Journal Religio_82-301-1-PB

Religió: Jurnal Studi Agama-agama

Volume 4, Nomor 1, Maret 2014

Strengthening the Meaning of Religion

in the Democratic Society

Hatim Gazali

Universitas Siswa Bangsa Internasional (USBI), Jakarta

[email protected]

Abstrak

Hubungan antara Negara dan agama di Indonesia khususnya Islam tidak selalu dalam keadaan rukun sejak kemerdekaan Indonesia. Hubungan tersebut bahkan lebih cenderung ke antagonisme, berpisah dari satu kesatuan namun saling membutuhkan. Di satu sisi, Islam adalah fondasi nasional oleh karena kesuciannya dan dipeluk kebanyakan orang Indonesia. Di sisi lain, Pancasila yang harus menjadi fondasi Negara dengan melihat kemajemukan dari bangunan sosial masyarakat Indonesia. Penelitian ini mendiskusikan tentang makna agama dalam masyarakat demokratis, khususnya di Indonesia. Ketika sekularisme meminta pemisahan agama dan negara, pada satu sisi, dan teokrasi (negara Islam) menuntut adanya penyatuan agama dan negara, pada sisi lain, Indonesia menawarkan Pancasila untuk menjembatani jurang antara keduanya. Dalam negara sekuler, peran agama dalam negara sejauh mungkin bisa diminimalkan, bahkan dienyahkan. Padahal, agama yang secara esensial mengandung prinsip-prinsip nilai dan moral memiliki posisi sentral bagi manusia. Sebaliknya, dalam negara teokrasi agama sangat mungkin untuk dialih fungsikan sebagai penindas rakyat. Dalam situasi dilematik ini, Pancasila tidak mempunyai pretensi mengenyahkan peran agama, dan juga tidak menjadikan agama sebagai alat justifikasi suatu rezim, melainkan memfasilitasi berjalannya peran agama dalam negara. Dengan begini, agama memiliki peran esensial dalam masyarakat demokratis.

Kata kunci: Pancasila, Demokrasi, Kekerasan Agama, Syariat Islam.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

30|Hatim Ghazali – Strengthening the Meaning of Religion in the Democratic Society

Introduction

The relationship between the state and religion, especially Islam, in Indonesia has not always been in harmony since Indonesian independence. This relationship has even shown a tendency to antagonism, apart from being integrated that is fraught with mutual suspicion. One of the reasons for this disharmony is a fundamental difference in understanding about Islam.

For one group, Islam is the national foundation because it is obviously holistic and chosen by the majority of Indonesians. This group understands the holistic nature of Islam organically, in the sense that legally and formally, Islam must exist in every aspect of their lives. Some of Indonesia founding fathers that belong to this group (Muslim Nationalists) are Ki Bagus Kadikusumo, A. Kahar Muzakkir, Abikusno Tjokrosujoso, H. Agus Salim and A. Wahid Hasjim.1

Meanwhile, to the other group, it is Pancasila—the five principles— that must be the foundation of the state, in view of the pluralistic nature of the Indonesian social construct. This group believes that Islam is indeed holistic in nature but, to them, making it the national foundation shows a lack of wisdom in viewing the pluralism of the social, cultural and religious aspects of the Indonesian people. This group interprets the holistic nature of Islam substantially, in the sense that Islam cannot be built into a legal and formal system, but still, its substance and essence must present in every aspect of life. Most of Indonesian founding fathers that belong to this group are the scholar, which have studied in Western and Europe, especially New Zealand

1 Their educational backgrounds are varied. Agus Salim was educated in the Western school system, while Wahid Hasjim was educated in the Pesantren (traditional Islamic education institution which uses classical book written by the ‘ulama’ of the medieval period. For detailed information about Pesantren, see Zamakhsyari Dhofier, Tradisi Pesantren: Studi tentang pandangan Hidup Kiai (Jakarta: LP3ES, 1982); Bahtiar Effedy, Islam and The State in Indonesia (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2003), 28; Faisal Ismail, Islam Vis-à-vis Pancasila; Political Tensions and Accomodation in Indonesia 1954-1995 (Jakarta: Departemen Agama, 2001), 22.

31Volume 4, Nomor 1, Maret 2014|

universities such as—to name only a few—Soekarno, Hatta and Supomo.2

The root of this debate is on the understanding of the relation between Islam and politics—or the state. Some people put religion and politics in a single unit while others argue that both religion and politics should be viewed as separate elements. The focus of this debate is whether Prophet Muhammad established a foundation for political Islam or only established religious principles without any intention to build an Islamic state.

This ongoing debate requires further discussion. And this paper aims to discuss it in more specific analyses, namely the role of religion in a democratic society, especially in Indonesian context. It is important because of several reasons. Firstly, it is based on the fact that although Indonesian people are religious, Indonesia is neither secular state nor Islamic state. In secular state, the state has no right to intervene religious belief and activity. It is different from Islamic state, or state based on religion in which the state has an authority to control religious activity. Secondly, Indonesia consists of plural religions and Indonesian government divides them into two religious groups; religions3 (Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism) and beliefs (aliran kepercayaan), such as Kaharingan, Amatoa, Sapta Dharma, Kejawen, etc. Briefly, the government put other six religions above into belief. Thirdly, inter-religious conflict often happens in Indonesia. Social conflicts which occurs in Ambon, Maluku, and Situbondo—to name only a few—frequently are colored by religious tendency. Therefore, Indonesian government considers that managing and controlling religions are importance.

2 Effendi, Islam and The State, 29. 3 Before the era of president of Abdurrahman Wahid, Indonesian Government recognizes five religions; not including Confucianism that had existed in Indonesia since 1967. In Abdurrahman Wahid era, however, government as well as in Presidential Decree No.6 adds Confucianism as a religion. Rumadi, “Agama dan Negara; Dilema Regulasi Kehidupan Beragama di Indonesia” in Jurnal Istiqro’, Vol. 04, No. 1 2005 (Jakarta: Department of Religious Affairs), 118.


The question is, should Indonesia have any rule and role in regulating and controlling religious activity, behavior, and morality? Answering this question is dilemmatic. In one hand, without controlling and managing of the state within inter-religion relationship, social and religious conflict will increase because every religion claimed as the right one (truth claim). And on the other hand, if the state controls religious activity, it is often to be religious politicization. The manipulation of religion for political-economic and cultural interests is more extensive, which later often intensifies social conflict. When religion becomes basic principle of the state, the opportunity to abuse a religious, doctrine to achieve a certain interest, becomes more potential, such as to establish its regime, oppress little people, and legitimate and implement an unpopular policy.

In this context, I think, Indonesian people need rule to manage and control religions. This rule is only to manage and control social, economic and political aspect of religion, not in the internal side of religion (faith), therefore I believe that religion has to differentiate from the state. This rule is also created based on agreement and consensus among each follower of religions that it is important to do in plural society like Indonesia. Of course, every area (district, province) needs particular rule that perhaps varies from one to another. The aim of this rule is to protect all religious community in Indonesia.

In addition, the consensus and agreement among religions’ followers enable religion to implement the role and meaning of religion as a medium to humanize human being, liberalize people form oppression, and keep moral society. Due to this rule of religions above, all religions can show its significant among human being as both religious followers and Indonesian citizen. In democratic society like Indonesia, the role of religions inevitably is a part of Indonesian life as well as in the first principle of Pancasila. In short, it is impossible to ignore the role of religion in democratic society as long as religion can carry out its messages for human life, because religion is compatible with some social values, such as democracy and pluralism.


The Ambiguity of Indonesian Identity

Before describing the role of religion in the democratic society, I would like to make a clear understanding on the relationship between state and religion in Indonesia, and several rules of religion today. Analyzing and criticizing the Indonesian today’s rule of religion is important, because the obstacle of religion’s role in Indonesia is caused by the problem of the rule of religion itself.

Although Islam is the largest religion in Indonesia, even in this world, Indonesia is not Islamic state, which is based on Islamic principles or laws. And Indonesia is not secular state as well, which separates religion from the state. They decide that the best solution for Indonesian is Pancasila, which detached religions from the state, but recognize them as well as stated in the first principle of Pancasila, The Lordship of the Supreme One (Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa).

However, the process of Pancasila to be the foundation of the state has undergone a long debate between Islamic and Secular Nationalists. Islamic Nationalists such as Ki Bagus Hadikusumo, Sukiman Wirjosandjoko, etc, want to make Islam as a basis of Indonesia, since Islam is an integral and comprehensive religion, covering and controlling all aspects of human life. Ki Bagus Hadikusomo said:

Honorable gentlemen! If you wish to establish a just and wise government in our state based on noble moral conduct and democratic deliberations and tolerance without compulsion in religion, then establish a government based on Islam, because Islam provides all of this.4

In order that Indonesia become a strong and stable state, I propose that the establishment of a free state of Indonesia be based on Islam, because this will be in conformity with the fundamental aspiration of the majority of people [who are Muslim]… Do not neglect the aspiration of 90 percent of the people [who are Muslim]5

4 Ki Bagus Hadikusumo, Islam Sebagai Dasar Negara dan Akhlak Pemimpin (Yogyakarta: Pustaka Rahayu, 1954), 13; Ismail, Islam vis-à-vis Pancasila, 42. 5 Ibid., 43.


Meanwhile, Secular Nationalists like Soekarno, Mohammad Hatta, Soepomo Wongsonegoro, Mohammad Yamin propose to separate religion (Islam) from the state, and put religion as private matters. Religion cannot be a basis of state. Soepomo stated:

Creating an Islamic state in Indonesia would mean that we are not creating a unitary state. Creating an Islamic state in Indonesia would mean setting up a state that is going to link itself to the largest group, the Islamic group. If an Islam state is created in Indonesia, then certainly the problem of minorities will arise, the problem of small religious groups, of Christians and others. Although an Islamic state will safeguard the interests of other groups as well as possible, these smaller groups will certainly not be able to feel involved in the state. 6

The debate and controversy of Indonesian ideology are continuous after independence, even today. Nevertheless, Soeharto’s regime of New Order era radically had rejected the formalization of Islamic law (Islamic state),7 oppressed all organizations, including Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), to accept Pancasila as the only one basis (asas tunggal).8 After the falling of Soeharto, Indonesians began to enjoy the democratic era in which the freedom of speech is one of the pillars. As consequence, discussion and polemic about the Pancasila as the ideology

6 B.J. Boland, The struggle of Islam in Modern Indonesia (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1982), 20; Ismail, Islam vis-à-vis Pancasila, 41. 7 Robert W. Hefner, “State, Society, and Secularity in Contemporary Indonesia” in Theodore Friend (ed.), Religion and Religiosity in the Philippines and Indonesia; Essay on State, Society, and Public Creeds (Washington DC: Southeast Asia Program, 2006), 41. 8 Nahdlatul Ulama accepts Pancasila as its sole basis in 27th national congress of NU held from December 8-12, 1984 in the Pesantren Salafiyah Syafi’iyah of Sukorejo Situbondo, East Java. This declaration stated: [1] Pancasila, as the basis and philosophy of the state of the Republic of Indonesia is not religion; neither can it replaces religion nor it can’t be used to replace the position of religion. [2] the principle of “Belief in One God” as the foundation of the Republic of Indonesia, as stated in article 29 paragraph 1 of the 1945 constitution which gives life to all other principles, reflects “monotheism” (tawhîd) in accordance with the notion of belief (iman) in Islam. Due to this declaration, the NU has obligation to maintain the true notion of Pancasila and its correct and consistent observance by all. See, Ismail, Islam vis-à-vis Pancasila, 216-219; Marzuki Wahid and Abdul Moqsith Ghazali, “Relasi Agama dan Negara; Perspektif Pemikiran Nahdlatul Ulama” in Jurnal Istiqro’, Vol. 04, No 01, (2005), 147-169.


of Indonesia took place in the second wave. Some people still endeavor to promote Islam as a basis of Indonesia, like Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia (MMI, Indonesian Council of Jihad Fighters), Front Pembela Islam (FPI, Islamic Defense Front), and Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI, Indonesian Party of Liberation), etc. In the Annual Meeting (Sidang Tahunan, ST) of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR, Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat) on 2000 and 2001, PBB (Partai Bulan Bintang) and PPP (Partai Persatuan Pembangunan) proposed “seven words” of the Jakarta Charter, “the obligation to practice the shari’a for its adherents”, to be part of the Constitution (UUD). But, the majority of political party rejects this proposal. 9 Those facts above have shown that the political and cultural movements to change the Pancasila are not completely vanished.

From Pancasila to Sharia: The Politicization of Religion

I believe that Pancasila is a final principle basis of Indonesia. T.B. Simatupang said, “Pancasila has been an important element in maintaining and strengthening the unity of religion”. Therefore, Simatupang suggests that all segments of Indonesian society, whether they are more religiously or more secularly motivated, could accept and support the Pancasila.10 According to Benyamin11 Pancasila is civil religion of Indonesia that can guarantee the different religion not only exist and co-exist but also pro-exist. However, it does not mean that Pancasila has run without any obstacles. In this chapter, I will discuss two issues regarding Pancasila as a basis of Indonesia and the problem of religious freedom.

9 Siti Musda Mulia, “Menuju Kebebasan Beragama di Indonesia, in Abd. Hakim & Yudi Latief (eds.), Bayang-Bayang Fanataisme; Esai-Esai untuk Mengenang Nurcholish Madjid (Jakarta: PSIK, 2007), 200. 10 T.B. Simatupang, “Ideology and Gospel: An Indonesian Perspective”, in Tj. Baarda, Zending op Weg naar de Toekomst, essays aangeboden aan Prof. Dr. J. Verkuyl (Kampen: 1978), 160. 11 Benjamin F. Intan, “Wajah Agama Publik di Indonesia”, in Reform Review, 1-1, (2007), 6-12.


1. Problems of Pancasila

At least, there are two problems concerning Pancasila as a basis of Indonesia. The first problem is the first principle of Pancasila, The Lordship of the Supreme One. This principle forces all religions, beliefs and traditions in Indonesia to believe in One God (personal God). Whereas, we know that Indonesia has many religions, beliefs and traditions, which may be does not have the concept of God, or belief in many gods, or impersonal God. The concept of God in Buddhism and Hinduism, for instance, differs from monotheistic religion, especially Abrahamic religions (Jew, Christianity and Islam).

Originally, god and goddess matters are not a central part of Buddhism. Sidharta Gautama, the founder of Buddhism, avoids talking about god and goddess. But, after Gautama era, some of Buddhist tries to re-conceptualize conceptualizing their God. In Hinayana school, there simply are no gods, because the question of God would be one, which did not tend to edification, and hence it would not be elucidated; God is neither affirmed nor denied. Buddha himself dismissed the Vedic gods, and his dharma after him had no place for them because Buddha transcended them. Meanwhile in Mahayana school, the Buddha become a kind of God, or take place of God, but the term is not applied to them because their significance is not as transcendent beings but as embodiments of dharma, of wisdom, of the truth of the world and human destiny.12

In Hinduism, another example, “The Long Search’ film reports that there are 330 million gods. Hindus have many gods and goddess through which they view Ultimate reality because indigenous people, Arya, believe that Hinduism is just a philosophy of life, not as a religion. As consequence, Hinduism is profound compromise with indigenous cultures. Every culture has different view, perception, and concept on response to the reality. For that reason, Ward J. Fellows stated “the Absolute Being of Hinduism is one, is many, is personal, is impersonal, is everything, is nothing, is red, is green, is good, is bad, is the word, is

12 Ward J. Fellows, Religion East and West (USA: Thomson Wadsworth, 1998), 116.


emptiness.13 Briefly, Eastern religions tend to worship either many gods-- according to different function, or human who becomes deified.14 However, both Buddhism and Hinduism in Indonesia should accept Pancasila as the sole basis of Indonesia,15 although they have different teachings regarding the concept of god.

And the second problem is the differences between “agama” (religion) and “kepercayaan” (belief). It is right that Pancasila does not differentiate religion and belief, but the interpretation of the first principle of Pancasila is “rather” different. Indonesia divides agama (religion) and aliran kepercayaan (belief). Indonesia has various beliefs (aliran kepercayaan), which sometime and frequently are judged by another religion as heretical belief. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom reports that:

The law officially “embraces” six religions—Islam, Catholicism, Protestantism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism. The government generally respects the freedom to worship of adherents to each of these religions. Presidential Decree No 6, promulgated in January 2000, lifted severe legal restrictions on the practice of Confucianism that had existed since 1967. While only these six religions are recognized officially, the law explicitly, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, whose adherents may experience difficult process of civil matters like marriage. Likewise, citizens who are members of religions other than the six officially recognized may be obliged to identify themselves as Catholics, Muslim, etc., in order to obtain national identity card or process other civil matters.

2. Questioning The Religious Freedom

Beside two issues related to the principle of Pancasila, there are two another issues that currently so obvious that injure the values and

13 Ibid., 60. 14 Lester Kurtz, God In the Global Village: the World’s Religions in Sociological Perspective (California: Pine Forge Press, 1995), 58-59. 15 KB. Sutrisno, “Agama, Politik, dan Negara; Perspektif Buddha” in Th. Sumartana (ed.), Agama dan Negara Perspektif Islam, Katolik, Hindu, Buddha, Kunghucu, Protestan (Yogyakarta: Interfidei, 2002), 50-51. See also another chapter in this book, AA. Ari Dwipayana, “Masihkah Kita Punya Peradaban”, 86-87.


principles of Pancasila; implementation of Islamic sharia and religion-based violence.

a. The Implementation of Islamic Sharia

Although Indonesia is neither secular nor Islamic state, but we can see both some national rules accommodating Islamic teaching, and later some places in which has any rule based on Islamic doctrine (sharia). To name only a few of any rules accommodating Islamic sharia are as follows: [1] Law No 1/1971 about Marriage, [2] Governmental Regulation No 28/1977 about Perwakafan (property donated for religious or community use) [3] Law No 7/1989 about Religion Judicature., [4] Law No 7/1992, Law No 10/1998 and Law No 23/1999 about National Banking system, which allowed the operation of Sharia Bank, [5] Presidential Directive No 1/1991 about Islamic Law Compilation, [6] Law No 17/1999 about Implementation of pilgrimage, and [7] Law No 38/1999 about Tithe (Zakat) Management.

Meanwhile, there are many residences in Indonesia implementing the local official-regulation (Peraturan Daerah) of Islamic Sharia. [1] in Bulukumba (South Sulawesi) there are some Islamic rule; Law No 03/2002 about prohibition, control and sale of drink, Law No 2/2003 about Management of tithe, Infak and alms, Law No 05/2003 about wearing Muslim and Muslimah code, Law no 06/2005 about the ability of reading-writing the Qur’an for Student and Bridegroom. In Gowa, the local government obligates women civil servant to wear veil, and adds the time of Islamic lesson in school. In Cianjur (West Java), there is a letter of local government No 061/2896 about recommendation of Islamic uniform.16 In Padang, the instruction mayor No 451.442/Binsos/III/2006 obligates wearing Islamic code.17

16 Ahmad Fuad Fanani investigates on the implementation of Islamic Sharia in West Java According to the leader of Pesantren (Traditional Islamic Education institution. Usually, this institution is operated by the Traditionalists Muslim [NU] and located in rural area). According to Fanani, the leaders of Pesantren have different perspectives about what sharia is. The conservative leaders look that sharia is absolute texts, which cannot be changed, while the moderate leaders tend to interpret the sharia. However, most leaders of Pesantren agree with the implementation of Islamic Sharia in the state rule. In accordance with non-Muslim, Islamic sharia will protect and safeguard non-


Nangroe Aceh Darussalam (NAD) has various rules of Islamic law; [1] Qanun (Law) No 11/2002 about the implementation of Islamic Sharia in the level of theology, Prayer and Islamic Mission, [2] Law No 12/2003 about Wine and a kind of Wine, [3] Law No 13/2003 about Maisir (Perjudian), [4] Law No 14/2003 about Khalwat, Law no 7/2004 about the Management of tithe (Zakat). Base on Pagar’s research, Aceh’s people enthusiastically agree with the implementation of Islamic Sharia, including for non-Muslim. When the observer aks “how if Islamic law occur only for Muslim”, 65 % disagree. In other words, 65 % of Aceh’s citizens agree with the implementation of Islamic Sharia for non-Muslim.18 Furthermore, Pagar concludes that the law of Islamic Sharia in Aceh does not give implication for dualism (double) of criminal law (pidana) in Aceh between Islamic Sharia and national law. It is because, Islamic law just regulates some, not all, aspects.19

b. Religious Violence

Religion frequently provokes, and even becomes the source of, the conflict, or at least exaggerates it. It is true that religion is not the only source and cause of peace, but like or dislike in fact that religion also becomes source and basis of conflict. Many scholars, such as Rene

Muslim as well as in the Medina when Muhammad live. Ahmad Fuad Fanani, “Jihad Memperjuangkan Syariat Islam; Pandangan Tokoh-Tokoh Pesantren di Jawa Barat”, (paper presented in 6th Annual Conference on Islamic Studies, Bandung: Department of Religious Affairs, 2006). 17 Sukron Kamil and Chaider S. Bamualim (eds.), Syariah Islam dan HAM (Jakarta: Center for the Study of Religion and Culture, 2007), 110-111. 18 Pagar, “Dualisme Hukum Pidana di Nangroe Aceh Darussalam: Analisis terhadap Dampak Penerapan Hukum Islam”, (Paper presented in 6th Annual Conference on Islamic Studies, Bandung: Department of Religious Affairs, 2006). 19 Rumadi, “Delik Penodaan Agama dan Kehidupan Beragama”, (paper presented in 6th Annual Conference on Islamic Studies, Bandung: Department of Religious Affairs, 2006). Rumadi gives some examples of the sullying of religion, such in the 1990 Arswendo Atmowiloto (Chief Editor of Monitor Tabloid) who got sentence five years. Monitor October 15, 1990 release polling about amazing figure. The result of this polling shows that the Prophet of Muhammad stands in the position eleven. Because of this polling, Arswendo get verdict five years, because he is claimed sullying of religion, specifically Islam. Another sample is Shaleh in Situbondo conflict in 1996, and Mas’ud Simanungkalit who get sentence three years because he had claimed doing false interpretation for the Qur’an, etc.


Girard (1973),20 Bruce Lawrence (1989),21 Regina Schwartz (1997),22 have recognized the link between violence and religion. The work of Juergensmeyer, for example, clearly shows how violence has occurred and spread under the banners of all religions. In his introduction, Juergensmeyer writes:

The first half of the book contains chapters on Christians in America who supported abortion clinic bombings and militia actions such as the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building; Catholics and Protestants who justified acts of terrorism in Northern Ireland; Muslims associated with the bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City and Hamas attacks in the Middle East; Jews who supported the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and the attack on Hebron’s Tomb of the Patriarchs; Sikhs identified with the killing of India’s prime minister Indira Gandhi and Punjab’s chief minister Beant Singh; and the Japanese Buddhists affiliated with the group accused of the nerve gas attack in Tokyo’s subway.23

Clearly, we can look particular cases of religious conflicts in Indonesia. Since 1996, violence under the banner of religion has been increasing in Indonesia. Besides small-scale religious violence, such as that Situbondo, East Java, (1996), Tasikmalaya, West Java (1996), Purwakarta, West Java (1995), Banjarmasin (1997), Ketapang, Jakarta (1998), Lampung (2002) and Mataran (2000)24 much larger-scale religious violence between Muslims and Christians began on January 19, 1999, in Ambon, Maluku.

20 Rene Girard, Violence and the Sacred, (Baltimore & London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973). 21 Bruce D. Lawrence, Defenders of God, The Fundamentalist Revolt Against the Modern Age, (New York: Harper & Row, 1989). 22 Regina Schwartz, The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997). 23 Mark Juergensmeyer, Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence,

(California: University of California Press, 2000), 13-14. 24 To know social conflicts in Indonesia, which also religious tendency takes place, you can see the researches from several intellectual, that collected in two books, Konflik Sosial Bernuansa Agama di Indonesia, Volume I and II, published by Department of Religious Affairs in 2002 and 2003.


Contemporary phenomenon is violence for Ahmadiyah, an Islamic sect founded in India by Mirza Gulam Ahmad and GKI (Gereja Kristen Indonesia) Yasmin. According to fatwa of the Indonesia Ulama Council (MUI), Ahmadiyah is illegal belief in Indonesia. Furthermore, because of MUI’s fatwa, government officially issued the SKB (Surat Keputusan Bersama) 3 Menteri (SKB No.3/2008, No: Kep-033/A/JA/6/2008, and No 199/2008) to criminalize Ahmadiyah.

The implementation of Islamic Sharia and religious violence in Indonesia show that the formalization Islamic Sharia into state’s law is problematic. Toward this problem, I think, we should firstly differentiate (not separate) between religion and state affairs. It is important to avoid what Benjamin F. Intan calls “politicization of religion” and “religionization of politic”. The two factors making religion's roles in public area are not productive and contributive to welfare and prosperity of this country. 25

Differentiating between religion and state matters is not a form of secularism nor theocratic, but both religion and state (politics) have different area. If secularism tends to separate religion from the state, while religion also consists of public doctrine (privatization of public matters), and theocratic is a kind of “publicization of the private matter”, the differentiating religion and state is moderate choice than both. Therefore, to some extend state has right to intervene religion as long as it related to the role of the state such as separatism and social conflicts provoked by religion. In accordance with private matters of religion such as belief, religious experience, etc., the state has no right to intervene. The reason of why this separation between religion and state is important is that both religion and state partly have the same role, namely building welfare society, doing justice, humanity, etc. The difference between religion and state that religion is to inward aspect of human being, while state is to outward aspect of human being as a citizen.

25 Benjamin F. Intan, “Wajah Agama Publik di Indonesia”, in Reform Review, Vol. 1, No. 1, (2007), 34.


The aim of distinguishing the state and religion is how religion has good meaning for individually or socially human being. Therefore, religion does not legitimate and justify the oppression, injustices, inhumanity, but religion otherwise promotes and contributes the role of the state in order that both religion and state can cooperate to humanize human being, build welfare and justice society, and empowering civil society. In other words, differentiating state and religion implicitly will make religion has strong role in managing and controlling socially and individually human being. Accordingly, both state and religion will compete each other to apply their function and meaning in social life.

Strengthening the Meaning of Religion

Religions have two faces, which R. Scoot Appleby calls “the ambivalence of the sacred”.26 Religion, at one hand, appears as the source of violence. The other hand religion can be potential element to breed peaceful and reconciliation. In other words, religion is understood to be the source of serenity, security and peace. But in fact, religion often is an inciting factor of tension and conflict among religious adherents as well as with other religious groups.

Meanwhile, all religions doctrinally promote noble messages such as peace and humanity. Contradiction between the noble messages of religion (Das Sollen) and the reality (Das sein) has to look for its solution, unless religions will lose its function in social reality. No other choices, we have to build and develop the role of religion as well as the original aim of religion.

Ted G. Jelen and Clyde Wilcox (2002) divide political roles of religion into two general categories; priestly religious politics and prophetic religious politics.27 In the first category, religion and state may stand in a mutually supportive relationship to one another, while in the

26 R. Scoot Appleby, The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publisher, Inc, 2000), 45. 27 Ted G Jelen and Clyde Wilcox, “Religion: The one, the Few, and the Many,” in Ted G Jelen and Clyde Wilcox (eds.), Religion and Politics in Comparative Perspective (USA: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 7.


second one political and religious authority may assume opposed or independent roles. Furthermore, Jelen and Wilcox explain that priestly religions may enhance or legitimate political authority in a variety of ways. National regime supports particular religions, or even establishes official national religions, such as Islam in Iran, Catholicism in Spain and Ireland, Lutheranism in Sweden, or Anglicanism in England. Some other nations have not established a national religion, but they provide financial support to religious bodies, such as funding for religious school. In this context, the state may give subsidy for the dominant religion, for some but not all religion, or for all religions.

By contrast, the prophetic role of religion assumes that religion can assert a certain level of autonomy and independence from political authority. In many countries in which more than one religion is applied, disputes over the autonomy of religious belief and practice are quite common. Jelen and Wilcox give sample in the United State that the Supreme Court has ruled on a wide array of issues, including the rights of religious groups to avoid military service, to refuse to salute the flag in public school, to be exempt from laws governing the use of peyote, and to practice animal sacrifice. In 1994, a number Muslim school girls were expelled from French public school for wearing head scarves mandated by their religion.28

I am likely to differentiate religion and its followers. Specifically, in this context I would like to say that Muslim is not identical with Islam. In making this differentiation -that is as pre-requirement of the role of religion-, we can analyze clearly, who plays role in conflicts, whether the religion or the followers. The religions’ followers frequently manipulate religious teaching to provoke hostility and conflict. The standpoint of exclusive theology makes the follower to have prejudice and stereotype toward other religions. We can hear the expression in sermon and preaching in the mosque, church and synagogue in which sometimes is

28 Jelen and Wilcox, “Religion: The one”, 9.


promoted exclusive theology. Exclusivists are making isolation and trying to get rid of dialogue.29

Hence, we need to revise an exclusive theology to inclusive theology. The theology constructed by classical ‘ulamâ (Muslim scholars) within unharmonious interfaith relation led the frame of theology to be more exclusive, full of double standard and inter-suspicion. Such theology might be contextual in its age. Nevertheless, when the religious plurality becomes contemporary fact and natural law, theological changes is the essential need as the base of religious living in practice. This inclusive-transformative theology put the human on equal position no matter his religion, ethnic, race, language and tribe is (QS. Ali ‘Imrân [3]:64). On this level, all human is expected to be the God’s Caliph on

the earth (khalîfat Allâh fî al-ard}) to accomplish transformation toward the better direction and live in harmony with the environment. Therefore, war, religious conflict, or dispute must be avoided as a form of collective responsibility.

In the context of religions, all religions have a convergent point (kalimât sawâ‘ in the Qur’an term)—the bond of interfaith plurality. The inclusive–transformative theology has not only opened the possibility of truth in others’ belief, but also created serenity and world peace as a

collective responsibility. It means that universal values like love (rah}mah),

wisdom (h }ikmah), universal benefit (maslah}ah ‘âmmah), justice (‘adl) and equality, etc must be the ‘umbrella’ of all religions to cooperate in humanitarian deeds. All kinds of evil, violence, or terrorism must be common enemy. The prophet of Muhammad saw said: “O mankind! Disseminate peace, tighten the bonds of fraternity, feed (the hungry), and pray when most of people sleep at night, hence you will enter into heaven full of welfare”.

After all, good relationship between one religion to others and differentiating state and religion affairs will promote and make the role of religion stronger. I think, at least, there are three roles of religion in a democratic society in which every group has an equal right to speak out

29 Tarmizi Tahir, “Roles of Religious Leaders in Reducing Possible Conflict”, in ICIP Journal, Vol. 2, No.1 (2005), 1.


and to associate. First is controlling. The differentiating between state and religion affairs enables religion to control the state policy, which is against religions’ principles such as humanity, justice, liberation, etc. All religions have obligation to keep this world in balance. Therefore, the authoritarian state is an enemy of religion. This control does not place religion under religion, but both are equal. For instance, religion has right to control state when it uses symbols of religion to oppress citizen, or manipulates symbols for some political interest which is against with religious values.

Second is humanity. I believe that all religions come to this world only to humanize human being. Historically, all religions grow and develop in tribal and uncivilized society in which slavery, authoritarianism, gender inequality, conflict and violence occur in all over the place. Moses, Jesus and Muhammad was born in that situation.

Therefore, the great agenda of religion is humanity, H {asan H {anafî, professor at the University of Cairo, says, “Islam is a humanistic religion. Man is the center of the universe. Islam is a religion already modernized from theocentrism to anthropocentrism, from inauthentic to the authentic. The whole world is created for man”.30 Maintaining humanity values in Indonesia is very important, because Indonesia, which has more than 200 ethnic groups,31 several religions and beliefs, potentially expose the conflict and violence.

Abû H {âmid al-Ghazâlî describes the humanity, which he names

universal benefit (maslah}ah ‘âmmah) for five elements: [1] a safety of

religion, which means no coercion in believe certain religion (hifz} al-dîn),

[2] a physical safety, which means no violence (h }ifz } al-nafs) [3] a safety of

religious thinking and expression from intimidation (h }ifz} al-‘aql), [4] a

safety of family and descent (h }ifz} al-nasl), and [5] a safety of property

(h }ifz} al-mâl).32 Religion, especially Islam, has to maintain and apply these

30 H{asan H {anafî, “Reconciliation and Preparation of Societies”, in Journal of Millennium Islam, Vol. 1 No.1, (2000), IMFO-AMAN Indonesia, 17. 31 Robert Cribb, “Nation: Making Indonesia”, in Donald K. Emerson (ed.), Indonesia Beyond Suharto, Polity, Economy, Society, Transition, (New York: M.E. Sharpe, 1999), 3. 32 Abû H {âmid al-Ghazâlî, Al-Mustashfâ min ‘Ilm al-Us}ûl, Vol. 1 (Beirut: Dâr al-Fikr), 26. This hierarchy of the universal benefit differs from Hassan Hanafi. According to


values of humanity. Therefore, inhuman act, attitude, behavior and policy are an opponent of these values.

The third role of religion is liberation and justice. I believe that all religions want to liberate and advocate oppressed people. Therefore, the first followers of several religions are the oppressed people. Mohammad Tabli said,

To my best knowledge, among all the other revealed texts, only the Qur’an stresses religious liberty so unambiguously. The reason is that faith, to be true and reliable, must be a voluntary act. Faith is an individual concern and commitment and that even parents must refrain from interfering with it. Faith, as stressed in the basic text of Islam in clear and indisputable words, is a voluntary act born out of conviction and freedom.33

Besides liberation, religion also promotes justice. Allah said “Say: My Lord has enjoined justice, and set upright your faces at every time of prayer and call on Him, being sincere to Him in obedience; as He brought you forth in the beginning, so shall you also return” (QS. al-A‘râf [7]:29). Another verse, Allah said, “O you who believe! Be upright for Allah, bearers of witness with justice, and let not hatred of a people incite you not to act equitably; act equitably, that is nearer to piety, and he careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is Aware of what you do” (QS. al-Mâidah [5]:8). These two verses prove that the liberation and justice are the principle of, at least, Islam. Therefore, the piety will be more significant if do justice, and the justice will not occur without liberate oppressed people from their sufferings. Islam makes social revolution to deconstruct society of Arab for oppressed people.

Hanafi, its hierarchy is, [1] h }ifz } al-h }ayât (safety of life), which al-Ghazâlî calls h }ifz } al-nafs;

[2] h}ifz } al-dîn (safety of religion); [3] h}ifz } al-‘aql (safety of intellect); [4] h}ifz } al-‘ard } (safety

of dignity) which al-Ghâzalî calls h }ifz } al-nasl; [5] h}ifz } al-mâl (safety of property). See

H{asan H {anafî, Dirâsât Islâmîyah, (Cairo: Maktabah al-Anjalû al-Mis}rîyah), 99. 33 Mohamed Talbi, “Religious Liberty”, in Charles Kurzman (ed.), Liberal Islam: A Sourcebook, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 163.


Conclusion

Indonesia is neither secular nor Islamic state, but puts Pancasila as its sole basis, which acknowledges all religion and belief equally and does not give privilege to one religion, Islam for instance. This ideal relationship—for Indonesian context—practically often becomes problem such as politicization of religion and restriction of religion. The conflict, violence and implementation of Islamic sharia in some places are evidence that the ideal relationship frequently is manipulated to get political interest.

Therefore, besides supporting and strengthening this relationship, I suggest differentiating the state and religion affairs. Therefore, there is no intervention one another. The right to embrace a religion is the most basic of human rights and all legislation on religion should pay attention to those rights. The state should not define a religion, but should leave it to the people to define their own. The inclusion of religious identity in legal documents such as identity cards compromises the state’s guarantee on upholding human rights.

In principle, the role of religion is concerned with empowering of civil society and maintains religion from politicization and manipulation. Hence, the value principles such as controlling, humanity, liberation and justice must be done in order that religion has great and deep meaning for human being. Briefly, if state is aware to outward aspect of human being as a citizen, religion is aware to inward aspect (spirituality) of human being. Religion can reduce corruption, poverty, unemployment if religion gives meaning for its followers.

Bibliography

Ali, Mohammad. “Tantangan Kebebasan Beragama” in Media Indonesia. January 24, 2003.

Appleby, R. Scoot. The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publisher, inc, 2000.

Azra, Azyumardi. “Radical and Mainstream Islam: New Dynamics in Indonesia” in Theodore Friend (ed.), Religion and Religiosity in The


Philippinnes and Indonesia; Essay on State, Society and Public Creeds. Washington: Southeast Asia Studies Program, 2006.

Azra, Azyumardi. “The Rise of Muslim Elit Schools; A New Pattern of Santrinization in Indonesia”. In Al-Jami’ah Journal. No 64/XII/1999.

Boland, B.J. The Struggle of Islam in Modern Indonesia. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1982.

Cribb, Robert. “Nation: Making Indonesia”, in Donald K. Emerson (ed.), Indonesia Beyond Suharto, Polity, Economy, Society, Transition. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 1999.

Dhofier, Zamakhsyari. Tradisi Pesantren: Studi tentang pandangan Hidup Kiai. Jakarta: LP3ES, 1982.

Dwipayana, AA. Ari. “Masihkah Kita Punya Peradaban”, in Th Sumartana (ed.), Agama dan Negara Perspektif Islam, Katolik, Hindu, Buddha, Kunghucu, Protestan. Yogyakarta: Interfidei, 2002.

Effedy, Bahtiar. Islam and The State in Indonesia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2003.

Fanani, Ahmad Fuad. “Jihad Memperjuangkan Syariat Islam; Pandangan Tokoh-Tokoh Pesantren di Jawa Barat”. Paper presented in 6th Annual Conference on Islamic Studies, Bandung: Department of Religious Affairs, 2006.

Fellows, Ward J. Religion East and West. USA: Thomson Wadsworth, 1998.

Ghazâlî (al), Abû H{âmid. Al-Mustashfâ min ‘Ilm al-Us}ûl. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr.

Girard, Rene. Violence and the Sacred. Baltimore & London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973.

Hadikusumo, Ki Bagus. Islam Sebagai Dasar Negara dan Akhlak Pemimpin. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Rahayu, 1954.

H{anafî, H {asan. “Reconciliation and Preparation of Societies”. Journal of Millennium Islam. Vol. 1 No.1, 2000.


__________. Dirâsat Islâmîyah. Cairo: Maktabah al-Anjalû al-Mis}rîyah, 2003.

Hefner, Robert W. “State, Society, and Secularity in Contemporary Indonesia” in Theodore Friend (ed.), Religion and Religiousty in the Philippines and Indonesia; Essay on State, Society, and Public Creeds. Washington DC: Southeast Asia Program, 2006.

Huntington, Samuel, P. The Clash of Civilization and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996.

Intan, Benjamin F. “Wajah Agama Publik di Indonesia”. In Reform Review, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2007.

Ismail, Faisal. Islam Vis-à-vis Pancasila; Political Tensions and Accomodation in Indonesia 1954-1995. Jakarta: Departemen Agama, 2001.

Jelen, Ted G and Clyde Wilcox. “Religion: The one, the Few, and the Many,” in Ted G Jelen and Clyde Wilcox (eds.), Religion and Politics in Comparative Perspective. USA: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Juergensmeyer, Mark. Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. California: University of California Press, 2000.

Kamil, Sukron and Chaider S. Bamualim (Eds.). Syariah Islam dan HAM. Jakarta: Center for the Study of Religion and Culture, 2007.

Kurtz, Lester. God In the Global Village: the World’s Religions in Sociological Perspective. California: Pine Forge Press, 1995.

Lawrence, Bruce D.. Defenders of God, The Fundamentalist Revolt Against the Modern Age. New York: Harper & Row, 1989.

Maliki, Zainuddin. Agama Rakyat Agama Penguasa; Konstruksi Tentang Realitas Agama dan Demokratisasi. Yogyakarta: Galangpress, 2000.

Mohamed Talbi. “Religious Liberty”, in Charles Kurzman (ed.), Liberal Islam: A Sourcebook. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Pagar. “Dualisme Hukum Pidana di Nangroe Aceh Darussalam: Analisis terhadap Dampak Penerapan Hukum Islam”. Paper presented in


6th Annual Conference on Islamic Studies, Bandung: Department of Religious Affairs, 2006.

Rumadi. “Agama dan Negara; Dilema Regulasi Kehidupan Beragama di Indonesia”. Istiqro’. Vol. 04, No. 1, 2005.

__________, “Delik Penodaan Agama dan Kehidupan Beragama”, Paper presented in 6th Annual Conference on Islamic Studies, Bandung: Department of Religious Affairs, 2006.

Saidi, Anas. Memeluk Agama, Membangun Tahta; Kebijakan Agama Orde Baru. Jakarta: Desantara, 2004.

Schwartz, Regina. The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.

Simatupang, T.B. Ideology and Gospel: An Indonesian Perspective.

Sutrisno, KB. “Agama, Politik, dan Negara; Perspektif Buddha” in Th Sumartana (ed.), Agama dan Negara Perspektif Islam, Katolik, Hindu, Buddha, Kunghucu, Protestan. Yogyakarta: Interfidei, 2002.

Tahir, Tarmizi. “Roles of Religious Leaders in Reducing Possible Conflict”. ICIP Journal. Vol. 2, No.1, 2005.

Wahid, Marzuki and Abdul Moqsith Ghazali. “Relasi Agama dan Negara; Perspektif Pemikiran Nahdlatul Ulama”. Istiqro’. Vol. 04, No. 01, 2005.

Yamin, Muhammad (ed.). Naskah Persiapan Undang-Undang Dasar 1945. Vol.1. Jakarta: Yayasan Prapanca, 1959.

Zulkarnain, Iskandar. Gerakan Ahmadiyah Indonesia. Yogyakarta: LKiS, 2005.

Journal Religio_82-301-1-PB

Documents

Transcript of Journal Religio_82-301-1-PB