The relationship between revelation and reason, especially regarding the conflict between the two, is a problem that Muslim thinkers often discuss. Most scholars deny the existence of a conflict between revelation and reason; they argue that this should be the case because basically, both come from Allah, the Absolute Truth, so they can't contradict each other. This will undoubtedly affect the authenticity of the resulting interpretation and cause defects. Based on this, intellectual anxiety arises about how the scholars respond to this matter, which in this study will be devoted to the conflict between reason and revelation in Islamic law. This study is a literature review with several articles related to this topic. So, an understanding is produced that the assumptions that say there is a conflict between revelation and reason in Islamic law are unacceptable. Ibn Taymiyah also emphasized that even though it is forced that there may be a conflict between the two, the conflict that occurs is in the status of the proposition, which is qaṭ'ī-ẓannī, not in its status as revelation and reason. The conflict that occurs between revelation and reason can ultimately be categorized as al-dakhīl fi al-tafsīr, as one of the factors that causes the authenticity of interpretation to disappear.