The Demand of Islamic Law

8/9/2019 The Demand of Islamic Law

1/24

The Demand for Islamic Law in Indonesia:

Is it A Solution or a Blunder?

Introduction

This paper tells about the demand for Islamic law in Indonesia as

suggested by several Muslim organizations. The idea of Islamic law

has been revived by a number of Islamic activists as their concerns on

Indonesian crisis in all aspects of Indonesian life, such as political and

governmental crisis, economic crisis, moral crisis, and so on. This idea

is not easy to get the Indonesian peoples agreement, even for the

Muslim community themselves. This paper will explore and analyze the

arguments for and against the implementation of Islamic law in

Indonesia, mainly in terms of Indonesias political culture.

It is well known that Indonesia is the country with the largest

Muslim community. Although Islam was not the first religion to come to

Indonesia, it could be accepted by the majority of Indonesian society.

Out of more than 200 million Indonesian people, Muslims occupy 86

percent of the whole population. In the latest census in 2000, it shows

the following percentage that Muslim 86.1%, Protestant 5.7%, Roman

Catholic 3%, Hindu 1.8%, other or unspecified 3.4%.1 It is no wonder

1 Data gained from Indonesian population 2000 in CIA World Factbook, and accessed throughhttp://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/religions

1
http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/religionshttp://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/religions


2/24

that Islamic teaching has been absorbed as one of the Indonesian

cultural values. Besides, Indonesian political culture is also influenced

by this Islamic teaching.

This condition has led to claims by some Indonesian Islamic

movements to consider the need to the application of Islamic law in

Indonesia. It also can be said that they want the Indonesian

constitution not only adopt (some) Islamic values, but also to

implement (the whole) Islamic teaching, or well known as Shariah.

They argue that the implementation ofShariah will satisfy the majority

people of Indonesia, and at the same time protect the non-Muslim

rights. Moreover, to them, Islamic law is the only ideal model for

Indonesia to spread out Gods will to arrange better life in the world

and the hereafter.

In the Indonesian political discourse nowadays, the idea of

implementing is getting more and more attention. Actually if compared

with those who oppose the idea, those who favor are too few. I quote

Jones words in Kipp, et.al. (1987). Today most Indonesian Muslims

have given up talk of an Islamic state, but not all have given up hope

(p.17)

The Socio-Culture of Indonesia

Indonesia is a very diverse country. It consists of various

backgrounds of ethnicities, races, and religions. The fact that Indonesia

2


3/24

owns five biggest islands and tens of thousands of small islands has

emphasized its diversity. No less than 300 ethnics inhabit Indonesian

land and hundreds of language and local dialects are spoken all over

the country. In addition, each ethnic expresses its own cultural identity

through dance, dress, music, carving, and other artistic forms as well

as through laws, customs, and etiquette (Drakeley, 2005, p.xiv).

With these very diverse backgrounds, we cannot say that

Indonesia has a single culture. Each ethnic in each region has its own

culture. If there are 300 ethnics in Indonesia, it means there are 300

different cultures. Thus, its not surprising if Legge (1964) insists that

Indonesias motto Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (in English, unity in diversity)

is more as an aspiration rather than a solid reality (p.3).

Even though Islam is the majority religion in the country, the

Indonesian Muslims are not of the same variant of Islam. Some of the

Muslims are likely to be identified as traditionalist ones, while the

others may be considered as reformists, modernists, or even

radicalists. Among them there are basic differences in interpreting

Islamic teaching although there are a lot of common values that they

hold.

In addition, there are two biggest Islamic organizations in

Indonesia which dominate the overall population of Muslim community

there. They are Nahdlatul Ulama (which is in English may be best

translated as the Awakening of Islamic Clerics, and often abbreviated

3


4/24

as NU) and Muhammadiyah. NU was founded in 1926 and best

considered as traditionalist Muslim, while Muhammadiyah was

established fourteen years before NU and best identified as modernist,

reformist Muslim. In the real daily practice, NU is more accommodative

to acculturation between Indonesian (and mainly Javanese) culture and

the Islamic dogma. Meanwhile, Muhammadiyah is more puritan in the

way it ensures the people to revive the values of Islam as they were in

the era of the Muslims prophet Muhammad. It gives little (if none)

chance to combine the Islamic values (which were originally from Saudi

Arabia) with the local ones.

Besides there is a majority religion in Indonesia, there is also one

dominant ethnic, i.e. Javanese. Ethnic Javanese are mainly

concentrated in Central Java and East Java, which are in Java Island.

However, people of this ethnicity have been spreading all over

Indonesia and it has the largest population all over Indonesia. In the

latest data of Indonesian demography, taken from the latest census of

2000, it indicates that of the entire Indonesian population Javanese

occupies 40.6%, Sundanese 15%, Madurese 3.3%, Minangkabau 2.7%,

Betawi 2.4%, Bugis 2.4%, Banten 2%, Banjar 1.7%, other or

unspecified 29.9.2The dominance of Java has attracted observers to

study it more in depth because it reflects the main Indonesian

socioculture.

2 Source: Indonesian population 2000 in CIA World Factbook, and accessed throughhttp://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/ethnic_groups

4
http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/ethnic_groupshttp://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/ethnic_groupshttp://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/ethnic_groups


5/24

Studying about Javanese we cannot be away from Geertzs work

on it.3He classifies Javanese society into three main categories: Santri,

Priyayi, andAbangan. He defines santri as the group of Javanese

Muslim who is more concern with the Islamic doctrine rather than the

ritual detail. For the santris, said Geertz, self-declaration as being

Muslim is very important as well as to apply Islamic doctrine to life.

(Geertz, 1960, p.126-130). The examples ofsantri groups are NU and

Muhammadiyah although one is traditionalist while the other is

modernist. Meanwhile, abangan in Geertz conception is a group of

Javanese people (many of whom are Muslim) who are more fascinated

with ritual detail rather than the doctrine. They are very tolerant about

religious beliefs (ibid.). I want to add here that inAbangans mind the

belief in God is must, but the application of worshiping does not have

to be performed exactly as in the Islamic doctrine. For example, they

rarely (if not, never) pray five times a day, like other Muslim santris.

The last category in Javanese community ispriyayi. Geertz identifies

priyayi as a man who could trace his ancestry back to the great semi-

mytical kings of pre-colonial Java[in because of the Dutch long-term

colonialisms influence the definition]widened to include commoners

pulled into the bureaucracy as the supply of authentic aristocrats ran

out (Geertz, 1960, p.229). He also adds thatpriyayi is a group of

religio-aesthetically concerned warrior gentry, receivers of foreign

3 Clifford Geertz wrote a book The Religion of Java in 1960 that has become the main referencefor many observers to study Indonesian culture, especially of Javanese.

5


6/24

cultural fashions and the rationalizers of local ones.

TheAbangan, Santri and Priyayi are mostly Muslim, but they are

of different levels of religiosity. The santri groups are dealt fully with

the five pillars of Islam, i.e. 1) the acknowledgment that there is no god

but Allah and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, 2) the

application of five prayers in a day, 3) the alms (for those who can

afford it), 4) The fasting during Ramadhan,and 5) hajj pilgrimage (for

those who can afford it). In addition, the santri groups always avoid un-

Islamic activities, such as those of pre-Islamic traditions. Meanwhile,

thepriyayi, although identified as Muslim, they still keep the pre-

Islamic heritage (in which sometimes contradictory to Islamic values).

They may pray five times a day, but are still interested in metaphysical

philosophy. Unlike santri andpriyayi,abangan are basically animistic,

fond of visiting the witch doctors, and are interested in making

offerings. (Neill, 1973, p.254). However, abangan mostly consider

themselves as Muslims.Abangan may also do the fasting, but they

usually have different purpose and reason. For example, ifsantri do

the fasting only for fulfilling their duty as Muslims, abangan do this for

the condition for asking wealth and the like to the God. Drake (1989)

adds another important notions as follows:

Not only is there a difference between traditional,nominal abangan and devout santri, but there is asignificant gap between fundamentalists andmoderates, between those who believe it is impossibleto separate religion from politics or any other aspect of

6


7/24

life, and those who support the depoliticization ofIslam, believing that a pragmatic differentiationbetween religion and politics is necessary forIndonesia to cope with the demands of modern times.(p.230)

From the explanation above it is clear that Indonesian socio-

cultural aspects are so diverse. Even in one ethnicity (like Javanese)

their interpretation of religion is different from each other. That is way

Indonesia must apply a constitution that can accommodate and

tolerate their differences because this can share the values that

Indonesian people have.

The Political Culture of Indonesia

In terms of political culture we cannot say that Indonesia has a

single one, as Indonesia is too complex if categorized into one culture.

However, the major Indonesian political culture can be said of

Javanese. This is because Javanese has the biggest ethnic in Indonesia

as well as the most dominant one. Many key persons in Indonesian

government, be they in the central, provincial, or local level are of

Javanese ethnic. This shows that Java, along with Javanese ethnic is

central to all political power.

We may also divide Indonesian political culture into three.4 They

are traditional political culture, Islamic political culture, and Modern

political culture. In the traditional political culture, Javanese culture has

4Source:http://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htm

7
http://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htmhttp://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htmhttp://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htm


8/24

a very good place. This is because Javanese people handled many

important positions in the New Order. This Javanese culture is a

patrimonial bureaucratic which is full of the attitude of obedience to

respect seniors, conform to hierarchical authority, and to avoid

confrontation. This is what makes Javanese people are very obedient to

the rulers. It also proves that Javanese are never involved in a series of

rebellions to the republic. The Islamic political culture of Indonesia is

also diverse since there are at least two mainstreams of Islam:

traditionalists and modernists. The two mainstreams see differently

about the role of Islam in the society. One sees that it is a must to

formalize Islam and separated from societys culture, while the other

sees that societys culture should be accommodated in applying

Islamic values. However, both Islamic mainstreams see that the

country should be in harmonious with the Holy Koran and Hadits orAs-

Sunnah5, the two main sources of Islamic belief. The third political

culture of Indonesia can be said as the modern culture. In modern

culture I can argue that Indonesian people try to implement global

value in their own interpretation. They start to look at the model of

American democracy. People may judge some conducts as democratic

or non-democratic based on the Western (here, American) conception

of democracy.

However, from the facts above we can see that Indonesian

5Hadits or (also called)As-Sunnah is a compilation of what Prophet Muhammad had said, done,and/or decided during his life.

8


9/24

political culture is not single, either. It has various kinds of culture to

apply though there are some common things. The common thing in

Indonesian political culture is that there is still conformity to

hierarchical authority. Let me take a simple example. In Indonesia it is

very uncommon to see ordinary people speaking with people of

authority, for example a mayor speaking to a local shop keeper. There

must be always a gap of conversation between them. The shop

keeper will have to behave very properly (if he/she knows that the

person whom he/she is talking to is a mayor. With this reality, it can be

said that it is hard for the people of lower level to disobey the people of

the higher level. This phenomenon almost happen in all Indonesian

regions regardless their ethnicities, races, and religions.

Debates about the Implementation of Islamic Law in Indonesia

Since the pre-Independence era, the discourse about the

importance of unification between state and religion has been a central

debate. In pre-Independence era, the founding fathers were to agree

the inserting of several phrases indicating Islam as Indonesias formal

religion. At that time, the members of the Preparatory Committee for

Indonesian Independence (Panitia Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia)6

drafted the Jakarta charter. In the Jakarta Charterit was mentioned

that the state was to be based upon belief in God, with the obligation

6 This committee was actually made by the Japanese authority in Indonesia that had promised togive and Indonesia independence and to decide when to give it. However, finally Indonesianfounding fathers decided the fate of Indonesia. The committee comprised representatives ofIndonesian nationalists and Islamic leaders.

9


10/24

for the adherents of Islam to carry out Islamic law (Ricklefs, 1993,

p.209).

After the independence, there was a compromise, which stated

that Indonesia was a religious nation, without making a certain religion

or faith to be the nations religion. Ricklefs (1993) adds that it is the

Japanese navy who warned that Christian Indonesians would not agree

of the special role held for Islam, so the Jakarta Charter and the

condition that the head of state must be a Muslim were deleted

(p.213). The founding fathers of Indonesia wanted to unite Indonesias

diverse people to identify common values and then be committed to

these.

After that, it was agreed that the ideology of Indonesia as

Pancasila, rather than Islamic Law since Pancasila is more

accommodative to those differences. In addition, there is no separation

of rights and responsibilities between Muslims and non-Muslims as long

as they are all Indonesian citizens. Of course, within Pancasila there

are Islamic values. However, it became common values as all religions

teach good values. For example, Pancasila consists of five principles as

follows: 1) Belief in God, 2) Nationalism, 3) Humanism, 4) Democracy,

and 4) Social Justice. Those values are acknowledged also by Islam as

well as other religions. In other words, rather than applying Islam as

the foundation of the country, the founding fathers agreed to adopt its

values. Some Muslim activists agreed it, but some others didnt.

10


11/24

Pancasila that was then adopted as the basic principle for

Indonesia proved to be suitable for the Indonesian diversity. In Suharto

regime Pancasila was promoted to be the only azas or basic foundation

for all people in Indonesia. Organizations or any associations which do

not adopt Pancasila as the basic foundation will be regarded as illegal

and government would ban them.

It was a hard time for many Islamists because they were still in

doubt whether following this government rule would be contradictory

to Islamic teaching. Some of them could accept Pancasila as the

ideology of Indonesia, but they still doubted if it applied to their own

social organization. They would not agree ifPancasila became the

only azas for all kinds of organization.

However, finally Islamic movements could accept it after NU, the

biggest Muslim organization in the country, agreed it. NU was the first

Islamic organization which explicitly accepted the idea. On December

21st, 1983, in one letter of decision (Surat Keputusan) by the Higher

Board of Nahdlatul Ulama (PBNU) it said that NU declared five points of

the relationship between Pancasila (the Basic Principle of Indonesia)

and Islam as follows:7

1. Pancasila is the foundation and philosophy of the Unitary State of

the Republic of Indonesia is not a religion, and cannot replace

7 The text is translated from the original version into English by the writer. This text was accessedthrough NUs official website:http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848

11
http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848


12/24

religion and cannot be used to replace the existence of religion.

2. The Principle "Belief in God" as the foundation of the Unitary

State of the Republic of Indonesia which is in accordance to

article 29 section 1 in the 1945 Constitution of Indonesia, which

is the base of the other principles, reflects tauhidin the

conception of Islamic belief.

3. For Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) Islam is aqidah8 and shariah,9 which

include aspects of human relations with Allah and human

relations with other humans.

4. The acknowledgment and application ofPancasila are the

realization of the Indonesian Muslim community to apply their

religious teaching.

5. Consequently, NU has the obligation to maintain the correct

conception ofPancasila and its application which is pure and

consequent by all parties.

Apart from that, there are still a number of groups who are

dissatisfied with the adoption ofPancasila rather than Islamic law. The

former president of Indonesia, Abdurrahman Wahid or usually called

Gus Dur10 in his article NU, Islam, dan Demokrasi mentions that two

8Aqidah is Arabic word. It may be translated as the belief or faith in the existence of God9Shariah is also Arabic word. In this context it is best translated as the application of formalworship to show obedience to God.10 Abdurrahman Wahid or Gus Dur was president of Indonesia in 1999-2001. In 1984-2000 heserved as the chief of NU (Nahdlatul Ulama), the largest Muslim organization in Indonesia, andperhaps in the world.

12


13/24

of those who favor Islam are PPP (Partai Persatuan Pembangunan the

Unity Development Party) and PBB (Partai Bulan Bintang Crescent

Star Party), while those who oppose the idea of Islamic law are PKB

(Partai Kebangkitan Bangsa National Awakening Party), the party

which he leads and PAN (Partai Amanat Nasional National Mandate

Party), whose founder is the former Chair of National Upper House.11 If

we have a look at the principle that is used in those parties we can find

the difference more obviously. The party basic principle of PPP and PBB

is Islam, while that of PKB and PAN is Pancasila. I can add here that the

other party that adopts Islam as basic principle for the party is PKS

(Partai Keadilan Sejahtera Welfare Justice Party). PKS is a new Islamic

Party which gains a lot of support especially from young educated

Muslims. This party even has more strategic agenda in struggling

Islamic law for the Constitution of Indonesia.

The fall of Suharto regime has led to political euphoria in which

Indonesian want to celebrate their independence. Many people

express it differently. Some ethnic minority groups express it by

establishing new parties which are affiliated to their ethnicities. Some

Islamists express it by making Islam as the basic foundation or azas for

their parties. This is because in Suharto regime, the only azas that was

acknowledged by the government was Pancasila. Thus, when the

11Gus Dur mentions this in his article NU, Islam, dan Demokrasi in his own website:

http://www.gusdur.net/indonesia/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1581&Itemid=58

13
http://www.gusdur.net/indonesia/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1581&Itemid=58http://www.gusdur.net/indonesia/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1581&Itemid=58


14/24

regime collapsed people make use of it by reviving their own

aspiration. In addition, the idea of Islamic law has now been revived

and slowly but surely it gains more supporters.

The Islamic law supporters argue that Indonesian democracy is

not the real condition that many people are dreaming of. They insist

that the democracy in Indonesia has only been in the practice of the

general election. The general election which ran peacefully was often

used as the parameter of the success of democracy. After that, there

are still many severe conditions of the society since the practice of

corruption and other illegal behaviors never ends.

To them, democracy is from Western countries and it is a man-

made product. Thus, it will not answer the problems of a nation totally

because mans logic and rationality are very limited. Meanwhile,

shariah is God-made and since so it is perfect. It is simply because God

knows everything, but men dont. If God has decided that something is

about to happen, so it happens.

Formalistic (if not said fundamentalist) Muslims are always

convinced that God through His messenger has given the whole

solution for mankind to live in the world and to prepare for the

hereafter. There is nothing incomplete in the Holy Koran andAs-

Sunnah. Everything is there, even about the rule of daily practices.

Even political affairs have been explained in detail in Islam. Prophet

Muhammad has given the examples of his success in managing

14


15/24

Madinah, which they also called as a civil society.

The shariah supporters see that democracy in Indonesia gives

more bad excesses rather than the good ones. People will tend to use

only their logic without any consciousness to the holy teaching from

the God. Therefore, democracy is not more than justification about

anything human beings like to do as long as it is supported by the

majority. They argue that many times democracy act to support

something that is actually contradictory to religion (here Islam). For

example, it will allow gambling, alcohol consumption, free sex, and the

like as long as it has support in the parliament. (Man-made) democracy

never decides what should be, but it only decides what it is. If this

happens, in their opinion, it will slowly but surely destroy the nation by

itself.

They insist that the best thing that they can do is to establish the

implementation ofshariah. With shariah people are not suppose to

argue or oppose what God has commanded. They just need to obey

whatever is said in the Holy Koran andAs-Sunnah.There is no need to

protest what the dogma has taught. By obeying the God-made rule,

people will surely reach the real happiness. In brief, shariah is the only

solution to any country, including Indonesia.

Unlike its supporters, those who oppose shariah will just see the

real example of the implementation ofshariah in the world. There is

never a good example right now of the realization ofshariah. It cannot

15


16/24

be said that Saudi Arabia (which has implemented shariah) is a good

example. One cannot claim any country that is successfully

implementing shariah in the world as a successful country in common

sense. Saudi Arabia even has a lot of problems with Indonesia in the

cases of labors. Not few Indonesian female workers get abused or

other improper behaviors from Saudi Arabian people. In addition, the

law in Saudi Arabia does not seem to support the Indonesian female

workers rights.

Also, in the international relations, the countries that adopt

Islamic law or shariah have not proved to promote peace in the world.

Even many Arab nations (which all implement shariah) are often

involved in long and bloody disputes. Lets take examples of Quwait vs

Iraq, Iran vs Iraq, and so on and so on. And in the domestic affairs

there is not enough fact of their success. Moreover, those cases

happen in generally Arab countries which are culturally similar. How if

the country is so diverse such as Indonesia? Would it be impossible for

the realization of the idea ofshariah?

Besides that, the idea ofshariah implementation will just hurt the

feelings of other Indonesia minority religions. Those who oppose the

idea ofshariah always consider the effect of the application to those

minorities. The minorities will never accept the idea because it will just

like excluding them form the mainstream of the country. The minorities

will never be treated equally by the law because they are indeed not

16


17/24

equal. This is because people other than Muslims in the shariah will

not have the same rights and obligation. Those who are obliged to do

shariah are only Muslims and therefore, Muslims will become the

subjects in many (if not all) important governmental positions.

Meanwhile, the people from the other religions are only the objects of

the government policy. And this is just not fair. Although minority

religions in Indonesia are only 12 percent of the whole population, it

does not mean that they have to accept what the majority decides. It

will be a hard work to ensure those minorities just to follow the rule

that apply to them. Not only that. Even, it is very hard to make sure

the whole Muslim community about the importance ofshariah

application in Indonesia.

Analyzing the Demand ofShariah Implementation

I argue here that shariah is not only inappropriate for the solution

of problems in Indonesian context, but also because it can be a blunder

to Indonesian national life. Religious conflicts, mainly, will escalate to

higher degrees. There will be too many ending discussions related to

this. People who are not satisfied will try to defend their opinions

starting from the gentle actions until the hard ones, and the victims

will be Indonesian people themselves. Adherents of Christianity and

other minority religions will not follow this formulation. They will think

that they are treated just like as second-class citizens. Not only

conflicts with other religions will happen, but also conflicts within Islam

17


18/24

itself. For Islam is of many kinds of interpretation, each will struggle to

promote their own ideals. Each wants to urge the values of Islam based

on their own interpretation. Traditionalist and modernist Muslim may

fight each other to insert their aspiration which may contradict to the

others. As a result, the communal conflicts that severely happened in

the early Post-Suharto era are likely to go on.

Religious conflicts happened very badly in 1999 when Ambon, a

city in Maluku Indonesia, in which Christians and Muslims had lived

there peacefully, was struck by the violence conflict. Unfortunately, it

was between Christians and Muslims who had lived side by side in

peace for very long time. There were a lot burnings of mosques and

churches. Hundreds of people were dead, and thousands of them were

homeless. Even though many scholars believe that it was not purely a

religious conflict, it cannot be denied that religious sentiments still

played essential roles in the national life. For example, what happened

in Ambon Maluku was initially because of other (economic or political)

issues, but then it could be easily driven to the religious intolerance

because religious sites as well as religious people were then becoming

targets of the conflict. The conflict wouldnt have been bigger unless

the religious sentiment was suggested.

This is the fact that Indonesian people is easily mobilized by

religious issues. Just like what happened in the Suharto era. There was

an issue of Christianization which aroused the anger of Muslim society.

18


19/24

Muslims could not accept this as a legal practice. Many Muslims at that

time were reported convert to Christianity. As the reaction of this,

Indonesian Muslims struggled to diminish the Christianization. Many

illegal churches were burnt down. Again and again it was because of

the religious sentiments. People find it hard to understand that

tolerance is a must in the integration of Indonesia. They may

understand it, but when faced with real situation they may lose their

consciousness, mainly if driven by religious fanatism.

In the Muslim community itself especially from the abangan,

which is actually the majority group of Muslim, it is too difficult to

accept the consequence. In their mind, religion is only a private matter

between men and their God. One cannot force someone else to do

worship as it is suggested by God, because each has their own

appreciation of religion. In abangan or common Muslims, with the

relatively lower degree of religiosity, shariah is all about the

punishments that in the human rights sense are unacceptable. Some

of the punishments that they are worried about (because they think

that these are inhuman are the cutting hand for thieves, dead penalty

forzina doing sex out of legal marriage, and many more.

Besides, those who support the establishment ofshariah have no

enough reference about the real implementation of it. All of them

refered the shariah to what had been done by Prophet Muhammad in

the early 7th century. To me its too long to return back to the nostalgic

19


20/24

of the past. Also, the conditions and situations of the society are far

different. Those who support shariah fail to see that people are always

changing. To them, no matter how people change, but Gods command

is never changing. In here I argue that the shariah supporters are

textualists. They never give enough consideration of the application in

todays context. Even, if they are based on the context, they still have

hindrance to insert it in the modern atmosphere. The text is never

changing. It is true. But since the society is always changing, updated

interpretation should be applied.

I cannot believe if there is a consensus ofshariah in Indonesian

context, even in the Muslim community. They often disagree with each

other in the very simple implementation of Islamic teaching in daily

life. I take an example, that the Modernists never agree with the

typical way of the worship performed by the traditionalists. They might

say that it was not based on the real Islam. So, what is real Islam is

still debatable. Another example is that the Modernists and

Traditionalists often hold the celebration of Eid el Fitr (the Islamic holy

day) in different days. The traditionalists may hold it later then the

Modernists, or vice versa. I think if they may disagree in a very simple

case, how can they agree each other in the bigger case, like the state

affairs?

The idea of promoting Islamic law or shariah is then only a

utopia. It is only nostalgia of the past and the hope for a never-realized

20


21/24

condition. It is rather than as blunder rather than solution. Indonesia

has once reached national integration which can include all differences

in Indonesia with the formulation ofPancasila, but then shariah idea

came to destroy all the good order.

Conclusion

Shariah implementation has been revived by some Muslim

activists to repair the condition of Indonesia which is full of bad

practices of corruption, collusion, and other bad things, be they in

governance or in the Indonesian daily life. They argue that Islamic law

is the only solution to bad Indonesian life. This idea has got a lot of

oppositions not only from non-Muslims but also from the Muslims

themselves, though. The oppositions say that it will endanger the

Indonesian diverse society.

From the perspective of socio-culture and political culture it can

be concluded that Islamic law or shariah is not a solution to Indonesian

context. Even, it can be a blunder in which conflicts may occur

severely. The conflicts are not only between Muslims and non-Muslims

but it can be within Muslims. This can be so because there is no

agreement which kind of Islam is going to be applied.

The best thing that can be done is to keep the Pancasila as the

basic foundation for Indonesian people. Pancasila has proved to be the

most accommodative formula for Indonesia which consists of people

21


22/24

from different backgrounds of ethnicities, races, and religions. What is

to improve is to insert religious values not only from Islam but also

from other religions which can give benefits for the whole community.

Bibliography

22


23/24

Drake, Christine. 1989. National Integration in Indonesia; Patterns and

Policies. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Drakeley, Steven. 2005. The History of Indonesia. Westport,

Connecticut: Greenwood Press.

Deklarasi tentang Hubungan Pancasila dengan Islam (The Declaration

of the Relationship between Pancasila and Islam). At:

http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?

lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848

Ethnic Indonesian population 2000 in CIA World Factbook, accessed

through http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/ethnic_groups

Geertz, Clifford. 1960. The Religion of Java. Illinois: The Free Press of

Glencoe.

Indonesian Political Culture accessed through

http://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htm

Kipp, Rita Smith and Susan Rodgers. (eds). 1987. Indonesian Religion

in Transition. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.

Legge, J. D. 1964. Indonesia. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Neill, Wilfred T. 1973. Twentieth Century Indonesia. New York:

Columbia University Press.

Religion in Indonesian population 2000 in CIA World Factbook,

accessed at http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/religions

23
http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/ethnic_groupshttp://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htmhttp://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/religionshttp://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848http://www.nu.or.id/page.php?lang=id&menu=news_view&news_id=10848http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/ethnic_groupshttp://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htmhttp://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/religions


24/24

Ricklefs, M. C. 1993.A History of Modern Indonesia since c. 1300.

Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Political Culture of Indonesia. accessed through

http://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htm

Wahid, Abdurrahman. (article) NU, Islam, dan Demokrasi in his own

website: http://www.gusdur.net/indonesia/index.php?

option=com_content&task=view&id=1581&Itemid=58
http://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htmhttp://www.gusdur.net/indonesia/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1581&Itemid=58http://www.gusdur.net/indonesia/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1581&Itemid=58http://countrystudies.us/indonesia/85.htmhttp://www.gusdur.net/indonesia/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1581&Itemid=58http://www.gusdur.net/indonesia/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1581&Itemid=58

Documents

The Demand of Islamic Law