Inter-ethical for Saving World

Using Michel Foucault’s theory, Knitter says that there is no meta-narrative and meta-problem; including language, that always limits what we know. Language politically, economically and culturally is conditioned. Nevertheless, we cannot deny the universal problem affecting everyone, namely ecological problem. Due to common problem, inter-religious solutions in solving this problem, according to Knitter, are must be done. Seeking inter-religious solutions must be started with ethics, because it is the soil in which religion grows, rather than formal religion. Mencius describes the same mystical experience transmitted through ethical sensitivity “when they see a child about to fall into a well”. This sameness is called “the mind that cannot bear to see the suffering of others”.

Therefore, all religions are united in the experiencing common problem like ecological problem. The common problem should cause the same response and action. I agree with this notion that religions through mystical and ethical approach have the same point of which can be common ground in order to solve ecological problem. It means that whatever your religion, ideology and understanding of religion are, you are facing environmental problem, over consumption and over population.

Although there is common problem, I think, it doesn’t meant that all religions can elaborate his own religion for seeking the common point with other religions. In fact, there are many religious followers do not want to face environmental problem together. The suggestion for starting with ethics and mystics, I think, is not easy to do because mystical and ethical discourse is too elite which is only a few people can access it. This suggestion makes me remember with Hans Kung idea’s global ethic. However, we quickly have to realize that Kung’s idea, for some extend, faces problems that one of which is political interest.

Therefore, the challenge is how to down earth (earthed; membumikan?) this notion in the practical level. Ethical and mystical point of religions, I think, must be guidance for arranging practical. Many scholars and religious leaders proclaim the ethical point of religion for saving this world, but it practically does not much more work.

In Islamic perspective, the one way to down earth ethical and mystical point of religion is fikih. I wrote environmental fikih (fiqh al-bi’ah) at al-Nadhar bulletin published by P3M Jakarta. In the article, I formulate practical point for saving this world, such as the re-interpretation the meaning of khalifah, ecology as part of Islamic doctrine, the relation between ecology and faith, ecological unbeliever.

At least, ethical and mystical point of religion for ecology, I think, is a new kind of inter-faith dialogue, which passes over theological limit.

 

When Environmental Crisis Happens

Global and multidimensional crisis really happened. No aspects of human life can avoid this crisis. There are multidimensional crisis like global warming, environmental (also natural) disaster, over-consumption, pollution, lack of clean water, over-population, deforestation, illegal logging, loss of biodiversity, etc. However, the wisdom to maintain the environment is still near to the ground. Not only companies and government but per individual also play a role in this crisis.

We can see vulgarly many kind of environmental degradation such as companies, which privatize water, or government legalizing unjust environmental law, or even each individual working against environmental wisdom. Another side, the population growth quickly increases over the limit.

So, what important this issue in science-religion discourse? R.F Schumacher in his book, A Guide for the perplexed (1981), said that cause of multidimensional crisis is spiritual crisis in accordance with belief and meaning of life. Further, Sayyed Hossein Nasr states that this crisis mostly is caused by modern science that tends to scientism. In modern science, human being is central which its consequence destroys environment for human being need. In this case, the statement of Fritjof Capra in the Web and Life is true that we theoretically destroy this world before destroying practically.

Therefore, when reading The Environment and Risk, I become be pessimist for the future of this world. I doubt that our generation can survive in this world if we cannot change modern-man view. Due to this condition, Nasr criticizes modern science that put human being as a central. For that reason, Nasr suggests to promote what he calls scientia sacra, philosophia perennis, or al-hikmah al-khalidah, and advance eco-theology. There are many religious doctrines, which teach and promote environmental wisdom. The concept of Yin-Yang in Taoism and the concept of Ri’ayatul bi’ah (Yusuf Qordowi) who includes environment in Islamic principle (maqashid al-syari’ah), for instance, are religious resources that should be applied in practical life.

Nevertheless, I think, eco-theology is not sufficient. We have to advance what Charlene Spretnak calls Green politics. It is importance, because environmental degradation has something to do with politics. Unjust environmental law and weak law enforcement are politics area in which government should play a role.

For that reason, multidimensional crisis needs comprehensive solution, interdisciplinary resource, and multidimensional approach.

 

Truth and Inter-Religious Dialogue

Hinduism View[1]

Hinduism is the oldest religion coming to and living in Indonesia rather than other official religions like Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam. In the 732-729, Hinduism kingdom has existed in Indonesia, namely Mataram Kingdom.[2] Therefore, Hinduism has a great contribution in shaping Indonesian character. One of the Hinduism contributions is peace and harmony among different background. “Inter-religious unity has always been part of nation’s culture”[3] Mpu Tantular’s phrase, Bhineka Tunggal Ika, becomes Indonesia’s National Emblem. However, this phrase often does not match with social fact in which “religious conflict” often happens.

For that reason, this paper wants re-excavate Hinduism view both in historical and religious teaching. It is important to harmonize the plurality of religions which often conflict. Therefore, in this paper, I not only summarize the two selected paper[4] but also respond and add something that they are not mention.

 

Maulid dan Transformasi Sosial

Harian Jogja, 9 Maret 2009

Sebelum Islam datang, penduduk Arab (Mekah) disana kebanyakan adalah para mulhidin (penyekutu Allah). Sementara, konstruk sosialnya penuh dengan ketimpangan, ketidakadilan dan kesenjangan. Perang antar kabilah (suku/kelompok) seringkali terjadi. Kehidupan dibawah gurun pasir tidak menemukan titik terang sama sekali. Disana, perampokan, pencurian, penjarahan adalah salah satu tradisi yang melekat.

Ditengah situasi kacau balau seperti itulah lahir Muhammad kedunia dari keluarga yang sangat sederhana, di Kota Mekah. Seorang bayi yang kelak akan membawa perubahan besar bagi sejarah peradaban dunia. Bayi itu yatim, bapaknya yang bernama Abdullah meninggal kira-kira tujuh bulan sebelum ia lahir. Kehadiran bayi itu tidaklah disambut oleh ayahnya. Kemudian, bayi itu dibawa ke Ka’bah dan disanalah diberi nama Muhammad. Kelahiran Muhammad (Maulidun nabiy) diperingati setiap tahun oleh kalangan muslim Indonesia. Muhammad lahir tanggal 12 Robiul Awal. Tak lama kemudian, ibu Muhammad, siti Aminah, meninggal setelah Muhammad berumur enam tahun.

 

Trap of Science and Religion

After Pak Zain (Zainal Abidin Bagir) explaining the universe, I know that the universe is very large and consists of many things, not only earth, human being, animal, etc. Therefore, the question “are human beings special” is important to consider. In this context, I believe that human beings are only a little thing in this universe. Therefore, human beings must respect others. However, human beings are unique, because they are the only one among universe who has reason to rationalize and understand this universe. Because of reason, human beings often feel superior to others that can explain everything.

Science is human being creation to explain this universe, makes life simpler and sometime destroys this universe. As human creation, science surely has limitation in the explaining and rationalizing this universe. As well, religion does not merely given by God, but also human creation. The purpose of religion more and less is similar to science, namely explaining this universe. For instance, both science and religion have the same explanation that the source of human being, animal, bird, etc, is same (nafsin wahidah in the Qur’an term). The difference between science and religion is that religion consists of ethical thing which in science less got space. Another difference is that science pure human reason, meanwhile religion has mystical thing. It means that science and religion have the same purpose; their differences are only in their content.

The problem is both scientists and religious often claim that his explanation is totally right meanwhile other explanations are wrong. Scientists sometime blame religious outlook, and conversely. In this case, scientists and religious believe in their own creation. In other words, what they create then become belief. However, both have limitation and are relative. Because of this, I assume that the belief of human being in religion and science is trap. Briefly, the relative dimension of science and religion must be considered as the limitation, consequently between science and religion can not claim each other as the only true explanation.

 

Jembatan Mistikal untuk Dialog Antaragama

Sebuah Catatan untuk When Mystic Maters Meet Syafa‘atun Almirzanah[1]

Oleh Kautsar Azhari Noer

Mukadimah

Pertama-tama saya ingin mengucapkan terima kasih yang sebesar-besarnya atas kehormatan yang diberikan oleh Panitia kepada saya untuk menjadi narasumber pada acara Peluncuran dan Bedah Buku When Mystic Masters Meet: Paradigma Baru Relasi Umat Kristiani-Muslim karya Mbak Syafa‘atun Almirzanah (selanjutnya karya ini disingkat W3M) di tempat yang sangat prestigius ini. Karya ini menampilkan dua mistikus besar dunia, Ibn ‘Arabi dari tradisi mistikal[2] Islam dan Meister Eckhart dari tradisi mistikal Kristen. Karya ini adalah sebuah upaya untuk memberikan sumbangan bagi dialog umat Kristiani-Muslim.

Saya tidak mungkin membicarakan semua aspek penting dari karya ini karena keterbatasan kesempatan dan ruang makalah ini. Lebih dari itu, karena pengetahuan saya tentang pemikiran mistikal Meister Eckhar jauh lebih tidak memadai, maka pembicaraan lebih banyak terfokus pada beberapa masalah yang terkait dengan Sufisme dan pemikiran Ibn ‘Arabi. Pokok pembicaraan dalam makalah ini, seperti terlihat pada judul makalah ini, adalah jembatan mistikal bagi dialog antaragama yang tidak lepas dari kandungan W3M.

Makalah ini berupaya menunjukkan bahwa Sufisme, mistisisme, spiritualitas, atau istilah lain yang semakna, adalah jembatan yang tepat dan efektif bagi dialog dan hubungan antaragama. Makalah ini membicarakan mengapa Sufisme, sebagaimana mistisisme dalam agama-agama besar dunia lain, dapat menjadi jalan yang tepat di antara jalan-jalan lain dalam tradisi Islam untuk menjadi jembatan bagi dialog dan hubungan antaragama. Makalah ini membicarakan bagaimana dialog antaragama harus dilakukan. Makalah ini juga menyinggung aspek-aspek metodologis dan teknis dalam W3M yang memang menjadi titik berangkat dan inspirasi bagi makalah ini.

 

Competition Between Science and Religion

Steven Weinberg’s statement “with or without religion, good people can behave well and bed people can do evil” is interesting. Another interesting statement is the question “why” either for science or religion. However, Weinberg says that science (physics) has a better explanation than religion can ever be. It is interesting because both compete to explain this world.

I agree with the both statement of Weinberg. The goodness and badness can not be determined by merely religion. It means that people can be good or bad independently separated from religion. Richard Dawkins gives an example how people do in the name of God. Khaled Abu Fadl was shown in his book, Speaking in God’s Name, that many people (Muslims) oppress others in the name of God. As well, many people do good thing based on their belief in God.

Another point is how religion and science explain this world; creation, universe, God, etc. Although science has scientific explanation about this creation of universe, it cannot be proven as well as religion explanation which only requires belief without further explanation. If we realize the character of both science and religion, we can accept both; that it is impossible for religion to explain everything comprehensively and perfectly, because religion explanation was stagnant while the human reason and this world still go on. As well, science although it can explain scientifically has limitation in the rationalizing and observing the past phenomena when science (not knowledge) in the formative age.

Because of this, some believers cannot accept science explanation of this universe as well scientists reject religion explanation. The challenge, I think, is how science and religion explanation can accept each other. It is hard unless one of them revises its explanation or divides each space in the explaining this world.

 

Bedah Buku Relief, CRCS UGM

 

Launching Buku& Film “Mysticism”

Pendekatan dan cara untuk menggelar dialog dan kerjasama agama-agama tak selamanya berjalan mulus. Disana-sini ditemukan hambatan-hambatan yang cukup signifikan. Penyebabnya pun kian tak tunggal, mulai dari sikap mendua kitab suci (the ambivalence of the sacred), tafsir eksklusif terhadapnya sampai pada faktor-faktor non agama seperti politik, sosial, budaya. Karena hambatan-hambatan tersebut, banyak tokoh yang berpendirian bahwa hanya dalam ruang tasawuf (mysticism)-lah, titik temu, kerjasama dan dialog agama-agama bisa dilangsungkan dengan baik.

Dalam konteks inilah, buku When Mystic Masters Meet karya Syafa’atun, Ph.D ini., menjadi sangat penting. Buku ini membahas dua mistikus besar abad Pertengahan dalam Kristen dan Islam, yaitu Meister Eckhart dan Muhyi al-Din Ibn al-‘Arabi. Dua tokoh ini bagi penikmat mysticism cukup akrab. Dua tokoh ini disamping kontroversi, ternyata memiliki ketajaman visi yang mampu memperluas, memperbaharui, merekonstruksi pandangan-pandangan teologis yang telah mapan. Akhirnya karya Ibn al-`Arabi dan Meister Eckhart juga sangat berakar pada kitab suci kanonik sehingga pada saat tertentu mereka seolah menulis komentar atau tafsir terhadap al-Qur’an dan Bible.

Karena itu, jangan lewatkan acara Launching dan Bedah Buku When Mystic Masters Meet; Paradigma Baru Hubungan Umat Kristen-Muslim, yang sebelumnya diawali dengan pemutaran film The Mystic’s Journey (Producer Huston Smith) pada Kamis, 19 Februari 2009 di Lantai 5 Gedung Pascasarjana Universitas Gadjah Mada yang dilaksanakan oleh Religious Issues Forum (Relief) Center for Religious and Cross-Cultural Studies (CRCS) UGM. Contact Person: 08174121513 (Hatim Gazali)

 

Che Guevara Sebenarnya

Guy Sorman
FILSUF DAN EKONOM PRANCIS, PENGARANG EMPIRE OF LIES

Dalam perjalanan sejarahnya, Hollywood sering kali menyajikan produk-produk yang konyol, tapi para pembuat film biasanya tidak menutupi perilaku sadis para pembunuh dalam film yang mereka produksi. Tapi Steven Soderbergh berbuat demikian dalam film garapannya yang baru mengenai kehidupan Che Guevara. Che, sang tokoh revolusioner, seperti ditampilkan aktor Benecio del Toro dalam film Soderbergh ini adalah khayalan belaka. Pahlawan kaum kiri dengan rambut dan cambang bagaikan seorang hippie, citra yang sekarang menjadi ikon di kaus dan cangkir gendut di seluruh dunia, cuma mitos yang diciptakan para propagandis Fidel Castro–semacam persilangan antara Don Quixote dan Robin Hood.

Seperti dongeng pada umumnya, mitos Che yang dibangun Fidel mengandung persamaan dengan fakta sejarah yang dilebih-lebihkan, tapi cerita sebenarnya jauh lebih gelap. Mungkin saja Robin Hood merampok si kaya dan, untuk menghilangkan jejaknya, membagi sebagian harta rampokannya kepada si miskin. Di Spanyol, pada abad pertengahan, kesatria-kesatria mirip Quixote mungkin saja berkeliaran di desa-desa, bukan untuk melawan naga di dalam dongeng, melainkan menghabisi sisa-sisa muslim dari negeri itu.