伊斯兰高等教师与南加里曼丹社会的塔夫希尔研究问题

Wardani Wardani
{"title":"伊斯兰高等教师与南加里曼丹社会的塔夫希尔研究问题","authors":"Wardani Wardani","doi":"10.15642/islamica.2020.15.1.1-27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is intended to examine the development of published works on the interpretation of the Qur’ān in South Kalimantan in the 2000s, by comparing the works written by intellectuals in Islamic university (in the case of Antasari State Islamic University, Banjarmasin) and beyond. By applying the continuity-change and challenge-response approaches, this article finds that the two types of exegetical works show that the authors' interpretation is limited to theory, not yet in an effort to produce original interpretive works. In general, most of the exegetical works written by intellectuals in Islamic university are intended to meet the formal requirements of education, such as achieving degrees and preparing lecture handbooks. Meanwhile, the works of Muslim intellectuals beyond the university appear to be more responsive to many issues, such as issues of ritual, science, and magic. In terms of originality, both exegeses work mostly originate from traditional sources, while the former applies a thematic approach (mawḍū‘ī) as a tool for modern interpretation and the latter applies an analytical approach (taḥlīlī) for a conventional one.","PeriodicalId":30844,"journal":{"name":"Islamica Jurnal Studi Keislaman","volume":"15 1","pages":"1-27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Problematika Kajian Tafsir di Perguruan Tinggi Islam dan Masyarakat Kalimantan Selatan\",\"authors\":\"Wardani Wardani\",\"doi\":\"10.15642/islamica.2020.15.1.1-27\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article is intended to examine the development of published works on the interpretation of the Qur’ān in South Kalimantan in the 2000s, by comparing the works written by intellectuals in Islamic university (in the case of Antasari State Islamic University, Banjarmasin) and beyond. By applying the continuity-change and challenge-response approaches, this article finds that the two types of exegetical works show that the authors' interpretation is limited to theory, not yet in an effort to produce original interpretive works. In general, most of the exegetical works written by intellectuals in Islamic university are intended to meet the formal requirements of education, such as achieving degrees and preparing lecture handbooks. Meanwhile, the works of Muslim intellectuals beyond the university appear to be more responsive to many issues, such as issues of ritual, science, and magic. In terms of originality, both exegeses work mostly originate from traditional sources, while the former applies a thematic approach (mawḍū‘ī) as a tool for modern interpretation and the latter applies an analytical approach (taḥlīlī) for a conventional one.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30844,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Islamica Jurnal Studi Keislaman\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"1-27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Islamica Jurnal Studi Keislaman\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15642/islamica.2020.15.1.1-27\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Islamica Jurnal Studi Keislaman","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15642/islamica.2020.15.1.1-27","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在通过比较伊斯兰大学(以班贾马辛的安塔萨里国立伊斯兰大学为例)和其他地方知识分子所写的著作,来研究2000年代南加里曼丹有关《古兰经ān》解释的出版著作的发展。本文运用“延续-变化”和“挑战-回应”的分析方法,发现这两种类型的释经作品表明作者的释经仅仅局限于理论层面,尚未努力创作出具有原创性的释经作品。一般来说,伊斯兰大学的知识分子所写的训诂著作大多是为了满足教育的正式要求,如获得学位和准备讲座手册。与此同时,大学以外的穆斯林知识分子的作品似乎对许多问题更有反应,比如仪式、科学和魔法问题。就原创性而言,两位释经者的作品大多来自传统来源,而前者采用主题方法(mawḍū ' ' ')作为现代解释的工具,后者采用分析方法(taḥlīlī)作为传统解释的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Problematika Kajian Tafsir di Perguruan Tinggi Islam dan Masyarakat Kalimantan Selatan
This article is intended to examine the development of published works on the interpretation of the Qur’ān in South Kalimantan in the 2000s, by comparing the works written by intellectuals in Islamic university (in the case of Antasari State Islamic University, Banjarmasin) and beyond. By applying the continuity-change and challenge-response approaches, this article finds that the two types of exegetical works show that the authors' interpretation is limited to theory, not yet in an effort to produce original interpretive works. In general, most of the exegetical works written by intellectuals in Islamic university are intended to meet the formal requirements of education, such as achieving degrees and preparing lecture handbooks. Meanwhile, the works of Muslim intellectuals beyond the university appear to be more responsive to many issues, such as issues of ritual, science, and magic. In terms of originality, both exegeses work mostly originate from traditional sources, while the former applies a thematic approach (mawḍū‘ī) as a tool for modern interpretation and the latter applies an analytical approach (taḥlīlī) for a conventional one.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信