Legal Interpretation of Conditional Polygamy Prohibition in Marriage Contracts: A Comparative Study in Islamic Law

Background: The legal validity of anti-polygamy clauses in Islamic marriage contracts remains contested between classical Islamic jurisprudence and contemporary statutory reforms. Although previous studies discuss polygamy from doctrinal, sociological, and judicial perspectives, limited research comparatively examines the legal enforceability of such clauses under classical Shāfi'ī jurisprudence and Indonesia's Kompilasi Hukum Islam (KHI).

Objective: This study analyzes the legal validity of anti-polygamy clauses under classical Shāfi'ī jurisprudence and the KHI, compares their underlying legal reasoning through maqāṣid al-sharī'ah, and evaluates their implications for Islamic family law reform in Indonesia.

Methods: This qualitative doctrinal legal research applies a comparative approach using classical Shāfi'ī legal texts, the Qur'an, relevant ḥadīth, the KHI, and contemporary Islamic family law literature. Data were analyzed through doctrinal interpretation, comparative legal analysis, and the maqāṣid al-sharī'ah framework.

Findings: Classical Shāfi'ī jurisprudence considers anti-polygamy clauses legally non-binding while maintaining the validity of marriage. In contrast, the KHI recognizes their enforceability to promote justice, family welfare, and legal certainty. Comparative analysis demonstrates that maqāṣid al-sharī'ah provides a normative framework for reconciling classical jurisprudence with contemporary statutory reforms.

Conclusion: A maqāṣid-based approach enables Islamic family law to preserve doctrinal authenticity while strengthening contractual autonomy and protecting family welfare.

Novelty: This study proposes an integrated maqāṣid-based comparative framework that bridges classical Shāfi'ī jurisprudence and Indonesia's statutory Islamic family law in assessing the legitimacy and enforceability of anti-polygamy clauses.