By Mohamad Abdun Nasir
In April 14,2010, The Jakarta Post run an article about the role of religious organizations in keeping the country unity. The author gives a particular attention to NU. He argues that this organization holds a pivotal role in keeping the stability of the country. I agree absolutely. Historically this largest Islamic organization participated actively in the Independence movement. The state has awarded NU founding fathers as national heroes. Unlike recent flourishing Muslim organizations that maintains strong Islamic transnational networks and envisions the establishment of an Islamic state, NU was established in this country. To this organization, Pancasila is final and national unity is nonnegotiable. Looking at these records, it is unintelligible to question NU’s loyalty to the state. Discussing its spirit of nationalism is redundant.
Instead, the real question now is about its religious ideology. Is it still moderate or attuned to be conservative? Certainly NU, along with Muhammadiyah, is not extreme or radical. They are often regarded as the representation of moderate Indonesian Islam. However, if we consider recent cigarette, bank interest, early marriage and female genital mutilation fatwas issued by these two organizations respectively, we may question their moderateness.
NU has lately released two edicts regarding early marriage and female genital circumcision. The fatwa approved these highly controversial matters. A couple month ago, the Forum of East Java Female Pesantren, associated virtually with NU, declared that Facebook is forbidden (if it is misused). These fatwas are staggering.
As far as it is concerned, there is authoritative texts that neither conjoin nor forbid early marriage and the genital mutilation. The scripture does not set a limit for a proper minimum marriage age. No Qur’anic verse nor a sound Prophetic tradition sanction female genital mutilation. The fatwa were thus likely issued on the basis of secondary texts, such as jurist legal works. By endorsing such fatwa at the expense of primary texts and of social, economical and medical issues where early marriage could lead easily into family disharmony, manipulation and abuse and the genital mutilation could create women’s sexual and health problems, the fatwa echoes a setback in Islamic legal thought.
KH. Sahal Mahfudz, a re-elected NU Chairperson, once pronounced the idea of Fikih Sosial, a notion that Islamic law is best perceived as a social ethic for social enforcement. The idea reflects a strong wish to develop the methodology of Islamic law (manhaj) rather than to embrace its products (qaul) uncritically. Similarly, the late KH. Abdurrahman Wahid launched the idea of Pribumisasi Islam to ground Islam deeply rooted in its historical context. Islam in this perspective is conceived of being a universal and cosmopolitan religion that is able to interact with its local contexts. Islam is dialogic, accommodative and responsive. These are a bright idea, yet they apparently remain underdeveloped. The issuance of the two fatwa is a glaring example emerging conservatism and a bitter blow to that reform spirit.
A newly announced NU Central Board Member is dominated by male figures. Even no female member is found. This does not necessarily mean harmful, but another indication of its conservative bias and patriarchalism. In this view, women are seen inappropriate to occupy a central position in Islamic leadership. NU has for sure woman’s wing organizations, such as Muslimat and Fatayat. Yet, its central board that has the highest authority to direct the organization and to compose its strategic plan and agenda remain lacked of female figures. This could strengthen patriarchal and gender biases, as the two fatwas already demonstrated.
NU has a great number of potential cadres and female activists who are engaging in women’s empowerment at the social basis and local level. Pesantren, as its mass and cultural basis, has to a considerable degree participated in gender mainstreaming. Many pesantren have conducted various training in reproductive health, women’s life skill and human right campaigns. Pesantren graduates have also successfully made strong and qualified publications regarding gender issues, such a widely-read book Fikih Perempuan by progressive figure KH. Husein Muhammad. It is therefore justifiable to ask why these progressive button-up movements and reform spirits and voices from below do not touch its elite central organization. Are the myth of women as a source of chaos (fitna) and misogyny, as these are preserved in traditional literature circulated and read in traditionalist Islamic schools, still so appealing? This is perpetual theme, that should be addressed immediately.
Conservatism has also encouraged a fierce controversy over the involvement and active participation of NU young generations in Islamic liberal networks. This resentment has catapulted Ulil Abshar Abdalla from taking any position in its central board organization despite the fact that he was one of the chairperson candidates who earned not insignificant votes. These all are noticeable features, from which we might interpret NU’s current religious ideology.
It is of course unfair to judge NU new board regressive until it is conversely proven. The new board has just been elected and perhaps has not begun drawing upcoming agenda. However, it is now a right moment to raise the question on moderatism, hoping that they do not repudiate to accommodate this other voice from below. The phenomena discussed here are a real challenge that this organization faces. Managing such issues will considerably determine in its own image and character building as moderate. Success to resolve this challenge will move its position into the middle way. We hope and wait, but do not want to be disenchanted.
The writer is an Atlanta-based member of North America NU Community.
Sunday, July 04, 2010
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Critical-humanist religion
Critical and humanist understandings of religion
Terrorism is not only a state of violence, but also a state of mind, an ideology. It is also a part of transnational movement stimulated by various reasons. There is no single cause or factor elucidating terrorism comprehensively. However, it is obvious that religion or religious understanding in many ways play a pivotal role to produce a violent ideology that leads to brutal activities, as terrorists often manipulate scriptures or erroneously points the idea of jihad to justify their terror attacks to innocent people.
In this respect, detaining terrorists or even killing them thus does not necessarily terminate terror attacks because this does not address the root of the problem. Many still holding similar views with terrorists are ready to become their future successors. When one terrorist dies, the others will come forward to take retaliation. Stern raids to terrorist camps might reduce terror acts temporarily. I do not mean to overlook security approach to terrorism, but this still needs a more fundamental approach to deal with it.
One important step to eradicate religious extremism, radicalism and terrorism is to invoke critical and humanist understandings of religion. The critical method necessitates comparative and comprehensive approaches. Through comparison, religious devotees will be familiar with various different interpretations within their religious tradition. They will acknowledge that religious scholars have already developed means and methods to expound a particular theme or doctrine. They will also understand that such-and-such doctrines are not given and self-evidence, but rather produced through such mechanism and processes that remain subjected to criticism.
The comparative method will make them aware that their choice of thought or school does not invalidate others’ choices since other also have their own argument. The idea behind comparison is that they will understand that their choice is not absolute, but relative, true. This will make them aware with strength and weakness in every school or tradition.
Religious fanaticism and bigotry commonly stem from a strict selectivity of thought and rebuttal of pluralistic interpretation. No religion is monolithic, and therefore no single narrative in a religion is authoritative and representative of, let alone superior over, all rest of other narrations or interpretations within one religious tradition. Unfortunately, the majority and dominant approach in religious studies seems to be normative, simply transforming doctrine from one generation to another. It fails to apprehend critically the history of religion and the production of a religious discourse, which were yielded from specific power relations within historically embedded time and place.
Likewise, religion should not be approached partially, but must be comprehensively. Partial understanding might lead to reduction and manipulation. Extreme interpretation of religion often stems from an exclusive selection to a particular notion, while declining other related issues. In the case of Islam, the Prophetic tradition that strongly fosters goodness and to prevent badness (amr ma’ruf nahi munkar), even though through the use of physical enforcement, is a good example to advance here. Radical groups such as The Islamic Defense Front (FPI) often understand it narrowly. This group simply employs this tradition to justify their violent action on the foreclosing of discotheques or cafes because they accused such places as being a center of moral decadence. They do not compare their argument with what the Qur’an said. The Qur’an clearly calls for Muslims to disseminate Islam with wisdom (hikmah) and good teaching (mau’idha hasanah), not with violence [Qur’an 16: 125]. This is a palpable example of failure in comprehensive understanding of the teaching of Islam.
The comparison also helps appreciate differences that exist both within internal religious traditions and amongst interreligious communities. This is a good start to stimulate sympathy to other faiths. By making comparison, it will uncover a common denominator lying behind diverse religious phenomena. There is an essence of religion despite various manifestations of religious practices. The essence can refer to a divine being or a spiritual existence. The essence might also refer to the spirit of affection, love and peace that every religion promotes. The notion of sameness and common denominator in religions should become a vital point from which religious humanism and the spirit of religious humanist embark. This spirit shows that religious devotees fundamentally share basic human needs and characters, such as the need to worship the spiritual Being and the spreading of peace and justice. It is what exactly humanist religion is. It is on this humanist notion that interreligious interaction and dialogue should begin.
This does not mean however that I advocate a unification of religion, because it is impossible to deny religious pluralism. What we need to do is to acknowledge others as human and religious beings with their beliefs, as we do. We do not have to judge other’s belief from our own faith. Neither do we need to fault others if they adopt different interpretations and practices from what we do. Every religious follower has a full right to implement their beliefs as long as they are realized within the frameworks of humanism, peace and justice. In contrast, every extreme view that might create exclusivism, radicalism and terrorism in the name of religion is simply contrary to spirit of humanist religion and therefore should be prevented through, among other things, critical and humanist understanding of religion
Mohamad Abdun Nasir, lecturer of State Institute of Islamic Studies (IAIN) Mataram
and PhD student in Religion at Emory, Atlanta, the US.
Terrorism is not only a state of violence, but also a state of mind, an ideology. It is also a part of transnational movement stimulated by various reasons. There is no single cause or factor elucidating terrorism comprehensively. However, it is obvious that religion or religious understanding in many ways play a pivotal role to produce a violent ideology that leads to brutal activities, as terrorists often manipulate scriptures or erroneously points the idea of jihad to justify their terror attacks to innocent people.
In this respect, detaining terrorists or even killing them thus does not necessarily terminate terror attacks because this does not address the root of the problem. Many still holding similar views with terrorists are ready to become their future successors. When one terrorist dies, the others will come forward to take retaliation. Stern raids to terrorist camps might reduce terror acts temporarily. I do not mean to overlook security approach to terrorism, but this still needs a more fundamental approach to deal with it.
One important step to eradicate religious extremism, radicalism and terrorism is to invoke critical and humanist understandings of religion. The critical method necessitates comparative and comprehensive approaches. Through comparison, religious devotees will be familiar with various different interpretations within their religious tradition. They will acknowledge that religious scholars have already developed means and methods to expound a particular theme or doctrine. They will also understand that such-and-such doctrines are not given and self-evidence, but rather produced through such mechanism and processes that remain subjected to criticism.
The comparative method will make them aware that their choice of thought or school does not invalidate others’ choices since other also have their own argument. The idea behind comparison is that they will understand that their choice is not absolute, but relative, true. This will make them aware with strength and weakness in every school or tradition.
Religious fanaticism and bigotry commonly stem from a strict selectivity of thought and rebuttal of pluralistic interpretation. No religion is monolithic, and therefore no single narrative in a religion is authoritative and representative of, let alone superior over, all rest of other narrations or interpretations within one religious tradition. Unfortunately, the majority and dominant approach in religious studies seems to be normative, simply transforming doctrine from one generation to another. It fails to apprehend critically the history of religion and the production of a religious discourse, which were yielded from specific power relations within historically embedded time and place.
Likewise, religion should not be approached partially, but must be comprehensively. Partial understanding might lead to reduction and manipulation. Extreme interpretation of religion often stems from an exclusive selection to a particular notion, while declining other related issues. In the case of Islam, the Prophetic tradition that strongly fosters goodness and to prevent badness (amr ma’ruf nahi munkar), even though through the use of physical enforcement, is a good example to advance here. Radical groups such as The Islamic Defense Front (FPI) often understand it narrowly. This group simply employs this tradition to justify their violent action on the foreclosing of discotheques or cafes because they accused such places as being a center of moral decadence. They do not compare their argument with what the Qur’an said. The Qur’an clearly calls for Muslims to disseminate Islam with wisdom (hikmah) and good teaching (mau’idha hasanah), not with violence [Qur’an 16: 125]. This is a palpable example of failure in comprehensive understanding of the teaching of Islam.
The comparison also helps appreciate differences that exist both within internal religious traditions and amongst interreligious communities. This is a good start to stimulate sympathy to other faiths. By making comparison, it will uncover a common denominator lying behind diverse religious phenomena. There is an essence of religion despite various manifestations of religious practices. The essence can refer to a divine being or a spiritual existence. The essence might also refer to the spirit of affection, love and peace that every religion promotes. The notion of sameness and common denominator in religions should become a vital point from which religious humanism and the spirit of religious humanist embark. This spirit shows that religious devotees fundamentally share basic human needs and characters, such as the need to worship the spiritual Being and the spreading of peace and justice. It is what exactly humanist religion is. It is on this humanist notion that interreligious interaction and dialogue should begin.
This does not mean however that I advocate a unification of religion, because it is impossible to deny religious pluralism. What we need to do is to acknowledge others as human and religious beings with their beliefs, as we do. We do not have to judge other’s belief from our own faith. Neither do we need to fault others if they adopt different interpretations and practices from what we do. Every religious follower has a full right to implement their beliefs as long as they are realized within the frameworks of humanism, peace and justice. In contrast, every extreme view that might create exclusivism, radicalism and terrorism in the name of religion is simply contrary to spirit of humanist religion and therefore should be prevented through, among other things, critical and humanist understanding of religion
Mohamad Abdun Nasir, lecturer of State Institute of Islamic Studies (IAIN) Mataram
and PhD student in Religion at Emory, Atlanta, the US.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)