MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017502888 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v2n2p50

The Role of the I l Movement in the State’s Constitution of Perlis, Malaysia

2009· article· en· W2017502888 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohd. Nasir bin Abd. Hamid, Che Latifah binti Ismail, Kamaruzaman Jusoff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionIdealismState (computer science)LawIslamPolitical scienceSovereigntySubject (documents)Reform movementState religionSociologyPhilosophyTheologyEpistemologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 19th Century CE the term i l is used to denote ‘reform’ to perceive idealism of reformers, al-Afgh n , ‘Abduh and Rida and those who were influenced by them. They struggled to refine Muslim society and to call them back to Islam. The objective of this paper is to study factors of diffusion of the idealism in Perlis, Malaysia. Besides, it would indicate the role of the i l movement in determining the notion of Perlis’s Constitution. Through researches in many documents as well as interviews the study found that the movement in Perlis emerged in the early 1920s CE to challenge the practice of the Sh fi‘ madhhab (school of thought) in the state. The movement succeeded in challenging the strength of Kaum Tua (the Shafi’i adherents) and caused the closing of their pondok (learning centre). What was more important, the movement’s proposal to establish the doctrines of ahl al-sunnah wa-’l-jam ‘ah without being subject to any particular madhhab to be the basis of the State's structures gained the support of the Perlis Sovereign as well as the State Executive. Meanwhile, a King who would be appointed to govern the State should be a person who follows the doctrines. When compared with provisions of the other States in Malaysia it means that only Perlis has chosen to make an open rejection to the practice of taql d of particular madhhab in the State’s religious administration. Therefore, it would be good to suggest that people should be given a wide opportunity to study, to accept and to practise any opinion that is in accordance with al-Qur’ n and al-Sunnah in order to show a great appreciation of the State’s doctrine.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.018
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207