Indonesian syariah is sui generis—it is not the syariah of the Middle East, North Africa or other parts of Southeast Asia. It does, however, share a common classical (Arabic) heritage with Muslim states in other regions, including the great technical fiqh heritage. All states have had to work through that heritage since the nineteenth century, and in doing so have stretched the historically derived doctrine to the edge. For example, modern medical science and modern forms of finance now pose questions that force syariah techniques to their limits (Hooker 2003a: 227 ff.). More recently, Bulliet (2004: 135 ff.) has used ‘edge’ to mean periphery—in the sense of the differences that have emerged between the traditional centre of Islam (the Middle East) vis-à-vis the geographical edge of Islam (Africa and Asia). Both meanings are appropriate for Indonesia and it is in them that the notion of syariah as a work in progress finds its context.

‘Work in progress’ can mean just a continuing activity, but it has also acquired connotations of improvement or advancement. From the Western point of view ‘progress’ has a favourable resonance. But this is not a universally held position in Muslim states, where the modernization of syariah is often rejected as just another version of orientalism (see, for example, Mahdi 1990). Here I use ‘progress’ in the minimal sense of work that is proceeding. In this sense Indonesian syariah can be described as having progressed to the point where it is suitable for local and temporal conditions—a real achievement. Progress on the localization and rationalization of syariah (see Chapter 2) is also advancing into new (‘edge’) territory. Of course one may object that the syariah is no longer an independent variable but merely an object to which the state gives a form in some law or regulation. Fiqh has totally disappeared. The state sets the agenda and conducts an ongoing process of selection directed towards the creation of a national school of legal thought (mazhab).