Ethical awareness basis of Islamic ideals

Religion is said to have been frequently abused in intergroup friction but sociologist Abdul Munir Mulkhan from the Yogyakarta- based Sunan Kalijaga Institute of Islamic Studies and a leader in the Muhammadiyah organization also looks at perceptions among devotees.

Question: Recently we've seen many groups saying they represent Muslims involved in assaults against entertainment sites which they say are sources of vice. How do you see this?

Answer: There are a number of Muslim communities that are confused by the current rapid changes brought on by increasing globalization. I call them "normative communities," meaning communities which try to apply the Islamic normative laws as stated in the syariah (standard of Islamic law).

So, personally, they cannot be blamed for the acts of violence which they see as carrying out the teachings. The fault lies in their leaders or ulema who should teach them how religious values should be understood amid a rapidly changing social context.

Such communities cannot accept the reality that society is now more open and permissive towards "non-Islamic" cultures.

They also see people from such cultures are more able to realize their roles in life with a better social economic status.

Both factors are main reasons behind their violent prone behavior towards symbols of more open and permissive cultures.

Q: But there are indications that some are used by hoodlums to widen their territory...

A: It is open to debate on who's using whom. But I think such community members are also using hoodlums to enforce the law according to their belief. They use hoodlums because they know that such attacks are illegal.

The above communities often justify their actions with the argument that there are anti-Islamic groups aiming to destroy Islam through such cultures. (For this purpose) groups of hoodlums and even people with political interests are accommodated.

Another factor is that it is easy to claim to represent religious values because the values are abstract.

Moreover the origin of leaders from some of the groups are not entirely clear, including their religious and social activities. This adds to the increasingly unclear normative base of such movements...

Q: So who is actually responsible for such phenomenon in Islamic society?

A: This goes back to the elite in Islam; they should be more clear in leading the ummah (Islamic community), in raising awareness that the problem of vice (maksiat) cannot be destroyed by violence because this leads to others' misery.

I think this is the result of politicizing religion which has more or less affected the stance of the ummah in viewing differences (in society), and in interpreting religious norms.

Q: Has weak law enforcement contributed to such acts of anarchy?

A: That is also a trigger... but the issue is not so simple ... how can we expect strong law enforcement? In the West it is possible because people's minimum economic needs have been met.

This is also an issue of the role of the state in protecting its residents.

Q: Haven't entertainment spots become inevitable needs?

A: In the 1970s there was the suggestion that drinks containing alcohol of a certain percentage be declared halal (allowed by Islam); basically what is haram (forbidden in Islam) is (drinks) which cause one to become drunk.

Therefore the traditional fermented cassava or glutinous rice (tape) could have more potential to make consumers drunk because of its higher alcohol content.

I think the concept of maksiat can be dynamic; basically it means actions which are harmful to oneself and other people. This includes entertainment which makes people forget their responsibilities, which could be any form (of entertainment).

Q: How should we respond to maksiat?

A: We can resist it but we must provide an alternative. For instance, we should provide solutions for a prostitute, so she can overcome her economic problem in a halal way...

I'm sure everyone wants to live their lives with nothing to do with maksiat, they just feel they are unable to do so and feel reluctant (to change their ways) because others have such a narrow vision of maksiat.

Q: Do all Muslims want the enforcement of syariah through violence?

A: Election results suggest that the really practicing Muslims are only about 25 percent. This relates to how Islam is introduced among its followers. It also involves a review of the history of about 23 years in the period when the Koran was conveyed in several phases.

This was the development of society towards a normative community.

I would prefer ethical awareness as the basis of Islamic norms; the law is actually only the consequence of such ethical awareness. Ethical enlightenment is the most important issue here; as exemplified by commands to perform the prayers (shalat) in the 11th year of the period of the Prophet Mohammad.

Islam teaches that those eligible to enter heaven are not only those who practice Islam. When people don't understand the laws they cannot be punished according to the laws; the degree of one acting according to religion only applies to how far someone lives according to the syariah.

Islam can also tolerate followers of other religions, and can even tolerate ways in social structures which are not based on Islam.

Q: Has the assault by the civilian groups enforced the image that Islam is identified with armed conflict?

A: That is part of Islamic history of 100 to 200 years after the death of Prophet Mohammad. The rule of Bani Abassiyah, two centuries after the Prophet's death, saw the drawing up and formalization of the syariah for the interest of the Islamic government at that time.

Dissenting ulema and scholars, many of them Islam's great intellectuals and philosophers, were eliminated.

Q: Could you elaborate on the need for a review of interpretations of Islamic teaching?

A: The social teachings of Islam were constructed 1,000 years ago when the social context was very different from today. A (review) is needed to provide guidance on how people should live in the modern world on the basis of Islam.

The issue is highly complicated now ... regarding theology, many experts think the main Islamic thoughts recorded under the rule of Bani Abassiyah was final.

All Muslims feel sure that the Islamic teachings are complete, mainly in the arrangements of social and private life. But what is widely neglected is how to apply those arrangements in a growing social context.

Q: What would be an ideal Islamic society?

A: A society which is based on Islamic ethics or the universal tasawuf values. These ethics include teachings on justice, honesty, respecting other people's rights and so on.

Islamic thought should therefore be enriched by philosophical thoughts, which should not be subject to suspicion.

Nowadays there are efforts to revive the original values of tasawuf which do not necessarily involve tarekat institutions, but which stress ethical relationships, and also relationships between man and God, so that ritual differences will no longer lead to conflict.

People will no longer feel restless in viewing skin deep differences.

I think this is the right time to review the role of religion in economic, social and political life, because society is becoming more open. So leaders and ulema must be able to produce radical concepts to seek solutions for civilization, to bridge dialog between religious norms and rapid changes.

Religious thinkers must provide practical and pragmatical religious ways, not those formulated 1,000 years ago. In other words, how to make religious life simpler; those who can fast can do so, and those who can't (need not).

Q: The Wahabiyah movement, which seeks to purify Islam, views Islam in Indonesia as contaminated by traditions. Is purification necessary?

A: The Wahabiyah introduced by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab tends to distance itself from local traditions ... so sharp differences have emerged between Islamic traditionalists represented by Nahdlatul Ulama and modernists represented by Muhammadiyah. Actually Muhammadiyah is not included in Wahabiyah although the development of Muhammadiyah did involve the formalization of syariah.

However, since the 1990s Muhammadiyah wished to return to its roots, hence we're seeing more tolerant figures.

In my view the understanding of purification should be a movement to return Islam to ethical values which are open, accommodative, humanist and universal. (Asip A. Hasani)