Dialog as an Alternative in Religious Practice

dimension of shariah is the start of one’s path to becoming a grand Sufi as Ibn Arabi and al-Ghozali or al-Maturidi, which often is truly misunderstood by the religious community. Let us recall the statement of Rabiah al-Adawiyah, a woman Sufi who developed the mahabbah the LOVE school of thought to God. Rabiah Adawiyah stated: “If my prayers are for expectation of your heaven, then put me in your damnation. And if I pray for fear of hell, then do not judge my prayers But if my prayers are solely for my love to You, o Allah, the possessor of LOVE, then judge my prayers Do not cast Your Face away from me”. This is her deep spirituality which is often misunderstood by some who consider the importance of formal matters. Formal matter is not the same as matters full of formalities, this is what needs to be understood further. Formal matters such as obligatory and preferential rituals of worship, and even rituals that are ghoiru mahdah, are means leading to one’s spiritual faith, so that it is sensible to say that one would not become a grand Sufi as Rabiah, Ghozali, Maturidi, Ibn Arabi, and Hasan Asyari were one not to pass the dimension of shariah in their faith Thus, religious community is surely not immune to the realities of life. Once we are aware that our presence is not without social-historical and sociological context, it would be strange if these contexts were to be eliminated. It is impossible to eliminate the social context of where we live, what is possible is that reality must become a part of the lives of the faithful wherever they are. If they are incapable of understanding and placing the context, we will consequently be in a room that appears to be empty, void and hidden. While in fact we exist in the public sphere which is full of contestations. Contestation could be in the form of various religious activities and political formations. However, the contestation in connection to the community of the faithful is the contestation in righteousness amar ma’ruf nahi munkar and competition in righteousness fastabiqul khairat, because the community of the faithful is the chosen community in the face of God khaira ummatin. Chosen not because of its quantity, not because of its bad conducts, chosen not because of its anger and ferocity. The community of the faithful is chosen because of its competition in conducting good deeds. They are chosen because of their peace and patience tawasaq watawa sabil sabru. This must be the basis in the faith to God, regardless of whether God would later judge us to go to heaven or hell, but conducting good deeds becomes its main duty. Consider the following statement by Sayyed Hosen Nasher: “We in faith must be brave to go beyond the boundaries of the fortress of exclusivism”. The fortress of exclusivism is a religious model which corners others by saying that they are the most righteous and noble in front of others. We must declare exclusively the religion we acknowledge and adhere to personally exclusive but we must place other religions as we acknowledge and adhere to ours. “We are personally exclusive but socially inclusive”. Remember this message of S.H. Nasr, a Muslim intellectual and spiritualist from Iran and an influential expert in contemporary Islamic philosophy Nasr, 1992. A “theological jump” as suggested by Hosen Nasher above is indeed very difficult to be carried out by most of the faithful communities. Nevertheless, if the faithful communities are able to step out of formalistic and materialistic piety, it appears that the idea in developing a new form of piety will find its place as desired by some of them. Faith which “passes over” is a very relevant idea in the current condition where we are no longer able to life “alienated” from social context. In reality, the presence of religions on earth had always began with and referred to the social historical and sociological contexts as elaborated above. God revealed religions on earth not for the sake of God, but for humans, for humanity and prosperity not for conflict and bloodshed. This is why religion refers to humanity not others. Religion answers problems which arise on earth, it is an asset in facing the creator God the Omnipresent and the Just Rahman et.al, 2007. Surely we will question why some faithful communities are reluctant to “go beyond the fortress” which up till now serves as an obstacle in life of coexistence? This is where matters that are related to the delivery of religion to the public community must receive serious attention from religious figures specifically to Muslim orators, missionaries, religious teachers, or priests who are duty bound to deliver religious speeches as well as counsel to the public. If these counsellors to the public were the “wrong” type of people and do not have the professional aptitude in delivering their messages, conducting religion will subsequently become dismal, disorderly, complicated, and horrendous It is extremely dangerous if religion were to fall into the hands of unprofessional people, let alone those that are full of short term political interests. These kinds of people would be happier to see interreligious discord and disharmony because it is difficult to reap benefit if there were harmony while religions are being pitted against each other. Who are professional proliferators of religion? They are those who at the very least possess an equal mastery over “the language of heaven and of earth”, not simply those who memorize heavenly language but are illiterate of earthly one. Such things will be very dangerous to the public that is present amidst diversity of public faith and culture. A proliferator or counsellor of religion must also bear genuine intent in providing counsel so that the community of the faithful would compete in conducting good deeds. Conducting good deeds for himself, for his group or another group who mutually are of faith and live in the same community is equally righteous. A professional counsellor is not emotionally bound to political parties but only “bound to the will of God” to conduct good deeds. There are no ulterior motives or seeking of praise and elevation to be regarded as the best among fellow community of faith, as the advice of Rabiah Adawiyah above. Only God is the rightful judge by doing as much good as possible for the love of God. The deed is good because there is a need to do good to oneself and to others. That is the main principle in competing in righteousness fastabiqul khairat, and enjoin in what is right and prevent from doing wrong amar ma’ruf nahi munkar to all mankind without political interest tendencies. That is the importance of the presence of professional religious counsellor which cannot be refused to lead the community of the faithful towards novel religiosity in the context of multi-religious and multicultural society, because diversity of ethnicity, race, religion, social class, and historical context of religion’s existence particularly in the Indonesian land. Without our joint notion in the presence of professional religion proliferators, expecting the arrival of new diversity is impossible because what will come instead are diverse performances which are instantaneous, full of formalities, and without substance. In other words, we will conduct religion rich in formalities but deprived of substance in piety The presence of professional religion proliferators does not mean they are paid religion proliferators, since currently the word professional is identical to “pay” which are in exorbitant amount at times. Hence, the pun states that paid demonstration is paid demonstration Of course this is not what we meant with professional religion proliferators. We must recall that the language of religion, which is the language of heaven, is far more complex than what we understand as of today Our understanding on the language of religion language of heaven is the understanding we possess and it is “extremely limited”, unable to “delve” into all the richness of the language of religion language of heaven which is full of symbols, full of hidden expressions, full of wisdom, full of insight and so forth. In short, the language of religion will be impossible for us to understand exactly as the will of the creator of the language itself that we call GOD. Analyse the language of religion thoroughly in detail, do not read it carelessly. We do not claim to be capable of exactly understanding the language of religion due to its own complexities as is the complexities of its creator who created the earth and all its contents Hidayat, 1997. By understanding our limit to “understand” the language of religion, we would be distanced from a haughty form of piety. We would be far from a monopolistic form of piety. We would be far from piety that endangers others. We would also be far from piety that is condescending to others. However, by understanding the limit in understanding our language of religion we will be wiser, more open, more attentive to mutual problems, more obedient and genuine in delivering good deeds for the sake of GOD, not good deeds for the sake of fellow humans. The address is GOD, although it is through the channel of fellow human beings. This is the diversity we mutually desire in connection to multi- religious and multicultural society as we experience together in Indonesia.

9.5 Conclusion

Some of the notes above portray there’s immediate need in religious life in Indonesia. The need to take a “theological jump” is not to be delayed much longer, since theological jump is not the same as converting to a different religion, but it enriches spiritual life of individuals and the religious community. We can no longer say that our religiousness is “exclusive” because the others are all wrong. What is possible is to be “exclusive” personally but inclusive socially. We have to dare doing what in the Sufi realm is known as “going over the boundaries of formalities” in religion by prioritizing religious spirituality which does not mean leaving formal matters. In order to move towards a diversity which is said to be novel, we must present and approach religion in the public context or public sphere which is full of contestation as conveyed by sociologists like Jürgen