TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Editorial: Controversial edicts
Three of the six fatwa issued by the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) have drawn strong resistance, not only from the general public, but also from individual Muslim organizations whose representatives sit in the country's highest Islamic authority
Change Size
Three of the six fatwa issued by the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) have drawn strong resistance, not only from the general public, but also from individual Muslim organizations whose representatives sit in the country's highest Islamic authority.
The three controversial edicts ban vote abstention, smoking and yoga. The three, plus another three on abortion, vasectomy and marriage with minors, were issued by MUI during its two-day national meeting in Padangpanjang, West Sumatra, which ended Sunday.
The edict that bans vote abstention immediately received strong criticism from both political experts and the public for neglecting people's individual right to decide not to cast their votes at the general elections. Furthermore, the council, a religious body, has been criticized for crossing the boundaries by dictating people's political behavior.
The council's edict that forbids smoking by children and pregnant women, and smoking in public places, however, has received different a response from the public. While many have supported the edict, as it helps prevent people and the country's youth from the hazardous impacts of smoking, strong opposition has come from the tobacco business community, saying the tobacco industry has contributed much by providing employment for Indonesians and boosting the country's economy.
Meanwhile, the council's edict banning Muslims from practicing certain aspects of yoga containing Hindu elements, such as chanting and meditation, has been slammed as excessive and counterproductive.
All these criticisms of the council's edicts, including from the country's largest Muslim organization - the Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) - only shows that the council is disconnected from the Muslim organizations it represents and that the edicts fail to reflect the true reality of Indonesian Muslims.
An intriguing question is how could the MUI officials, who are representatives of leading Muslim organizations and the Muslim intellectual community, go against their respective organizations?
A subsequent important question is whether it is imperative to have the MUI - which will be 34 years of age this year - reformed and restructured in accordance with the social, cultural and religious dynamism of Indonesian Muslims and people in general. Or should we just let the council continue on its own way, ignoring it and eventually allowing it to dig its own grave as its supporters abandon it?
Perhaps we still remember the noble vision and mission of the MUI, which was established on July 26, 1975 after a national meeting of the ulema of top Muslim organizations, government leaders and Muslim intellectuals in Jakarta. The meeting aimed, among other things, to settle differences in the understanding of Islam among Islamic followers, and to promote unity in Islam and national unity through pluralism.
The MUI was also established encapsulating principles of democracy - that the council accommodates and responds to the aspirations of society.
We once had a dignified MUI under the leadership of its first chairman, Hamka, who won the respect of the Muslim community, government as well as non-Muslim communities. It is now up to the MUI to reform itself for its betterment or to be abandoned by its supporters, the Muslim community and the general public.
