Social Ethics as a Basis in Religious Conduct
better than the conditions in other countries such as in the Middle East and Africa, in the last few years, the condition of interreligious relation,
particularly in connection to the minority groups still receives negative assessment. This is reported by institutions such as Centre for Religious
and Cross-Cultural Studies CRCS UGM, Setara Institute, the Wahid Institute, and even the Indonesian Board of Survey LSI reported that
from 2009 – 2012 the religious condition in Indonesia experienced a decline in religious freedom due to annual increase in the number of
violence. The amount of violence reached 294 cased from its previous number of 172 cases in 2011 Kompas, 29 Desember, 2012.
Considering the amount of violence cases there is indeed interest and compulsion of religious community to shift its paradigm in religious
conduct. Conducting religion is no longer limited to thinking of one’s own life through the oppression of others, but it is no less important to
conduct religion with consideration to making others feel comfortable and at peace. This interest indicates personal piety and social piety
which is translated into hablun min Allah wa hablun min an nas in life. Constructive dialog is in reality easily implemented in the Indonesian
context, even more so now as we know Indonesia suffers from numerous chronic diseases such as natural disasters which constantly
loom all day; the issue of acute poverty; the very dangerous issue of backwardness with the increasing social economic gap of the society;
and a number of other actual issues which beg the joint attention of the religious community. However, if the religious community is reluctant
in carrying out concrete actions or constructive dialog, it will be difficult to achieve our expectation of growth in interreligious dialog which truly
creates more conducive conditions for interreligious relations in Indonesia. Indonesia would ultimately become a mere jungle of violence
among religious communities due to their reluctance in engaging in cooperative interreligious dialog constructively.
As an alternative in religious life, dialog is therefore a very concrete and necessary matter to the religious community in Indonesia. if the
religious community is reluctant in conducting interreligious dialog theological dialog which in my opinion is better suited to religious
figures religious elites, while constructive dialog is “grounded” from theological dialog so that it is more suitable with the real conditions of
Indonesia. Dialog, thus, becomes a necessity for religious community. Dialog, thus, will truly not be the cause of religious poverty and spiritual
aridity. In fact, it is through interreligious dialog that followers of religion will be more enriched by listening to stories or spiritual
experiences that are different to our own. We do not need to convert religion to understand a different religion
let alone ridicule different religions. Dialog is therefore not a mere obligation of religious community, but it is a life necessity of diverse
religious community. Dialog will tighten the interreligious bond between one another, however, dialog in its true meaning is not merely a
series of monolog which only considers disadvantages and weaknesses of other religions differing to the one adhered to by the followers. This
kind of dialog is in actuality a series of monolog among religious communities, it is not a dialog but it is often carried out due to
theological and paradigmatic closed-mindedness regarding dialog itself. Thus, the need for interreligious dialog in Indonesia is a part of the
obligations of its religious community. Interreligious dialog will therefore be a necessity for all religious communities which exist amidst
the differences and heterogeneity of society in Indonesia. If there is no intent to conduct constructive dialog or theological dialog of the
religious elite, then it is quite difficult to expect peace and harmony in the religious community as advised by Hans Kung which I quoted freely
in the initial writings of this passage. Religious dialog, therefore, becomes a basic necessity for the religious community particularly in
Indonesia, and the world community in general. Dialog could connect
sensitivity of religious community to social conditions appearing in front of us as religious community. Religious dialog could also be said as a
part of the dialog of humanity which is a defining characteristic of civilized religious community possessing care towards others Kesley,
1992. The intent in building interreligious dialog in Indonesia which is
recently being carried out by various parties, although it still leaves a number of problems such as the excess of violence based on theological
religious background as reported by survey institutions surely becomes a mutual point of concern. As reported by the Setara Institute for
instance state that there were more than 156 cases of interreligious violence in Indonesia between 2010 – 2012, which is phenomenal since
this is an era where religious and political freedom becomes a part of our lives. Therefore, if we intend to create conducive conditions for today
and the future in regards to religious life, then the need for religious dialog must be executed without hypocrisy and suspicion.