Tolerance and pluralism in Muhammadiyah remains

Tolerance and pluralism in Muhammadiyah remains

Ahmad Najib Burhani, Jakarta

When debating the future of Muhammadiyah in this newspaper, we
seem to always fail to escape from the debate about the
"fundamentalists/radicals" and "liberals" within the
organization. This discourse, however, is unavoidable as the
power of the conservatives was seen to be quite strong during the
45th Congress in Malang, which led to the election of Din
Syamsuddin as the new chairman of Indonesia's second largest
Muslim organization. There are also less prominent liberals on
the organization's new executive board.

Din is an intellectual and politician who used to adhere to
the principle of "struggle from within" (as happened when he was
with the Golkar Party) and was considered warm to the West (as he
was educated in the U.S.) during the heyday of the New Order
regime, but who is now increasingly regarded as a
"fundamentalist" and as someone with a confrontational attitude
toward the West, particularly after the reform movement was
launched here, and even more particularly after Sept. 11 and the
U.S. invasion of Iraq.

So, the questions are: What will the impact of his election be
on the organization in the future? Will the organization abandon
the spirit of tolerance and pluralism that has been painfully
nurtured by some concerned members? These are not easy questions,
and I myself cannot give a definitive answer to them. In fact, my
previous article in this paper (July 12) was not attempting to
give such an answer, but rather to merely indicate the
contemporary propensities of the organization.

It is true that the liberal thinking espoused by dozens of
young intellectuals grouped in the JIMM (Muhammadiyah Youth
Intellectual Network), has made the conservatives feel
uncomfortable. However, have these young people really deviated
from Islam? I don't think so. As long as these young people
follow the principles of Islam, there is nothing to worry about.
After all, differing interpretations are a blessing in Islam, and
dialog always has to be promoted to resolve the differences.

It is entirely understandable if Din did not throw his support
behind JIMM during his victory speech, as this would have "hurt"
the majority conservatives who played a major role in getting him
elected. However, neither did he display a hostile attitude to
the group. In fact, his relations with members of JIMM have
always been warm and supportive. Furthermore, it was Din who
founded the PSAP-M (Muhammadiyah Center for Religion and
Civilization), a body which often engaged in unorthodox ways of
thinking in Islam. Din used this background to fend off
accusations that he is a fundamentalist.

Before his election, Din was invited to a religious conference
on pluralism in a Western country and made a visit to Australia,
while stressing the importance of relations between the two
countries. Moreover, with some young activists due to be sent to
the UK to further their studies in a collaborative venture
between the UK and Indonesia, Din has rightfully stressed that
such collaborative ventures should continue. What does this mean?
This means that the anxiety that Din is anti-Western, even where
his statements have been understandable, for example, his strong
statement against the U.S. invasion of Iraq (the Vatican, in
fact, gave the same response!), is not wholly justifiable.

And when asked about how Din would try to reconcile the two
opposing camps, during an interview with this paper (July 21),
Din said, "Here dialog is badly needed ... This should be
understood as an exchange of ideas rather than a clash of them.
Muhammadiyah should facilitate a culture of tolerance. The touch
of leadership is needed to do this."

Asked about the prospects for the application of sharia, he
answered, "It is often only interpreted as Islamic law, when it
actually implies something broader -- the introduction of a
religious character and morality to a country."

Therefore, one should not be excessively pessimistic about the
current developments in Muhammadiyah or that the spirit of
inclusiveness and pluralism will effectively wither. While we
need to be cautions, I myself am of the opinion that it is almost
certain, although not entirely so, that any new leadership in a
democratic and open society will steadily move towards the
"middle way".

This means that in circumstances where the spirit of democracy
fully takes root in this country, Din will be left with no choice
but to be appropriately accommodative to all forces within the
organization; in this case, the conservatives and liberals,
irrespective of which group enjoys a majority.

That is why I could not agree more with Imam Cahyono of JIMM,
who in this paper (July 23) reminded us about the character of
the organization, founded by K.H. Ahmad Dahlan in 1912, which
should always be based on amar ma'ruf nahi munkar (campaigning
for the performance of good deeds and disavowal of misdeeds).
This principle, in my understanding, can only be implemented if
we first engage in a process of critical reflection -- not only
about other societies, but also about our own.

In his sermon during Friday prayers at the AR Fachruddin
mosque after his election, Din emphasized that the jihad that we
need is not a physical jihad (lil mu'aradhah), let alone a jihad
involving violence and terrorism, but a "competitive" jihad
(jidah lil muwajahah). This means we all need to pursue the
principle of fastabiqul khairat (constructive competition to
perform good deeds), not only among Muslims, but also between
Muslims and other believers.

What else does this mean? It means that to effectively carry out
this principle, the spirit of pluralism and tolerance of the
diversity in Indonesian society, including equally importantly
within the Muhammadiyah organization, is something that must be
nurtured, and this will involve the voluntary acceptance of the
very existence of others.

The writer is a Muhammadiyah activist and a researcher at the
Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI). He can be reached at
najib27@yahoo.com.