PENGGUNAAN HADIS DALAM DISKUSI MASALAH KEAGAMAAN DI INDONESIA PERTENGAHAN ABAD XX ( STUDI TERHADAP PEMIKIRAN HADIS AHMAD HASSAN DAN SIRADJUDDIN ABBAS )

Rozian Karnedi, S.Ag., M.Ag., NIM.: 17300016058 (2020) PENGGUNAAN HADIS DALAM DISKUSI MASALAH KEAGAMAAN DI INDONESIA PERTENGAHAN ABAD XX ( STUDI TERHADAP PEMIKIRAN HADIS AHMAD HASSAN DAN SIRADJUDDIN ABBAS ). Doctoral thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (PENGGUNAAN HADIS DALAM DISKUSI MASALAH KEAGAMAAN DI INDONESIA PERTENGAHAN ABAD XX ( STUDI TERHADAP PEMIKIRAN HADIS AHMAD HASSAN DAN SIRADJUDDIN ABBAS )) 17300016058_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (11MB) | Preview
	Text (PENGGUNAAN HADIS DALAM DISKUSI MASALAH KEAGAMAAN DI INDONESIA PERTENGAHAN ABAD XX ( STUDI TERHADAP PEMIKIRAN HADIS AHMAD HASSAN DAN SIRADJUDDIN ABBAS )) 17300016058_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (18MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

In the mid-twentieth century, a sharp contradiction between two Indonesian prominent Islamic thinkers Ahmad Hassan and Siradjuddin Abbas led to truth-claim debates that eventually brought an intolerance in each of their book. The discrepancy backgrounds this dissertation from which the questions arose – why there were disagreements and why they turned into truth claim and intolerance. This study aims at analyzing the debates and focuses on: 1) why did they not comprehend hadith in the same way? 2) what effects did this contradiction contribute to religious thoughts in Indonesia? 3) what effects did it give to the thoughts of hadith. With library research, this qualitative study employed two approaches: first, historical approach with intellectual history theory by Kuntowijoyo. Second, sociology of knowledge approach with relationism theory by Karl Mannheim. Its concept and theory refers to Traditionalist and Reformist Islam, Social Thoughts and Context. The steps used in the historical method are: 1) heuristic or collecting sources, 2) verification or criticizing the sources, 3) interpretation or analyzing facts using biography and hermeneutics approaches. This step was conducted by thoroughly examining Ahmad Hasan and Siradjuddin Abbas’ written works and other related ones, 4) historiography or displaying the research’s results. The results show that: first, there was a different platform between the two when trying to understand hadith, in particular when the hadith discussed belief, worship, muamalah and religious tradition. It was not only the methodology and genesis of understanding, but sociological factor also caused the difference. Both thinkers in the mideighteenth century proceeded the younger-older rivalry tradition. They used organizations and publications where hadith was their reference. The condition, in turn, put them as sectarians and partial, overwhelmed by the community’s ideology and interests. Second, the disagreement and unhealthy discussions induced responses from reformists, traditionalists, and moderates. The varied responses from positive(supporting), negative (against and criticizing) to moderate were, in fact, representation of the existence of two different groups – those who supported Islam purification and those who against it. Third, the contradiction contributed in the approach and understanding hadith method in the sense that theological approach was necessary when trying to understand hadith on belief and that critical discourse analysis method historical approach was needed to understand the text or hadith understanding discourse.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item