Faqih A. Faiqil Faqih

Relasi Agama dan Negara Perspektif Analisis Ushul Fikih

Introduction

Relasi agama dan negara perspektif analisis ushul fikih. Telusuri relasi agama dan negara di Indonesia lewat analisis Ushul Fikih. Pahami konflik Jakarta Charter & sinergi Islam-negara demi manfaat sosial masyarakat.

Abstract

Religious-state conflicts coloured the journey of this nation since begun the establishment of the Republic Indonesia (since independence), starting from conflicts about formulation of Jakarta Charter to conflicts that have occurred recently. The conflict that occurred with regard to the Jakarta Charter was nothing more than a conflict about the basic formulation of the state, whether the State of Pancasila or the Islamic State. Then continued with conflicts related to the PKI, a conflict of faith movements involving clashes among the abangan’s community, students and the military. Not only that, there are many others about religious-state conflicts. This article wants to understand comprehensively about the state and religion (Islam), in order can read the relationship beetwen synergize religion with the state. The following synergence of religion and state will be formulated based on the dialectical formulation between wa>zi’ di>niy (regulator and supervisor religion: religious control) and w?zi’ sulta>niy (regulator and supervisor government: government control) based on the study of Jurisprudence Proposal. This research results that religion (it means, Islam) and the state have common ground in an effort to realize the social benefit of society. Islam is a control for Muslims to realize benefits because Islam believed by the true religion by Muslims. The state became control to realize benefits because the state has the authority to regulate and make policies for all its people. In the role of being a control for the benefit, there is no superior between religion and the state.

Review

This article addresses a highly pertinent and complex topic in the Indonesian context: the relationship between religion and the state, particularly in light of historical conflicts. The author's ambition to offer a comprehensive understanding and formulate a synergistic relationship between the two, drawing on the analytical lens of *Ushul Fikih* (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence), is commendable. The introduction of *wa>zi’ di>niy* (religious control) and *w?zi’ sulta>niy* (government control) as dialectical categories to frame this synergy is an intriguing approach, suggesting a potentially novel contribution to the discourse. The central finding, positing common ground in realizing social benefit with neither religion (Islam) nor the state being superior in their roles as controls, presents a harmonious vision that is theoretically appealing and relevant to contemporary debates. While the chosen analytical framework offers a unique perspective, the abstract raises several questions regarding the depth of its application and the scope of its historical analysis. The historical overview of conflicts, from the Jakarta Charter to the PKI, feels somewhat condensed and might benefit from a more nuanced engagement with the diverse political, social, and economic factors at play, beyond simply framing them as "religious-state conflicts" or "faith movements." Furthermore, the immediate narrowing of "religion" to "Islam" in the core argument, without explicit prior framing in the title or initial abstract sentences, might lead to an assumption of scope that requires clearer definition. The claim of "no superior" between religion and state, while an ideal, requires robust theoretical and historical justification within the *Ushul Fikih* framework to demonstrate its practical applicability in a pluralistic society like Indonesia. To strengthen the article, a clearer articulation of the methodology is needed. The abstract mentions "This research results that," implying empirical or analytical work, yet describes the method as a "study of Jurisprudence Proposal," which sounds more theoretical. Elucidating how *Ushul Fikih* principles are specifically applied to the Indonesian context, and how they historically inform or reinterpret these conflicts, would significantly enhance the argument. Further, engaging with counter-arguments or historical instances where this synergy has been difficult to achieve would add a layer of critical depth. Despite these points, the article's core endeavor to find a harmonious theoretical framework for religion-state relations through an indigenous Islamic jurisprudential lens is highly valuable and warrants further development to rigorously address the complexities of its subject matter.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.