This is a comment on a letter titled “Exporting moderate Islam” (The Jakarta Post, Dec. 24) by John Hargreaves. Again, while Muslims’ comments about the Swiss vote have mostly been moderate and sensible, it is mostly Westerners’ comments that are fiercely against.
The letter (taken cum granu salis) made an interesting read. The commentator seemed to enjoy lecturing (professional aberration?), selecting a few phrases taken out of context, describing them as distortions, oversimplifications or making some strange elucubrations, eventually sometimes leading to my same conclusions.
First, Christianity obviously did not expand with a big bang, it took time to develop throughout the various Roman empires. But it is a fact that it has dramatically and indelibly shaped the Western world the way we know it now, through a process that lasted 2000 years. At the end of his disquisition about renaissance, Galileo, enlightenment, Islamic dominance in Iberia and Sicily, the writer admits that Christianity has been an important factor in the formation of the European civilization. So where is the distortion? Not having considered the marginal influence of Norse mythology? I consider myself as an agnostic. Indonesia has been my home for some 35 years, but I am a bule (white person) who is adapting as much as possible to local conditions, without rejecting my cultural heritage which makes me who I am.
Second, frankly I do not get what the visa-on-arrival has to do with the minaret issue. Switzerland voted against building minaret, while mosques can be freely built. If we want to dwell on reciprocity issues, we can go on forever: while Rome, like it or not the capital of Christianity for 2000 years, has the largest mosque in Europe, Mecca and Medina are off limits not only to cathedrals or tiny chapels, but even to non-Muslims.
Third, it is a well known fact that Muslim immigration in America and Europe show substantial differences, one being limited in numbers, qualified and educated, therefore easily adaptable, the other being a large mass of poorly educated and poorly qualified individuals, who, ill adapted to local conditions, are entrenched in their original, closed cultures and end up creating impenetrable ghettos.
It is therefore quite understandable that Europeans are concerned, and any American “oversimplification” of the issue is out of place. While the US immigration is rightfully rather selective, exhortations for Europe to open doors to indiscriminate immigration and Turkey’s admission to the EU (see Newsweek et al.) are self-serving US, not European interests.
Fifth, a good Muslim friend told me that the Prophet said that there would be 72 versions of Christianity and 73 of Islam. Some time ago a director general at the Religion Affairs Ministry told me that there were more than 150 Protestant sects in Indonesia! I do not know how many Muslim sects or schools there are but it is obvious that uniformity is something that does not exist, not here or anywhere else.
The idea that Indonesians should try to export their moderate versions of Islam to counter the pervasive trend of Arabization, therefore wahabization and radicalization of Islam, is not my idea, but it has also been mentioned by several respected Muslim figures. Unfortunately, what I have seen in 35 years in this country is creeping Arabization, and a situation where a few radicals dominate the scene, while the moderate majority remains silent (or maybe actually accepts and agrees: where have all the kain kebaya and konde disappeared? Replaced by Middle Eastern / Pakistani attire?). And the few daring and wise voices such as the one of former president Gus Dur remain voices in the desert.
Benito L. Curtaz
Jakarta
