所有的知识都是为了意义生活，而不是裁剪生活，即便法可以通过形式化的逻辑建构起来，但这并不代表法所服务的生活是可以建构的。面对社会生活中习惯法存在的制度事实，以规范研究为志业的法学需将其纳入视野。而理论上面临的争议、实践中存在的困惑及法的民族叙事亦凸显此问题。但既有研究大多以一种白描手法对规范进行调查，而缺乏深层次的学理分析，研究的发展需找到能统摄包容众多规范表达的命题并进行阐释，习惯法的法理探讨即为此研究作业之一。就习惯法的定义存有限缩论和泛化论两种倾向。限缩论认为习惯法要成为“法”须有国家权力的加持，而泛化论又似乎将国家制定法之外的大部分社会规范都纳入。区别于限缩论和泛化论，就习惯法的范畴可运用标准、态度、压力三个因素作出鉴别。法理即法之理据，包括事理和义理两个面向，对习惯法法理的探讨亦按照这一径路，其中事理包括存在之理、生长之理、变迁之理和运行之理。存在之理是从人的存在本身对习惯法的理解，人以身体为中心结构世界的过程中规范也方此出场，并通过其编码作业使人成为一个规范的存在，其中习惯法是人生活世界的规范。生长之理与变迁之理是从时空二维对习惯法的解释，空间既是法的规范对象，又参与到法的生产过程之中，习惯法规范外观因为空间的差异性而呈现多样性，这是由生活世界的内在规定性决定的，是生活世界在法世界的具象表达，这一生长之理亦提示了习惯法的内生性、地方性和自发性三个重要特征。空间制造差异，时间呈现变化，规范消亡、规范变化、规范新生是习惯法的主要变迁样态，这是社会变迁中的规范适应、流动性社会的关系重建、不同文化的遭遇互鉴、国家建构中国家权力空间再造的结果，但变化中亦有不变。运行之理旨在呈现习惯法运行中的关键要素，其中权威显现规范，仪式发挥隐喻下的规范感知和实践中的规范内化作用，而有形强制并非主要压力，团体的接纳或排斥才是最为重要的压力，期间面子亦作为一种压力形式。精神义理是从意义系统对习惯法的阐释，习惯法存在外在不确定与内在确定特征。内在确定方面，整体主义影响了习惯法对人的认识和对人之事务的特殊安顿，个别正义呈现了习惯法对正义的理解向度，而没有互惠就没有团体，互惠是团体安定的核心原则。从习惯法本身去理解习惯法才能解释其规范表达、制度实践及价值信守。习惯法的不可通约性亦说明其不能在更大范围使用，但习惯法对人的理解、对规范的表达及规范对人意义的诠释有很重要的提示意义。

All knowledge is meant to make sense of life, instead of tailoring it. Although law can be constructed in a systematically logical manner, it doesn’t mean life, where law plays a role, is constructible. As an institutional fact, customary law exists in social life. In this circumstance, law science, which focuses on norms, is supposed to put customary law into perspective. The controversy in theory, the confusion in practice, and the national narrative of law also highlight the value of research of customary law. However, most previous research investigated norms of customary law in a plain way without deeper theoretical analysis. The research of customary law calls for finding and interpreting its propositions that embrace a wide range of normative expressions. It is one of important aspects to explore the jurisprudence of customary law.There are two tendencies in the definition of customary law, namely，one is limited in a narrower scope and the other is too generalized. The former holds that state power must support customary law to become “law” while the latter seems to include most social norms other than state-made law. In the context of customary law, the distinction between the two tendencies can be identified by applying three factors: norms, attitudes, and pressure. Jurisprudence is the rationale of law, including justification and general rule which is divided into rule of existence, rule of growth, rule of evolution and rule of operation. Thus, the jurisprudence of customary law is intended to be explained from the two aspects of general rule and justification.Customary law can be understood in terms of human existence itself through the rule of existence. The process of structuring the world with a human body focus is also where the norms emerge and make the man a normative being through its coding operation, of which customary law is the norm of the living world. Customary law can also be interpreted from the temporal and spatial dimension through the rule of growth. Space is the object of norms of law, and involves the generation of law. The manifestation of customary law is diverse because of the variability of space, which is determined by living world and is the figurative expression of the living world in legal world. What’s more, the rule of growth infers three important characteristics of customary law: internality, localism and spontaneity. Space leads to divergence of norms, and time causes change of norms. The extinction, change and renewal are the major modes of evolution of customary law. The modes are the results of the adaptation of norms in social changes, the reconstruction of relations in a fluid society, the exchanges and mutual learning between different cultures, and the reconstruction of the space of state power in the construction of the state. But there is also a constant in change of norms. Meanwhile, the rule of operation presents the critical elements in the operation of customary law. Among the element, the authority reveals the norms, the rituals have the function of letting people perceive norms in a metaphorical way and internalizing norms in practice while physical coercion isn’t the main pressure, but the group’s acceptance or rejection is the major one, and the matter of ego is a form of pressure. On top of that, the justification of spirit is an interpretation of customary law at the meaning system level. From the aspect, customary law is characterized by external uncertainty and internal certainty. In terms of internal certainty of customary law, collectivism influences the understanding of human beings and the special settlement of human affairs, individual justice presents the understanding of the dimensions of justice customary law, and there is no community without reciprocity, which is the core principle of community stability.Customary law can only be interpreted in terms of its normative expression, institutional practices and values if it is understood in its own right. To some extent, customary law, because of lack of commensurability, cannot be applied in a wider-scale context. Yet customary law has important implications for the understanding of human beings and norms, and for the interpretation of the meaning of norms to human beings.