Contemporary conflicts over efforts to expand the role of Islamic law in the national legal system of Indonesia are so intense that they undermine reasoned public debate about this question. They are part of a long-standing polemic, not only about the role of Shariah in Indonesia generally but about the specific question of whether the Jakarta Charter, which references obligations to obey Islamic law, should be restored as part of the Constitution. This article is an attempt to revive the neglected academic discourse on the role of Islamic jurisprudence in Indonesian law, and to move beyond the confused polemics to a thoughtful consideration of where Islamic law fits in a non-Islamic state such as Indonesia. Because Indonesia is a secular state, the Shariah as a whole is not enforced by the state, but the Shariah has a significant meaning for Muslims in Indonesia because it provides the norms distinguishing the obligatory and recommended from those actions which are neutral, disapproved and prohibited in Muslims' lives. Moreover, some elements of Islamic jurisprudence in personal law have been absorbed into positive law in Indonesia through the decisions of religious courts, which have existed since the Dutch colonialism,3 as currently regulated by Law No. 7/1989. The Compilation of Islamic Law No. 1/1991 essentially functions as the legal code for all Muslims who must resort to the religious courts for the adjudication of disputes involving marriage, divorce, inheritance and waqf. Thus, consideration of the propriety of attempts to extend Islamic law to matters of property and of contract is appropriate at this time.