Meta Ose Ginting | CRCS | Wednesday Forum Report
Akhmad Akbar Susamto, active lecturer in in the Graduate School of Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) started his presentation in Wednesday Forum about Islamic and Western economics by explaining the background behind the academic discipline of Islamic economics. Islamic economics has been developed based on a belief that Islam’s worldview differs from that of Western capitalism. Islamic economics has its own perspectives and values related to how decisions are made. According to Susanto, the boundaries of Islamic economics as a social science or a discipline are closer to economics than to theology or to fiqh.
There is a strong impression telling that Islamic economics is in complete opposition with the Western conventional economics. Susanto argued that such an impression is wrong: although the Islamic worldview does differ from the worldview of Western capitalism, Islamic economics as an academic discipline was established to realize the Islamic worldview and can stand together with conventional economics established in the West. Each can benefit from the other.
Susanto introduced a new framework for Islamic economic analysis that lays a foundation for the complementarity between Islamic and conventional or Western economics. This new framework can resolve the dilemma faced by Muslim economists and help to establish Islamic academic disciplines alongside their Western peers.
This new framework introduced by UGM economists to define the scope and methodology of Islamic economics. It is called the Bulak Sumur framework. The name is taken from the name of the place where UGM is located. Based on the framework, an economy can be considered Islamic as long as it constitutes visions and methods which are consistent with Islamic worldview and it is able to help and guide societies to transform their economy towards the achievement of welfare as Islamic worldview dictates. To be Islamic requires not only separating the sacred and profane but being able to depict both the current state and the ideal state. Thus, the Bulaksumur Framework includes:
Arsip:
Wednesday Forum Report
Meta Ose Ginting | CRCS | Wednesday Forum Report
The aim of this research is to examine the background of the rumors spread in Sumba especially in relation to “foreign intruders”. For Kabova, Sumbanese rumors in general are an effort to define themselves in opposition to outside forces and also a tool for maintaining the norms within the society. Rumors according to Kabova are uncertain knowledge that spread rapidly. She added also that rumors are stories which are believed by the community and transmitted to them because they resonate with their life circumstances and address their social and/or moral concerns. Rumors also are not something that needs to be proved or disproved.
In Sumba, Kabova focused her research in Waikabubak the west part of Sumba island. In her previous research, Kabova tried to find some pattern and relation in the motivation and imagination of the incoming tourists. In this project, she did some structured interview with local people as well as participant observation. In her efforts to gather information, Kabova also tried to gather some informal narratives to her time spent with the local people of Sumba.
One of the myths perceived by the Sumbanese is the myth about sacrifices for bridge construction. Resurfacing from time to time, these rumors say that victims’ heads and other parts of the body are used to help the building construction. They use the terms penyamun and djawa toris to refer to anyone trying to kidnap local people, especially children, and take their body parts. One of the participants told her: “In the past we recognized djawa toris immediately, because a djawa, unlike us, would wear long trousers.” Djawa in the Lali dialect is anyone whose immediate ancestry is not from Sumba; djawa toris are those looking for body parts.
Following that, another idea about djawa toris or penyamun also talk about suspiciousness. “Maybe during the day he is good, but inside he is rotten. He is alone, he has a machete and in the night we will slit our children’s throat”. (Sumbanese woman talking about an Australian tourist). Due to this suspiciousness, tourists who do something outside the norm are considered djawa toris. Some places that tourist normally don’t go to will invite suspicion for the locals; tourists should stay in the cities and villages, should not go to the forest. If they go somewhere outside the norm, they should explain where they are going, what they are going to do, how long, and why.
Another aspect of the rumors is the prominence of electricity. Kabova told her stories about how the old people are usually afraid of the electricity because they think it consists of human fresh blood. Blood in Sumbanese narrative is a symbol of power. In the context of Sumba, blood has duality. The cold blood and the hot blood. Hot blood is the blood where people die in a harmful way, like in violence. This hot blood believed to has ability to speak. By her explanation, the roots of the rumors could be traced back to the era of slave trade past centuries ago. The cultural memories remain in people’s remembrance through the narratives that have been told times to times. For example, she quoted Needham (one of the researchers in Sumba): “When I lived in Kodi , in the mid-fifties, the appearance of a strange vessel out at sea, or just a rumor of one, would provoke all the signs of a general panic; men look fiercely serious, and screaming women dashed to pick up their children.”
The scenario of the rumors happened in this way. The victims are the Sumbanese, Lolinese, Kabihu members, uma members. The offenders are outsiders: missionaries, colonizers, Indonesian incomers, tourists, and state agents. Rumors can also be understood as a form of protest against the loss of political autonomy. The last point Kabova made about the circulation of the rumors as the mechanism of social control. It is a way of the local people to maintain norms. Deviation is punished by with accusations and then ostracism. For example, a man (former prisoner) accused of being a penyamun was completely ostracized by the community and those around. Mentally ill people are also often accused of being penyamun. The other way this rumors also have been used perpetually by the thieves who want to steal the animals in their neighborhood.
Some fascinating questions came up in the Q and A session. One of them is the role of religious leaders in the rumors spreading and why people still believe it up to now? Kabova told that the reactions toward the rumors are different between people in the village and in town. People keep using the story for some reason like to educate their children even though they do not believe in it. Also, the social gap between the old and younger generation shows different reaction. Subandri also came up with the story that almost in every place of Indonesia we can find narratives of head hunters. And children are always the target. Kabova thinks it is because the children are the weakest among the society because they need protection from others.
Meta Ose Ginting | CRCS | Wednesday Forum Report
“Like the study of feminism, masculinity can be an important approach in religious studies. The study of masculinity emphasizes how man superiority has been graded or perceived from time to time that in turn it becomes a norm for society.”
Rachmat Hidayat, a Project Director in Kalijaga Institute for Justice, State Islamic University Sunan Kalijaga, who shared his research in the weekly CRCS-ICRS Wednesday Forum, September 14, 2016, is and experiences about Muslim men from three Southeast Asia countries—Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia—living for years in Australia. His research questions are grounded in the problem of masculinity in Islamic studies.
In Muslim majority society, the figure of man is portrayed as the “imam” or, in a very general sense, the leader of the family. In the Muslim based society, the doctrine that male is the leader is embodied in the daily practices. The role as man in Muslim families anchors their responsibility in leading the household but, in contrast to the men living the non-Muslim society, the meanings and understandings change.
Building a framework that can help masculinity to be accepted in Islamic studies, Hidayat argued that just like the study of feminism, masculinity can be an important approach in religious studies. In general, the study of masculinity emphasizes how man superiority has been graded or perceived from time to time that in turn it becomes a norm for society.
The problem of masculinity in Muslim men living in Australia is in the sense of manhood within the family structure. In such context, the challenges are coming from the liberal and secular societies. Before explaining more about that problem, Hidayat described masculinity and how it works in the society. Masculinity is taking man as a gendered subject and perceiving men’s identity as related to but different to women. Men’s identity was constructed within certain historical, cultural, and social process. But this construction and the identity itself changes from time to time.
Furthermore, Hidayat asserted that gender construction and the meaning of the self is something that people define and negotiate every day because the discourse of the self is related to other. There are valves imply in Men’s identity. The gender construction adding the values such as bravery, toughness, rationality, to men’s identity and make people unconsciously define men in those values. In doing so, in Muslim community, being a man means being religious and strong at the same time. The practices of being a man in Muslim based society are included the practice of competition, dominance, and fathering. It shows that performance as a man cannot be separated to the relation with woman and kids.
Masculinity only can be defined and identified in the relationship therefore to study about masculinity in Islamic Studies, the approach must be done by examining men also as religious gender actors. In the context of secular of Australian society, the Muslim men identify challenges by some unfamiliar condition. Muslim men need to negotiate their position under the relation that lies between the Muslim women-Muslim brotherhood-the divine and the society itself.
With their various background, the 25 Muslim men in Australia whom he interviewed compromise and negotiate their position as Imam in their daily basis which relates to the men’s role as bread-winner in family. Facing the adversity and limitation, the Muslim men build their survival mechanism. In that survival mechanism, men need to share the authority, responsibility, and power to their partner who have more opportunity to get the money. Hence, some Muslim women replace the role of Men as bread-winner.
Responding to those facts, Samsul Maarif from CRCS asked whether women might also have masculinity and thus the term masculinity is not exclusive for men. “Masculinity, like feminine, is construction and it shows particular quality rather than embedded on sex,” said Hidayat. Within this framework, Muslim Southeast Asian women in Australia who perform their role as bread-winner also have masculine quality. However, as Hidayat underlined, men’s role as Imam is a non-negotiable status for men. Thus, responding to the challenges in every day live in Australia, Muslim men adopt some norm and apply it to the family as an act of negotiation. For example, the practice of partnership and individual freedom equality. Even when the wife becomes the bread-winner, the husband still has authority to manage the family. Furthermore, by giving permission to the wife for working, a husband serves their role as humble and just Imam because he aware of its limitation and humbly accept it. Hence, now Muslim men understand the role of Imam differently: as an act to love, to sacrifice, to share, and not being selfish with their family member.
Meta Ose Ginting | CRCS | Wednesday Forum Report
In a world so full of complexity, how does intimacy work? To Dian Arymami, it is very significant and important to revisit the understanding of intimacy because she observes the transformation of intimacy is connected to the transformation of society. The practice, the understanding of intimacy have been reconstructed from time to time. Usually people would think about intimacy as an act of loving, but up to now there are many cases show that intimacy could be something out of love, outside of committed relationship and, to be more precise, outside of marriage. Moreover personal needs and desires are also part of our religiosity. Religiosity and intimacy are not totally opposed to each other.
Dian Arymami’s ongoing research on new kinds of intimacy in the phenomenon of extradyadic or non-monogamous relationships that have quickly become widespread in urban areas of Indonesia is not advocacy on behalf of a group of people but she insists that she is studying the voices of the voiceless. Their emergence can be seen on a practical level as a rebellion against the structure and social fabric of Indonesian society but at the same time as part of an ongoing shift of ideological values and norms. Those who practice extradyadic relationships are a voice that could not be heard by the society because people would always claim that the problem is in person not society. We must think about this kind of intimacy as a social phenomenon and not a personal disease or failing.
Therefore, Dian came up with the signs of embodied practice of intimacy in the schizophrenic society. It related to something that material not representation. It is social not familial and she continue by saying that it multiplicity not personal. Many things transform relationships. According to the cases that Dian come up with, the social media is one of the biggest influence in transforming relationship in society. The discourse about intimacy embodied in the way people perceive things like divorce, sexuality, dating style, poly-amor trend and many others to follow. To define schizophrenic society, she refers to the theory of Gilles Delueze and Felix Guattari about the process of schizophrenia. Unlike Freud’s understanding about paranoia, the schizophrenic term in Delueze shows a condition of an experienced of being isolated, disconnected which fail to link up with a coherent sequence. She than continues that no one is born schizophrenic. Instead, schizophrenia is a process of being. In the schizophrenic society, everyone experiences diverse meanings in relation to other objects, and, in the other times or places, no meaning at all. In other words, meanings are based on the schizophrenic’s object experiences, but it is society itself that must be understood as schizophrenic.
By highlighting her respondents’ experiences, Dian shows that there are many consequences of the practice of intimacy or intimate relationships in (as) the schizophrenic society including “value crash,” double life, “time and place crash” and many others. In extradyadic relationship people become a substitution for something that they cannot fill.
In the question and answer session, there were many fascinating questions about this topic. Zoyer, a researcher concerned with on-line dating in Yogyakarta, offered the idea that the complexity of intimate relationships in urban areas in Indonesia is affected by the cultural expectation that young people marry by certain ages. That is why people are trying to free themselves by “jumping into the extraordinary.” The other question brings us to a reflection about what are the practitioners of these extradyadic relationships are becoming in society. Dian answered by changing the question: instead of questioning a person’s behavior, we must question society. Dian closed her remarkable presentation by stating that the idea of love is not exclusive and absolute.
Meta Ose Ginting | CRCS | Wednesday Forum Report
Elizabeth Inandiak began her presentation in Wednesday Forum with the familiar fairy tale opening “once upon a time.” A distinguished French writer who has lived in Yogyakarta since 1989, she herself is a story teller. In her newest book Babad Ngalor Ngidul (Gramedia, 2016), she tells how she came to write her children’s book The White Banyan published in 1998, just at the end of the New Order. She explained that the book grew out of the tale of the “elephant tree” tale that she created herself after she “bumped” into a banyan tree while she was wandering in her afternoon walk back in 1991. Her story became reality when shemet Mbah Maridjan, the Guardian of Mt. Merapi, and was shown a sacred site at Kaliadem on the slopes of Mt. Merapi, a white banyan tree. Her new book about the conversation between the North and South areas of Yogyakarta takes its name from Babad (usually a royal chronicle, but here of two villages) and the phrase Ngalor-Ngidul, which in common Javanese means to speak nonsense but for her is about the lost primal conversation between Mount Merapi as the North and the sea as the South.
Quoting the great French novelist Victor Hugo’s remark that “Life is a compilation of stories written by God” Inandiak highlighted how meaning is found in stories which come before larger systems like religion. In her book and her talk, she told stories from her experiences with the victims of natural disasters in two communities, one, Kinahrejo, in the North and one, Bebekan,in the South. Inandiak explained that the process of recovery after a natural disaster is a process with and within the nature. It is about the reconciliation between human communities and nature. In natural disasters people mostly lose their belongings such houses, money, clothes and domesticated animals, but, she said, the most important thing is not to lose their identity. Houses can be rebuilt, but once people lose identity they don’t know how to rebuild anything else. Inandiak spoke about the disaster as a conversation between the North and the South. This is also a kind of stories that helps people deal with their situation, by accepting that disaster are part of natural cycles.
Inandiak also spoke about rituals. First there were the rituals enacted by Mbah Maridjan and Ibu Pojo, the shamaness who was his unacknowledged partner, to connect human communities and nature. The offering ritual they made to Merapi included three important layers that describes their own identities: ancestors, Hinduism and Buddhism, and Islam especially Sufism. Despite all the issues that Mbah Marijan and Ibu Pojo faced before they died in the 2010 eruption, they insisted what they were doing is an act of communicating with the nature that was their home. Second, in order to overcome the difficulties after a disaster, stories and ritual mean a lot for reestablishing the victims’ identity. By doing rituals like dancing or singing, they connect to the wishes that become true. The wishes that they made bring such a different in their perspectives in continuing life. Through ritual people want to get connected with nature and Inandiak told how she helped these villages rebuild their identities.
In the question and answer session, we were moved by many fascinating question about the relation of nature and person. One of them is how the three layers in Javanese ritual—reverence for ancestors, Hinduism and Buddhism, and Islam, particularly Sufism—deal with the interference of world religion. Inandiak responded that there must be many changes brings by the world religion, especially in Kinahrejo, where Mbah Maridjan faced pressure from fundamentalists. The way villagers perceive myth changes from time to time. Their Muslim-Javanese identity is something they need to maintain in negotiation. In answering the issues about participants in the rituals wearing hijab, Inandiak argued that these layers should be clearer. They are not rooted in one story. But to maintain the customs is also important.
Inandiak closed her presentation with a remarkable message that disasters come from the interaction of people and nature but no one should feel guilty or think that any disaster is the result of sin or human mistakes. The most important things are not to give up and to work to rebuild identity.
Meta Ose Ginting | CRCS | Wednesday Forum Report
Corruption is one of many problems that Indonesia as a nation faces. It is not only a law-related problem but also a cultural problem. As such, culture and the values it promotes could also in one way or another be a powerful weapon to fight corruption. These are the points that Subandri Simbolon emphasized in his presentation about a ritual of sharing meat as a value to prevent corruption in Toba Batak society.
To begin his presentation, Subandri showed a video about the process of sharing meat (membagi jambar) ritual at a wedding in Batak land. The video tells about how the meat is shared to certain groups of families as a symbol of acknowledgment and appreciation of their existence. In the video, family members circle around the meat as it is being cut into specific portions and one person lifts up a portion of the meat and calls out family names and gives the meat to them as other people can watch them clearly. The portion of the meat is given out based on the Batak system of family kinship called Dalinan No Tolu..
The process of sharing jambar is arranged in some parts. First, mengalap ari. Mengalap ari is the process of choosing a good day to begin the ritual. Secondly, the ritual begins by cutting the meat into certain portions while the audience can see it clearly. The leader will then share the meat to the people by calling their names. Here is the strong educational point by the sharing meat ritual happened. By sharing the meat and let everyone watch it, it teaches people about honesty, appreciation and acknowledgment of the relationships among families. The meat being shared in jambar juhut is a representative of “source of life”. By receiving the source of life, people are receiving blessings. Other than being a symbol of blessing, meat also a symbol of people’s rights. When they receive their portion, it means their existence and their rights to be involved and participate are being acknowledged.. Therefore, discussing blessing and rights in the Toba Batak context invites people to not be greedy and to say enough when it is enough.
Subandri highlighted the point that in the process of sharing meat there are strong and meaningful interpretations where the generations can learn about anti-corruption attitudes. Moreover he added, in the ritual of jambar juhut there is a strong relational concept shows that humans are connected to each other. Because this cultural conception is to some extent closer to Batak Toba people’s daily lives than the abstract legal definitions of fairness and government laws, Subandri argued that it can be more effective and powerful to turn people from corruption. In a relational framework, corruption is an activity that is detrimental because it violates and even negatesrelationshipsReflecting on this relational framework, Subandri revisited the meaning of sharing meat in Toba Batak tradition, arguing that it can be interpreted as an effort to strengthen relationships and promote honesty.
During the discussion session there were many fascinating questions that led people to deeper reflection on how humans sometimes are separated from their tradition to such an extent that they no longer think of it as a part of their existence or as a medium to learn from but merely as ceremony. One challenging question was about how, in many other traditions, instead of fulfilling the intention of renewing people’s understanding about relationships, this kind of ritual fails because it becomes a problem because of economic reasons. In order to answer that, Subandri encouraged the audience to think about the meat as a symbol of source of life: if it feels burdensome, people can replace the meat with something else like vegetables so that no one will be excluded. Subandri was also asked about the role of Christianity as the major religion in Toba land in this kind of ritual. He answered that while sometimes a priest or pastor is invited to begin the ceremony with prayer, there is not really any significant influence.
The discussion came to an end with a challenging invitation for all of us to find in our own culture the values that we can use to develop a cultural defense against corruption. Even though there is always to the possibility we might misinterpret the meaning of rituals such as this one, in the end, it is worth trying.
