Dr. Zainal Abidin Bagir adalah Ketua Program Studi Agama dan Linatas Budaya,

Sekolah Pascasarjana, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta

Beberapa hari terakhir ini muncul banyak tanggapan atas apa yang disebut sebagai tuduhan intoleransi agama di Indonesia oleh Dewan HAM PBB. KH Hasyim Muzadi menyebutkan, Indonesia sebetulnya adalah negara Muslim paling toleran di seluruh dunia dan lebih toleran dari negara-negara Barat yang mendiskriminasi Muslim. Justru ketika Muslim menjadi korban intoleransi, tidak ada yang berbicara HAM. Prof Yunahar Ilyas membuat pernyataan senada dan memberikan bukti toleransi Indonesia, mulai dari adanya perayaan hari besar agama-agama sampai akomodasi menteri-menteri non-Muslim. Ia juga mengatakan bahwa tudingan intoleransi itu mungkin disampaikan ‘LSM-LSM yang tidak suka dengan Islam’. Sayangnya, sebagian tanggapan itu tampak tidak tepat sasaran, yang terjadi di Dewan HAM PBB di Jenewa pada 23 dan 25 Mei 2012 yang lalu adalah bagian dari Sesi ke-13 dari Universal Periodic Review (UPR) di mana negara-negara anggota PBB diwajibkan mengirim laporan tentang situasi HAM di negaranya. Dewan HAM tidak membuat suatu resolusi, tidak menilai suatu masyarakat atau negara toleran atau tidak, namun masing-masing negara secara terpisah mengajukan tanggapan atas laporan pemerintah itu dan memberikan rekomendasi.

Leonard C. Epafras | ICRS

Saya baru saja menyelesaikan salah satu tahapan akhir dari studi S3 saya. Studi saya adalah di bidang IRS (Inter-Religious Studies) yang dari namanya bisa ditebak jika ia bersifat antar-bidang dan multi-disiplin. Karakter keilmuan ini pula yang menyebabkan saya berjungkir balik, lompat sana dan sini menggunakan ginkang tertinggi, dan segala jenis ilmu kanuragan demi menjawab pertanyaan riset yang cuman tiga itu. Itu sebabnya belajar dari banyak teman dan coba-coba, akhirnya saya mengembangkan teknik untuk melakukan riset seefektif mungkin.

Gde Dwitya Arief | CRCS
Upon reading an opinion piece about strategy to disseminate the idea of peaceful coexistence between religious groups and the role of Pancasila in it, I could not help but stricken by the pessimism toward the benefit of teaching Pancasila. The opinion piece rightfully pointed out to our need of better religious studies classes but perhaps it has mistaken the vital role of Pancasila education in our nation building process for merely teaching of irrelevant ‘lofty ideals’.
If our problem is the current model of Pancasila education then we have to reform our way of teaching Pancasila to our students. We should not, by whatever means, undermine the historical fact that Pancasila is a foundation on which our founding fathers build our multicultural nation while fighting narrow religious idea of conceptualising state ideology.
In our current national situation where extreme ideological threat of NII and its idea of Islamic state is proliferating, Pancasila could not be more important .
Perhaps we should take some time to look back at how Pancasila was conceptualized and why it was dubbed as  principles that makes Indonesia a model for the future Islamic civilization by religious scholar Bassam Tibi.
Soekarno and the Idea of Deconfessionalized State
When Indonesia’s constitution was worded there was a heated debate in  the Investigatory Committee for the Efforts for the Preparation of Indonesian Independence (BPUPKI) between the supporters of what we know as ‘Jakarta Charter’ and proponents of Pancasila. The first group was in favor of Islam as a the state’s legal-formal base, represented by Natsir and Agus Salim while the other group strongly advocated the idea of separation between religion and the state represented by Soekarno and Hatta.
The problem of proposing Jakarta Charter is that eventhough the majority of Indonesians are Moslems we have also to recognize other religious minority groups. Therefore, the idea of Islam as legal-formal base for the new nation will create uneasiness among these minorities. Soekarno and Hatta, as both nationalist, prefer a form of deconfessionalized state that does not have to resort to religion as its legal-formal base.
Soekarno clearly wrote in his book ’Di Bawah Bendera Revolusi’ : “the principle of the unity of state and religion for a country which its inhabitant is not 100% Moslem could not be in line with democracy. In such a country, there are only two alternatives; there are only two choices: the unity of state religion, but without democracy, or democracy, but the state is separated from religion”.
Why the unity of state and religion could not be in line with democracy? Apologetic reasoning for advocating Islam as the state’s legal-formal base is that the state will give the minorities special status of ‘dhimmies’ or protected ones. However ‘dhimmies’ are not of equal status with Moslems, they are subdued. In the past it was in the form of different taxes. This idea of course is not in line with the idea of equal citizenship in modern democracy.
For that reason, Pancasila which includes monotheism, humanism, national unity, democracy and justice was given birth by our founding fathers as a smart solution. Pancasila promoted values that we all shared without referring specifically to any religious teachings and it stands above any religious ideologies. Thus make it acceptable for every members of the new nation.
The fact that Pancasila was born in Indonesia, a Moslem country, and proposed by our majority Moslem founding fathers makes it of Islamic model for managing interreligious relationship within a democratic state. As the renowned religious scholar Bassam Tibi once praised, Pancasila makes other religious groups of equal status with Islam in a largely democratic Moslem country. It proposes a future model for promoting domestic peace in the Moslem world which has significant minorities. To some degree it also proves that democracy works in a culturally Islamic environment which means interrupting Samuel Huntington’s thesis that Islam is not compatible with democracy.
A New Model for Teaching Pancasila
We have to admit that the current method of teaching Pancasila is not the best yet that we have. Many have mentioned that it is indeed perceived as a boring subject by most of the students. It means there is an urgent call to reform our current way of disseminating this critical understanding of Pancasila’s role in our nation-building process to our youth.
We need a new model of teaching Pancasila which underlines its historical conceptualization and vital significance to our nation building process. We also have to get rid all the myths that surround it including the abuse of it as ideological empty slogan during the New Order era.
This is the task we are now facing. The call can not be more urgent since recent development of insurgent separatist groups like NII and its activism has penetrated deep to our society. It is no surprise if their target are college students. This is actually the critical segment within our society to which we will hand on the future of our nation building process.
Gde Dwitya Arief 

is a master student at Center for Religious and Cross-Cultural Studies,
Gadjah Mada University and an editor at etnohistori.org

Laman ini menampilkan rekam bibliografi tentang kehidupan beragama di Indonesia, dengan tema penyesatan dan penodaan agama di Indonesia yang berasal dari sumber koran, majalah, buku, jurnal ilmiah, skripsi maupun tesis. Sebagian besar bibliografi, tersedia link akses artikel penuh.
Wacana penyesatan dan penodaan agama niscaya terjadi di semua agama. Wacana tersebut merepresentasikan problem intra agama di mana kelompok mainstream menyesatkan kelompok lain yang berbeda tapi masih dalam satu agama atau memiliki kesamaan sebagian tradisi keagamaan dengannya. pemberlakuan undang-undang no. 1/PNPS/1965 memiliki banyak kelemahan salah satunya karena dikriminatif. Pada umumnya kelompok yang dituduh sesat selalu merupakan kelompok kecil di tengah masyarakat dengan pandangan keagamaan mainstream.
Selama tiga tahun (2008, 2009, 2010) CRCS berturut-turut merekam kasus-kasus penistaan dan penodaan agama, silahkan lihat laporan tahunan:
Peraturan Perundang-undangan dan Fatwa MUI

In general, the religious community in Indonesia was able to portray itself as powerful in strengthening cohesion, developing peace, and contributing to a constructive form of social criticism. But on the other hand some religious groups still played a role in acting destructively and igniting conflict.
Efforts to strengthen the cohesion of society were put into practice both communally and as initiated by individuals, as well as through government.
At government level, inter-religious encounters were actively facilitated by the Ministry of Religious Affairs through several institutions, such as the Center for Religious Harmony. Perhaps less widely known is that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs through the Directorate of Public Diplomacy participated actively in initiating inter-religious dialogue, mostly at regional and international levels. The dialogue involves not only religious leaders but also young people, academics, and the media, in international meetings in Indonesia or abroad. In 2009 the Directorate participated in forums such as the fifth Asia Pacific-level inter-religious dialogue meeting held in Australia; the Asia-Europe Meeting (in the ASEM context), also the fifth, held in Seoul; bilateral inter-religious dialogue with Austria and Russia; and the high-level Alliance of Civilizations meeting, which is a UN initiative, held in Turkey. It must be acknowledged that the Directorate of Public Diplomacy was established in 2002 (and began inter-religious dialogue in 2004), partly in the shadow of global concerns over religion-based violence after the events of 9/11 (2001) in the U.S. and the 2002 Bali bombings. After operating for over five years, it is now important to evaluate the impact of its activities. This includes the fundamental question of whether the paradigm of the dialogues it sponsored, formed partly in response to the above global concerns and accusations of Indonesia as a node in a terrorism network, is still appropriate or needs to be modified to be more constructive, and whether its activities should move beyond simply a showcase of the so-called Indonesian religious harmony.
At the local community level, 2009 manifested many positive examples of inter-community relations.
BOOKS

Since the Bali bombing attacks in 2002, terrorism, especially those involving Muslim perpetrators and done with islamic motivation associated with them, became one of the issues that characterize the religious life of Indonesia. Measures to deal done fairly systematically. In this regard, the Indonesian police often gets credit for the success they catch the perpetrators and the people in this terrorist network. Condemnation of the bombers came from many religious leaders and community organizations. Although there appears to be a tendency to decrease the number of cases, terrorism obviously has not disappeared from Indonesia.