| Title | : | Relation among Different Religious Believers in Kotesan, Prambanan, Klaten |
| Author | : | Ruwandi (CRCS, 2005) |
| Keywords | : | Relation among Different Religious Believers |
| Abstract | ||
| This research aims at analyzing the creation of interfaith relation, the factors that influence this creation, and the ways of maintaining it. This is a socio-anthropological study conducted in Kotesan, Prambanan, Klaten, Central Java. The respondents of this study are the key persons consisting of village government officials, public figures, religious leaders, and several common people. The methods used to collect the data are Focus Group Discussion (FGD), participant observation, in-dept-interview, and documentation. Then, the data collected from the research field are socially and anthropologically analyzed. The research findings show that interfaith relation in Kotesan, Prambanan, Klaten is a historical heritage handed down from generation to generation. The creation of the relation is influenced by several conditions, for instance: geographical setting, social and living-hood systems, economic condition, and the level of welfare. All the community layers – they are village government officials, public figures, religious leaders, and common people, actively involve in the process of the creation. There are two factors that influence interfaith relation in Kotesan namely internal and external factors. The former consists of emotional, cultural, and familial affinities, and religious teachings; while the latter covers contact with outsiders, and people’s mobility. Familial affinity is the most influential since this one has characterized the internal factors and lessen the significance of the external shapers. Kotesan villagers maintain the established relation through several ways, for instance: social activities, dialog, and government and intra-faith creations. Social activities, however, are the most significant ways because the informality of these activities makes the extensions of the actors involved in conversation and the scope of social problems discussed. |
||
