Despite his controversial ideas, Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid unquestionably has influenced many, both who he physically met and those who read and heard his talks, writings, work and discussions about him.
The former president and former chairman of the Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) was widely portrayed as a fighter for democracy, a great intellectual and an inclusive and genuine ulema. After his death in January, praise and respects poured for his achievements in promoting democracy, humanity and Islam.
During his brief tenure as the country’s fourth president from October 1999 to July 2001, Gus Dur, however, was not only controversial, but confused people, including those who idealized him, about many things: his ideas and maneuvers.
People around him said that while Gus Dur had brilliant ideas on democracy, he often acted as an authoritarian.
After receiving ideas from certain individuals, for instance, and taking them as “true”
information, Gus Dur was reluctant to consider ideas from other sources. Gus Dur, as the stories went, was often too confident of his own ideas and such behaviour seemed to drive him to be feudalistic, sometimes.
He was often confrontational and found it easy to appoint and sack government officials.
Gus Dur’s maneuvers were probably too complicated to many, such as me. For those who think they are knowledgeable about Gus Dur’s, they argue it is because Gus Dur projected “reality” beyond his time and context.
Some who used to idealize Gus Dur were, nevertheless, “tired” to think (and sick of thinking) about him. But for those whose academic concern was on pluralism, multiculturalism and human rights, they could not avoid reviewing Gus Dur’s ideas and actions. Gus Dur’s advocacy for human rights inspired many.
Trying to critically read and understand Gus Dur’s ideas and actions, one might actually discover that Gus Dur’s advocacy on human rights, pluralism and multiculturalism was sporadic, and so not significantly effective. His ideas and actions advocating and protecting the minorities tended to be reactive.
Due to Gus Dur’s sporadic and reactive advocacies, it is then hard to locate the significance of Gus Dur’s thoughts, responses, and advocacies toward minority groups, especially those having been the victims of the state’s and society’s anti-religious-cultural freedom since the colonial era up to the present.
Like many historians of Indonesia’s Islam, Gus Dur seemed to perceive that the encounters and interactions between local and Islamic traditions throughout the archipelago were peaceful. Whether he was aware or ignorant, Gus Dur neglected to review the phenomenon of coercive mass conversions in the second half of 1960s and in 1970s, and the implications on our contemporary situation.
For issues of pluralism and multiculturalism in Indonesia, Gus Dur ignored addressing important questions, “Why should the state officiate [only imported] religions?” “What has the state’s officiating religions contributed to ideas of pluralism, multiculturalism, and human rights?” and “Why should every one affiliate to the state’s official religions?”
The above important questions were not yet illustrated in Gus Dur’s life. That Gus Dur was a pluralist and multiculturalist is unquestionable to me, too.
His advocacies on the ideas were strong and apparent. But, his work on religious pluralism mostly benefited those enjoying official religions. No objection to say that Gus Dur was a multiculturalist, but his concept of it was always overshadowed by the hegemonic discourses of the official religions.
In other words, if we are right that Gus Dur is the father of pluralism and multiculturalism, the “children” would (probably only) be those receiving benefits from the state’s officiating (the imported) religions.
For those who have been reluctant, but afraid of expressing their views, to affiliate to the official religions, they have a hard time to understand what “Gus Dur is the father of pluralism and multiculturalism” means.
To be fair, Gus Dur had done many respectful things but left lots of work for us. His advocacy on pluralist and multiculturalist ideas has not reached many “children” of the nation.
We, Gus Dur’s “fans,” should and have to expend the ideas. Otherwise, we are perpetuating discrimination, perhaps unconsciously.
The writer is a Ph.D candidate in Islam and Indigenous Religions, Arizona State University, USA and Teaching Assistant for Indigenous Religions at the Center for Religious and Cross-Cultural Studies (CRCS), UGM.
| 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|