Ahmadiyah and the vulgarization of Islam

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: najib27@yahoo.com