Muhammadiyah intellectuals need meaningful dialog

Muhammadiyah intellectuals need meaningful dialog

Hilman Latief, Jakarta

The emergence of the Muhammadiyah Young Intellectual Network
(JIMM) generated a heated debate among Muhammadiyah members
before, during and after the recent Muhammadiyah congress in
Malang. A number of congress participants accused JIMM of
deviating from the spirit of Islam and of being involved in
liberal movements that allegedly originate from "non-Islamic
views".

This is not too surprising, because since two years ago the
tension between the "left camp" (liberal) and the "right camp"
(conservative) of has become more and more serious. This tension
also has been generated by the fact that dialog as a suitable
medium to reconcile such religious differences has often been
neglected.

On the one hand, JIMM and other progressive Muhammadiyah
members have attempted to find "a new model" of Muhammadiyah by
adopting and appreciating new courses concerning civil society,
civil pluralism, liberal hermeneutics and conflict resolution. On
the other hand, the majority of Muhammadiyah members have striven
to keep Muhammadiyah in the "old pattern".

The questions are: how far have Muhammadiyah and JIMM tried to
understand each other? How many forums have so far been offered
by Muhammadiyah to let JIMM speak up? Metaphorically and
factually, JIMM is Muhammadiyah's own child.

It comprises young Muhammadiyah activists, for the most part
university students, who are aware of the need for a new style of
Muhammadiyah movement in terms of Indonesia's pluralistic
society.

In October 2003, along with other activists, I was invited by
JIMM to present a paper and share my opinions concerning
hermeneutics, one of the topics discussed at the first JIMM forum
in Bogor.

During our gathering, we talked about multiculturalism, civil
society, social analysis, new social movements, social research,
globalization and anti-globalization, hegemony and anti-hegemony,
poverty, feminism, empowerment, etc.

These topics are very common among NGOs. By dealing with such
topics in the forum, it seems the young members of Muhammadiyah,
who call themselves intellectuals, was trying to focus their
involvement in Muhammadiyah.

However, the efforts and expectations of these young people to
be involved in Muhammadiyah have been perceived in the opposite
way by their "parents". Interestingly, the Muhammadiyah members
who do not agree with the existence of JIMM fail "to catch the
mustard". They are simply concerned with the "intrinsic religious
ideas" raised by JIMM such as hermeneutics or religious
pluralism, but do not grasp the main idea JIMM is dealing with: a
new social movement.

If it is true that Muhammadiyah senior members care about
their organization and young generation -- who will become their
successors -- they must guide them, not by accusing the youths of
deviating from Islam or from Muhammadiyah's mission, but by
offering forums for dialog with the intention of reconciling the
idealism of JIMM and Muhammadiyah.

It is disappointing to see how some prominent Muhammadiyah
members have accused JIMM activists of being "secular-liberal",
while at the same time the young activists have called the older
members "fundamentalist-Taliban".

It is necessary for JIMM and Muhammadiyah to realize how
unfavorable this situation is. JIMM members have the kind of
potential Muhammadiyah must preserve. Muhammadiyah activists have
sincerely devoted themselves to the organization.

Indeed, the intrinsic religious issues embraced by JIMM, to
some degree, intersect with the ideas held by the Liberal Islam
Network (JIL) from Nahdlatul Ulama (NU). Many Muhammadiyah
members and activists from other Muslim organizations who are
supposedly anti-liberal Islam seem to put JIL and JIMM in the
same mold. They concentrate more on the term "liberal" rather
then the core ideas of JIMM. Therefore, it is not surprising that
many Muhammadiyah activists, along with other conservative
Muslims, are accusing JIMM of being secular-liberal and Western
agents.

As a new entity within Muhammadiyah, JIMM is still in the
process of maturing. Muhammadiyah members cannot expect instant
results from JIMM's intellectual exercises.

But we also have to be aware that many organizations that have
the same ideology as Muhammadiyah, which is the ideology of
Puritanism, have come rapidly into existence. That means there is
a lot of empty space in society left by Muhammadiyah that is
going to be filled by such organizations.

Moreover, we must also realize that Muhammadiyah cannot solve
and will not be able to handle all problems faced by the nation
without involving other entities. Therefore, the ideology of
openness and progressiveness, as introduced by Ahmad Dahlan and
other founding fathers of Muhammadiyah, should be re-articulated.

Nevertheless, some important messages also must be addressed
to JIMM members. Without reducing their idealism, the current
negative response from Muhammadiyah must be seen as a critique
indicating that JIMM needs to discover a new strategy in
articulating its idealism.

The intellectual discourse within JIMM must be ready to be
transformed to the level of action. The progressiveness of JIMM
activists, if they really want to be called progressive, must
also be proved with concrete actions.

Above all, formal or informal support from Muhammadiyah is
still needed by these young people. Therefore, in order to fill
the gap between JIMM and Muhammadiyah, a sincere and frank dialog
must immediately be organized.

The writer is a lecturer at the School of Islamic Studies at
Muhammadiyah University in Yogyakarta. He is an alumnus of the
Pesantren Muhammadiyah, Darul Arqam, Garut. Currently, he is
pursuing an advanced degree at Western Michigan University. He
can be reached at hilman.latief@wmich.edu