In search of the format for interreligious understanding
Opinion and Editorial - August 24, 2002
Bambang Bider, Journalist, Pontianak, West Kalimantan
There have been two major explosive events in our recent past. The first occurred at home with the collapse of the New Order regime, followed by the emergence of various religious, political and ethnic conflicts. The second was the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States.
In the early days of modern times, religious communities did not reject sciences. When Copernicus first presented his hypothesis on heliocentrism at the Holy See, he opened Pandora's box, triggering a revolution. Since then modern sciences have belittled mythologies and religion; one reason for the emergence of religious fundamentalism.
Fundamentalism -- be it Judaism, Christianity or Islam -- rarely comes up to fight outside enemies. Fundamentalism has emerged as an internal struggle waged by the traditionalists in fighting against their fellow adherents whom they believe have compromised much in the secular world.
In Indonesia, fundamentalism has emerged not only against fellow believers but also against the state. The state as a secular institution with various interests often belittles indigenous beliefs as it officially recognizes only five religions. These officially recognized religions, on the basis of legitimacy gained from the state, their own dogmas and their own understanding, have arbitrarily labeled indigenous religions as forms of paganism and animism.
Kalimantan Review reported in May 2001 that two evangelists set on fire sacred items belonging to a Dayak family in Sanggau Ledo district, Bengkayang regency, West Kalimantan, thereby causing the child of the house owner concerned to be possessed.
Then in July 2002, Kalimantan Review also reported a theft of a sacred statue of the Dayak ethnic group.
"Official religions" made their inroads into the Dayak ethnic groups in the 20th century. These new religions have a different kind of faith from that of the Dayak. When embracing the official religions, these new adherents abandoned a number of rites and acts that were in contradiction to the new faith.
The theological view that the indigenous beliefs of the Dayak is an example of paganism has triggered disguised resistance on the part of certain Dayak circles, who believe that this new religion has secularized the indigenous beliefs.
The scholar John Hick, who wrote An Interpretation of Religion (1989) and Rainbow of Faiths (1995), uses a philosophical foundation for the pluralistic understanding of the reality of human responses to what is considered as transcendent.
Major religions shape different perceptions and concepts about and, consequently, different responses to, major traditions or civilizations. In each tradition, human life is transformed from self-centeredness to reality-centeredness.
Religiosity, which basically means faith in transcendent reality, is expected not only to dwell on spiritual matters behind the walls of temples, convents and mosques but it must be implemented in real conditions.
Raimon Pannikar has made a mind-teasing statement that "there is now not a single human or religious tradition which is self-sufficient and capable of saving human beings from various difficulties facing the community."
This statement is a challenge for the drawing up of a new format for interreligious understanding based on universal human values, rather than just serving dogmas. Religious differences have come about not due to absolute reason but because of a particular thing connected with a particular time in history and culture. Therefore, a religious conviction must transcend traditional absolutism.
The ongoing crisis is attributable to the fact that some of us, and particularly our major social institutions, support concepts originating in an obsolete world view. A new paradigm is badly needed here. Finally, religion is a human being's subjective way of responding to and living in relation to God