These shifts in how judges and jurists perceive fairness and agreement in local conflicts in turn have shaped legal decisions and scholarly writings on the national level. In this chapter I argue that local-level debates in various parts of Muslim Indonesia have shaped what is otherwise a surprising turn in interpretations of Islamic law by the Supreme Court and by Indonesian jurists. In the next chapter I examine the ways in which historians and jurists have drawn on everyday social life to reinterpret how women and men ought to divide property under Islamic law. These analyses suggest that arguments pitched at a universalistic level in fact are part of a multilevel network of reflection, argumentation, and debate – public reasoning across levels of society.

Legal conflicts in Takèngën and elsewhere often concern the legitimacy of gifts (hibah) and bequests (wasiat) made before death. Recall how, in Isak, at the heart of many disputes has been a claim that a grandparent or parent once gave some land, or assured a child that after death land would go to her or him. Claims to this effect are often central to efforts at resisting the division of an estate among heirs, and if the land is in or near Takèngën the parties are much more likely to come to court to contest the division.