Religious freedom: Just a slogan, or something we need to uphold?
EACH citizen in Indonesia is entitled to practice whatever faith he/she believes in. Our Constitution, in article 29, verses 1 and 2, supports this. This means the state legally guarantees its citizens to adhere and to practice whatever religion they believe in. The question is; if the state recognises its citizens' right to have, or even perhaps not to have, religion, then why do some people, who claim to be religious, prevent others from exercising the same right they have to practice their faith?
The question seems to be fair, especially in the present situation where the country has witnessed some disputes and atrocities motivated by what is regarded as simple narrow-minded understanding, on the part of religion followers, of their religion and how to behave according to it.
Yet, at the same time, we need to pause to contemplate and understand the reasons that encourage the religion followers to do what they do. Then, and only then, can we decide whether to keep pointing our fingers at them for the atrocities or to point our fingers somewhere else and offer some solutions.
Regretfully, some people, in the name of religious freedom, are pointing their fingers at religion followers before even trying to really understand why they do what they do. While we certainly must condemn violence, it would be wise to also consider the reasons why it happens.
Indonesia, along with Vietnam, Pakistan and Turkmenistan, is on the blacklist of countries that violate religious freedom, according to the standard set by America (The Jakarta Post, May 4).
However, in the case of what has been happening in Indonesia, we need to carefully weigh the situation and the reasons before agreeing with America or those who think that just because there has been some violence in the name of a religion we can believe that the religion cannot tolerate others or that the followers of the religion are narrow-minded bigots who think they are the only ones who are right.
Each religion has, often rigid, its own teachings, interpretation, sets of rules, standards and procedures governing what its followers should and should not do. Anyone who, on his/her own accord, is willing to adhere to the teachings of a religion should do the best he/she can to live according to the standards set by the religion.
While a religion may cater to different interpretations of how its teachings should and can be applied in the life of its followers, the religion and its followers will not tolerate anyone who, despite trying to substantially change the religious teachings from the observed standards, rules and procedures, claims that he/she still practices the same religion.
Interpretation is oftentimes personal. Yet, what is personal should not, in the name of religious freedom, be glorified over what is respected and observed by the group which the individual has agreed to belong to.
The interpretations of a religion can only be justified if they are still within the corridor of the "acceptable" interpretation according to the observed standard, rules and procedures set by the religion.
Interpretations in a religion, and of the religious teachings, are a very complex matter and require a high understanding of the religion. Nobody, in the name of religious freedom, can just proclaim that his/her interpretation is justifiable unless he/she can come up with irrefutable proof based on the literature, sources and facts regarded by the religion, and strictly follow the procedures and rules observed by the religion.
This is also true in the case of Ahmadiyahs, or the teachings disseminated by Ahmad Moshaddeq, in Indonesia. The reactions demonstrated by the groups claiming to be mainstream Islam should not immediately be considered as violating others' right to practice a religion. Finding out more about why they do it will provide us with a better and critical perspective of the matter.
Islam is a religion of peace and, yet, at the same time, it will never tolerate anyone trying taint its teachings. Muslims are obliged to believe, in addition to others things, that Prophet Muhammad (peace be unto him) is the last messenger of God and that the Koran is the only holy book for them.
People who, of their own accord, are willing to embrace Islam as their religion should observe this. If anyone wants to claim to be a prophet or invents new teachings and religion, he/she is welcome to do so in the name of religious freedom as long as he/she does not say they are Islamic, or Muslim, because he/she is not, according to the belief.
Ahmadiyahs claim that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of India is their prophet and Tadzkirah, despite their denial, as their holy book. This means that Muhammad is not, in their belief, the last prophet and that the Koran is not their only holy book.
It is true that even within Ahmadiyahs there is a difference in how they view the position of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad; some think he is just an enlightened reformer of Islam, some elevate him to the position of a prophet.
Still, since Islam is an already comprehensive religion from its conception and does not need anyone to reform or renew its teachings, Mirza's claims cannot be justified. In addition, Prophet Muhammad himself said in a hadith (the prophet's sayings and deeds regarded by Muslims as the second source of laws after the Koran) that there would be no more nubuwaah (prophet/prophethood) after him.
Islam is not the only religion that will do anything to keep its teaching pure and untainted. History records that Christian also did, and will do the same. Certainly, other religions will follow the same path. History tells that the Vatican condemned, pursued and tried any groups they considered were deviating from the "mainstream."
Indonesia is not the only country that faces religious freedom-related issues. The facts show the United States, that claims to be the most democratic country, seized, banned and even burned the camp in Waco where the followers of David resided, banned the teachings of Jones and, most recently, raided the followers of a sect that allows polygamy.
After all, religious freedom is also about respecting any religion to rule its followers according to its teachings.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments