FPI--Islam

http://muslimbertaqwa.blogspot.com/p/fpi-islam.html

FPI adalah Front Pembela Islam.

Kalau melakukan perbuatan kekerasan / perusakan, bukan lagi Islam,namanya berobah menjadi  Front Pembela Iblish.

Karena yang suka melakukan kekerasan / perusakan itu hanya Iblish / Syaitan.

Iblish sangat licik menipu manusia, bahkan ulama2 pun bisa ditipunya. 

ALLAH berfirman;
[QS 43:37] Dan sesungguhnya setan-setan / iblish itu benar-benar menghalangi mereka dari jalan yang benar dan mereka menyangka bahwa mereka mendapat petunjuk. 

[QS 17:53] Sesungguhnya setan /  Iblish itu menimbulkan perselisihan di antara mereka. Sesungguhnya setan / Iblish  itu adalah musuh yang nyata bagi manusia.

[QS 2:168]sesungguhnya setan / Iblish itu adalah musuh yang nyata bagimu. [169] Sesungguhnya setan itu hanya menyuruh kamu berbuat jahat dan keji, (perbuatan2 kekerasan,perusakan dan pembunuan dll ).

ALLAH menciptakan Iblish dari api yang panas. 
Kalau Iblish / Syaitan menunggangi manusia maka; 
--muka dan matanya merah seperti merah api yang panas, kata kata yang keluar dari mulutnya juga kasar dan buruk, marah atau emosi, dan perbuatan2nya merusak, zolim dan bahkan mudah membunuh lawan2nya.

Itulah bahayanya manusia Iblish atau syaitan yang ada dalam masarakat.

ALLAH berfirman; Hati2 Srigala berbulu domba yang akan menerkam dari dalam.

Coba anda perhatikan orang2 yang melakukan perbuatan kekerasan /perusakan dan penindasan kepada muslim Ahmadiyah dan pemilik2 warung seperti di vedio dibawah ini;

Benar bukan?

AKAR KONFLIK DALAM UMAT ISLAM KARENA MERUJUK KEPADA HADITS PALSU, HADITS CIPTAAN MANUSIA IBLISH, BUKAN KEPADA AL QURAN DALAM MENEGAKAN"AMAR MAKRUF NAHI MUNGKAR".

Assalamu'alaikum wrwb

Kalau kita lihat dalam masarakat kenapa dalam umat Islam sering terjadi konflik atau perbuatan kekerasan sesama saudara muslim atau dalam bangsa yang plural ini?

Kenapa umat Kristen dapat hidup lebih damai - harmoni dan sejahtera dari umat Islam?

Alhamdulillah,semoga ALLAH memberikan saya ilmu dan melindungi dari tipu daya syaitan yang terkutuk.

1.Pertama kenapa sering terjadi konflik atau perbuatan2 kekerasan dalam umat Islam? 

Akarnya adalah dimana klompok Islam Garis Keras seperti FPI,FUI,MMI,JAT dan MUI merujuk kepada sebuah hadist Palsu yang mana bertentangan dengan al Quran seperti Hadits di bawah ini dalam menegakan "amar makruf nahi mungkar"

"Siapa saja di antara kalian yang melihat kemungkaran,hendaklah is mengubah dengan TANGAN MU:jika tidak mempu, hendaklah dengan lisannya; jika tidak mampu hendaklah dengan hatinya.Akan tetapi,yang demikian adalah selemah lemahnya iman.HR.Muslim"
Dengan tangan diartikan membuat undang2 untuk melarang firqoh2 Islam yg berbeda dgn mereka, dan bahkan dgn tangan mereka merusak dan membunuh lawan2nya.

Reiziq Shihab,Pemimpin FPI merujuk kepada hadits diatas itu dalam menegakan "amar makruf nahi mungkar " Lihat pidato Raziq Shihab di Video ini;

Inilah bukti2 perbuatan kekerasan dari melaksanakan hadist Palsu itu;

Perusakan warung2 yang mencari uang dalam bulan puasa;

 3 orang muslim Ahmadiyah terbunuh;

Massa FPI Serukan Serbu Masjid Ahmadiyah Terdekat

Akirnya Rizieq Shihab di tahan 1.5 tahun sebagai hukuman.

Warga yang menolak kehadiran FPI di daerahnya

Jadi tidak heran kalau dalam masarakat Islam sering terjadi bentrokan bahkan perusakan dan pembunuhan2 sesama muslim dan sebangsa.

ALLAH memerintahkan kepada umat Islam wajib menegakan amar makruf nahi mungkar dengansantun dan baik2 dalam masarakat seperti ayat ALLAH ini, bukan dengan kekerasan dan paksaan;

(1) Kamu adalah umat yang terbaik yang dilahirkan untuk manusia, menyuruh kepada yang makruf, dan mencegah dari yang mungkar, dan beriman kepada Allah..QS.3:110(2) "Dan hendaklah ada di antara kamu segolongan umat yang menyeru kepada kebajikan, menyuruh kepada yang ma'ruf dan mencegah dari yang munkar" (QS. Ali Imron 3:104)

(3) "Dan suruhlah manusia mengerjakan yang baik dan cegahlah mereka dari perbuatan yang mungkar, lalu bersabarlah terhadap apa yang akan menimpamu.Sesungguhnya yang demikian itu termasuk hal-hal yang diwajibkan (oleh Allah)"(QS. Luqman 31:17).

 Bagaimana ALLAH memerintahkan untuk mencegah perbuatan2 mungkar tersebut?

Apakah benar dengan menggunakan tangan untuk merusak,membunuh orang lain?

ALLAH berfirman kepada Rasul sebagai berikut ini;

Maka berilah PERINGATAN ,(kepada peminum2alkohol, wanita2 penari,penjudi2 atau kepada penyembah2 berhala, ajaran2 sesat dll) karena sesungguhnya kamu hanyalah orang yang memberi peringatan. Kamu bukanlah orang yang berkuasa( diktator, atau
orang yang memaksa) atas mereka. Tetapi orang yang berpaling,khafir(ingkar,melawan), maka ALLAH akan mengazabnya dengan azab yang besar..(QS.88;21-22).

"Tugas kamu(Muhammad) hanya menyampaikan saja. Kami lah yang menghisab perbuatan2 mereka" dan QS.13:40.

"Jika sekiranya kamu bersikap keras,kasar,jahat budi pekerti, berhati kasar (tidak lemah lembut, tidak senyum ), niscaya larilah tamu-tamu itu dari kamu."(QS.3:159 ). (Anti kekerasan).

Jika mereka tetap berpaling,maka sesungguhnyakewajiban yang dibebankan ataskamu(Muhammad) hanyalah menyampaikan (amanat ALLAH ) dgn terang Qs 16 :82.

[QS 64:12] Dan taatlah kepada Allah dan taatlah kepada Rasul, jika kamu berpaling maka sesungguhnya kewajiban Rasul Kami hanyalah menyampaikan (amanat Allah) dengan terang.

KESIMPULAN;

Jelaslah bahwa menegakan amar maruf nahi mungkar bukan dengan tangan atau dengan kekerasan atau dengan paksaan, seperti dilakukan oleh klompok Islam garis Keras FPI cs;  tapi dengan santun, dan baik2. Tugas Muhammad saw bukan memaksa tapi sekedar mengingatkan saja dengan baik2 dan bersabar.

"Serulah(manusia) kepada jalan Robbmu dengan hikmah dan pelajaran yang baik dan bantahlah mereka dengan cara yang baik."

Jadi cara FPI menegakan amar makruf nahi mungkar adalah salah besar dan berakibat umat Islam menjadi kacau dan tidak aman serta kelihatan image islam yang ugly dan brutal.

Semoga hadits palsu yang berakibat fatal itu dapat di buang jauh2 dari umat Islam. 

Mari kita sebarkan ajaran Islam yang santun,toleransi, damai dan berkasih sayang sesama manusia di bumi yang satu ini.Mari kita jauhi perbuatan2 kekerasan dan paksaan kepada orang lain yang berbeda keyakinan agama, dan style hidup dengan kita.

Harapan saya kepada pembaca budiman,semoga  artikel ini dapat disebar luaskan kepada teman2, sekolah2, usztad2 dan ulama2 agar mereka dapat mengetahui bahwa Hadits itu adalah berbahaya dan mendatangkan konflik dalam masarakat Islam. 
Terimakasih semoga ALLAH meramati para pembaca budiman.amin. 

2. KENAPA UMAT KRISTEN DAPAT HIDUP LEBIH DAMAI-HARMONI DAN SEJAHTERA?

Di abad 13 bukanlah umat Kristen tidak pernah melakukan perbuatan2 kekerasan sesama Kristen, jutaan umat Kristen Protestan yang terbunuh dan melarikan diri dari negerinya karena di zolimi oleh Fundamentalis Katolik.

Sekarang di Era Technologi ini, pemerintah2 Barat memberikan jaminan berkeyakinan beragama dan tidak beragama serta memberikan kemerdekaan untuk menafsirkan Bible sesuai dengan  masing2 sekte.

Disamping itu ulama2 Kristen mentaati peraturan2 ALLAH yang tertulis dlm Injil yaitu haram menjudge atau menghakimi keyakinan saudara2nya yang lain sebagaimana wahyu ALLAH di bawah ini;

ALLAH berfirman;

Ini kunci kedamaian antara beragama di Amerika Serikat.

Do not judge your brother’s faith, you will be not judged.
For with what judgment you judge, with the same measure, it will be measured back to you.
Why do you judge your brother’s faith? Who do you think you are to judge other, We all stand before God’s judgment hereafter. God made laws, and only God can judge people’s faith.

Sekiranya pastor2 di benarkan mengharamkan atau menjudge keyakinan orang lain, maka akan terjadi lah permusuhan antara sekte2 Kristen yang banyak itu. 

Akirnya akan terjadi lagi penindasan dari golongan  majoritas terhadap minoritas seperti pernah terjadi di Eropa di abad 13 dulu, dimana golongan majoritas katolik Fundamentalis mengharamkan dan menindas golongan Kristen protestan( reformer), jutaan umat protestan yang melarikan diri dari negerinya dan meninggal dunia gara gara berbeda keyakinan menafsirkan ayat2 ALLAH di Bible.

Yang berhak menghakim atau mengharamkan keyakian agama seseorang hanya ALLAH saja. ALLAH yang membuat peraturan2 maka ALLAH yang Maha tahu siapa yang benar dan siapa yang sesat.

 
Allah berfirman:
God has made laws for His people, Only God can judge those who follow God's Laws or who does not. Who does you think you are to judge one another, you all will kneel before God's judgment hereafter.

Inilah salah satu lagi kunci kenapa masarakat Amerika dapat hidup damai-harmony in diversity.

Apakah ulama2 Islam dapat mentaati perintah ALLAH diatas itu?

Kalau semua ulama2 Islam terutama Ulama2 Islam Garis Keras seperti FPI mentaati perintah ALLAH itu,barulah akan tercapai umat Islam yang damai-harmoni dalam perbedaan2 menafsirkan ayat2 ALLAH.

Kalau tidak mentaati wahyu ALLAH diatas itu dan masih merujuk kepada hadits palsu selama itu pula umat Islam akan konflik sesamanya sampai hari kiamat.

Pesan saya kepada pengunjung2 page FPI ini dapat menyebarkan LINK INI kepada teman2 atau usztad2 atau ulama2 di sekeliling anda semoga hadits palsu itu tidak dijadikan sebagai hadits rujukan untuk menegakan amar makruf nahi mungkar seperti yang dilakukan oleh FPI cs. 

Semoga bangsa kita ini dapat mencicipi masarakat yang damai-sejahtera yang dicita citakan oleh kita semua dari dulu sampai hari ini. Kalau sudah tercapai hidup yang damai, tanpa kekerasan dlm masarakat, barulah ALLAH akan memberikan rezeki yang berlimpah dari langit dan bumi sebagaimana ALLAH janjikan QS 7:96.

Religious radicalism and cultural change

http://www.insideindonesia.org/stories/religious-radicalism-and-cultural-change-04022890

SUNDAY, 05 FEBRUARY 2012 00:00

DADANG KAHMAD

Sundanese people view difference in new and worrying ways

West Java has long been known for the tolerant nature of its society and culture. ‘Siger tengah’, or ‘the middle road’, is an underlying principle of Sundanese culture that promotes moderation and the avoidance of extremes of both right and left. The Sundanese also reflect proudly on their values of friendliness and courtesy, reflected in expressions like ‘hormat ka saluhureun, nyaah ka sahandapeun, jeung someah ka sasama’ (respect for elders, affection for the young, and courtesy towards peers) and ‘someah hade ka semah’ (politeness and kindness to visitors). Social values of mutual assistance are embodied in the expression ‘resep nulung ka nu butuh, nalang ka nu susah’ (take pleasure in helping those in need and supporting those in trouble). These and similar sayings reflect a West Javanese society that values courtesy, harmonious living, mutual concern and support, and discernment in taking actions and decisions.

Nevertheless, in recent times, it is as though these cultural values have been lost. A significant escalation in acts of violence, particularly in matters of religion, has been evident in West Java. In the 10 days following the issuing of the West Java Gubernatorial Regulation banning Ahamdiyah on 3 March 2011 alone, a total of 56 cases of violence directed at the Ahmadiyah community occurred in West Java, among other places in Cianjur, Majalengka, Ciamis, Banjar, Bandung, Cirebon, Indramayu, Sukabumi and Tasikmalaya. According to the 2010 Report on Tolerance and Intolerance issued by the Moderate Muslim Society, in that year West Java recorded the highest number of incidences of intolerance of all Indonesian provinces - more than half the total 81 cases. This represented a four-fold increase on the figures for 2009 in West Java. Most cases occurred in Bekasi, Bogor, Garut and Kuningan. In Bekasi, the acts of intolerance involved obstruction of religious observances, the denial of access to places of worship, and attacks on members of the Batak Christian Protestant Church (HKBP). In Bogor, seven of the 10 cases recorded also involved Christians and were connected to church buildings. In Garut and Kuningan, most of the cases involved the Ahmadiyah community.

Tensions explode in Cikeusik

One incident of violence against the Ahmadiyah community that has drawn widespread attention in Indonesia and abroad occurred in Cikeusik, a subdistrict of Pandeglang in the province of Banten. This particular incident resulted in the deaths of three Ahmadiyah community members. According to observers, the incident arose from the concerns of some local inhabitants over the presence of Ahmadis in the village. They accused Ahmadiyah of propagating a deviation from Islamic teachings in regard to the status of Mirza Gulam Ahmad as a Prophet of God, and of offering a financial reward to anyone willing to adopt their beliefs. Meetings were held between the two groups on three occasions in November 2010, sponsored by local civilian and military authorities and representatives of the Council of Indonesian Islamic Scholars (MUI).

A coalition made up of members of the local community, local government representatives and Islamic scholars issued three demands to the Ahmadis: first, that the community should cease all its activities; second, that it should take immediate steps to integrate fully with the local community; and third, that it should formally disband. All three demands were rejected by the Ahmadis, who remained steadfast in their beliefs. From that point, the Ahmadiyah leaders were subjected to intimidation through SMS and verbal accusations, until the situation finally exploded in the events of 6 February 2011 and the deaths of three members of the community.

A number of different versions of the chronology of events leading up to the Cikeusik incident have emerged, including those of the Commission on Missing Persons and Acts of Violence (KontraS), the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), the police, popular mass organisations and Ahmadiyah itself. But they all tend towards the same conclusion – that the clash was triggered by the presence in the village of members of the Central Ahmadiyah Militia Brigade (Laskar Ahmadiyah Pusat), who originated from Bekasi, Jakarta and Bogor.

Before the arrival of the Ahmadiyah Militia, the leadership and members of the Cikeusik Ahmadiyah community had been taken into protective custody, following indications that their headquarters in the village of Umbulan were about to be attacked. Militia members reached the village the day before the events took place, intending to stand guard over the Ahmadiyah headquarters and its assets. Some versions of what occurred say that rioting the following day was incited by their arrogance. In video recordings supporting these accounts, they can be seen responding to calls by police intelligence agents to leave the building with their own threats of violence, ‘If the police are incapable [of preventing a mob attack], just turn them loose. Only when the world is bathed in blood does the real fight begin!’ According to some versions, it was these words that ignited the community’s anger.

In the version of events put forward by the MUI, the Ahmadiyah militia were warned by a number of local inhabitants to leave the building, but chose to respond by making their own show of strength, a kind of display of invulnerability that drove their opponents to anger. According to this account, the rioting occurred not because of doctrinal matters, but in an attempt to settle a question of honour between two groups of combatants. Other versions point to the behaviour of local inhabitants as the root cause of the clash, referring to local people waving machetes and shouting threats like ‘police out of the way’, ‘these are infidels’, ‘set fire to Ahmadiyah’, and ‘close down Ahmadiyah’.

Events such as this raise serious questions for West Javanese society in general: What has led to this situation? What is going on in West Java? Has there been a fundamental change to the tolerance and harmony for which Sundanese culture is known?

Culture and conflict

Sundanese culture has been subjected to a series of distortions as a result of the pressures that are weighing upon it. The first of these is the influence of a series of national-level crises whose impacts have been felt also at the local and regional levels. On-going issues such as a crisis of confidence in the government, socio-economic and legal crises, and questions about the integrity of those holding public office and their ability to offer models of good conduct have all had a psychological impact on the Sundanese people. These issues cause anger and contribute to public resentment, evident in demonstrations by students, local non-government organisations, and the broader community. These often end up as riots. The same tendency is evident in the actions of West Java’s motorcycle gangs, which are frequently brutal and anarchic. In part, all these actions are the consequence of a loss of confidence and an absence of role models.

A second distortion has come from processes of modernisation that have made the Sundanese ‘individualistically-minded’, meaning they do not care about the environment surrounding them. Modernisation has resulted in the loosening of social ties, opening up opportunities for individuals and groups to pursue their own interests unhindered by those around them. This phenomenon has been apparent on occasions when terrorists have been apprehended, to the surprise of neighbours who had no previous knowledge of their actions.

The third factor is the reality that the Sundanese are not bound together in clans, such as the Batak marga or the Javanese trah, which function to give individuals from a variety of backgrounds a sense of primordial collective identity. This means that the Sundanese are more likely to regard someone of a different religion or belief system as ‘the Other’, whose existence needs to be marginalised and obliterated. Under this type of social structure, the ideals of co-existence, let alone pro-existence (the encouragement of groups with different religions and belief systems) are very difficult to realise, if not completely unthinkable.

Finally, the culture of mutual assistance has been eroded. In its place comes an orientation towards economic-based transactions, a culture that replaces the norms and values of community with a more materialistic orientation. Under these circumstances, everything is determined by the power of money. Money becomes the new measure of virtue, even of the truth, and of piety. It takes hold of a society’s way of thinking, and forms attitudes to life and goals in life, destroying a society’s community values. Ultimately, it displays the attitude expressed in the saying ‘resep maledog ka nu gede, jeung nalipak ka nu leutik’ (a liking for defying authority and abusing the weak).

The violence that occurred in West Java can also be examined from an historical angle. Conflict and violence in this region form a history of conflict between state and society, sometimes deliberately engineered for particular interests, and sometimes occurring spontaneously. Think, for example, of the Darul Islam movement and its Indonesian Islamic Army, which lasted for more than 13 years and led to untold loss of human life and material wealth. The same is true in the case of Haur Koneng, the Jihad Command, the Imran Movement and a number of other conflicts. The people of the Sundanese region, known for their devotion to religion, have proven to be easily manipulated by political interests, to the point where vertical conflicts between state and society quickly spread to horizontal conflicts among different sectors of the community.

The post-1998 period has seen an increase in this type of conflict, as political openness and democratisation make people more confident about expressing their thoughts and feelings. Against the background of economic hardship and social injustice, the absence of a history of freedom of expression means that the actions of one group have the potential to offend other groups, such as occurs in conflict between radical and moderate elements. This helps explain how so many people objected to Ahmadiyah’s existence, objections which first surfaced after 1998 and have peaked in the last five years.

Many communities have experienced a loss of identity that can lead to panic, which makes them vulnerable to a ‘quasi ethics’ that can turn them into mobs intent on violence. The mobs who took violent action against the Ahmadiyah community in Cikeusik and elsewhere did so with pride. They set fire to houses, cars and the Ahmadiyah mosque with a sense of righteous anger, because the Ahmadis were seen as ‘foreigners’, people of a different faith, a different culture. The situation was exacerbated by the exclusive attitudes of the Ahmadis themselves, who refused to take part in religious observances with fellow Muslims with different beliefs.

A return to values

To restore the identity of the Sundanese people, or the people of West Java as a whole, it will be necessary to revitalise the Sundanese values of tolerance, harmony and peaceful co-existence. In the past, these ancestral values were inculcated through the institutions of Sundanese society and provided a guide for individual behaviour. Now they need to be re-examined, disseminated and ingrained in wider society. The cultural principles embodied in the expressions and maxims quoted above must not remain simply slogans. They must be fully revitalised, so that the spirit behind them becomes a frame of reference for life in this multicultural and multi-religious era.

By reviving the wisdom of Sundanese culture, the conception of the ideal Sundanese person of the past may be able to shape a West Java that will be free of violence in the present and the future. This is a collective responsibility which will require the involvement of all sectors of society, beginning with the regional government, religious leaders and the people’s representatives, and incorporating all social groups. The challenge is to work together to limit the opportunities for the rise of radicalism, terrorism and other expressions of violence in the land of Sunda, thereby returning the Sundanese to their original identity of ‘aman, tentrem, kertaraharja’ (Safe, in repose, prosperous).

Prof Dadang Kahmad (dkahmad1@yahoo.com) is director of Post-Graduate Studies at the Islamic State University (UIN) Sunan Gunung Djati, Bandung, and is a member of the Muhammadiyah Central Executive. He visited Australia as a guest of Monash University and the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law.

This article was translated by Keith Foulcher and is part of a series that presents reflections by prominent West Javanese Muslim intellectuals one year after the Cikeusik tragedy. 

 

The Islamic world view behind Cikeusik

http://www.insideindonesia.org/stories/the-islamic-world-view-behind-cikeusik-10022892

FRIDAY, 10 FEBRUARY 2012 16:41

HENDAR RIYADI

The incident that took place in Cikeusik, in the Pandeglang district of the province of Banten in early February 2011, has left a deep wound on the consciences of people concerned about humanitarian issues. Information technology has laid bare the full horror of the events, spreading images of the blows from blunt objects, bamboo sticks and rocks that rained down on the half-naked bodies of two members of the Ahmadiyah community who, even in a state of total immobilisation, remained the targets of hate-filled emotion. Some of the attackers could even be seen jumping up and down on the bodies of the victims after they were most likely already dead.

Yet these tragic events had a simple cause: these people met their deaths at the hands of a mob because they held beliefs that differed from those of the mainstream. The public outrage at this act of inhumanity reached new levels of intensity in July 2011 when those charged with the administration of justice handed down insignificant sentences on the perpetrators of the violence and murder.

There are a number of issues surrounding the incident that till now remain unclear: How is it that differences of belief can become so emotional? How do we explain legal decisions so out of step with the public’s sense of justice? Why does the government fail to protect its citizens? Have the police and army been involved as actors? What about the possibility of conspiracies designed to harm the image of Islam?

Unless all these issues can be fully resolved, it is likely that similar acts of violence will recur, making it more difficult to ensure the maintenance of religious tolerance and human rights in the years to come. When the violence that occurred in Cikeusik is considered in the light of other instances of violence and infringements on freedom of religion, such as the debates over the building of places of worship, accusations about false teachings and insults to religion, claims concerning Christianisation (or apostasy) and a whole range of issues related to the misuse of religion for particular interests in regional elections, the future of religious tolerance and plurality in Indonesia’s multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multicultural society does not look bright.

World view and religious radicalism in West Java

Where religious-based violence is concerned, surveys indicate that West Java has for a while been one of the most conflict-prone regions in Indonesia. Among the complex of issues that lie behind these acts of violence, religious world view stands out. In general, the Islamic community in Indonesia, and in West Java in particular, subscribe to a religious world view based on a version of Islam that is minimalist and puritanical, which is also expressed in Islamic mass organisations like Nahdhatul Ulama (NU), Muhammadiyah, the Islamic Union (Persis), the Council of Islamic Scholars (MUI), the Islamic Forum of Scholars and the Community (FUUI) and the Congregation of Muslims Party (PUI).

Without doubt, some of the West Javanese Islamic scholars who studied in Mecca were influential in shaping and strengthening this view. While studying there, they came under the influence of Wahabi theology, which gives negative meanings to diversity in Islamic observance. Sundanese Muslims tend to be very puritanical in their practice of religion and in their theological outlook, so they are prone to strong reactions whenever their convictions are challenged. In recent times, such strong reactions have occurred in response to three particular issues: the granting of permits for places of worship, perceived insults to Islam, and proselytising among the poor by Christians. Each of these issues, when considered carefully, can be seen to be related to theological convictions which problematise diversity. The same is true of puritanical responses to interpretations of Islam from secular and liberal perspectives; these are seen as threats to the beliefs held by the broad Islamic community, or umat.

Acts of violence against the Ahmadiyah community, including the Cikeusik incident, are related to the dominant form of Islamic theology in West Java, because they arise from doctrinal issues surrounding the status of the prophet Muhammad and the Ahmadiyah scriptures that are considered heretical on this score. Holders of mainstream beliefs in the region, as represented by Islamic-based mass organisations, vigorously reject the presence of Ahamdiyah in West Java, because of the challenge it poses to orthodox beliefs. Almost all of the mass organisations mentioned above (NU, Muhammadiyah, Persis, MUI, FUUI, PUI and others) have issued statements rejecting Ahmadiyah’s right to exist, accusing it of promoting a false doctrine counter to true Islam.

In my view, it is this minimalist and puritanical Islamic world view which has produced the ‘negative theology’ of the West Javanese Islamic community and its inflexible stance. This outcome has provided justifications for the practice of violence. This violence can be verbal, taking the form of labelling different views as deviations from the truth and in defining those who hold them as infidels. It can also take physical form, such as evictions and other acts that have resulted in the deaths of members of the Ahmadiyah community in several locations.

The puritanical character of West Javanese Islam is strengthened by the existence of educational institutions (including study groups) that tend to emphasise the dogmatic and ritualistic aspects of Islam and promote exclusive, intolerant and sometimes sectarian attitudes. These institutions and study groups are very effective at re-inventing, preserving and passing on the minimalist and puritanical Islamic world view and the ‘negative theology’ described above.

A survey of reading material dealing with matters of religion from a number of Islamic schools, for example, reveals an absence of any attempt to understand religion in the context of a rapidly changing, contemporary society. In its place such schools promote material specifically reflecting the ideology of the particular mass organisation associated with the school. This situation breeds exclusive and sectarian attitudes and makes it difficult for students to accept different understandings of Islam. This tendency to cast the teaching of Islam in schools in an ideological light also has the effect of strengthening the exclusivity of religious identity, rather than encouraging a pluralistic and diverse sense of ‘being Indonesian’. It also sows the seeds of intolerance and religious radicalism in society.

The role of Islamic mass organisations

Fundamentally, religion is ambivalent in character: it can be gentle or it can be ferocious, merciful or harsh, peaceful or warlike. The leadership, or religious elite, which includes the kiai (revered teachers and scholars) and the heads of religious-based social organisations and political parties, play an influential role in channelling community sentiment: either in the direction of consensus, compromise, moderation and harmony or towards controversy, mutual distrust, conflict and violence. When acts of violence and anarchic attitudes are justified in the name of religion, as occurred in the Cikeusik incident, the religious elite shares some of the responsibility.

It may well be the case that organisations like NU, Muhammadiyah, Persis, MUI, FUUI and PUI have played a major role in building harmonious religious communities. They have made a significant contribution to the development of people’s character and religious understanding in society, most notably through the variety of educational institutions they have established, from kindergartens to tertiary institutions. They have also been very active in educating their communities through organisational activities and Koranic recitation classes (pengajian). In addition, through associations formed in conjunction with the government, such as the Forum for Inter-Religious Harmony (FKUB), they have promoted the importance of living in harmony and at peace with other religions, in a climate of mutual understanding and a respect for plurality.

In connection with the Cikeusik incident, they have issued strong joint statements condemning the anarchic actions of sectors of the community. However, there is still the question of whether these Islamic organisations have done enough to calm tensions in religious life as a whole. Why is it that members of the Ahmadiyah community have seen the role of these organisations in precisely the opposite light, finding no positive contributions from Islamic organisations towards resolving the conflict?

Leaving aside questions about the role of Islamic organisations in the past, there are in my view a number of steps that need to be taken by these organisations in moving towards the future. Firstly, they need to develop a religious world view that is multicultural in outlook. By this I mean a religious paradigm that promotes and strives to implement the values of diversity, the idea that diversity (in culture, language, ethnicity and religion) is a universal fact of nature.

The guiding principle of this multicultural religious paradigm or world view is that all cultural groups must be treated equally, with honour and respect. Within Islam, such a principle resides within the fundamental doctrine of the oneness of God (tauhid). According to the Pakistani poet and scholar, Muhammad Iqbal (d. 1938), the essence of tauhid as a working principle is equality, fraternity and freedom. This interpretation not only has implications for our understanding of the undivided unity of God, but it also relates to the unity of humanity and the unity of creation. It means that all forms of discrimination – whether they relate to race, religion, sex, status, wealth, or intellectual or physical capability – are in fundamental contradiction with one of the most basic principles of Islam.

This vision must be promoted right down to the grassroots. Up till now, progressive religious thinking has been confined to the elite levels of Islamic mass organisations. At the grassroots level, religious discourses and attitudes tend to be aggressive (arousing hatred of particular groups or communities), intolerant and sectarian – as can be seen in print media such as the bulletins issued by mosques at the Friday congregational prayer. In this context, the use of information technology and telecommunications (TV, mobile phones, internet, teleconferencing, printed media etc.) will be crucial.

Secondly, Islamic organisations need to develop a model for formal education and religious study that is more oriented to progressive, inclusive and tolerant attitudes towards difference. The type of education that has been pursued up till now has bred a religiosity that is exclusive, intolerant and sectarian. For example, the material used in the teaching of theology, jurisprudence and exegesis has been excessively defensive of Islamic belief, resulting in a perpetuation of a negative theology, a theology of hatred and hostility towards outsiders.

The type of education that has been pursued up till now has bred a religiosity that is exclusive, intolerant and sectarian.

The teaching methods have been passed down through generations, and resemble indoctrination more than an appeal to philosophical reason and the development of wide-ranging perspectives, especially in relation to the growth of a multicultural and multi-religious contemporary culture. The development of a progressive, inclusive, welcoming and tolerant teaching model would be a significant step towards minimising the potential for acts of violence, religious radicalism and anarchism.

Thirdly, Islamic organisations need to develop a religious orientation that identifies with the interests of the weak and marginalised sectors of society. They need to show how Islam, as a body of teaching that derives from divine inspiration, can take a critical stance towards social inequalities. They must become a vanguard in defending the interests of those who are impoverished, marginalised and whose rights have been violated. These types of circumstances oblige Islamic organisations to develop a ‘transformative theology’, or what has recently come to be called a progressive Islamic theology. This means a religious paradigm based in praxis, the struggle against injustice and the defence of the poor.

Defending the poor

Many Indonesians live in difficult material circumstances and must struggle to fulfil their basic needs for food, clothing and a place to live. So it is perfectly understandable if these people are like tinder, easily ignited by the fires of emotion and prone to the type of brutality and anarchic acts that can be directed at religious communities. In fact, violence in the name of religion can be especially brutal, because it is driven not only by material need but also by ideological conviction. It is these circumstances that make it imperative for religious organisations to orient themselves to the weak and marginalised, because it is among these sectors of society that the seeds of emotionalism, radicalism and anarchism can so easily spring to life.

Fourthly, Islamic organisations must be consistent in strengthening their position in their dealings with broader society, and especially the institutions of government and the market, which together exercise hegemony over all aspects of life in Indonesia. Without isolating themselves from the state and the market, they must develop a critical stance towards both, aligning themselves with the public interest. The position of Islamic organisations as players in civil society has been severely weakened by the power of politics and the market, to the point where they have been powerless in the face of a number of issues relating to politics and the economy. In West Java, a number of Islamic organisations still function as mouthpieces for the government, political tools and ‘servants’ of those who wield the power of money. As a result, they need to strengthen their position by reconfirming their place in networks and coalitions with other elements of civil society.

Religious world view plays a critical role in motivating acts of violence. In the Indonesian context, and particularly in West Java, the religious world view concerned is that of minimalist and puritanical Islam. This type of religious world view gives birth to a negative theology of non-compromise, non-consensus and non-negotiation in relation to difference and pluralism. To re-establish the harmony of religious life, these Islamic organisations have a very significant role to play.

The steps I have outlined above will help to strengthen the cohesive capacities of religious harmony, and ultimately help to reaffirm national integration and the consolidation of a mature democracy in Indonesia. It is a task that will require the involvement of many different players, both at the local-national level and in the regional-global context.

Hendar Riyadi (hendarriyadi@ymail.com) is a lecturer at the Sunan Gunung Djati State Islamic University (UIN), Bandung, and is involved in the Muhammadiyah Young Intellectuals Network (JIMM). He visited Australia as a guest of Monash University and the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law.

This article was translated by Keith Foulcher and is part of a series that presents reflections by prominent West Javanese Muslim intellectuals one year after the Cikeusik tragedy.