100 Tahun Muhammadiyah

Kompas, Senin, 30 November 2009 | 02:39 WIB

Ahmad Najib Burhani

Muhammadiyah memperingati kelahirannya yang ke-100 pada 8 Zulhijah 1430 H atau bertepatan dengan 25 November 2009.

Penggunaan kalender Hijriah sebagai perhitungan satu abad ini berbeda dari sistem kalender yang dipakai saat pendirian, yaitu kalender Masehi (18 November 1912). Sebagian pengamat melihat pergeseran pilihan kalender ini bukan sesuatu yang penting dibicarakan karena hanya berkaitan dengan perayaan. Pada 18 November 2012, mereka percaya, Muhammadiyah akan mengulang perayaan 100 tahun secara lebih meriah. Namun, bagi sebagian orang, pergeseran ini dianggap sebagai bukti proses Arabisasi dalam tubuh organisasi modernis ini.
Pertanyaannya, ke mana arah keberagamaan Muhammadiyah? Apakah ia akan menjadi organisasi progresif atau akan terjebak pada fundamentalisme?
Selama ini, pengamat dan warga Muhammadiyah sering memasukkan organisasi ini dalam kategori Islam moderat. Apa makna moderat? Sebagai sebuah ”konsep relasi”, istilah Islam moderat memiliki dua sifat, afirmatif dan negatif.
Sifat pertama mengindikasikan adanya dua peradaban berbeda, Islam dan Barat. Menjadi moderat berarti tetap menjadi Muslim sejati dan pada saat bersamaan mengadopsi nilai dan ide Barat. Masuk dalam kategori afirmatif adalah anggapan tentang dua zaman, dulu dan sekarang.
Bersikap moderat berarti menjaga nilai baik dari Islam zaman dulu dan mengadopsi nilai baru yang lebih baik. Sementara sifat kedua dari moderat mengindikasikan penolakan terhadap dua ekstrem, liberal dan radikal. Seorang Muslim moderat bukanlah teroris, juga bukan orang yang berpaham liberal.
Istilah Islam moderat lebih kental aroma politik daripada pendasaran teologis dan sosiologis. Istilah ini dipopulerkan George W Bush dalam rangka war on terror. Mereka yang berpihak kepada Bush disebut moderat Islam, sementara lawannya dianggap teroris. Istilah ini memperkokoh pandangan tentang benturan peradaban antara Islam dan Barat yang didengungkan Samuel Huntington. Islam adalah oposisi biner dari Barat.
Dengan menghindari penggunaan istilah Muslim moderat yang kontroversial itu, saya menawarkan penggunaan kategori baru dalam membaca Muhammadiyah berdasarkan pendekatan teologis: puritan, salafis, dan progresif.
Puritan, salafis, dan progresif
Berdasarkan penelitian saya tahun 2007, orang puritan, sebagai mayoritas di Muhammadiyah, memiliki model keberagamaan unik. Mereka amat konservatif dalam beragama, tetapi orientasinya bersifat duniawi. Orang puritan, dalam istilah Max Weber, menekankan asketisme duniawi. Keberhasilan beragama diukur dari seberapa banyak beramal sosial; membangun sekolah, panti asuhan, dan rumah sakit. Keselamatan bagi kelompok lebih terletak pada aktivitas sosial.
Dalam beragama, kelompok puritan percaya, perempuan harus aktif di publik, tetapi harus terpisah dari laki-laki. Jilbab bukan sesuatu yang wajib, tetapi dianjurkan agama. Negara Islam dan syariat bukan sesuatu yang perlu diperjuangkan saat umat Islam tak mendapat halangan apa pun dari negara saat menjalankan ajaran agama.
Kelompok kedua adalah salafis. Mereka amat peduli terhadap kode dan ritual keberagamaan. Orientasi keberagamaan kelompok ini adalah other-worldly atau semata-mata akhirat dan keselamatan terletak lebih pada keimanan daripada aktivitas sosial. Orang salafis tidak tertarik perdebatan teologis karena terlalu banyak intelektualisme justru mengacaukan keimanan.
Orang salafi percaya, tempat ideal perempuan adalah di rumah. Jika terpaksa mereka harus ke luar rumah, seperti sekolah, perempuan harus dipisahkan dari laki-laki. Konsekuensi lain dari pandangan ini, hukum pemakaian jilbab adalah wajib. Bagi kelompok ini, gagasan pelaksanaan syariat Islam harus didukung dan negara Islam lebih baik daripada sistem sekuler.
Berhadapan dengan salafi adalah kalangan progresif yang percaya terhadap kesesuaian Islam dengan Barat dan berusaha mengadopsi nilai dan ilmu dari Barat. Kelompok ini amat peduli dengan teologi dan menjadikan intelektualisme sebagai jalan pembebasan dan keselamatan. Mereka adalah penentang penerapan syariat Islam, penganjur agar perempuan aktif di publik dengan tanpa ada pemisahan dari laki-laki, menganggap jilbab sebagai bagian budaya Arab yang tidak wajib ditiru, dan percaya, pemerintahan sekuler adalah sistem terbaik bagi umat Islam.
Dinamika Internal
Istilah Islam modernis bagi Muhammadiyah dengan mendasarkan pendekatan sosiologis akhir-akhir ini mungkin kurang begitu tajam. NU yang dulu dianggap tradisionalis bergerak cepat mengatasi ketertinggalannya. Menyebut Muhammadiyah sebagai Islam moderat akan membawa organisasi ini dalam ranah kepentingan politik global.
Maka, barangkali yang lebih pas, Muhammadiyah sedang mengalami dinamika internal untuk mendefinisikan dirinya secara teologis. Setidaknya tiga model keberagamaan itu sedang berkompetisi untuk menentukan identitas teologis organisasi ini. Kalau kita percaya Weber, berangkat dari sinilah kita bisa membayangkan masa depan Muhammadiyah dalam beragam aspek kehidupan.
Ahmad Najib Burhani Peneliti LIPI; Mahasiswa Program PhD Universitas California, Santa Barbara

Download PDF

Muhammadiyah braces for second wave of reform after 100 years

The Jakarta Post, Thu, 11/26/2009 1:28 PM | Headlines

In conjunction with the centennial celebration of Muhammadiyah, The Jakarta Post's Sri Wahyuni spoke with chairman Din Syamsuddin on Wednesday about various issues related to one of Indonesia's largest Islamic organizations. The following is an excerpt from that interview.

Question: How do you see the significance of the centennial for Muhammadiyah?

Answer: Being 100 years old for an organization like Muhammadiyah is indeed very meaningful because age has shown a cycle of changes. Entering the second century of its existence, therefore, offers momentum for the organization in the future, to look back but step forward.

What challenges do you see ahead?

One of the biggest internal challenges could be the saturation caused by our 100-year existence. As the 100 years were used to develop initial thoughts, stagnancy could emerge at both the levels of thought and action.

Unless self-adjustment to external global change occurs successfully, the internal wheel of the organization could become stagnant. Thank God, Muhammadiyah does not experience this kind of stagnancy very seriously.

What self-adjustment does Muhammadiyah need now?

Self-adjustment is something that must happen in Muhammadiyah because continuity and change are the basic characters of the organization. Self-adjustment must be conducted by holding onto our fundamental values, while at the same time considering the demand for a paradigm change, which in turn will also cause a change in strategy and approach.

Of course this is not an easy task, especially with regard to the huge development that Muhammadiyah has made, making it big and less flexible. There was criticism in the 1980s that Muhammadiyah was like a big elephant, which could not move very easily and was less responsive, despite globalization. Again, thank God, the condition is not that critical, but we admit that such a phenomenon is happening in the organization.

The self-adjustment we need now is how to anticipate these speeding dynamics so they will not negatively impact on our achievements over the last 100 years. As such, the self-adjustment will take the form of a demand for revitalization.

In this case we don't need new extreme breakthroughs, but more focus on how to revive the old vitality that has been there since our establishment. Then when the organization is considered ready, we need breakthroughs to direct the trends to make them go according to plan.

Muhammadiyah was formed with the spirit of reform. We call it the first wave of tajdid (reform movement). Now we have to start the second wave of tajdid, which actually needed to start 15 to 20 years ago. But we have just started it now and we will need some 15 to 20 years to make Muhammadiyah really ready for the second wave of tajdid.

What kind of breakthroughs do you need?

We have to think about it collectively especially because Muhammadiyah also requires collective work. Unless there is a change in the leadership structure in the organization, these breakthrough have to be decided collectively.

Actually if we want it to happen quickly, we could restore the leadership to a central figure, like during the time of Ahmad Dahlan, the founding father. The figure is given the mandate and authority to lead and make decisions. Collective leadership is good, but also bad in terms of slowing the decision-making process.

My point is that we need a breakthrough. Like in the first wave, Muhammadiyah has to come up with pioneering and alternative ideas, has to have the courage to go against the stream and perform differently from the negative stream that it wants to reform, then come up with problem solving action and have the courage to take risks.

The problem is, when these ideas are discussed collectively they can be weakened and may require some compromises. The implementation, similarly, will not be as easy as during the old days, during the Ahmad Dahlan era.

In the second wave, what we need is the creation of action programs with the same basic values and ethos. Only the output will be different.

For example, when we reread the Al Ma'un verses from the Koran, what we come up with today may not be orphanages like in the old days, but maybe a comprehensive social security system or social safety net.

We expect the upcoming congress will come up with a so-called reflective, yet prospective and centennial manifesto that we will use as the key focus for our future.

What role has Muhammadiyah been playing at the international level?

Muhammadiyah indeed is not just a national, but also a international phenomenon, as shown by the special branches we have in 18 countries. We also have organizations using the same name, "ism" and symbol in the four neighboring countries of Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Cambodia, although structurally they have no relations to Muhammadiyah.

Over the last few years, Muhammadiyah has also gone global through involvements in a number of international forums including the world peace forum and the UN decade for inter-religious and interfaith dialogue, whose resolution draft is to be finalized next month and will be declared in Melbourne, Australia. Muhammadiyah was also asked to be a member of the International Consultative Group (ICG) between the Morro Islamic Liberalization Front (MILF) and the Philippine government.

A century of Muhammadiyah and modern Indonesia

M. Hilaly Basya , Leiden | The Jakarta Post, Thu, 11/26/2009 9:51 AM | Opinion

Based on the Hijriyah (Islamic) calendar, on 8 Dzulhijjah 1430 (Nov. 26, 2009), Muhammadiyah will mark the one hundredth anniversary of its existence. Muhammadiyah was established by Kyai Haji Ahmad Dahlan in 1330 Hijriyah, or Nov. 18, 1912.

As is well known, from the beginning of its movement Muhammadiyah paid great attention to the modernization of the nation. Modern Indonesia, more and less, has been influenced by Muhammadiyah figures.

Of course as a big organization in which many people are involved, Muhammadiyah has experienced dynamic development.

In general, the Muhammadiyah movement is based on modern principles. It is characterized by many modern institutions such as hospitals, schools, universities and banks developed and maintained by Muhammadiyah.

On the other hand, as explained by prominent Muslim scholar Azyumardi Azra (1999), Muhammadiyah is less responsive on contemporary issues related to modern social and political problems. Routine activities in maintaining its modern institutions may be one of the factors behind the problems.

Muhammadiyah’s concern in ritual issues is also another factor in waning Muhammadiyah interest in sociopolitical issues. It is indicated from the edicts issued by the Majelis Tarjih (law-making council) Muhammadiyah board that most of the edicts are related to bid’ah (heretic worship).

Many believe that conservatism on the part of Muhammadiyah regarding contemporary Islamic thought is caused by its emphasis on the purification agenda. In fact, as explained by Syamsul Anwar (the law-making council chairman), Muhammadiyah has two agendas: purification and dynamization, or reformation.

In the Ahmad Dahlan era, Muhammadiyah was more responsive to social problems such as in education and the economy.

In the early time of the movement, Muhammadiyah also highlighted reformation. However, in its later development, Muhammadiyah paid more attention to purification issues.

This later tendency cannot be separated from transnational Islamic movements, such as Wahhabism, that have penetrated into Indonesia. The Wahhabi movement has attracted Muhammadiyah activists.

In general, Wahhabism has similar concerns with other salafi movements, which Muhammadiyah is part of. The group has called on Muslims to return to Koran and the Sunnah (the Prophet’s traditions).

In addition, Wahhabis are not tolerant to diversity.

Wahhabism intends to purify Islam from local customs. That is why in certain periods, Muhammadiyah showed a more puritan face seeking to establish pure Islam rather than a progressive face.

Regardless of its dynamic fluctuations, Muhammadiyah still greatly contributes and supports the modern nation-state. Muhammadiyah has no intention of establishing an Islamic state. It is a modernist movement, since the first time Muhammadiyah eagerly provided education for Muslims.

It means that cultural movement is seen by Muhammadiyah as the basic requirement for modern Indonesia. In addition, the nature of Muhammadiyah is shown by its vision and mission mentioned in the Muhammadiyah constitution.

At its 33rd congress in 1956, three leaders of Muhammadiyah – K.H. Fakih Usman, Prof. K.H.M. Faried Ma’ruf and Dr. Hamka – presented the concept of Masyarakat Islam yang sebenar-benarnya (Truly Muslim society).

This concept was accepted as Muhammadiyah’s vision. This concept emphasized social education, not political orientation.

In other words, the concept does not mean establishing an Islamic state. As far as Muhammadiyah is concerned, education is the basic necessity to improve Indonesian dignity.

Furthermore, Muhammadiyah has a strong commitment to supporting secular political government as shown by Ahmad Syafii Ma’arif, the organization’s chairman from 1999 to 2005, who stated at a Muhammadiyah congress that democracy was the best political system to establish human rights and Islamic society.

This commitment has been proved since the early time of Indonesian independence.

Ki Bagus Hadikusumo, the representative of Muhammadiyah in the Pantia Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia (Preparation Committee of Indonesian Independence) agreed that the sentence mentioning the implementation of sharia law for Indonesian Muslims be eliminated from the Pancasila (national ideology) and the 1945 Constitution.

This decision was difficult, since most Indonesian Muslim leaders at that time demanded the state implement sharia law for Muslims.

Hadikusumo, with other committee members, discussed the relation between the state and religion. He realized that Indonesia was a diverse country, so it would be wise to make Indonesia a home for all people.

He convinced Indonesian Muslim leaders that the Constitution, which separated state from religion, was compatible with Islam.

In addition, Muhammadiyah developed modern educational institutions attempting to support the modernization policy developed by the governments of Sukarno and Soeharto.

This fact is the cultural capital of Muhammadiyah scholars and activists. Although in the middle of its movement this organization tended to be puritan, in general Muhammadiyah is still committed to modern values.

In the late 1990s, Muhammadiyah showed its progressive face. Social and political conditions as the impact of democratic transition also triggered this progressive wing to be involved in guiding the transitional period.

Radical Islamic movements colorizing the democratic transition in the post-Soeharto regime have attracted Muhammadiyah scholars’ attention, including that of Amien Rais, Syafii Ma’arif, Din Syamsuddin, Munir Mulkhan, Amin Abdullah, Dawam Rahardjo and Moeslim Abdurrahman.

They have played an important role in countering radical Islamic ideas. The position of these scholars on the Muhammadiyah board gave them the chance to articulate progressive ideas related to Islam and democracy. They criticized the conservative and radical Islamic thought brought by radical Islamic organizations.

Ahmad Syafii Ma’arif, for instance, said radical Islamic ideas had no future in Indonesia since they would disrupt the concept of a modern nation-state that accommodated diversity.

The idea of an Islamic caliphate, for example, would destroy Indonesia as a nation, and democracy as well. Their role in guiding democratic transition to become established or consolidated democracy is significant. It is important to note that the role of Muhammadiyah and similar organizations in Indonesia will influence the future of modern Indonesia.

Hence, Muhammadiyah activists need to always re-evaluate and reform their position in order to be able to support the nation.

The writer is a lecturer at Muhammadiyah University Jakarta (UMJ) and a student at Leiden University, the Netherlands.

Muhammadiyah Mantapkan Peran: Lakukan Pembaruan Tahap Kedua

KO M PA S / P R I YO M B O D O

Ketua Umum Pimpinan Pusat Muhammadiyah Din Syamsuddin (kiri) berbincang dengan Ketua MPR Taufik Kiemas dan Ketua Umum Pengurus Besar Nahdlatul Ulama (PBNU) Hasyim Muzadi di sela-sela Syukuran Satu Abad Muhammadiyah di Kantor PP Muhammadiyah, Jakarta Pusat, Selasa (24/11) malam.

Rabu, 25 November 2009 | 04:13 WIB

Jakarta, Kompas - Memasuki usia satu abad, Persyarikatan Muhammadiyah akan memantapkan peran dalam memajukan bangsa. Muhammadiyah juga akan terus menjaga hubungan proporsional dengan pemerintah, akan mendukung program pembangunan yang baik, tetapi sekaligus mengkritik pemerintah jika menyimpang dari konstitusi.

Demikian disampaikan Ketua Umum Pimpinan Pusat Muhammadiyah Din Syamsuddin dalam acara Syukuran Satu Abad Muhammadiyah di Gedung Pusat Dakwah Muhammadiyah, Menteng, Jakarta, Selasa (24/11) malam.

Pada usia 100 tahun ini Muhammadiyah bertekad untuk melakukan pembaruan tahap kedua. ”Pada babak baru itu Muhammadiyah akan melakukan transformasi gerakan untuk menawarkan pemikiran-pemikiran alternatif,” kata Din dalam sambutannya.

Transformasi juga dilakukan dalam mengembangkan basis kekuatan ekonomi dan mendinamisasi masyarakat madani agar lebih otonom dan bermoral. Upaya lain adalah mengembangkan basis kekuatan ekonomi, penguatan gerakan perempuan, dan mereformasi amal usaha.

Dalam kehidupan berbangsa, lanjut Din, Muhammadiyah akan terus memantapkan peran dalam merekonstruksi pranata sosial berbasis kebudayaan Indonesia yang modern dan religius. Untuk itu, Muhammadiyah mengajak seluruh masyarakat untuk kembali pada karakter bangsa yang sesungguhnya. Masyarakat diminta untuk mengembangkan budaya hidup religius, rukun, dan damai agar Indonesia tumbuh menjadi bangsa yang unggul dan berperadaban luhur.

Muhammadiyah mengajak seluruh elemen bangsa untuk melakukan revitalisasi visi dan karakter bangsa. Pembentukan kembali karakter bangsa penting dilakukan untuk menjadikan Indonesia sebagai bangsa yang berharkat dan bermartabat.

Sebagai gerakan dakwah, Muhammadiyah akan terus menjaga hubungan proporsional dengan pemerintah. ”Muhammadiyah akan mendukung pemerintah asal pemerintah baik dan benar,” ujar Din.

Sebaliknya, Muhammadiyah tidak akan segan mengkritik pemerintah jika menyimpang dari konstitusi, apalagi nilai agama dan budaya luhur bangsa.

Acara Syukuran Satu Abad Muhammadiyah dihadiri sejumlah tokoh Muhammadiyah, seperti Amien Rais dan Malik Fajar. Syukuran juga dihadiri Ketua Umum Pengurus Besar Nahdlatul Ulama KH Hasyim Muzadi, Ketua MPR Taufik Kiemas, Ketua DPR Marzuki Alie, Menteri Kehutanan Zulkifli Hasan, Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Patrialis Akbar, Ketua Mahkamah Konstitusi Mahfud MD, dan tokoh lainnya.

Dalam sambutannya, Taufik mengucapkan selamat ulang tahun yang ke-100. Dia memberikan apresiasi kepada Muhammadiyah yang terus berjuang di bidang pendidikan, kesehatan, dan kesejahteraan sosial. Muhammadiyah sudah melahirkan generasi muda terdidik yang siap mengangkat martabat bangsa.

Muhammadiyah lahir pada 8 Zulhijah 1330 Hijriah, bertepatan dengan 18 November 1912 Masehi. Persyarikatan itu didirikan oleh KH Ahmad Dahlan di Yogyakarta. Selama satu abad berdiri, Muhammadiyah memiliki ribuan ranting di Indonesia dan ranting istimewa di 18 negara.

Muhammadiyah juga memiliki belasan ribu sekolah, 167 perguruan tinggi, ratusan panti sosial, dan ribuan amal usaha lain, termasuk amal usaha yang berkaitan dengan pemberdayaan ekonomi rakyat. (NTA)

Berebut Tafsir di Muhammadiyah

Jawa Pos, [ Minggu, 22 November 2009 ]

Judul Buku : Para Pembela Islam
Penulis : Pradana Boy Z.T.F.
Penerbit : Gramata, Jakarta
Cetakan Pertama, 2009
Tebal 220 halaman

DISKURSUS pluralisme, liberalisme, dan sekularisme, dalam beberapa tahun terakhir merupakan diskursus kajian Islam yang paling banyak menyedot perhatian umat Islam di Indonesia, tidak terkecuali di Muhammadiyah sebagai organisasi Islam yang merepresentasikan Islam modern dan rasional. Saya katakan demikian, karena perbincangan mengenai pluralisme, liberalisme maupun sekularisme, di lingkungan Muhammadiyah belakangan bukan lagi berada dalam tahap discourse penuh dinamika, tetapi justru bergeser menjadi hegemoni, tepatnya hegemoni kelompok konservatif Muhammadiyah terhadap keberlangsungan pemikiran Islam progresif di organisasi ini.

Fenomena tersebut yang kemudian mendorong dan menyita perhatian sahabat saya, Pradana Boy Z.T.F., untuk melakukan research secara mendalam tentang ''pertarungan'' konservatif dan progresif di tubuh Muhammadiyah. Riset itu tentu sangat menarik, mengingat ciri utama Muhammadiyah sebagai organisasi modernis yang selama ini dikenal memegang pemahaman Islam terbuka dan toleran. Buku ini merupakan pengembangan dan penyesuaian untuk tesis masternya di Fakultas Kajian Asia, Australian National University (ANU), Canberra. Tesis ini berjudul In Defence of Pure Islam: The Conservative-Progressive Debate Within Muhammadiyah yang kemudian diterbitkan dalam edisi Indonesia dengan judul: Para Pembela Islam, Pertarungan Konservatif dan Progresif di Tubuh Muhammadiyah.

Dalam buku ini, Boy dengan tegas dan berani menggambarkan bahwa ada pertarungan antara kubu konservatisme dan kubu progresifisme di Muhammadiyah. Boy meng-highlight tragedi pemecatan saya dari Universitas Muhammadiyah Gresik dan pemecatan M. Dawam Rahardjo sebagai gejala konservatisme yang berbahaya bagi masa depan Muhammadiyah (hlm. 149-150). Bukti empirik lainnya yang menggambarkan konservatisme Muhammadiyah adalah muktamirin di Malang yang sangat kritis terhadap isu-isu kontemporer, seperti pluralisme, liberalisme, dan sekularisme. Juga "terlempar''-nya para intelektual liberal dari kepengurusan Muhammadiyah seperti Moeslim Abdurrahman, M. Dawam Rahardjo, Abdul Munir Mulkhan, dan Amin Abdullah. Dari situ kemudian muncul anggapan bahwa terpilihnya Din Syamsuddin sebagai ketua PP Muhammadiyah sebagai kemenangan kubu konservatif.

Barangkali terinspirasi tesis Gellner, yang menyimpulkan bahwa konservatisme Islam, yang kelihatannya tidak punah dalam kondisi modern tapi justru merangsang kebangkitannya, telah membuat Boy bersemangat untuk menerbitkan buku ini dengan harapan mampu menjadi kekuatan penyeimbang. Jika dugaan saya benar, maka kehadiran buku ini patut mendapat respons positif, mengingat kebangkitan kelompok konservatif akan menjadi penghambat bagi kelompok progresif di Muhammadiyah. Ini, tentu saja, merupakan sesuatu yang wajar bagi Boy, yang mengemban tanggung jawab intelektual. Tidak saja karena posisinya sebagai ketua Presidium JIMM (Jaringan Intelektual Muda Muhammadiyah), tapi lebih besar dari itu, ia juga seorang akademisi. Dari sini, sangatlah bisa dimengerti jika Boy berpandangan bahwa membiarkan Muhammadiyah semakin menjauh dari intelektualisme, sama halnya merelakan Muhammadiyah menjadi gerakan konservatif (hlm. 85). Atas dasar itulah, Boy ingin menegaskan bahwa jika Muhammadiyah ingin melanjutkan pembaharuan di bidang pemikiran, maka jalan satu-satunya adalah dengan mengakomodasi pemikiran-pemikiran progresif yang menjadi ciri utama gerakan ini.

Boy tampaknya sadar bahwa musuh yang paling berbahaya di pengujung abad ini --sebagaimana pernah dikemukakan Karen Armstrong- adalah fenomena fundamentalisme agama. Tidak berlebihan kiranya jika saya katakan bahwa kehadiran buku ini sebagai salah satu upaya "penyelamatan" dari berbagai bentuk penyusupan yang dilakukan "Islam ideologis" yang berpotensi "merusak" semangat pembaharuan.

Di sisi lain, Muhammadiyah yang selama ini merasa terbuai oleh berbagai macam pujian, baik dalam buku-buku, tesis, maupun disertasi, dan dalam batas-batas ekstremnya juga terkesan antikritik, justru belakangan ini dikejutkan dengan banyaknya penelitian yang melontarkan kritik tajam terhadap Muhammadiyah.

Akhirnya, saya tak perlu ragu mengatakan bahwa buku ini merupakan karya cemerlang sebagai bentuk tanggung jawab intelektual penulisnya, dalam mengkaji secara serius dan mendalam terhadap menguatnya arus konservatisme, yang tak pernah berhenti menjadi "pengganggu" peradaban. Padahal, di usianya yang hampir satu abad, Muhammadiyah seharusnya lebih menancapkan dirinya untuk melakukan pembacaan kreatif atau peremajaan pemikiran terhadap teks atau Alquran maupun realitas yang sarat dengan diskursus.

Pembacaan kreatif terhadap teks haruslah mencakup pembaharuan pemikiran dan penafsiran. Suatu pembacaan tidak dikatakan kreatif jika tidak membawa pembaharuan dalam banyak pemikiran dan konsepsi. Tidak ada pemikiran yang produktif tanpa adanya kerja analisis-kritis. Karena itu, peringatan Nietzsche, Marx dan Freud -dan secara implisit juga ditegaskan oleh Boy dalam buku ini- agar pembaca harus selalu curiga pada sebuah teks sangatlah penting.

Atau dalam bahasa agama, kita tidak boleh taqlid, yaitu menerima kebenaran tanpa sikap kritis. Demikian juga jargon Muhammadiyah "kembali kepada Alquran dan Hadis'' juga mengandaikan sikap kritis-metodologis-ilmiah dengan harapan mampu menangkap pesan dan menafsir makna zaman.

Terakhir, saya ingin mengutip pernyataan Prof Dr Ahmad Syafii Ma'arif dalam pengantar buku ini yang cukup bijak: "Karya ini harus kita apresiasi sebagai sebuah pandangan kritis yang ingin menyajikan apa adanya akan fakta-fakta yang akhir-akhir ini berkembang di Muhammadiyah utamanya di ranah pemikiran Islam.'' (*)

Moh. Shofan, Peneliti di Yayasan Paramadina Jakarta

Journal Article

Aljunied, Syed Muhd Khairudin. 2011. “The ‘other’ Muhammadiyah Movement: Singapore 1958–2008.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 42 (02): 281–302. doi:10.1017/S0022463411000051.

Anwar, Syamsul. 2005. “Fatwā , Purification and Dynamization : A Study of Tarjīḥ in Muhammadiyah.” Islamic Law and Society 12 (1): 27–44.

Baidhawy, Z. 2007. “Building Harmony and Peace through Multiculturalist Theology-Based Religious Education: An Alternative for Contemporary Indonesia.” British Journal of Religious Education 29 (1): 1–18. doi:10.1080/01416200601037478.

Barton, Greg. 2014. “The Gülen Movement, Muhammadiyah and Nahdlatul Ulama: Progressive Islamic Thought, Religious Philanthropy and Civil Society in Turkey and Indonesia.” Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations 25 (3): 287–301. doi:10.1080/09596410.2014.916124.

Beck, Herman L. 2005. “The Rupture between the Muhammadiyah and the Ahmadiyya.” Bijdragen Tot de Taal-, Land- En Volkenkunde (BKI) 161 (2): 210–46. doi:10.1163/22134379-90003708.

Beck, Herman L. 2014. “The Contested State of Sufism in Islamic Modernism: The Case of the Muhammadiyah Movement in Twentieth-Century Indonesia.” Journal of Sufi Studies 3 (2): 183–219. doi:10.1163/22105956-12341269.

Burhani, Ahmad Najib. 2013. “Transmission of Islamic Reform from the United States to Indonesia: Studying Fazlur Rahman’s Legacy through the Works of Ahmad Syafii Maarif.” Indonesia and the Malay World 41 (119): 29–47. doi:10.1080/13639811.2012.750097.

Burhani, Ahmad Najib. 2005. “Revealing the Neglected Missions : Some Comments on the Javanese Elements of Muhammadiyah Reformism.” Studia Islamika 12 (1): 101–30.

Burhani, Ahmad Najib. 2006. “The Ideological Shift of Muhammadiyah from Cultural into Puritanical Tendency in 1930s.” Jurnal Masyarakat Dan Budaya 8 (1): 1–22.

Burhani, Ahmad Najib. 2011. “Lakum Dīnukum Wa-Liya Dīnī the Muhammadiya H’s Stance towards Interfaith Relations.” Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations 22 (3): 329–42.

Bush, Robin. 2014. “A Snapshot of Muhammadiyah–social Change and Shifting Markers of Identity and Values.” Asia Research Institute Working Paper Series, no. 221: 1–25.

Dewi, Kurniawati Hastuti. 2008. “Perspective versus Practice: Women’s Leadership in Muhammadiyah.” Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 23 (2): 161–85. doi:10.1355/SJ23-2A.

Drakeley, Steven. 2009. “Bung Karno and the Bintang Muhammadiyah: A Political Affair.” New Zealand Journal of Asian Studies 11 (1): 208–21.

Federspiel, Howard M. 1970. “The Muhammadijah: A Study of an Orthodox Islamic Movement in Indonesia.” Indonesia 10 (10): 57–79. doi:10.2307/3350635.

Federspiel, Howard M. 2002. “Modernist Islam in Southeast Asia: A New Examination.” The Muslim World 92 (3): 371–86.

Fuad, Muhammad. 2004. “Islam, Modernity and Muhammadiyah’s Educational Programme.” Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 5 (3): 400–414. doi:10.1080/1464937042000288697.

Fuad, Muhammad. 2002. “Civil Society in Indonesia: The Potential and Limits of Muhammadiyah.” Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 17 (2): 133–63. doi:10.1355/SJ17-2A.

Hadler, Jeffrey. 2016. “Home , Fatherhood , Succession : Three Generations of Amrullahs in Twentieth-Century Indonesia.” Indonesia 65 (65): 122–54.

Harijanto, Christian, and Ian Chalmers. 2013. “Transforming the Writing of History : The New Narrative of Enlightenment within Muhammadiyah.” Review of Indonesian and Malaysian Affairs 47 (2): 63–90.

Hicks, Jacqueline. 2012. “The Missing Link: Explaining the Political Mobilisation of Islam in Indonesia.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 42 (1): 39–66. doi:10.1080/00472336.2012.634640.

Hosen, Nadirsyah. 2002. “Revelation in a Modern Nation State: Muhammadiyah and Islamic Legal Reasoning in Indonesia.” Asian Law 4: 232.

Howell, Julia Day. 2010. “Indonesia’s Salafist Sufis.” Modern Asian Studies 44 (05): 1029–51. doi:10.1017/S0026749X09990278.

Jackson, E, and Bahrissalim. 2007. “Crafting a New Democracy: Civic Education in Indonesian Islamic Universities.” Asia Pacific Journal of Education 27 (1): 41–54. doi:10.1080/02188790601142892.

Jamil, Fathurrahman. 1995. “The Muhammadivah and the Theory of Maqasid Al-Shari’ah.” Studia Islamika 2 (1): 53–68.

Jung, Eunsook. 2014. “Islamic Organizations and Electoral Politics in Indonesia : The Case of Muhammadiyah.” South East Asia Research 22 (1): 73–86. doi:10.5367/sear.2014.0192.

Kahin, Audrey R. 1984. “Repressein and Regroupment: Religious and Nationalist Organizations in West Sumatra in the 1930s.” Indonesia 38: 39–54. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

Kim, Hyung-Jun. 2010. “Praxis and Religious Authority in Islam: The Case of Ahmad Dahlan, Founder of Muhammadiyah.” Studia Islamika 17 (1): 69–92.

Miswanto, Agus. 2012. “Human Rights Education in Indonesia: The Muhammadiyah Schools Experience.” In Human Rights Education in Asia-Pacific (Volume Three), 91–124. http://www.hurights.or.jp/archives/asia-pacific/section1/2012/11/volume-three.html.

Möller, André. 2005. “Islam and Traweh Prayers in Java: Unity, Diversity, and Cultural Smoothness.” Indonesia and the Malay World 33 (95): 37–52. doi:10.1080/13639810500192541.

Njoto-Feillard, Gwenaël. 2014. “Financing Muhammadiyah: Early Economic Endeavours of a Muslim Modernist Mass Organization in Indonesia (1920s-1960s).” Studia Islamika 21 (1): 1–44.

 Nurwanto. 2012. “The Portrait of Gender Justice and Injustice in the Islamic Teaching Text- Book and Muhammadiyah Teachers ’.” IJIMS, Indonesian Journal of Islam and Muslim Societies 3 (1): 149–73.

Palmier, Leslie H . 2010. “Modern Islam in Indonesia : The Muhammadiyah After Independence.” Pacific Affairs 27 (3): 255–63.

Sciortino, Rosalia, Neni Ridarineni, and Brahmaputra Marjadi. 2010. “Caught between Social and Market Considerations: A Case Study of Muhammadiyah Charitable Health Services.” Reproductive Health Matters 18 (36): 25–34. doi:10.1016/S0968-8080(10)36528-1.

Sirry, Mun’im. 2009. “‘Compete with One Another in Good Works’: Exegesis of Qur’an Verse 5.48 and Contemporary Muslim Discourses on Religious Pluralism.” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 20 (4): 423–38. doi:10.1080/09596410903194886.

Stark, Jan. 2004. “Contesting Models of Islamic Governance in Malaysia and Indonesia.” Global Change, Peace & Security 16 (2): 115–31. doi:10.1080/0951274042000233341.

Steenbrink, Karel. 1995. “Qur’an Interpretations of Hamzah Fansuri (CA. 1600) and Hamka (108-1982): A Comparison.” Studia Islamika 2 (2): 73–95.

Stepan, Alfred, and Kunkler Mirjam. 1998. “An Interview with Amien Rais.” Journal of International Affairs 61 (1): 205–17.

Sukidi. 2006. “Max Weber’s Remarks on Islam: The Protestant Ethic among Muslim Puritans.” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 17 (2): 195–205. doi:10.1080/09596410600604484.

Sulistiyanto, Priyambudi. 2006. “Research Notes and Comments: Muhammadiyah, Local Politics and Local Identity in Kotagede.” SOJOURN: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 21 (2): 254–70. doi:10.1355/SJ21-2F.

Syamduddin, M. Din. 1995. “The Muhammadiyah Da’wah and Allocative Politics In The New Order.” Studia Islamika 2 (2): 35–71.

Syamsiyatun, Siti. 2007. “A Daughter in the Indonesian Muhammadiyah: Nasyiatul Aisyiyah Negotiates a New Status and Image.” Journal of Islamic Studies 18 (1): 69–94. doi:10.1093/jis/etl044.

Syamsiyatun, Siti. 2007. “Muslim Women’s Politics in Advancing Their Gender Interest: A Case-Study of Nasyiatul Aisyiyah in Indonesian New Order Era.” Al-Jami’ah 45 (1): 57–89.

Tamney, Joseph. 1980. “Modernization and Religious Purification: Islam in Indonesia.” Review of Religious Research 22 (2): 207–18. doi:10.2307/3510661.

  

-------

2007. "An Interview with Amien Rais." Journal of International Affairs 61, no. 1: 205-216.

Anwar, Syamsul. 2005. "Fatwā, Purification and Dynamization: A Study of Tarjīh in Muhammadiyah". Islamic Law and Society. 12 (1): 27-44.

Arifianto, Alexander. 2009. "Explaining the Cause of Muslim-Christian Conflicts in Indonesia: Tracing the Origins of Kristenisasi and Islamisasi". Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations. 20 (1): 73-89.

Asyari, Suaidi. 2007. "A Real Threat from Within: Muhammadiyah’s Identity Metamorphosis and the Dilemma of Democracy." Journal of Indonesian Islam, Vol 1, No 1 (2007)

Azra, Azyumardi. 1994. "Muhammadiyah: A Preliminary Study," Studia Islamika 1.2 (1994), 187-200.

Baidhawy, Zakiyuddin. 2007. "Building harmony and peace through multiculturalist theology-based religious education: an alternative for contemporary Indonesia". British Journal of Religious Education. 29 (1): 15-30.

Baried, Baroroh. 1977. 'Un mouvement de femmes Musulmanes: "Aisyiyah".' Archipel 13 (13): 129-35.

Basya, M. Hilaly. 2010. "Muhammadiyah Scholars and Democratic Transition in Post-New Order Indonesia: The Critical Response of Muhammadiyah Scholars to Radical Islamist Movements." Kultur, 5 (1): 47-62.

Beck, Herman L. 2005. "The rupture between the Muhammadiyah and the Ahmadiyya". Bijdragen Tot De Taal-, Land- En Volkenkunde. 161 (2): 210-246.

Burhani, Ahmad Najib. 2005. "Revealing the Neglected Missions: Some Comments on the Javanese Elements of Muhammadiyah Reformism." Studia Islamika, Vol. 12, No. 1: 101-129.

-----. 2005. "Document: The 45th Muhammadiyah Congress : Contest between Literal-Conservative and Liberal-Moderate Muslims in Indonesia." Studia Islamika, Vol. 12, No. 1: 185-189.

-----. 2006. "The Ideological Shift of Muhammadiyah from Cultural into Puritanical Tendency in 1930s." Masyarakat dan Budaya. VIII (1) : 1-22.

-----. 2011. "Lakum dīnukum wa-liya dīnī: the Muhammadiyah's stance towards interfaith relations." Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, 22 (3): 329-342.

Cahyono, Untung and T. Ibrahim Alfian. 2006. "Angkatan muda dalam dinamika muhamadiyah 1918-1967." Humanika, 19 (3): 301-310.

Daniels, Timothy. 2007. "Liberals, moderates and jihadists: protesting Danish cartoons in Indonesia". Contemporary Islam. 1 (3): 231-246.

Dewi, Kurniawati Hastuti. 2008. "Perspective versus Practice: Women's Leadership in Muhammadiyah". Sojourn. 23 (2): 161.

Djamil, Fathurrahman. 1995. “The Muhammadiyah and the Theory of Maqasid al-Syari’ah.” in Studia Islamika, Volume 2, Number 1, 1995, pp. 53-68.

Drakeley, S. 2009. "Bung Karno and the Bintang Muhammadiyah: A Political Affair". NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF ASIAN STUDIES. 11 (1): 208-221.

Federspiel, Howard M. 1970. "The Muhammadijah: A Study of an Orthodox Islamic Movement in Indonesia". Indonesia. 10: 57-79.

-----. 2002. “Modernist Islam in Southeast Asia: A New Examination.” Muslim World. 92, 3& 4, 371-386.

Fuad, M. 2004. "Islam, modernity and Muhammadiyah's educational programme". INTER ASIA CULTURAL STUDIES. 5: 400-414.

Fuad, M. 2002. "Civil Society in Indonesia: The Potential and Limits of Muhammadiyah". SOJOURN. 17: 133-163.

Hadi, H. Abd. 2007. "Gerakan Pemikiran Muhammadiyah dari Puritanisme ke Dinamisme." Paramedia, Vol 8, No 4 (2007)

Hadler, Jeffrey. 1998. "Home, Fatherhood, Succession: Three Generations of Amrullahs in Twentieth-Century Indonesia." Indonesia, Vol. 65, (Apr., 1998), pp. 123-154.

Hosen, Nadirsyah. 2002. "Revelation in a Modern Nation State: Muhammadiyah and Islamic Legal Reasoning in Indonesia." Australian Journal of Asian Law. Volume 4 No 3.

Howell, Julia Day. 2009. "Indonesia's Salafist Sufis." Modern Asian Studies, Published online by Cambridge University Press 23 Dec 2009. doi:10.1017/S0026749X09990278

Jackson, Elisabeth. 2007. "Crafting a New Democracy: Civic education in Indonesian Islamic universities". Asia Pacific Journal of Education. 27 (1): 41-54.

Kahin, Audrey R. 1984. "Repression and Regroupment: Religious and Nationalist Organizations in West Sumatra in the 1930s." Indonesia, Vol. 38, (Oct., 1984), pp. 39-54.

Kulsum, Ummi, T. H. Ibrahim Alfian and Ahmad Adaby Darban. 2006. "Majlis tarjih muhammadiyah pada masa pemerintahan Hindia Belanda 1927-1942 Kajian Sejarah." Humanika, 19 (3): 281-299. http://i-lib.ugm.ac.id/jurnal/download.php?dataId=9147.

Latief, Hilman. 2003. “Post-Puritanisme Muhammadiyah: Studi Pergulatan Wacana Keagamaan Kaum Muda Muhammadiyah ( 1995-2002),” Tanwir: Jurnal Pemikiran Agama dan Peradaban, Edisi 2, vol. 1, no. 2 (Juli 2003), hlm. 43-102.

Masyitoh, Masyitoh. 2008. "A. R. Fakhruddin: The Face of Tasawuf in Muhammadiyah." Jurnal Millah (Jurnal Studi Agama). Vol 8, No 1.

Mintarti. 2001. "Etos kerja dan perilaku ekonomi di kalangan NU dan Muhammadiyah."Sosiohumanika, 14 (3): 537-547.

Moller, Andre. 2005. "Islam and traweh prayers in Java: Unity, diversity, and cultural smoothness". Indonesia and the Malay World. 33 (95): 37-52.

Muhaimin, Yahya. 1990. "Muslim Traders: The Stillborn Bourgeoisie". Prisma No. 49. pp.

83-90.

Nakamura, Mitsuo. 1979. The reformist ideology of Muhammadijah; paper, presented at the panel on "focus on Islam" as a part of the school seminar series entitled "the Indonesian connection"; held in Canberra, November 9, 1979. Canberra: Australian National University, Department of Anthropology, Research School of Pacific Studies.

Pelras, Christian. 1993. "Religion, Tradition, and the Dynamics of Islamization in South Sulawesi." Indonesia, Vol. 57, Archipel (Apr., 1993), pp. 133-154.

Palmier, L H. 1954. Modern Islam in Indonesia: The Muhammadiyah after Independence. Pacific Affairs 27 (3): 255-.

Probojo, Lany. 2010. "RITUAL GUARDIANS VERSUS CIVIL SERVANTS AS CULTURAL BROKERS IN THE NEW ORDER ERA". Indonesia and the Malay World. 38 (110): 95-107.

Rais, M. Amien. 1995. “Al-Islam wa al-Nashrâniyyah fî Indûnîsiya”, in Studia Islamika, Volume 2, Number 1, 1995, pp. 69-91.

Rutten, M. 1999. "Rural Capitalists in India, Indonesia, and Malaysia: Three Cases, Two Debates, One Analysis?" SOJOURN. 14 (1): 57-97.

Sciortino, Rosalia, Neni Ridarineni, and Brahmaputra Marjadi. 2010. "Caught between social and market considerations: a case study of Muhammadiyah charitable health services". Reproductive Health Matters. 18 (36): 25.

Sjadzali, Munawir. 1994. "Muhammadiyah sebagai Gerakan Pembaharu?" Akademia. Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta. No. 03. Tahun XII/1994.

Stark, J. 2005. "Contesting models of Islamic governance in Malaysia and Indonesia". Peace Research Abstracts. 42 (1).

Steenbrink, K. 1995. "Qur'an interpretations of Hamza Fansuri (ca. 1600) and Hamka (1908-1982): A comparison." Studia Islamika, 2 (2): 73-98.

Sukidi. 2006. "Max Weber's remarks on Islam: The Protestant Ethic among Muslim puritans". Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations. 17 (2): 195-205.

Sulistiyanto, P. 2006. "Muhammadiyah, Local Politics and Local Identity in Kotagede". SOJOURN. 21 (2): 254-270.

Sulistiyanto, Priyambudi. 2006. "Research Notes and Comments - Muhammadiyah, Local Politics and Local Identity in Kotagede". Sojourn. 21 (2): 254.

Supriatna and Heru Nugroho. 2005. "Muhammadiyah dan Pemiskinan Budaya Studi Terhadap Putusan Majelis Tarjih Tentang Jenazah dan Implementasinya dalam Ritual Kematian di Kampung Kauman Yogyakarta." Sosiosains, (18(3): 537-557.

Syamsiyatun, Siti. 2007. "A Daughter in the Indonesian Muhammadiyah: Nasyiatul Aisyiyah Negotiates a New Status and Image". Journal of Islamic Studies. 18 (1): 69-94.

Tamney, Joseph. 1980. "Modernization and Religious Purification: Islam in Indonesia". Review of Religious Research. 22 (2): 207-218.

Toshimitsu, Masafumi. "The Muhammadiyah Movement in Aceh in the Dutch Colonial Period." Southeast Asia : history and culture. 東南アジア : 歴史と文化 24 pp.76-99

van der Kroef, Justus M. 1958. "The Role of Islam in Indonesian Nationalism and Politics." The Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 1 (Mar., 1958), pp. 33-54

Waardenburg, Jacques. 1988. "Muslim Enlightenment and Revitalization. Movements of Modernization and Reform in Tsarist Russia (ca. 1850-1917) and the Dutch East Indies (ca. 1900-1942)." Die Welt des Islams, New Series, Bd. 28, Nr. 1/4: 569-584.

Yapie KH. 1996. "Protecting the mother's and child's health. Indonesia. Moslems and Islamic organizations participate in the family planning movement". Integration (Tokyo, Japan). (47): 16-7.