Clerics, edicts and trust

Khairil Azhar

The simple and low profile Islamic figure, after listening to a question, usually did not answer it directly, especially when the question was related to sensitive problem or disputable. Even he often took a day or two or three before answering it. He always said, “Let me think first. I need to learn it as well as possible. Hastiness makes us closer to the wrong path.” And the figure was Sheikh Ibrahim Musa, an Islamic leading expert from Minangkabau in the beginning of the 20th century.
This attitude actually was practiced by most of the prominent figures in Islamic clerical history. Imam Shafi’i, for example, the founder of the school of thought mostly embraced in Indonesia, spent most of his time learning and examining each issue came up carefully and delivered an edict with his famous saying, “This is my opinion. Please check and confirm it as well as possible. Perhaps there is another better solution….”
Nowadays, as if the clerics were smart machines. They pretend to know every thing. Take a look at the religious service delivered on a TV show for example or how most of them preach on Fridays. Many of the services at the end exactly raise up fear and anxiety instead of peacefulness and happiness. Similarly, instead of becoming more informed and knowledgeable, the listeners or viewers are put into an obscurity and made to be pretending being enlightened while in fact they get nothing but a short-moment relief.
Or the services may end up with tears and cries, while these expressions are taken for granted by some, symbolizing the quality of faith. And to the questionable assumption and phenomenon, the religious figure Jalaluddin Rahmat once responded when he was talking about what is so-called spiritual quotient. “If all of the other intelligences found so far, especially the ones verified by Howard Gardner, have their accurate means for measurement, this quotient impressively has its own measure in Indonesia. Someone with better spiritual quality with this instrument will have more tears spilled from his eyes. The more cries and tears, the more spiritual quotient he has.”
In the same tone with the above narrowness is of course related to how the services given by some of the clerics actually make the world smaller with new rules and restrictions for the people. Edicts contrarily have been instruments to shackling the supposed hurriyya (freedom) provided by the God Himself. And the reason behind this repression is never explained clearly to the level of haq al-yaqin, definitely authenticated based on reliable evidences.
As the first resulting consequences of this narrow-mindedness surely are confusion and insecurity in the heart of the people, it is somehow then opposing the grand idea of how Islam has been revealed to appease and bless all creatures in the universe (rahmatalli’alamin). Instead of gaining better consciousness through the religious teachings, the people on the other way intentionally or unintentionally position themselves in such a distance from the religion itself. That is why, for example, many Moslems decide to stay being abangan, not adhering strictly to the precepts of their nominal religion, rather than becoming santri or strictly adherent.
On the other end of the continuum, religious edicts latently may derail the people into the abyss of excessiveness if not extremism. The clerics, officially or unofficially, potentially stiffen the flexibility of what is so-called hablumminannas, human or communal relationship aspects of the Moslems, and make them easily in a friction with the other groups in the society. They then will find themselves more different from the others and identify their own group extremely tightly.
It is then not the first controversial problem issued conservatively by the clerics in the story “Indonesian Clerics Want Rules for Facebook” appeared at The Jakarta Post, Friday, 22 May 2009 and some following stories. Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), for example, have also released edict to the prohibition of practicing yoga, whereas many people convince about its advantages for physical and mental health and there is no specified faith foundation evidently harmed.
What the clerics fail so far to show up in front of their followers and the other people is about “trust”. And it is no an easy subject. The edict delivered by MUI about Golput (prohibition not to be participating in the national election) might be the best example of how their credibility was at stake. This semi-official institution decided the edict however could be seen allegedly accommodating Islamic parties interest amid the people confusion of their sinking performances. As it was proven later, that despite of the edict, the “trust” of the people (not to say Moslems) to the Islamic parties as well as the election itself then evidenced lowering, and the edict failed to prove itself weighing an influence onto the people.
This is then about how people actually trust the religious leaders.
Buya Hamka, the first head of MUI, might have shown us what an aspect of trust actually. When he was offered the position, calmly persistently he refused to be salaried by the government or any other institutions which would make him not independent or under pressure. Had this prerequisite been accepted by both sides, Buya Hamka taught us a worth lesson. When he was offered to deliver an edict related to seemingly confused religious practice between Moslems and their non-Moslems counterparts, he barely rejected. As an Islamist as well as a nationalist he could accepted pluralism based on his well-comprehension on the religion, but he refused to lead the people into a dispute related to ritual mixture, albeit this was for the sake of the government program of establishing inter-faith tolerance which was unfittingly launched.
The trust is also about how the clerics choose the needy issues to be solved. Instead of busying themselves with supra-structural issues, which do not touch the most problems the people are facing, they actually potentially could help the them with their edicts and acts and gain recognition and admiration through participating in solving the more real problems such as starvation, malnutrition, illiteracy, underdevelopment, and many other actual problems. The clerics therefore should contribute their social power to leveraging people’s quality of life economically and socially while it is this the foundation of what the holy texts insist to be built as one of the prerequisite of people welfare and justice.
And the last, it is about how trust could become the base of how an edict delivered. Most of controversial edicts so far were based on hesitancy, a quality that is actually required to be considered extremely in Islamic legal philosophy extending from the quality of shak (severe hesitancy) to zhan (light hesitancy). It is then about changing the paradigm of how to take a look at the phenomenon and the people with positive viewpoints rather then with even a slight suspicion. Is not that “al-asl fi al-ashya’ al-ibahat”, every thing naturally is allowed and acceptable? Does not it remind us that positive-minded is the main base and not skepticism?
The God Himself actually has given a good example in this case in the Koran. When the angels hesitated and complained the creation of human being, that they would just do destruction and be in wars, the God wisely assure them that these creatures, as long as they have sound mind and knowledge, will be able to establish welfare and justice (2:30-39). In other words, the God Himself positively has shown us how to consider a problem, not merely on the bad possibilities but proportionally should start from the positive parts.

The writer is currently a teacher and graduated from the Syari’a Faculty of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.