This paper attempts to analytically examine the possibility of constitutional borrowing for the Muslim world regardless the differences in history, system, culture, language, and cha­racteristics. It discusses this issue by looking at the arguments put forth by the oppo­nents of comparative cons­titutional interpre­tation and their counter arguments. It will consider materials from Canada, USA, South Africa, Singapore, Malaysia, and Hungary, taking the position that constitutional borrowing can be justified. The paper argues that the 1999-2002 Indonesian constitutional reform should be taken into account by other Muslim countries in undertaking their constitutional reform. The substantive approach of the Shari‘ah that has been used in Indonesia has shown that Muslim world can reform its constitutions without the “assistance” of Western foreign policy. Indo­nesian constitutional reform has demonstrated that Islamic constitutionalism comes from within Islamic teaching and the Islamic community itself; it is a home grown product.