http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaileditorial.asp?fileid=20050727.F05&irec=4
********
It is said that one of the roots of religious violence or terrorism is
the teaching of hate toward "others" and a monopoly of the
entitlements of truth. There is a difference between "us" and "them".
This kind of belief grows rapidly in the modern, globalization age. In
short, it is not merely the texts or the interpretation of holy texts
that produces vandals or terrorists, but also this context.
*********
Ahmadiyah and the vulgarization of Islam
Ahmad Najib Burhani, Jakarta
The recent attack on the Mubarok campus, a compound used by the
Indonesian Ahmadiyah Congregation (JAI) in Bogor on Friday on July 8,
by a swarm of brutes calling themselves the Indonesian Muslim
Solidarity (GUII) adds an extensive list of grievous events related to
Muslim tolerance and religious freedom in Indonesia.
This case creates the face of Islam, which is nowadays often portrayed
in a very ugly way, and becomes more horrific and scarring. Draconian
attitudes manifested by some Muslims are not merely directed toward
non-Muslims. It is also directed at their fellow Muslims, who have a
different understanding of religious belief, so they also act harshly.
Some questions that frequently occur are the following: Is Islam
really a non-humanistic religion? Or, this is only an accusation or
misperception addressed to Islam. How about the immoral deeds
conducted by some of its followers? Is the theology of terror, as
mentioned in AF Fanani & A Amirrachman's article, Dialog,
understanding the best ways to end theological terror? (The Jakarta
Post, July 22), truly embedded in Islam?
Is vandalism or terrorism a characteristic of Arabic people, as
insinuated in Sutiono's article, Stop Equating Islam with the Arab
World, (The Post, July 22), which should be separated from Islam? Are
the cruel attitudes rising from certain religious doctrines or are
they emerging from tradition and culture of Muslim society?
For some Muslim apologists, as mentioned by Khaled Abou el Fadl
(2003), the easiest rhetorical answers for these questions are the
following: It is unfair to intermingle Islam with the deeds of its
adherence. Islamic doctrines and teachings should also be seen as a
separate matter from Muslim culture and tradition. Any person from any
religion could conduct violence and radical acts, not solely Muslims.
By separating Islamic doctrines and teachings from Muslim people --
similarly for other religions -- it would be clearly seen that Islam
absolutely never teaches or calls its followers to do acts against
humanity.
Another interesting answer, as mentioned in Karen Amstrong's article,
Blame the politics, not the religion of Islam (The Post, July 13) is
by attributing responsibility for a bad deed to the local or
international government policy.
These answers, in my view, do not satisfy people's curiosity about the
relation between Islam and some of its followers who often conduct
violent actions. It is completely impossible for a terrorist suspect
like Heri Kurniawan ("Heri Golun") to suddenly say, without any
hesitation, to his family that he is going to wage jihad (by carrying
out a suicide bombing in front of Australian Embassy in Jakarta).
To a certain degree, the act of some people to attack JAI's compound
is similar to Heri's deed. It is undoubtedly not possible for the
members of the FPI (Front Pembela Islam) or the LPPI (Lembaga
Penelitian dan Pengkajian Islam) to spontaneously be convinced that
JAI is deviating from the truth and misled, and so should be raided.
Because of poverty, a number of people bravely kill themselves
intentionally. However, to carry out a suicide bombing, poverty is not
a strong reason to arouse people's desire to do so. Behind poverty,
there are of course some strong ideological reasons convincing the
suicide bomber that his deed would be rewarded in heaven; he would get
a title, syahid (martyr). Without neglecting that some of the
attackers were blind followers or had a personal interest, it has been
assumed that the attackers on JAI's compound got some indoctrination
before their deed was done in God's name.
It is said that one of the roots of religious violence or terrorism is
the teaching of hate toward "others" and a monopoly of the
entitlements of truth. There is a difference between "us" and "them".
This kind of belief grows rapidly in the modern, globalization age. In
short, it is not merely the texts or the interpretation of holy texts
that produces vandals or terrorists, but also this context.
The holy texts can be used or manipulated as divine justification for
a certain non-humanistic action whenever the context gives ground or
support to this effort. However, if we continuously receive the
ideology of hatred, small or only superficial incidents around us
could also give rise to more vandals and terrorists.
Poverty is a fertile ground for nurturing radicalism. This is a place
where someone can easily find people ready to be influenced or
directed into violent actions. Local or international policy could be
also a good impetus for militant acts. However, solely relying on
economic and political reasoning does not really give us an answer
about the violent attack conducted by a group of Muslims against their
fellow Muslims in West Java. This attack can only be seen from
theological and ideological perspectives, spreading radical teaching
among Muslims.
The attack on the JAI compound in Parung, near Bogor is a unique case;
it was not against people from a different religion or associated with
American symbols. This shows that the monopoly of truth is not only
pertinent in intra-religion, but also within religion or
inter-religion. These Muslims apparently believed that it was okay to
assault other Muslims because of a difference of opinion.
JAI has been attacked, tomorrow it could be the JIL (Liberal Islam
Network), and then the day after tomorrow the JIMM (Muhammadiyah Youth
Intellectual Network) or UIN (State Islamic University) Syarif
Hidayatullah Jakarta. Just like Ahmadiyah, which was accused of being
"esat dan menyesatkan (off track and misled), members of JIL and JIMM
are often called infidels by some fundamentalist Muslims.
The Koran contains the words of Allah with multiple interpretations.
This holy book has many voices, "polyphonic". The true interpretation
belongs to Allah himself. If an interpreter says that his
interpretation is the only right interpretation, he hijacks Allah's
authority. Imprisoned by authoritarianism, someone would speak, attack
and kill in God's name. In fact, authoritarianism is considered to be
heresy (syirk), the highest sin in Islam.
The writer is a researcher at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences
(LIPI), and an activist with Pemuda Muhammadiyah. He can be reached
at: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Milis Wanita Muslimah
Membangun citra wanita muslimah dalam diri, keluarga, maupun masyarakat.
Situs Web: http://www.wanita-muslimah.com
ARSIP DISKUSI : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wanita-muslimah/messages
Kirim Posting mailto:wanita-muslimah@yahoogroups.com
Berhenti mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Milis Keluarga Sejahtera mailto:keluarga-sejahtera@yahoogroups.com
Milis Anak Muda Islam mailto:majelismuda@yahoogroups.com
This mailing list has a special spell casted to reject any attachment ....
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wanita-muslimah/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
