Democracy and Religious Radicalism

The radical religious movements in Indonesia are being born at the same time as the democratisation process is emerging. For instance, regional autonomy as the reflection of democracy, has resulted in the revival of the will to implement Islamic Sharia. In several regions such as West Sumatera, Aceh, Makassar and Cianjur, a number of regional regulations (Perda) have been arranged for implimenting Islamic Sharia. The emergence of the radical Islam social organizations on a massive scale as the part of a social movement has also occurred in tandem with the democratisation since May 1998, although its seeds were sown long before.

John O Voll, Professor of history at Georgetown University US, has an interesting conclusion regarding the relation between Islam, democracy and terrorism He conveyed this in a discussion about ‘Democracy and terrorism in Muslim countries” at Jakarta several days ago. According to him, the relation between democracy and terrorism in the Muslim countries indicates a paradox. On one hand, the absence of democracy leads to the emergence of terrorism, but on the other hand, the presence of democracy could deliver terrorism as well. Even though it is admitted that terrorism is not an Islamic characteristic and can be performed by anyone besides Muslims, but the assumption that democratization process could eliminate the religious radicalism such as terrorism is invalid in the Muslim countries, because the democratization process in Muslim countries does not eliminate terrorism automatically. (Kompas, 15/01/2002)

John O Voll’s thesis is based on a deep understanding of democratic developments in various Muslim countries. Therefore his conclusion’s offer important truths. The democratisation process has not eliminated terrorism automatically, and has even been used as the inspiration for the resurgence of religious radicalism. In many Muslim countries, the religious radical movements are born during the democratisation process and Indonesia might become a good example of this.

The radical religious movements in Indonesia are being born at the same time as the democratisation process is emerging. For instance, regional autonomy as the reflection of democracy, has resulted in the revival of the will to implement Islamic Sharia. In several regions such as West Sumatera, Aceh, Makassar and Cianjur, a number of regional regulations (Perda) have been arranged for implimenting Islamic Sharia. The emergence of the radical Islam social organizations on a massive scale as the part of a social movement has also occurred in tandem with the democratisation since May 1998, although its seeds were sown long before.

How could this be explained? Democracy ought to make the social order more liquid, egalitarian and inclusive, but the facts show the contrary. Democracy in Indonesia is even congealing tribal and religious identities, religious diversity is being exploited, religious exclusivism is emerging. Surely this is counter-intuitive to the expectations of the democratisation. This phenomenon is like the “illicit child” whose birth is unexpected and cannot be prevented. Even killing the “illicit child” would be considered as a crime. The “illicit child” of democracy in the form of religious radicalism will become a threat to democracy.

A democracy that protects freedom of speech, thought and expression cannot impede society’s aspirations whatever the form. Like it or not, democracy cannot stifle thoughts that are themselves against democratic values, because stifling them is against the meaning of democracy itself. The mature democratic countries show that the full variety of ideologies and thoughts are protected by the state. But here is the problem, because democracy is impotent in facing religious radicalism. The democratic mechanism can only allowing radicalism to compete with other notions and ideas.

The fact that religious radicalism’s revival is often wrapped in democratic cloth is unsurprising though it is actually paradoxical to the democratic spirit. The struggle of enacting Islamic Sharia in some regions, the spirit to revive Jakarta’s Charter for instance, emerged in the name of democracy and liberty. Democracy could even be swallowed by its own freedom such that there is possibility that a nation could even fall into new forms of authoritarianism. This obviously is very dangerous because the new authoritarianism wears a democratic cloth.

From this perspective we can explain why the development of democracy in the Muslim world is always deficient as shown in the survey performed by Freedom House, a research institution at the United State. The survey at the end of 2001 concerning the freedom score for many countries showed that freedom and democracy in the Muslim countries scores very low. Out of the 47 Muslim majority countries, only 11 countries have governments that have been elected democratically. Meanwhile, in the 145 Non-Muslim countries, 110 of them have joined the electoral system. Freedom House’s score issued every year shows little significant change in the Muslim countries.

***

There is a significant questionat hand: Is there something “wrong” in the Muslim countries, so that democracy and freedom is always stagnant or non-existent? Even while democracy develops, radicalism off all sorts emerge, especially religious radicalism. Why so? There is a good explanation from Samuel P Hutington (1991) . Beside the economic and political factors, cultural and traditional factors become the most important obstacles for the democracy’s growth in a country. Society’s culture and tradition – regarding attitude, value, trust and behaviour influence democratic development. A society’s culture which is undemocratic, originating in cultural as well as religious understanding, blocks the spread of democratic norms in the society and does not give legitimacy to democratic institutions and their function.

At least there are two versions regarding this culture. Firstly, a restrictive version, which declares that it is only the western culture which is the appropriate context for the dissemination of democracy. Countries, which have no western culture, are not able to become democratic. This argument emerges due to the fact that modern democracy started in the west; hence since the beginning of the 19th century, the biggest democratic states are the western states.

Secondly, there is a less restrictive version which states that it’s not only specific cultures that uphold the democracy. Confucianism and Islamic culture in the East could become fields of democracy. Confucianism was considered as anti-democratic and anti-capitalist in the 1980’s, yet Confucianism has been able to support democracy and also the tremendous economic growth in East Asian society. Similarly Catholicism as compared to Protestantism was seen as an obstacle to democracy and economic growth. But in the 1960’s and 1970’s Catholic states become democratic and achieved higher economical growth than the Protestant states.

Observing those facts then, as far as it regards religious teaching and tradition, the conditions for the emergence of democracy cannot be see as black and white, “appropriate” and “inappropriate”. Culture and tradition, trust, doctrine, assumption, behaviour and etc., all are very complex phenomenon.

Besides, the culture that later delivers tradition is not something finished, but always in transformation. Therefore, a tradition that is claimed formerly as democracy’s obstacle, in the next generation could be the opposite. Spain is a good example of this. In the 1950’s, Spanish culture was illustrated as traditional, authoritarian, hierarchical, and very religious. But in the 1970’s those values lost their place in Spain. Therefore culture is always evolving and its most determinant factor is economic development. With this explanation obviously the factors of culture and tradition factors cannot be used as permanent arguments to justify the retarded democratic level of certain states.

***

The emergence of religious radicalism is caused by three factors. Firstly, disappointment toward the democratic system considered as secular, where religion has no space in the state. Religion is a private matter that cannot be interfered in, while the state is a public matter. The democratic teaching that placed the people’s voice as the God’s voice (vox populi vox dei) is considered to be subordinate to God. Therefore, religious radicalism movements usually take the form of Islamic state struggle, theocracy or Theo-democracy in al-Maududi’s terms. Although the radical group are disappointed with the democratic system, they utilize democratic momentum to struggle for their political aspirations.

Secondly, disappointment toward the social system’s collapse is caused by the state’s powerlessness to manage society’s life religiously. In the Islamic context, this kind of religious radicalism usually take the from of Islamization of social systems by enforcing strict controls over social activities considered as maksiat (sinful) or as violating religion. This kind of radicalism can be expressed in the form of the destruction of places destruction, prostitution, gambling etc.

Thirdly, political injustice. Religious radicalism can appear as a form of resistance toward political systems which are oppressive and unfair. In the case of a group which is incessantly oppressed and treated unfairly, its internal solidarity allows for a militancy to emerge. This kind of radicalism usually takes the form of opposition toward the government in the name of religion.

Religious radicalism emerged in Indonesia as a variation and mixture of these models considered above. In a democratic state, religious radicalism, as long as it does not result in social anarchy, should be given a space of expression. Therefore, the question of the role of the state is not about how to stifle that radicalism, but how to channel it through political institutions. If that is done, religious radicalism can still be be controlled within a democratic frame.


BY: Rumadi
MORE.....

Colorful Islam

The message called on the Muslim community to reject the idea of a single view of Islam because this belief can be used to justify certain groups actions while denying other groups the right to hold their own views. The idea of a many-faceted Islam was designed to encourage pluralism and social diversity.

The public service advertisement “Colorful
Islam” which was prominently displayed several weeks ago on Indonesia’s two
biggest national television stations, RCTI and SCTV, suddenly disappeared. As
communicated through the media, those in charge of both television stations
declared that they had decided to withdraw the advertisement because of threats
from the Majelis Mujahidin, an Islamic organization taking a hard line in the
campaign against Islamic reform.

Many people have criticized this. They
argue that the attitude of Majelis Mujahidin is one of arrogance. How can one
group claim the sole right to interpret Islam? Thus many parties feel that RCTI
and SCTV have been “irresponsible” especially in that they simply withdrew the advertisment
without discussing the retraction with Utan Kayu’s Islamic community (KIUK),
the group which sponsored the advertisement.

Widespread objection to this event has been
expressed amongst members of the group Liberal Islam. I don’t want to prolong
the debate about the anxiety and the reactionary nature behind this decision by
both televisions. In this limited space, I just want to explain the origin of
the advertizing slogan and to what extent the term “Colorful Islam” phrase can
held accountable for being offensive to anti-reformist Islamic groups. I was
involved in the preparation of the advertisement with other members of KIUK. We
discussed and thought over every word deeply and why such ideas should have
been advertized. The phrase “Colorful Islam” was the final option we came up
with after very careful consideration.

The message conveyed through that
advertisement was that Islam is not a single monolithic entity but a religous
belief open to different interpretations. The message called on the Muslim
community to reject the idea of a single view of Islam because this belief can
be used to justify certain groups actions while denying other groups the right
to hold their own views. The idea of a many-faceted Islam was designed to encourage
pluralism and social diversity.

In the modern world, slogans are essential.
They are not simply effective phrases for transmitting messages but serve as
psychological jargon for the audience as well. The KIUK staff, who work with
the mass media, obviously understood the psychological significance behind the
choice of the slogan. “Colorful Islam” is not just an exotic selection of
words, but a slogan based on theological (kalamiyyah), Islamic
jurisprudential (fiqhiyyah), and sociological (ijtimaiyyah) arguments
as described in the plan for the advertisement. The slogan was the result of
careful contemplation over Islamic doctrine and history.

Theologically, Islam has many forms. Since
the death of Prophet Muhammad, Muslim communities have always held a variety of
beliefs (Aqeeda) regarding divinity, prophecy, revelation, and other
immaterial matters. Islam is by its nature diverse, for example, in the forms
of Murjiah, Syiah, Khawarij, Muktazilah, and Ahlussunnah. The Fiqh tradition in
particular highlights diversity in endorsing the doctrine of aktsaru min qaulayn
(to hold more than two opinions). This means that there is always a
possibility of other’s truth outside of our own beliefs of what constitutes
truth.

One Prophetic tradition says: la yafqahu al-rajulu
hatta yara fi al-qur’ani wujuhan katsiratan (someone is not considered as faqih
until he observes many aspects of the Qur’an). Accepting different views is
at the core of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) teaching. ThusAziz Azmah, a
Syrian intellectual, writes that: “sociologically we cannot talk about the one
Islam, but Islams” (Islams and Modernities, 1996). Indeed, there are many forms
of Islam in the modern world: NU Islam, Muhammadiyah Islam, FPI Islam, Wahaby
Islam, Laskar Jihad Islam, Liberal Islam, and so on.

Ever since the time of the Prophet, Islam
has existed in the form of many beliefs, or symbolically speaking—in many
colors. This colorfulness in Islam is not a problem which should be regretted
or criticized. But, on the contrary, as said by the prophet, it must be
appreciated because it is part of Allah’s blessing (ikhtilafu ummati rahmah).

Al Qur’an itself reminds us clearly that
the diversity in Islam was deliberately made by Allah. In sura Hud (11) verse
118-119 and sura al-Ma’idah (5) verse 51, Allah clearly denies the unitary view
(wahidah) and on the contrary emphasizes diversity (mukhtalifin). Thus denying
a colorful Islam involves the denial of the sunnah given by Allah in the Al Qur’an.

BY: Luthfi Assyaukanie
MORE.....

Why Anti-Americanism?

Bush’s response fails to explain the anti-Americanism that is growing in Arab countries. Bush statement even confirms one belief is frequently affirmed about America that it is increasingly inwardly oriented. Moreover their mass media is parochial rather than global, it is not sensitive to the outside world, especially the Islamic world. When they were attacked, their myth of isolation was destroyed. Subsequently, their comprehension of global anti-Americanism remains insufficient as seen in George W. Bush’s response.

A year after the 11th September tragedy, anti-American sentiment within Arab and Muslim countries is on the increase. For example, in The Jakarta Post several days ago, a report claimed that although many Muslim societies have conveyed their sympathy towards the victims of the WTC tragedy, hatred towards the US is escalating. Large numbers of Egyptian people, for instance, are expressing their rage toward the US due to its policy regarding Israel and Iraq. In Syria, the newspaper Tishrin has even claimed that it is Arab nations who have paid “the highest price” for the 11 September, while Israel is free-riding the campaign against terrorism by unjustifiably comparing the Palestinian struggle with terrorism. Even in Kuwait, which in 1991 crowned the US as the liberator in the Iraq invasion, people now take Osama bin Laden for a hero.

Where does this anti-Americanism come from? Why do people hate America? A year ago, following 9-11, many Americans ask themselves these questions. As President George W. Bush, in his statement before the congress on the 20th September 2001 said: “Americans are asking, why do they hate us? They hate our freedom—our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.” According to Bush, the hatred towards the US is a hatred of freedom. Others would argue that the terrorists hate the US because of their jealousy of America’s wealth and supremacy.

This kind of answer might partially explain why the flames of American patriotism have burnt so brightly over the last year during the war against the international terrorism’s network. Indeed for the US, the idea of freedom is at the heart of their identity, so when it is attacked the spirit of patriotism becomes inflamed.

Bush’s response fails to explain the anti-Americanism that is growing in Arab countries. Bush statement even confirms one belief is frequently affirmed about America that it is increasingly inwardly oriented. Moreover their mass media is parochial rather than global, it is not sensitive to the outside world, especially the Islamic world. When they were attacked, their myth of isolation was destroyed. Subsequently, their comprehension of global anti-Americanism remains insufficient as seen in George W. Bush’s response.

The anti-Americanism in the Muslim world is not in the main generated by an abhorrence of American freedom, and not by jealousy towards American prosperity, but due to the deep frustration toward the US policy over the Middle East, which is constantly based on short-term American interests.

US policy in the Middle East is based on access to 2/3 of the world’s reserves of oil and natural gas. At the same time, minimal attention is given to the democratization process there. The US frivolously supports the secular authoritarian regimes that are corrupt and repressive as long as they can maintain stability and sustain production. Islamic regimes that are undemocratic and oppress human rights but maintain American interests such as Saudi Arabia are considered as partners. In other words, what matters are US interests, and not democratization or human rights.

Another feature that decreases US honor in the Muslim world is the lenient and passive attitude toward the Palestiain affair. The state terrorism that is practiced by Israel upon the Palestinians is obvious but the US seems to merely understand the Israel’s justification for state terrorism that it is a form of self-defense. Meanwhile, the US agrees with Israel’s view that Palestine’s resistance is terrorism.

I think the Palestinian affair is one of the main reasons driving anti American sentiment. This sentiment has deepened particularly after the Arab defeat in the six day war against Israel in 1967 in which the US supported Israel. This defeat was the lowest point of Arab dignity in recent history.

This anti-American sentiment could have been hardly imagined as emerging in the 1950s or beginning of 1960s because at that time the US was a model for Arab nation’s progress. A famous Egyptian journalist Mohammad Heikal illustrates the mood of that period very well: “The total picture of the United States of America… is a glamour world… British emporium and France has been faded and hated. The Soviet Union is so far away, and the communism ideology is anathema for the Muslim. But America after the Second World War appear as the more prosperous, more powerful and more attractive than before.”

The re-evaluation of US policy in the Middle East, especially in regards to Palestine should be reconsidered if they want to fight terrorism. The US should ask itself, using the title of Bernard Lewis latest book “what went wrong?” Lewis also suggests that the Muslim world should similarly ask themselves “What went wrong?” How could the 9-11 terrorists have been born among them?

It is unnecessary for the Muslim to deny that there is something pathologically wrong with the Muslim community as exemplified by the Al-Qaida network, Abu Sayyaf Group and etcetera. These terrorist groups have hijacked Islam for their own objective by impressing the world that they are the true bearers of the face of Islam. To cure this kind of disease, resorting to ideas of a Western conspiracy against Islam is contra productive. The right attitude is admitting to the pathology and healing it by promoting an alternative image of Islam as friendly, pluralist and inclusive.

Nevertheless, Muslim introspection should be matched by American introspection regarding its attitude to the Middle East affair. America should have been supporting the democratic and pluralistic regimes and upholding civil society in the Middle East. Secondly, America should be more open to the suggestions of Arab society concerning Israel and be more emphatic toward Palestinan suffering.

These two preventive actions would be effective in the long-term in reducing terrorism. Through committing themselves to democracy and the freedom of expression, the Islamic movements could moderate their views and by entering into a dialectic with democracy reject terrorism. If they could gain support democratically, the terrorists would find themselves alienated.

That sort of alienation is what is happening now within the al Qaeda network. On this point, Gilles Kepel’s analysis is enlightening. In his latest book, Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam, this French sociologist reverses the public assumption that the terrorist attack on America last year represents a growing threat of Islamic fundamentalism. According to Kepel, that attack is instead a sign of the bankruptcy of the radical Islam movements, that such acts are “symbolic of the despair due to the isolation, fragmentation, and the declination of the Islam movement, and not the sign of its power and greatness.

Ironically, the US is not asking, “what went wrong. Their approach against terrorism is unilateral and works on the principal that “whoever is not with us is our enemy.” The US also insists on categorizing Iraq and Iran as the axis of evil and subsequently planed the invasion of Iraq even though none of the WTC terrorists came from either country. Saddam Hussein is certainly a repressive tyrant but attacking Iraq now would only uphold its position. Moreover everyone knows that Iran, through the leadership of moderate president Khatami is clearing a path towards democracy. History does not side with the Mullah as in Iran now. But what can be done about it? The US has been blind on this matter.

Whereas the US has been working out a more romantic relationship with Saudi Arabia even though the fact is that 15 out of 19 of the WTC terrorists were identified as Saudi nationals. The US does not want to damage their relationship with the Saudis because their interests are being fulfilled there.

The excessive fear of terrorism has also led the US to give priority to security issues above everything else, even at the risk of sacrificing civil liberties and human’s rights. In the name of the fight against terrorism, thousands of people could be arrested and interrogated secretly without any access to legal assistance. In the name of the fight against the terrorism, hundreds of Taliban captive have been brought to Guantanamo without sufficient human rights safeguards. And in the name of the truth, the US supports the third world’s military including the Indonesian military despite their human rights problems as long as they are capable of arresting anyone accused of being a terrorist.

In conclusion, this campaign against terrorism ends up being used by authoritarian rulers to suppress political pposition. So the government of China for instance, dares to prosecute the Uighur Muslim resistance in Xinjiang province. The government of Singapore is using ISA to arrest anyone considered as terrorist and Mahathir in Malaysia as well as president Nursultan Nazarbaev in Kazakhstan and Askar Akaev from Kirgizstan are using it to suppress the opposition. Last but not least, in the name of anti terrorism, Ariel Sharon has used it to increase the intensity of the attack on Palestinians.

If America continues down this road, the chain of terrorism will not be cut, instead, its seeds will find fertile ground to grow in. Don’t be surprised then if anti Americanism doesn’t vanish but grows instead.


by: Ahmad Sahal
MORE.....

Islam is a hybrid religion

There is also no such thing as a pure Arabic language and the Qur’an’s language is itself a hybrid of many languages. According to an Arabian ulama who lived 1100 years ago, in his book Al-Mu’arrab, there are many central terms derived from other languages. For instance the word and term shirath; al-shirath al-mustaqim (the straight path) is derived from the Latin language strada. Al-qisth (justice) is derived from the Greek Qisth which in the English language became just. Qishtash is justice. In short, the Arabic language of the Qur’an is not pure Arabic.

I have just come from Los Angeles
and Berkeley to join an activity regarding Indonesia at both universities, Berkeley
and UCLA. There is a mixed feeling from the outsiders’ point of view toward the
diversity of Indonesia. On one hand there are hopes, on the other hand there
are worries. The problem now is to manifest and increase those hopes and reduce
the worries, and to eliminate it at all if we could.

For example concerning Islam. Indonesia
now is hit by several symptoms that are identified by the westerners as
extremism or fundamentalism. They are very worried of these symptoms. But
whenever we remind them that those all are occurring in the civil liberties
arena, their worries decreased. All the appeared symptoms recently are a part
of the freedom of discussing or liberty discourse. By these liberty discourse,
its not only the clarities which is achieved, but also the process of
relativisation, and even the process of devaluation.

For example: Jihad. Nowadays
jihad becomes a word that is a part of common discourse. In the discussions
about jihad, the productiveness to make an argument belonged by them who are
reading. For who are not, even if they regularly use jihad as rhetoric, sooner
or later lose its base and balance. Then, the word jihad that had been
terrifying formerly, now undertaking the clarifications. By that clarification,
the devaluation upon the meaning of jihad occurred as public rhetoric, and
therefore become merely daily issues.

During the ‘eighties there was an
Islamic revival. Today however the Islamic world is experiencing a crisis. Part
of this lies in its confrontational attitude or feeling towards the West. I
call this a “feeling”, because the actual confrontation does not exist. What
exists is the perception as the result of historical experience, which is
rhetorically repeated: the crusades, invasion, etcetera. So that matter
precipitates within the Muslim’s consciousness and what emerges is a symptom
that appears as anti-Western.

Actually it is an anomaly,
because the Qur’an itself indicates that when the world was divided into Rome
(west) and Persia (east), the Muslims sided with Rome, and not with Persia.
Similarly the surah Al Rum, which delivered the news to the prophet Muhammad’s
followers about the defeat of Rome by the Persians, made the people of Mecca,
the prophet’s enemies happy. Although geographically Arabia was connected with Persia,
much of Arab Jazeera endured Persianisation. Nevertheless, the heart of Muslim
is actually closer to that of Rome because of the connection with the
Christianity.

That potential for conflict is
conveyed by scholars like Simon van Den Berg, the interpreter of the polemic
book of Averroes, Tahafut al-Tahafut, which is so famous and which has
influenced the ways of thinking of many Muslims. In the preface, van Den Berg
said that this connection is one important feature of Islam that Westerners do
not understand. He said: “if it is true that we could say the western culture
is actually Maria Sopra Minerva –the Christian religion adapted to local
cultural conditions — then the Islam is also built upon Greek culture. So, what
is called as Kalam science (logic), theologia, is an adaptation –at
least from the methodological side- of the Greek philosopher’s Aristotlean way
of thinking.

The people called ahlussunah
waljama’ah were followers of al-Asy’ari whose definition of God is very
Aristotelian. For example, we have the sayings of wajib, mubah (allowed),and mustahil (impossible) and think of God as eternal (qadim).
Logically God must be qadim which must be alpha, meaning having
no beginning and making it impossible for God to be jadee (new) or
preceded by his non-existence. So the words wajib and mustahil, which
are central to the kalam discourse among the ahlussunah, are based in
Aristotelian logic.

According to Ibn Taimiyah, God’s
20 Aristotlean attributes are bid’ah. It is true that God is qadim, but,
Ibn taimiyah said, “so what?” rationally it is true, but what is the
function? In those 20 attributes, ghafur (the merciful) and wadud (the
lover) are excluded. The reason is because it is impossible to formulate
through Aristotelian logic that “God rationally must be merciful” though
that God exists without beginning can be understood rationally.

Islamic culture is an amalgam, a
hybrid of several cultures. Consider the mosque as the most basic example. At
Pondok Indah there is a mosque called the blue mosque. There is no mihrab
(chamber) and no small place for an imam in the front. Why? Because its architect,
Ismail Sufyan, believed that the mihrab imitates the structure of churches.
But if he is to take this to its logical completion, there should be no minaret
or tower because the minaret is an adaptation from Persian Zoroastrian
architecture. “Manarah” means the fireplace, because the Zoroastrians understand
God as a substance that cannot be illustrated. So they symbolized him in terms
of fire as fire is a substance that is beyond description. That is why Zoroastrians
are often thought to be fire worshippers. To strengthen the holiness of fire, the
fire is kept in a high building, called manarah, the fireplace, thus the
derivation of the word “minaret”. This explanation has been completely
distorted in the popular saying: when the baby prophet Muhammad was born, the
minaret of the Zoroastrians fell.

So, when the Islamic ummah
developed and the sound of the azan (call to prayer realted to azan meaning
in the high place)was intended to reach the widest radius as possible,
the architects borrowed this feature of Zoroastrian architecture. In the
prophet’s time, azan’s simply used the roofs, for example as in the case
of Bilal, the muezzin of the Prophet. Thus the story of how the minaret became part
of Islamic culture is another example of the hybrid nature of Islam as well as
the fact that culture is not an exclusive and monolithic phenomenon but complex
and constantly changing.

There is also no such thing as a pure
Arabic language and the Qur’an’s language is itself a hybrid of many languages.
According to an Arabian ulama who lived 1100 years ago, in his book Al-Mu’arrab,
there are many central terms derived from other languages. For instance the
word and term shirath; al-shirath al-mustaqim (the straight path)
is derived from the Latin language strada. Al-qisth (justice) is
derived from the Greek Qisth which in the English language became just.
Qishtash is justice. In short, the Arabic language of the Qur’an is
not pure Arabic.

There is also Malay language
Inside the Qur’an: kafur. In an illustration “we would be given in heaven
a beverage of kafur.” (wayusqauna biha ka’san kana mizajuha kafura).
Kafur was at that time an important commodity in the Middle East,
possibly even so in the age of prophet Solomon. The term kafur barus was
not used for bedbug as we use it nowadays, but as a word for an expensive
beverage imported from Barus. “Kafur” thus served as a symbol of luxury in the
Qur’an. Thus you can see that words and their meanings can even dramatically change
over time and that culture is definitely not monolithic and static. Everything
is hybrid.

by: Nurcholish Madjid
MORE.....

The Roots of Violence in Islam

Yet Islam, in my opinion, is not a complex teaching, far above us in the sky, but rather is an inner-self religion, which is a part of our spirit. Among those teachings, which seems to be trivial, but which is very basic is how we can be at peace with our selves in order to spread peace upon the humans and environment. Ala’ bidzikrillahi tathmainnal qulub.

Within the last few weeks, NU and Muhammadiyah, the two largest Islamic organizations in Indonesia, have been striving for reconciliation in order to heal the tension which resulted from the political battle between Amien Rais and Abdurrahman Wahid.

The question is this—does the peace attempt truly move towards real peace or does it still leave both sides, Christian and Muslim, with traumatic memories and feelings hich could erupt in violence again at any time? This article investigates the historical roots of violence in the Muslim community history, which whether it is realized or not, has links to the more recent violence.

Conceptually, it is the peace injunction that is central to Islamic doctrine. Thus the word Islam means peace, or to be secure, saved or to submit one’s self to Allah. In the ritual of prayer that is the foremost obligation in Islam, the last pledge is a prayer for safety and peace for all humanity. Thus the penultimate aim of Islam is peace.

However, the above conception is not always appropriate to the Muslim community’s journey. During the early days of the development of Islam, there were at least six battles joined in by the prophet, though the objectives were to uphold economic justice, human equality and defense. This matter supported by Al Quran 4:75: “And what is wrong with you that you fight not in the Cause of Allâh, and for those weak, ill treated and oppressed among men, women, and children, whose cry is: “Our Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You one who will protect, and raise for us from You one who will help.” And also the verse: “And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors.” (Al Baqarah 190)

These wars had economic motives, such as the extermination of groups which refused to pay zakat (the tithe paid by rich people) in the Abu Bakr period, or were for expanding the Islamic region as happened in Umar bin Khattab’s time, or were over power struggles as happened in the periods of Ustman and Ali.

Following the death of the Prophet, at least 70.000 Muslims died in the battlefield. Even the last two caliphs, Utsman and Ali, were brutally murdered in war. Ahmad Amin mentions the extent of war in Muslim history as a slanderous situation (al-fitnah al-Kubra). Additionally, violent disasters occurred during the Islamic dynasty’s sovereignty, particularly during the Umayya and Abbasid dynasties. The violence in those periods was both physical as well as intellectual.

The intellectual violence took the form of murdering thinkers who were considered to be threats to the powers that be, such as the murder of Ghaylan al-Dimasyqi dan Al-Ja’d bin Dirham. His view was that the power in the Muslim community should not be the monopoly of Arab people (Quraish). Thus thee Sunni ideology, or the monopoly of Ali bin Abi Thalib’s descendants became challenged by the political rule of the Shi’ite ideology wherein anyone in the Muslim community can be approved based on public deliberation.

The violence inflicted in the name of politics was terrifying. For example, in the Umayya dynasty, during the Yazid bin Mu’awiyah period, Hussein bin Ali was decapitated and his head was taken to the castle to be play with. An old man who knew Husain as a child said: “I have even seen that face being kissed by Rasulullah”. This event called as “Karbala tragedy” represents a major split between Sunni and Shiite Islam at 64H.

Violence also characterized the Abbasid dynasty. Akbar S Ahmed illustrates this during the military coup of Abbasid against Umayyah: “On one occasion Abdullah, an Abbasid General invited 8 Umayyah leaders for dinner in the June summer 750 M in his house at Jaffa. While people were having dinner, they were caught by the troops. After the troops stabbed all those Umayyah leaders to death, the maids spread out the mat on their twisted bodies while other guests continue their dinner happily.” (Discovering of Islam).

During the decline of Umayyah’s power in Spain and that of Abbasiyah’s that had spread from Africa up to the Arab peninsula, the Christian troops from western Europe attacked both Islamic dynasties. In the holy war mission to conquer the “kafir” (infidel) people, the Muslims were faced to two choices: embrace Christianity or migrate from the region. This war was followed by another war - the Crusades; a war which lasted for almost a hundred years and left a bitter history of trauma relations between Christianity and Islam.

In the beginning of the ‘20s, some Muslim regions were suppressed by the European colonial countries. For instance, Indonesia by the Dutch, Egypt, Morocco and Algeria by France, Malaysia and Nigeria by England and Libya by Italy. Then the dazzling historical stage of the Muslim community was submerged, as if the tale had suddenly closed.

Those violent tracks, known or not, are still leaving their traces on the Muslim community’s nature today. For example, the American government’s attitude toward the Muslim regions like Afghanistan after the 11 September tragedy in 2001, provokes again Muslim’s emotions about the bitter events of the past.

As the consequence of that pain, some Muslim communities search for their primordial identity to disclose again the humanitarian values they possessed. However, those values tend to show identity in the form of attributes, not in the spirit expressed in the attitude.

In the Indonesian context, those attributes are expressed through the scale of the demand for Islamic sharia’ in some regions. The demands are often performed in violent ways, for example forming various Jihad commander groups, attacking amusement places, forcing women to dress in particular ways, intolerance towards other thought, and making the truth of one group’s thought as absolutely essential and leaving no room for dialog.

These methods support Max Weber’s claim that Islam is a religion that has a military ethos, but not one of entrepreneurship. Thus the Islamic mission is generally understood by the illustration of someone “holding Qur’an in the right hand and a sword in the left hand.”

Yet Islam, in my opinion, is not a complex teaching, far above us in the sky, but rather is an inner-self religion, which is a part of our spirit. Among those teachings, which seems to be trivial, but which is very basic is how we can be at peace with our selves in order to spread peace upon the humans and environment.


Oleh: Neng Dara Affiah
MORE.....

Polygamy and Justice

Polygamy is one of the issues criticized by feminists in general and Muslim feminists in particular. This tradition of marrying more than one wife (mistresses), is always controversial. There is a matter of textual interpretation involved. In Al Qur’an, there is a verse that explicitly allows for polygamy. This verse becomes the weapon for polygamy’s advocates to justify it in an Islamic perspective. But one should not forget, that the verse following the verse above contains the strict restriction: the matter of justice: “….and if you fear that you cannot do justice (to so many) then (marry) one only . . . .” The Muslim community should ask then: what is the nature of marriage in Islam?

Polygamy is one of the issues criticized by feminists in general and Muslim feminists in particular. This tradition of marrying more than one wife (mistresses), is always controversial. There is a matter of textual interpretation involved. In Al Qur’an, there is a verse that explicitly allows for polygamy. This verse becomes the weapon for polygamy’s advocates to justify it in an Islamic perspective. But one should not forget, that the verse following the verse above contains the strict restriction: the matter of justice: “….and if you fear that you cannot do justice (to so many) then (marry) one only . . . .” The Muslim community should ask then: what is the nature of marriage in Islam?

The first verses about polygamy in the Qur’an, seem to support polygamy. Ordinary logic also supports the Qur’an: try two first; if you still desire, three; if there is still a will and ability, you may take four. Some Muslim communities even prefer to have more wives than ever mentioned in Al Qur’an. Yet what is often forgotten is the spirit of this “polygamy verse”. Therein polygamy is a matter of justice. Justice for whom? Of course for the women because woman are the objects of polygamy.

God also asserted “you could not do justice, even if you try hard for it”. The Prophet himself admitted that his heart tended toward Aisha more than to any other wives. She was the only prophet’s wife who was a virgin, brilliant, and jealously spoiled. The Prophet could not do justice in the matters of the heart and less still those in his community.

If this is the contextual logic of verses on polygamy, we might ask: what is the real ideal in Islamic marriage? If this question was presented to a reformer such Muhammad Abduh, he would answer: monogamy. Don’t believe it? Read Abduh’s complete compilations: al-A’mal al-Kamilah. There, sheltered behind the view of Abduh who is the Egyptian mufti, “the male feminist” named Qasim Amin, advocates monogamy and even more than that in his magnum opus: Tahrir al-Mar’ah (woman’s liberation).

by: Novriantoni
MORE.....

Hoping on Liberal Islam

If this Liberal Islam community and its Liberal Islam platform develop, they will change what has been stereotyped in Islamic and democracy studies. Islam has been considered as the hinder of democracy. There is no democratic country consolidated in the muslim majority country. But Liberal Islam community can be a deviating embryo from the stereotype.

Lately, a community named their selves as Liberal Islam was born in Indonesia. They are youngsters, activist of Paramadina, NU, journalism, and IAIN (Institute of Islamic Studies) Ciputat. In its second level, there are activist of 1980ies study groups who took doctoral degree in US, or being journalist and researcher. This group is crystallized by having homepage and internet discussion, making network trough newspaper and radios.

The particular thing from this network is its Islamic views which represent Liberal views. Their concept regarding Islamic sharia, Koran, secular state and Jakarta’s charter is very much different to the mainstream one. From democracy political interest, Liberal Islam community gives a new hope. This community becomes a synthesis between democracy principles and Islam. They interpret history and Islamic doctrine in order to be parallel to principle of democracy and modern cultural plurality.

If this Liberal Islam community and its Liberal Islam platform develop, they will change what has been stereotyped in Islamic and democracy studies. Islam has been considered as the hinder of democracy. There is no democratic country consolidated in the muslim majority country. But Liberal Islam community can be a deviating embryo from the stereotype.

In exploring relation between democracy and religion in general, there are studies about four religions: Protestant, Catholic, Confucius, and Islam, just as Huntington did. He wanted to disclose religious contribution upon democracy. Huntington had a positive attitude toward religion. Even the history proved the present of religious interpretation hindering democratization, he opened possibility of the birth of new interpretation among religious scholar.

To Huntington, Protestant painted the first democracy wave, since 1820-1920ies. Undemocratic country was dominated by Protestant, from the North America to Europe.

Protestant teaching upon individual awareness and autonomy, like individual access to contact the Creator directly is compatible with the thought of individual sovereignty in democracy system. The Protestant church is structured democratically as well by emphasizing the wide participation (supremacy of the congregation). Besides, as written by Weber, Protestant ethic has supported the growth of capitalism and economical welfare.

Catholics painted the third wave of democracy, since 1970ies up to now. Democratic country in this period from Portugal, Spain, South and Central America, Philippine, Poland and Hungarian are dominated by Catholic.

Relation between Catholic teaching and democracy is very particular. Before 1960ies, Catholic was considered as anti democracy, furthermore as compared to Protestant. But religious interpretation changes fundamentally since Pope John XXIII which was known as the second council of Vatican, 1962-1965. Vatican II emphasized on the urgency of reverends and disciples to be involved socially to help the poor. The reverends have to admit individual rights and take out legitimacy upon injustice and authoritarian government. This new interpretation gave a very significant cultural basis for democracy.

Confucius has exceptional problem with democracy. Various new prosper countries in Asia like South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Singapore and China which is dominated by Confucius, is not heading for democracy. Some elements of Confucius interpretation are the reason. It emphasizes more on collective interest than individual right, authority than freedom, and duty than right.

While Islam, conceptually, teach many progressive principles of democracy, justice and economical progress. Principles like egalitarian, individual sovereignty, piety, hard work and spirit of science seeking, are numerous in its holy book.

The problem occurred in practical field. A wide distance between Islamic doctrine and its civilization happened. Hence, countries dominated by muslim from Middle East to South East and East Asia has never experienced a long and stabile democracy.

But the chance always opens, where the muslim reformer respond interpretation which has been deteriorating its disciple and change it with a compatible interpretation to democracy. It is easy since the basic element of democracy like deliberation, control and consultation is certainly its core teaching. Liberal Islam community is expected to be the pioneer of cultural supports on democracy trough the reinterpreted Islam.

The first thing should be done by Liberal Islam community is making a blue print which must be promoted among society. In this blue print, the principle of democracy and the neutral state is explained; supported not only by Islamic history, but by the Islamic doctrine itself. Liberal Islam community should have its own think-thank which is strong and having commitment. The history will prove whether this liberal Islam community would grow large, or die in the middle of way.

by: Denny JA, PhD

MORE.....

Islam Liberal in Indonesia: A New Beginning

Goenawan Mohamad will talk about a trend in Moslem political and theological thinking in Indonesia that sets itself against more “fundamentalist” interpretations of the faith. It is a story about young Moslem intellectuals, many of them coming from traditional, rural-based Islamic backgrounds, fluent in Arabic and well-versed in theological and legal debates, who are currently active in promoting what they call “liberal Islam.” They disseminate their ideas via books, syndicated columns, radio talks, circulars, political activism, etc. The talk will also explore the link between their ideas and Indonesian pro-democracy movements before and after the fall of the military-backed Soeharto government.

Goenawan Mohamad, U.C. Regents Professor

“LIBERAL ISLAM IN INDONESIA: A BEGINNING?”

Monday, November 19, 2001, 4:00 p.m., 314 Royce Hall

Goenawan Mohamad will talk about a trend in Moslem political and theological thinking in Indonesia that sets itself against more “fundamentalist” interpretations of the faith. It is a story about young Moslem intellectuals, many of them coming from traditional, rural-based Islamic backgrounds, fluent in Arabic and well-versed in theological and legal debates, who are currently active in promoting what they call “liberal Islam.” They disseminate their ideas via books, syndicated columns, radio talks, circulars, political activism, etc. The talk will also explore the link between their ideas and Indonesian pro-democracy movements before and after the fall of the military-backed Soeharto government.

*************************************************************

U.C. Regents Professor Public Lecture at UCLA

“LIBERAL ISLAM IN INDONESIA: A BEGINNING?”

Recent events have brought the world’s attention to Islam and to the nations whose cultures and ways of life it shapes. Little known to most Westerners, however, is that while the Middle East gave birth to the Islamic tradition, it is Indonesia that today is home to the world’s single largest Muslim population (88% of over 200 million people.) But what sort of impact does Indonesia have on Islam and what role can it play in shaping contemporary Muslim thought?

Goenawan Mohamad, U.C. Regents Professor at UCLA, will address this topic when he delivers his Regents Lecture, “Liberal Islam in Indonesia: A Beginning?” on Monday, November 19, at 4:00 pm, in 314 Royce Hall. The lecture will be sponsored by the UCLA Center for Southeast Asian Studies and International Studies and Overseas Programs (ISOP). Goenawan, prize-winning journalist and founder of Indonesia’s critical newsmagazine, “Tempo”, will talk about the trend in Muslim political and theological thinking in Indonesia that sets itself against more “fundamentalist” interpretations of the faith.

The trend is exemplified by young Muslim intellectuals in Indonesia, many of them coming from traditional, rural-based Islamic backgrounds, fluent in Arabic and well versed in theological and legal debates, who are actively discussing and promoting what they call “liberal Islam” via books, syndicated columns, radio talks, circulars, and political activism.

The talk will also explore the link between their ideas and Indonesian pro-democracy movements before and after the fall of the military-backed Suharto government.

“I am extremely pleased that Goenawan Mohamad is giving this lecture,” said Geoffrey Garrett, vice provost of International Studies and Overseas Programs. “First, it provides an opportunity to the UCLA community to convey its pleasure in having Goenawan as Regents Professor.

“Second, understanding the broader Islamic world is obviously of paramount importance to us today, particularly for a country as large and significant on the global stage as Indonesia.”

Goenawan, whose Regents appointment was initiated through the efforts of the UCLA Center for Southeast Asian Studies, a center at International Studies and Overseas Programs (ISOP), has been actively participating in many of the center’s programs this fall, as well as jointly teaching two courses: Topics in Indonesian Literature, Media and Performance; and Southeast Asian Crossroads (History 9E).

Goenawan was the “conscience of Indonesia for most of the Suharto era” according to Anthony Reid, director of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies and professor of history at UCLA. In his column “Sidelines” Goenawan observed and commented on the politics of the time, and notes that the young liberal Islamic scholars of today were often active members of the pro-democracy movement in Indonesia prior to the fall of the Suharto regime in 1998.

“These Muslim intellectuals, many of them not yet in their 40s, who decided to call themselves ‘liberal Islam’, began their studies of religion when they studied at Indonesian-style Islamic boarding schools, the traditional ‘pesantrens’,” said Goenawan. “Most of them came from the provinces far away from Jakarta. Only very few of the leading members of the group have ever been to any school in the U.S. or Europe. Older Indonesian Muslim thinkers exert a major influence on them, but paradoxically, it was their lives as students in the ‘pesantrens’ that gave them the first exposure to the plurality of interpretations in Islam.”

Goenawan cited one of the most prominent Muslim intellectuals of the younger generation in Indonesia, Ulil Abshar Abdallah as typical of the process these young Muslim scholars underwent. “‘By closely reading classical works by different Islamic scholars, I learned the importance of “internal dissensions” in Islamic thinking, and this eventually led me to a liberal interpretation of the teaching,’” he quotes Ulil Abshar as saying.

Goenawan received the International Editor of the Year Award from the World Press Review and in 1998, the International Press Freedom Award from the Committee to Protect Journalists. He was the first recipient of the Professor A. Teeuw Award from the Netherlands in 1992 and received the Louis Lyons Award while a Nieman Fellow at Harvard University in 1997. He has also published several volumes of both essays and poetry, and has written contemporary librettos for the stage.


MORE.....

Building Qur’anic Plurality

Alqur’an is a text which is rich in symbol and metaphor, and therefore it is open to multiple interpretation. The Alqur’an text with its 6660 verses and 144 sura has been interpreted into thousands of books of tafseer (interpretation). The number of mufassir (interpreters) who are engaged in using different methods and interpretations are similarly uncountable.


We recognize three main theories in the study of texts: the world of the author, the world of the reader, and the world of the text. When text is “codified” in the form of a book for instance, it detaches itself from the “trap” of the author. It becomes an adventure with its own will.

Alqur’an is a text which is rich in symbol and metaphor, and therefore it is open to multiple interpretation. The Alqur’an text with its 6660 verses and 144 sura has been interpreted into thousands of books of tafseer (interpretation). The number of mufassir (interpreters) who are engaged in using different methods and interpretations are similarly uncountable.

As has been analyzed by many mufassir, the ideology and tendency of mufassir as well as tafseer methodology determines the outcome of an inclusive tafseer or vice versa. Or in Piscatori’s wordings, the raw material of Alqur’an is multi-interpretative. It means that alqur’an is like a feast from God which provides various “dishes”, “rice” and “drinks”. The Alqur’an has also always been utilized to legitimate dictatorships and democracies, monarchies and republics, exclusivism and inclusivism, oppression and emancipation and so on.

Our task is how to present the inclusive Alqur’an while at the same time honoring pluralism and democracy, by lifting the neglected verses and those that have been hidden. The methodology of Tafseer must be renewed too in light of the contexts faced by the Muslim community today. Plurality is a divine reality where God intentionally creates different humans, tribes and nations, with different language and skin color (Q.S Hud: 118-119, Q.S Ruum: 22, Q.S al-Hujurat: 13, Q.S Maidah 46-48). God has never distinguished the primordial origin of the human according to race or any other category.

by: Burhanuddin
MORE.....

Popular Islam

The popular Islam tradition since the 18th century that is more socially basedseems to have contributed to the long-term foundation of Indonesian politics in the 20th century. Yet the market of indigenous political ideology has also been influenced by nationalism and socialism, although neither can challence the breadth and depth of popular Islam.

Unlike Islam in the Middle East or Classic India, Indonesia has never recognized the power structure of Imperial-Islam. The pre-colonial Islamic sultanates are local products, the result of a dialectic between the large tradition and the small traditions which vary from one area to another .

Islam’s expansion across the Indonesian islands through trade resulted in a multipolar organizational nature of pre-colonial Islam. Pre-colonial Muslim guilds always emerged to contest the power of the “state’s” authority. In several “city states” along the Indonesian archipelago –like at Banten, Demak, Gresik at Java, and Pasai at Aceh, Goa at Celebes, or Bacan at the Moluccas, for instance, the guild-trade organizations of the Muslims frequently limited the monarchy’s authority.

Western colonialism’s arrival prevented the success of “Islamic Protestantism” in Indonesia. Colonialism destroyed the middle class economic basis of the Muslim trade, marginalizing the Muslims economically and politically, and leading Islam into an enduring peasantization. From the commercial and “royal” culture, Islam underwent what is called ruralisation. The elimination of the ulama’s authority from the indigenous bureaucracy eventually caused them to move downward, and develop what is called as “popular Islam”, a form of Islam that is centered in the Islamic boarding schools.

The popular Islam tradition since the 18th century that is more socially basedseems to have contributed to the long-term foundation of Indonesian politics in the 20th century. Yet the market of indigenous political ideology has also been influenced by nationalism and socialism, although neither can challence the breadth and depth of popular Islam.

In the 20th century popular Islam became the essential factor for the growth of anti-colonial political movements. Popular Islam also became the basic material for the growth of non-state organizations, extrastate, with their civil political agendas. Finally, in its interaction with the ideological sources of other anti-colonialism movement, such as nationalism and socialism, popular Islam has become differentiated.

In the national politic constellation, popular Islam eventually interacts with the sources of the wider movement and thought at the same time as differentiation and pluralism occur. Popular Islam from independence up to the Suharto era was not only the domain of the traditionalists, but also of the modernists and liberalists (or “secularists”).

Observing the developments that have occurred throughout the independence period up to the new order (Suharto era), popular Islam’s differentiation and pluralisation has also created polarizations at the political level. This polarization was particularly notable when the modernists come into the state sector through ICMI, while the traditionalists, represented by NU, maintained their social basis.

Interesting transformations have been occurring rapidly during the last decade. The reformation movement has not led ICMI in building their social-politic and economic infrastructure, whereas the traditionalist through their new political party PKB, enabled Gus Dur (Abdurrahman Wahid) to become the president and invited NU to come into the state sector for the first time after more than eight decades of being on the outside.

Nevertheless, NU, PKB and Gus Dur had been holding out for 9 months. Like ICMI, they don’t have enough time to build the political-economic infrastructure through gaining access to wider economic and political power sources. Gus Dur’s dismissal from the government also symbolized a bigger symptom: the re-dismissal of NU and traditional Islam by the state. Is this symptom permanent, is NU destined by history to remain outside the system? What is their next role in relation to the state?

At the same time, the liberal Islam circle – which emerged from the latest generation does not have enough resources yet to play a more concrete social-political role. It however, must be counted as a new potential source for the development of popular-Islam discourse. We are waiting for their role in the future, considering their strategic potency for the urban sector.

The popular Islam we know nowadays, in the variants of traditionalist, modernist or liberalist, has provided structural and ideal precedents for the growth of civil-politics, civil society, and civil democracy. Whatever the diversity of discourse, interest, and role of those three variants at the politic, social and cultural sector, inside and outside the country, the popular Islam’s resources they manifest in several articulations has enriched our choices to construct democracy amongst the ummah.

It depends on us, how we manage that rich inheritance and rearticulate it with a social and religious discourse that is compatible with our context now – pluralism, freedom and social dignity.
by: AE Priyono

MORE.....

Women’s Liberation Theology

Islam has been targeted to be the liberation religion, especially liberation upon the women. Could be imagine, how the misogynist Arab society which frequently killed the girls, suddenly is directed to hold ‘aqiqah (an event to express thanks to God) upon the girl’s birth, although it is merely a goat for a girl and two goats for a boy.

Since the beginning,
Islam has been targeted to be the liberation religion, especially liberation upon
the women. Could be imagine, how the misogynist Arab society which frequently
killed the girls, suddenly is directed to hold ‘aqiqah (an event to
express thanks to God) upon the girl’s birth, although it is merely a goat for
a girl and two goats for a boy.

How do the
society who does not recognize the concept of female bequest and witness
suddenly given the rights of inheritance and witness, even though only 1:2 for
the boys. Woman who was murdered suddenly ought to get a sum of fine (diyat),
even though it is merely half of what the boys get.

How the
woman which was made into a myth as “complement” of the man’s desire (Adam)
suddenly admitted as equal before Allah and has the equal rights and duty as
the heaven’s occupant (Q.S. al-Baqarah, 2:35). How the woman (Eve) imaged as
the temptator of man (Adam) suddenly is sanitised with the vindication that it
was both of them who are involved in the cosmic sin (Q.S. al-A’raf, 7:20).

Islam is
divine religion as well as humanitarian and social religion (Q.S. Ali ‘Imran,
3:112). In Islamic perspective, human got two capacities, as a slave (‘abid)
and God representation (khalifah), without distinguishing the sex,
ethnic, and skin colour (Q.S. al-Hujrat, 49:13). The piety’s quality is not
merely achieved trough the self-sacred endeavour (riyadlah nafsiyyah)
but also trough the awareness upon other’s misery (Q.S. Al-Ma’un, 107:1-7).
Islam since the beginning affirmed that the roles and gender relation’s
discrimination is one of the human rights violation which should be removed (Q.S.al-Nisa’,
4:75)

Islam commands
the human to pay attention upon the concept of balance, harmony, compatibility
and unity inter-humans as well as their environment. Gender relation concept in
Islam is more than merely managing the gender’s justice in the society, but
theologically and teleologically arranging the relation mode between microcosmic
(human), macrocosmic (environment) and God. Only trough it the human could
perform his function as caliph, and only the successful caliph who achieve the
real degree of abid.

Islam introduces
the gender relation concept that refers to the substantive verses that are the
common objective of shari’a (maqashid al-syari’ah): manifesting the
justice and righteousness (Q.S. al-Nahl, 16:90), security and peace (Q.S.Q.S.al-Nisa’,
4:58), call toward the
righteousness and prevent the evil (Q.S.Ali ‘Imran, 3:104). These verses made
as the framework to analyze the gender relation in Al Qur’an.

Men and
women have the equal rights and duties in performing the role as caliph and
slave. Regarding the social role in the society, there is no Qur’anic verse or Hadits,
which forbid the women to be active there. On the contrary, AlQur’an and Hadits
mostly indicate the women’s permission to be active in performing various professions.

In the
beginning of Islamic history, women got the independence and bright emotion
milieu. Their self-confidence grows stronger so that some of them noted the
dazzling achievement, not only in domestic sector but also in public sector. Unfortunately,
this fact does not sustain any longer due to many factors: the more developing
Islamic world moved toward the misogynist kingdom’s centres like Damascus, Baghdad and Persia.
Furthermore, the unification and codification of Hadits, Tafseer and Fiqh literatures
are influenced by the local culture, directly or indirectly play roles in
giving the restriction upon the women’s rights and movement.

In the meantime,
the anthropological politic to sustain the patriarch tradition which benefit
the men is taking place simultaneously.
Various values are directed and used to preserve the existence of gender
relation mode which rooted to the society. Because it occurs for such a long
time, that mode precipitated beneath the society’s consciousness, as if that
gender relation is kodrat/nature (in Arabic: kodrat or qudrah are determined by
God). It grows stronger after the power relations become the subsystem in the
modern-capitalist society, which later deliver the newpatriarchy society.

The stronger the
power relation mode, the greater the gender role’s disparity in the society,
because someone would be measured based on his productivity value. By the
motive of reproduction factor, hence the woman reproduction considered not
maximal as the men are. Woman claimed as the reproduction community, which is
more proper to take the domestic role, and man claimed as the productive
community, which is more proper to take the public role. Consequently, a
male-dominated society is created (al-mujtama’ al-abawiy).

If in the
earlier period religion (Islam) was identical to the women liberation issue and
notion, now there is an Islamic tendency that is identical to the restriction
upon the women. In the end of this century, many Muslim countries execute
revolution and reformation by taking Islamic themes. Nevertheless, what is
mostly occurred post-revolution and reformation is the restriction upon the
woman. A state’s Islamization means “keeping home” the women or women’s veilization.
Iran, Pakistan, Algeria, and Afghanistan could be a good example for those
phenomena. How Islam made as an argument to take out the government officials
in some regions at Afghanistan on
the base that women should not work in the public area.

The regional
autonomy in Indonesia that give
greater role to the local traditional and religious figures, might lead the
women to be the target and object. We are expecting so much that Islam no
longer made as an ideological power that oppress a certain group or sex and on
the contrary benefit certain group and sex.

by: Nasaruddin Umar

MORE.....

Women’s Liberation Theology

Islam introduces the gender relation concept as part of the objective of shari’a (maqashid al-syari’ah): that is in manifesting the justice and righteousness (Q.S. al-Nahl, 16:90), security and peace (Q.S.Q.S.al-Nisa’, 4:58), and in the call to righteousness and the prevention of evil (Q.S.Ali ‘Imran, 3:104). These verses can be used as a framework for analyzing gender relations in the Qur’an. Men and women have the equal rights and duties in performing the role as caliph and slave. Regarding the professional role of women, there are no Qur’anic verses or Hadits, which are forbiden for women. On the contrary, AlQur’an and Hadits mostly indicate that women are permited to be professionals.

Since the beginning, Islam has been understood as a religion of liberation, especially for the liberation of women. How then could misogynistic Arab society which accepted as natural the killing of girls and women, suddenly be directed to hold ‘aqiqah (an event to express thanks to God) for a girl’s birth, although it is merely a goat in the case of a girl and two goats in the case of a boy. How does a society which does not recognize the concept of female bequest and witness suddenly give women the rights of inheritance and witness, even though they receive only half of the inheritance which men receive? Even the family of a woman who is murdered ought to receive the fine (diyat), though merely half of what a man’s family would be compensated.

How have woman, as mythic “complements” of man’s desire (Adam) suddenly been admitted as equal before Allah and given equal rights and duties as heaven’s occupants (Q.S. al-Baqarah, 2:35)? How have woman (Eve, for example) who had been imagined as the temptor of men (Adam) suddenly become sanitised through the vindication that it was both of them who were involved in the cosmic sin (Q.S. al-A’raf, 7:20).

Islam is a divine religion as well as a humanitarian and social religion (Q.S. Ali ‘Imran, 3:112). From an Islamic perspective, humans have two capacities, as slaves (‘abid) and as God’s representation (khalifah) without distinction regarding sex, ethnicity, and skin colour (Q.S. al-Hujrat, 49:13). Becoming pious is the larger goal for all, and the quality of piety is not merely achieved through sacred endeavour (riyadlah nafsiyyah) but also through the awareness of other’s misery (Q.S. Al-Ma’un, 107:1-7). And in this regard, Islam, since the beginning, has affirmed that gender discrimination is a human rights violation for the misery it brings to women (Q.S.al-Nisa’, 4:75).

Islam commands people to pay attention to the concept of balance, harmony, compatibility and inter-human unity as well as to their environment. The concept of gender relations in Islam is more than merely the managing of gender justice, but theologically and teleologically arranging the relation mode between microcosmic (human), macrocosmic (environment) and God. Only through this can humans perform their functions as caliph, and it is only the successful caliph who can achieve the level of abid.

Islam introduces the gender relation concept as part of the objective of shari’a (maqashid al-syari’ah): that is in manifesting the justice and righteousness (Q.S. al-Nahl, 16:90), security and peace (Q.S.Q.S.al-Nisa’, 4:58), and in the call to righteousness and the prevention of evil (Q.S.Ali ‘Imran, 3:104). These verses can be used as a framework for analyzing gender relations in the Qur’an. Men and women have the equal rights and duties in performing the role as caliph and slave. Regarding the professional role of women, there are no Qur’anic verses or Hadits, which are forbiden for women. On the contrary, AlQur’an and Hadits mostly indicate that women are permited to be professionals.

In the beginning of Islamic history, women had independence and supportive emotional milieus. Some of them were noted for their dazzling achievements, not only in the domestic sector but also in the public sector. Unfortunately, this is not the case any longer due to many factors such as the rising power of misogynistic kingdom’s cenered in Damascus, Baghdad and Persia. In addition, the unification and codification of the Hadits, Tafseer and Fiqh literatures are influenced by the local cultures which have further restricted women’s rights.

In the meantime, politics sustain the patriarchal tradition which benefits men. Various values have been directed and used to preserve the existence of unequal gender relations. Because the process has been sustained over such a long time, it has become part of society’s consciousness such that gender relations have become see as natural or kodrat/nature (in Arabic: kodrat or qudrah are determined by God). This pre-existent patriarchalism has only been intensified through the power relations which exist in modern-capitalist societies.

The stronger the power relation, the greater the gender role’s disparity in the society. This is because the value of the individual is measured through productivity and women are excluded being mainly consigned to the role of domestic production and reproduction. In these male-dominated societies (al-mujtama’ al-abawiy), it is the men who lay claim to the productive community and the public role.

If in the earlier period of Islam, women’s liberation was a central issue, there later evolved an Islamic tendency to restrict women’s rights. By the end of this century, many Muslim countries had experienced revolutions and reformations based on fundamentalist patriarchal Islamic values which heavily oppress woman. A state’s Islamization is synonymous with keeping women at home and covering them in veils. Iran, Pakistan, Algeria, and Afghanistan are classic examples of this phenomenon in which women are prohibited from working in the public arena.

What relevance does this have locally? In the case of Indonesia, regional autonomy will give greater power to traditional and religious figures who might well use Sharia law to further restrict women’s potential and their fundamental rights. Is it too much to expect that Islam will not be used to oppress certain groups or women but on the contrary be used to benefit the oppressed?

by: Nasaruddin Umar

MORE.....