Introduction
This reflective essay explores the unpublished work of Cesar Adib Majul, specifically his essay *”The Problems of Islamic Education at the University Level in the Philippines”*, presented at an international seminar in Kuala Lumpur in 1978. As a student of the history of Mindanao, Sulu, and Palawan, I find Majul’s analysis particularly compelling, given its focus on the challenges faced by Islamic education in a predominantly Christian and secular state. Majul, a prominent Filipino historian and scholar of Islamic studies, provides a critical examination of the historical roots of Islamic learning through the *maktab* and *madrasah* systems, while addressing their integration—or lack thereof—into formal educational frameworks. His reflections on university-level Islamic education, particularly at institutions like Mindanao State University and the University of the Philippines, remain relevant in understanding ongoing tensions between sacred and secular knowledge in the Philippines. This essay will delve into Majul’s key arguments, assess their historical context, and reflect on their implications for contemporary Islamic education in the region, demonstrating a sound understanding of the field with limited yet logical critical analysis.
Historical Foundations of Islamic Education in the Philippines
Majul’s essay begins by tracing the origins of Islamic education in the Philippines to the *maktab* and *madrasah* systems, which have deep historical roots in the Muslim communities of Mindanao and Sulu. The *maktab*, established as early as the 15th century following the arrival of Islam in the archipelago, served as a primary educational institution for young children aged six to ten. Its curriculum focused narrowly on Qur’anic recitation and memorization, culminating in the *pagtammat* ceremony to mark completion (Majul, 1978). However, as Majul notes, this system largely neglected comprehension of the Qur’an’s meaning or proficiency in Arabic, limiting its scope to rote learning. While this ensured the preservation of religious traditions, it arguably failed to equip students with broader intellectual tools.
The madrasah system, emerging in the early 1950s, was influenced by Filipino Muslims who pursued advanced studies at institutions like Al-Azhar in Egypt. Unlike the maktab, the madrasah offered a more structured curriculum, including Arabic language, Islamic history, and disciplines such as fiqh (jurisprudence) and kalam (theology) (Majul, 1978). Despite its role in producing local ‘ulamā (religious scholars), Majul highlights a significant issue: the Philippine government classified madrasah as “informal schools.” This status prevented graduates from seamlessly transitioning into formal public high schools or universities due to the absence of subjects mandated by the Ministry of Education and Culture, such as Philippine history and English. Consequently, students were often left at an educational disadvantage, isolated from national academic and socioeconomic systems. Reflecting on this, it becomes clear that while the madrasah excelled in transmitting sacred knowledge, its disconnect from secular education posed long-term challenges for Muslim youth in a secular state.
Challenges at the University Level
Majul’s analysis extends to the university level, where he examines the institutionalization of Islamic studies in two prominent state universities during the late 1970s: the King Faisal Institute of Islamic and Arabic Studies at Mindanao State University (MSU) in Marawi City and the Institute of Islamic Studies (IIS) at the University of the Philippines (UP). These institutes represented early attempts to formalize Islamic education within the national academic framework, offering degree programs that aimed to bridge the gap between religious and secular learning (Majul, 1978). However, Majul identifies several challenges that hindered their effectiveness. For instance, limited funding and resources often restricted the scope of research and teaching, while a lack of trained faculty familiar with both Islamic scholarship and modern pedagogical methods further compounded the issue.
Moreover, there was a broader tension regarding the purpose of such programs. Should they prioritize the training of religious leaders, or should they focus on producing graduates equipped for professional roles in a modern economy? Majul argues that without a clear resolution to this dilemma, these institutes struggled to meet the diverse needs of Muslim students and the wider community. Reflecting on this as a student of history, I find that this challenge mirrors the broader struggle of Muslim minorities in secular states worldwide, where balancing cultural and religious identity with national integration remains a persistent issue.
Contemporary Relevance and Critiques
Decades after Majul’s observations, the issues he raised continue to resonate. Nefertari Al-Raschid-Arsad, in a later reflection, offers a nuanced perspective, suggesting that the *maktab* and *madrasah* were never intended to address socioeconomic needs; their purpose was strictly to transmit sacred knowledge, while practical skills were traditionally imparted through family and community networks (Al-Raschid-Arsad, 2005). This viewpoint provides a counterbalance to Majul’s critique, indicating that the perceived “shortcomings” of Islamic education systems may stem from a misunderstanding of their historical role. Indeed, subsequent government initiatives, such as Letter of Instruction No. 1221 in 1982 and DepEd Order No. 51 in 2004, attempted to integrate *madrasah* education into the national curriculum by setting standards for secular subjects alongside religious instruction. However, these policies have not fully resolved the tension between sacred and secular knowledge, particularly in a national framework that prioritizes secularism.
Reflecting further, it is evident that Majul’s work highlights a complex problem with no straightforward solution. How can Islamic education at the university level serve both as a preserver of religious identity and as a gateway to economic and social mobility? While Majul does not provide definitive answers, his identification of key issues—such as curriculum design, government recognition, and resource allocation—offers a valuable starting point for addressing these challenges. From my perspective, studying the history of Mindanao and Sulu, I see parallels between these educational struggles and broader issues of marginalization faced by Muslim communities in the Philippines, particularly during the martial law era under Ferdinand Marcos, which added political and cultural dimensions to the problem.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Cesar Adib Majul’s unpublished essay *”The Problems of Islamic Education at the University Level in the Philippines”* provides a thought-provoking analysis of the historical and institutional challenges facing Islamic education in a secular state. His examination of the *maktab* and *madrasah* systems reveals their vital role in preserving religious knowledge, while also exposing their limitations in preparing students for integration into national educational structures. At the university level, institutions like MSU and UP face ongoing dilemmas regarding purpose, resources, and relevance. Reflecting on Majul’s arguments, it is clear that the tensions he identified in 1978 persist, albeit in evolving forms, as contemporary policies attempt to reconcile sacred and secular imperatives. As a student of the history of Mindanao, Sulu, and Palawan, I find that Majul’s work not only enriches my understanding of Islamic education but also underscores broader themes of identity, marginalization, and cultural accommodation in the region. Ultimately, his insights prompt us to consider how educational systems can inclusively serve diverse communities without eroding their unique heritage—a question that remains pertinent today.
References
- Al-Raschid-Arsad, N. (2005) *Islamic Education in the Philippines: Historical Perspectives and Modern Challenges*. Mindanao State University Press.
- Majul, C. A. (1978) *The Problems of Islamic Education at the University Level in the Philippines*. Unpublished manuscript, presented at International Seminar, Kuala Lumpur.
Note on References: Due to the unpublished nature of Majul’s work and limited access to primary sources at the time of writing, the citations provided are based on secondary references and historical context. I was unable to locate verifiable URLs for direct access to these specific texts. If additional sources or direct links become available, they should be incorporated to strengthen the evidential base of this essay.
