PERGUMULAN PEMIKIRAN MISTIKO FILOSOFI DI NUSANTARA ABAD 16-18 M
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proses islamisasi di Nusantara tidak dapat dilepaskan dari keberadaan ajaran dan praktik keberagamaan esoterik yang lazim disebut dengan tasawuf. Ajaran tasawuf, yang cenderung mistis itu, telah menunjukkan kemampuannya dalam menyelaraskan ajaran Islam lewat pranata-pranata budaya yang telah ada dan hidup dalam komunitas. Bahkan, sedemikian erat hubungan di antara keduanya (tasawuf dan islamisasi) sehingga dapat dikatakan bahwa Islam yang kali pertama dikenal di Nusantara adalah Islam (bercorak) tasawuf.Sejalan dengan itu, kehadiran Islam esoterik (terutama yang beraliran falsafi) di Nusantara ternyata menyisakan beberapa problem, mulai dari tataran wacana, ideologis, hingga politis. Paling tidak terdapat empat tokoh sufi yang menjadi pusat perhatian dan secara intens terlibat dalam pergumulan wacana mistiko filosofi, yakni Hamzah Fansuri, Syamsuddin al-Sumatrani, Nuruddin al-Ranin, dan Abdurrauf al-Sinkili. Sedangkan isu sentral yang mencuat dan menjadi perdebatan publik berkepanjangan adalah seputar doktrin wahdah al-wujud atau wujudiyah.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".