Introducing New Religious Ideas to Mathla’ul Anwar: K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar (1939-1973)


  • KH. Uwes Abu Bakar
    By: Didin Nurul Rosyidin Ph.D*

    Mathla’ul Anwar is one of the largest Muslim associations in Indonesia along with Nahdlatul Ulama or NU (mostly seen as the most prominent representative of the “traditionalist” Muslim groups established by several pesantren-leading religious teachers in 1926) and Muhammadiyah (the largest group of the modernist or reformist Muslims established in 1912). Mathla’ul Anwar was established in 1916 by several Bantenese kiyais, an Indonesian term used to attribute religious teachers, including K.H. Tubagus Muhammad Sholeh, K.H. Entol Muhammad Yasin, K.H. Mas Abdurrahman, K.H. Abdul Mu’thi and others[1].
    Since the beginning, Mat
    hla’ul Anwar took serious works to improve the standard of Islamic educational system through introducing a modern graded system in which there were nine classes ranging from A, B, I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII and each of these classes took one year. Students would spend nine years of study before graduating from the madrasah of Mathla’ul Anwar. One teacher would supervise one class and give teachings based on the curriculum that had been designed for each of those nine classes[2]. Mathla’ul Anwar operated this kind of education system until 1950 when it replaced its nine-graded system with a new reformed system of schooling introduced by the newly independent government of Republic of Indonesia[3].
    As a religious group, Mathla’ul Anwar established its own system of religious thought that was in the early decades very much similar to that of NU. In matters of theology, it associated itself with Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah (followers of the teachings of the prophet and a part of the majority of Muslims, or well-known as a Sunni faction) of the Ash’ariyah stream (one of the Sunni theological schools in Islam besides Mu’tazilah, Qodariyah, Murjiah, and Jabariyah). However, unlike most of Javanese kiyais who in a variety of grades and ways showed their tolerance to syncretistic attitudes of people’s religiosity, Mathla’ul Anwar’s kiyais strongly rejected all kinds of heretical traditions and regarded them as the inherited products of Hinduism and Buddhism[4]. In matters of Islamic law, it solely referred to the Syafi’ite school of thought (one of the four major Islamic schools of law in addition to Hanafite, Maliki, and Hanbalite) and did not tolerate to the idea of talfiq, exercising different ideas of schools of Islamic law in certain religious practices, and often condemned the religious ideas advocated by reformist groups, mainly Muhammadiyah, as false doctrines, particularly in matters related to an independent religious exercise, ijtihad.[5]
    In politics, Mathla’ul Anwar did not clearly formulate specific political points of view since it took policies to associate with other organizations in driving its political aspiration. For instance, form 1915 up to 1928, it joined Syarekat Islam (Islamic League or SI), the only ever largest Muslim political group in the political history of Indonesia and established in 1912,[6] and from 1928 up to 1952, joined NU[7]. Mathla’ul Anwar’s withdrawal from SI was not because of its purely political dissatisfaction with the latter rather due to its disagreement with the growing dominance of the “modernist” religious thought promoted by Muhammadiyah leaders within SI’s leadership circles. From this historical perspective, I would like now to elaborate the roles of K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar who took the leadership of Mathla’ul Anwar in 1939 in introducing new religious ideas to Mathla’ul Anwar.
    Profile and Educational Background
    K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar was born in Menes in 1912. His educational careers were entirely spent in Menes where he studied in the madrasah of Mathla’ul Anwar from 1919 up to 1926. Like other students of this madrasah who preferred to live in one of the existing pesantrens around Menes areas in order to enhance their expertise in religious knowledge, a young Uwes studied religious sciences in several pesantrens in Menes under the guidance of several Mathla’ul Anwar’s teachers who organized their own pesantren, such as K.H. Entol Muhammad Rais, K.H. Abdul Latif and K.H. Mas Abdurrahman[8].

    Political Careers in Mathla’ul Anwar and Elsewhere
    After finishing his seven years of study in the madrasah of Mathla’ul Anwar, he got a licence from the central board of Mathla’ul Anwar allowing him to teach religious knowledge elsewhere or establish a new madrasah. Mathla’ul Anwar applied a very selective method in awarding this licence. Only would those who had a high qualification be given this licence after successfully passing several tests conducted by the director of educational affairs of Mathla’ul Anwar, K.H. Mas Abdurrahman. Uwes’ intellectual potency assured the director to send him to such a number of madrasahs of Mathla’ul Anwar outside areas of Menes as those in Lampung and in Sukamandi. Uwes spent eight years of teaching in both areas from 1930 up to 1938. Because Mathla’ul Anwar at that time affiliated with NU, Uwes also taught in madrasahs of NU where the madrasahs of Mathla’ul Anwar were located[9]. In 1938, he returned to Menes where he taught in his alma mater.
    In Menes, his career in Mathla’ul Anwar rapidly advanced as he was elected as the general chairman at the third Congress of the organization held in 1939 or only one year after his return to Menes. He was the third general chairman since the foundation of the body only after K.H. E. M. Yasin and K.H. Abdul Mu’thi. The process of his election was very intense indeed. There were two factors contributing to this intense situation. First, in this Congress, members of Mathla’ul Anwar for the first time witnessed the rise of a new generation within the organization as most of its founders were ageing and some of them even already died, such as K.H. Entol Muhammad Yasin in 1937 and K.H. Tubagus Muhammad Sholeh in 1926. Second, there were more than one candidates, each of them had a special worth, including K.H. Entol Djunaedi, K. Asrori, K. Chabri Abdurrahman, and K. Uwes Abu Bakar[10].
    K.H. Djunaedi was a son of K.H. E. M. Yasin, and graduated from the Al-Azhar University in Cairo. Returning from Cairo in 1927, he introduced a new idea of the upgrading of the madrasah of Mathla’ul Anwar from seven to nine grades. He himself then supervised pupils at the highest level of class. K. Asrori was among the most brilliant pupils of K.H. Mas Abdurrahman and people believed that he was the most fitting successor of the latter. His credit also came from his status as a graduate of the Pesantren Darul Ulum Jombang where many NU’s prominent figures came from. K. Chabri was the eldest son of K.H. Mas Abdurrahman. His credit was solely from his important genealogical link. Compared to these three figures, K. Uwes was unknown among members of Mathla’ul Anwar. His wide travellings of teachings in areas outside Menes was one of the major factors of his unfamiliar reputation. His sole credential was only that he was a former pupil of K.H. Mas Abdurrahman. Not many of them at that time paid much attention to his experiences as results of his wide teaching journeys. People even described him as a “dumb” because of his infrequent speaking in the front of public audience[11]. Only was K.H. Mas Abdurrahman who viewed Uwes’ great experiences as a valuable capital in chairing an organization having successfully expanded its influence in vast areas, like Karawang, Tangerang, Lebak, Pandeglang, Bogor, and Lampung[12].
    In the session of the election of the new general chairman, most of participants of the Congress were reported to incline to K.H. Djunaedi. However, their first choice was unexpectedly disrupted by K.H. Mas Abdurrahman’s opposition and, thus, the Congress faced a deadlock. K.H. Mas Abdurrahman then preformed a prayer (istikharah) asking a divine answer for the most appropriate figure for the new leader. During, or perhaps after, performing the prayer, K.H. Mas Abdurrahman surprisingly proposed Uwes as the new leader. The charismatic stature of K.H. Mas Abdurrahman played a major role in easily achieving consensus among participants and, therefore, Uwes became a new general chairman[13].
    This process of selecting leadership brought about rife frustration among members of Mathla’ul Anwar, particularly K.H. Djunaedi and his loyal supporters, although they did not explicitly showed their discontent. However, several months later their opposition soon surfaced as K.H. Djunaedi and his sister, Nyi Hajjah Zaenab, the chairwoman of the madrasah of Mathla’ul Anwar for girl, established their own madrasah, named Maslakhul Anwar[14]. This political tension was the first incident faced by Mathla’ul Anwar.
    Uwes Abu Bakar led Mathla’ul Anwar until his death in 1973 during which he was elected seven times. Compared to other general chairmen who had and have led the organization since the beginning up to now, K.H. Uwes held the longest time of leadership. K.H. E. M. Yasin led this group twenty one years (1916-1937), K.H. Abdul Mu’thi two years (1937-1939), K.H. Muslim Abdurrahman nine months (1973-1974), K.H. Nafsirin Hadi eleven years (1974-1985), K.H. Entol Burhani six years (1985-1991), and Drs. H. Irsyad Djuwaeli, the current leader, has led the organization from 1991 up to now.
    In addition to his activities in Mathla’ul Anwar, K. Uwes was also active in NU holding the chairmanship of the executive board of the Pandeglang NU branch from 1939 before being forced to resign in 1952 because of the different political views on the separation of the NU from Masyumi, the largest Muslim political party after Independence and established in 1945[15].
    In politics, he was a member of the Japanese-established advisory council of Pandeglang from 1942 till 1945 and, at the same time, was also one of the vice-general chairmen of the advisory council of Banten[16]. After Independence, he joined Masyumi and he became a member of parliament of Pandeglang and West Java from 1945 till 1955. In the 1955 general election, he was elected as a member of parliament of Masyumi from 1956 till 1959. The abolishment of parliament and the introduction of the Guided Democracy by President Sukarno in 1959 ended K. Uwes’ membership in parliament. The banning of Masyumi in 1960 forced him to retreat from politics[17]. However, in 1964 when the anti-Communist forces led by the military set up their own association, Sekretariat Bersama Golongan Karya (Joint Secretariat of Functional Groups, or Sekber Golkar), K.H. Uwes joined it and occupied one of the vice general chairmen of this association[18].

    In 1967, he was involved in attempts to rehabilitate Masyumi through the creation of the Badan Koordinasi Amal Muslimin Indonesia (Coordinate Association of Indonesian Muslim Works, or BKAMI) in which he held one seat of the vice-general chairmen. This effort, yet, failed to be materialized due to the refusal of the New Order government. Later on, the BKAMI then created a new Muslim party, Partai Muslimin Indonesia (Indonesian Muslims Party, Parmusi)[19]. Enduring internal ruptures within this new party, partly because of the government’s intervention on internal affairs of the party, caused a split in its leadership. K.H. Uwes was involved in these conflicts as he along with minority leaders led by Jaelani Naro created a new executive board challenging the existing executive board led by the dominant Muhammadiyah leader, Djarnawi Hadikusuma[20]. These lasting clashes produced severe failures of the party in the 1971 general election. K.H. Uwes who was among the party’s list of candidates for parliament unsuccessfully won sufficient votes. Disappointed by the poor result of this general election pushed him to leave politics at whole in 1972[21] 

    Mathla’ul Anwar under K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar’s Chairmanship
    The first task faced by K.H. Uwes in his early leadership of Mathla’ul Anwar was to consolidate the organization following the controversial result of the third Congress. Strongly supported by K.H. Mas Abdurrahman until his death in 1944, Uwes succeeded in organizing a Congress in 1943 in which he was without any contender elected as the general chairman. The battle for revolution in which the madrasah buildings both in Menes and other areas were badly devastated contributed to reunite the already divided leaders of the group. In 1949, returning from the battlefields, K.H. Djunaedi and his sister, Hj. Zainab, rejoined Mathla’ul Anwar as they fused their own madrasah to the association[22].
    In 1950, Mathla’ul Anwar obtained a legal recognition of its madrasah from the government. By this official status, alumni of the madrasah of Mathla’ul Anwar were equal with those of public schools. However, this official promotion also forced the organization to adopt a new system of schooling introduced by the government in which schools were divided into three stages: elementary with six years of schooling, secondary with three years, and high school with also three years. Mathla’ul Anwar then split its nine-graded system of schooling into two stages: elementary and secondary. The organization seemed to well appreciate these changes of schooling as long as they did not give any significant impacts on fundamental elements of its educational system. The fact was not always as that as expected.
    The government in fact also obliged all schools to include secular matters, including English lessons, in their curriculum. Although Mathla’ul Anwar had included such secular subjects as Indonesian language, geography and history, into its curriculum since the period of the Japanese occupation, it still showed its reluctance to implement the government’s instructions, particularly related to the inclusion of English lessons. As the government set the inclusion of all secular matters as one of the requirements of gaining financial aids and maintaining the legal status of school, Mathla’ul Anwar finally adopted secular matters into its education curriculum, although with the continuing resistance, particularly from senior religious teachers (kiai) who still believed that the introduction of secular matters, particularly English lesson, meant the continuance of the colonial system of education producing infidels[23].
    In the early 1950s, Mathla’ul Anwar for the second time encountered internal ruptures. However, unlike the 1939 conflicts that were purely internal affairs in nature, the 1950s was predominantly driven by political tensions in Masyumi. Few years after its creation in 1945, Masyumi faced internal splits. In 1947, the SI wing seceded from the party due to its different views on the new cabinet structure of the government led by a Communist Prime Minister, Amir Syarifudin[24]. In 1950, internal disputes again arose in Masyumi as leaders of NU were unhappy with the new structure of leadership of the party resulted from the 1949 party Congress in which kiyais lost their decisive position in the party’s leadership. NU’s lost of the post of the ministry of religious affairs in 1952 because of Masyumi’s decision to promote Faqih Hasyim of Muhammadiyah as a new minister exacerbated the already fractured situation. NU felt humiliated by this last decision and, in its 1952 Congress, decided to withdraw from Masyumi and established its own party, NU[25]. NU’s political withdrawal divided members of Mathla’ul Anwar into three general groups ranging from those supporting NU, Masyumi’s supporters, and those inclining to make Mathla’ul Anwar independent. As the number of the second group supporters grew insignificantly and finally joined the third group, the conflicts were then between the first and the third along with the second groups, or between the pro and anti NU.
    The pro-NU argued that it was a moral obligation for members of Mathla’ul Anwar to maintain the inherited affiliation with NU whatever the status of NU was. Their argument referred to the fact that since 1928 when Mathla’ul Anwar was in the hand of the founders, it joined NU. Furthermore, in 1938, it hosted the 13th National Congress of NU. They also viewed that the reason of the founders of Mathla’ul Anwar to no longer joined SI and then joined NU in 1928 was because of little respect to kiyai showed by modernist groups that dominated SI at that time[26]. Now, the same situation took place in Masyumi. Meanwhile, supporters of the anti-NU group argued that NU was no longer a purely religious and social organization as before. Political affiliation was viable to change every time. An explicit political affiliation to a certain political party whatever the party was would be dangerous to the sustainability of education institutions operated by Mathla’ul Anwar[27].
    In the 1952 Congress, the second group won the battle as Mathla’ul Anwar in the final session issued a statement declaring its independence not only from political parties but also from any religious and social organizations[28]. By issuing this declaration, Mathla’ul Anwar thus cut off its affiliation with NU as well as Masyumi. However, this declaration of independence did not prevent its members to personally affiliate with any political parties as long as those parties championed Islamic ideas. Instead of solving the dilemma, this declaration brought about fierce resistances from the supporters of the first group. The inflammatory speech of K.H. Wahab Hasbullah, the general chairman of NU, when visiting Menes in 1952 gave fuel on fire[29]. The pro-NU group unilaterally declared its separation from Mathla’ul Anwar and established its own madrasahs, such as Anwarul Hidayah, Mathla’ul Li Nahdlatil Ulama, or Malnu, Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah, and Nurul Amal. K.H. Uwes who was at that time the general chairman of the executive board of NU of Pandeglang branch was forced to resign and replaced by K.H. Hamdani, one of the prominent leaders of the pro-NU group[30].
    This split caused the fall of a number of Mathla’ul Anwar branches in Menes areas and faced new rivalries in operating madrasah and recruiting new pupils. However, suffering at the local level did not hamper Mathla’ul Anwar’s expansion program at the national level. Its early success in establishing a number of branches in areas of West Java and Lampung placed it among nationally widespread Muslim organizations along with NU, Muhammadiyah, Persis, Al-Irsyad, and Al-Washliyah. Due to this national standing, Mathla’ul Anwar received a financial grant from the government in running its educational institutions[31]. Many local madrasah foundations thus joined the already recognized national organizations, including Mathla’ul Anwar. Therefore from 1952 up to 1960, Mathla’ul Anwar received a number of proposals of joining presented by local madrasahs, such as Anwariyah of Bandung, Al-Iman of Magelang, Ma’had Islam of Semarang, Nahdhtul Wathan of NTB, Nurul Islam of Donggala, Ichsaniyah of Tegal, and several madrasah in Aceh under the leadership of Muhammad Isa. In 1960, Mathla’ul Anwar soon became the third largest Muslim organization in Indonesia, only after NU and Muhammadiyah[32]. However, compared to those two mass-based Muslim organizations, Mathla’ul Anwar did not rely on a vast number of individual members rather on a number of education institutions, although in its 1953 Congress it created a special regulation on procedures of individual recruitment[33].
    The declaration of political non-affiliation that was regularly issued by Mathla’ul Anwar in its Congresses (1953 and 1956) seemed to be unconvincingly enough to stop the rise of allegation of its closeness with Masyumi. The decline of Masyumi’s political power in the last 1950s due to the involvement of its leaders in separatist movements exerted great influence over Mathla’ul Anwar. The fact that many of its members were active in Masyumi and showed their support to the separatist Darul Islam (DI) movements in West Java in 1950s and 1960s bolstered its political enemies consisting of secular nationalists, communists, and NU’s supporters to further give pressures on Mathla’ul Anwar. Because of this unfavourable situation, K.H. Uwes asked the government to issue a legal statement explaining Mathla’ul Anwar’s full independence status in 1959[34]. Both the banning of Masyumi in 1960 and the crushing of the DI rebellion in 1960s in which some of leaders of Mathla’ul Anwar were among the arrests in fact exerted severe influences over Mathla’ul Anwar. Supporters of both PKI and NU had more legitimacy to further the organization, regardless its official independence standing. In 1962, K.H. Uwes held an emergency meeting with some leaders of Mathla’ul Anwar to find the best solution in facing these political attacks. The meeting decided to change the symbols of the organization[35].
    In 1964, as the anti-communist movement led by the army officials strengthened, Mathla’ul Anwar that had been suffering under the pressures of the PKI joined the establishment of the Sekber Golkar along with other anti-communist groups, such as HMI, Muhammadiyah, Persis, Al-Irsyad, and PII. Members of Mathla’ul Anwar in a variety of areas played major roles in outlawing the PKI and Sukarno in 1966[36]. It also played a role in promoting the establishment of the New Order regime. However, its support to Suharto’s regime was based on a high hope on the creation of a more democratic situation in Indonesia in which Islamic ends could be materialized in political as well as socio-cultural lives. The secular tendency of the New Order government in 1970s led the post-Uwes leaders of Mathla’ul Anwar to take opposing attitudes[37].

    Plurality of Religious Thought
    K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar wrote several treatises and books, including Al-Waqud, Targhibul Atfal, Surat Imam Malik kepada Harus Al-Rasyid dan Wazirnya, Tuntunan Bergaul dan Bermasyarakat, and Ishlahul Ummmah Fi Bayani Ahli Sunnah Waljamaah. Although some of them used Arabic words as the title, all of those books were in Indonesian language. From those books, only was Islahul Ummah that survives and has been widely read and referred by members of Mathla’ul Anwar. In this paper, I would like to focus on Ishlahul Ummah that was firstly published in 1969 by the central board of Mathla’ul Anwar in order to record religious ideas of K.H. Uwes.
    The publication of the Ishlahul Ummah was aimed at responding to the political failures of Muslim politics during two decades after Independence and the widespread of distrust among Muslim groups in Indonesia who each of them claimed to be the true follower of Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah[38]. In his book, K.H. Uwes, therefore, largely elaborated the meaning of Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah and the main characters of the true follower of it. Unlike his teacher, K.H. Mas Abdurrahman, K.H. Uwes showed his high admiration towards some Muslim thinkers who were considered to be controversial in Indonesian Muslim community, such as Ibn Taimiya and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab. He also discussed some highly sensitive religious issues such as talfiq and taqlid as well as promoted the idea of tolerance against different or even conflicting religious opinions arisen by different Muslim thinkers and groups.
    The new fashion of religious thought developed by K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar was resulted from several factors. First, as he maintained his political affiliation with Masyumi, he was considerably disillusioned from his traditional fellows of NU. Furthermore, in the time of the 1955 general election, many of his former fellows in both Mathla’ul Anwar and NU by referring to religious doctrines often attacked Masyumi and its supporters as no longer true followers of Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah. Second, his active role in Masyumi led him to intensively interact with many religious figures coming from different groups, including Muhammadiyah, Al-Irsyad, and Persis, such as M. Nasir, Abu Bakar Aceh who gave the preface to his book, Ishlahul Ummah, Firdaus, Mukhtar Ghozali, and Saleh Suady[39]. Particularly the last name was later active in Mathla’ul Anwar and appointed as a member and then the general chairman of the Fatwa Council of Mathla’ul Anwar in 1961[40]. The unification of variety of local madrasahs in the last 1950s and early 1960s, many of them had similar religious outlook to that propagated by Muhammadiyah and Persis, intensified the widespread of new religious ideas among members of Mathla’ul Anwar. No less important factor that contributed to the changes of religious fashion of K.H. Uwes was his personal character who was described by his followers as a curious person who would give high appreciation towards any new ideas including religious thought.
    The author divided his book into several topics: the definition of Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah, its history, its points of view on theology, politics, Islamic law, and proper attitudes towards different opinions on religious issues. In the last part of his book, the author also briefly described biographies of several prominent Muslim thinkers, including Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik, Imam Syafi’I, Imam Hanbali, Imam Bukhori, Imam Muslim, Ibn Taimiyah, and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab.
    In matters of the definition and the history of the rise of Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah, K.H. Uwes firstly referred to the prophet tradition in which the prophet explained the term and the meaning of Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah. Based on the normative texts, he believed that Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah had truly been existent since the very early times of Islamic history and not the result of the creation of the next generation of ulama as many scholars suggested. But, he also recognized the historical fact saying that Ahlussunnah Wal Jamaah materialized as s distinctive thought and group when Abu Hasan Al-Asy’ari declared his theological thought as the true doctrine of this group of thought. The author clearly showed his theological inclination to the Ash’arite thought and based on it rejected other theological thoughts, such as Khawarij, Syiah (except Istna ‘Ashariyah and Zaidiyah), Mu’tazilah, Qodariyah, Murjiah, and Jabariyah[41].
    In politics, he elaborated the concept of Ulil Amri that according to him meant a group of people who had a special authority to make rules and constitutions dealing with life of people. There were other terms that had a similar meaning of the word Ulil Amri such as Ahlul Jamaah and Ahlul Hilli Wal Aqdi. In the modern times, the forms of Ulil Amri were parliament or people’s assembly in which people’s representatives elaborated rules and constitutions. He rejected the notion saying that Ulil Amri meant a head of state since Ulil Amri signified a plural meaning. However, since the Ulil Amri elected the head of the state, it was a religious obligation for all subjects to show their obedience to the head of the state. Therefore, any rebellious action against the legally recognized government was forbidden and considered to be the bughot action to which the government had a full right to take military actions against the progenitors of the bughot action[42]. His high concern over the issue of the bughot action seemed to show his clear opinions on the legality of a number of Muslims led rebellions, particularly such as the PRRI in Sumatra and the DI/TII in West Java, Aceh and South Sulawesi. In these uprisings, many of Masyumi’s and Mathla’ul Anwar’s leaders were actively involved and because of which Mathla’ul Anwar in the 1960s became one of the main targets of political attacks launched by both Sukarno’s and Suharto’s loyalists.
    K.H. Uwes divided Islamic law into two parts: (ibadah) divinely based rituals that were immune from changes and muamalah that was the result of human interpretation and was vulnerable to changes. He viewed that all products of ijtihad of ulama should be included into the latter part. The diversity of those products of thought was natural as every human had his own method of interpretation as well as his conclusion. At the same time, as a mankind, those ulama were also not immune from making errors. Critical attitudes were highly required in order to adhere or reject certain religious opinions of ulama. The author also dismissed the idea that only four schools of Islamic law (mazhab) were legitimate, although he recognized that among a number of ever existing mazhab in the history of Muslim civilization, four mazhab ranging from Hanafite, Maliki, Syafiite and Hanbalite were the most prominent[43]. In relation to the question of taqlid, adhering to a certain mazhab, K.H. Uwes considered it as the best way for common Muslims who did not have enough qualification for immediately understanding the complexities of Islamic doctrines. But, he also underlined the possibility to directly refer to main sources of Islamic doctrines for those who had a high quality of religious understanding. The author also arose another question of exercising talfiq, combining a variety of mazhab opinions on a particular religious practice. According to him talfiq would not give any effects to the status of legality of one’s religious practice and therefore could not be absolutely forbidden as many traditionalist scholars, including K.H. Mas Abdurrahman, declared.[44]
    The author fully devoted the last parts of the book to briefly describe biographies of some prominent Muslim thinkers as mentioned above. The major aim of outlining their profiles, writings, and valuable contributions to Muslim society was to provide clear information about those figures, including their controversies along with historical background. Through this effort, the author expected people to proportionally appreciate them and treat them justly. In his final remark, the author then condemned those, whether they were religious teachers or only common followers, who often accused one or more of those figures without any sufficient knowledge. For example, many Indonesian Muslims accused Syekh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab, Ibnu Taimiyah, Al-Afghani, and Abduh as infidels (kafir). This baseless accusation was one of the major factors leading to splitting conflicts among Muslim groups in Indonesia. Furthermore, K.H. Uwes elaborated another factor that led Muslims to such a wrong judgement. He concluded that the politics of colonialism that exercised the strategy of divide and conquer played major role in enlarging this false notion within Indonesian Muslim communities. Thus, he suggested that the time had arrived for all Indonesian Muslims to liberate themselves from the colonial framework of politics and live in tolerant and pluralistic circumstances[45]
    Impacts of K.H. Uwes’ Religious Renewal
    Since the focus of the study is Mathla’ul Anwar, I would like to focus on the impacts of this religious renewal towards members of Mathla’ul Anwar. To view the impacts of this religious renewal, it is important to highlight the succeeding developments of religious thought within Mathla’ul Anwar after the publication of the book. There were at least three general features of religious thought growing in Mathla’ul Anwar in 1970s. Two sons of K.H. Mas Abdurrahman, K.H. Muslim and K.H. Kholid, led the first notion. Both advocated the idea that the main sources of Islam were Qur’an and Sunnah, while Ijtihad was solely the method of analysing and interpreting both religious sources. Any religious legal rule should be based on a clear statement from both Qur’an and Hadits. K.H. Muslim, for instance, ever said, that “a dog was not religiously forbidden (haram) because both Qur’an and Hadits did not explicitly mention that matter”[46].

    This group furthermore rejected the notion of obliging adherence to a certain mazhab. In politics, this group took oppositional stance against Pancasila considering it as a non-Islamic ideology. The second group more emphasized the importance of adhering mazhab particularly the four prominent madhab, well known as Madzahibul Arbaah that they considered as the true interpretation of Islamic law. One of the leading figures of this group was K.H. Uyeh Balukia who had composed a number of religious writings, such as Aqidah Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah adalah Kriteria Yang Relevan Dalam Arah Pembangunan Sekarang, Fiqih Syafi’I Berdalil, Mutiara Ghaniyah Syekh Abdul Qodir Jaelani, Tarjamah Azkiya Syekh Satho Addimyati etc. In politics, this group took an accommodative stance against the state. For instance, K.H. Uyeh viewed the state-promoted ideology of Pancasila as the result of the Ijma (consensus) of Indonesian people that all Muslims had a religious obligation to adhere it. Objection to Pancasila meant violating the ijma decision that was religiously forbidden[47].
    The last group was moderate both in religious thought and political notion. They recognized the mazhab but declared that there was no obligation to adhere to a certain mazhab. Every one who had an ability to directly understand the sources of Islam could exercise their own Ijtihad. K.H. Abdul Hadi of Tangerang was among the leaders of this group[48]. Surprisingly, although there were differences in religious thought, members of Mathla’ul Anwar did not attack each other. It is not surprising that in the general meeting of members of Mathla’ul Anwar, I come across a variety of applications of religious practices.

    Conclusion
    From this study, there are at least three general conclusions. First of all, religious thought within Mathla’ul Anwar has developed dynamically. Therefore, this will be misleading to take a monolithic description of religious thought of one religious group as practiced by many scholars. Second, intensive interactions with new religious circumstances had brought K.H. Uwes and Mathla’ul Anwar to absorb new religious ideas that were not inherited from the founders. Finally, political and social factors played a great role in developing new religious ideas within Mathla’ul Anwar.
    *Pimpinan Pondok Pesantren Al-Mutawally Bojong, Cilimus, Kuningan, menulis Disertasi  Tentang MA (Dari Kampung ke Kota) di Universitas Leiden, Belanda

    Bibliography
    • Abdurrahman, K.H. Mas, Al-Jawaiz fi Ahkam al-Janaiz, n.p., n.d.
    • Abu Bakar, K.H. Uwes, Ishlahul Ummah dalam menerangkan arti Ahli Sunnah Wal Jama’ah, Jakarta: PB Mathla’ul Anwar, 2004, reprinted.
    • Anonymous, Menapak Jejak Mengenal Watak: Sekilas Biografi 26 Tokoh Nahdlatul Ulama, Jakarta: Yayasan Saefudin Zuhri, 1994.
    • Balukiya, K.H. Uyeh ,Laporan dan Pengarahan Ketua Majelis Fatwa Mathla’ul Anwar K.H.U. Balukiya Syakir SY Pada Muktamar Mathla’ul Anwar Tanggal 10 Juli 1985 di Menes Banten Jawa Barat in Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, Keputusan Muktamar ke XIII dan HUT ke 69 Mathla’ul Anwar, Jakarta: Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, 1985.
    • Kahin, George McTurnan, Nasionalisme dan Revolusi di Indonesia, Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka Kementrian Pengajaran Malaysia, 1980.
    • Mahmunji, E. Oji, Riwayat Hidup Singkat K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar Al-Marhum, n.p., n.d.
    • Mimbar, 20 February 1920.
    • Pengurus Besar (PB) Mathla’ul Anwar, Sejarah dan Khittah Mathla’ul Anwar, Jakarta: PB Mathla’ul Anwar, 1996.
    • Syarjaya, E. Syibli, and Jihaduddin, Dirasah Islamiyah I: Sejarah dan Khittah Mathla’ul Anwar, Menes: Perguruan Mathla’ul Anwar Pusat Menes, 2003.
    • Thaba, Abdul Azis, Islam dan Negara Dalam Politik Orde Baru, Jakarta: Gemma Insani Press, 1996
    • Tim Penyusun, Mathla’ul Anwar dalam Perspektif Sejarah Gerakan Islam di Indonesia, a paper presented at the Seminar on the History of Mathla’ul Anwar, May 1991.
    • Ward, Ken, The Foundation of the Partai Muslimin Indonesia, Ittaca: Temple University Press, 1970.
    [1] Other names of the founders of Mathla’ul Anwar were kiai Tegal, K.H. Abdul Mu’thi, Kiyai Soleman Cibinglu, K.H. Daud, kiyai Rusydi, kiyai. Entol Danawi, K.H. Mustaghfiri, kiyai Saiman, K.H. Muhammad Rais, and K.H. Entol Ismail, Pengurus Besar (PB) Mathla’ul Anwar, Sejarah dan Khittah Mathla’ul Anwar, Jakarta: PB Mathla’ul Anwar, 1996, p. 10, Tim Penyusun, Mathla’ul Anwar dalam Perspektif Sejarah Gerakan Islam di Indonesia, a paper presented at the Seminar on the History of Mathla’ul Anwar, May 1991, p. 16.
    [2] Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, Sejarah dan Khittah Mathla’ul Anwar, Jakarta: Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, 1996, p. 11.
    [3] Interview with K.H. Mahnun, 18 July 2002.
    [4] K.H. Mas Abdurrahman, Al-Jawaiz fi Ahkam al-Janaiz, n.p., n.d., pp. 45-46
    [5] Interviews with K.H. Ma’ani Rusydi, 19 July 2002, and Nahid Firdaus Abdurrahman, a grandson of K.H. Mas Abdurrahman, 5 August 2003. See also Tim Penyusun, Sejarah Mathla’ul Anwar dalam Perspektif Sejarah Gerakan Islam di Indonesia, a paper presented at the Seminar on the history of Mathla’ul Anwar, May 1999, p. 25.
    [6] Mimbar, 20 February 1920.
    [7] Anonymous, Menapak Jejak Mengenal Watak: Sekilas Biografi 26 Tokoh Nahdlatul Ulama, Jakarta: Yayasan Saefudin Zuhri, 1994, pp. 74 – 77. See also Tim Penyusun, Mathla’ul Anwar …, pp. 21-28.
    [8] E. Oji Mahmunji, Riwayat Hidup Singkat K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar Al-Marhum, n.p., n.d., p. 1.
    [9] Ibid.
    [10] Tim Penyusun, Mathla’ul Anwar …, p. 45.
    [11] Ibid.
    [12] Ibid.
    [13] Ibid., pp. 45-48.
    [14] Ibid., p. 59.
    [15] E. Oji Mahmunji, Riwayat …, p. 1
    [16] Ibid.
    [17] Ibid.
    [18] E. Syibli Syarjaya and Jihaduddin, Dirasah Islamiyah I: Sejarah dan Khittah Mathla’ul Anwar, Menes: Perguruan Mathla’ul Anwar Pusat Menes, 2003, pp. 29-30. See also Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, Sejarah …, p. 44.
    [19] For a complete explanation on the creation of Parmusi and the involvement of Muslim associations see Ken Ward, The Foundation of the Partai Muslimin Indonesia, 1970, Abdul Azis Thaba, Islam dan Negara Dalam Politik Orde Baru, Jakarta: Gemma Insani Press, 1996 and Mintaredja, H.M.S., Renungan Pembaharuan Pemikiran Masyarakat Islam dan Politik Indonesia, Jakarta: Permata, 1972.
    [20] Ibid.
    [21] E. Oji Mahmunji, Riwayat …, p. 1and Syibli Syarjaya and Jihaduddin, Dirosah Islamiyah I …, p. 34.
    [22] Tim Penyusun, Mathla’ul Anwar …, p. 65.
    [23] Interviews with K.H. Muhsin, 20 July 2002, K.H. Mahnun, 18 July 2002, and K.H. Rafiudin, 20 July 2002, all of them are former students who witnessed the first adoption of secular subjects to madrasah of Mathla’ul Anwar along with their following controversies.
    [24] According Thaba, the main factor of SI’s withdrawal was purely political since its leaders looked for a position in the structure of the cabinet of Amir Syarifudin who sought support from the Islamic element in order to strengthen the legitimacy of his cabinet since he failed to persuade Masyumi leaders. Abdul Azis Thaba, Islam dan Negara …, p. 160. About SI’s secession from Masyumi see also George McTurnan Kahin, Nasionalisme dan Revolusi di Indonesia, Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka Kementrian Pengajaran Malaysia, 1980, pp. 258 – 262.
    [25] Ibid., pp. 163 – 165
    [26] Interview with K.H. Ma’ani Rusydi, 19 July 2002.
    [27] Interview with H. Rafiudin, 20 July 2002.
    [28] Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, Sejarah dan Khittah …, p. 24 and Syibli Syarjaya and Jihaduddin, Dirosah Islamiyah I …, p. 16. See also Tim Penyusun, Mathla’ul Anwar …, p. 70. in 1959, the non-affiliation status of the organization finally gained a legal recognition from the government. By this government decision, Mathla’ul Anwar was regarded as an independent social and religious organization similar to that of Muhammadiyah and other socio-religious associations. See footnote number 34.
    [29] Interview with K.H. Abdul Hadi Mukhtar who witnessed the event, 14 September 2002.
    [30] Interview with K.H. Ma’ani Ruysdi, who was among young NU leaders demanding the resigning of K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar from his post as the general chairman of the executive board of NU of Pandeglang branch, 19 July 2002.
    [31] Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, Sejarah dan Khittah …, p. 34.
    [32] Ibid., p. 35.
    [33] Ibid., p. 27.
    [34] Ibid., pp. 33-34.
    [35] Interviews with K.H. Abdul Hadi Mukhtar, 14 Septeber 2002 and K.H. Tubagus Emi Suhaemi, 6 August 2003.
    [36] Tim Penyusun, Mathla’ul Anwar …, pp. 90-91, Interviews with K.H. Mahnun, a former leader of the Kesatuan Aksi Pemuda dan Pelajar Indonesia (Indonesian Student and Youth United Action, KAPPI) of Mathla’ul Anwar Madrasah in Menes, 18 July 2002, and with O. Boman Rukmantara, 17 July 2002.
    [37] Interview with Saleh As’ad, 18 July 2002.
    [38] K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar, “Prakata Pendahuluan” in K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar, Ishlahul Ummah dalam menerangkan arti Ahli Sunnah Wal Jama’ah, Jakarta: PB Mathla’ul Anwar, 2004, reprinted.
    [39] Tim Penyusun, Mathla’ul Anwar …, pp. 76-77.
    [40] Ibid., p. 80.
    [41] K.H. Uwes Abu Bakar, Ishlahul Ummah …, pp. 18-19.
    [42] Ibid., p. 38.
    [43] Ibid., pp. 126-128.[44] Ibid., p. 154.
    [45] Ibid., p. 217.
    [46] Interview with O. Boman Rukmantara, 17 July 2002.
    [47] K.H. Uyeh Balukiya, Laporan dan Pengarahan Ketua Majelis Fatwa Mathla’ul Anwar K.H.U. Balukiya Syakir SY Pada Muktamar Mathla’ul Anwar Tanggal 10 Juli 1985 di Menes Banten Jawa Barat in Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, Keputusan Muktamar ke XIII dan HUT ke 69 Mathla’ul Anwar, Jakarta: Pengurus Besar Mathla’ul Anwar, 1985, p. 51.
    [48] Interview with Huriyudin, 14 August 2002.



    0 komentar:

    Posting Komentar




    Followers