The phenomenon of promoting religious issues with nuanced pragmatism has been growing stronger in Indonesia of late. Certain people and groups that ultimately claim to be the most religious have been diligent in presenting the language, attributes and symbols of religion to the public. At the same time, they point to other people and groups for their lack of appropriateness, guidance and even religiosity.
The problem becomes extremely naive when that particular group comprises or contains many individuals whose indicators and appearance shows doubtful religious mastery; the same goes for their observance of aqidah (religious tenets), rituals and the like. However, they passionately claim to be the most religious for the sake of their narrow and momentary goals.
Regardless of intent, the growth of religious identity causes turmoil to disturb social unity – no matter how slightly – and cause friction among the nation\'s children. The plurality that has practically existed since the formation of communities on the islands of Nusantara (Indonesia) and which is inherent to Indonesian society (no matter how remote) becomes disrupted. The "us-them" social identity grows stronger to tarnish the deeply rooted Indonesian social concept of "we".
Biased religiousness
From any angle, this phenomenon of growing religious identity does not reflect any religious values at all. Religiosity is not only highly reductive, but also highly biased. It is reductive because religious teachings are reduced in such a way so that only spiritual and religious symbols remain – especially in Islam, which consists of aqidah, sharia (in a narrow sense) and morality.
This pattern is clearly biased because religiousness, with its ethic-moral basis and framework, is disregarded and instead used for self-interests and group interests in a short-term, pragmatic, or other manner.
The emergence of religiosity today indicates how certain individuals and groups view religion as a powerful medium to manipulate the emotions of religious followers. Religious symbols and attributes can anesthetize and enchant religious followers. The use of religious language can dumb them down almost all matters.
In the name of religion, religious followers – especially laypeople – can be easily urged to undertake anything. In this, such religious proponents see this as an opportunity to manipulate religion and religious followers concurrently. They then package their interests using symbols and languages that carry religious nuances to later develop the phenomenon of the public distribution of religious symbols, attributes and the like.
Of course, the growth of nuanced religiosity permeates not only the above. The growth of Islamism cannot be denied. In fact, the commodification of religion is a reality that has agitated the clamor of religiousness in the country. However, it is not impossible in the present context that the myriad causes could merge into and converge on a singular interest: the momentary and pragmatic political interest of seeking power.
Sincere religiousness
Whatever the reasons, these can only harm the religious community. Manipulating religion, politicizing religion, or however it may be called, will only suppress the religious community, while flouting and contradicting religious values and teachings. The mission of religion to nurture human beings towards maturity, wisdom and sensibility, and to elevate humans to happiness in the earthly and eschatological realms will almost certainly never be realized.
Regardless of the reason behind the growing use of religious symbols – symbols that are nearly detached from the vision of religious morality and a recently emerging symptom – the lack of sincere religiousness cannot be entirely ignored. To be honest, we – or some of us, at least – are not entirely sincere in our religiousness. In fact, the essence of “having religion” is sincerity. Having religion essentially means surrendering ourselves to the Creator.
Concretely, religiousness means adhering to religious values and teachings as practiced substantively in implementing and enforcing justice, realizing social welfare, strengthening the sense of brotherhood, and the like.
We are must be sincere. From sincerity, we will undoubtedly continue to learn so that our religiousness is accountable to the Creator and others. It is urgent for us to refer to our past leaders whose religious sincerity was undoubted. Our Muslim predecessors include K.H. Hasyim Asy\'ari, K.H. A. Wahid Hasyim, K.H. Ahmad Dahlan, and H. Agus Salim. Among our Catholic predecessors are I.J. Kasimo and Father Mangunwijaya, while among our Christian predecessors is A.A. Maramis, and I Gusti Ngurai among our Hindu predecessors. Of course, there are many figures of other religions who were true and sincere in their religiousness.
The memories of these leaders must be revived to explore and understand their inspirational thinking on religion, but more importantly, so that we may emulate them. They had strong faith and practiced their religion sincerely as manifest in their selfless service to their followers, the nation, and the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI)
Abd A’la, Caretaker, Pondok Pesantren Annuqayah Latee, Sumenep; Professor, Sunan Ampel State Islamic University, Surabaya
