The Sanctity of Pancasila and the Nation's Worldview
Some time ago, I was rereading writings about Buya HAMKA. Among his various stories and thoughts, one expression continues to echo in my head. It goes something like this: if a person is accustomed to seeking prostitutes, even in Mecca he will find them. Conversely, if a person seeks goodness, even in a country known for its various dark sides, he will find it.
Regardless of the exact phrasing, Buya HAMKA’s message is very compelling. Humans often do not see the world as it is, but rather as the worldview they have constructed. In psychology, this tendency is known as confirmation bias, the inclination to seek and interpret information that reinforces pre-existing beliefs (Nickerson, 1998). Therefore, two people can witness the same event but draw different conclusions: one finds a threat, while the other finds a lesson; one sees an enemy, the other sees a fellow human being.
The more I think about it, the more I feel that this message is relevant for understanding the nation’s worldview, which has been encapsulated in a single concept commemorated annually: the Sanctity of Pancasila. Since 1965, the Indonesian nation has continuously commemorated it, but precisely because it is constantly repeated, we sometimes forget to question its meaning.
What is truly sacred about Pancasila? It is not merely because it has survived various historical challenges, but because it shapes a worldview that allows this highly diverse nation to continue living together. Pancasila is fundamentally not just a collection of five principles memorised in school. Pancasila is a way of viewing humanity and communal life.
When a person internalises the principle of humanity, they will more easily see human dignity rather than merely group identity. When a person understands the principle of unity, they will be driven to seek common ground rather than magnify differences. When a person internalises the principle of democracy, they will see criticism and dissent as a natural part of democratic life, not a threat to be eliminated. The ability to see in this way does not emerge on its own. It must be shaped through education.
This thought aligns with Ki Hajar Dewantara’s idea that education is not merely about filling heads with knowledge, but also guiding the growth of character and shaping how a person views life. This thinking becomes important because one of the primary means of shaping the national worldview in Indonesia has been Pancasila education.
Unfortunately, the journey of Pancasila education in Indonesia has not always moved in that direction. In Indonesian history, almost every regime has had its own way of teaching Pancasila through schools. During the Guided Democracy era, Pancasila was linked to the state’s revolutionary project. During the New Order era, it was taught systematically through the P4 Upgrading Course. In the Reformasi era, civic education has not been fully able to keep pace with the increasingly broad development of political freedoms. As a result, although generation after generation learns about Pancasila, education has often been more successful in making students recognise the contents of Pancasila than in using its values to understand complex problems and manage differences in real life.
Research by Carole L Hahn (1998) shows that effective civic education does not rely solely on memorising concepts, but on the experience of discussing and confronting differing views openly. In other words, democracy is learned through practice, not just explanation.
In a public sphere increasingly filled with polarisation and sharp differences of opinion, I am again reminded of Buya HAMKA’s reflection. If a person only seeks faults in groups with different views, they will find them. If a person only seeks threats in every criticism, they will find them. However, if a person seeks humanity, justice, and wisdom, they will find them even amidst sharp differences.
This reflection also reminds me of the educational practices we strive for at Sukma Bangsa School. Because we are in Aceh—a region that has special autonomy in implementing Islamic law while also holding important traces in the Republic’s history, including when Bireuen served as the seat of the Indonesian government during the Dutch military aggression—we learn that Acehnese, Islamic, and Indonesian identities do not have to be opposed. A worldview that sees the three as mutually reinforcing is precisely an important part of national education.
In this context, we view Pancasila education. Pancasila is not treated as mere subject matter to be memorised, but as a value to be lived. Students learn that differences do not always have to end in conflict. They are invited to dialogue, cooperate, and solve problems together. In this way, Pancasila values are endeavoured to be present not as rote learning, but as a life experience. Religious values are also not positioned as an opponent of nationhood, but as a moral foundation for carrying out life as a responsible citizen.
Of course, this practice is not yet perfect. However, the experience teaches that Pancasila education does not require grand slogans, but a learning space that allows students to directly experience the values of humanity, unity, democracy, and justice.
Therefore, the most important sanctity of Pancasila in the 21st century lies not in its ability to defeat other ideologies, but in its ability to shape the nation’s worldview. In a highly diverse Indonesia, the ability to see common ground amidst differences is not a luxury, but a prerequisite for survival.