Contextual absoluteness is a well-known topic in the principles of Islamic jurisprudence . It is based on the signification of the speaker's silence, provided that the speaker is established to be in the position of full articulation , and it is utilized to delineate the limits of the speaker's intent and to identify the elements involved in a ruling or its subject matter. Despite the theory's prominent role in the process of deriving religious rulings, its potential within the domain of statutory interpretation, particularly concerning civil law, has rarely been explored independently. The central question is whether contextual absoluteness can be employed as a valid interpretive tool for the interpretation of civil law, and if so, what the basis for such an application would be. This study adopts a descriptive-analytical method, drawing upon jurisprudential principles fiqh sources, and historical documents. The findings indicate that the interpretive rules for understanding religious and legal texts share common rational foundations; thus, from this perspective, the necessary theoretical groundwork for utilizing contextual absoluteness in legal interpretation is established. Furthermore, the legislator is generally presumed to be in the position of full articulation during the legislative process; therefore, his silence carries interpretive significance.