Th e D iscu r sive I de n t it y of You n g I n don e sia n M u slim s:
I slam and I ndonesian Nat ionalism
Abst ract
The art icle is a research proposal which is designed t o exam ine t he const ruct ion of discursive ident it y of young I ndonesian Muslim s. I t m ust be em phasised t hat t he ident it y is form at t ed by t he int erplayed discourse of I slam as dom inat ed by t he st at e- backed inst it ut ions’ perspect ives as w ell as t he diverse Muslim organisat ions’ and sect s’ opinions. I n addit ion, t he ident it y is also cont est ed v is- a- vis t he const ruct ion of I ndonesian nat ionalism . To becom e Muslim as w ell as I ndonesian, in som e, is a v ery com plicat ed definit ion. The form at ion of t he Republic of I ndonesia as a secular st at e challenges t he est ablishm ent of t he Muslim ident it y.
Furt herm ore, t he art icle is st ressed on t he diverse Muslim s cat egories on t he basis of t heir social, cult ural and polit ical posit ions, experience and capabilit y t o exercise t he st at e and religious aut horit ies. These differences are shaped by in- equal degree of I slam ic knowledge and t he affiliat ion and t he non- affiliat ion t o part icular Muslim organisat ions, sect s or I slam ic polit ical part ies. Am ong t he I ndonesian Muslim yout hs, t he differences are experienced by t he diverse educat ion background part icularly on t he basis of I slam ic t eachings and pract ices t hey received.
Last ly, I propose t o adopt t he Gram m ar of I dent it y from Gerd Baum ann as a st ruct ural approach in analysing t he ident it y const ruct ion. Two t ypes of gram m ar, religious and public/ polit ical segm ent ary/ encom passm ent gram m ars are designed t o exam ine t his discursive form at ion. To build t he gram m ars, I use a m odified Muslim classificat ion from Geert z ( Sant ri, Abangan dan Priy ayi) and Kurzm an ( Rev ivalist , Liberalist and Cust om ary) . Alt ernat ively, I suppose t o adopt t he inclusivist - ex clusivist cat egory from Fat im ah Husein in delineat e t he recent configurat ion of I ndonesian Muslim s.
Key words: I ndonesian Muslim s, Muslim I dent it ies, I ndonesian Nat ionalism
I ndon e sia n M u slim s: A H ist or ica l I n t r oduct ion
I ndonesia is t he w orld's m ost populous Muslim - m aj orit y nat ion. The Cent ral Bureau of St at ist ics ( BPS- St at ist ics I ndonesia) st at ed t hat 86% of t he I ndonesian populat ion of 206,264,595 was declared as Muslim according t o t he 2000 Census. However, Muslim diversit y in I ndonesia is qualit at ively unique. Alt hough regarded as I ndonesia’s m ain religion and em braced by t he m aj orit y across t he count ry, I slam is not t he principle of t he st at e. I n ot her words, I ndonesia is not an I slam ic st at e. The st at e w as founded and is governed based on secular principles. I slam plays a m ore effect ive role wit hin com m unit ies as a w ay of life t hat is apparent ly separat ed from t he st at e. Mehm et ( 1990: 20- 21) uses t he t erm ‘I slam ic periphery’ in a geographic sense as well as an et hnographic sense t o describe t he nat ure of I ndonesian Muslim s. As I ndonesia is geographically sit uat ed far away from t he
I slam ic heart land of t he Arabs, I ndonesian Muslim s have, for cent uries, undergone assim ilat ion and accult urat ion wit h various cult ures, beliefs, and ideologies. I t is t his sit uat ion w hich m akes I ndonesia so different and dist inct from all ot her Muslim count ries in t he w orld ( Bow en, 2003; Hefner, 2000) .
The relat ionship bet ween I ndonesia and I slam has fluct uat ed over t he years. Boland ( 1982) describes t he rise and fall as a process of st ruggling for exist ence and influence in m odern I ndonesia. The form ulat ion of t he I ndonesian st at e, including t he nat ional principles and t he st at e m odel, could be seen as t he result of negot iat ion bet ween Muslim s and non- I slam ic com m unit ies or bet w een Muslim leaders and Nat ionalist s; t he lat t er being secular in t his count ry. The com prom ise t hat w as reached indicat es t hat I ndonesia holds various ideologies and religious beliefs t hat are basically ant agonist ic ( Ram age, 1995) . The count ry’s first president , Soekarno, had t r ied t o creat e a harm onious ‘big t ent ’ for various Muslim com m unit ies, secular nat ionalist groups including non- Muslim adherent s, t he com m unist part y and soldiers ( Schw arz, 1994) . His experim ent failed aft er several polit ical upheavals including t he rise of t he I ndonesian I slam ic st at e m ovem ent , Daarul I slam . Throughout t he islands t hese upheavals occurred as a react ion t o t he ineffect iveness of Soekarno’s governm ent ( Boland, 1982) and t he exclusion from t he I ndonesian polit ical syst em of Masyum i, which was t he biggest Muslim part y in 1950s- 1960s ( Hefner, 2000) . During t he ‘New Order’ under Soehart o’s regim e, I slam did not play a cent ral role in t he I ndonesian polit ical syst em despit e rem aining t he nat ion’s leading religion ( Schwarz, 1994) . Aft er Soehart o’s regim e collapsed in 1998 t he sit uat ion changed dram at ically. Muslim s had m ore opport unit ies t o ent er polit ics, including t he est ablishm ent of I slam ic part ies and t he prom ot ion of I slam ic values in t he rules of t he st at e.
Nevert heless, t he t erm ‘secular st at e’ m ight be w rong and m isunderst ood as a descript ion of I ndonesia. Ant hony John point ed out t hat t he t erm was a ‘religious st at e philosophy’ ( see Schw arz, 1994) . This m eans t hat alt hough I ndonesia was declar ed as a non- I slam ic st at e, I slam , being adhered t o by t he m aj orit y, influences not only all aspect s of everyday life but also t he adm inist rat ion of t he St at e. To t his ext ent , int erpenet rat ed relat ionships bet w een I slam and t he st at e ( Ram age, 1995) m ust be highlight ed. I n ot her words, not only do I slam ic values cont ribut e highly t o t he Governm ent ’s policies but t he st at e also plays a significant role in shaping Muslim s’ beliefs and pract ices.
Furt herm or e, t he I ndonesian polit ical landscapes are crow ded by diverse I slam ic part ies as well as diverse I slam ic organisat ions. Bot h part ies and organisat ions have played a prom inent role in prom ot ing I slam ic values and pract ices over t he societ y as well as t he running of t he st at e. Yet t he foundat ion of t w o Muslim - like governm ent or governm ent - backed bodies indicat es how t he St at e also shapes Muslim s’ pract ices. One such body is The Minist ry of Religious Affairs, which is dom inat ed by Muslim officials and part icularly serves Muslim s’ religious affairs such as haj j pilgrim ages and m arriages; t he ot her is Maj elis Ulam a
MUI , 2007) MUI is backed and financed by t he Governm ent and has t he religious aut horit y t o issue fat w a or I slam ic legal opinions.
I n societ y, however, I slam ic values ar e not alone in influencing and shaping t he cult ural and social norm s. I slam ic syncr et ism , w hich blends I slam w it h ot her religions and local beliefs, is found across t he count ry. Since before t he beginning of t he m odern era, I ndonesia w as t he place in which a variet y of beliefs and ideas lived, com pet ed and coexist ed ( Hefner,2000) . Buddhism , Hinduism , Anim ism and t he Chinese way of life t oget her w it h I slam ic m yst icism w ere assim ilat ed t o creat e a new variet y of Muslim com m unit y t hat qualit at ively differs from sim ilar com m unit ies in t he Middle East . Geert z ( 1964) concluded t hat I slam ent ered I ndonesia as an already overcrowded religious landscape; it m erely changed t he Hindu and Buddhist t erm s by subst it ut ing Arabic nam es. However, t here are som e purit an Muslim s or Sant ri w ho t ry t o pract ice I slam in it s original form from t he Arabic cult ures and t hrow out all non- I slam ic influences. The exist ence of t hese various Muslim cat egories is shaped by differences in t he underst anding and t he pract ice of I slam in everyday life.
To sum up, t he exist ence and influence of I slam wit hin I ndonesian Muslim s, part icularly in t he const it ut ion of t heir Muslim ident it y, cannot be analysed solely on t he basis of t he collect ive or individual int er pret at ions of I slam wit hin I ndonesians or upon how t hey pract ice it in everyday life. I t m ust also t ake int o account t he int erplay and int erpenet rat ing power relat ionship bet ween t he st at e and t he elit es of Muslim clerics t o shape t he m ainst ream of I ndonesian Muslim discourse. The t wo aut horit ies, t he religious aut horit y as played by individually Muslim cler ics as well as inst it ut ionally by Muslim or ganisat ions or I slam ic polit ical part ies and st at e- backed aut horit y by Minist ry of religious affairs and MUI regularly and accident ally conduct t o m aint ain t he m ainst ream discourse of I slam in t he count ry.
D e v e lopin g I n don e sia n M u slim I de nt it ie s
Prim arily, t he const ruct ion of ident it y is not only shaped by subj ect s’ int erpret at ions but is also det erm ined by social const raint s and t he act s of power inequalit ies w it hin t he social w orld. Wit h reference t o Jenkins’ ( 2004: 3- 6) explanat ion of ident it y as t he finding and elaborat ion of sim ilarit y and difference
or sam eness and differing ( Gingrich 2004: 6) , t here are t wo im port ant st eps in t he ident ificat ion and ident it y building, ext ernal and int ernal processes labelled as
social cat egorisat ion and group ident ificat ion ( Jenkins, 1997: 80) . Social
social ident it y by t he m irroring and adopt ion of t he sam e collect ive awareness ( Mead, 1968 cit ed in Scot t and Marshal, 2005) . I dent it y is enact ed as w ays of seeing and st ruct ures of act ions of individuals and people in t he w orld ( Karner , 2007: 70) .
As em phasized by St uart Hall ( 1996) , t he const ruct ion of ident it y, t hen, is highly det erm ined by t he pow er relat ions and social st ruct ures m anifest ed in discourses and inst it ut ions. Discourse it self as int roduced by Michel Foucault is considered as t he flow of know ledge ( Jäger, 2002: 34) which shapes w ays of t hinking and act ing in real life ( Cheek, 2004) . On t he one hand, discourses and inst it ut ions influence people’s t hought s of t heir ident it y as well as how t o behave and define t heir posit ion in t he societ y. On t he ot her hand, linguist ic/ discursive pract ices of ident it y as conduct ed by people are t he basic requirem ent by which ident it y is t o be const it ut ed in real life.
Thus, t he process of ident ificat ion int errupt s t wo dim ensions - t he individual m ind in how t o be and how t o act , and t he pow er relat ion in which s/ he exercises or is being exercised ( Karner, 2007) . Alt hough ident it y discourse shapes individuals’ t hought s and behaviours, ident it y requir es t he individual’s linguist ic/ discursive pr act ices t o exist . This process indicat es t he dialect ic process of ident ificat ion bet w een st ruct ures and agency.
To a cert ain degree, ident it y is not a st able ent it y t hat all can sim ply define and use in everyday life. Jenkins ( 2004: 74- 76) point s out t hat ident it y is ‘becom ing’ and const ruct ed in our upbringings. Sim ilarly, Hall ( 1996) st at es t hat ident it y is never com plet ed; it is alway s a process. I dent it y is fluid and cont inuously reinvent ed, recr eat ed and m odified rat her t han j ust discovered and t hen m aint ained across a period of t im e ( Baum an, 2004) . The next generat ions are unable t o sust ain t heir ident it y w it hout adopt ing and absorbing bot h values and m at erials from w ider societ y. The discourse of ident it y is not only accept ed and pract iced as given but also pract iced t hrough adapt at ion and resist ance. The process of pow er relat ions w hich shape discourses develops in t wo w ays. I t influences all part icipant s from t he t op dow n as w ell as bot t om - up, giving t hem opport unit y t o resist and finally exercise pow er, as w ell as challenging t he discourse t oo. The linguist ic/ discursive pract ices of ident it y are t he product s of a syncret ic and hybrid cult ure ( Karner, 2007) where m em bers of a com m unit y live and int eract wit h each ot her.
t he St at e power. How ever, t he process overlapped and int eract ed w it h t he w ider const ruct ion of I ndonesian ident it y which is const it ut ed wit h pluralit y in et hnicit y, religion and cult ure.
Follow ing t his process, t he est ablishm ent of t he Minist ry of Religious affairs and Mej elis Ulam a I ndonesia ( MUI or The council of I ndonesian Muslim clerics) support ed by diverse I slam ic part ies and Muslim organizat ions, dem onst rat es t he int erpenet rat ion bet w een I slam and t he St at e. I n a nut shell, Sant ris ( Geert z’s t erm for m ore devout Muslim s) exercise t he st at e pow er t o est ablish a legal-religious aut horit y over all I ndonesian Muslim s. Moreover, various Muslim organisat ions dom inat e t he const ruct ion of I ndonesian Muslim s by issuing religious opinions eit her support ing or challenging t he St at e’s regulat ions. Yet t his est ablishm ent also m eans t hat t he St at e at t em pt s t o exercise religious aut horit y in order t o st rengt hen it s dom inat ion and t o cont rol I slam ic beliefs and pract ices. The collaborat ion bet ween Sant ri and t he St at e plays a prom inent role in const ruct ing t he discourses of I ndonesian Muslim s.
The rest , being t he m aj orit y of Cust om ary or com m on Muslim s (Abangan) exclude t hem , becom ing powerless t o define t heir Muslim ident it y am ong Sant ris
and t he St at e. Their lack of know ledge about I slam put s t hem in t he posit ion of having t o accept t he discour ses of I ndonesian Muslim s. However, following Jenkins’ and Hall’s concept s of ident it y as a developing yet never- ending process, I ndonesian Muslim ident it y is not only accept ed and pract ised as it is in linguist ic/ discursive pr act ice; but can also be m odified, added t o, ignored and resist ed part icularly by Cust om ary Muslim s.
I n analysing t he discursive ident it y am ong t he I ndonesian yout hs, I propose t o consider t he educat ional backgrounds w hich are experienced by t he lat est generat ion. The diverse educat ional experience delineat es t he I slam ic t eachings t hey receiv e on general w eekly basis. These educat ional backgrounds are ident ified by four different cat egories. First , young Muslim s w ho st udy at an I slam ic religious schools or Pesant ren ( I slam ic Boar ding Schools) whet her t hey st at e- adm inist rat ed or privat e, m anaged by a t radit ional adm inist rat ion or a m odern adm inist rat ion. The next cat egory consist s of yout hs w ho enrol in st at e-public school. I n t his cont ext , t hey are only given I slam ic r eligious t eaching for t w o hours a w eek by I slam ic t eachers. The t hird cat egory is adolescent s w ho spend t heir t im e in a privat e- public school t hat is adm inist rat ed by Muslim inst it ut ions. I n t hese schools, st udent s are given m ore I slam ic r eligious t eaching, but not as m uch as t hose w ho st udy at I slam ic religious school. The final cat egory consist s of young Muslim s who st udy at privat e- public school t hat are adm inist rat ed by non- Muslim organizat ions. Som e schools in t his cat egory pr ovide I slam ic t eaching for Muslim st udent s but m ost of t hem do not .
am ong yout h Muslim s t o const it ut e t heir religious ident it y and show it in public space.
The last , bot h different educat ional experience and t he affiliat ion and non-affiliat ion t o I slam ic part ies or or ganisat ions cult urally and pract ically define t heir Muslim ident it y in everyday life. The sense as a part of I slam ic com m unit y
(um m ah) by and large is influenced by t his definit ion. To som e ext ent , t he
definit ion is eit her fully- or part ly- det erm ined or st and against t he m ainst ream discourse of I ndonesian I slam as const ruct ed by t he st at e- backed inst it ut ions and Muslim privat e organisat ions and sect s.
Gr a m m a r of I n don e sia n M uslim s’ I de n t it y
Here, I propose t o use t he st ruct ural approach of t he ‘gram m ars of ident it y’ from Gerd Baum ann ( 2004) t o explore t he configurat ion of t he I ndonesian Muslim s’ ident it ies. These gram m ars are used t o build a st ruct ural fram ework t o exam ine t he discursive form at ion of I ndonesian Muslim ident it y before finally analysing it s pract ice at t he agency level.
Baum ann ( 2004: 19- 26) st at es t hree st ruct ures t hat are elabor at ed from t hree pieces of w ork: from Said on Orient alism ; from Evans- Prit chard on t he Nuer t ribes and from Dum ont on Hom o Hierachicus. On Orient alism , Said explains t he binary classificat ion bet w een “w e” and “ t hey” as different and cont radict ory; each elem ent lying in opposit ion and wit h m axim um cont rast . The Nuer t ribal ident it y was build under t he segm ent ary lineage m odel as a pyram id of ident ificat ion. Alt hough t he various elem ent s of t he Nuer w ere const ant ly at w ar, t hey shared t he sam e ident it y and st ayed t oget her, part icularly when resist ing t he Brit ish conqueror. On Hom o Hierarchicus, Dum ont describes t he encom passm ent m odel which is built by adopt ing or co- opt ing select ed kinds of ot herness. The m odel underlines t he fact t hat alt hough all elem ent s are different , som e have a bet t er posit ion and consequent ly have pow er over t he ot hers. Thus t he ‘superior’ acknowledge t hat t he ot hers are part of t he w hole despit e t heir differences; t he ‘inferior’ accept and absorb t he socio- cult ural values of t he superior.
Alt hough Baum ann did not m ent ion any variat ions in his concept s, I propose t w o com bined st ruct ures, segm ent ary and encom passm ent , wit h which t o build a st ruct ural fram ew ork of t he gram m ars of I ndonesian Muslim s’ ident it ies. Two gram m ars are built , one under religious life and one under public/ polit ical life where t he ident it ies are different ly cont est ed. The religious gram m ar indicat es t he dom inat ion of I slam in t he ident it y const ruct ion whereas t he polit ical gram m ar signifies t he nat ionalist ic w orld view am ong I ndonesian Muslim s. The t wo gram m ars cont est I slam and I ndonesian nat ionalism in t he const ruct ion of I ndonesian Muslim yout hs.
Kurzm an’s perspect ive which em phasised t he cust om ary Muslim s ( cult urally Muslim s) illum inat es t he m aj orit y of Muslim s as t he whole. The com binat ion it self provides t he com parat ive analysis of t he gram m ar.
The first gram m ar is const it ut ed at t he level of religious life by cent ering on Muslim s com pared w it h ot hers and in a variance relat ionship. I com bine t wo t ypes of Baum ann’s ‘gram m ars of ident it y’, segm ent at ion and encom passm ent . Segm ent at ion m eans t hat all part ies are form ally equal, allowing ‘fusion and fission’ ( Baum ann, 2004: 23) where all part ies share t he sam eness in a higher level alt hough t hey com pet e w it h each ot her t o reach t he t op. Encom passm ent w orks by ‘a hierarchical sub- inclusion of ot hers w ho are t hought by a higher level of abst ract ion t o be really ‘part of us’’ ( Baum ann and Gingrich, 2004: x) .
The I ndonesian ident it y is built segm ent arily by bot h I ndonesian Muslim s and non I ndonesian- Muslim s. They fight each ot her t o dom inat e I ndonesian cult ure and ident it y. The I ndonesian Muslim s’ ident it y it self is const it ut ed segm ent arily by Liberalist s, Moderat es and Revivalist s, t hus t hey encom pass Cust om ary Muslim s or Abangan. These t hree also st ruggle t o represent bot h as I ndonesian Muslim s, influencing t he charact er of I slam wit hin t his count ry while also sharing t he ident it y of Sant ris, t he m ore devout Muslim s. Alt hough Cust om ary Muslim s are inferior, t hey are regarded as part of t he whole I ndonesian Muslim societ y. This posit ion renders t hem pow erless in t he form ulat ion of I ndonesian Muslim discourse except t o accept and pract ice it in everyday life.
Figu r e 1 : Th e Re ligiou s Se gm e n t a r y/ En com pa ssm e n t Gr a m m a r in I ndon e sia
The second gram m ar is derived from public/ polit ical life. As in t he case of t he first gram m ar, I ndonesia is also built segm ent arily by I slam ic and non- I slam ic orient at ions. While I slam ic orient at ion encom passes bot h I slam ic- Religious and Nat ionalist - Religious, I slam ic encom passes Cust om ary/ Abangan and non-Muslim s/ Cat holics- Christ ians. Bot h I slam ic- Religious and Nat ionalist - Religious orient at ions are inspired by I slam ic values but differ in t heir im plem ent at ion in t his count ry. The I slam ic- Religious fact ion int ends t o I slam ise I ndonesia part icular ly by prom ot ing Sharia as t he legal fram ewor k. The Nat ionalist - Religious fact ion also int ends t o I slam ise I ndonesia, but rat her t han support ing t he
I ndonesian
I ndonesian Muslim s
Non I ndonesian Muslim s
Liberalist s Moderat e Revivalist s
Shariat izat ion program m e t hey want t o prom ot e I slam ic values in playing a m or e significant role in I ndonesia t han t he m ere presence of I slam ic sym bols and signs. I n relat ion t o t he first gram m ar, Revivalist s affiliat e t o t he I slam ic- Religious while Liberalist s and Moderat es prefer t he Nat ionalist - Religious. I n cont rast , non- I slam ic orient at ions deny all I slam ic orient at ions by arguing t hat I ndonesia is not an I slam ic st at e. I n Gert z’s t erm s, Cust om ary Muslim s or Abangan bot h Nat ionalist and Socialist st and t oget her w it h Cat holics, Christ ians, Hindus, Buddhist s and Anim ist s.
Figu r e 2 : Th e Pu blic/ Polit ica l Se gm e nt a r y/ En com pa a sm e nt Gr a m m a r in I n don e sia
As a st ruct ural fram ework, t wo t ypes of ‘gram m ar of ident it y’ are used t o exam ine t he form at ion of young I ndonesian Muslim s’ ident it ies. The linguist ic/ discursive pract ices of t his ident it y are st im ulat ed in response t o m ainst ream I ndonesian Muslim discourses. Sim ply speaking, t heir relat ionship t o ot hers, t heir posit ion in t he configurat ion of I ndonesian Muslim societ y and t heir preferences for polit ical affiliat ion will be elaborat ed in cont ext as a cont est at ion of t he discursive form at ion of ident it y.
To conclude, in t alking about t he I ndonesian Muslim s’ at t it udes t oward t he ot hers, Fat im ah Husein ( 2005) used t w o dichot om ous cat egories: I nclusivist and Exclusivist as t he basis classificat ion during t he ‘new order’ era. I nclusivist s are charact erised by t he idea of st at e- religion separat ion while t he Exclusivist s desire t he unified st at e- religious aut horit y of I ndonesia. I n addit ion, alt hough it was not quit e explicit , Husein also supposed t he t hird cat egory, non- affiliat ed t ype of I ndonesian Muslim s. The non- affiliat ed Muslim s represent a large m em ber of t he com m unit y which do not belong t o part icular Muslim organisat ions, sect s as well as polit ical part ies. This t ype is not easily com pared t o Cust om ary Muslim s as underst anding and pract icing hybrid- I slam w it h local cult ure and cust om . The non-affiliat ed Muslim s are who prefer t o be Muslim independent ly from diverse religious- polit ical and ideological agenda. I int end t o adopt Husein’s neut ral classificat ion as t he alt ernat ive t o build t he I ndonesian Muslim s’ gram m ar of ident it y in t his research. To som e ext ent , t he classificat ion can be expanded by
I ndonesian
I slam ic Non- I slam ic
I slam ic- Religious
Nat ionalist - Religious
Nat ionalist s-Abangan
Socialist s-Abangan
adding power relat ion analysis in how each cat egory exercise bot h religious and st at e aut horit y t o prom ot e it s dist inct ive definit ion of I slam and I ndonesian nat ionalism .
Re fe r e n ce s
Anderson, Benedict R. O'G., 1991. I m agined Com m unit ies: Reflect ions on t he Origin
and Spread of Nat ionalism. Rev ed. London: Verso
Bart h, Fredrik., 1969. I nt roduct ion in Bart h, Fredrik., Ed. Et hnic groups and
boundaries. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Basw edan, Anies Rasyid., 2004. Polit ical I slam in I ndonesia: Present and Fut ure Traj ect ory. Asian Survey ( 44) 5, pp. 669- 690
Baum ann, Gerd., 2004. Gram m ars of I dent it y/ Alt erit y: A St ruct ural Approach. I n Baum ann, Gerd and Gingrich, Andre. Eds. Gram m ars of I dent it y/ Alt erit y A
st ruct ural Approach. The EASA series. New York ; Oxford : Berghahn Book . p.
18- 50
Baum ann, Gerd and Gingrich, Andre., 2004. Debat ing Gram m ars: Argum ent s and Prospect . I n Baum ann, Gerd and Gingrich, Andre. Eds. Gram m ars of
I dent it y/ Alt erit y A st ruct ural Approach. The EASA series. New York; Oxford
: Berghahn Book. p. 192- 204.
Boland, B. J., 1982. The st ruggle of I slam in m odern I ndonesia. The Hague: Nij hoff. Bosm a, Ulbe., 2004. Cit izens of Em pire: Som e Com parat ive Observat ions on t he
Evolut ion of Creole Nat ionalism in Colonial I ndonesia. Com parat ive St udies in Societ y and Hist ory, 46, p. 656- 681 Cam bridge Univ ersit y Press.
Bowen, John Richard., 2003. I slam , law, and equalit y in I ndonesia: an ant hropology of public reasoning. Cam bridge: Cam bridge Univ ersit y Press
BPS- I ndonesia ( The Cent ral Bureau of St at ist ics) . BRI EF ANALYSI S of I ndonesian
Populat ion. [ online] Available at : < URL:
ht t p: / / www.bps.go.id/ sect or/ populat ion/ pop2000.ht m > [ Accessed 3rd June 2007]
Dhofier, Zam ahsyari. 1980., I slam ic Educat ion and Tradit ional I deology in Java. I n Fox, Jam es J., Ed. 1980. I ndonesia: t he m aking of a cult ure. Canberra: The Aust ralian Nat ional Universit y, Research on School of Pacific St udies. P. 263- 272 Effendy, Baht iar. 2003. I slam and t he St at e in I ndonesia. Singapore: I nst it ut e of Federspiel, Howard M., 2001. I slam and I deology in t he Em erging I ndonesian St at e :
The Persat uan I slam ( Persis) , 1923 t o 1957. Revised ed. Leiden: Brill
Geert z, Clifford., 1964. The religion of Java. Free Press of Glencoe; Collier- Macm illan, Hall, St uart ., 1996. Who needs ‘I dent it y’? I n Hall, St uart and du Gay, Paul. Eds.
Quest ion of Cult ural I dent it y. London: Sage. P. 1- 17
Hefner, Robert W., 2000. Civil I slam : Muslim s and dem ocrat izat ion in I ndonesia.
Oxford : Pr incet on Universit y Press.
Jacobson, Jessica., 1998. I slam in Transit ion: Religion and I dent it y am ong Brit ish Pakist ani Yout h. Florence, USA: Raut ledge
Jenkins, Richard., 1997. Ret hinking Et hnicit y : Argum ent s and Explorat ion. London: Sage.
Karner, Christ ian., 2007. Et hnicit y in Everyday Life. Oxon; New York: Rout ledge.
Kurzm an, Charles., Ed. 1998. Liberal I slam : a source book. New York: Oxford Univ ersit y Press
Liberal I slam Net w ork . 2003. About Liberal I slam Net w ork . [ online] Available at : < ht t p: / / islam lib.com / en/ about us.php> [ Accessed 5t h June 2007]
Luckens- Bulls, Ronald., 2005. A Peaceful Jihad: Negot iat ing I dent it y and Modernit y in
Muslim Java. New York: Palgrave
Mehm et , Ozay., 1990. I slam ic ident it y and developm ent : st udies of t he I slam ic periphery. London: Rout ledge
MUI ( Maj elis Ulam a I ndonesia or The Council of I ndonesian Muslim Clerics) ., 1981.
Perayaan Nat al bersam a. ( Celebrat ing Christ m as t oget her) . [ online] Available at : < URL: ht t p: / / www.m ui.or.id/ m ui_in/ fat wa.php?id= 71> [ Accessed 5t h June 2007]
MUI ( Maj elis Ulam a I ndonesia or The Council of I ndonesian Muslim Clerics) ., 2005.
Perkawinan Beda Agam a ( I nt er- r eligious Marriage). [ online] Available at : < URL: ht t p: / / www.m ui.or.id/ m ui_in/ fat wa.php?id= 135> [ Accessed 5t h June 2007] MUI ( Maj elis Ulam a I ndonesia or The Council of I ndonesian Muslim Clerics) ., 2007.
Sekilas Tent ang Kam i ( At Glance about Us) . [ online] Available at : < URL: ht t p: / / www.m ui.or.id/ m ui_in/ about .php> [ Accessed 5t h June 2007]
Muj ani, Saiful and Liddle, William ., 2004. Polit ics, I slam and Public Opinions. Journal of
Dem ocracy, 15 ( 1) [ online] . Available at : < URL:
ht t p: / / m use.j hu.edu/ j ournals/ j our nal_of_dem ocracy/ v015/ 15.1m uj ani.pdf> [ Accessed 5t h August 2007]
Noer, Deliar., 1973. The Modernist Muslim Mov em ent in I ndonesia, 1900- 1942. Oxford: Ox ford Universit y Press.
Peacock, Jam es L., 1978. Muslim purit ans: Reform ist psychology in Sout heast Asian I slam. Universit y of California Press.
Pohl, Florian., 2006. I slam ic Educat ion and Civil Societ y: Reflect ions on t he Pesant ren
Tradit ion in Cont em porary I ndonesia. Com parat ive Educat ion Review, 50 ( 3) , p. 389- 409
Ram age, Douglas E., 1995. Polit ics in I ndonesia: dem ocracy , I slam and t he ideology of t olerance. London: Rout ledge,
Ram bergs, B. and Gj esdal, K., 2005. Herm eneut ics. St anford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy . [ online] Available at : < ht t p: / / plat o.st anford.edu/ ent ries/ herm eneut ics/ > [ Accessed 1st Jan 2007]
Rick lefs, M. C. 2001., A Hist ory of Modern I ndonesia since c. 1200. 3r d ed. Plagrave MacMillan.
Schwarz, Adam ., 1994. A nat ion in wait ing: I ndonesia in t he 1990s. St . Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin,
