The West accuses Islam at becoming a nest of terrorism. This places Islam into a corner. The accusation cannot be denied, because if a Moslem tries to search and study the holy Qur’an, the term jihad, jihad against the infidels, may be found. But on the other side, Qur’an teaches Moslems to be do tolerant of other religious believers. However, many Westerns more believe in the first point, that Islam is a nest of terrorism. Many facts stated, for instance, suicide bombing that often happened on Palestine or Israel, World Trade Center (WTC) tragedy, the Bali bombing and later, the Kuningan bombing.
But in this paper I don’t pretend to explain the first study, but rather to explain the Islamic concept of pluralism. Many studies of pluralism are actually held and practiced, but for me this issue is still up to date to give an image that Islam isn’t a nest of terrorists, that Islam isn’t an exclusive kind of religion, on the contrary, inclusive. In this opportunity I will present the pluralism concept that was established by Farid Esack, a contemporary thinker from South Africa, who lived under apartheid regime.
Defining Islam: a short explanation
Etimologically Islam is defined as submission and surrender. In dictionary of Lisan Arab, Ibn Manzur said that Islam means submission (al-Inqiyad).[1] Also according to Islamic law (syariah), Islam is defined to submission, to syariat and maintaining everything that Muhammad SAW’s brought.
I think in this occasion I don’t want to explore what Islam is, because it has been described widely in many Islamic books.
The Concept of Islam of Esack
Farid Esack tries to describe Islam in terms not as has been understood like the explanation above, but he views Islam as a religious term that has active character bases. In other words, Islam doesn’t mean a narrow formulation or a passive concept formed as an institutionalized religious system, that he said as reified conception of Islam.[2] But rather than that, he interpreted it as an active label that refers to practice performance that was formed and perceived as surrender way, obeying and totally submitting to God.
For Esack, the word of Islam is a positive representation of practice actions as active responds to order and God’s wish. Therefore, it doesn’t prevail just to a religious sect, but universally to all religions, especially, for Esack’s case, for all people of South Africa that totally admit and respond their God’s order. [3]
What Esack said above normatively based on Allah said in Qur’an: 3: 19:
Behold, the din with God is Islam; and those who were vouchsafed the scripture aforetime, out of mutual jealousy, differed only after knowledge had come unto them. But as for the one who reject is ungrateful (Yakfur) for signs of God, behold God is swift in reckoning.
In the verses above Esack finds that there two central understandings, and they are a base for the appearance of kind of exclusive and chauvinistic understanding in Islam. Both the key words were din and al-islam. [4] For getting more comprehensive understanding, Esack tries to elaborate the views of interpreters (mufassirin) that he considered represent the majority views. There are many interpreters that he cited in his book, such as, al-Thabari, Ibn Arabi, Zamakhsyari, al-Razi, Rasyid Ridha and Thabatabai.
To strengthen his argument, Esack refers to the linguistic analysis that is held by Ibn Manzur and Wilfred Cantwell Smith of the term of din in holy Qur’an. [5] After reading both prominent figures, Esack has a strong assumption, the term of din doesn’t has a narrow meaning –as held by majorities of Islamic thinkers- as a reified and formal religious system. In other words, in this context, Esack doesn’t interpret Islam as din, but emphasizes a process. The term of din is understood as surrender to God. According to Esack, there some reason for this:
“First, the term din was employed with various meaning within the Arabian Peninsula during seventh century. It was inevitable that the Qur’an would use it within the confines of those understandings. The absence of the plural form, adyan, is perhaps reflective of this, because religious life was not as fully reified then. Secondly, the Qur’an is engaged in a dynamic relationship with its hearers; it speaks and uses expression in terms of understanding of a community or individuals at a particular stage of their development. Thus the word din is not employed in the communal sense in the early Meccan context. Thirdly, to deny to affirm din or yaum al-din had little or nothing to do with verbal or theoretical affirmation or rejection related to a personal life-style to respond to God and a higher moral imperative or one of actively displaying contempt for these. Fourthly, the present near universal understanding of din as ‘religion’ and the corresponding virtual elimination of din as a personal response to God is unfounded in the text of the Qur’an, as well as in traditional exegesis.” [6]
The word of Islam as Muhammad Asad said, means self-surrender unto God. As a verbal noun, the term appears only eight times in the Qur’an whereas its foundation verb, aslama, appears twenty-four times.
Although this term is infrequently used, it has a central position in Moslem self definition.[7] The fact that this word is infrequent in Qur’an indicates that the character of Qur’an does not focus too much on the words that are related with static-metaphysic thought rather than the words that are intrinsically related to the active and dynamic conception.
According to Jane Smith, actually the appearance of various interpretations to this word, focused to two conditions: first, the relation between self-surrender externally and internally. Second, related with individual aspect and Islamic sect. In other words, the meaning of genuine Islam summarized in a mix between individual and sect understanding. This view is generally followed by classical interpreters in defining Islam. [8]
The Concept of Pluralism
The definition of Islam as a non reified and formal concept results in the acceptance of other religious believers. This then also results in receiving the religious pluralism concept. According to Webster Collgeate Dictionary, the word of pluralism means “Theory that there are more than one or more than two kind of ultimate reality”. [9] Therefore Esack gave chapters on his book Qur’an Liberation and Pluralism, that especially explain about this. Actually In Islamic discourse, religious pluralism isn’t a new topic. Some prominent Islamic thinker, like Fazlurrahman,[10] Mohammed Arkoun,[11] Asghar Ali Engineer[12] and others wrote a specific exploration about it before Esack.
But from all of the ideas that he wrote, there were new ideas about Qur’anic perspective in relation with other religious believers, relationship among religions, gender equality that was established from the consciousness to implement it to practice liberally. Practically, by his hermeneutical approach on the Qur’an about religious pluralism, Esack tried to relate pluralism theme to liberation of South Africans from their suffering. Even the pluralism concept that was born in South Africa came for their struggle for real liberation from the apartheid regime. The socio-political culture that was practiced in South Africa created apartheid ideology which divided religious people into groups.
One of his efforts to bridge theological rigidity, especially for the oppressed people was to establish theology was based on religious pluralism mixed with theology of liberation. The fundamental thing that he presented from this idea was how to identified religious community as self and having relationships with the others. Esack stated that theological categories of self and other were no longer tenable. [13]
This then began with the new interpretation on the keys word like the concept wilayah, kufr, and hijrah (exodus) theme. Many qur’anic verses were cited in his explanation.[14] From this exploration he concludes that the text dealing with the wilayah of religious Other, when understood in their historical context, offers a radically different perspective to that which a casual and decontextualized reading renders. Far from preventing Moslems from entering into relationship of solidarity with the religious Other, they actually facilitate and inspire the progressive Islamists’ pursuit of a hermeneutic that accommodate the religious Other and liberative-praxis.[15] While in the exodus paradigm, he said that this support for solidarity with the Other, though, was not limited to the religious Other, but also embraces those among the poor and downtrodden who actively reject the religious beliefs of Islam.
The context of pluralism, though, was not a vague commitment to Allah in forms of Otherness; indeed, some forms of Otherness are vehemently opposed and the Qur’an does not hesitate to encourage the severest forms of opposition to them. Instead, the Qur’an roots its own pluralism in a common struggle against oppression and injustice. Rather than a fashionable interfaith dialogue, we see an unarticulated solidarity with the marginalized and exploited that crosses narrow doctrinal lines. The basis of the pluralism being postulated in the Qur’an is, one may say, liberal praxis.
Some Notes For Esack
His concepts of Islam not as an idiom or label proposed not exclusively to Moslems, but also to another believers that really submit to respond their God’s order. From his exploration between Islam and pluralism it can be seen that Esack used a hermeneutical theory[16] in interpreting Qur’anic verses. He understood that the interpreters, classical or contemporary, were human that could be right or wrong in the interpretation process. They also interpreted the scripture according to the situation and environment where they lived.[17]
The fundamental thing that needs to be answered in this note is how to explain the relation between the idea of pluralism presented by Esack with interest, or in Habermas language, to clearly separate between knowledge and interest. To prove this theoretically Habermas has made a clear method; to make dialectical process that has its historical traces from the oppressed dialogue then reconstruct what has been oppressed.[18] There I think in this note I will use the critical theory as a tool of analysis on the pluralism ideas that establish by Esack.
From this condition Esack tries to stand up against oppressions and tries to liberate people that have the same fate with him. That why then, the way of his interpretation on Qur’an always announced liberation, justice, inter-religious solidarity, and advocacy for the oppressed.
Second, his interpretation influenced by his community. May be he cannot deny this, because logically a man will leave a community if he has no need or interest any longer in that community.
His idea of pluralism clearly has a purpose that not only stops on the discourse level, but further than that is oriented as a tool that can form agregation and social mobility.
At least, if ideology is considered as a system, idea, way of thought or structure of thought then can be parts of ideological tools, Esack’s idea itself also is a kind of structure of thought. Therefore Esack’s ideas about pluralism are a structure of thought that includes from its ideology. Automatically, Esack’s structure of thought is also influenced by his ideological orientation that reflects his class position and his social bases as the oppressed that struggles for justice and liberation. In this case, I think Qur’an also can be an ideological tool that is very accurate to destroy apartheid ideology and other ideology that has its oppressive and tyrannical. So it is not strange if Esack understand Qur’an not just only understand, interpret and translate it, but also must be able to implement it in a structure of action.
Bibliography
Asghar Ali Engineer, “On Religius And Intercultural Dialogue”, http//.www.global. net. com.
Budi Hardiman, Menuju Masyarakat Komunikatif , Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 1993
Fazlurrahman, Tema-Tema Pokok Al-qur’an, trans. Ahsin Muhammad Pustaka : Bandung, 1996.
Victoria Neufeldt, Webster New College Dictionary, (USA : Macmillan,1996.
Farid Esack, Qur’an Liberation and Pluralism, Oxford: One World, 2002
Ibn al-Mandzūr, Lisān al-‘Arab, Kairo : Dar al-Kitab al-Masri, vol. 2.
Muhammad Arkoun, Nalar Islami Nalar Modern, Jakarta: INIS.
Wilfred C. Smith, The Meaning and End of Religion, New York : Mentor Books, 1991.
[1] Ibn al-Mandzūr, Lisān al-‘Arab, (Kairo : Dar al-Kitab al-Masri), vol. 2. p.1467-1470.
[2]Farid Esack, Qur’an Liberation and Pluralism, (Oxford: One World, 2002), p. 126.
[3]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 134.
[4]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 127.
[5] Wilfred C. Smith, The Meaning and End of Religion, (New York : Mentor Books, 1991), p. 102.
[6] Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 129.
[7]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 129.
[8]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 129.
[9] Victoria Neufeldt, Webster New College Dictionary, (USA : Macmillan,1996 ), p. 878.
[10] Fazlurrahman, “Major Themes Qur’an” or check on, Fazlurrahman, Tema-Tema Pokok Al-qur’an terj. Ahsin Muhammad (Pustaka : Bandung, 1996), p. 233-245
[11] Muhammad Arkoun, Nalar Islami Nalar Modern, (Jakarta: INIS), p . 215-219.
[12] Asghar Ali Engineer, “On Religius And Intercultural Dialogue”, http//.www.global. net. com.
[13]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 179.
[14] For example, 5: 51, 3: 28 and many others.
[15] Farid Esack, Qur’an Liberation..….p. 203.
[16] The hermeneutical theory that used by Esack refers to Carl Braaten definition stated that hermeneutic was the science reflecting on how a word or an event in a past time and culture may be understood and become existentially meaningful in our present situation. It involves both the methodological rules to be applied in exegesis as well as the epistemological assumption of understanding. See, Farid Esack, Qur’an, …….., p. 51.
[17] Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 50.
[18]Budi hardiman, Menuju Masyarakat Komunikatif (Yogyakarta : Kanisius, 1993), p. 13.
But in this paper I don’t pretend to explain the first study, but rather to explain the Islamic concept of pluralism. Many studies of pluralism are actually held and practiced, but for me this issue is still up to date to give an image that Islam isn’t a nest of terrorists, that Islam isn’t an exclusive kind of religion, on the contrary, inclusive. In this opportunity I will present the pluralism concept that was established by Farid Esack, a contemporary thinker from South Africa, who lived under apartheid regime.
Defining Islam: a short explanation
Etimologically Islam is defined as submission and surrender. In dictionary of Lisan Arab, Ibn Manzur said that Islam means submission (al-Inqiyad).[1] Also according to Islamic law (syariah), Islam is defined to submission, to syariat and maintaining everything that Muhammad SAW’s brought.
I think in this occasion I don’t want to explore what Islam is, because it has been described widely in many Islamic books.
The Concept of Islam of Esack
Farid Esack tries to describe Islam in terms not as has been understood like the explanation above, but he views Islam as a religious term that has active character bases. In other words, Islam doesn’t mean a narrow formulation or a passive concept formed as an institutionalized religious system, that he said as reified conception of Islam.[2] But rather than that, he interpreted it as an active label that refers to practice performance that was formed and perceived as surrender way, obeying and totally submitting to God.
For Esack, the word of Islam is a positive representation of practice actions as active responds to order and God’s wish. Therefore, it doesn’t prevail just to a religious sect, but universally to all religions, especially, for Esack’s case, for all people of South Africa that totally admit and respond their God’s order. [3]
What Esack said above normatively based on Allah said in Qur’an: 3: 19:
Behold, the din with God is Islam; and those who were vouchsafed the scripture aforetime, out of mutual jealousy, differed only after knowledge had come unto them. But as for the one who reject is ungrateful (Yakfur) for signs of God, behold God is swift in reckoning.
In the verses above Esack finds that there two central understandings, and they are a base for the appearance of kind of exclusive and chauvinistic understanding in Islam. Both the key words were din and al-islam. [4] For getting more comprehensive understanding, Esack tries to elaborate the views of interpreters (mufassirin) that he considered represent the majority views. There are many interpreters that he cited in his book, such as, al-Thabari, Ibn Arabi, Zamakhsyari, al-Razi, Rasyid Ridha and Thabatabai.
To strengthen his argument, Esack refers to the linguistic analysis that is held by Ibn Manzur and Wilfred Cantwell Smith of the term of din in holy Qur’an. [5] After reading both prominent figures, Esack has a strong assumption, the term of din doesn’t has a narrow meaning –as held by majorities of Islamic thinkers- as a reified and formal religious system. In other words, in this context, Esack doesn’t interpret Islam as din, but emphasizes a process. The term of din is understood as surrender to God. According to Esack, there some reason for this:
“First, the term din was employed with various meaning within the Arabian Peninsula during seventh century. It was inevitable that the Qur’an would use it within the confines of those understandings. The absence of the plural form, adyan, is perhaps reflective of this, because religious life was not as fully reified then. Secondly, the Qur’an is engaged in a dynamic relationship with its hearers; it speaks and uses expression in terms of understanding of a community or individuals at a particular stage of their development. Thus the word din is not employed in the communal sense in the early Meccan context. Thirdly, to deny to affirm din or yaum al-din had little or nothing to do with verbal or theoretical affirmation or rejection related to a personal life-style to respond to God and a higher moral imperative or one of actively displaying contempt for these. Fourthly, the present near universal understanding of din as ‘religion’ and the corresponding virtual elimination of din as a personal response to God is unfounded in the text of the Qur’an, as well as in traditional exegesis.” [6]
The word of Islam as Muhammad Asad said, means self-surrender unto God. As a verbal noun, the term appears only eight times in the Qur’an whereas its foundation verb, aslama, appears twenty-four times.
Although this term is infrequently used, it has a central position in Moslem self definition.[7] The fact that this word is infrequent in Qur’an indicates that the character of Qur’an does not focus too much on the words that are related with static-metaphysic thought rather than the words that are intrinsically related to the active and dynamic conception.
According to Jane Smith, actually the appearance of various interpretations to this word, focused to two conditions: first, the relation between self-surrender externally and internally. Second, related with individual aspect and Islamic sect. In other words, the meaning of genuine Islam summarized in a mix between individual and sect understanding. This view is generally followed by classical interpreters in defining Islam. [8]
The Concept of Pluralism
The definition of Islam as a non reified and formal concept results in the acceptance of other religious believers. This then also results in receiving the religious pluralism concept. According to Webster Collgeate Dictionary, the word of pluralism means “Theory that there are more than one or more than two kind of ultimate reality”. [9] Therefore Esack gave chapters on his book Qur’an Liberation and Pluralism, that especially explain about this. Actually In Islamic discourse, religious pluralism isn’t a new topic. Some prominent Islamic thinker, like Fazlurrahman,[10] Mohammed Arkoun,[11] Asghar Ali Engineer[12] and others wrote a specific exploration about it before Esack.
But from all of the ideas that he wrote, there were new ideas about Qur’anic perspective in relation with other religious believers, relationship among religions, gender equality that was established from the consciousness to implement it to practice liberally. Practically, by his hermeneutical approach on the Qur’an about religious pluralism, Esack tried to relate pluralism theme to liberation of South Africans from their suffering. Even the pluralism concept that was born in South Africa came for their struggle for real liberation from the apartheid regime. The socio-political culture that was practiced in South Africa created apartheid ideology which divided religious people into groups.
One of his efforts to bridge theological rigidity, especially for the oppressed people was to establish theology was based on religious pluralism mixed with theology of liberation. The fundamental thing that he presented from this idea was how to identified religious community as self and having relationships with the others. Esack stated that theological categories of self and other were no longer tenable. [13]
This then began with the new interpretation on the keys word like the concept wilayah, kufr, and hijrah (exodus) theme. Many qur’anic verses were cited in his explanation.[14] From this exploration he concludes that the text dealing with the wilayah of religious Other, when understood in their historical context, offers a radically different perspective to that which a casual and decontextualized reading renders. Far from preventing Moslems from entering into relationship of solidarity with the religious Other, they actually facilitate and inspire the progressive Islamists’ pursuit of a hermeneutic that accommodate the religious Other and liberative-praxis.[15] While in the exodus paradigm, he said that this support for solidarity with the Other, though, was not limited to the religious Other, but also embraces those among the poor and downtrodden who actively reject the religious beliefs of Islam.
The context of pluralism, though, was not a vague commitment to Allah in forms of Otherness; indeed, some forms of Otherness are vehemently opposed and the Qur’an does not hesitate to encourage the severest forms of opposition to them. Instead, the Qur’an roots its own pluralism in a common struggle against oppression and injustice. Rather than a fashionable interfaith dialogue, we see an unarticulated solidarity with the marginalized and exploited that crosses narrow doctrinal lines. The basis of the pluralism being postulated in the Qur’an is, one may say, liberal praxis.
Some Notes For Esack
His concepts of Islam not as an idiom or label proposed not exclusively to Moslems, but also to another believers that really submit to respond their God’s order. From his exploration between Islam and pluralism it can be seen that Esack used a hermeneutical theory[16] in interpreting Qur’anic verses. He understood that the interpreters, classical or contemporary, were human that could be right or wrong in the interpretation process. They also interpreted the scripture according to the situation and environment where they lived.[17]
The fundamental thing that needs to be answered in this note is how to explain the relation between the idea of pluralism presented by Esack with interest, or in Habermas language, to clearly separate between knowledge and interest. To prove this theoretically Habermas has made a clear method; to make dialectical process that has its historical traces from the oppressed dialogue then reconstruct what has been oppressed.[18] There I think in this note I will use the critical theory as a tool of analysis on the pluralism ideas that establish by Esack.
From this condition Esack tries to stand up against oppressions and tries to liberate people that have the same fate with him. That why then, the way of his interpretation on Qur’an always announced liberation, justice, inter-religious solidarity, and advocacy for the oppressed.
Second, his interpretation influenced by his community. May be he cannot deny this, because logically a man will leave a community if he has no need or interest any longer in that community.
His idea of pluralism clearly has a purpose that not only stops on the discourse level, but further than that is oriented as a tool that can form agregation and social mobility.
At least, if ideology is considered as a system, idea, way of thought or structure of thought then can be parts of ideological tools, Esack’s idea itself also is a kind of structure of thought. Therefore Esack’s ideas about pluralism are a structure of thought that includes from its ideology. Automatically, Esack’s structure of thought is also influenced by his ideological orientation that reflects his class position and his social bases as the oppressed that struggles for justice and liberation. In this case, I think Qur’an also can be an ideological tool that is very accurate to destroy apartheid ideology and other ideology that has its oppressive and tyrannical. So it is not strange if Esack understand Qur’an not just only understand, interpret and translate it, but also must be able to implement it in a structure of action.
Bibliography
Asghar Ali Engineer, “On Religius And Intercultural Dialogue”, http//.www.global. net. com.
Budi Hardiman, Menuju Masyarakat Komunikatif , Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 1993
Fazlurrahman, Tema-Tema Pokok Al-qur’an, trans. Ahsin Muhammad Pustaka : Bandung, 1996.
Victoria Neufeldt, Webster New College Dictionary, (USA : Macmillan,1996.
Farid Esack, Qur’an Liberation and Pluralism, Oxford: One World, 2002
Ibn al-Mandzūr, Lisān al-‘Arab, Kairo : Dar al-Kitab al-Masri, vol. 2.
Muhammad Arkoun, Nalar Islami Nalar Modern, Jakarta: INIS.
Wilfred C. Smith, The Meaning and End of Religion, New York : Mentor Books, 1991.
[1] Ibn al-Mandzūr, Lisān al-‘Arab, (Kairo : Dar al-Kitab al-Masri), vol. 2. p.1467-1470.
[2]Farid Esack, Qur’an Liberation and Pluralism, (Oxford: One World, 2002), p. 126.
[3]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 134.
[4]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 127.
[5] Wilfred C. Smith, The Meaning and End of Religion, (New York : Mentor Books, 1991), p. 102.
[6] Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 129.
[7]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 129.
[8]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 129.
[9] Victoria Neufeldt, Webster New College Dictionary, (USA : Macmillan,1996 ), p. 878.
[10] Fazlurrahman, “Major Themes Qur’an” or check on, Fazlurrahman, Tema-Tema Pokok Al-qur’an terj. Ahsin Muhammad (Pustaka : Bandung, 1996), p. 233-245
[11] Muhammad Arkoun, Nalar Islami Nalar Modern, (Jakarta: INIS), p . 215-219.
[12] Asghar Ali Engineer, “On Religius And Intercultural Dialogue”, http//.www.global. net. com.
[13]Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 179.
[14] For example, 5: 51, 3: 28 and many others.
[15] Farid Esack, Qur’an Liberation..….p. 203.
[16] The hermeneutical theory that used by Esack refers to Carl Braaten definition stated that hermeneutic was the science reflecting on how a word or an event in a past time and culture may be understood and become existentially meaningful in our present situation. It involves both the methodological rules to be applied in exegesis as well as the epistemological assumption of understanding. See, Farid Esack, Qur’an, …….., p. 51.
[17] Farid Esack, Qur’an…, p. 50.
[18]Budi hardiman, Menuju Masyarakat Komunikatif (Yogyakarta : Kanisius, 1993), p. 13.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar