Arkoun and his Deconstruction Method
Written
by Ahmad Muzaqqi* and Arif Imam Zulfahmi^
by Ahmad Muzaqqi* and Arif Imam Zulfahmi^
Biography
 |
| Source: algeriesite.com |
February 1, 1928 at Tourirt-Mimoun, diKabilia, a mountainous area has a
population of Berbers in east Algiers.[1]
Circumstances as that which confronted him since his youth in three languages:
Kabilia language, Arabic (which brought together Islamic expansion since the
first century of Hijra), and the French brought by nations who rules than
Algeria in 1830-1962.[2] Three
languages perform their respective roles. Language Kabilia delivered a number
of traditions, the direction in economic and social fields. More Arabic
languages are as a means of expression and the preservation of
religious traditions. While,
French was the language of
government revenue and it was the means of science and Western traditions.
Arkoun’s education begins at elementary school in
his native village. Then he studied in a school in the port
city of Oran. From the year 1950-1954 he studied Arabic language and literature
at the University of Algiers. Then in the middle of the Algerian war of
liberation from the French (1954-1962), he enrolled as a student in Paris.
Since then he settled there. Struggle with language support and the more viscous
the French culture, but concern remains Arkoun study, the Arabic language and
literature and Islamic thought.
his native village. Then he studied in a school in the port
city of Oran. From the year 1950-1954 he studied Arabic language and literature
at the University of Algiers. Then in the middle of the Algerian war of
liberation from the French (1954-1962), he enrolled as a student in Paris.
Since then he settled there. Struggle with language support and the more viscous
the French culture, but concern remains Arkoun study, the Arabic language and
literature and Islamic thought.
Arkoun completed his formal education with doctoral degree in
literature major in 1969 from
the University of Sorbonne in Paris with a dissertation on humanism in ethical
thinking Maskawaih, Persian Muslim thinker (d. 1 030 M).
literature major in 1969 from
the University of Sorbonne in Paris with a dissertation on humanism in ethical
thinking Maskawaih, Persian Muslim thinker (d. 1 030 M).
Arkoun’s Levels of formal education through further was strengthened by interaction with
three languages earlier, also his tradition of thought, especially the Islamic
thought, which mostly expressed in Arabic. Any Western tradition, especially
that developed in language and in the country of France. So, Arkoun live his
life among the various traditions and cultures. Involvement in the three
languages is an important factor affecting his thinking. It is also a
(possibly) causing concern for the role of language in human society thought so
great.
three languages earlier, also his tradition of thought, especially the Islamic
thought, which mostly expressed in Arabic. Any Western tradition, especially
that developed in language and in the country of France. So, Arkoun live his
life among the various traditions and cultures. Involvement in the three
languages is an important factor affecting his thinking. It is also a
(possibly) causing concern for the role of language in human society thought so
great.
The core and form of Views
Arkoun said that to understand a text we need understand the language.[3]
Arkoun proposed the need for a “critical history of the text passed down with
the name of the Qur’an,” but unlike the Egyptian scholar, he expressed a more
self-assured and critical perspective. He also considered the holy text as
something now lost and irretrievable, no longer the result of transcendence,
arguing that the divine source has become unrecognisable due to the pressure of political
ideology. Arkoun’s “critique of Islamic reason” incorporated the legacy of the
French Enlightenment, although it would be a mistake to say, as some of his
enemies did, that he adopted a western point of view or estranged himself from
his origins.
Arkoun proposed the need for a “critical history of the text passed down with
the name of the Qur’an,” but unlike the Egyptian scholar, he expressed a more
self-assured and critical perspective. He also considered the holy text as
something now lost and irretrievable, no longer the result of transcendence,
arguing that the divine source has become unrecognisable due to the pressure of political
ideology. Arkoun’s “critique of Islamic reason” incorporated the legacy of the
French Enlightenment, although it would be a mistake to say, as some of his
enemies did, that he adopted a western point of view or estranged himself from
his origins.
In his way to “show”
the vie is, Arkoun published his Pour une critique de la raison Islamique
(Critique of Islamic Reason) in 1984, in French and the work was translated
into Arabic as Tarikhiyah al-Fikr al- Arabi al-Islami (The Historicism of
Islamic Arab Thinking). He focused on the problem of the reading of Islamic
Arab tradition. Arkoun thesis started from historical reading or the problem of
historicism and interpretation (hermeneutics). Arkoun intended to comprehend
the whole socio-cultural phenomenon through historical perspective, that the
past should be viewed through its historical stages. In understanding history,
it is should be limited according to its chronological and obvious/empirical
(?) facts. It means, historicism functioned as a meaning reconstruction method
through eradication of the relevancy between the text and the context. If this
method used for religious texts, what is needed is a new meaning which potentially
hidden in the texts.
the vie is, Arkoun published his Pour une critique de la raison Islamique
(Critique of Islamic Reason) in 1984, in French and the work was translated
into Arabic as Tarikhiyah al-Fikr al- Arabi al-Islami (The Historicism of
Islamic Arab Thinking). He focused on the problem of the reading of Islamic
Arab tradition. Arkoun thesis started from historical reading or the problem of
historicism and interpretation (hermeneutics). Arkoun intended to comprehend
the whole socio-cultural phenomenon through historical perspective, that the
past should be viewed through its historical stages. In understanding history,
it is should be limited according to its chronological and obvious/empirical
(?) facts. It means, historicism functioned as a meaning reconstruction method
through eradication of the relevancy between the text and the context. If this
method used for religious texts, what is needed is a new meaning which potentially
hidden in the texts.
Historical method used
by Arkoun is one of the combinations of western social sciences developed by
French (post) structuralism thinkers. His main references are de Saussure
(linguistic), Levi-Strauss (anthropology), Lacan (psychology), Barthes
(semiology), Foucault (epistemology) and Derrida (grammatology). All elements
above he managed as such, so that they become ‘the Critique of Islamic Reason’.
His investigation on classical texts was to find out other meaning hidden in
the texts, so that to go to reconstruction (context) must undergo the
deconstruction (text). Arkoun not only give attention to classical texts from
Islamic scientists, he also investigated the scripture/holy texts.
by Arkoun is one of the combinations of western social sciences developed by
French (post) structuralism thinkers. His main references are de Saussure
(linguistic), Levi-Strauss (anthropology), Lacan (psychology), Barthes
(semiology), Foucault (epistemology) and Derrida (grammatology). All elements
above he managed as such, so that they become ‘the Critique of Islamic Reason’.
His investigation on classical texts was to find out other meaning hidden in
the texts, so that to go to reconstruction (context) must undergo the
deconstruction (text). Arkoun not only give attention to classical texts from
Islamic scientists, he also investigated the scripture/holy texts.
How would Arkoun view
the tradition (turats)?
the tradition (turats)?
Arkoun generally
differed two traditions. In his work written in French, he used two terms,
tradition and turats at the same time, and classified it into the first two
division, Tradition and Turats with
capital letter ‘T’, that is a transcendence tradition which is understood
and percept as an ideal ‘tradition from God’ and cannot be changed by
historical events. This kind of tradition is eternal and absolute. The second
tradition, written in small case ‘t’ , tradition or turats. This kind of
tradition is formed by man and woman’s history and culture, as heredity or as
human interpretation on the God’s Holy texts (Arkoun, 1987: 17-24).
differed two traditions. In his work written in French, he used two terms,
tradition and turats at the same time, and classified it into the first two
division, Tradition and Turats with
capital letter ‘T’, that is a transcendence tradition which is understood
and percept as an ideal ‘tradition from God’ and cannot be changed by
historical events. This kind of tradition is eternal and absolute. The second
tradition, written in small case ‘t’ , tradition or turats. This kind of
tradition is formed by man and woman’s history and culture, as heredity or as
human interpretation on the God’s Holy texts (Arkoun, 1987: 17-24).
Between those two
traditions, Arkoun marginalized the first kind of tradition. According to him,
that kind of tradition is outside human knowledge and reason. So, his target
and investigation object was the second kind of tradition, a tradition formed
by historical condition (in relation to time and space). Reading turats means
reading texts, all the texts, because turats was formed and standardized in the
history, and should be read through the historical sketches. To him, one of the
goals to read the texts, particularly the Holy texts, was to appreciate them in
the changing situation and condition. It means, religious teachings from the
Holy texts should accommodate and not in opposition with every situation and
condition. Here, what Arkoun tried to do was to harmonize between tradition and
modernity through a new method. There are many Quran commentators undergo an
historical and linguistic critique which is the feature of hermeneutics,
nowadays. Many writings emerge from the orientalists as also from Islamic writers
themselves.
traditions, Arkoun marginalized the first kind of tradition. According to him,
that kind of tradition is outside human knowledge and reason. So, his target
and investigation object was the second kind of tradition, a tradition formed
by historical condition (in relation to time and space). Reading turats means
reading texts, all the texts, because turats was formed and standardized in the
history, and should be read through the historical sketches. To him, one of the
goals to read the texts, particularly the Holy texts, was to appreciate them in
the changing situation and condition. It means, religious teachings from the
Holy texts should accommodate and not in opposition with every situation and
condition. Here, what Arkoun tried to do was to harmonize between tradition and
modernity through a new method. There are many Quran commentators undergo an
historical and linguistic critique which is the feature of hermeneutics,
nowadays. Many writings emerge from the orientalists as also from Islamic writers
themselves.
Jane Ms. Aucliffe wrote “Quranic Hermeneutic:
“The views of Al-Tabari and Ibn Katsir” which emphasized interpretation method
and a small part about social horizon (Mc. Mauliffe, 1988: 46-62).[4]
Muslim contemporary thinker, Fazlur Rahman discussed it with the double
movement interpretation, while Arkoun with his circle of
language-history thinking. For Arkoun, the integrated interpretation is an
interpretation that sees the connection between language thinking and history
dimension. To do this hermeneutical interpretation, the first step is to
distinguish and to show which one is the first/former original text and which
is the hermeneutical text.
“The views of Al-Tabari and Ibn Katsir” which emphasized interpretation method
and a small part about social horizon (Mc. Mauliffe, 1988: 46-62).[4]
Muslim contemporary thinker, Fazlur Rahman discussed it with the double
movement interpretation, while Arkoun with his circle of
language-history thinking. For Arkoun, the integrated interpretation is an
interpretation that sees the connection between language thinking and history
dimension. To do this hermeneutical interpretation, the first step is to
distinguish and to show which one is the first/former original text and which
is the hermeneutical text.
Arkoun intended to
bring the Islamic thought into Quranic discourse, as it is which is open against
various reading and at the same time open for different understanding. The
difficulty Arkoun faced in his project was that Quran as the first text or the
first event has been covered by Islamic thinking as such in the form of various
literatures as a second text or hermeneutical text. The covering is as such so
that hindered to understanding Quran as it is.
bring the Islamic thought into Quranic discourse, as it is which is open against
various reading and at the same time open for different understanding. The
difficulty Arkoun faced in his project was that Quran as the first text or the
first event has been covered by Islamic thinking as such in the form of various
literatures as a second text or hermeneutical text. The covering is as such so
that hindered to understanding Quran as it is.
To overcome this
problem, Arkoun borrowed Derrida’s “deconstruction’s” method or “uncovering”
and archaeological analysis used in examining historical artifacts. By this
archaeological analysis he tried to do an historical clarification on
hermeneutical texts from certain thinking tradition, that is to clarify and
clean the “dust” of space and time which covered them so that it will be
noticed the relation between texts from particular historical stages and social
context, the generation and the various thinking movement in the same
historical time. Instead of showing the relation between thinking and history,
Arkoun also showed the inseparable relation between thinking and language. Any
Islamic thinking, besides as a “mirror” of the dynamic struggles of the
socio-historical reality, it is also formulated, conceptualized and spoken in a
certain “language”.
problem, Arkoun borrowed Derrida’s “deconstruction’s” method or “uncovering”
and archaeological analysis used in examining historical artifacts. By this
archaeological analysis he tried to do an historical clarification on
hermeneutical texts from certain thinking tradition, that is to clarify and
clean the “dust” of space and time which covered them so that it will be
noticed the relation between texts from particular historical stages and social
context, the generation and the various thinking movement in the same
historical time. Instead of showing the relation between thinking and history,
Arkoun also showed the inseparable relation between thinking and language. Any
Islamic thinking, besides as a “mirror” of the dynamic struggles of the
socio-historical reality, it is also formulated, conceptualized and spoken in a
certain “language”.
What Arkoun did was an
example of how to “manage” Quran with the hermeneutic instrument. Hermeneutic
tradition focused on three aspects: text, context, and contextualization in a
continued circle. It means, when one investigating and at the same time
“reproducing” meaning, the three aspects should be employed continually. When
one investigates the meaning of a text, he/she should give attention to its
context at the same time from where the text came and how the text understood
in its original context, so that with the kind of understanding, the reinterpretation
of meaning of the particular text in a different context can be done.
example of how to “manage” Quran with the hermeneutic instrument. Hermeneutic
tradition focused on three aspects: text, context, and contextualization in a
continued circle. It means, when one investigating and at the same time
“reproducing” meaning, the three aspects should be employed continually. When
one investigates the meaning of a text, he/she should give attention to its
context at the same time from where the text came and how the text understood
in its original context, so that with the kind of understanding, the reinterpretation
of meaning of the particular text in a different context can be done.
In this case, Arkoun
revealed that there should always be a connection between language, thinking
and history. Islamic society and religious society in general should be fully
aware that there is a dialectical relation between language, thinking and
history. No any other religious thinking that loosely untied from language and
history. In relation to Quran, Arkoun insisted that the holy book of Moslems is
words, language, cultural and religious phenomena coming up from its own
situation, so that it would not producing meaning, except in its context; and
in its turn, creating an awareness’s structuralized, furthermore Quran is a
religious text to read and to live through (Arkoun, 1990, 19: 185-186).
revealed that there should always be a connection between language, thinking
and history. Islamic society and religious society in general should be fully
aware that there is a dialectical relation between language, thinking and
history. No any other religious thinking that loosely untied from language and
history. In relation to Quran, Arkoun insisted that the holy book of Moslems is
words, language, cultural and religious phenomena coming up from its own
situation, so that it would not producing meaning, except in its context; and
in its turn, creating an awareness’s structuralized, furthermore Quran is a
religious text to read and to live through (Arkoun, 1990, 19: 185-186).
The religious
institutions crisis strongly indicated that religion as far as nowadays tends
to be an authoritative one. Religious messages is in its original existence is as
an effort to liberate lost by the historical processes, which distorted it. The
crisis emerged because religion changing into a “hierarchical” institution
where the authorized was an “authority” that has right to speak about truth in
the name of “absolute authority”, whether God, the authoritative or others.
institutions crisis strongly indicated that religion as far as nowadays tends
to be an authoritative one. Religious messages is in its original existence is as
an effort to liberate lost by the historical processes, which distorted it. The
crisis emerged because religion changing into a “hierarchical” institution
where the authorized was an “authority” that has right to speak about truth in
the name of “absolute authority”, whether God, the authoritative or others.
All above cases showed
that when a religion become an institution monopolized by a certain authority,
then it will loose its nature as a liberate religion. Another effect of
mono-interpretation is how difficult to get a new and fresh interpretation. So,
a new and fresh reinterpretation is a must. Only by a contextual a continuous
reinterpretation, a religion will open to changing of time and progress and
also will escape from authoritarianism, which will make infertile the society
itself.
that when a religion become an institution monopolized by a certain authority,
then it will loose its nature as a liberate religion. Another effect of
mono-interpretation is how difficult to get a new and fresh interpretation. So,
a new and fresh reinterpretation is a must. Only by a contextual a continuous
reinterpretation, a religion will open to changing of time and progress and
also will escape from authoritarianism, which will make infertile the society
itself.
The religious discourse
domination on other religious discourses supposing a hierarchical structure,
which placed the dominant in “central” position and the other in the “margin”
(periphery) position. This hierarchical structure is not only exclude a certain
religious discourse, but also conquer, subordinate and repress it (Alam, 1994:
33). For the reason above, it is needed a strategy to do a turning in this
interpretation hierarchical structure to delegitimise the “central”, “origin”
and “primary” claims of the dominant discourse. The advantageous strategy to
reinterpret n the over institutionalized religious processes is by
deconstruction method.
domination on other religious discourses supposing a hierarchical structure,
which placed the dominant in “central” position and the other in the “margin”
(periphery) position. This hierarchical structure is not only exclude a certain
religious discourse, but also conquer, subordinate and repress it (Alam, 1994:
33). For the reason above, it is needed a strategy to do a turning in this
interpretation hierarchical structure to delegitimise the “central”, “origin”
and “primary” claims of the dominant discourse. The advantageous strategy to
reinterpret n the over institutionalized religious processes is by
deconstruction method.
Deconstruction is not a discourse, in term of a
group of statements which directing and forming those practices.
Deconstruction is not a method consists of a set of formal rules to analyze
discursive and non-discursive practices, too. Deconstruction is more as a
strategy to reveal the ambiguity of a discourse by tracking the pathway of
paradoxical movements inside the discourse, so that any discourse’s unit
subversively basic assumption of it.
group of statements which directing and forming those practices.
Deconstruction is not a method consists of a set of formal rules to analyze
discursive and non-discursive practices, too. Deconstruction is more as a
strategy to reveal the ambiguity of a discourse by tracking the pathway of
paradoxical movements inside the discourse, so that any discourse’s unit
subversively basic assumption of it.
The ambiguity in the
text and the interpretation of it is related to the problem of meaning in
connection with the text. The text, according to Derrida, does not have a
literal meaning, because it supposing the absolute selfpresence of the meaning.
In fact, the text (signifier) as a representation will never be able to
represent the representing of the meaning (signifier) pointed out by the text.
text and the interpretation of it is related to the problem of meaning in
connection with the text. The text, according to Derrida, does not have a
literal meaning, because it supposing the absolute selfpresence of the meaning.
In fact, the text (signifier) as a representation will never be able to
represent the representing of the meaning (signifier) pointed out by the text.
The text’s role is to
differ and at the same time to defer a meaning. By doing a signification of the
meaning, the text showed the absence of another meaning. But then, what is left
is a trace of a meaning pointed out. The movement of sign “to differ” and “to
defer” is what Derrida called the difference. By emphasizing that any text
(religious text) is a “trace” which always refers to the other texts, at he
same time strengthen the objection on the claim that a religious discourse can
have direct access to the “original” meaning of a text. This claim strengthened
the dominant position of a discourse against the other discourses. By changing
the interpretation hierarchical structure, deconstruction placed the discourses
in coexistence position.
differ and at the same time to defer a meaning. By doing a signification of the
meaning, the text showed the absence of another meaning. But then, what is left
is a trace of a meaning pointed out. The movement of sign “to differ” and “to
defer” is what Derrida called the difference. By emphasizing that any text
(religious text) is a “trace” which always refers to the other texts, at he
same time strengthen the objection on the claim that a religious discourse can
have direct access to the “original” meaning of a text. This claim strengthened
the dominant position of a discourse against the other discourses. By changing
the interpretation hierarchical structure, deconstruction placed the discourses
in coexistence position.
A deconstruction to a
text means to open the possibility over the various interpretations on the
text. The deconstruction of a text also bring another consequence sociologically,
that is uncovering interpretation monopoly on a certain authority which talked
about “”one truth” in the name of God, state or the ruler. Because, by
supposing that there were a certain authority, it also means supposing “The
Transcendence I”. If we bring the “transcendence I” to the side, then the many
possibilities opened for the various interpretation. Interpretation becomes
democratic, so that the truth will not be monopolized by one certain interpretation.
text means to open the possibility over the various interpretations on the
text. The deconstruction of a text also bring another consequence sociologically,
that is uncovering interpretation monopoly on a certain authority which talked
about “”one truth” in the name of God, state or the ruler. Because, by
supposing that there were a certain authority, it also means supposing “The
Transcendence I”. If we bring the “transcendence I” to the side, then the many
possibilities opened for the various interpretation. Interpretation becomes
democratic, so that the truth will not be monopolized by one certain interpretation.
The understanding of
this one truth actually in relation with the assumption about the existence
“the transcendence I” which omnipotent about the text, so that the
interpretation He produced has the “one authority” on the truth. Arkoun
deconstructed “the transcendence I” through the concept of the “logos historicity”,
then the one authority lost its supports, so that the plurality interpretation
alternatives emerges. In the plurality contexts, the interpretation hegemony falsified
and the text become alive and open to all interpretation. At the same time, no
more “the freezing of a text” in religion and ideology, which we know as a starting
point of all frozen thinking until now. The possibility to employ discourses on
the religious texts open democratically. A good consequence is religious life
of mankind relatively become critical, plural and dynamic.
this one truth actually in relation with the assumption about the existence
“the transcendence I” which omnipotent about the text, so that the
interpretation He produced has the “one authority” on the truth. Arkoun
deconstructed “the transcendence I” through the concept of the “logos historicity”,
then the one authority lost its supports, so that the plurality interpretation
alternatives emerges. In the plurality contexts, the interpretation hegemony falsified
and the text become alive and open to all interpretation. At the same time, no
more “the freezing of a text” in religion and ideology, which we know as a starting
point of all frozen thinking until now. The possibility to employ discourses on
the religious texts open democratically. A good consequence is religious life
of mankind relatively become critical, plural and dynamic.
Arkoun took advantage
in this deconstruction method in order to reconstruct the Islamic classical
scientific tradition. By this uncovering method will be seen the knowledge’
layers which had been covered by orthodoxies. After this step, it will be
distinguished which part is important and which one is not in the Islamic
study. The elaborative study offered by Arkoun is a little different from what
other Islamic thinkers did. His thought colored by structuralism,
post-structuralism, and deconstruction which all of them emphasize on linguistic
analyses. In many of his works, Arkoun uses the three paradigms mentioned above
to read and understand Islam, and also the more important is to reformulate
Islam.
in this deconstruction method in order to reconstruct the Islamic classical
scientific tradition. By this uncovering method will be seen the knowledge’
layers which had been covered by orthodoxies. After this step, it will be
distinguished which part is important and which one is not in the Islamic
study. The elaborative study offered by Arkoun is a little different from what
other Islamic thinkers did. His thought colored by structuralism,
post-structuralism, and deconstruction which all of them emphasize on linguistic
analyses. In many of his works, Arkoun uses the three paradigms mentioned above
to read and understand Islam, and also the more important is to reformulate
Islam.
It is good to be noted
that the deconstruction method cannot be employed without the knowledge
preparation about history, about the hidden Islamic tradition and also the
tradition that has been contaminated by external elements. In this process,
Arkoun tried to reemphasize the marginalize meaning or the forgotten one
because of the many covering and freezing processes underwent in Islamic
thinking. If in one hand Derrida emphasized that “deconstruction”, Arkoun
obviously did so that the deconstruction should be followed by “reconstruction”
of a discourse which has left the limitation, frozen, and the distortion of
former discourses.
that the deconstruction method cannot be employed without the knowledge
preparation about history, about the hidden Islamic tradition and also the
tradition that has been contaminated by external elements. In this process,
Arkoun tried to reemphasize the marginalize meaning or the forgotten one
because of the many covering and freezing processes underwent in Islamic
thinking. If in one hand Derrida emphasized that “deconstruction”, Arkoun
obviously did so that the deconstruction should be followed by “reconstruction”
of a discourse which has left the limitation, frozen, and the distortion of
former discourses.
Arkoun tried to turn
the higher hierarchy between bipolar concepts. Turning upside down the higher
concept between bipolar concepts is one of the characteristic of
deconstruction. But on the contrary, Arkoun still insists on a “transcendental
signifier”. He said that oral language is the earlier language form and more
original than written language. Arkoun corresponds the shift from oral to
written language as a shift from language of prophet into a teaching discourse.
The prophet language discusses the limited situation of human condition, which
opens to various contexts. While teaching discourse explained and classified
according to a rigid concept and tended to close the meaning in a rigid interpretation
which reject other interpretation. As a result, a “text” into “pretext”
(arguments), which often only repeated and not profoundly thought and functioned
as a legalization of a certain group authority.
the higher hierarchy between bipolar concepts. Turning upside down the higher
concept between bipolar concepts is one of the characteristic of
deconstruction. But on the contrary, Arkoun still insists on a “transcendental
signifier”. He said that oral language is the earlier language form and more
original than written language. Arkoun corresponds the shift from oral to
written language as a shift from language of prophet into a teaching discourse.
The prophet language discusses the limited situation of human condition, which
opens to various contexts. While teaching discourse explained and classified
according to a rigid concept and tended to close the meaning in a rigid interpretation
which reject other interpretation. As a result, a “text” into “pretext”
(arguments), which often only repeated and not profoundly thought and functioned
as a legalization of a certain group authority.
Arkoun argued that we
should be critical on traditional Islamic reasoning models, which make
chaotic the traditional interpretation, which rooted in history with God
messages content. He suggested the Islamic people to deconstruct the way of
past thinking and the interpretation of holy texts. The habit of Islamic reasoning,
which generated uncritically, should be deconstructed and the holy texts should
open for the historical and modern linguistic investigation. For that reason,
he employed this deconstruction method to reconstruct scientific tradition of
classical Islam. He believes that without stimulus and the discipline of openness
with the meeting of modern thinking results, the Islamic knowledge standard
among the traditional Islamic expert and the Islamists will degrade.
should be critical on traditional Islamic reasoning models, which make
chaotic the traditional interpretation, which rooted in history with God
messages content. He suggested the Islamic people to deconstruct the way of
past thinking and the interpretation of holy texts. The habit of Islamic reasoning,
which generated uncritically, should be deconstructed and the holy texts should
open for the historical and modern linguistic investigation. For that reason,
he employed this deconstruction method to reconstruct scientific tradition of
classical Islam. He believes that without stimulus and the discipline of openness
with the meeting of modern thinking results, the Islamic knowledge standard
among the traditional Islamic expert and the Islamists will degrade.
Bibliography
Mohammed
Arkound, Islam Kontemporer Menuju Dialog Antar Agama terj. Ruslani,
Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2001, h.v.
Arkound, Islam Kontemporer Menuju Dialog Antar Agama terj. Ruslani,
Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2001, h.v.
Mohamme
Arkoun, Rethingking Islam,Togyakarta: LPMI, 1996, h.57.
Arkoun, Rethingking Islam,Togyakarta: LPMI, 1996, h.57.
Article/paper
“Critic of Islamic Thought: Deconstruction of Mohammed Arkoun” by Fatimah,
Depok: UI.
“Critic of Islamic Thought: Deconstruction of Mohammed Arkoun” by Fatimah,
Depok: UI.
en.wikipedia.org/Mohammed
Arkoun
Arkoun
* Student of Fakultas Ushuluddin IAIN Walisongo Semarang angkatan 2011 from Purwodadi, Indonesia.
^ _________, from Ungaran, Indonesia.
[1] en.wikipedia.org/Mohammed Arkoun
[2] Mohammed Arkound, Islam Kontemporer Menuju Dialog Antar Agama terj.
Ruslani, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2001, h.v.
Ruslani, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2001, h.v.
[3] Mohamme Arkoun, Rethingking Islam,Togyakarta: LPMI, 1996,
h.57.
h.57.
[4] Article/paper “Critic of Islamic Thought: Deconstruction of
Mohammed Arkoun” by Fatimah, Depok: UI
Mohammed Arkoun” by Fatimah, Depok: UI
No comments:
Post a Comment