Synopsis
Muhammadiyah’s 47th congress was marked by a fierce theological
debate between its moderate and conservative members. While a moderate
candidate was eventually elected as its new chairman, the conservative
contender came very close to taking over the organisation.
Commentary
MUHAMMADIYAH, INDONESIA’s second largest Islamic organisation, held
its muktamar or national congress from 3 to 7 August 2015 in Makassar,
South Sulawesi. Unlike its traditionalist cousin the Nahdlatul Ulama
(NU), Muhammadiyah’s founding philosophy is to purify Islam from
man-made and syncretic elements – what Muhammadiyah members called
“superstitions, innovations, and mystics” (tahyul, bid’ah, and
khurafat). However, it historically advocates such reforms through
peaceful dialogue and political moderation rather than a more radical
path.
A number of key issues were discussed during the five-yearly
congress. First, activists debated whether Islam as practised by
Muhammadiyah members should follow a universalist paradigm, as advocated
by conservative members of the organisation; or should it follow one in
which Islam is practised within the Indonesian socio-cultural context,
as argued by progressive and moderate members. The latter introduced the
concept of “Islam with Progress” (Islam Berkemajuan) to highlight that
while Islam’s fundamental principles are universalist and timeless, they
need to be reinterpreted to reflect the context of a modernising
Indonesian society, by utilising independent reasoning (ijtihad).
Other key issues & leadership contestation
Second, a consensus was reached for Muhammadiyah to legally challenge
newly-passed national laws that were considered to be unjust for its
30-million members by taking these laws to the Constitutional Court
(Mahkamah Konstitusi). The Indonesian Constitution mandates the
ownership of natural resources and other key economic sectors to fall to
the Indonesian state. Muhammadiyah’s legal challenges resulted in the
Court to rule Indonesia’s Oil and Gas Law and Water Resources Law to be
unconstitutional.
However, the main agenda of the muktamar was to elect a new general
chairman to lead Muhammadiyah for the next decade, as Din Syamsuddin,
its outgoing chairman, could no longer be re-elected after completing
two-consecutive five year terms (2005-2015). Congress delegates wanted a
new chairman who could mediate between the moderate and conservative
factions within the organisation, which Din Syamsuddin did effectively.
Two leading candidates emerged among members of the Muhammadiyah
leadership board. The first was Haedar Nashir, a sociology lecturer with
Muhammadiyah University in Yogyakarta. He is a long-time Muhammadiyah
activist who has served in numerous leadership positions for more than
three decades, including as chief editor of “Muhammadiyah Voice” (Suara
Muhammadiyah), the organisation’s official weekly newsmagazine.
Haedar wrote his doctoral dissertation on the growth of new
conservative Indonesian Islamic organisations such as Hizbut Tahrir
Indonesia (HTI) and Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia (MMI), which have
popular following among young Muhammadiyah members. He argued that
unlike first-generation Islamic reformist organisations such as
Muhammadiyah, the new organisations are “promoting an integralistic and
reductionist interpretation of the shari’a and demanding its
institutionalisation within the Indonesian state”.
If these organisations – HTI and MMI _ managed to increase their
influence among Indonesian Muslims, it can lead to growing intolerance
of Muslim minorities and non-Muslims among Muhammadiyah members. Due to
these conclusions, Haedar’s candidacy came under attack from
conservative activists, who accused him of being a ‘liberal’ Muslim.
The conservative contender
The second candidate was Yunahar Ilyas, a professor of Islamic
theology (usluhuddin) at Sunan Kalijaga State Islamic University in
Yogyakarta, who was a former board member of the Indonesian Ulama
Council (MUI). He led the Special Revelation and Propagation (tabligh
and da’wah) Department, which organises Muhammadiyah’s religious
teaching and propagation activities, for a decade (2000-2010).
Yunahar is known for his criticisms of Muslim minority sects. For
instance, he believes Shiism is a ‘time bomb’ that threatened the unity
of the Indonesian ummah and that there can be no reconciliation between
Shi’ite and Sunni believers. He also has urged the Indonesian government
to outlaw the Ahmadi community in Indonesia, arguing as long as they
are not prohibited, they will continue to “encourage conflict among
themselves and Indonesian Muslims who are true believers”.
Yunahar’s candidacy received strong support from conservative
Muhammadiyah members, and among younger activists within the
organisation. For instance, Dahnil Anzar, chairman of Muhammadiyah Youth
(Pemuda Muhammadiyah) argues that “Muhammadiyah needs to be led by an
intellectual alim who understands Islam as the solution for all lives
and society’s problems,” alluding to Yunahar’s status as an ulama.
Aggressive behind-the-scene lobbying by Yunahar’s supporters propelled
his candidacy in the muktamar, almost outmanoeuvering Haedar.
Realising a conservative takeover of the organisation would have
occurred had Yunahar won the chairmanship election; the progressive
faction developed an alliance with Din Syamsuddin’s faction during the
final round of the election. While Haedar eventually won the
chairmanship position, there were only 19 votes separating him from
Yunahar in the final round of voting, indicating strong support among
conservative and young Muhammadiyah activists for Yunahar’s candidacy.
Epilogue
The conclusions of the recent Muhammadiyah muktamar highlighted the
continuing struggle between moderate and conservative members of the
organisation on how to interpret Islam, how the organisation should play
its role in Indonesian politics, and who should lead Muhammadiyah for
the next decade.
Haedar Nashir’s election as its new general chairman reflects the
continuing dominance of the moderate establishment within the
organisation. However, strong support for Yunahar Ilyas among young
Muhammadiyah activists means that this dominance is increasingly being
challenged by more conservative members. As conservatives increasingly
fill Muhammadiyah’s leadership positions, its moderate, pro-democratic
outlook might be eclipsed over time.
As chairman, Haedar needs to carefully manage the division among
moderate and conservative camps within Muhammadiyah and to retain its
reputation as an Indonesian Islamic organisation with a moderate and
modernist outlook.
About the Author
Alexander R Arifianto PhD is a Research Fellow with the Indonesia
Programme, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang
Technological University, Singapore.
https://www.rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publication/rsis/co15230-the-2015-muhammadiyah-muktamar-narrow-win-for-conservatives/#.VjLazyuTxoq
orcid.org/0000-0002-0333-8344