NU rift: A question of religious legitimacy

NU rift: A question of religious legitimacy

By Einar M. Sitompul

JAKARTA (JP); The emergence of a rival to the Nahdlatul Ulama
executive board concerns me deeply even though I am not a Moslem.
As far as I know, this is the only time when a change has been
sought due to a dislike of the organization's leadership.

Abu Hasan, the self-acclaimed rival leader, would find it
difficult to deny the accusation that he is avenging his defeat
at the NU congress in 1994 in West Java city of Cipasung. His
move is nothing but a political maneuver.

Since its establishment 70 years ago, NU has often faced
problems, whether in asserting itself as a religious organization
following ahlusunnah wal jamaah (adherence to tradition as
practiced by the majority of Moslems) or in developing Islamic
teachings in everyday life under a Moslem scholar (who, according
to tradition, is regarded as the prophet's heir).

However, every time there is a problem, NU has been capable of
finding a way out by referring to tradition, the Koran and the
collection of stories relating the words and deeds of the
Prophet. It is with the Moslem scholars that NU's specific
characteristic lies as a religious organization (jamiah diniyah)
because it is the scholars who best understand the religious
teachings.

Even while the nation was facing serious problems, NU did not
abandon its religious identity when it issued the jihad
resolution 50 years ago.

In the development era characterized by both centralization
and globalization, in which economic interests increasingly
dominate, religious identity needs to be further developed.

If NU fails to observe developments, its members, with a
deeply rooted religious spirit, will become supporters of the
establishment and a mere agent for legitimation of the
development process.

For that reason NU's commitment should be to develop religious
content for the benefit of its members and the community. As the
country's largest socioreligious organization centered on the
role of Moslem scholars, NU has the religious duty to be critical
of national development.

Al Ghazali once said that damage to the body of Moslem
scholars would cause damage to the state. This rival executive
board is a manifestation of liberalism and the declining respect
for an organization's authority.

NU has repeatedly been able to overcome crises as long as all
parties in the huge organization were willing to obey its rules.
However, this becomes difficult when certain circles resort to
political maneuvers external interference for their own
interests.

Abu Hasan's move to establish a rival NU board is not in
keeping with NU's character and tradition. NU was established by
istikharah (special prayers) and consultation with senior
scholars, including Hadratus Syeh Hasyim Asyari. Is it proper
that Abu Hasan should try to do the same, made possible by his
financial ability? If there is a dispute, it should be solved the
NU way, which gives priority to brotherhood (ukhuwah Islamiyah)
and good behavior (akhlakul karimah).

If the rival figures want to take over NU's leadership, they
should give religious arguments for doing so. If these are
considered correct they will receive membership approval. To
establish a rival board without a valid religious reason will
harm NU in particular, and the Moslem community in general.

Abu Hasan's move will diminish NU's dignity and be detrimental
to the organization, which, at the Situbondo congress, declared a
return to the 1926 Khittah (policy) of remaining independent and
uninvolved in real politik.

In addition, NU is not a hierarchical organization. In NU
various currents and traditions of Islam meet. If Abu Hasan and
friends have a different vision for implementing religious
values, they will not be impeded because NU is a flexible
religious organization.

Abu Hasan's weakness is that he does not have convincing
religious arguments to serve as a basis for action. If NU is
dragged into disputes for the sake of chairmanship only, it will
be no different from other mass organizations where group
interests tend to dominate.

The emergence of the rival board leads one to conclude that it
is apparently not easy for a religious organization to remain
independent. Political obstacles abound and it is hard to deny
that forces have consolidated to maintain the status quo, which
requires support of the community and a degree of polarization as
well.

It is becoming increasingly harder to say no in this era of
rampant pragmatism and rare idealism (in defense of identity).

The disintegration faced by NU is not new for religious
organizations. A few years ago, the oldest church in Indonesia,
the Batak Protestant Church, began experiencing a rift which
persists until today. It is hoped that those with access to power
will not allow NU to experience a similar fate.

It is my hope that NU under the leadership of Abdurrahman
Wahid is able to overcome the pressure to divide the organization
by referring to the constitution and NU's character and morals.

The lesson is that government recognition is no guarantee of
freedom from political storm. To defend one's identity in a
corporate culture requires dedication, strength and patience. And
during this spiritual fasting month, may the NU leaders be
blessed with the wisdom which enables them to maintain unity.

The writer is a pastor and an observer of socioreligious
matters. He is the author of NU and Pancasila and is finishing
his Ph.D studies at the Higher Institute of Theology in Jakarta.