traditional practices under study.
c. Drawing Conclusions and Verification
Conclusions are drawn based on the integration
of field findings and theoretical frameworks, particularly the theory of ‘Urf
in Islamic law and the theory of living
law in customary law. Data validity is strengthened through cross-verification
between sources and methods.
5. Data Validity
To maintain data validity and reliability, this
study uses source and method triangulation techniques. Source triangulation is
carried out by comparing information from traditional leaders, religious
leaders, and tradition practitioners. Meanwhile, method triangulation is
carried out by comparing the results of interviews, observations, and
documentation.
This technique is in line with the approach
recommended by Norman K. Denzin, who emphasizes the importance of using various
data sources and methods in qualitative studies to ensure the validity of
research results [33].
6. Theoretical Framework in
Analysis
The analysis of field data was conducted by
combining two main theoretical frameworks, namely:
a.
The Theory of ‘Urf in Islamic Law
This theory is used to assess the legal status
of the Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition, whether it falls under the category of ‘Urf
ṣaḥīḥ, which is acceptable in
Sharia law, or ‘Urf fāsid,
which must be rejected. This approach was developed by classical scholars such
as Al-Khallāf and Abu Zahrah, and expanded upon by contemporary thinkers such
as Wahbah Zuhaili and Jasser Auda[34].
b.
The Theory of Living Law in Customary Law
This theory explains the validity of customary
law that is alive and binding in society, even though it is not formally
written. In this case, the theory developed by Eugen Ehrlich, Van Vollenhoven,
and Ter Haar became the basis for assessing the position of customary law in
the social practices of the Bolaang Mongondow community[35].
RESULTS
1. General Description of
the Bontowon Kon Bui’an Tradition
The Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition is a form of
traditional procession carried out by the indigenous people of Bolaang
Mongondow, North Sulawesi, in the context of endogamous marriage, which is
marriage between individuals who are related. This tradition is a social
requirement that must be fulfilled by couples who are related by blood, such as
first or second cousins, even though they are not considered mahram according
to Islamic law. The main purpose of this procession is to symbolically “sever”
the family relationship so that the couple is no longer considered to have
close blood ties according to custom, thereby making the marriage acceptable to
the community.
This process consists of several stages,
including: family deliberation, consultation with traditional leaders, and the
performance of rituals that include symbolizing separation such as cutting the
rope, moving the bride and groom’s seats, and reciting traditional prayers.
This action is not intended to completely erase the blood relationship, but
rather as a form of “social cleansing” so that both parties are considered free
from traditional prohibitions.
Based on participatory observation and field documentation,
this tradition is still solemnly practiced by traditional communities,
especially in villages that still strongly uphold traditional structures and
the existence of traditional institutions. This shows that customary law still
has normative power in the social life of the community, even in the private
sphere such as marriage.
2. Views of Traditional
Leaders and Local Communities
In-depth interviews with traditional elders
revealed that this tradition is a form of local wisdom that serves to maintain
social harmony and the honor of the extended family. Traditional leaders
emphasized that this procession is not a violation of religion, but rather a
middle ground created to avoid internal conflicts between families. One
traditional leader stated:
“We never teach our people to hate their
relatives. But if Bontowon is not performed, the villagers will reject the
marriage. This has been the custom for a long time.”
In-depth interviews with traditional elders
reveal that this tradition is a form of local wisdom that serves to maintain
social harmony and the honor of the extended family. Traditional leaders
emphasize that this procession is not a violation of religion, but rather a
middle ground created to avoid internal conflicts between families. One
traditional leader stated:
"We never teach our children to hate their
siblings. But if Bontowon is not performed, the villagers will reject the
marriage. This has been the custom for a long time.”
This statement shows that the existence of
Bontowon Kon Bui’an has strong social legitimacy. It is not merely ritualistic,
but rather a mechanism for conflict resolution and social relationship
management in a community that highly values family structure.
In addition, people who have undergone this
procession say that they understand the symbolic meaning of the tradition. Most
do not interpret it as a severing of blood ties, but as a form of social
recognition that they have fulfilled the norms that apply in the community.
This shows that there is a distinction between the social and theological
meanings of traditional practices.
3. Religious Leaders’ Views:
Tension and Tolerance
The views of the religious leaders interviewed
show ambivalence towards the Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition. On the one hand,
they recognize that the symbolic act of severing family ties is normatively
contrary to the principle of friendship in Islam. In QS Muhammad: 22–23, Allah
condemns those who sever family ties, which is considered a violation of social
and moral order[36].
However, religious leaders also stated that in
the local context, this practice could be tolerated as long as it was not
interpreted as a theological belief, but merely as a social symbol. A village
imam stated:
“As long as the intention is not to completely
sever ties, and they still greet each other, I think it’s fine. This is a
matter of culture, not faith.”
This statement shows that there’s room for
negotiation between traditional norms and Islamic teachings, which are carried
out pragmatically by local religious leaders. In some cases, religious leaders
even get involved in giving prayers at the end of the procession, as a form of
normative syncretism that shows openness to social interpretations of religious
texts.[37].
4. Islamic Legal Assessment:
‘Urf Khāṣ and the
Perspective of Maqāṣid al-Syarī’ah
This analysis of the tradition uses the concept
of ‘Urf khāṣ in Islamic
law, which refers to local customs that apply only to certain communities and
have become long-standing practices. According to Al-Khallāf, ‘Urf can be used as a basis for law if it meets the
conditions of being a custom that does not contradict the text and does not
undermine the objectives of Sharia[38].
In this context, Bontowon Kon Bui’an meets the criteria as ‘Urf khāṣ ṣaḥīḥ because it does not
explicitly contradict the Qur’an or Sunnah, as long as it is not interpreted
literally as severing ties.
Furthermore, the maqāṣid al-syarī’ah
approach becomes an important analytical framework for assessing whether this
practice brings maslahat (benefit) or mudarat (harm). Based on
al-Syātibi’s theory, one of the objectives of sharia is to preserve nasl
(descendants) and ‘aql (reason) through social stability. In this case,
Bontowon Kon Bui’an can be interpreted as a social instrument to avoid
divisions within the community due to violations of customary norms.
The approach developed by Jasser Auda also
emphasizes the importance of reading local practices through a systemic
approach, in which sharia values must be interpreted in the social and
historical context of society[39].
Thus, this practice cannot be rejected outright simply because of certain
symbolism, but must be viewed within the framework of the overall social system
that supports it.
5. Negotiation between
Customary Law and Sharia in Social Practice
The findings of this study indicate that the
people of Bolaang Mongondow do not see any fundamental conflict between adat
and Islam. Instead, they have established a functional relationship of
negotiation. Adat is used as a social instrument that regulates
horizontal relationships within the community, while Islam is used as a
spiritual guide in vertical relationships with God. In this context, Bontowon
Kon Bui’an functions as a link between these two systems of norms.
In practice, there is no rigid legal dualism,
but rather gradual and contextual integration. This is in line with the concept
of interlegality proposed by Zainal Abidin Bagir, namely the convergence of
different legal systems within the same social space[40].
This concept explains how customs and Islam do not negate each other, but
rather complement and adapt to each other.
DISCUSSION
The Bontowon
Kon Bui’an tradition that has developed among the Bolaang Mongondow community
presents an interesting encounter between customary norms and Islamic legal
principles. As a symbolic form of severing kinship ties before marriage between
close families, this practice has become an integral part of the social
construction of the local community. However, the position of this tradition in
the eyes of Islamic law is not necessarily accepted without debate. Within the
framework of classical fiqh, such traditions can be analyzed through the
concept of ‘Urf , which refers to social customs recognized as long as
they do not contradict the textual provisions of Islamic law. Abdul Wahhāb
Khallāf asserts that ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ
is a custom that is widely practiced and does not contradict the principles of
sharia[41].
Therefore, the question that arises is whether the symbolism of severing family
ties in this tradition contradicts Islamic teachings or is simply a local
custom that can be tolerated.
On the one
hand, contemporary Islamic legal thinkers such as Wahbah Zuhaili and Yusuf
al-Qaradawi give considerable space to local traditions as long as they do not
alter legal provisions that are qat’i in nature. The Bontowon Kon Bui’an tradition
does not intend to sever biological or legal ties, but rather to create social
legitimacy so that married couples who are related are not considered to be
violating customary norms. The symbolism of severance in this case is merely a
social representation, not a theological one. Within this framework, Bontowon
can be positioned as a valid ‘Urf khāṣ, as it is local, has been
consistently practiced, and does not substantially contradict the principles of
sharia[42].
However, the voices of scripturalist scholars who reject any form of severing
ties, even symbolic ones, cannot be ignored. Surah Muhammad verses 22–23
explicitly condemn those who sever family ties[43].
This debate reveals a tension between a textualist approach that emphasizes literal
adherence to the text, and a contextualist approach that prioritizes the social
meaning of traditional symbols.
When this
tradition is analyzed using the maqāṣid al-syarī’ah approach, the
direction of the discussion becomes more open. Al-Syātibi formulated that
sharia exists to protect five basic aspects of life: religion, soul, intellect,
lineage, and property. In this context, the practice of Bontowon can be seen as
an effort to preserve lineage and intellect socially, as it prevents internal
conflicts, upholds the honor of the extended family, and fosters broader social
harmony. Jasser Auda further developed the maqāṣid within a systemic framework,
rejecting a purely legalistic approach and offering a dynamic and
context-responsive interpretation[44].
Therefore, if the social benefits of this tradition outweigh the potential
losses, then in terms of maqāṣid, this tradition can be accepted as a
form of realization of sharia values in the local context.
However,
objections still arise from some circles who view that symbolizing the
severance of kinship risks obscuring the meaning of silaturahmi. In classical
interpretations such as those presented by al-Ghazālī, silaturahmi is a moral
and spiritual obligation that involves not only blood relations, but also a
sense of social responsibility[45].
However, it is important to note that the Bolaang Mongondow community does not
necessarily interpret Bontowon as a severing of emotional or social ties.
Following the traditional ceremony, relationships between families often remain
strong. In other words, the bonds of kinship are not severed in a substantive
sense. In Fiqh al-Awlawiyyāt, Yusuf al-Qaradawi emphasizes that maintaining the
substance of a relationship is far more important than mere formalities[46].
Thus, this tradition can be interpreted as a form of social engineering that
upholds the principles of ukhuwah (brotherhood) and togetherness, albeit with
different symbolism.
As a
researcher, I position myself within an interpretive-critical framework, which
seeks to understand social and legal dynamics without getting bogged down in
rigid normative judgments. I am aware that as an individual caught between two
systems of knowledge Islam as a normative religion and adat as a living social
system I must adopt a reflective and open-minded approach to interpreting
reality. The approach I employ is not an Islamic legal approach rooted in a
specific school of fiqh, but rather utilizes the analytical tools of social
fiqh, maqāṣid al-syarī’ah, and interlegality theory to examine how
society creatively and contextually manages the tension between religion and
culture. This position avoids the trap of cultural relativism, which justifies
all local practices, as well as legal fundamentalism, which denies social
complexity.
From an academic perspective, this position
reveals a significant research gap. Until now, most studies on the relationship
between adat and Islam have tended to take a dichotomous approach, as if these
two legal systems were mutually contradictory or incompatible. In reality,
however, as demonstrated in the practice of Bontowon, communities are able to
blend and adapt these two systems in a dynamic manner. This gap is widened by
the lack of research that examines local practices from the perspectives of
maqāṣid and ‘Urf simultaneously,
and integrates them with the national legal framework and progressive legal
theory. Therefore, this study aims not only to describe the practices of
Bontowon Kon Bui’an but also to fill the epistemological gap in the often
fragmented discourse on Islamic law and customary law.
Furthermore,
the legal position of Bontowon Kon Bui’an in the Indonesian legal system should
also be analyzed through the concept of living law. Eugen Ehrlich stated that
truly living law is that which is practiced by society, not merely that which
is written in regulations[47].
This tradition has been going on for decades and has become an important part
of the social structure of indigenous communities. Van Vollenhoven and Ter Haar
state that customary law grows and develops dynamically within the communities
that practice it, rather than being based on external authority[48].
Thus, in the context of Bontowon, we see how customary law has become a
normative mechanism that cannot be ignored, even by state law. It has become a
value system that shapes the social structure of society and at the same time
provides solutions to problems in interpersonal relationships within the
community.
Finally, the
existence of this tradition cannot be separated from the fact that Indonesian
society lives in an interlegal space, as stated by Zainal Abidin Bagir. Society
is not only subject to one legal system, but negotiates between state law,
religious law, and customary law. In such a space, legal practices are hybrid,
full of compromise, and rich in symbolic meaning. The Bontowon Kon Bui’an
tradition is a concrete manifestation of the interlegal process, where
customary leaders, religious leaders, and the community create symbolic
mechanisms to align customary norms with Islamic teachings. In some practices,
the customary procession even concludes with a prayer led by a religious
leader, signifying a consensus that customary law and Islam can coexist
harmoniously.
In Clifford
Geertz’s perspective, this kind of tradition can be understood as a cultural
expression that contains a symbolic meaning system, which represents social and
religious values simultaneously[49].
The symbolization of severing kinship ties is not an act that separates people
socially, but rather a middle ground for responding to tensions between
customary norms and religious teachings. Therefore, the presence of Bontowon
Kon Bui’an cannot be seen merely as a remnant of traditional practices that
need to be abandoned, but as a discursive space that reveals the dynamics of
the relationship between locality and the universality of Islamic law. This is
where its academic relevance lies: it illustrates that law is not merely a
product of texts, but also the result of negotiations between social reality,
religious norms, and the historical context of the society that upholds it.
CONCLUSION
This study concludes that the Bontowon Kon Bui’an
tradition in the Bolaang Mongondow community is a symbolic practice that
reflects the legal negotiation between custom and Islam in the context of
endogamous marriage. Although at first glance it appears to be a form of
severing family ties, this practice is actually a social mechanism aimed at
maintaining harmony and preventing conflict within the extended family
structure. This tradition does not substantially contradict the principles of
Islamic law when analyzed through the perspectives of ‘Urf ṣaḥīḥ and maqāṣid al-syarī’ah, as it
brings benefit and does not cause harm (mafsadah).
This
study also shows that local communities have the capacity to negotiate two
different legal systems through richly meaningful symbolic practices. Using a
social fiqh approach, living law theory, and the concept of interlegality, this
research makes an important contribution to understanding how Islamic law can
be brought to life in the context of Indonesia’s legal and cultural plurality.
These findings also challenge the dichotomy
that has often been used in discussing the relationship between customary law
and Islamic law. Instead of negating each other, the two systems can actually
reinforce each other in creating a social structure that is fair, responsive,
and contextual. Therefore, this study emphasizes the importance of reading
local symbolism as part of an authentic expression of Islam, as well as
broadening the horizon of Islamic law interpretation in a pluralistic public
sphere.
RESEARCH LIMITATIONS
This study has several limitations that need to
be critically examined. First, the scope of the study is limited to the Bolaang
Mongondow community, so the findings cannot be generalized to all regions of
Indonesia that have similar traditions. Social, cultural, and religious
dynamics in other regions may show different patterns in managing the
relationship between custom and Sharia law.
Second, the qualitative approach used, which
involves observation, interviews, and documentation, allows for a deeper
understanding of social meaning, but does not provide quantitative data to
support generalizations or comparisons. Additionally, sensitive issues such as
religious and customary practices tend to make some informants, especially
those from the ulama community, cautious and more likely to provide normative
rather than reflective answers.
Third, interpretations of Islamic legal
principles such as ‘Urf and
maqāṣid al-syarī’ah are mostly sourced from secondary literature and have not
been accompanied by in-depth analysis of primary Arabic texts, such as
classical books on usul fikih. This limitation may affect the accuracy of legal
arguments in the normative dimension. Nevertheless, this study still provides
an important foundation for understanding Islamic law in living local practice.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
Further research is recommended to expand the
scope of the study to other regions with similar symbolic practices in the
relationship between customary law and Islamic law, such as in the Minangkabau,
Bugis, or Madura communities. Such comparative studies would enrich our
understanding of how the intersection of Islamic law and customary law unfolds
in different social contexts, as well as how religious authorities and
customary leaders build consensus within the framework of a pluralistic
society.
Additionally, an interdisciplinary approach
combining anthropology, legal sociology, and theological studies can provide a
broader and deeper perspective. The use of mixed-methods combining qualitative
and quantitative data can also offer a more comprehensive picture of how
society perceives the symbolization of customary law and its legality within
Islam.
Further research should also involve direct
reading of classical and contemporary fiqh primary sources, especially to
strengthen legal arguments within the framework of maqāṣid al-syarī’ah, ‘Urf
, and fiqh al-awlawiyyāt. This is important to avoid speculative approaches
and to ensure that the study’s contributions are not limited to the
socio-anthropological realm but also enrich the normative discourse on Islamic
law in the context of a pluralistic and democratic nation-state such as
Indonesia.
REFERENCES
Al-Ghazālī. (1993). Iḥyā’ ‘Ulūm al-Dīn,
Jilid II. Beirut: Dār al-Ma’rifah.
Al-Khallāf, A. W. (1960). ‘Ilm Uṣūl al-Fiqh.
Kairo: Dār al-Qalam.
Al-Syātibi, I. M. (1997). Al-Muwāfaqāt fī
Uṣūl al-Sharī’ah, Jilid II. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah.
Al-Zahrah, M. A. (1958). Uṣūl al-Fiqh.
Kairo: Dār al-Fikr al-’Arabī.
An-Na’im, A. A. (2008). Islam and the
secular state: Negotiating the future of Shari’a. Harvard University Press.
Auda, J. (2008). Maqasid al-Shariah as
philosophy of Islamic law: A systems approach. London: International
Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT).
Bagir, Z. A. (2013). Interlegality dalam
masyarakat majemuk: Pendekatan alternatif studi hukum dan agama. Jurnal
Masyarakat dan Budaya, 15(3), 289–300. https://jmb.lipi.go.id/index.php/jmb/article/view/235
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design:
Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Los
Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act in
sociology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The
SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Ehrlich, E. (1936). Fundamental principles
of the sociology of law. Harvard University Press.
Engle Merry, S. (2006). Human rights and
gender violence: Translating international law into local justice. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Geertz, C. (1960). The religion of Java.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of
cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Harahap, S. (2005). Islam dinamis:
Pergumulan Islam dengan budaya lokal. Jakarta: Logos Wacana Ilmu.
Hasbi. (2020). Mapasari: Simbolisasi perkawinan
adat Mandar dan implikasinya dalam fiqh. Al-’Adalah, 18(1), 55–62.
https://doi.org/10.24042/adalah.v18i1.5699
Hooker, M. B. (2008). Indonesian Syariah:
Defining a national school of Islamic law. Singapore: Institute of
Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS).
Husaini, & Ridhwan. (2021). Mapparola dalam
tradisi adat Bugis Makassar: Perspektif Islam dan budaya. Jurnal Adat dan
Hukum Islam, 5(2), 133–137. https://doi.org/10.24252/jahi.v5i2.26730
Paputungan, S. (2020). Tata cara perkawinan
adat Bolaang Mongondow di Kotamobagu Timur (Laporan Penelitian).
Universitas Dumoga Kotamobagu.
Peletz, M. G. (2002). Islam and the cultural
politics of legitimacy in Southeast Asia. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Prayoga, G. (2016). Doi’ Menere’ dalam
perkawinan adat Bugis (Skripsi). Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Gunung
Djati Bandung.
Saladin, B. (2013). Merari’ (kawin lari)
dalam perspektif hukum Islam dan negara di Lombok. Jakarta: Prenadamedia
Group.
Soekanto, S. (1981). Pokok-pokok sosiologi
hukum. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.
Soepomo. (1982). Hukum adat dalam sistem
hukum nasional. Jakarta: UI Press.
Ter Haar, B. (1962). Asas-asas dan susunan
hukum adat. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita.
Van Vollenhoven, C. (1918). Het adatrecht
van Nederlandsch-Indië. Leiden: Brill.
Yusuf al-Qaradawi. (1995). Fiqh
al-Awlawiyyāt: Dirāsah Jadīdah fī Ḍaw’i al-Qur’ān wa al-Sunnah. Kairo:
Maktabah Wahbah.
Zuhaili, W. (1986). Uṣūl al-Fiqh al-Islāmī.
Damaskus: Dār al-Fikr.
[1] Fazal Alzagladi, Praktik Yoko dalam
Perkawinan Masyarakat Bolaang Mongondow, Tesis, Universitas Islam Negeri
Alauddin Makassar, 2018, hlm. 25.
[2] Ginanjar Prayoga, Perkawinan Adat Bugis:
Studi Tentang Doi’ Menere’, Skripsi, Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Gunung
Djati Bandung, 2016, hlm. 36.
[3] Bustami Saladin, Merari’ (Kawin Lari) dalam
Perspektif Hukum Islam dan Negara di Lombok, Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group,
2013, hlm. 45.
[4] Wahbah Zuhaili, Uṣūl al-Fiqh al-Islāmī,
Damaskus: Dār al-Fikr, 1986, hlm. 113–117.
[5] Soerjono Soekanto, Pokok-Pokok Sosiologi
Hukum, Jakarta: Rajawali Press, 1981, hlm. 2; B. Ter Haar, Asas-Asas dan
Susunan Hukum Adat, Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita, 1962, hlm. 5.
[6] Sukmawati Paputungan, Tata Cara Perkawinan
Adat Bolaang Mongondow di Kotamobagu Timur, Laporan Penelitian, Universitas
Dumoga Kotamobagu, 2020, hlm. 12–13.
[7] Heri Zulhadi dan Mohsi, Endogami dan Hukum
Islam di Sade Lombok: Tinjauan Maqāṣid al-Syarī’ah, Jurnal Syariah dan
Hukum Islam, Vol. 10, No. 1 (2019), hlm. 48–49.
[8] Al-Ghazālī. Iḥyā’ ‘Ulūm al-Dīn. Beirut:
Dār al-Ma’rifah, 1993, Jilid II.
[9] Al-Khallāf, Abdul Wahhāb. ‘Ilm Uṣūl al-Fiqh.
Kairo: Dār al-Qalam, 1960.
[10] Al-Syātibi, Ibrāhīm ibn Mūsā. Al-Muwāfaqāt
fī Uṣūl al-Sharī’ah. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah, 1997.
[11] An-Na’im, Abdullahi A. Islam and the Secular
State: Negotiating the Future of Shari’a. Harvard University Press, 2008.
[12] Auda,
Jasser. Maqasid al-Shariah as Philosophy of Islamic Law: A Systems Approach.
London: International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), 2008.
[13] Bagir, Zainal Abidin. “Interlegality dalam
Masyarakat Majemuk: Pendekatan Alternatif Studi Hukum dan Agama.” Jurnal
Masyarakat dan Budaya, vol. 15, no. 3, 2013, hlm. 289–300.
https://jmb.lipi.go.id/index.php/jmb/article/view/235
[14] Geertz, Clifford. The Religion of Java.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960.
[15] Harahap,
Syahrin. Islam Dinamis: Pergumulan Islam dengan Budaya Lokal. Jakarta:
Logos Wacana Ilmu, 2005.
[16] Hasbi. “Mapasari: Simbolisasi Perkawinan Adat
Mandar dan Implikasinya dalam Fiqh.” Al-’Adalah, vol. 18, no. 1, 2020,
hlm. 55–62. DOI: 10.24042/adalah.v18i1.5699
[17] Hooker,
M.B. Indonesian Syariah: Defining a National School of Islamic Law.
Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS), 2008.
[18] Husaini & Ridhwan. “Mapparola dalam Tradisi
Adat Bugis Makassar: Perspektif Islam dan Budaya.” Jurnal Adat dan Hukum
Islam, vol. 5, no. 2, 2021, hlm. 133–137. DOI: 10.24252/jahi.v5i2.26730
[19] Paputungan, Sukmawati. Tata Cara Perkawinan
Adat Bolaang Mongondow di Kotamobagu Timur. Laporan Penelitian, Universitas
Dumoga Kotamobagu, 2020.
[20] Peletz,
Michael G. Islam and the Cultural Politics of Legitimacy in Southeast Asia.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002.
[21] Prayoga,
Ginanjar. Doi’ Menere’ dalam Perkawinan Adat Bugis. Skripsi, Universitas
Islam Negeri Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, 2016.
[22] Saladin,
Bustami. Merari’ (Kawin Lari) dalam Perspektif Hukum Islam dan Negara di
Lombok. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group, 2013.
[23] Soekanto,
Soerjono. Pokok-Pokok Sosiologi Hukum. Jakarta: Rajawali Press, 1981.
[24] Soepomo.
Hukum Adat dalam Sistem Hukum Nasional. Jakarta: UI Press, 1982.
[25] Ter
Haar, B. Asas-Asas dan Susunan Hukum Adat. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita,
1962.
[26] Van
Vollenhoven, Cornelis. Het Adatrecht van Nederlandsch-Indië. Leiden:
Brill, 1918.
[27] Yusuf
al-Qaradawi. Fiqh al-Awlawiyyāt: Dirāsah Jadīdah fī Ḍaw’i al-Qur’ān wa
al-Sunnah. Kairo: Maktabah Wahbah, 1995.
[28] Denzin,
Norman K., & Lincoln, Yvonna S. The
SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th
ed., Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 2011, hlm. 3–4.
[29]
Creswell, John W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative,
and Mixed Methods Approaches, 3rd
ed., Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, 2009, hlm. 178–179.
[30]
Angrosino, Michael V. Doing Ethnographic and Observational Research.
London: SAGE, 2007, hlm. 35.
[31] Patton,
Michael Q. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd
ed., Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 2002, hlm. 341.
[32] Miles,
Matthew B. & Huberman, A. Michael. Qualitative
Data Analysis, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 1994, hlm.
10–12.
[33] Denzin,
Norman K. The Research Act in Sociology, New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1970, hlm. 300.
[34]
Zuhaili, Wahbah. Uṣūl al-Fiqh al-Islāmī,
Damaskus: Dār al-Fikr, 1986, hlm. 117; Jasser Auda, Maqasid al-Shariah as Philosophy of Islamic Law, IIIT,
2008, hlm. 21–22.
[35] Ter
Haar, B. Asas-Asas dan Susunan Hukum Adat,
Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita, 1962, hlm. 5; Eugen Ehrlich, Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law,
Harvard University Press, 1936, hlm. 28.
[36] Al-Qur’an, Surah Muhammad: 22–23.
[37] Syahrin Harahap, Islam Dinamis: Pergumulan
Islam dengan Budaya Lokal, Jakarta: Logos Wacana Ilmu, 2005, hlm. 124.
[38] Abdul Wahhāb Khallāf, ‘Ilm Uṣūl al-Fiqh,
Kairo: Dār al-Qalam, 1960, hlm. 124.
[39] Jasser Auda, Maqasid al-Shariah as
Philosophy of Islamic Law: A Systems Approach, London: IIIT, 2008, hlm.
21–23.
[40] Zainal Abidin Bagir, “Interlegality dalam
Masyarakat Majemuk: Pendekatan Alternatif Studi Hukum dan Agama,” Jurnal
Masyarakat dan Budaya, vol. 15, no. 3 (2013), hlm. 290.
https://jmb.lipi.go.id/index.php/jmb/article/view/235
[41] Abdul Wahhāb Khallāf, ‘Ilm Uṣūl al-Fiqh,
Kairo: Dār al-Qalam, 1960, hlm. 124.
[42] Wahbah al-Zuhaili, Uṣūl al-Fiqh al-Islāmī,
Damaskus: Dār al-Fikr, 1986, hlm. 117.
[43] Al-Qur’an, Surah Muhammad: 22–23.
[44] Jasser Auda, Maqasid al-Shariah as
Philosophy of Islamic Law: A Systems Approach, London: IIIT, 2008, hlm.
21–23.
[45] Al-Ghazālī, Iḥyā’ ‘Ulūm al-Dīn, Beirut:
Dār al-Ma’rifah, 1993, Jilid II, hlm. 251.
[46] Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Fiqh al-Awlawiyyāt,
Kairo: Maktabah Wahbah, 1995, hlm. 33.
[47] Eugen Ehrlich, Fundamental Principles of the
Sociology of Law, Harvard University Press, 1936, hlm. 28.
[48] Ter Haar, B., Asas-Asas dan Susunan Hukum
Adat, Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita, 1962, hlm. 5.
[49] Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of
Cultures, New York: Basic Books, 1973, hlm. 89–90.
