Studies on human beings from the perspective of the Qur’an have extensively discussed the dimensions of servitude to God, human stewardship, and moral responsibility. However, the relationship among these three concepts as an integrated framework of the human role from the perspective of Tafsir Tarbawi has received limited integrative reconstruction. This study aims to analyze the relationship among the concepts of ibadah, khalifah, and amanah in the Qur’an and to reconstruct them as a conceptual framework of the human role and its implications for Islamic education. This study employs a qualitative approach using library research and the muqarran method of Qur’anic interpretation within the perspective of Tafsir Tarbawi. The primary sources include the Qur’an and the works of Tafsir Ath-Thabari, Ibn Kathir, al-Misbah, and al-Azhar. The main verses analyzed are QS. Adz-Dzariyat [51]:56 concerning ibadah, QS. Al-Baqarah [2]:30 concerning khalifah, and QS. Al-Ahzab [33]:72 concerning amanah. The analysis was conducted through the collection and categorization of relevant verses, examination of their contexts and meanings, comparative analysis of interpretations, and conceptual synthesis. The findings indicate that ibadah, khalifah, and amanah are integrally interconnected. Ibadah functions as a transcendental orientation, khalifah as the actualization of human roles, and amanah as the ethical principle and accountability underlying the fulfillment of those roles. This reconstruction results in a conceptual framework of orientation-actualization-accountability. From the perspective of Tafsir Tarbawi, this framework indicates that Islamic education should develop human beings holistically by strengthening their spiritual, intellectual, social, and moral dimensions, thereby cultivating individuals who possess faith and knowledge, demonstrate good character, are capable of actualizing their potential, and are responsible in fulfilling their roles as servants of Allah and stewards of the earth
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ariansyah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: