Forward
The debate on the problem of secularization and secularism has already consumed a sizable portion of the history of
At the level of practice, the application of the concept of a “secular nation” is also very relative. Is, for example, the state forbidden to interfere in religious education at school, regulate the construction of places of worship, or assist in the education of da’i (propagators) or pastors, regulate the issue of halal and haram (Islamically lawful or unlawful), gather zakat, limit the number of religions which may be recognized, as well as not regulating in connection with the hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca)? Or for example, must the state give freedom to its citizens to embrace any religion or belief, including marriage by any method, because that represents a basic right of every citizen?
Proposing to change the term from “secular nation” to “democratic nation” In
What needs to be understood is that the ide of a ‘Secular nation’, or innovation in the Islamic world, including Indonesia, because in 1981, the late Ali Moertopo made seven exegeses of the The Divine Moral Principles of the One Great God (from the state Ideology, Pancasila), whose contents contain the same points-if not exactly the same points-with the thought of Denny JA.
In spite of proposing to change the term from ‘secular nation’ to ‘democratic nation’, Denny JA still holds the opinion that a “secular nation” is the ideal from for the country[1]. In fact, from this article the thinking of Denny JA is more clear, by referring to the United States as the ‘main secular nation’ for example: these seven exegeses are (a) The Republic of Indonesia guarantees the freedom of every resident to embrace their respective religions and to perform their rites and rituals according to their religion and belief ( sub –section 29, section 2, 1945 Constitution ) ;(b) In the Republic of Indonesia the freedom of religion is recognized, as well as the freedom of each person to embrace a religion; (c) In the Republic of Indonesia religion is a private institution and not a state institution, therefore it is not regulated, handled, or conducted by the state; (d) The Republic of Indonesia values and respects religion without differentiation or discrimination.[2]
Denny JA also promotes the
So Indeed, the problem of “secular nation”, “democratic nation”, and “the relationship between religion and the state is a large issue which cannot possibly obtain a full treatment in this limited space. However, debating this issue is very important, in order to find a common meeting point-if possible-or to find a good synthesis, especially the one which is best to be applied in
A concept or thought does not appear over night. Terms possess and understanding or are understood bye the people who already have a certain perception and predetermined back-ground. In an Indonesia context, for example, this concept of a secular nation is set together with the appearance of the issues of “sectarianism”, “primordialism”, and the “majority as dictator”, following what was called by the political analyst R. William Liddle as a “dramatic change” in the Islamic political policies of the New Order era since the middle of the eighties..
Liddle[3] note a number of indicators of that change. Among Them are: the revocation of the forbiddance of wearing Islamic headscarves by Muslim ladies, the submission of a Bill (RUU) for Religious Courts, and the establishment of the Islamic Bank.
In this context, the Muslims of Indonesia were an easy target for various accusations, because they did not want to receive this concept of a’ Secular nation’. It was as if the Muslim were not tolerant, and behaved as the “just because” majority. Or perhaps because they rejected the concept of a secular nation came the accusation that the Muslims wanted a religious or theocratic state. At the least, when Islamic values or laws were accommodated in the national legal system, came the strong accusation that the principle of a secular nation had already been abandoned.
According to Western understanding, a “religious nation” is an order of God, whose reign obtains its power from “above” with the result that the government is religious in nature and cannot be criticized or asked to take responsibility.. Whereas, Islam views that the people are the source of power of the ruler, to the extent that a ruler cannot be immune from criticism, and the rule of law is over everything. The difference is that law in Islamic society originators from the Qur’an and the sayings and actions ( hadith) of the prophet (Muhammad SAW). On the other hand, law in the West originates from nature or Ancient Rome
Islam and non-Muslim Communities
It has always been said that the attitude of non Muslim communities towards Islamic rule is a critical and delicate question which many people hesitate to discuss for fear of causing dissension between Muslims and non-Muslims.
As for the provisions, may quote the Holy Qur’an:
“God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you for ( your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: For God loveth those who are just”[4]
Also refer to the general principle in Islamic jurisprudence: “They shall have the same obligations and rights as we”.
The Islamic Holy texts enjoin Muslims to treat non-Muslim in a kind and fair manner. Apart from the rights and obligations involving worship, they are equal to Muslims with respect to all other rights and obligations related to social life and the rights of citizens
Purpose of the Islamic State
The Holy Qur’an clearly states that the aim and purpose of this state is the establishment, maintenance and development of those virtues with which the Creator of this Universe wishes the human life to be adorned and the prevention and eradication of those evils the presence of which in human life is utterly abhorrent to God. The State in Islam is not intended for political administration anly nor for the fulfillment through it of the collective will of any particular set of people: rather, Islam place a high ideal before the state for the achievement of which it must use all the means at its disposal. And This purpose is that the qualities of purity, beauty, goodness, virtue, success and prosperity which God wants to flourish in the life of His people should be engendered and evolved and that all kinds of exploitation, injustice and disorders which, in the view of God, are ruinous for the world and detrimental to the life of His creatures are suppressed and prevented.
Although an Islamic state may be set up in any portion of the earth, Islam does not seek to restrict human rights or privileges to the geographical limits of its own state. Islam has laid down some universal fundamental rights[5] for humanity as a whole, which are to be observed and respected under all circumstances whether such a person is resident within the territory of the Islamic state or out side it, whether he is at peace with the state or at war. Human blood is sacred in any case and cannot be spilled without justification. It is not permissible to oppress women, children, old son or the wounded. Woman’s honors and chastity are worthy of respect under all circumstances.
Conclusion
Islamic History is rich with proof of democratic government with the understanding that there is equality before the law, vulnerability to criticism, governmental transparency, and responsibility and protection for the rights of the people. In his farewell (Final) Pilgrimage in Mecca, Prophet Muhammad, may the peace and mercy of Allah be upon him, said in his speech: “ Oh mankind, if there is anyone whom I ever lashed his back (unfairly), then here is my back so that he can avenge that lashing”.[6] The Muslims have never had a” History of revenge” regarding religion, such as has been experienced by the peoples of the west. Because of that, it would be very strange if some of the followers of Islam became frightened and withheld feelings of revenge towards their own religion, to the extent that they made Islam as” a forbidden (haram) thing,” or something which must always be suspected and distanced from the state, as if religion is the source or impetus of government corruption..
Whereas, corruption can be done whenever, by whomever, in any place, and by wearing any type of clothing, whether it is the clothing of religion, communism, secularism, or even democracy.
Reference:
Repubika, 6/19/1997
Moertopo, Ali, National Development Strategy Published by CSIS,
Liddle, William R., Islam, Politics and Modernization,
The Holy Quran
Islamic Law and Constitution. Ch.6.Sec VII and Ch,7. Sec.IX and X
Huwaydi, Fahmi, Demokrasi, Oposisi, dan Masyarakat Madani,
[1] Repubika,6/19/1997
[2] see Ali Moertopo, in National Development Strategy Published by CSIS,
[3] in his book Islam, Politics and Modernization (published by Pustaka Sinar Harapan, 1997, pp.70-71
[4] The Holy Quran (60): 8
[5] Abul ‘ala alMaududi .Islamic Law and Constitution. Ch.6.Sec VII and Ch,7. Sec.IX and X
[6] Look. Dr. Fahmi Huwaydi, Demokrasi, Oposisi, dan Masyarakat Madani, Mizan, 1997: 281-290
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar