The Origin of Nasyiatul Aisyiyah: Organising for Articulating Religious-based Womanhood in Pre-Independent Indonesia

Siti Syamsiyatun

Abstract
There is always a reason why people develop an organization; the questions to be raised are at least why and how people are organizing. The present paper attempts to investigate similar questions as experienced by Indonesian Muslim women who have organized themselves in an association called Nasyiatul Aisyiyah. This organization has evolved from a group of female students, Siswa Praja Wanita (Respectable Female Pupils), in a Muhammadiyah Standard School founded in 1991, to being one of the largest Muslim women’s organizations in Indonesia today. In this paper I am focusing my analysis on the organization’s development during pre-independent Indonesia and putting the phenomenon of Nasyiatul Aisyiyah’s growth in specific perspectives, namely social and religious. The data for this study is generated from both library and field research, the latter of which was undertaken in June-October 2003.

The rise of Indonesian feminism undoubtedly has always been associated with the publication of letters written by a Javanese priyayi woman Raden Ajeng Kartini, as a result of her correspondence with Dutch feminists and her exposure to Western feminist thought. While Kartini’s ideas are based in Javanese culture, another kind of feminist demand was articulated from a religious (Islamic) perspective emerging in the second decade of twentieth century Indonesia. This voice was made public by Muslim women who organized themselves through Sapa Tresna (Those Who Love) and Siswa Praja Wanita/SPW (Respectable Female Students) who later on merged their groups. SPW, later to become Nasyiatul Aisyiyah, undertook activities to cater for the needs of its ever larger audiences. Some of its most noticeable achievements have been providing education for women, even to reach those denied by the colonial and religious authorities of the time; and preparing women preachers who became the backbone of religious learning among women even until today. The organization also cultivated its special characteristics for leadership from religious values. However, this does not mean that Nasyiatul Aisyiyah ignored its cultural roots, in shaping the internal culture of the organization.

Key words:
Women, Islam, Organization, Indonesia, Colonial Period

Citation: Syamsiyatun, Siti. 2004. The Origin of Nasyiah: Organising for Articulating Religious-based Womanhood in Pre-Independence Indonesia." in R. Cribb (ed.). Asia Examined: Proceedings of the 15th Biennial Conference of the ASAA 2004. Canberra: ASAA & Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, the Australian National University. pp. 1-25. http://coombs.anu.edu.au/SpecialProj/ASAA/biennial-conference/2004/Syamsiyatun-S-ASAA2004.pdf

Era Baru Gerakan Muhammadiyah

Judul	:	Era Baru Gerakan Muhammadiyah
jenis	:	Agama Islam
Pengarang	:	Pradana Boy ZTF, M. Hilmi Faiq, Zulfan Barron
Jumlah Halaman	:	247
Kode Buku	:	p 175 / AG.08.02.178
Tahun Terbit	:	2008
Harga Awal	:	35000
Harga Diskon	:	26250
Bonus	:	-

Meruahnya jumlah anak jalanan, pengemis, pengangguran dan anak putus sekolah, merupakan indikasi nyata fenomena alienasi kelas dalam masyarakat global. Belum lagi mereka yang dieksploitasi oleh kekuatan kapitalis demi akumulasi modal, seperti buruh pabrik, tenaga kerja wanita, buruh tani, nelayan maupun kelompok marjinal lainnya.

Fakta-fakta ini semestinya menggugah kesadaran kaum agamawan untuk berperan dalam mengakhiri ketimpangan ini. Buku ini merupakan ekspresi perlawanan kalangan yang jenuh dengan nomenklatur ketidakadilan. Para penulis buku ini mengusung semangat dan perspektif baru dalam upaya mengakhiri hegemoni kapitalisme dengan harapan dapat meretas jalan menuju keadilan universal.

Muhammadiyah, sebagai organisasi yang awalnya didesain sebagai mesin perubahan sosial, memiliki posisi strategis dalam memainkan peran ini. Dalam kerangka mengembalikan pemihakan Muhammadiyah kepada domain sosial yang dulu pernah sangat dekat dengannya itulah, buku ini dihadirkan.

Adapun pembahasan perbab dalam buku ini adalah:

BAB I

IKHTIAR REINTELEKTUALISASI MUHAMMADIYAH

1. Menyongsong Muhammadiyah Jilid Ketiga (A. Fuad Fanani)

2. Rethinking Tajdid Gerakan Muhammadiyah (Subhan Setowara)

3. Kebangkitan Intelektual Muda Muhammadiyah (Andar Nubowo)

4. Bangkitnya Second Muhammadiyah (Zuly Qodir)

5. Second Muhammadiyah (Deliar Noer)

6. Intelektual Sebagai Agen Perubahan (Pradana Boy ZTF)

7. Agama sebagai Konsep Kognitif (Kuntowijoyo)

8. Memahami Gelisah Orangtua (Imam Subkhan)

9. JIMM: Sebuah Teks Multitafsir (Pradana Boy ZTF)

BAB II

MUHAMMADIYAH DAN REFORMULASI TEOLOGI KAUM TERTINDAS

1. Mencari Sentimen Baru Ber-Muhammadiyah (Said Ramadhan)

2. Muhammadiyah sebagai Agen 'Welfare Society' (Suharko)

3. Mustadl'afin sebagai Kategori Sosial (Zainuddin Maliki)

4. Ber-Islam Secara Kritis, Memihak Kaum Mustadl'afin, Membumikan Tuhan di Ranah Praksis (Zuly Qodir)

5. Mustadl'afin dan Kaum Proletar dalam Elitisme Pengingkaran Tuhan (A. Munir Mulkhan)

6. Kontekstualisasi Surat al-Ma'un: Kendala Tradisi dan Pengembangan Makna untuk Pelayanan dalam Islam (Hamim Ilyas)

7. Dari Teologi Mustadl'afin Menuju Fiqih Mustadl'afin (A. Najib Burhani)

8. Pemihakan Kepada "The New Mustadl'afin" (Imam Cahyono)

9. Berteologi Melawan Kemiskinan (Subhan Setowara)

BAB III

AGAMA, GLOBALISASI, DAN NEO-LIBERALISME

1. Peran Pemimpin Religius dalam Proses Transformasi Sosial (Nasikun)

2. Peran Kecendekiawanan dalam Pengembangan IPTEK Di Era Globalisasi Ultraliberalisme (Nasikun)

3. Tiga Pemikiran Mengenai Perlawanan terhadap Hegemoni Kapitalisme (Muhadi Sugiono)

4. Globalisasi, Neo-Liberalisme dan Lokalitas (Arie Sujito)

APPENDIKS :

INTELEKTUALISME BARU DALAM SOROTAN

1. Membebaskan Teks, Meruntuhkan Hegemoni

2. Muhammadiyah Buktikan Intelektualitas Lewat JIMM

3. LAISA MINNA, Mereka bukan golongan kami: Jejak Liberalisme, Pluralisme, Inklusivisme di Muhammadiyah

4. Intelektual Muda dan Kesiapan Menerima Perbedaan

5. Tiga Pilar JIMM

6. Intelektualitas Untuk Praksis

7. Seumur Jagung yang Disorot

8. Kelahirannya Tanpa Deklarasi

9. Dianggap Liberal, "JIMM Diadili"

BIODATA PENULIS

BIODATA EDITOR

Retrieved from: http://ummpress.umm.ac.id/detail.php?id_buku_baru=228

The Borderline between Muslim Fundamentalism and Muslim Modernism: An Indonesian Example

Herman L. Beck (Tilburg Faculty of Theology)

Beck, Herman L. 2001. "The Borderline between Muslim Fundamentalism and Muslim Modernism: An Indonesian Example." in Anton Houtepen and Jan Willem van Henten. 2001. Religious identity and the invention of tradition. Assen, the Netherlands: Royal Van Gorcum. pp. 279-291.

Throughout the turbulent times surrounding Suharto's stepping down as President of Indonesia in May 1998, the Muhammadiyah movement was often mentioned thanks to the actions of its then chairman, Amien Rais (b. 1944). In the Western news coverage of the events, two aspects were always emphasized. The Muhammadiyah was called a modernist movement and its members were numbered around twenty million, making it a potentially powerful force which had to be taken into account by the main figures in the struggle for power. Sometimes, it was added that the Muhammadiyah movement was outnumbered only by the thirty-five million members of the Nahdlatul Ulama, which was invariably called a traditionalist Muslim organization.

In conversations about the contemporary political situation in Indonesia, I have noticed that, unconsciously, most Western people seem to prefer the modernist Muslim organization to the traditionalist one. Apparently, regarding the future of Indonesia, they have higher hopes for Muslim modernism than they have for Muslim traditionalism. They associate probably Muslim modernism in some way or another with Western modernism. However, studying the history of the Muhammadiyah movement, one discovers that, since its establishment in 1912, several labels have been put on the organization to characterize it, labels varying from a "modernist" movement to, quite recently, an "Islamis," and "a large, well-organized Islamic fundamentalist movement." Would people still prefer the Muhammadiyah movement, if it was called a Muslim fundamentalist movement, to a Mslim traditionalist organization?

If one and the same Muslim movement can be called both a modernist and a fundamentalist one, does this imply that these Western terms are not appropriate to be used in an Indonesian Muslim context, especially, because of the fact that anti-modernism is, generally, considered to be one of the most important characteristics of all kinds of fundamentalism? Are the terms modernism and fundamentalism to be replaced by other, less contaminated or comprehensive terms? I do not think this will be useful, because, although these terms can create erroneous impressions, they have become too current to be easily replaced. Moreover, the multifaced character of the Muhammadiyah movement may easily cause confusion, because certain aspects of its character are considered to fall roughly into the broad Western category of modern modernism, while other aspects are rated among the features of the broad Western category of religious fundamentalism.

Although one of the tasks of the Western scholar of the history of religions and comparative religion is to characterize his object of study on the basis of data available to him by using labels understandable to his Western readers, it is also his task continually to stress the fact that phenomena of the Muslim world are rarely adequately covered by Western labels. Therefore, to solve the question of whether the Muhammadiyah is a modernist or fundamentalist movement the first section of this contribution will be dedicated to a discussion of the term religious modernism when applied to the Muhammadiyah movement. In the second section, some general features of religious fundamentalism(s) will be given. The third section will focus on some elements the Muhammadiyah movement and Muslim fundamentalism to have in common. Finally by pointing out some significant differences between the Muhammadiyah movement and Muslim fundamentalism, it will become clear in the concluding section that, in my view, the Muhammadiyah cannot be considered a religious fundamentalist movement, although it shares some aspects with what is commonly called Muslim fundamentalism...

read the article at google book

Islamic Purity at Odds with Javanese Identity

Islamic Purity at Odds with Javanese Identity
The Muhammadiyah and the Celebration of the Garebeg Maulud Ritual in Yogyakarta

Herman Beck
(Theologische Faculteit Tilburg)

... As for Ahmad Dahlan himself, his aim was to purify Islam by openly opposing various manifestations of innovation and superstition which had crept in, such as the ritual community meals (Jav./In., slametan or kenduren), the visits to graves and the veneration of saints, the belief in amulets (Jav./In., jimat) and heirlooms (Jav./In., pusaka) as possessing magical power and sacred energy, and religious relics dating from the Hindu and Buddhist periods in Indonesia. He considered these religious phenomena, often referred to as expressions of adat, as shirk or polytheism, to be worst sin possible, in flat contradiction to the most important Islamic doctrine of tawhid, the profession of the unity of God. Surprisingly, however, neither Ahmad Dahlan nor any other representative member of the Muhammadiyah has, to my knowledge, ever made an official statement condemning the celebration of the Garebeg Maulud ritual by the Sultan of Yogyakarta as innovation or superstition. This Garebeg Maulud ritual is, nonetheless, impregnated with concepts, rites and symbols, which are generally renounced by the Muhammadiyah.

In order to trace the motive(s) which held the Muhammadiyah back from officially condemning the Garebeg Maulud ritual, I will first sketch its celebration in broad outlines, and then try to ascertain, by tracing the origin and the historical development of the Garebeg Maulud ritual, which of its features should be considered as integral and indispesable parts of the ritual. Thirdly, I will dwell on some interpretations of, and comments on, the Garebeg Maulud ritual and its various parts, made by both Muhammadiyah members and others. In section four I will discuss the social environment in which the Muhammadiyah developed in early 20th century Yogyakarta. Finally, in the concluding section, I will demonstrate that iti is the social environment of the movement which is responsible for its historical and current attitude towards the Garebeg Maulud ritual...

Beck, H. 1995. "Islamic purity at odds with Javanese identity: the Muhammadiyah and the celebration of the Garebeg Maulud ritual in Yogyakarta". In Jan Platvoet and Karel van der Toorn (eds.). Pluralism and Identity: Studies in Ritual Behaviour. Leiden: Brill. pp. 261-284.

Read the article at google book

Sustaining Islamic Activism in Secular Environments: The Muhammadiyah Movement in Singapore

Asia Research Institute
Working Paper Series No. 120

Sustaining Islamic Activism in Secular Environments:
The Muhammadiyah Movement in Singapore

Syed Muhd Khairudin Aljunied

Department of Malay Studies, national University of Singapore
mlsasmk@nus.edu.sg.
August 2009

http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs/wps/wps09_120.pdf

The role of Islamic activists in shaping the politics and religious life of Muslims in secular states has attracted an increasing level of scholarly interest and media attention in recent years in view of the current global war against terror. In Southeast Asia, as well as in North America and Europe, the genesis, structure, membership and sources of funding of Muslim movements have come under the close scrutiny of states and security analysts, whose overriding concerns are the identification and proscription of groups that lean in any way towards support for violance... One movement that has attracted the attention of both colonial and postcolonial authorities in Singapore is the Muhammadiyah, due mainly to its promotion of a missionary ideology and unyielding critiques of practices that are deemed as incompatible with the pure Islamic faith.

This paper is not intended as a response to state policies. Rather, it aims to add to the small body of scholarly literature surrounding Islamic activism and Muslim movements in Singapore. While many studies have been devoted to the history and evolution of the forty-million-strong Muhammadiyah movement in Indonesia, very little has been written about movements in other parts of Southeast Asia that have shared common general goals and ideas. To this lacuna must be added the preoccupation of past students and scholars with the study of selected Islamic movements in Singapore, particularly the All-Malaya Missionary Society (or Jamiyah), owing to the remarkable breadth of its activities and to its prolonged existence. The Muhammadiyah movement in Singapore thus deserves a more in-depth analysis and treatment, not only because of the paucity of works about it, but also because of its reformist and modernist outlook, which parallels that of Jamiyah. Both movements have also been equally attuned to global developments, while simultaneously demonstrating a high degree of dynamism and commitment in their engagement with local challenges, especially in the realm of the educatio, social welfare and religious guidance.

Furthermore, the fact that the Muhammadiyah movement has maintained a strong presence since 1958, whilst operating effectively within a secular, non-Muslim-dominated society governed by what have been described as 'illiberal democratic' colonial and post-colonial regimes in Singapore, is a particularly interesting theme that calls for deeper investigation...

... The Muhammadiyah, as will be argued, provides an informative case study of a Muslim movement in Singapore that has been successful in overcoming the limits of social demography and state secularism by broadening its activities and ideology, and by readjusting its modus operandi in accordance with evolving political and social contexts. Additionally, the interplay between local Islamic activism and international movements and the appropriation of global Islamic discourses and paradigms within a local context as exemplified by the Muhammadiyah reflects the creative agency of Muslims in Singapore which allows for comparison in the study of Islam in other parts of Asia.

By synthesizing historical evidence with insights and concepts borrowed from social movement theorists, this paper will provide a critical analysis of the processes that have enabled the Muhammadiyah movement in Singapore to sustain its relevance and vitality. I will argue that four processes have been crucial in this regard, the foremost being the symbiotic relationship between the leaders and the led. The esprit de corps among the rank and file was instrumental in the forging of the networks and links, both locally and globally. The crucial roles palyed by key members of Muhammadiyah in the formulation and subsequent revision of the movement's ideational frames constituted the second process that will be elaborated at length. Thirdly, there existed, from time to time, political opportunity structures which Muhammadiyah judiciously exploited, insofar as this strategy did not compromise the general goals of the movement. The fourth historical determinant is to be found in the availability of a wide array of mobilizing structures, which served as bases for the dissemination of the movement's ideology, and as arenas where new members could be recruited and funding could be sought. The next part of this paper will discuss the origins of the Muhammadiyah movement and its formalization, focusing primarily on the background of its key personalities and the contexts within which they operated. This section, which will also elucidate the rendering of the movement's history, will be followed by an explication of the four processes bwhich contributed to the consolidation and expansion of the movement from 1958 to 2007.

Muhammadiyah's Experience in Promoting Civil Society on the Eve of the 21st Century

M. Amin Abdullah

Abdullah, M Amin. 2001. "Muhammadiyah's Experience in Promoting Civil Society on the Eve of the 21st Century." In Mitsuo Nakamura, Sharon Siddique, and Omar Farouk Bajunid. Islam & civil society in Southeast Asia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. pp. 43-54.

In reviewing approaches in the study of civil society, Robert Hefner has discerned two patterns:

Some studies on civil society emphasize one of these two sets of variables [structural and cultural] as opposed to another. ... [S]ome adopt a strongly culturalist approach as if problems of democracy and civility were primarily matters of getting cultural discourse right. By contrast, other studies emphasize structural and organizational variables, as if civility and democracy were the natural product of a certain kind of organization. [Emphasis added.]

This chapter argues that the Muhammadiyah, as an Islamic social-religious organization in Indonesia, cannot be aptly explained by this binary and dichotomous approach. The most critical point in understanding civility and democracy concerns not one, but both, of these variables --not in isolation, but as a "socio-genetic" or dialectical interaction, and even as something interwoven between both sides.

There are various definitions of civil society. The essence of civil society, as once defined by Robert Hefner, emphasizes "material prosperity,... tolerance of dissenting viewpoints, limits on state power, the freedom to express their views and choosing their own way of life". Meanwhile, Peter Berger emphasizes the notion of pluralism rather than secularism. It should be noted beforehand, that the concept of civil society surfaced and suddenly became popular around the 1980s, and was inspired and provoked by the decline of almost all socialist regimes in Eastern Europe. It is rather difficult, actually, to directly relate this concept of civil society with the Muhammadiyah's existence. It is my belief, however, that the concept of civil society is not limited to the late eighties and nineties. In the case of Indonesian Muslims, this awareness came in the early twentieth century. It was exemplified by the establishment of such non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as the Muhammadiyah in 1912, the Nahdlatul Ulama in 1926, and many others around the same time. It is obvious, however, that the social and cultural context in Indonesia then was totally different from that which existed in 1980s in Eastern Europe, or even from that of France in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when the idea of civil society first emerged. Without going into a comparison, I would like to delineate the Muhammadiyah's experience as a modern Islamic movement in Southeast Asia in promoting and implementing those civic virtues in Indonesian society.

read the article at google book

Bapelurzam Kendal: A Muhammadiyah Zakat Movement

Tuti Alawiyah Najib

Alawiyah Najib, Tuti. 2006. "Bapelurzam Kendal: A Muhammadiyah Zakat Movement." Caider S. Bamualim et.al. Islamic Philanthropy and Social Development. Jakarta: Center for the Study of Religion and Culture. pp. 143-166.

The collection and management of zakat within Muhammadiyah was initiated by the Central Leadership's Decree No. 02/pp/1979 which ordered the establishment of a Muhammadiyah zakat agency. The purpose of this agency was to better regulate zakat collection and distribution and ensure that the full potential of zakat in improving social welfare was realized. This is not to say that such this concept did not exist in the organization prior to this, for if we look closer into the organization's history, we see that the concept of organizing zakat and eradicating poverty through zakat already existed at the time of the organization's inception. The organization had from the very beginning sought to stress the importance of helping and caring for the needy. KH. Ahmad Dahlan, the founder of Muhammadiyah, often recited Surat Al-Maun of the Holy Qur'an whenever he addressed Muhammadiyah audiences. This Surat reinforces the importance of caring for and helping the needy, particularly orphans and the poor, as Allah labels those who perform their prayers but do not also care for the needy as weak Muslims.

This chapter serves as a study of Badan Pelaksana Urusan Zakat Muhammadiyah (the Muhammadiyah Agency for Zakat Affairs) or Bapelurzam Kendal. This agency is a part of the local branch of Muhammadiyah in Kendal, and was established solely for the purpose of managing zakat. Bapelurzam Kendal was selected for this study because it has recorded the highest success rate in the collection and distribution fo zakat mal compared to other Muhammadiyah branches. Apart from that, this institution clearly illustrates the work and activities of Muhammadiyah in the field of zakat at the regional and branch levels where it had begun.

Muhammadiyah-NU: Perbedaankah atau Perpecahan?

Gusdur.net, Jum'at, 16 Agustus 2002

Oleh : KH. Abdurrahman Wahid

Ketika Muhammadiyah didirikan pada tahun 1912, KH. M. Hasyim Asy\'ari dari Tebuireng, Jombang, menanyakan siapa pendirinya. Mendengar jawaban KH. Ahmad Dahlan, beliau ganti bertanya, adakah orang itu santri yang bersama beliau mengaji pada KH. Sholeh Darat (Semarang)? Ketika memperoleh kepastian bahwa KH. Ahmad Dahlan itu adalah orang yang dimaksud tersebut, beliau mengatakan tentu Muhammadiyah organisasi yang baik, karena tokoh pendiri tersebut adalah orang baik. Hal ini dapat kita benarkan, kalau kita ikuti sejarah Muhammadiyah. Tekanan pada pendidikan, kesehatan dan kegiatan-kegiatan sosial menunjukkan hal itu dengan nyata.

Hal ini jugalah yang tampak dari pergaulan KH. M Bisri Syansuri, ketika beliau menjadi anggota PBNU, dan praktis menguasai Majlis-Majlis Hukum Agama (Majaalis al-Figh) --sebelum beliau membawa pendapat-pendapatnya ke forum tersebut, beliau selalu pergi ke Yogyakarta, untuk memperdebatkannya dengan KH. Hadjid dari Pengurus Pusat (PP) Muhammadiyah. Terkadang mereka bisa berdebat selama tiga hari berturut-turut dan terkadang pula mereka bersama pergi ke rumah KH. Adzkiya di Kroya (Pak Tua Ir. Musthofa Zuhad, dari PBNU sekarang) untuk maksud yang sama. Baru setelah itu, KH. M. Bisri Syansuri memaparkan \"pendapatnya\" kepada forum-forum di atas, yaitu setelah melalui \"uji-coba\" dengan kedua orang tersebut. Kelihatan sekali, antara mereka tidak ada jarak yang harus dijembatani, karena perbedaan pendapat di antara mereka adalah hal yang biasa, seperti perbedaan pendapat dengan iparnya, KH. A. Wahab Chasbulah.

Penulis pernah tinggal selama tiga tahun (1954-1957) di rumah KH. M. Djunaidi di Kauman, Yogyakarta. Di tempat itu, penulis sering melihatnya berdebat sangat lama tentang soal-soal figh, dengan tokoh NU KH. Ali Ma\'sum dari Pondok Pesantren Krapyak, yang belakangan menjadi Rais ‘Am PBNU. Padahal, induk semang penulis, KH. M. Djunaidi itu belakangan menjadi anggota Majlis Tarjih (Dewan Agama) PP. Muhammadiyah. Di sini, tampak jelas bagi penulis, adanya keakraban antara tokoh-tokoh puncak NU dan Muhammadiyah tersebut.

*****

Pertanyaan utamanya adalah, kita melihat keakraban tersebutkah dalam menilai hubungan Muhammadiyah dan NU, atau justru sebaliknya? Justru yang kita lihat sehari-hari, sikap fanatik baik dari orang-orang NU maupun dari orang-orang Muhammadiyah sendiri, hingga terkadang tampak sebagai pertentangan dan perpecahan, bukannya sebagai perbedaan. Ini sangat diperlukan, karena tanpa memperoleh jawaban yang tepat, perpecahan dalam tubuh kedua organisasi Islam terbesar di negeri kita itu tampak semakin menjadi-jadi. Tentu ini tidak kita inginkan, sehingga kalau memang benar-benar keduanya berpecah dan bertentangan, hendaknya dapat diarahkan kepada perbedaan saja. Ini adalah proses pendidikan yang berlangsung lama, namun tak dapat terhindarkan.

Salah satu sebab mengapa tampak yang terjadi adalah pertentangan, dan bukannya perbedaan, adalah akibat tekanan kedua-duanya atas institusi atau lembaga, dalam hal ini kedua organisasi tersebut. Tekanan pada kelembagaan, membawakan keharusan untuk mempertahankan kepentingan/interest kedua perkumpulan tersebut, yang masing-masing bertabrakan satu sama lain. Pihak sendiri harus dimenangkan, dan pihak lain harus di\"kalah\"kan. Jadilah seolah-olah mereka saling berhadapan, padahal dalam kenyataan mereka menganut corak kehidupan yang sama yaitu mementingkan akhlak/moralitas/etika. Terkenal dengan ucapan H. Munawir Sadzali, mantan menteri agama kita, bahwa di Muhammadiyah ada orang NU bernama Ahmad Azhar Basyir (Ketua Umum PP. Muhammadiyah saat itu, dan di lingkungan PBNU ada orang Muhammadiyah bernama Abdurrahman Wahid), yang membawakan pembaharuan-pembaharuan.

Bahwa kedua perkumpulan itu memiliki persamaan-persamaan penting, jarang sekali diingat. Pertama, kedua-duanya mengacu pada tujuan kemaslahatan umat, yang dalam literatur kita umumnya disebut kesejahteraan rakyat. Pembukaan UUD kita, yang dibuat antara lain oleh tokoh-tokoh kedua organisasi itu, merumuskan hal itu sebagai masyarakat adil dan makmur. Jadi, tak benarlah ungkapan salah seorang Kyai NU; al-hamdulilah, keluarga besar kita semuanya beraqidah Islam, minimal Muhammadiyah. Menanggapi hal ini, Ahmad Azhar Basyir memberikan komentar, di Muhammadiyah juga banyak orang yang menganggap NU minimal.

*****

Aspek lain yang jarang dilihat orang, yakni perlakuan Keraton Hamengkubuanan di Yogyakarta. Keraton tersebut \"merangkul\" kedua-duannya, dengan menyantuni NU (melalui status \"Masjid Pethok Nagari\" di Mlangi dan Wonokromo) serta tetap membiarkan KH. Ahmad Dahlan menjadi penghulu keraton setelah mengadakan pembaharuan dengan mendirikan Muhammadiyah. Jadi, baik tradisionalisme maupun pembaharuan sama-sama memperoleh santunan dari keraton, yang sekarang bertambah dengan kebiasaan \"semaan\" al-Qur\'an yang dahulu dirintis oleh alm. Kyai Hamim Jazuli (Gus Mik).

Kedua hal yang berbeda itu, yakni tradisionalisme Nu dan pembaharuan Muhammadiyah, seringkali melupakan kita. Dari sesuatu yang sangat penting: Islamisasi terbatas/limited Islamization --yang, dirintis Sultan Agung Hanyokro Kusumo, dengan pemakaian hukum-hukum nikah figh sebagai \"peraturan\" di keraton dan pemakaian bulan Muharom sebagai permulaan tahun Saka, ini dilanjutkan oleh pimpinan keraton.

Tentunya, ini harus memperhitungkan kenyataan bahwa --untuk beberapa dasa warsa, cara kehidupan \"sekuler\" yang tidak mau tahu dengan ajaran agama sempat menerapkan dominasinya atas masyarakat kita, termasuk keraton.

Dengan demikian jelaslah, bahwa keraton Hamengkubuanan memperlakukan Muhammadiyah dan NU, sebagai sebuah budaya, dengan tidak mementingkan institusinya. Ini adalah tindakan yang sangat bijaksana, yang sudah sepatutnya ditiru dan dicontoh oleh para pimpinan kedua organisasi tersebut.

Dengan ungkapan lain, baik tradisionalisme NU maupun pembaharuan Muhammadiyah haruslah diukur secara budaya, dan bukannya secara kelembagaan. Bukankah kini anak-anak muda kedua belah pihak sering dihadapkan kepada tantangan budaya modern yang menjauhkan mereka dari akar-akar budaya masa lampau? Bukankah ini melupakan kita dari kenyataan adanya orang-orang Muhammadinu, yang seringkali sudah tidak melihat relevansi pemisahan keduannya. Kalau saja kita menjadi dewasa dalam hal ini, kita akan melihat keadaan NU dan Muhammadiyah, bukannya pertentangan dan perpecahan antara keduanya.

Paso, 10/3/2002
*Penulis adalah ketua dewan syura DPP PKB

http://www.gusdur.net/pemikiran/Detail/?id=26/hl=id/Muhammadiyah-NU_Perbedaankah_Atau_Perpecahan

Tugas Berat Muhammadiyah

Pikiran Rakyat, Sabtu 8 Juli 2000

Oleh Prof. Dr. Nurcholish Madjid

MUHAMMADIYAH merupakan contoh menarik tentang sebuah konsekuensi pendidikan yang tidak disengaja, dalam hal ini pendidikan modern (Belanda). Bermula sebagai bagian dari Politik Etis (1901), pendidikan modern Belanda diperkenalkan oleh pemerintahan kolonial dengan tujuan ganda: memberikan kesempatan kepada pribumi untuk berpartisipasi dalam peradaban modern dan untuk menjinakkan gerakan liar kemerdekaan Indonesia. Implikasi dari tujuan pendidikan hourgrojeian itu (dari kata Snouck Hourgrounje, red) adalah bahwa semakin banyak orang Indonesia yang mengikuti pendidikan modern, semakin luas partisipasi mereka dalam agenda noblesse oblige (kewajiban mulia, red) kaum kulit putih untuk memberadabkan bangsa barbar non-kulit putih.

Tetapi hasilnya ternyata membawa berkah berganda. Di satu pihak, pemerintahan kolonial mulai melihat munculnya kelas terdidik birokrat yang taat kepada pemerintah, tapi di lain pihak ada konsekuensi sampingan. Gerakan nasionalis modern tumbuh dari sistem tersebut, salah satunya adalah Muhammadiyah. Yang lainnya adalah Budi Utomo dan Syarikat Dagang Islam/Syarikat Islam.

Adalah sebuah hikmah ganda, bahwa lahirnya gerakan reformasi Islam seperti Muhammadiyah disambut baik pemerintahan kolonial (sebuah perangko diluncurkan pemerintah kolonial untuk menghormati "pelayanan baik" Muhammadiyah kepada pemerintahan Belanda). Tapi pada saat yang sama, Muhammadiyah dikhawatirkan menjadi ujung tombak gerakan modernis Islam seperti yang terjadi di Mesir dengan tokohnya Jamaluddin al-Afghani, atau seperti yang dilakukan Muhammad Abduh dan Rashid Ridha di Timur Tengah yang akhirnya menjadikan kolonialisme sebagai sasaran nasionalisme radikal.

Sisi lain dari peranan Muhammadiyah dapat dilihat dari kenyataan bahwa, sejalan dengan ide reformasinya, ia memulai agenda sosial keagamaan dengan mendirikan sekolah-sekolah tipe Belanda seperti HIS, MULO, dan AMS, bukannya model pesantren yang telah lama berakar. Bahkan sistem madrasah telah dan masih digunakan secara terbatas. Dengan sifat program pendidikan seperti itu, gerakan Muhammadiyah lebih berafinitas kepada elit kolonial, khususnya elit tradisional Jawa, yaitu priyayi dan golongan birokrat kolonial.

Situasi seperti ini tentu saja mendapatkan reaksi dari mayoritas ulama yang menentang introduksi sekolah-sekolah Belanda. Para cendekiawan, ulama, maupun pemimpin sosial keagaan "tradisional" (yang oleh pemerinah Belanda disebut sebagai volk) bereaksi keras menentang "Politik Etis" dan mengkounternya dengan mendirikan berbagai pesantren. (Ulama sering disalahartikan sebagai sosok seperti pendeta, padahal dalam Islam tidak ada kelas yang memiliki otoritas "gerejani").

Lembaga pesantren telah lama berdiri dalam berbagai budaya, seperti Al-Zaytunah dan Al-Azhar di dunia Arab dan Deoband di India. Di Indonesia ia dianggap sebagai kelanjutan dari "padepokan," sedangkan di dunia internasional ia merupakan kelanjutan dari zawiyah, ribat, khaniqah, dan bahkan funduq (yang kemudian diindonesiakan menjadi "pondok", yang asal katanya adalah bahasa Arab yang meminjam bahasa Yunani/Syriac "phandakiyum" (yang artinya rumah kecil untuk menginap sementara). Namun pondok atau pesantren besar di Jawa seperti Tebuireng, Tambakberas, Rejoso, Lirboyo, Jampes di kompleks Jombang-Kediri telah berdiri pada awal abad ke-20 dan bukan sebagai penyeimbang sistem dan konsep pendidikan Belanda.

Pesantren-pesantren ini kemudian berhimpun dalam gerakan nasionalis lainnya yaitu Nahdatul Ulama (NU). Fakta ini pada tingkat tertentu bisa menjelaskan mengapa ada perbedaan (rupture) antara Muhammadiyah dengan NU sejak awal pergerakan keduanya, dan masih terasa hingga kini.
**

BANYAK wajah Muhammadiyah, tapi tentu saja yang paling menonjol adalah wajah reformisnya. Sifat reformis pergerakannya disimbolisasikan dalam sebutan "Muhammadiyah" itu sendiri. Berbagai pengamat menilai penyebutan nama "Muhammadiyah" bisa mengundang berbagai masalah karena bisa saja berarti bahwa para pengikut Muhammadiyah menyembah Muhammad yang sebetulnya "hanya" seorang rasul, seorang manusia biasa yang tidak memiliki kualitas ketuhanan. Tapi tentu saja bukan begitu maksud para pendiri Muhammadiyah. Nampaknya apa yang mereka maksudkan, sesuai dengan misi reformasinya, adalah mengajak semua Muslim untuk tidak terperangkap dalam "madzhabisme" seperti Jafariyah, Hanafiyah, Malikiyah, Syafiiyah, Hanbaliyah dll, dan tidak terpaku pada person seperti pada gerakan Sufi, misalnya Qadariyah, Naqshabadiyah, Tijaniyah dll.

Jadi, terminologi "Muhammadiyah" secara langsung dimaksudkan sebagai pembebasan kaum Muslim dari partikularisme madzhab dan mengajak mereka kembali kepada ajaran murni Rasul Muhammad yang bersumber pada Qur'an dan Sunnah. Konsekuensi positif dari pembebasan religius ini adalah berupa kesiapan warga Muhammadiyah untuk menerima apapun yang baik dan berguna untuk kemanusiaan, seperti ilmu dan pengetahuan, dari manapun sumbernya dan kapanpun datangnya, dan memandangnya sebagai harta warisan kemanusiaan.

Salah satu spirit dasar ajaran Rasulullah, seperti yang dirumuskan ulama klasik, terutama Syafiiyah adalah :"Pada prinsipnya segala ritual yang non-religius dihalalkan kecuali jika ada dalil yang menyatakan sebaliknya (Al-asl fi al-ashya [ghayr al-'ibadah] al-ibahah illa idza ma dalla al-dalil 'ala khilafi-hi)". Ada juga prinsip lain yang merupakan sisi lain dari mata uang yang sama dengan prinsip ini: "Pada prinsipnya segala ritual keagamaan adalah diharamkan kecuali kalau dinyatakan sebaliknya" (Al-asl al-ibadah al-tahrim illa idza ma dalla al-dalil 'ala khilafi-hi).

Tak diragukan lagi, butir-butir di atas merupakan sumbangan besar Muhammadiyah sebagai gerakan reformis. Tapi ketika menjalankan peran reformisnya kemudian, Muhammadiyah mengalami tantangan serius tentang bagaimana mengatasi citra organisasi yang (ironisnya) "dogmatik" dibandingkan dengan NU yang lebih "liberal" dan "fleksibel", menurut majalah Time edisi terakhir. Nampaknya warga Muhammadiyah harus mentrasedensi diri di atas "Muhammadiyah" yang sekarang justru terkesan kuat sebagai Ja'fariyah, Hanafiyah, Malikiyah, Syafiiyah, Hanbaliyah, Qadariyah, Naqshabandiyah, Tijaniyah, dll, dengan dua sisi positif dan negatifnya. Dengan kata lain, "Muhammadiyah" telah tumbuh menjadi madzhab baru lainnya. Suatu cara berpikir yang oleh para pendirinya ingin dihapuskan dari ummat.

Maka, betapapun besarnya pujian yang diterimanya sebagai sebuah organisasi yang sukses membawa umat Islam Indonesia ke arah modernitas, Muhammadiyah kini menghadapi tugas berat untuk meningkatkan proses demokratisasi ummat dan bangsa dengan jalan membangun egalitarianisme, toleransi, pluralisme, inklusivisme, moderasi, dan humanisme universal yang sejati. Semua prinsip ini, yang sudah dipahami para pimpinan Muhammadiyah, secara eksplisit sudah digariskan dalam Qur'an dan Sunnah, tanpa keraguan sedikitpun. Karena Muhammadiyah masih dalam bungkus Asyariyah (sesuatu yang tidak sepenuhnya paralel dengan paham Al-Afghani, Abduh dan Ridha, untuk tidak menyebut Ibnu Taymiyah), maka warga Muhammadiyah dihadapkan pada beban untuk mengembangkan Kalam untuk merespon tuntutan pembangunan kemanusiaan, karena Kalam klasik pada kadar tertentu adalah merupakan respon kaum muslimin terhadap tantangan pada masanya. Wallahu
alam.***

Prof. Dr. Nurcholish Madjid, adalah Rektor Universitas Paradina Mulya