The
bloody fight erupted in Negri Pelauw few days ago suddenly emerges critical
question among Malukan. During “normal” condition for some years there are several
internal violent riots both in Christian (Sarane)
communities and Muslim (Salam)
communities. The conflict triggered by various factors but mostly by quarrel of
internal groups within the communities such as land border, interfamily’s
dispute, conflicting adat’s point of
view, etc.
As
far I knew, there were not clearly solutions initiated by local communities
themselves. Many were intervened by the government and police/military so that
it seems more formally than culturally conflict resolutions. For sure, I do not
neglect that strategy but somehow Malukan needs more aware that not all
internal conflict can be resolved by formal approaches. We should take an important
lesson from our previous conflict experience that essentially Malukan has local
wisdom to accommodate potential conflict and resolving internal conflict among
themselves. Still, whatever it will be the reason Malukan should aware about
the root of conflict inside as well outside.
What
about the Pelauw riot? Some media (printed and online) reported that it was
triggered by the adat ritual which is
usually conducts before Idhul Adha
ceremony. But the media did not explain – or probably they deliberately keep
the information – about the main factor of riot. I was trying to search
information via internet and phone to get confirmation about the cause of
Pelauw’s riot but failed, until my colleague sent me a pinch of information.
My
colleague said that usually before Idhul
Adha the Pelauw people conducts an adat
ritual. They have been conducting the adat
ritual for centuries since their ancestry life. The adat ritual is included in series of preparation ritual for
celebrating Idhul Adha. Pelauw people
have no serious problem to accommodate local tradition into Islamic ceremony as
they view that adat and Islam has
been their cultural identity (cf. the concept of intermingling identity of
Malay and Islam in Malaysia). Their understanding about Islamic teaching
colored the local tradition and vice versa: their local tradition is used as
religious expression. The dynamic interpenetration between Islam and adat resulted on what well-known in
Pelauw as “Islam syariah” and “Islam adat”. They do accept these two
typologies.
However,
it is interesting that currently there are prominent influences from modernist
or fundamentalist groups of Islam which endeavor to purify such tradition by
abolishing such an adat ritual. They
are mostly Pelauw people who perceived different Islamic teaching from outside.
It is not clear enough about the identification of outside here. The modernist
groups totally reject the execution of adat
ritual as a way to distort Islamic purity (kafir).
They regard it as not Islam so that they endeavor to conduct dakwah vastly as religious mission to
purify Islam – as they understood it – against adat . On the other hand, mostly Pelauw people who devoted to adat assert that they are true Muslims
as well while respecting adat as
existential realm in their Islamic religiosity. Islam for them only could be
comprehended if Islam colors the local culture of Pelauw. Islam, therefore, is
part of Pelauw’s cultural identity, not merely a religion.
The
recently Pelauw case – and some others – reminds me to M.C. Ricklefs’ book Polarising Javanese Society: Islamic and
other visions (c. 1830-1930). Ricklefs depicts that the interpenetration of
religion (Islam) and society (Javanese) eventually resulted on the ambiguous
identity of Javanese people. By doing historical analysis he displays that
tension between Islam and Javanese tradition incrementally invented latent
conflicting identity and involved power contestation of these bulwarks. The
so-called “mystic synthesis” he used to identify Islam in Javanese society and
it was driven by political power of Sultan Agung and Pakubuwana II who succeeded
to accommodate Islam and Javanese tradition. Sociologically, Ricklefs’ analysis
found that the interpretive tension between Islam and Javanese tradition then
emerged new social construction, i.e. putihan
(pious Muslim), abangan (nominal
Muslim), and priyayi who opposed
Islam openly, not by embracing Christianity, but returning to Java’s
pre-Islamic past.
By
writing this shortly note, I would like to provide only my socio-cultural
reflection about the phenomena of religion and culture dynamic
interrelationship. We actually should learn much from our own history to
construct our own distinguished historical narrative. We cannot evade that our religiosity
in Maluku (or elsewhere in Indonesia) is very affected by our local cultures. Also,
our cultural expressions are much constructed by our religious interpretations.
What we can do, in my view, is not to refuse totally both but perceiving them
critically and further trying to contextualize them as we live in changing
contemporary eras. The important aim is we learn relentless from the dark-side
of our history to create our new history for Malukan next generations. I have
no perfect conclusion or suggestion. I just offer peaceful possibility as a part
of our cultural big puzzling picture.
No comments:
Post a Comment