Back in 1983, Harun Nasution was the rector of one of Indonesia’s state universities, a highly respected figure with strong credentials earned from a prestigious university abroad. In contrast, Ayah was just an unknown person — He was merely a graduate of PGAN (MAN) Bima, whose high school certificate was lost when the ship he was on sank in Bali Straits while on his journey from a rural area of Bima to seek a better life in Jakarta. When he arrived, he had lost everything; no one could have predicted the kind of intellectual life that lay ahead of him.
Ayah’s quest was to wait for someone in the academic world who would oppose Harun Nasution’s ideas and decisions as outlined in his published writings. When no one stepped forward, he confidently took it upon himself. As an intellectual, people would understand Ayah’s concerns about how Harun Nasution’s decisions and ideas at the time significantly impacted the welfare of the community within the institution he led. Despite his humble background, Ayah dared to critique and respond to the ideas of a respected professor and the rector of a prominent Islamic university at that time. He was capable of responding with four consecutive writings titled: “Responding to Prof. Dr. Harun Nasution’s Ideas: 1) “On the Encouragement of Philosophy, Kalam, and the History of Islamic Civilization Courses”, 2) “Islamic Philosophers’ Views on the Truth of Their Religion”, 3) “Understanding Rationality”, 4) “Reform is Agreeable, as Long as It Does Not Deviate”.
The writings conceptualized the way of thinking aimed at understanding the fundamental fallacy in the Islamic Reform initiated by Harun Nasution. It then proceeded to highlight the deviations of Harun Nasution’s approach as to how these limitations could impact the development of UIN students, and persisting fallacies may be plaguing their religious and spiritual lives:
“On August 3, 1983, Harian Pelita published a speech by the Rector of IAIN Jakarta, Prof. Dr. Harun Nasution, in which he outlined his ideas on Islamic reform. The essence of his message was the need for reinterpretation (ijtihad) of the core principles found in the Quran and Hadith. Regarding ijtihad, which involves revising the curriculum to move beyond just religious studies and creating a curriculum that aligns religion with modern scientific knowledge.
Kompas on September 21, 1983, published an interview with Prof. Harun Nasution, in which he explained his Islamic reform ideas, stating: The IAIN curriculum, according to Harun, is oriented toward producing mujtahids. This is reflected in the curriculum, which includes the encouragement of courses such as philosophy, theology or kalam, history and Islamic culture or Sufism.”
Cr: “On the Encouragement of Philosophy, Kalam, and the History of Islamic Civilization Courses”
Ayah first saw the fallacies and then constructed the laborious proofs afterwards. When I tried to follow his reasoning, I was astonished by how he had obtained such precise empirical data. It was quite difficult to comprehend everything, as he drew extraordinary connections from seemingly all possible angles. His reasoning was highly detailed and intense, aimed at understanding the fundamental fallacies in Harun Nasution’s ideas and arguments:
“Based on the definition of Ijtihad and the requirements needed to apply it, as outlined above, it is clear that Prof. Dr. Harun Nasution’s ideas, which he promoted for Islamic reform (Ijtihad) within the institution he led, are seriously misguided. He encouraged courses in philosophy, Islamic history and culture, and Sufism, encouraging students at IAIN Jakarta to adopt a rational approach. However, these subjects do not meet the criteria established by scholars for applying Ijtihad.”
Regarding the concept of rationality, Ayah argued that an example can be found in Q.S Al-Imran:112, which states:
“They will be stricken with disgrace wherever they go, unless they are protected by a covenant with Allah and a treaty with the people”
Hablum minal Lahi (worship of Allah) is not based on rationality, but on dogma rooted in faith in Allah SWT. When Prophet Muhammad SAW returned from the Isra and Mi’raj, he shared the event with the rationalists and disbelievers of the Quraysh. None of them believed in the event because it did not fit their rational understanding. However, the Muslim community, led by Abu Bakr, believed, saying, “Whether rational or not, I believe because of my faith in the prophethood of Muhammad SAW.” Therefore, in matters of worship, it is not about whether something is rational or not, but about our faith in Allah SWT. As for Hablum minannas (human relations), reason can play a role. Thus, Prof. Dr. Harun Nasution’s call for a rational approach to Islamic reform is a misguided one”
Cr: “Understanding Rationality”
He carefully presented his deduction by laying out all the precise definitions that formed the basis of Harun Nasution’s ideas, further highlighting their flaws. This approach made it easier to understand the fallacies in Harun Nasution’s thinking.
According to Dr. Ibrahim Al-Nughaimisyi, the former Religious Affairs attaché from Embassy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in Jakarta, his analytical prowess was described as, “He is like a thorn in the throat of those (deviant groups), because he constantly monitors them with evidence, like a lion waiting to pounce and bring them down, using all his effort and resources.”
Ayah explored the complexities of this discourse rightfully by asking seemingly simple questions that led to greater clarity. As he put it: “To what extent does philosophical truth exist? Is it equal to the truth contained in the Quran and Hadith? Is it higher or the opposite? Is it certain or relative? The answer to these questions is: The truth according to Allah in the Quran, as stated in His words: ‘This is the truth from your Lord, so do not ever be one of those who doubt’ (Al-Baqarah – 147). Therefore, the absolute truth that is correct is the truth that comes from God, which is Islam.”
He highlighted the limitations of philosophical thinking within the Islamic vision of truth in his work titled “On the Encouragement of Philosophy, Kalam, and the History of Islamic Civilization Courses.” In this article, he emphasized the limitations of human abilities, a perspective acknowledged by the philosopher himself:
“The word philosophy comes from the Greek ‘Philosophia,’ which means ‘Love’ and ‘Sophia,’ which means ‘Knowledge.’” He explains that according to the Roman author Cicero (106–43 BCE), the first person to use the word “philosophy” was Pythagoras. This was in response to intellectuals of his time who called themselves “knowledge experts.” Pythagoras argued that knowledge, in its complete sense, was not suited for humans. Every person encounters difficulties in acquiring it, and even if they spend their entire life pursuing it, they will never reach its ultimate limit. Thus, knowledge is something we seek, and we can obtain a portion of it without ever fully grasping it. Therefore, we are not knowledge experts, but rather seekers and lovers of knowledge.”
“What is Islam’s perspective on this? According to the Quran, Allah says, “We have given but little knowledge” (Q.S. Al-Isra 185). Therefore, the knowledge that the human mind can acquire is very limited.”
Cr : “On the Encouragement of Philosophy, Kalam, and the History of Islamic Civilization Courses”
In his continued article, “Islamic Philosophers’ Views on the Truth of Their Religion,” Ayah then explained the limitations and fallacies of Islamic philosophers in understanding the truth of their religion. He wrote “Ibn Rusyd argued that when there is a contradiction between revelation, reason, and philosophy, revelation should be interpreted in such a way that it aligns with reason and philosophy.” If further examined, one of Ibn Rusyd’s most famous works, Tahafut al-Tahafut, Ibn Rusyd emphasized that philosophy should be prioritized in interpreting the truth, especially in matters related to God and the universe. In this work, he debated the perspectives of al-Ghazali, who criticized philosophy. Ayah pointed out that:
“Ibn Rusyd saw Aristotle as the perfect human being and the greatest philosopher, who had reached the truth that could not be mixed with error. Due to his admiration for Aristotle and other philosophers, an intense polemic developed between al-Ghazali and Ibn Rusyd, which ultimately led Imam al-Ghazali to declare Ibn Rusyd a disbeliever for three reasons: 1) Ibn Rusyd believed that the universe is eternal and will last forever; 2) He argued that God does not know the details of what happens in the universe; 3) He denied the physical resurrection on the Day of Judgment.”
Similarly, Ibn Sina (Avicenna) shared a similar perspective. Ayah quoted, “Ibn Sina argued that if there is a conflict between religious truth and philosophical truth, religion must submit to the truth of philosophy.” If further examined,in his work Fasl al-Maqal, Ibnu Sina wrote that philosophers could rationally interpret revelation, and if there was a conflict between revelation and reason, the revelation should be interpreted according to rational philosophical principles. In this context, logic served as the primary tool for interpreting religious truth to ensure it aligned with the metaphysical and rational principles discovered through philosophy.
“In response to the issue mentioned above, Islamic scholars strongly condemned those views at that time, including prominent figures such as Imam Al-Ghazali, a renowned philosopher, Sheikhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim, Ibn al-Salah, and other notable scholars of the Sunnah.
In Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 34, and Surah Al-A’raf, verses 11-14, ‘Allah asked, “What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?” He replied, “I am better than he is: You created me from fire and him from clay.” ‘Allah said, “Then get down from Paradise! It is not for you to be arrogant here. So get out! You are truly one of the disgraced’” (Surah Al-A’raf 11-14)
Iblis refused to prostrate to Adam, believing himself to be superior because he was created from fire, while Adam was created from clay. As a result, Allah condemned him as a disbeliever. So, can someone who believes their intellect can surpass divine revelation be considered less of a disbeliever than Iblis?
When someone asked Ibn al-Salah about the study of philosophy, he responded: ‘Whoever engages in philosophy will find their heart blinded to the pure goodness of Shariah, which is supported by clear evidence and reasoning.‘
What knowledge could be more contemptible than one that blinds its possessor and darkens their heart, preventing them from the light of our Prophethood?”
Cr : “On the Encouragement of Philosophy, Kalam, and the History of Islamic Civilization Courses” & “Islamic Philosophers’ Views on the Truth of Their Religion”
While Ayah emphasized ijtihad, it wasn’t just that I finally grasped the first principle – that the fundamental issue being debated was the tool used in matters related to the cognitive content of reasoning within the context of the Islamic vision of truth. After further reflection, it was evident that philosophical thinking could not be used to provide the correct meaning in understanding the truth of the Quran and Sunnah. The demands of philosophical thinking were incapable of achieving an accurate interpretation of its divine meaning. Acknowledging philosophical thinking limitations, the correct approach was attained through ijtihad: “As the scholars define it, although the wording may differ slightly, the substance and meaning remain the same. It means exerting one’s intellectual effort to seek clarity or certainty in Islamic law or its intended meaning regarding a specific issue, following the conditions and guidelines for the requirements of ijtihad.”
What astounded me was that this process required a combination of specific dispositions, abilities, and knowledge that must all be present for one to be considered capable of undertaking it. The dispositions involved in ijtihad include akhlaqul karimah, moral and intellectual virtues, emphasizing that ijtihad would be invalid if one of these requirements was lacking. Thus, the abilities required were so refined that they demonstrated the strictness of Ijtihad thinking process.
I perceive that Ijtihad, along with all its necessary conditions, is distinguished not merely by its systematic nature – so precise in seeking clarity and certainty to understand the essence of truth in Islam – but also in its ability to eliminate errors in reasoning which often occur when freedom of thought is practiced without guiding principles or proper structures. Furthermore, ijtihad is also capable of interpreting the empirical evidence of the truth in Islam.
“Al-Ma’mun’s tendency toward unlimited freedom of thought, and his positive view of philosophers as ‘chosen individuals,’ ultimately undermined respect for the Prophets and Messengers, as well as the truth of Islam, which has been passed down through generations as the one and only absolute truth, serving as the standard of values in all matters.”
Cr: On the Encouragement of Philosophy, Kalam, and the History of Islamic Civilization Courses
***
His writings led to a shift in the balance of individual understanding, strengthening certain beliefs at the expense of others in the battle of ideological ideas. Precisely where the greatest possible value could be plotted, what God did for him was profoundly personal: his published writings became the divine intersection of minds between Ayah and Muhammad Natsir. Even Harun Nasution asked his peers about Ayah.
On the fourth day, just as Ayah’s final article was published in Harian Pelita, Muhammad Natsir instructed his assistant, Hardi M. Arifin, to look into the author of the published articles. “Arifin, please investigate who Amin Djamaluddin is, where he got his education, what organization he’s involved in, and if he’s married, find out who his wife is and what her education is,” Natsir ordered. After receiving the information, Muhammad Natsir instructed, “Please find Amin Djamaluddin, I really want to meet him.“
Muhammad Natsir thus came to acknowledge Ayah’s capabilities. When they were finally introduced, Natsir stood up from his desk, moved to a regular chair facing Ayah, and said, “I have read and thoroughly reviewed your articles published in Harian Pelita. Prof. Dr. Harun Nasution is an internationally renowned orientalist. What you’re doing is work of international caliber. It’s rare to find someone who can do what you’re doing. I’d like you to help me. My door is always open to you.” This was the first meeting between Ayah and Muhammad Natsir, and as a result, Ayah was appointed as a special expert staff member to assist Natsir in the field of religion.
From this juncture, Ayah’s character and contributions had garnered him recognition, esteem, and authority. He founded and established an independent research and Islamic studies institute. He had carved out a brilliant career in his profession.
He also successfully founded a foundation that builds a free secondary school in a remote area of Bima, NTB, and a boarding school in Jakarta. This initiative offers educational opportunities to children residing in regions characterized by elevated poverty levels, high crime rates, and significant population density. The boarding school aims to tackle moral and educational challenges while supporting low-income and orphaned children, emphasizing his commitment to expanding educational opportunities.
His immense positive impact led to him, along with several other prominent Indonesian Islamic leaders, being invited as guests of honor by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 2008. The honorable guests were received personally by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Minister of Religious Affairs, Syeikh Soleh Bin Abdul Aziz Aalu along with his staff. A seemingly perfect storyline.
***
It has already been two years since he passed, yet everything that Ayah built over time continues to form a strong foundation, shaping the way I interpret the world and creating the nurturing environment in which I grew up, stimulating my outward experiences.
My deep connection with him indirectly protects me from the savagery I might inflict upon myself. In his biosphere, he nurtures my soul, polishing the light within. It receives, reflects, and is transformed by the reflection of him, whose presence embodies the external essence of my soul. The essence of who he was continues to guide and shape me.
Reading his old published writings, I suddenly felt a quiet strength within myself. In nearly all his work, I have come to realize that true faith, as Islam encourages, is an intellectual journey. It is, however, an intellectual effort in what it means to learn dispositions, abilities, and knowledge from the scholars that represent authority to deliberate correctly our movement toward genuine Islam in such a world gripped by crisis of truth. As Sheikh Muhammad Abduh interprets:
“This verse clearly states that taqlid (blind imitation) without the consideration of reason or any guidance is a trait of the unbelievers. One cannot have faith if their religion is not understood with reason, if it is not personally known until they are certain of it.
Belief is not meant for a person to degrade themselves by doing good deeds like a lowly animal, but rather it is meant for a person to enhance their intellectual capacity, to improve themselves through knowledge, so that when they do good deeds, they are truly aware that the goodness is useful and accepted by God. In avoiding evil, they also understand the dangers and the far-reaching consequences of that evil.’
This is the kind of faith that Islam encourages. Intellectual faith that is convincing, that has been reflected upon and carefully thought out, and after that, with this reflection and reasoning, one will arrive at a conviction about the Almighty God.”
While philosophy – particularly philosophy of science – is valuable, the Islamic framework considers it at a subordinate level as methodology, in this context, “subordinate” means that the philosophy of science is not the ultimate goal; rather a supporting or dependent methodology aimed at achieving a higher purpose: Haqq. This framework positions philosophy as an instrumental discipline, implying a hierarchical relationship where the philosophy of science serves as a specific, assisting tool to achieve true knowledge within the pursuit of the truth in Islam.