 |
| Former Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid. Photo: Shutterstock/Toto Santiko Budi |
Abdurrahman Wahid or Gus Dur is a complex figure. Besides being a cleric who turned politician, Gus Dur was a thinker and intellectual, a democracy advocate, statesman, defender of minority rights, and also a national teacher. His thoughts remain timeless, even though he passed away nearly 14 years ago; yet his name, struggles, and footsteps continue to inspire and serve as exemplary.
Gus Dur's consistency in his struggle lies in his courage to uphold truth with clean and righteous principles, based on the alignment between the nation's noble values and Islamic principles. It is through his exemplary model that he becomes an inspiration to society, aiding in resolving various national issues such as poverty, injustice, intergroup sentiments, and other national problems.
Delving into the depths of his thoughts, Gus Dur actually had views that almost referred to the term liberation theology, although he didn't explicitly mention it as such. However, on several occasions, Gus Dur provided definitions, such as a populist orientation towards the function of Islam, or Islam as a social ethic juxtaposed with capitalist hegemony. In practice, Gus Dur directed religious movements towards liberation, whether through protesting against capitalism or defending the oppressed poor through the basis of Islamic boarding schools.
Historically, Gus Dur was indeed one of the pioneers in the emergence of Islamic thought renewal, particularly within NU (Nahdlatul Ulama) and Islamic boarding schools. Various ideas such as Islam's indigenization, usul fiqh as the methodology of thought, Islam's acceptance of Pancasila principles, rationalization of traditional Islamic texts, and religious tolerance have opened up avenues for the expansion of thought towards liberation movements, especially in rural areas, through the transformative potential of Islamic boarding schools.
Gus Dur also played a significant role in shaping the strategic framework for the realization of substantive Islamic values towards the establishment of democracy in the nation. This is evident in his advocacy for a form of democracy not modeled on Western political systems but as a democratization process where society gains its rights maximally. This tendency became more prominent when Gus Dur indigenized (localized) these values into a fresh and rich Islamic scholarly mindset. For instance, when Gus Dur equated the concepts of humanism and human rights with Islamic concepts of al-kulliyat al-khams, the five basic principles of Islamic law.
Through this indigenization of Islam, Gus Dur made it an absolute prerequisite for social transformation to occur. Without the resolution of religious and cultural tensions, Islam would merely engage in symbolic struggles rather than a humanitarian struggle for justice. Even in the context of modernizing Islamic thought, often associated with capitalist modernization, Gus Dur prioritized structural transformation as its primary goal.
Regarding Islam's openness to other civilizations, according to Gus Dur, it should not necessarily imply the destruction of Islamic tradition but rather serve as a prerequisite for the realization of universal Islamic values. In line with this, Gus Dur referred to five guarantees (al-ushul al-khams) of basic human rights, all of which converge towards the establishment of power structures devoid of oppression.
It is evident that Gus Dur's intellectualism reflects a transformative character in structural, cultural, and social domains, where his endeavors focus on social change by elevating human dignity as its main objective.
Aligned with this, Gus Dur's intellectualism is also utilized to critique the state and the knowledge politics surrounding it. The injustice inherent in development legitimatized by the modern knowledge system is under critique, leading towards changes in superstructures, both political governance and the ideologies that underpin it. Alongside this, Gus Dur's transformation is driven through ideological critiques of the de-ideologization of Islam and empowering communities through participatory activities within Islamic boarding schools to dismantle structural oppression.
With such transformative ideas, Gus Dur's thinking and intellectualism can be considered an adaptation of ideas leading towards liberation theology. Because the birth of liberation theology (in Latin America) is a form of social-moral indictment and resistance against developmentalism. For its adherents (Gustavo Gutierrez, Segundo, etc.), liberation theology is not only understood as a speculative theological concept aimed at spiritual satisfaction but also a paradigm of struggle inspired by faith to mobilize and organize for the realization of a more just and humane social order.
From this perspective, it is not an exaggeration to refer to Gus Dur as a liberator, who makes liberation the basis of his beliefs and actions. Because Gus Dur, as an interpreter of Islam, is capable of steering religious movements towards liberating marginalized groups, by using Islam as both an institutionalized medium and a reflection turned into action.
As for liberation within Islam, Gus Dur bases it on the tradition of Muslim submission to the behavior of the Prophet, placing Muslims between two points of tension: the zero point of surrender (Islam) to serve Allah, and the one hundredth point of earthly stewardship as His representatives obligated to strive for the welfare of all mankind (rahmatan lil ‘alamin). From here, the basis of liberation within Islam can be unearthed, which is the moral-ethical boundary of religion that every Muslim must adhere to.
Regarding liberation within Islam, according to Gus Dur, it refers to a political goal that doesn't assume the existence of a competing political structure from the system to be changed. Because if there is competition, the nature of religious movements, according to Gus Dur, becomes ideological. As long as religion cannot free itself from ideological constraints, it will not be able to create societal liberation, but quite the opposite. Therefore, Gus Dur positions the ethical morality of religion more towards a transformative function, as a critique of hegemonic oppression, while engaging in practical efforts to address "structural pain" resulting from development orientations and strategies that oppress.
So, Gus Dur's idea of liberation theology is seen more in the light of the ethical morality of religion used as a structural critique, rather than being used as a competing political structure to create a new order, because the most important function of religion is to engage in concrete actions to realize human values and struggles, which are explicitly stated in existing structural programs.
As for the movement of liberation from religion, in Gus Dur's view, it should not be seen from a particular perspective, whether revolutionary or anti-revolutionary, because religion has its own liberation nature, which unfolds slowly and far-reaching, so religion is not a shaper or determiner of social change, as the world changes according to its own mechanisms. According to Gus Dur, the role of religion is supplementary, providing means and motives for the creation of social change.
If religion exceeds this function, according to Gus Dur, it becomes worldly, and because of that nature, religion then requires the repressiveness of power to maintain its existence. Gus Dur's interpretation of religious liberation is more meaningful in a more revolutionary perspective, that is, liberation without any basis or foundation except human beings themselves. So, it is very existential.
Bibliography:
Arif, Syaiful. (2009). Gus Dur dan Ilmu Sosial Transformatif. Depok: Koekoesan.
Löwy, Michael. (2013). Marxisme et Thèologie de la Libèration, terj. Topatimasang, Roem, Teologi Pembebasan; Kritik Marxisme & Marxisme Kritis. Yogyakarta: INSISTPress.
Wahid, Abdurrahman. (2011). Tuhan Tidak Perlu Dibela. Yogyakarta: LKiS.
0 comments: