Questions for religious affairs minister

READERS FORUM Tue, 09/28/2010 11:05 AM

Letter: Questions for religious affairs minister

Religious Affairs Minister Suryadharma Ali said the Jamaah Ahmadiyah faith — who claim to be Muslim — had to be broken up, as these followers violated regulations and were not Muslim (the Post, Aug. 31).

Suryadharma Ali and his group apparently see themselves to be “true” Muslims and Ahmadis not.

Now, my questions are:

• Can any definition of a Muslim be found in the Holy Koran, or was any such definition applied by the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) without exception during his lifetime? If there does exist such a definition then what is it?

• Can it be considered legitimate for anyone to propose any definition, in any era, which is in disregard of such a definition found in the Holy Koran, or by the Holy Prophet, a definition that can be shown to have been applied in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet?

• Is it to be considered legitimate to declare someone to be outside the pale of Islam, notwithstanding one’s belie8f in the Five Pillars of Islam, just because one’s interpretation of a few verses of the Holy Koran is unacceptable to some Muslim divines of certain sects?

The Ahmadis believe in the Five Pillars of Islam, Six Pillars of Faith including the Holy Koran as their Holy Book. Their “problem” is that their interpretation of the verse khataman nabiyyin is unacceptable to some Muslims.

The Holy Koran says “[Allah] named you Muslims both before and in this Book,” (Chapter 22: 78)

The words “He named you Muslims before” mean that this name was prophesized a long time ago before Prophet Muhammad. Muslim and Islam as proper names were given from God to the Holy Prophet Muhammad so this name belongs to Allah and He has the patent.

The Holy Prophet Muhammad said “One who observes the same prayer as we do, faces the same direction [in prayer] as we do, and partakes from the animal slaughtered by us, then such a one is a Muslim concerning whom there is a covenant of Allah and His Messenger; so you must not seek to hoodwink Allah in the matter of this Covenant.” from Bukhari, Kitabus-Salat, Baab Fazl Istiqbal il-Qibla.

Can Mr. Suryadharma surpass the authority of defining what is “Islam” and “Muslim” that are defined by God in the Holy Koran and Prophet Muhammad? Do you think the Prophet Muhammad’s definition of Muslim has expired?

The history of religious persecution, as told by the Koran, clearly shows that followers of true religion or true faith did not begin to persecute religious minority groups but they were victims of violence as minority groups.

The Koran gives the example of Noah, Hud, Abraham, Saleh, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and others, who called the people to God by using love, sympathy and humility.

Dildaar Ahmad
Indonesian Muslim Ahmadi
Bogor, West java

URL: www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/09/28/let...fairs-minister.html

Disbanding Ahmadiyah costs the freedom of the nation

OPINION Fri, 09/17/2010 10:48 AM

Disbanding Ahmadiyah costs the freedom of the nation

Al Makin, Yogyakarta

By the end of Ramadan, Religious Affairs Minister Suryadharma Ali promised to bestow a “controversial gift” on Indonesians, a gift that would displease proponents of tolerance, peace and common sense.

That is, after Idul Fitri he will take serious steps to disband Ahmadiyah. The arguments supporting his statement sound obsolete and unfounded. That is, the group violated a 2008 joint ministerial decree and the outdated 1965 anti-blasphemy law. The public knows where these “weak laws” lead us.

As a politician of the United Development Party (PPP) and a former cooperatives and small and medium enterprises minister, Suryadharma Ali’s maneuver is not mindless. Genuine motivations behind his effort should be explained.

However, as he will unlikely explain what has really provoked him to lash out at the religious minority, we can only guess.

Take a political drive as the first clue to this puzzle.

As a politician, he needs popularity to enhance the number of voters for his party. To become the center of the media’s attention is of great benefit to him. He is now popular. As soon as you type his name into Google, his statement about disbanding Ahmadiyah will appear in various online publications.

As a party that targets conservative voters, the PPP, which was established in the early years of Soeharto’s government, faces the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) as a serious competitor in the political race.

However, the PKS is seemingly building its image as an “open political party” that “makes room” for the values of pluralism and nationalism. This party has seemed to have learned the lesson that Indonesians are not fond of leaning too far to the right. PKS leaders want to swing the party to the middle, at least in the eyes of the public.

The gambit sounds tactical. The PKS also deserves credit, for educating conservative stakeholders to accept the fact that the party needs to increase the number of voters, regardless of their beliefs and ideologies. Politics is about the voters, in front of whom your principles should be disguised.

However, the strategy also yields risks. Indonesian voters with nationalist sentiments may look at the PKS’ move with a measure of skepticism, while loyal voters with conservative and radical minds may leave the party, seeing that the party has betrayed their original ideology.

The PPP, which wants to construct itself as an icon of conservatism, has seized on an opportunity. The Ahmadiyah issue has been chosen to attract potential conservative and radical voters.

If this is the case, short-term political gain has won out over long-term national interest.

Iskandar Zulkarnain, a scholar on Ahmadiyah, wrote that the Islamic sect’s contributions to this country and Indonesian Muslims since even before independence, such as translating the Koran into Javanese and other intellectual endeavors, cannot be belittled. Amien Rais also held Ahmadiyah’s achievements in the world, such as promoting intellectual Islam in Europe, in high regard.

What is obvious is that in the soil of Indonesia, Ahmadiyah has stood for much longer than those who want to eradicate it. Ahmadiyah — like NU (Nahdlatul Ulama), Muhammadiyah, the PGI, Kawali, Parisada Hindu Dharma, and other religious groups that have colored the Indonesian canvas with diversity — has contributed to this country much more than those who want to annihilate it.

Ahmadiyah is part of Indonesia. If its members are not allowed to live in this country, which they love as much as we do, where should they go? Should we just throw them into ocean? Or expel them?

There are rows and rows of Indonesian leaders and intellectuals who will side with the “oppressed” Ahmadiyah, as they know that banning Ahmadiyah comes at the cost of the freedom of all Indonesian people.

If Ahmadiyah is disbanded because its teachings are different from Indonesian Shafi’ite Sunni majority, there are more sects and Islamic groups on the list, including Indonesian Hanbalite Sunni, Hanafite Sunni, Shiite, Tarekat groups (e.g. Naqshabandiyah, Satiriyah, Jalaluddin Rumi groups), numerous Islamic local variants, and so on.

Next, if you follow a religion that is different from those the Religious Affairs Ministry officially acknowledges, be ready to be banned. The same warning rings true for those who embrace different faiths.

Simply put, our fate and freedom is now attached to that of Ahmadiyah. To allow Ahmadiyah to be disbanded means to let us follow the same fate. Here, in Indonesia, we persecute our own brother Muslims.

Let us consult to the speech delivered by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono at Harvard University, in which he challenged Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations”. Agreed Mr. President! Now a question please. What about clashes among Indonesians?

The writer is a lecturer at the State Islamic University Sunan Kalijaga.

URL: www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/09/17/disbanding-a...dom-nation.html

Religious Affairs Minister Still Insists on Dissolving Ahmadiyah

Religious Affairs Minister Still Insists on Dissolving Ahmadiyah

Thursday, 02 September, 2010 | 16:17 WIB

TEMPO Interactive, Jakarta — The Religious Affairs Minister, Suryadharma Ali, insists on stopping all Ahmadiyah religious activities.

Suryadharma said that their activities still violates the Department of Home Affairs Decree, the Department of Religious Affairs Decree and the Attorney General Ministerial Decree, issued some time ago.

“The thought behind the dissolution were not simple. The choice to let it be and dissolving it have its own risks, but we must refer to the ministerial decree,” said Suryadharma after an Iftar meal at the Vice President’s house, on Tuesday (31/8).

Suryadharma said that the ministerial decree is a legal formal law.

The point is demanding Ahmadiyah to stop spreading its teachings because it is against a religion’s main foundation.

Besides that, Suryadharma also hold onto PNPS Decree no. 1/1965 on religious desecration.

He worried that if the matter is unresolved, it will create a bigger problem.

According to him, it has the potential to cause public friction and is very dangerous.

“If this is left unresolved, it would seem that we let it grow. Moreover, this is quite sensitive and if nothing is done about it, there will be escalation and it could create public friction,” he said.

However, Suryadharma warned that the Ahmyadiyah dissolution should be carried out in stages.

That is the reason he asked all Islamic mass organizations to provide counseling to Ahmadiyah adherents.

But Suryadharma promised that he will coordinate with certain parties to carry out this plan.

“Of course we must coordinate efforts as to resolve the matter.”

EKO ARI WIBOWO

Copyright © 2010 TEMPOinteraktif
URL: www.tempointeractive.com/hg/nasional/2010/09/02/brk,20100902-276005,uk.html

Editorial: The tyranny of the majority

EDITORIAL Wed, 09/01/2010 11:25 AM

Editorial: The tyranny of the majority

The Jakarta Post

“The greatest threat facing the US is the tyranny of the majority,” penned nineteenth-century French writer Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy in America. He could just as easily be writing about Indonesia today, especially after Religious Affairs Minister Suryadharma Ali announced his plan to ban Ahmadiyah, a religious sect with more than 200,000 followers. He said the presence of the sect, whose existence predates even this republic, is an affront to Islam, the country’s predominant religion.

His statement is a clear display of raw power in the name of the majority. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s silence in the face of what is a clear a breach of the constitution is indicative of his own complicity. Tocqueville’s warning is upon us. This country, founded upon religious freedom, that claims to pride itself on the diversity of its people, is in peril.

The basis of Suryadharma’s action against the Ahmadiyah is a 2008 decree that forbids Ahmadiyah from propagating its teachings, including its tenet that Muhammad was not the final prophet, as mainstream Muslims believe. Despite the case never having gone to court, the decree was drawn up based on the 1965 Blasphemy Law to curtail the group’s activities. But if this is a pretext used to ban a religion or denomination, then other religions and minority groups in Islam in this country have plenty to worry about.

The action against Ahmadiyah is based on the Religious Affairs Ministry’s interpretation of a faith. If this is the case, the question is where does it stop? Mainstream Islam has interpretations about God and truth that are different from other religions: Is Jesus God or a prophet? Was Jesus crucified or was it someone else? Did Abraham slaughter Ismail or Isaac? If Muslims find idolatries offensive, should shrines and statues of Buddha be demolished? Is Muhammad the last prophet of Islam? Going by the reasoning used to ban Ahmadiyah, any of the above different interpretations and many more could one day be deemed by majority Muslims to be heretical and offensive, and used as ground to ban a religion. No minority religion or sect is safe in this country.

The tyranny of the majority in Indonesia comes in the form of religious persecution. It is a reflection of increasing intolerance on the part of majority Muslims towards religious minorities. Why else is the action against Ahmadiyah taking place now, after decades of peaceful coexistence? Other religious minorities are also feeling the brunt. Christians, the largest among the minorities, are finding it difficult to build their churches and many existing ones are being vandalized and their followers attacked.

Suryadharma, a politician by background and chairman of the Islamist United Development Party (PPP), was completely out of line when he encouraged citizens to act as watchdogs to the activities of Ahmadiyah followers. On the ground, his statement has been interpreted as a green light to harass and attack the sect’s followers. Suryadharma should be fired for using his Cabinet position for his own political objectives, and for encouraging the use of violence against other citizens.

For years, many people have questioned the wisdom of having a full ministry in charge of religious affairs. The late Abdurrahman Wahid, when he was president, pondered about disbanding the ministry but refrained. Religious affairs are managed quite effectively by religious leaders, and their relations are being managed through interfaith dialogues. The problem begins when the state starts interfering, interpreting the substance of religion and inevitably takes sides.

Between disbanding Ahmadiyah for violating some obscure governmental decree and disbanding the Religious Affairs Ministry, whose minister is in clear violation of the Constitution by promoting religious intolerance and the tyranny of majority, we know which course Indonesia should take. God be with us.

URL: www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/09/01/editorial-the-tyranny-majority.html