BETWEEN TRADITIONALIST AND MODERNIST: THE ISLAMIC REFORMATION OF HAJI ABDUL LATIF SYAKUR IN MINANGKABAU IN THE 20 TH CENTURY

Between Traditionalist and Modernist: The Islamic Reformation of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur in Minangkabau in the 20th Century Licensed Under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.

Ahmad Khatib, he is closer to the Tarekat cleric. He became one of the murshids of the Naqsyabandi order. Later, followers of the senior clergy and followers of the tarekat were known as the old (traditionalists), while groups of reformers who called for rationality in religion and encouraged the pursuit of ijtihad were known as the young (modernists). The modernist understanding of Islam in Minangkabau, even now, has become a religious understanding that is generally adhered to by most urban Muslim communities in West Sumatra. In addition to carrying out the ideas of rationality and progress, modern Islamic figures are those who live in cities in Minangkabau (Yelda, 2021). Even so, the idea of reform reached the village community through students who came to the city. It's just that the modernist understanding of Islam only survives and develops in urban society.
The traditionalist and modernist dichotomy have theoretically lasted so long in Islamic studies-more than half a century. The emergence of this dichotomy is a major contribution from Deliar Noer in Islamic studies. Azyumardi Azra even mentioned that Deliar Noer was the person most responsible for the spread of the traditionalistmodernist dichotomy in Indonesian Islamic studies (Azra, 1997). This article attempts to review the traditionalist-modern dichotomy when viewing the construction of Indonesian Islam in the early 20th century. This dichotomy had a major impact on the statement that the old was the only group that mobilized and modernized Islam in Indonesia in the early 20th century. A review of the traditionalist-modern Islamic dichotomy was carried out by examining the work of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur. In the description later, this article will present Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's position between the two traditional Muslim groups (old) and the modern (young). This position can be seen from his thoughts on the concept of ijtihad, the problem of khilafiyah, education, and tasawuf (Islamic mysticism), the themes that were debated by the two Islamic groups at that time. Minangkabau in the XX century as a whole Apart from traditionalists and modernists, there are other Islamic groups involved in the construction of Islam in West Sumatra.

B. Method
This study is a literature review. The objects of this study are manuscripts by Haji Abdul Latif Syakur, in the form of books, and other written works, both printed and in the form of handwriting. The research data, in the form of works by Haji Abdul Latif Syakur, will be analyzed using historical and sociological approaches. A historical approach is used in this study to trace the reformist intellectual footprint of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur. It is also important to point out that, with this historical study, it is hoped that the intellectual history of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur can be uncovered and explained. This is done to explore new ideas and those of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur, as well as the similarities and differences with his predecessors. In addition, this study will also look at the movement model carried out by Haji Abdul Latif Syakur in Islamic reform in Minangkabau. The sociological approach is used to look at social, cultural, and religious relations with the person and thoughts of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur in Islamic reform as a research object. This social approach will also read the position of ideas from Haji Abdul Latif Syakur when there was a polemic between the old and the young during the Islamic reformation in Minangkabau.

C.
Findings and Discussion 1.
Findings From the end of the 18th century until the beginning of the 19th century, the Paderi movement was born in Minangkabau (Azra, 2009;Schrieke, 1973). This movement was pioneered by three people, namely Haji Miskin from Pandai Sikek Luhak Agam, Haji Abdurrahman from Piobang Luhak Lima puluh Kota, and Haji Muhammad Arif from Sumanik Luhak Tanah Datar (Hamka, 1967). This movement was motivated by the socio-religious conditions of the Minangkabau people, which in practice were considered incompatible with Islam. In another language, Taufik Abdullah calls it a cultural tradition that is mixed with Islam. With the teachings of the Islamic religion still not completely abandoned, such as cockfighting, the emergence of enmity between growing tribes, and the occurrence of conflicts between adherents of the tarekat because they are mutually proud of the majesty and sanctity of each tarekat (Hurgronje, 1973). They, who call themselves the Padri group, strictly prohibit behavior that is considered contrary to Islam. The austere method was not approved by the customary holding groups (A'la, 2008;Nasir, 2008).
The three clerics spread and carried out their religious movements, starting from their respective villages. The Padri movement wanted Islamic teachings and laws to be carried out purely under the demands of the Koran and Hadith. Therefore, all things that are considered heresy, superstition, and superstition, as well as habits that do not include Islamic teachings, must be removed (Latif, 1988). This movement was met with resistance from the community, especially the indigenous people. The indigenous people considered that the purification movement carried out by the Padri was aimed at destroying the customs and habits that had been passed down from generation to generation, and even the indigenous people accused the religious people of wanting to take over power from the indigenous people. Although this movement did not substantially succeed in changing the social, cultural, and political structures in Minangkabau, it was able to strengthen the influence of Islam in the Minangkabau social system (Azra, 2009;Schrieke, 1973).
After the 20th-century Islamic renewal, Padri was spearheaded by Syekh Ahmad Khatib Al-Minangkabawi. However, Ahmad Khatib is rarely associated with the Islamic reform agenda because his influence is limited to religious issues and issues from his Minangkabau village. This has an impact on the conclusion that the reformation of the Islamic world, especially Southeast Asia, was referred to as the reformist influence of Egypt through Muhammad Tahir Jalal al-Din. Tahir is indeed well-known as an intermediary for Muhammad Abduh's reform ideas for the Southeast Asian region (Amir, 2008). Indonesia through the publication of al-Imam magazine, which was published in Singapore in 1906.
Some of Ahmad Khatib's reform ideas in Minangkabau were continued by his students: Haji Abdul Karim Amrullah, Haji Abdullah Ahmad, Thaib Umar, and Djamil Djambek. However, in their development, they were also influenced by Taher Djalaluddin and classified themselves as the Group of young. The young carried out reforms in many aspects: education, politics, and social affairs; building rational awareness of religion; refusing to adhere to one school of thought; eliminating practices that are considered deviant; and emphasizing traditionally accepted Islamic laws (Abdullah, 2018). In the field of education, the reformers have succeeded in establishing schools using the modern education system and curriculum. Abdullah Ahmad founded the Adabia School (1909), Zainuddin Labayel- Yunus founded Diniyah (1915), and Abdul Karim Amrullah played an active role in modernizing the educational system of the Iron Bridge. Surau, which later changed its name to Sumatra Thawalib (1916), was founded by Thaib Umar in 1910 as the Diniyah School in Sungayang-Batusangkar. These schools changed surau educational institutions that used the halaqah system into a classical system, as well as setting limits on the length of education. Meanwhile, in the field of curriculum, modern Islamic educational institutions combine religious subjects with general subjects (Yunus, 1996;Zulmuqim, 2015). These schools then encouraged the birth of other modern schools in various parts of Indonesia (Fadhil, 2007).
Modified Islamic educational institutions such as Sumatra Thawalib have used learning methods that are no longer fixated on traditional learning methods but instead use discussion methods. Even the literature used in the study comes from various regions of the Middle East, such as in the field of fiqh using the book Bidayat al-Mujtahid by Ibn Rushd, in the field of tauhid using the work of Muhammad Abduh entitled Risalah Tawhid, and in the field of tafsir using the book of commentaries al-Manar by Muhammad Abduh and Rashid Ridha (Saerozi, 2014).
More than that, reformers spread the idea of renewal through written works that were published in al-Munir's magazine, which was founded in Padang City on April 1, 1911 AD. This magazine was founded by Abdullah Ahmad with the help of other reformers. Al-Munir is published twice a week and is written in Malay with Arabic script. Al-Munir magazine tried to answer various problems that arose in Muslim society at that time (Samsuddin, 2004;Sunarti, 2015). This magazine then inspired the birth of various magazines and newspapers in Sumatra West. Hundreds of newspapers and magazines with various ideologies were published in various areas of Minangkabau, such as the Oetoesan Melajoe Newspaper, which was published by indigenous people in 1911, while those with European education published Insulinde magazine in 1901 (Samry, 2012).
Another means used by the young's group in disseminating Islamic reform ideas is organization. Haji Abdullah Ahmad and his colleagues founded the Islamic Religious Teachers' Association (PGAI) organization in Padang in 1920. Meanwhile, the young's students at the Jembatan Besi Surau founded an association named Sumatra Thawalib in 1918, which later succeeded in establishing a religious school named Sumatra Thawalib in various areas such as Padang Panjang, Parabek, Padang Japan, Batusangkar, Bukittinggi, and other areas. The young has also played an active role in forming and developing the Muhammadiyah organization in Minangkabau since 1928 (Elhady, 2017;Koda, 2017;Sya'bani, 2018). The establishment was bridged by HAKA from Maninjau, then spread to Padang Panjang, Bukittinggi, Payakumbuh, and other areas, where the majority of members are the young (Daya, 1988).
The Islamic Reformation at the beginning of the 20th century formed an urban Muslim community. Namely, Muslims who think rationally, are advanced, and are critical of religious views The Islamic reform movement carried out by the Young was responded to by the traditional clerics (the Old). For the old, after 600 Hijriyah, Muslims were declared obligated to obey the early generation of scholars in terms of proposals and furu' (branches) in Islam. Later, the ulemas of the Old also founded an organization called the PersatuanTarbiyah Islamiyah (PERTI) at the initiation of Sheikh SulaimanArrasuli. This organization was founded by old clerics, including Sheikh Abdul Wahid Payakumbuh, Sheikh SulaimanArrasuliCandung, Sheikh Arifin Arsyad Batuhampar, Sheikh Djamil Djaho, and Sheikh Abbas Qadi Ladang Lawas. The movement undertaken by the Old through PERTI is similar to that carried out by the Young. PERTI has intensively carried out educational reforms, publishing newspapers such as Seoarti (Soeara Tarbiyah Islamiyah) and Al-Mizan (Latif, 1988). All of these 90 Akademika: Jurnal Pemikiran Islam Vol. 28, No. 01 January -June 2023 movements of the Old are nothing other than to hinder the growth of the modern Islamic movement. Ideas about Islamic renewal in the early 20th century and how traditional Islam responded to renewal had an impact on religious polarization. Hamka emphasized that during the religious polemic, Minangkabau was split in two. This period peaked around 1914-1918(Hamka, 1967. The response of traditional scholars to reform has brought Muslims in Minangkabau into a polemic that, according to Taufik Abdullah, although only a few years old, is very heartbreaking (Abdullah, 2018).

Discussion Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's Renewal Idea
In this section, we will see how Haji Abdul Latif Syakur views the issues that are being debated by the Old and the Young, as well as his Islamic ideas as an Islamic reformer. Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's thoughts will be broken down thematically based on his works in the form of manuscripts. The themes discussed in this article are ijtihad, khilafiyah, tasawuf, and education. Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's thoughts on these themes are compared with the views of the Old and the young to find out his position as an Islamic reformer.

Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's views on Ijtihad
Related to Islamic renewal, the theme of ijtihad revolves around the question of whether ijtihad can still be carried out by Muslims or not. In answering this question, Muslims are generally divided into three groups: first, groups that think that ijtihad is closed so that taklid in one of the Islamic schools of thought is mandatory; second, groups that require absolute ijtihad in religion; and third, groups that allow ijtihad within certain limits.
This last group is not very popular among Muslims. In Minangkabau, the first group belongs to the Old (traditionalists), while the second group belongs to the Young (modernists). Traditionalist Islam believes that ijtihad can no longer be carried out because no one has reached the degree of absolute mujtahid. The existence of an absolute mujtahid has ended in 300 hijrah, while the mujtahid fatwa has ended its term in 400 hijrah, and mujtahid tarjih-people authorized to perform ijtihad and study the laws contained in their schools of thought-ended in 600 hijrah (Latif, 1988). Meanwhile, reformers are of the view that ijtihad is a necessity in religion and taklid is prohibited. On this basis, the young do not bind themselves to one particular school of thought but instead accepts all the opinions of the existing schools of thought as truths of equal value. Muslims are allowed to take a more appropriate opinion according to the existing situation and conditions, as long as they do not adhere to two or more schools of thought on one issue.
Based on this attitude, modernists have not only reopened the door to ijtihad but have also encouraged Muslims to practice ijtihad in their religion (Hamka, 1967). Thus, the opinion of the existing madhhab priests may only be adopted as a religious reason in an emergency (Djamal, 2002). In contrast to the young, the old obliges Muslims to adhere to only one school of religion. That way, in matters of Islam, a Muslim must adhere to and follow the words of the scholars (Latif, 1988).
The obligation to adhere to a school and religion is obtained by the elderly through Ahmad Khatib Al-Minangkabawi, who is an imam in the Shafii school of thought in Mecca (Djamal, 2002;Hamka, 1967). The young's views, which prohibit taklid and call for ijtihad, were obtained from the renewal spirit brought by Taher Jalaludin from Muhammad Abduh in Cairo (Amir, 2008). Both the old and the young were originally students of Ahmad Khatib. And Ahmad Khatib was recorded as a religious reformer to a certain extent. Later, The young announced that they had renounced their faith and had taken their path in efforts to reform religion, so The young called for ijtihad (Djamal, 2002;Hamka, 1967). This call for ijtihad is made because the attitude of taqlid is considered to have hampered the progress of Muslims, prevented Muslims from using their minds in understanding Islam, kept people from digging into divine secrets, and made Muslims anti-intellectual (Djamal, 2002).
Despite calling for ijtihad, Abdul Karim Amrullah, as a mouthpiece for youth, warned people to be careful in making ijtihad and not pretend to be educated if they did not understand religion because this ijtihad would guide many people. It seems that the Young who require ijtihad are still worried about this freedom, even though they do not provide special conditions for someone who can do ijtihad apart from being careful. Between these two groups, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur has a different opinion. On the one hand, he acknowledges that there are people who must be immaculate, and on the other hand, he opens up the possibility of a new ijtihad.  (Syakur, t.tb). From this statement, it can be understood that Haji Abdul Latif Syakur has the belief that the possibility of ijtihad is still open even until the Day of Judgment. The possibility of this ijtihad is only permissible for people who meet certain requirements. This is to remember that every problem faced by the people must be resolved religiously (ijtihad). Although Abdul Latif opened up the possibility of ijtihad because of a new event, he was different from the young, who pushed for the function of reason in understanding religion and doing ijtihad. Instead of agreeing with the Young to use reason in religion, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur denounced the use of rationality in religion. This reproach can be understood as a form of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's criticism of the Young.
In one of his writings entitled al-Dhamm fi Din Allah bi al-Ra'y, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur begins with an appeal by the Imam of the Madhhab to their companions and followers to act according to the Qur'an and Sunnah. Abdul Latif's call for the Imams of the sects to return to the Qur'an and Hadith was a form of their caution and their adab, or ethics, towards the Messenger of Allah in case they were deemed to have added something deep into the Shari'a. Apart from that, this statement, said Abdul Latif, is a form of fear that some Muslims will consider them heretical if it turns out that there is something added to the Shari'a.
Abdul Latif divides Shari'a (law) into three parts: first, the law contained in the hadith; second, Shari'a (law) is allowed by Allah to be made by the Prophet himself to 92 Akademika: Jurnal Pemikiran Islam Vol. 28, No. 01 January -June 2023 educate the people; and third, Shari'a (law) is made by religion only as fadhilah, or priority. The laws put forward by the Prophet are explanations from the Koran that are general. While the mujtahids explain to the people general things in the sunnah. The followers of the mujtahids explain things that are general in the opinion of the mujtahids. And so on. Because the latter is an explanation of the previous one, for Abdul Latif, a religion based on his own opinion is prohibited by the owners of the Shari'a (Allah and His Messenger), companions, tabiin (second generation after the Prophet saw), and tabi' tabiin (third generation after the Prophet saw).
The existence of continuity in understanding religion makes Abdul Latif dislike freedom by having direct ijtihad on the two main sources of religion, the Koran and hadith. According to Abdul Latif, one must rely on the opinions of previous scholars who have existed or study the opinions of Islamic scholars before carrying out ijtihad independently as a way out of the problem at hand. If there is no previous scholarly opinion related to a newly emerging problem, then a person is allowed to do ijtihad with the condition that he must realize that his opinion does not represent Islam in general.
Abdul Latif encourages everyone who is ijtihad to avoid being a representation of Islam. Apart from that, Abdul Latif also presents the opinions of the school's imams about religious differences with reason and his own opinion. Abdul Latif also quotes the opinion of Imam Shafii, who is considered to also criticize ijtihad on his own; among others, the words of Imam Shafii are: "If a hadith of the Messenger of God comes to you, then it is sunnah. But following the consensus is more important than following the hadith unless the hadith is mutawatir". Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's explanation is, of course, contrary to the claims of the Young, who make the statement that the school's imams are a gateway to ijtihad. The advice of the school's imam to return to the Qur'an and the Hadith when the opinions of the imams are contrary to both is understood by the Young as it is. This reason then makes them attack the group that behaves taklid in religion and, at the same time, requires the existence of ijtihad.
From here, we can see that the position of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur is far from being called part of the Young in the matter of Ijtihad. When the young uphold the function of reason to interpret Islam from its main sources, the Al-Qur'an and Hadith, then Haji Abdul Latif Syakur criticizes religious people for basing their understanding of religion on reason, and he encourages Muslims to follow consensus in religion over time. Thus, we can confirm that Haji Abdul Latif Syakur is in a position between the traditionalists (The old) and modernists (the young) in this problem. He did not agree with closing the door of ijtihad and completely obeying the previous scholars as advocated by the Elders, nor did he fully accept that ijtihad was wide open for anyone who wanted to do it, like the teachings of the young.

Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's views on Khilafiyah
Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's views on khilafiyah are also different from those of the two main groups: traditionalists and modernists. The Old Group only raises legal issues from one point of view, namely Syafi'iyah. Whatever has been determined by the Syafi'iyah scholars is accepted and followed by the Old as it is. On the other hand, the young open up the possibility of a legal opinion using independent ijtihad. It is not uncommon for the young to criticize the opinions of certain schools of thought when they are deemed not to be under the Koran and Sunnah.
As for Haji Abdul Latif Syakur, even though he strongly adheres to the Shafi'i school of thought, in conveying a religious issue, he tends to express the opinions of scholars from the four main schools of thought, whether those opinions have similarities or differences. This method has made Haji Abdul Latif Syakur have a separate position in the process of determining the law and distinguishes him from the Old (traditionalists), who only emphasize one Shafi'i school of thought, as well as the Young, who require their ijtihad in making laws without referring to the opinion of the school except in a state of emergency (Djamal, 2002;Hamka, 1967). The young, apart from prioritizing ijtihad, also gave a certain assessment of the opinions of mujtahid scholars. Unlike Haji Abdul Latif Syakur, he did not evaluate (strengthen or weaken) one of the opinions of the mujtahid scholars, as did the young. According to Abdul Latif Syakur, this assessment does not need to be made based on the opinions of the mujtahid imams because he believes that all of the schools' opinions are correct and are in the right direction in religion. The reason is that religion comes with orders and prohibitions, so it is the scholars who divide the orders and prohibitions into five Sharia laws (Syakur, t.tb). Therefore, all mujtahid priests must be seen as people who are under the guidance of Allah SWT. Because none of the words of the mujtahid priests came out of the Shari'a.
It seems that Abdul Latif feels that it is unethical to suspect the opinion of the scholars of the madhhab, strengthening one and weakening the other, because the division of law itself arises from the ulama themselves, dividing the law into several parts, judged wrong and right. According to reasonable logic, the person who created the law enforcement method cannot be mistaken for using the method, steps, terms, and division of law that he created.
Every difference of opinion for Abdul Latif is under the law and the situation of every Muslim. For people who are strong in faith and physicality, they will do charity in a strict way as found in the Shariat, while those who are weak in faith or physicality should do charity with the ease available in the Shariat. This is as indicated by Allah QS At-Taghabun; 16, so that people fear God according to their respective abilities. Likewise, the words of the Prophet, peace be upon him: When I command you, then do it according to your ability.
Haji Abdul Latif Syakur said this order is general. A person with strong faith and physical strength in religion is not ordered to do something light because he is capable of doing something more serious. If a strong person only gives charity to the weak, then it means that he has played with religion. Meanwhile, weak people are not burdened with difficulties by doing heavy charity and doing charity strictly by religion. But if he does heavy practice, then there is no prohibition in religion except for syar'i reasons. This shows that the difference of opinion in religion is understood by Haji Abdul Latif Syakur as a choice that suits the situation, condition, and ability of each person. Thus, differences of opinion are not something that should be opposed.
When explaining the difference of opinion about a problem, Abdul Latif does not only present differences due to different schools of thought but also sources or arguments that can be used. arguments about the problem itself. And those sources have been recognized as valid by the experts. That means that the difference is not something made up but a prevalence of Islamic law so that everyone with different circumstances and conditions can practice the teachings of Islam without significant obstacles. If a religious obligation can only be fulfilled in one situation and under one condition, of course not all people can carry it out. Although the purpose of religion is for all people, the true difference of opinion is tolerance for religion if it is practiced properly.
Haji Abdul Latif's way of looking at khilafiyah seems relevant when applied in an urban society that is often faced with many choices, various religious expressions, and sources of information. All differences of opinion must be seen as available and 94 Akademika: Jurnal Pemikiran Islam Vol. 28, No. 01 January -June 2023 valid options in Islam, according to the conditions and situations of each person. In this context, urban Muslims who tend to value fraternal relations rather than khilafiyah get their legitimacy by looking at differences of opinion (Sumanti et al., 2020).

Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's views on the Tasawuf
The problem of Sufism, especially the tarekat, was one of several themes that became the focus of attention among Islamic reformers from the 17th century until the early 20th century. Sheikh Ahmad Khatib wrote up to nine books criticizing the practice of the tarekat. Sheikh Ahmad Khatib's rejection of the tarekat influenced Haji Abdul's Latif Syakur views later on. One of the articles written by Haji Abdul Latif Syakur is entitled al-Amru al-Jami' Liman Yasluku Tariqa Allah Ta'ala. The use of the words Yasluku (salaka-yasluku-sulukan) and Tariqah in this title is similar to the title of Syekh Ahmad Khatib's book, which contains criticism of tarekat practice in the Malay Islamic world, Fath al-Mubin Liman Salaka Tariq al-Wasilin.
The article entitled al-Amru al-Jami' Liman Yasluku Tariqa Allah Ta'ala contains six main themes, namely the obligation to study the pillars of Islam, muhasabah (selfintrospection), seek the pleasure of Allah, be generous and compassionate, and morals (Syakur, n.d.). Although he did not mention or criticize the practice of Sufism (tarekat), Haji Abdul Latif Syakur made his formula about tarekat.
According to Haji Abdul Latif Syakur, knowing the basics of Islam is the first step in a tarekat, or path to Allah, before entering the next five stages. Haji Abdul Latif Syakur continued, "People who want to avoid destruction and be included in the tarekat/path to Allah should fill their hearts with compassion for Muslims. Apart from having to have compassion, one must have good morals. Because morality is the essence of Islam. The essence of morality is that a person is kind and generous to his family members, neighbors, servants, and all Muslims". Finally, people who want to be included in a tarekat, or path to Allah, do so so that every Muslim has a sense of shame before Allah SWT. Because Allah knows and witnesses everything. These six things are, of course, formally different from the stages in the practice of Sufism or the stages of becoming a follower of a tarekat.
For Haji Abdul Latif Syakur, tarekat is a form of worship to Allah without detaching oneself from social life through daily values or morals. In addition to making a basic formulation of the tarekat, which is named Tariqa Allah (the way to Allah), Haji Abdul Latif Syakur defines the tarekat's instruments as rabithah. It should be noted that the case of Rabithah is one of the origins of polemics or the emergence of Islamic intellectual discourse in Minangkabau. Rejection of the practice of rabithah comes from modern Islamic groups and traditional reformers. The general reason for refusing is that Rabitah is considered something that can lead to shirk, fanaticism, and excessive worship of teachers, and these practices do not originate from religion (Latif, 1988).
Instead of supporting or rejecting one opinion, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur redefined and shifted the meaning of Rabitah from its original meaning in tarekat practice. According to Haji Abdul Latif Syakur Rabithah, it is a matter of human agreement in living life, both in matters of religion and schools of thought as well as in matters of gender and language. The ummah's agreement on matters of religion and schools of thought regardless of gender and language is what Abdul Latif calls al-Rabitah al-Diniyah (religious relations). While the ummah's agreement on gender and language issues regardless of one's school of thought and religion is called Abdul Latif as Rabitah Qawmiyah (national relations).
Haji Abdul Latif Syakur returns the meaning of rabithah to the meaning of language, namely relations, and bonds, then connects it with the social context that is being faced by Muslims. With this new definition, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur seems to want to say that in the era that the people (colonial) are currently facing, what is needed is not whether rabithah is part of religion or not, but how the role of religion is in dealing with the humanitarian problems that befall Muslims. Efforts to redefine the meaning of rabithah also need to understand that the issue of brotherly relations among religions and nationalities, for Haji Abdul Latif, must be a concern and more important than the issue of furu', or branches of religion. In his introduction to rabithah, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur writes: In these times, we have two strong rabithah (relationships), namely al-Rabitah al-Diniyah (religious relations) and al-Rabitah al-Qawmiyah (national relations). (Of the two, which one should be prioritized?) It's a tough choice. Especially considering what we see and hear about religious preaching that generally occurs in our nation and almost all over the world (Syakur, 1936). This article was written by Haji Abdul Latif Syakur in 1936. At that time, the condition of the Muslim community was divided; it was facing the challenges of modernity, and the majority of Muslims were followers of tarekat. This situation confused Haji Abdul Latif Syakur. On the one hand, there is an agenda for reforming Islam; on the other hand, there is a national problem that must be resolved. Rabitah terminology, which is usually part of tarekat practice, is used by Abdul Latif to build awareness of living together. He does not see Rabitah as something bad, but in a state of colonization, there is a relationship that needs to be built so that society is free from colonialism, namely al-Rabithah al-Qawmiyah (national relations). High spiritual awareness, according to Abdul Latif, must be commensurate with national awareness, anti-slavery, anti-exploitation, and the struggle against tyranny.
Apart from Rabitah al-Qawmiyah (national relations), Abdul Latif also interprets Rabitah as Rabitah al-Diniyah (religious relations). tribes, laws, and politics, which enable humans to kill each other. Islam calls for a universal sense of humanity so that humans can prevent divisions and are not hostile to each other. This religious relationship is a strong foundation in religion to build peace.
The concept of Rabitah al-Diniyah (religious relations) is a critical point for religious disputes that occur in Minangkabau society. According to Abdul Latif, religious relations can be built based on common humanity and beliefs. Indirectly, he wanted to state that differences of opinion in religion are the choices and rights of individuals. Therefore, a person is not justified in imposing his opinion on others. Moreover, the status of every religious human being is the same before Allah SWT.
By redefining the meaning of rabithah, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur has made a breakthrough in that the problem of Sufism is not only about the human relationship with God personally but also the relationship between humans and other human beings. By building good relations with other human beings based on religion as well as the nation, humans can be said to carry out religious orders. This view seems relevant to see how the urban Muslim religion is developing in Indonesia, where tasawuf is only seen as a matter of remembrance, wirid, blessings, and personal relationship with God.
Thus, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's interpretation of Sufism is different from the urban Sufism described by Julia D. Howell. Urban Sufism, explained by Howell, is a religious phenomenon of urban society that adopts the habits of Sufism that have been cleaned or purified of non-religious practices, as Hamka did (Howell, 2001). Meanwhile, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur does not purify the teachings of Sufism but instead shifts the focus of Sufism from spiritual problems to social and national ones. For Syakur, taking this social and national path is still interpreted as a way to God.

Haji Abdul Latif Syakur's views on education
Islamic educational institutions in West Sumatra towards the 20th century were divided into two styles: traditional and modern. Traditional Islamic education is general education that teaches the Koran, procedures for worship, and matters of faith (twenty traits). Islamic education at this level is also called Quranic recitation and takes place in surau-surau, or breaks. The level of education is not determined by class but by subject matter (Penerangan, 1959). After completing the Quran recitation, education is continued at a stage known as book study.
At the level of studying the book, Arabic is taught and knowledge related to it is acquired. In 1900-1908, Islamic education changed. Changes during this period occurred in the aspect of lesson content. If previously only one type of book was studied, then in the 1900s several other books began to be taught, both in Arabic, Islamic law, and Tafsir. These books were taught simply; namely, the teacher read the matan (text) and translated it into the local language, then explained what it meant. Lessons are considered complete or finished not because students pass the exam but because they are good at teaching. There are no diplomas or degrees; there is only recognition from teachers and society (Yunus, 1996). In this traditional system, students study for 10 to 15 years, depending on their sincerity (Penerangan, 1959), Again using the name surau with the name madrasa or the like and managed in a modern way. Not only with the new system, but the books studied are also new models, namely Egyptian school books and books written by the founders or school teachers (Yunus, 1996).
Before Islamic educational institutions developed into modern education, in West Sumatra there was already a secular education, generally founded and managed by the Dutch (Penerangan, 1959), traditional and modern Islamic Secular schools are educational institutions that only teach social and natural sciences and do not teach religious knowledge. Meanwhile, traditional Islamic schools are educational institutions that only teach religious knowledge without teaching social and natural sciences. The modern Islamic school is an institution that teaches religious knowledge as well as equips students with social, natural, and skill knowledge (Yunus, 1996).
In contrast to the three forms and concepts of secular education and Islamic education that have existed, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur believes that education is a way or a commitment to cleansing the soul, forming a rational way of thinking, strengthening the body, improving tradition, restoring tradition to good character, and putting it on the right path. In this way, education can be divided into three categories: intellectual education, physical education, and spiritual education. human development. Since humans do not know anything from birth, they must be educated perfectly. Thus, for Haji Abdul Latif Syakur, education applies throughout human life, and the content of education is given according to age level and needs (Syakur, t.ta).
Haji Abdul Latif Syakur disagreed with the dichotomy of education in the Islamic world for a long time. He believes that all education is important for humans based on their period of development and with all its benefits. On this basis, he modernized education. In 1906, three years before the Adabiyah School was founded, Haji Abdul Latif was already teaching religion in a modern way at Ma'hadBiaro and Surau Sicamin. This modern education system was then thoroughly implemented in Surau Sicamin, an educational institution whose name was changed to Tarbiyah Hasanah in 1912. At this school, he taught not only religious knowledge but also speech and writing skills. In the matter of education, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur no longer talks about religious or non-religious education, the knowledge that is obligatory or permissible, but about what is needed by humans.

From this description, it can be concluded that education for Haji Abdul Latif
Syakur is all about efforts related to the formation of human character and knowledge about religion and life. Education includes both physical and spiritual aspects. Education is not only a matter of how humans relate to God but also how humans know their rights and obligations to other humans, how humans treat other humans, how humans treat animals or other creatures, and even how humans love their homeland. On this basis, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur views all men and women as not only entitled to an education but also as knowing. He proved this by teaching religious knowledge, Arabic language skills, writing, and speech skills to Tarbiyah Hasanah school students, both boys, and girls.

D. Conclusion
Based on the description above, it can be concluded that the traditionalistmodernist dichotomy becomes irrelevant when used to read Haji Abdul Latif Syakur. Haji Abdul Latif Syakur is a scholar who adheres to a school of belief in fiqh but does not rule out the possibility that ijtihad may be needed. It's just that new ijtihad may be carried out by people who meet the requirements if the problem does not find a definite answer in the Qur'an, Sunnah, and ijma' of the scholars. Although it opens up the possibility of ijtihad, it rejects rationality in religion. Haji Abdul Latif's rejection of religious rationality as promoted by Islamic modernist groups did not necessarily make Haji Abdul Latif Syakur backward in managing education. He even became the first person to modernize Islamic education, both the system and the curriculum. As, for the problem of the practice of rabithah in tarekat, which has become a polemic among the ulama, Haji Abdul Latif Syakur did not reject it as a matter that had to be abandoned. He is of the view that apart from relationship and closeness with God, Muslims also need to build rabithah qawmiyah (national relations) and rabithah diniyah (religious brotherhood). Because both are also part of Islamic teachings. The meaning of rabithah, which was originally a personal relationship between humans and God, was changed to a social relationship by Abdul Latif Syakur.

E. Aknowledgements
Thanks to the Bani Latif Foundation for providing space for the writers to access the manuscripts of Haji Abdul Latif Syakur. Thanks to Buya Zul Ashfi who also helped provide important texts so that this research could become more extensive.