Al-jabiri's traces in m. amin abdullah's idea about integrative- interconnective paradigm for higher education

Between Islamic science and science, according to M. Amin Abdullah, it should not be dichotomous and lack a strong epistemological basis. For this purpose, the work of "integrating" is not enough, because the problem is the difficulty of combining the disciplines of Islam and science, which sometimes do not get along well and in both there is a potential to crush one another. Therefore, according to him, integration efforts must be followed by interconnection efforts of science. This idea from him emerged after he recontextualized M. Abed Al-Jabiri's thoughts, especially those related to the criticism of Arabic reasoning and the rethinking of epistemology. The results were brilliant. The integrative-interconnective paradigm of Islamic studies in Higher Education which he initiated is considered successful in offering a kind of worldview that is more actual, open, and builds a non-dichotomic scientific bridge in higher education. As developed by UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta at this time. This focus is what the author wants to discuss, and for that the author explores mainly all primary literature both written by Abdullah and from the relevant Al-Jabiri, approaches it historically-philosophically and then provides descriptive analysis.


INTRODUCTION
M. Abed Al-Jabiri (hereinafter written: Al-Jabiri) generally carries a new interreligious discourse on Islamic tradition, then postulates the discourse as an episteme. In connection with this, Al-Jabiri feels that the epistemological criticism of Arab reasoning (Islam) needs to be given. Moreover, that is the key word, in order to improve the universe of Arab (Islamic) civilization, which constitutes the entire Islamic discourse that develops, not only in the Arab region, but throughout the world (Al-Jabiri, 1991;Al-Jabiri, 1995;Al-Jabiri 2014).
As an influential thinker in this century, Al-Jabiri was heavily influenced by philosophical thought traditions, especially post-structuralism schools such as Lacan, Althusser, Derrida, Barthez to Foucault. Wijaya (2004), for example, was grouping Al-Jabiri into a group of reformist thinkers. Meanwhile, Washil (2013) equated him with other influential thinkers such as Arkoun, Hanafi and Rachman.
What has been criticized and proposed by Al-Jabiri, in this context is relevant to various problems in tertiary institutions that are of concern to M. Amin Abdullah (hereinafter written: Abdullah), especially related to his paradigm. One of the problems in higher education, according to him, is the scientific dichotomy problem. In most universities in Indonesia today, according to him, both Islamic and scientific sciences, both seem to greet one another and are treated differently. The problem becomes serious, especially when normative Islamic scholarship is less contributive to the real problems of humanity and social change. On the other hand, secular science develops outside the corridors of religious ethics and morals. According to him, this is the reason why it is important to reconstruct the paradigm in higher education, especially in Indonesia.
In connection with this reconstruction in the context of higher education in Indonesia, it is clear that more than just integrating work is needed. Because according to Abdullah, if you only rely on integration, the problem is the difficulty in combining Islamic scientific disciplines and science, which sometimes do not get along and even have the potential to crush each other. Apart from integration, it is also important to do scientific interconnection efforts (Abdullah, 2006).
Abdullah's idea of a n integrative and interconnective paradigm in higher education is of course not original from him, but rather the development he made after studying the thoughts of contemporary Muslim thinkers, including Al-Jabiri. Even in the context of his idea of t his, it is not an exaggeration to say that the traces of Al-Jabiri's thoughts are very visible, especially those related to the criticism of Arab reasoning and the rethinking of epistemology. The result is quite brilliant, the integrative-interconnective paradigm of Islamic studies in Higher Education which was initiated by many circles is considered successful in offering a kind of worldview that is more actual, open, and builds a non-dichotomic scientific bridge in higher education. An example of a university whose higher education has been successfully built based on this paradigm is UIN Sunan Kalijaga in Yogyakarta, a place where he was recorded as the Rector on this campus for two consecutive periods (2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010).

METHODS
This paper is the result of a literature review with a historical-philosophical approach and descriptive analysis. The data sources come from literatures related to the focus discussed, especially those written directly by M. Abed Al-Jabiri and M. Amin Abdullah. From Al-Jabiri, the author read Isykaliyat al-Fikr al-'Arabi al-Muashir, Bunyah al-Aql al-'Arabi, Qadlaya al-Fikr al-'Arabi, Al-'Aqlu As-Siyasi al-Arabi, and Taqwin al -'Aql al-'Arabi. Meanwhile, from Abdullah, the author explores his writings, such as: New Tafsir of Islamic Studies in a Multicultural Era, Reuniting Religious and General Sciences, Islamic Studies in Higher Education, and Re-Structuring the Methodology of Islamic Studies in the Yogyakarta School of Religion. With the exception of this primary data source, the authors also use secondary literature, as long as the author considers it relevant to the focus of the problem in the writing that the author writes. The authors tracked these data sources from the help of Google Scholar database.

Arab Reasoning Criticism
Arab reasoning criticism emerged as the failure reflection of Arab (Islamic) renaissance and at the same time a way to uncover the causes of this failure. Of course, Al-Jabiri is not the only Arab thinker who thinks so. The Arab (Islamic) Renaissance, which kept "stumbling" in the middle of the road, clearly became the anxiety of most Arab (Islamic) thinkers at that time, including Al-Jabiri. th The genealogy can be traced back to the 19 century, when Arabic (Islamic) culture vis a vis modern European culture. The marker is the domination of Western colonialism/imperialism, which has consequences for Arab backwardness and the defeat of Zionist Israel in 1948 and 1967, which has prompted Arab (Islamic) thinkers to work hard to provide explanations about the causes of Arab (Islamic) stagnation and failure in the renaissance, and to imagine a model of reform such as what else can be done to make the project successful (Boullata, 1990).
Al-Jabiri was no exception, who reflected seriously on this matter. From the results of his reflection, he then came to the conclusion that the factors that caused the Arab (Islamic) renaissance to experience stagnation, failure and even ceasing to be discouraged, were because they deviated from the proper renaissance mechanism. In addition, the blue print is not clear (Shah & Mappiase, 2001).
Al-Jabiri agreed that the renaissance required a commitment to return to tradition and adhere to basic principles. However, according to him, do not be mistaken by making the basic past principles as the basis for the renaissance which was held as it is. "Returning" to the basic past principles should be able to function as a criticism instrument of the "present" and "nearer past", then leap far into the future. The basic principles of the "distant" past should be able to be reinterpreted so that they can answer the challenges of today and the future.
This reinterpretation can be done by comparing the pattern of the Arab (Islamic) renaissance in the early days of Islam, which was marked by the reformist works of the Prophet Muhammad with the modern European renaissance. Referring to authoritative sources in Islam, especially the Koran, it is clear that Islam came to Arabia which was experiencing metaphysical and social turmoil. At that time also, there was a conflict between the Quraish elite (as the old ruling elite) and a group of people who wanted to reinforce the position of hanifiyah teachings.
The conflict occurred not only because the old elite felt that the position of power at that time was threatened, but also because the teachings carried by the people who carried the hanifiyah teachings deviated from the belief of the majority at that time who worshiped idols. When Islam was spread by the Prophet, it automatically took part in the conflict arena automatically, because it was thought to help reinforce the position of this hanifiyah teaching. Slowly but surely, the teachings that worshiped idols were replaced by the teachings of monotheism brought by those who embraced hanifiyah teachings and especially Islam. If getting the momentum of the renaissance, the Europeans went back far th to revive the legacy of Greco-Roman civilization in the 12 AD century, namely "humanism" (Al-Jabiri, 1994). Meanwhile, Arabs (Islam), which have the same capital for this, show the opposite (Boisard, 1988).
Thus, according to Al-Jabiri, Arabic (Islam) in responding to newness (now or in the future) must depart from the past; not in the sense of "inheriting it" outright but used as a basis for criticizing and even going beyond it (Al-Jabiri, 1994). That is what distinguishes Arabic (Islam) from modern Europe in the context of the renaissance.
According to Al-Jabiri, there are two characteristics that are problematic in the Arab world (Islam): First, the tendency to defend tradition. What was inherited from the Arab treasures (Islam), starting from aqidah, sharia (fiqh), language, literature, art, theology, nd rd philosophy and Sufism during the time of Tadwin (2 and 3 Hijriyah century until the rise th th of the Ottoman empire in the 10 /16 AD century even ironically taking a resistant position against anything from outside Arabia (Islam), because it is considered a threat to identity. In this context, Al-Jabiri argues that the process of returning to basic principles still needs to be done but it should be critical, not trail the past, but transcend it.
"Sheltering to the past" will only make Arab (Islam) adopt a resistant attitude towards outsiders/foreigners.
Second, the current Arab (Islamic) tradition is not born from a new reality, but from the previous memory of Arab (Islamic) tradition. As a consequence, contemporary reality is read but from the perspective of the past tradition. The minds of Arab generation (Islam) were led to the concepts/methods/thoughts of their previous generations, even being carried away and involved in conflict with the problems of their predecessors, even though the social reality was different. The Arabic (Islamic) tradition has lost its historical dimension, and is even considered sacred. Anything that originates from the Arab (Islamic) tradition in the past is considered far from being real, including the thoughts of its scholars (Al-Jabiri, 1989).
The problem lies in focus, which should not be trapped in "thinking", but what "produces thought". It should be realized that behind the linking of thought with ideology there is also a linkage of thought as an instrument for producing thought (al-fikr ka'adah li intaj al-fikr), and thought in the sense of being a collection of thoughts itself (al-fikr biwashfihi majmu 'al-afkar dzatuha). This tendency can be seen clearly from the language that developed in the Arab world (Islam). Although linked to each other, according to Al-Jabiri, they must still be distinguished. Al-Jabiri gave an example of how the classical philosophers distinguished between 'aql as the ability to know (al-quwwah al-mudrikah), and ma'qulat as the one who made sense or whose meaning was known (al-ma'ani al-mudrakah).
As for this distinction, according to Al-Jabiri is related to methodological factors, and therefore it is imperative to differentiate between them. Likewise, the distinction between 'aql and ma'qulat becomes significant for classical philosophers due to metaphysical motivations (for example: whether reason is independent/munfariq or not, whether the ma'qulat has independent objective truth or is it just a name) (Al-Jabiri, 2014).
At present, Al-Jabiri sees a tendency for an overlap between thought as "an instrument" and "a product of thought". The Arab socio-cultural environment (Islam) also conditions it. Thus, Arab (Islamic) thought, which currently has an "Arabic" impression, according to Al-Jabiri is not merely a view, concept and even theory that portrays Arab reality with certain distinctive characteristics, but also images it as "the product of a mechanism or thinking model formed by a number of Arab realities (Islam) itself with all the desired uniqueness in it" (Al-Jabiri, 2014).
A thinker is certainly not suddenly locked up by a certain culture unless he "thinks according to the logic of that culture" (al-tafkir dakhiluha). However, thinking in a particular culture, is not always thinking about culture with the logic of its own culture.
Because certain cultures according to Al-Jabiri should also be seen from the point of view of other cultures. Al-Jabiri gave an example of how Al-Farabi succeeded in studying Greece, while clearly, he was an Arab (Islam). Or, an orientalist who should still be considered as an orientalist even though the object discussing is Eastern and cultural Attarbiyah: Journal of Islamic Culture and Education https://www.attarbiyah.iainsalatiga.ac.id/index.php/attarbiyah/ issues. Thinking through a certain culture (at-tafkir dakhil tsaqafah mu'ayyanah) has the same meaning as thinking through a referential/guidance system (manzhumah marj'iyah) which forms basic coordinates, namely the determinants and shaping of culture, mainly in the form of turats (cultural heritage), the social environment, the way they see the future, even their views on nature, the world and humans (Al-Jabiri, 2014).
From here, according to Al-Jabiri, the definition of "Arab reasoning" can be formulated, according to which the word reason ('aql) is the translation of "thought as a thinking device" (al-fikr biwashfihi' adah li afkar) and associates the Arabic nature with the culture that is related to it namely Arab (Islamic) culture. However, according to him, Arabic reasoning needs to be understood, whether reason is formed (al-'aql al-mukawwan au as-said) or is it formed (al-aql al almukawwin au al-fa-'il) (Al-Jabiri, 2014). From his study, Arab (Islamic) reasoning at this time according to him is that reason is formed, not reasoning which forms it.
The reasoning that is formed is the main factor in the tendency of the loss of the tradition of critical thinking in the Arab world (Islam) today (Al-Jabiri, 2014). The Renaissance projected by Arabic (Islam), too, was not built from a tradition of rational thinking as an active and fundamental element, like the Greeks and/or modern Europeans. Reason is formed which is so dominant, making Arab (Islamic) thinkers only "think with reason" (at-tafkir bi al-aqal) but fail to "think about reason" (at-tafkir fi al-'aql) (Al-Jabiri, 2014).
As an effort to "understand the cause", Al-Jabiri analyzed the meaning of reason from Arabic (Islam) and compared it with Greek (by examining the thoughts of philosophers such as Heraclitus, Anaxagoras, Descartes, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle) a nd modern Europe (such as tracing Spinoza, Hegel, Imanuel Kant, and Hazenberg). He also concluded that modern Greece and Europe interpret reason identically with reason (which is close to knowledge), while in Arabic (Islam) it is closer to the meaning of behavior and morals. Such meanings can be found in Arabic dictionaries which review the word sense which is formed from 'a-qa-la, which is the relationship between the significance of this word and the ethical behavior according to Al-Jabiri, almost certain (Al-Jabiri, 2014).
That reason in modern Greece/Europe also penetrates the notion of morals, he does not deny. This can be found in the Stoics who saw every wisdom in life in accordance with "logos" or "universal reason". Likewise, Arabic reasoning that may penetrate into knowledge. However, there are fundamental differences between the two (Al-Jabiri, 2014).
The fundamental difference between the two can be seen from the illustration of the pictures in charts 1 and 2 below:

Rethinking Epistemology
Except for the criticism of Arab reasoning, Al-Jabiri's rethinking of epistemology also leaves an important trace in Abdullah's ideas which we discuss. The epistemology here refers to a series of basic principles produced by a particular culture as a foundation or basic framework for the activity of acquiring knowledge (epistemic system) and reproduction of knowledge. Epistemology is a conceptual framework used to organize experiences and direct responses to the outside world as a conscious reality (Edwards, 1972). Thus, the epistemology is clearly a very strategic position, because it talks about how to get correct knowledge. Knowing the correct way to obtain knowledge is closely related to the results to be achieved, namely in the form of knowledge. In the future, expertise in determining epistemology will greatly influence the color or type of knowledge produced (Harre, 1978).
In Al-Jabiri emphasized that epistemological rethinking is the right solution to respond to the challenges of modernity. However, the structure of Arabic (Islamic) reason which tends to give referential authority to the past model lays the problem. This tendency makes religious discourse always appear "ideological" on the pretext of authenticity.
Meanwhile, in building certain thoughts, Arabic (Islamic) thought does not originate from reality, but from a past model which is continually re-read. As also discussed above about the Arab reasoning critique of al-Jabri, this allows the tradition (turats) in Arabic (Islam) to be accepted in its totality without any awareness of revisiting it.

Bayani
Historically the bayani epistemology system is the earliest epistemological system that emerged in the context of Arabic (Islamic) thought. Bayani epistemology is generally used in the study of language (nahw, balaghah), Islamic law (ushul fiqh) and the science of kalam. This epistemology relies on the text (nash) of the Qur'an and hadith, ijma' and ijtihad as references in reconstructing concepts, especially in order to strengthen belief as a Muslim. (Al-Jabiri, 1991).
Bayani here means to think based on the authority of the text directly or indirectly. Directly means understanding the text as knowledge and applying it directly without thinking; whereas indirectly means understanding the text as raw knowledge, so it requires deeper interpretation and reasoning. Although bayani allows for interpretation, that does not mean that reason can freely determine the meaning, but still rely on the text.
The approach used is the linguistic approach, while the methods used are qiyas, istinbat, tajwiz, 'adah. Therefore, bayani in thought "stand on" in the text, either directly or indirectly, according to Al-Jabiri sense remains difficult to produce knowledge (Al-Jabiri,

1991).
Bayani has clearly contributed greatly to the process of transmitting texts from generation to generation, until later in the areas of interpretation, fiqh, ushul fiqh and others. The climax was when Shafi'i became a kind of "methodological benchmark" in the scientific realm of Islamic law. While it can be understood, Shafi'i thinking about Islamic law moves in the "operational space of thought" which is different from today's reality. But what happened was that the operational space for Shafi'i thought was inherited (Al-Jabiri, 2014).
According to Al-Jabiri, Bayani, it is not unnecessary, but it should be done in the context of scientific culture. He was only angry to see the position of reason in Arabic (Islam) which was treated only for the sake of justification, not an instrument used to obtain the truth. This is also problematic when scholars of Islamic law today think in a bayan way, but are often apological, subjective, and even inclined towards certain ideologies in translating texts. When they are faced with reality, and at the same time asked for their fatwa, it is not impossible because they are so twisted by the text being read, so they are potentially irrelevant to reality.
Attarbiyah: Journal of Islamic Culture and Education https://www.attarbiyah.iainsalatiga.ac.id/index.php/attarbiyah/ 'Irfani 'Irfani epistemology based his knowledge on kasyf, namely the disclosure of secrets by/because of God. With 'irfani, knowledge is not obtained based on analysis of the text like bayani, but depends on a person's pure conscience, and hopes that God will reveal knowledge. The workings of irfani can be found in Sufi practice. Even though the 'irfaniyyun read a text, the meaning is obtained through kasyf. Of course, the tradition of thinking this model is not original in Arabic (Islam). If traced, 'irfani has also flourished in th the Hellenic era since the end of the 4 BC century and the Greek period until the middle th of the 7 AD century (Faisol, 2010).
For the 'irfaniyyun, knowledge is not obtained from empirical-rational evidence, but through inner experience. In gaining knowledge, the 'irfaniyyun does not use their intellect and five senses. However, it is directly trying to grasp the high powers which he witnessed and found in their inner experience. But herein lays the problem, according to Al-Jabiri, because when faced with worldly realities, it is as if they "wash their hands". But that happened because according to Al-Jabiri, they felt that they could do nothing but only feel their limitations and isolation. The world in front of him seemed to be only ugly and became the main problem for them. Attitudes like this in turn give rise to a sense of doubt and grievance, which in turn, according to Al-Jabiri, has led to the birth of their hatred and hostility towards reality itself. These 'irfaniyyun people feel strange "inside" and "from reality" around them (Al-Jabiri, 1991).
According to Al-Jabiri, an Arab (Muslim) thinker should not be apologetic by using this method in dealing with reality, because it will only cause them to lose their tradition of critical thinking and busy themselves in the magical world. Obviously, 'irfani is one of the factors or causes that according to al-Jabri has succeeded in conditioning Arabia (Islam) in decline as it is now (Al-Jabiri, 1991).

Burhani
The epistemology of burhani thinking in Arabic (Islam) can be traced from the teachings of Al-Kindi, especially in al-Falsafah al-Ula, which is a written work that adapts many of Aristotle's philosophical thoughts. In al-Falsafah al-Ula, Al-Kindi assumes philosophy as the most relevant way of thinking to reveal the essence of something. That Al-Kindi has been instrumental in introducing burhani reasoning to the middle of Islamic Attarbiyah: Journal of Islamic Culture and Education https://www.attarbiyah.iainsalatiga.ac.id/index.php/attarbiyah/ civilization is hard to deny, however according to Al-Jabiri Al-Kindi's efforts at that time were still very partial. Al-Kindi's attempt to write al-Falsafah al-Ula at that time was not in the context of intending to introduce "rational reasoning" as characterized in Aristotle's philosophical thought. Al-Kindi's interest was none other than to attack most of the jurists who at that time forbade philosophy (Al-Jabiri, 1991).
A similar effort was made by Al-Farabi. In Kitab al-Surat he wrote, he explained the formation of a linear knowledge with Aristotle's explanation of Metaphysics, in which the emergence of knowledge should be preceded by consciousness, experimentation, and analysis and thought. For example, in the process of language birth. Whereas before "becoming" language, language is nothing but "voices", "letters" and "lafadz-lafadz" as well as "structures" found in a group of people. The birth of a knowledge too. However, the burhani model of reason that colored Al-Farabi's thought according to al-Jabri does not appear in pure Aristotelian logic which is based on the logic of "cause and effect". What Al-Farabi did, according to Al-Jabiri was only limited as a model of analysis or a way of producing knowledge. In short, Aristotelian logic was only borrowed by Al-Farabi as a formal thinking mechanism to replace other thinking mechanisms (Al-Jabiri, 1991).
With its various advantages, unfortunately the burhani epistemology in the Arab world (Islam) no longer has a place, especially after the time of al-Ghazali. At this time, reason is no longer as its original function, namely the function of analysis and demonstration, but more often it is only for "justification", especially in the context of defending the schools adopted (Al-Jabiri, 1991).

Interconnective Paradigm for Higher Education.
According to Abdullah, the tendency of some universities in Indonesia to be trapped in the logic of a scientific dichotomy, especially in the development of higher education, must be immediately corrected by building a new, more holistic-integralistic scientific construct. The key word is in the integrative-interconnective paradigm (Abdullah, 2003). However, reconstructing this dichotomic paradigm to become integrative-interconnective, as he wishes, is certainly not easy; because it requires more than just courage and commitment. The reconstruction of the paradigm that Abdullah aspires, means rereading the vision, mission and orientation of education. This is a "fixed price" if you do not want the higher education system to be rebuilt, trapped in a "repetition" of a tradition that does not have the ability to answer actual problems, let alone for the future (Barizi, 2011).
Challenges in the era of globalization, for example, clearly demand a quick and precise response from the higher education system. If you do not want to just survive in the midst of a tight global contestation, but also hope to win it, presumably a reorientation of educational thinking and the reconstruction of higher education systems and institutions in this predominantly Muslim country are urgent. Although building this integrative-interconnective paradigm seems difficult, it does not mean that it is impossible to do, because according to Abdullah, the trend in philosophy of science that we study reveals how almost all types of science -natural science, social science, and religious science -have the opportunity to experience a shifting paradigm. This happens because science is historical in nature, because it is built from historical human intellect (Abdullah, 2007).
In this context, it is clear that this epistemological field occupies a very strategic position in Abdullah's view, in the context of formulating a new paradigm for higher education, which he later calls the integrative-interconnective paradigm. Because it is related to the epistemological discourse, it becomes easy to understand why in Abdullah's idea of t his, it is very easy to find traces of Al-Jabiri's thought, which criticized Arab reasoning and carried out epistemological rethinking. In parsing the root causes of the lack of universities quality in Indonesia today, for example at the Islamic Religious Higher Education (PTKI), Al-Jabiri's critical logic about Arab reasoning and the rethinking epistemology can be borrowed. As can be understood, because the Islamic Religious Higher Education development trend in Indonesia seems to "follow" the previous educational development model in the Islamic past (between 650 AD to 1100 AD), this of course has the potential to close the opportunities for higher education being developed to open new perspectives in multidimensional scientific studies as in the European/modern world. In some of these Islamic Religious Higher Education, the logic of higher education is more evident in the areas of bayani and 'irfani than in burhani. VOL. 5 NO. 1, JUNI 2020 In questioning the dichotomic problem in Indonesian universities at this time, at Islamic Religious Higher Education, for example, that higher education developers should be able to prioritize burhani-style epistemology. However, that does not mean that the bayani and irfani traditions are missing. Maximum use of reason does not mean ignoring the text (bayani) and the importance of heart cleanliness ('irfani). By combining the three, Islamic Religious Higher Education can provide higher education that is able to adapt to the realities of changing circumstances and times, without having to neglect its textual reference sources and inner experiences. Moreover, according to Abdullah, Islam itself has never positioned God's revelations as the only source of knowledge. The source of knowledge in Islam can be from God and from His creatures (Abdullah, 2003;Abdullah, 2006).
Burhani epistemology is important because it tries to maximize reason and place it parallel to the sacred text in obtaining knowledge. However, in this burhani epistemology, rationality does not stop at the thinking ratio. The combination of a brilliant mind combined with a clear heart is much better. If this principle is brought into the paradigm of higher education development, of course higher education institutions have the potential to produce scientists or practitioners in the field of science and technology who are not dehumanized and alienated by faith and piety. Moreover, the aridity felt by modern humans today, it is because the science and technology that has developed is only based on rationality alone, and negates the hearts or feelings they have. The balance between thought (fikr) and feeling (dzikr) is important, and of course the ability to translate it into "righteous deeds" must be followed (Kahmad, 2014). For Abdullah, this combination of thoughts and feelings is an absolute prerequisite in building a new, more holistic-integralistic scientific construct in higher education.
In this context, there are three patterns of epistemological relationships that may be created from marrying the epistemology of bayani, 'irfani and burhani, namely parallel, linear, and circular patterns. The first pattern, means that the three existing epistemologies are running independently without a greeting; second, all three have seen the existence of other epistemologies, but do not want to take advantage of other epistemologies; and the third, is a pattern in which each epistemology is complementary to one another, so that it will manifest a balance between thought and dhikr. This last paradigm should be used because it allows these three epistemologies to dialogue and go hand in hand. Meanwhile, so far, the bayânî epistemology has mostly dominated and hegemonic in nature so it is difficult to have a dialogue with the epistemological traditions of 'irfânî and burhanî, as the substance of Al-Jabiri's criticism, according to Abdullah, does not need to happen. This bayânî mindset can develop if you engage in dialogue, are able to understand and take advantage of the fundamental aspects of the 'irfânî and burhânî mindset (Abdullah, 2002).
Therefore, a good relationship between these three epistemologies is not in parallel or linear, but in circular form. The parallel form will give birth to an epistemological style that runs independently without any relationship and contact with one another. While the linear form will assume that one of the three epistemologies is the "prima donna", so that it really depends on the background, tendencies and personal or group interests, whereas with the circular form it is expected that each scientific epistemology will understand the advantages and disadvantages of each and complete each other (Abdullah, 2002).
With this paradigm in Islamic Religious Higher Education, for example, the science of religion (Islam) no longer dwells on classical texts, but also develops and touches on contemporary social sciences. The paradigm of higher education with the epistemological circular pattern, where each complement each other, means that the three main areas of science, namely natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities are no longer independent but will be related to one another. The three of them will also become increasingly detached from their relationship. Although it will not unite the three, but at least there will be no more superiority and inferiority in science, there is no more claim to the truth of science, and scientists or practitioners born from this higher education model will have different attitudes and ways of thinking about science. The paradigm with this circular pattern is that the pilot project can be found at the Sunan Kalijaga State Islamic University (UIN) Yogyakarta, which is very serious in developing it, especially when Abdullah was rector at this campus for two periods (2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010). At UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, the higher education paradigm is developed to build science integratively (in the sense of being united to become a complete and unified whole), and interconnective (in the sense of having a connection and offense between one another). Thus, it is hoped that those who have studied at this campus, when they become scientists or practitioners in their respective fields, no longer think dichotomically.
The paradigm that was initiated by Abdullah is a model that changes the paradigm pattern of diadic to a triadic direction, which is none other than the triadic pattern inspired by the epistemology of Bayani, Irfani and Al-Jabiri's Burhanis. To connect the three, Abdullah borrowed models hermeneutic circle with the term ta'wil al-'ilmi that except from Al-Jabiri is also inspired by other contemporary Muslim thinkers like Mohammed Arkoun and Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd. Abdullah then formulated three terms from the basic principles of scientific reintegration-interconnection with the terms hadarat an-nas, hadârah al-'il, and hadârah al-falsafah (Riyanto, 2013). In this scheme, hadârah al-'ilm (namely empirical sciences) is no longer independent but in contact with hadârah alfalsafah (namely philosophy) so that it pays attention to emancipatory ethics. Likewise, the hadârah al-falsafah feels dry and barren if it is not related to the normative religion contained in the text culture (hadarat an-nas) and is even more so if it moves away from the problems caused and faced by hadârah al-'ilm (Abdullah, 2006). The consequence is that in tertiary institutions, especially Islamic Religious Higher Education, there should no longer be any sciences which in their study are made as if they are separate, but in an integrated-interconnected manner, like a spider web metaphor. In relation to actualizing this integrative-interconnective paradigm in higher education, there are at least three things that are important to note, namely: lesson content, learning methods, and reconstruction of approaches. The content of Islamic studies in tertiary institutions must include two dimensions at once: first, normativetheological as a hard core that shows a connection with God; second, the historical description which is a seat belt, provides a complete understanding of the relationship between religious teachings and the interpretation of religious teachings by social groups in the midst of a non-single society. Updates in learning methods need to be carried out, from previously monodisciplinary which makes it rigid and dogmatic, to multi and interdisciplinary. Approaches that are normative-historical and sociologicalanthropological will be able to nurture dynamic critical and spiritual awareness in dealing with contemporary problems as a result of social change as a consequence of modernity and globalization. Last but not least is the reconstruction of the approach. This paradigm of course also necessitates a triadic relationship between the three, namely the lesson content, learning methods, and the reconstruction of the approach. VOL. 5 NO. 1, JUNI 2020

CONCLUSION
The integrative-interconnective paradigm for higher education that was initiated by Abdullah offers a kind of worldview that is more actual, open, and builds a nondichotomic scientific bridge. It is no exaggeration to say that this brilliant idea was born from his efforts to reconstruct Al-Jabiri's thoughts, especially those related to the criticism of Arab reasoning and the rethinking of epistemology.
Abdullah realized that the Arab reasoning criticism proposed by Al-Jabiri was not just any criticism, but had practical importance, and this found its relevance in some Islamic Religious Higher Education in Indonesia which were difficult to compete because the higher education developed seemed to only "follow" the previous education development model in the past Islam. This trend is certainly the potential to close the opportunity of higher education developed to new perspective in science multidimensional study as in Europe/modern world.
In some of these Islamic Religious Higher Education, the logic of higher education is more evident in the areas of bayani and irfani than in burhani. In fact, in the development of higher education, combining the three is not impossible. In fact, by combining the three, Islamic Religious Higher Education can provide higher education that is able to adapt to the realities of changing circumstances and times, without having to neglect their textual reference sources and inner experiences. The pattern can be circular, in which each epistemology (bayani, 'irfani, and burhani) complement each other, and three areas of basic science (natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities) also no longer stand alone but will mutually integrative-interconnective. An example that applies this paradigm is UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta.
The integrative-interconnective paradigm that was initiated by Abdullah is a model that changes the paradigm patterns that diadic have made into triadic, which are none other than the triadic patterns inspired by the epistemology of bayani, 'irfani and Al-Jabiri's burhanis. To connect all three, Abdullah borrowed models hermeneutic circle with the term ta'wil al-'ilmi, and subsequently formulated the three terms of the basic principles of science reintegration interconnect with the term hadarat an-nas, hadârah al-'ilm, and hadârah al-falsafah. However, in its implementation to be functional, the lesson content, learning methods, and reconstruction of the approach also need to be considered. Including the relationship between the three which should be related triadically.