The
Sunni-Shiite tensions that have been smoldering for the last few years are
indicative of the radicalization of religious identities in Indonesia,
threatening our culture of tolerance.
Before the declaration of the Anti-Shia National
Alliance (ANNAS) in Purwakarta regency recently, violence and hatred against
Shiites have been widespread. The displacement of Shiites from their homes in
Sampang, Madura, after an incident in 2013 that left two persons dead, has
remained unresolved. Anti-Shia pamphlets have appeared in many places. Even
Yogyakarta, known for a while as a city of tolerance, has recently witnessed
increasing threats against Shiites.
On the other hand, there is a tendency among Shiites
to shift from a locally embedded expression of Shia to what Chiara Formichi
calls “a paradigm of devotion promoted by the Islamic Republic of Iran”.
In her “Shaping Shi’a Identities in Contemporary
Indonesia between Local Tradition and Foreign Orthodoxy”, Formichi contends
that in the post-reform era certain groups within the Shia community “have
tended to polarize between those committed to the practice of ritual paradigms
promoted by the Islamic Republic of Iran, and those cultivating cultural and
local manifestations of devotions”. It is true that conflict between these two
religious communities has deep roots in the history of Islam, but the recent
sectarian conflicts seem to have new elements of religious, political and
socio-economic reconfigurations in this country. From the perspective of
religious differences, the Sunni-Shia divide is reconcilable.
In the context of legal thought and practice, the
differences between Sunni and Shia beliefs are by no means greater than those
among different Sunni schools of law madhhab (schools of law). Just as Sunnism
crystalized into four schools of law (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i and Hanbali),
Shia is also divided into the Imamiyya or Twelver Shia, Zaydiyya and
Isma’iliyya. It is these broad communities to which by far the overwhelming
majority of Muslims belong nowadays.
The aspiration toward ecumenical rapprochement between
Sunnis and Shiites has been attempted by al-Azhar, one of the oldest Islamic institutions
of learning in Egypt. It started quite early in the 20th century when the
Shaykh al-Azhar, Salim al-Bishri, had a correspondence with the Shiite scholar
‘Abd al-Husayn Sharaf al-Din from Jabal ‘Amil in southern Lebanon. This
rapprochement culminated in the establishment of Jama’a al-Taqrib bayn
al-Madhahib al-Islamiyya (The Society for Rapprochement of Islamic Legal
Schools) in 1947 with the goal of promoting reconciliatory relations between
Sunnis and Shiites. Once this ecumenical thinking was institutionalized,
contacts took place that paved the way for peaceful coexistence.
In 1949, Jama’a’s journal, Risala al-islam, was
founded in which both Sunni and Shiite writers were afforded the opportunity to
voice opinions in favor of ecumenism. Among Shia scholars, the Lebanese
Muhammad Jawad Mughniyya was the staunchest supporter of rapprochement between
Sunnis and Shiites.Perhaps, the greatest success of this rapprochement was when
the Shaykh al-Azhar, Mahmud Shaltut, issued a statement in 1959 saying that
worship according to the Twelver Shia was valid and its madhhab was also fully
recognized within Islam.
Mughniyya visited Shaltut in Cairo a few weeks before
the latter’s death 1963 and vowed to bring his noble ideas to fruition.I
discussed Mughniyya’s life and ideas in my book, Scriptural Polemics: The Koran
and Other Religions, and I found his ecumenical thinking transcended the
theological divide. When he was in Cairo, Mughniyya visited mosques, bookstores
and universities in order to find out the opinion of the local Sunnis regarding
Shia. What outraged him most was the widespread ignorance and ineradicable
prejudices about Shia.
It was with this in mind that he had devoted several
monographs to comparative law and encouraged a reform of the curricula to
include Shia law in the courses of legal studies at the University. Until
today, the Shia madhhab continue to be studied at Al-Azhar along with other
Sunni schools.This Sunni-Shiite rapprochement initiated by the most acclaimed
Islamic institution in the world reflects the extent to which theological
differences that divide Sunnis and Shiites can be overcome and turned into
meaningful conversations.
This is exactly what a scholar like Yusuf al-Qaradawi,
the towering figure among Islamist groups, attempts to do. In his 2004 Mabadi’
fi al-Hiwar wa al-Taqrib bayn al-Madhahib al-Islamiyya (Declaration of
Principles for Dialogue and Rapprochement among Islamic Legal Schools),
Qaradawi urges Muslims not to brand others as unbelievers. He appeals to both Sunnis
and Shiites alike to avoid the exaggeration of religious extremists.It goes
without saying that Indonesian Muslims must learn from the al-Azhar initiative
and reliable scholars like Qaradawi.
Seen from the context, nature and significance of the
recent phenomenon of sectarian conflict, it seems clear that the radicalization
of Sunni and Shia identities has more political undertones due to the volatile
political atmosphere. Much of the support for sectarian organizations comes
from interest groups, both locally and globally.
It is no longer secret that anti-Shia movements have
had some connection with Saudi Arabia as much as certain Shia groups with Iran.
The Saudi anti-Shia position is reflected in a number of fatwa (edicts) issued
by Saudi ulema who consider Shia as a form of unbelief. It is worth mentioning
a fatwa by Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Baz, who served as Grand Mufti of the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia in 1994, saying that the differences between Sunnis and Shiites
were unbridgeable. The modern historical context framing this fatwa is the
struggle for political influence between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Thus, the radicalization of religious identities seems
to be fueled not so much by religious orientation as by political contestation
taking place outside this country. Of course, there are theological differences
between Sunnism and Shia, yet they are reconcilable. When religious motivation
interacts with political context, then our culture of tolerance is under a
serious threat.
The writer i Mun’im Sirry, Notre Dame, Indiana s an
assistant professor of theology at the University of Notre Dame, USA
No comments:
Post a Comment