{"title":"Differing Responses to Western Hermeneutics: A Comparative Critical Study of M. Quraish Shihab’s and Muḥammad ‘Imāra’s Thoughts","authors":"Sahiron Syamsuddin","doi":"10.14421/ajis.2021.592.479-512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article deals with Muslim scholars’ responses to Western hermeneutics and its application to the Qur’an. It focuses on the thoughts of two thinkers, i.e. M. Quraish Shihab from Indonesia and Muḥammad ‘Imāra from Egypt, and discusses them in a comparative critical way. On the basis of the available data, its author comes to the following conclusions. First, the two scholars have different receptions of the Western hermeneutics. While ‘Imāra rejects it totally only because it is rooted in the Western tradition that is different from the Islamic tradition, Shihab accepts it with some considerations on the basis that it can widen horizons of Qur’an interpreters, so that they might understand the Qur’an in a more careful way. Second, ‘Imāra’s arguments for his rejection of it are not strong enough, and even constitute misunderstandings of hermeneutical theories, whereas Shihab’s arguments can be considered more plausible, even though in some cases he does not give enough elaborations. Third, these responses have a certain impact on the dynamics of hermeneutical approaches in Indonesia. [Artikel ini membahas respon ilmuwan muslim mengenai ilmu hermeneutik barat dan penerapannya pada Qur’an. Tulisan ini fokus pada dua pemikir muslim yaitu M. Quraish Shihab dari Indonesia dan Muḥammad ‘Imāra asal Mesir serta mendiskusikannya dalam kerangka perbandingan kritis. Berdasarkan data yang diperoleh menunjukkan bahwa pertama, dua ilmuwan tersebut berbeda dalam penerimaan hermeneutik barat. ‘Imāra menolak sepenuhnya karena berakar pada tradisi barat, sedangkan Shihab menerimanya dengan beberapa pertimbangan selama dapat memperluas cakrawala penafsiran Qur’an dan dapat memahaminya dengan berhati-hati. Kedua, argumen penolakan yang diajukan ‘Imāra tidak cukup kuat dan kadang terdapat kesalahpahaman teoritikal, sedangkan argumen Shihab lebih masuk akal, walaupun dalam beberapa bagian ia tidak memberikan penjelasan lebih lanjut. Ketiga, kedua respon ilmuwan tersebut mempunyai dampak signifikan pada dinamika pendekatan hermeneutik di Indonesia.]","PeriodicalId":42231,"journal":{"name":"Al-Jamiah-Journal of Islamic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al-Jamiah-Journal of Islamic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14421/ajis.2021.592.479-512","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
This article deals with Muslim scholars’ responses to Western hermeneutics and its application to the Qur’an. It focuses on the thoughts of two thinkers, i.e. M. Quraish Shihab from Indonesia and Muḥammad ‘Imāra from Egypt, and discusses them in a comparative critical way. On the basis of the available data, its author comes to the following conclusions. First, the two scholars have different receptions of the Western hermeneutics. While ‘Imāra rejects it totally only because it is rooted in the Western tradition that is different from the Islamic tradition, Shihab accepts it with some considerations on the basis that it can widen horizons of Qur’an interpreters, so that they might understand the Qur’an in a more careful way. Second, ‘Imāra’s arguments for his rejection of it are not strong enough, and even constitute misunderstandings of hermeneutical theories, whereas Shihab’s arguments can be considered more plausible, even though in some cases he does not give enough elaborations. Third, these responses have a certain impact on the dynamics of hermeneutical approaches in Indonesia. [Artikel ini membahas respon ilmuwan muslim mengenai ilmu hermeneutik barat dan penerapannya pada Qur’an. Tulisan ini fokus pada dua pemikir muslim yaitu M. Quraish Shihab dari Indonesia dan Muḥammad ‘Imāra asal Mesir serta mendiskusikannya dalam kerangka perbandingan kritis. Berdasarkan data yang diperoleh menunjukkan bahwa pertama, dua ilmuwan tersebut berbeda dalam penerimaan hermeneutik barat. ‘Imāra menolak sepenuhnya karena berakar pada tradisi barat, sedangkan Shihab menerimanya dengan beberapa pertimbangan selama dapat memperluas cakrawala penafsiran Qur’an dan dapat memahaminya dengan berhati-hati. Kedua, argumen penolakan yang diajukan ‘Imāra tidak cukup kuat dan kadang terdapat kesalahpahaman teoritikal, sedangkan argumen Shihab lebih masuk akal, walaupun dalam beberapa bagian ia tidak memberikan penjelasan lebih lanjut. Ketiga, kedua respon ilmuwan tersebut mempunyai dampak signifikan pada dinamika pendekatan hermeneutik di Indonesia.]
这篇文章讨论了穆斯林学者对西方解释学及其在古兰经中的应用的回应。本文以印度尼西亚的古莱什·希哈卜和埃及的Muḥammad’Imāra两位思想家的思想为重点,以比较批判的方式进行探讨。根据现有的数据,作者得出以下结论。首先,两位学者对西方解释学有不同的接受。虽然' Imāra完全拒绝它,只是因为它植根于与伊斯兰传统不同的西方传统,但Shihab接受了它,并考虑到它可以扩大古兰经解释者的视野,以便他们可以更仔细地理解古兰经。其次,Imāra对他拒绝的论据不够有力,甚至构成了对解释学理论的误解,然而,即使在某些情况下,他没有给出足够的详细说明,什叶派的论点也可以被认为是更合理的。第三,这些回应对印度尼西亚解释学方法的动态产生了一定的影响。[原文如此][原文如此][原文如此][原文如此][原文如此][原文如此]Tulisan ini fokus pada dua pemikir muslim yitu M. quuraish Shihab dari Indonesia (Muḥammad ' Imāra) asal Mesir serta mendiskusikannya dalam kerangka perbandingan kritis。Berdasarkan数据yang diperoleh menunjukkan bahwa pertama, dua ilmuwan tersebut berbeda dalam penerimaan hermeneutik barat。' Imāra menolak sepuhnya karena berakar paada tradisi barat, sedangkan Shihab menerimanya dengan beberapa pertimbangan selama dapat memperperlua cakrawala penafsiran古兰经dan dapat memahaminya dengan berhati-hati。【翻译】:当你想要了解更多的情况时,请告诉我我的朋友,我的朋友是谁。Ketiga, kedua的反应将会是一个很好的例子,但是mempunyya dampak是一个很重要的例子。