give support, that is to say, cultural reasons: school-aged children will not be attracted to enter an education system that is not regarded as having any national identity.11 The remedy to the current malaise, Abdurrahman argues, lies not with one single strategy, such as integration of pesantren into the national system of education (although that is undoubtedly essential for its ongoing survival) but with changing the nature of pesantren leadership: It is only in this way that dynamic leadership of the pesantren will be able to prevent a protraction of the crisis in the pesantren, and develop the pesantren to become an educational and social institution that it is truly capable of facing the challenges oftime.12 'Making Islamic Law Conducive to Development' In his writing from the 1970s, Abdurrahman is often critical of certain aspects of Islamic education, both in the pesantren and tertiary sectors. He was even more critical, however, of the narrowness of traditional thought that developed concerning Islamic jurisprudence, as is seen in his 1975 article 'Menjadikan Hukum Islam sebagai Penunjang Pembangunan' (Making Islamic Law Conducive to Development).13 It is one thing to criticise contemporary systems of Islamic education, it is quite another to criticise that which, to many, represents nothing less than the codification of God's eternal will. That Abdurrahman does not shy from the task is testimony to his character and his entire way of thinking. Abdurrahman's incisive and far-reaching criticism of Islamic jurisprudence in Menjadikan Hukum Islam sebagai Penunjang Pembangunan' appears all the more remarkable when it is remembered that it was written in 1975, when Abdurrahman was a young 35 year old, little-known pesantren leader. While the same article from Abdurrahman's pen in the 1990s would be received with little surprise, its appearance almost two decades ago should serve as a reminder that Abdurrahman, the bold and independently-minded chairman of NU and outspoken public intellectual, has been a long time in the making. The text of 'Menjadikan Hukum Islam sebagai Penunjang Pembangunan' is densely layered and carefully argued, and is well deserving of careful examination. Here, however, the discussion will focus on a few seminal points. This should be sufficient to demonstrate the nature of Abdurrahman's quarrel with contemporary Islamic thought, and in doing so, should serve well as a bridge to the next section. Abdurrahman's first quarrel with current Islamic legal thinking is that it is essentially apologetic in tone and substance. That is to say, it is more concerned with the defence of an idealised abstract position than it is with meeting a real and immediate need: The pattern of thinking regarding Islam in this country is, in the same way, very apologetic in nature, able only to proclaim a vision of an ideal world in which Islamic law, it is emphatically proclaimed, has the power to bring happiness in this life and in the life to come, a world of the form of a city of God (civitas Dei) far beyond the reach of this present age, with all of its needs and critical issues requiring urgent attention and instant solutions. Should we then be surprised if Islamic law has lost its relevance to the developments in our lives all around us?14 The way forward, Abdurrahman argues, is clear enough: In order to become relevant Islamic law has to develop for itself a dynamic character. In doing this it needs to formulate itself as supporter of the development of national law in this realm of development. This dynamic character can only be obtained if Isiamic law focuses its attention upon the sort of worldly issues that our nation is struggling with at present, and provides solutions for the real life problems facing us at this point in time. It is being demanded of Islamic law that it develop itself in this way in a process of fluid change, and not be simply bound to the visions of a fantasised reality conceived in accordance with theories created in a long past age. This self-development requires a vision that extends well beyond the circle 6 Islamic legal experts themselves. In other words, it requires taking a multi-dimensional approach to life, and not simply remaining bound to normative formulations long since settled, that are, in fact, virtually at the point of becoming fossils.15 What is required, Abdurrahman insinuates, is a new reform movement, a new process of reform to bring the science of Islamic jurisprudence up-to-date with the demands of modernity, for the early reform movements, including modernism, have failed that which is required by modern society. A one- dimensional approach, he argues, is insufficient for the needs of society: In the failure to evaluate the long-term consequences 6 these two characteristics can be seen the failure of reformation after reformation which have occurred in the field of Islamic law down to the present. The reformation of al-Syafi'i (died 205 H/820 CE) succeeded in eliminating haphazard decision-making processes. His method, which became known by the name 'tariq al-istiqra', succeeded in simplifying the haphazard decision-making processes and creating a system that later came to be known as roots 6 jurisprudence (usul al-fiqh), as is manifested in his monumental work on jurisprudence, al-Risalah. But the efforts of al-Syafi'i himself ultimately failed to ward off the process by which religious law was made irrelevant as a consequence of being tied to an overly literal approach to the use of words and terms. In the same way the efforts in our nation of the reform movement led by Muhammadiyah, and the fundamentalist movement of Persis, which continued in this line, came to the same end. Until now, efforts to reinvigorate religious law have continued to have a sectarian character and have really only been successful in reinvigorating one or two aspects of life, because of their mono-dimensional approach. Seen on a broad scale, the re- invigoration that was hoped for failed to eventuate. In fact, there was a tendency for the intended re-invigoration to ultimately give birth to what were simply new variations on existing rigid formulations, in other words, creating a kind of neo-conservatism. [Abdurrahman then writes in a footnote:] This neo-Conservatism occurs in almost all matters where there is a very closed-minded attitude to changes in the way in which God's will is understood to be communicated free from linguistic strait-jacketing. For example, they have reacted very strongly, in comparison with other groups, to the pembaruan (reform) ideas of Drs Nurcholish Madjid and his friends, which very much revolve around changes in the meaning of items of terminology which are used to explain faith and the place of humankind with respect to God.)16 In effect, Abdurrahman argues, the achievement of a degree of modernity in one or two areas by Islamic modernists does not represent the achievement of full modernity: one swallow does not a summer make. Furthermore, over time modernism has given way to, and even produced, a new kind of conservatism that now stands in the way of further progress (which Abdurrahman clearly sees represented, at least in part, by thinkers such as Nurcholish Madjid). What is now required, Abdurrahman argues, is the formulation of new principles of hermeneutics and jurisprudence that better meet the contextual demands of the modern age. These principles, he suggests, must reflect the humanitarian spirit of Islam and allow it to speak to the needs of today's generation: This setting of limits to the field in which Islamic law should operate must be accompanied by efforts to formulate principles for decision making in matters of religious law which better reflect the needs of our age. Human judgement must be given due place. In fact the focus of legal decision making has to be directed towards the integration of human judgement with principles of jurisprudence. To this end, in the long run, consideration must be given to the possibility of developing a system of jurisprudence that is better able to anticipate the possible developments relating to life in the future. Initially, the methodology for developing this jurisprudence must be discussed and developed behind closed doors, given the sensitive nature of the issues. Issues such as how to resolve the apparent conflict between science and God's revelation, together with scholarship down through the ages, have to be discussed in a profound fashion if they are to give rise to the formation of a satisfactory methodology for the development of jurisprudence as outlined above. As an example. is it right that the prohibition against acting out of a fear of poverty (khauf al- imlaq) should apply to society as a mass (khitab 'am), to the point where, as a society, we have to give up efforts in birth control, even though there is clear evidence that we are in danger of a population explosion? Is it not rather the case that this prohibition applies to Muslims at an individual level and serves to keep them from living in a fatalistic fashion, commanding them instead to work hard in order to gain the daily sustenance promised by God? If the distinction made here between the understanding that applies to the mass of society (mafhum 'am) and that which applies to the individual (mafhum khas) can be accepted, where then do we draw the line between the two?17 At the heart of Abdurrahman's argument is the conviction that Islam is not static, and that the teaching of Islam is not something which is given once and never again requires reformulation or reapplication. In other words, he is arguing that an essential characteristic of Islamic law is that it must be contextually interpreted, and therefore, when the social and historical context changes, as it does constantly, so too must the application of eternal principles of that body of law: This invitation for growth and re-invigoration is not an invitation to tear down Islamic law. Rather, an invitation such as this is simply intended to align Islamic law to the needs of the moment, to align it to the constantly changing needs of humankind. What is intended is that efforts be made to make it more sensitive to the needs of humanity in this present age and in the age to come. Through this sensitivity Islamic law will constantly make the adjustments required, without sacrificing its transcendental values as fixed by God who must be praised. Through this sensitivity Islamic law will continue to contribute to the development of the nation, that is to say it will create dynamic principles for life based upon an awareness of the necessity for men and women to labour within the limits of their ability as mere creatures.18 Clearly then, the need to respond creatively to the challenges of modernity lies at the heart of his thought. This is very much the business of the following section. 'Pesantren Dynamisation and Modernisation ' Everything that Abdurrahman has done (not just in the 1970s but in the 1980s and 1990s also), he would argue, has been based on the twin convictions that the ideals of Islam, properly realised, can form the basis of a just, fair and humane society, and that the full potential of Islam in this modern age will only be realised when Islamic thought is allowed to respond creatively to the demands and challenges of modernity. In seeking to define the sort of ongoing creative response to change that is demanded of Islam in the late twentieth century one of the key terms employed by Abdurrahman is dinamisme. The Indonesian word 'dinamis' (from which Abdurrahman derives the noun form 'dinamisme') may have its origins in the English word 'dynamic' but it has travelled considerably since leaving the English language, to the point where, in Indonesian, it has come to mean not just the quality of being energetic and full of life, but also the ability to adapt and respond creatively to difficult circumstances.19 Abdurrahman invokes all of this and more in his usage of the word, as can be seen in this quotation from an article he presented at a LP3ES conference on pesantren in 1973 'Dinamisasi Dan Modernisasi Pesantren' (Pesantren Dynamisation and Modernisation): Before touching upon the issues referred to in the title 6 this discussion it is necessary to clarify what is meant by the use of the terms dynamisation and modernisation. Dynamisation, in the first instance, entails two processes: arousing once more existing positive life values/principles as well as replacing old values with new and more perfect values. This process of changing over values is known as modernisation.20 At the same time, the word dynamisation itself, in the usage being employed here, connotes 'moving in the direction of perfection', through the use of existing instruments and attitudes to life as a base. This principle is being put to the fore here because of the conviction that concepts that currently seem alien to the pesantren will in the future come to be an enormous stumbling block. We trust that this approach of seeking the acceptance of the pesantren itself will, in the long run. produce better results than any other conceptual approach.21 This 1973 article, it should be remembered, dates from very early in Abdurrahman's career, but already his conception of dinamisasi, a matter that is to become a cardinal element in his thought, is clearly well worked out. Abdurrahman believes that the present disarray, uncertainty and upheaval evident in the pesantren system, has its origin in two areas. Firstly it is, to a certain extent, a reflection of the generally troubled nature of Indonesia-s society in transition. Secondly it arises out of an awareness that the capacity of pesantren to face the challenges of modernitv is scarcely adequate; their structures are stagnated and they are ill equipped to respond to change. On top of all of this there is great difficulty in getting traditional village communities to provide adequate financial support. In the light of these difficulties it is essential, he argues, that pesantren respond appropriately to the challenges of modernity. Obviously the kind of triumphalism that seeks solace in past 'golden ages' is of no help here, but neither is 'pseudo-modernism', a superficial response to modernity that affects the appearance of progress but avoids its substance: The disturbed conditions of the pesantren system are seen manifested in two kinds of reaction to life values in this present time of transition. The first reaction takes the form of closing one's self off to developments in 'outside' society, especially in activities which are regarded as threatening the purity of religious life. This isolation occurs in such a Fashion as to practically prevent all forms of meaningful exchange of ideas with the outside world. Pesantren which choose to react in this fashion end up drowning in fond dreams about the glories of a long past era, and in activities intended to force the standards of that long past age onto society. Growing up amongst all of these activities are myths about the sacredness of pesantren leaders, to the point where there are all sorts of hagiographic efforts to lionise, to raise to the status of wali (saint), willy-nilly, people whose approach to life differs from the ordinary. The second reaction is to engage in what are in fact solidarity-making activities aimed at creating solidarity between the pesantren and broader society. The stirring up of this process is accompanied by an approach to life that makes a display of things that are ostensibly modern (pseudo-modernism). Techniques and methods of 'modernising oneself are developed in such a fashion as to leave the unavoidable impression of snobbery on the part of some sections of the pesantren community. One such example is the 'cultural adaptation of a modern face' in the form of endless array of grandiose ceremonies. Very scarce financial resources are, it would seem, not used in a wise fashion, but are instead spent on showy activities of the kind referred to by some as the 'the rule of the microphone'.22 What is required, Abdurrahman argues, is a commitment to seeking a middle way, balancing religious tradition with the practical demands that arise in response to modernity and the need to progress. One of the keys to success in this area is the inclusion of youth in pesantren leadership: The younger leaders in the pesantren, when included little by little in the process of leadership, are able to bring together the practical requirements for progress (especially the material ones) and the religious traditions which they have inherited from earlier generations. The most important issue facing us now is how to bring together the younger leaders in forums such as this one, in an enduring and widespread fashion.23 To this Abdurrahman adds a second prerequisite: the total overhaul of pesantren curricula and teaching material. The most important prerequisite for a wide-ranging and profound process of dynamisation is the wholesale reformulation of teaching material for religious learning. Classical texts and 'modern' text books a [a Mahmud Junus and Hasbi Ash-shiddieqi alike have exhausted their power to motivate development of a sense of belonging in religious life. From primary level teaching to tertiary institutions, santri (Muslim students) are being fed theorems that they can no longer digest. Mastery of these theorems has become stagnant, and no longer demonstrates an evolving character. It is precisely these formulations that must be reconstructed, whilst not losing the essential elements of the religious teaching that up till now has been our inheritance. Mature traditionalism is far better than superficial pseudo-modernism.24 It is significant that Abdurrahman concludes this paper, and this call for dinamisasi with a warning, not to, as it were, 'throw the baby out with the bath water--not to completely discard traditional learning in the quest for renewal and reform. Not only is this understanding integral to his conception of dinamisasi as a process that is profound and sophisticated, a process that picks up the enduring virtues and core elements of traditional scholarship and carefully incorporates them into a modern approach to learning, but just as importantly it is reflective of his conviction that traditional Islam has never been a static thing. In other words, Abdurrahman conceives of dinamisasi as not so much a twentieth century response to the pressures of modernity, but rather as an expression of Islam at its adaptive, flexible, traditional best. 'Good, but is it of any use?' 1980 saw Abdurrahman publish fourteen pieces of writing, eleven of them essays in Tempo magazine. The first of these Tempo articles was entitled 'Kyai Nyentrik Membela Pemerintah' (The Eccentric Kiai Stands up for the Government).25 This essay launched a series of essays on 'eccentric' kiai, with nine of the ensuing essays taking up the theme and discussing various colourful religious leaders. As traditional religious leaders each of these rather odd kiai share a common set of attitudes and approaches to dealing with the challenge of responding meaningfully to a rapidly changing world. Each of them, he argues, are, to varying degrees, distinguished by a rare flexibility of mind and ability to discern where the 'spirit of the law' must prevail over the 'letter of the law'. And whilst they are decidedly conservative figures they can also be said to be, in certain aspects, liberal and progressive in their thinking, being committed to the ongoing evolution of Islamic thought in relation to social practise. Abdurrahman uses these essays to educate his largely urban, middle class (and therefore predominately modernist or abangan) readership about the potential of traditionalist Islam to adapt and change, and about the level of humanitarian concern to be found in traditional Islam. But there is more to these essays than Abdurrahman being an apologist for traditional Islam. He is not talking about the average kiai, rather he is specifically focusing upon certain significant eccentric kiai in whom he finds a number of admirable traits and attitudes. He is arguing then, not so much for traditional Islam as for what it could be, and he is indicating the direction in which it should progress. In a Tempo essay entitled 'Balk Belum Tentu Bermanfaat' (Good, but is it of any use?) Abdurrahman writes about the jovial, independently-minded Kiai Ali Ma'shum (with whom he studied in Yogyakarta), or 'Kiai Ali Krapyak', as Abdurrahman refers to him in this essay.26 Kiai Ali's uniqueness lies not just in his good- natured boldness that sees him dishing out advice to all whom he considers as being in need of his insights, from cabinet minister down, but in the paradoxical combination of playful sociability and strong religious convictions. Some, Abdurrahman suggests, might argue that there is an inconsistency in taking a hard line on certain religious issues (such as the changes to the Marriage Law in 1973-4, the use of the symbol of kaabah (the large cuboid structure in the middle of the Great Mosque in Mecca) in the run up to the 1977 election) and yet being accommodative and easy going in social situations. Needless to say Abdurrahman does not see this as being a difficult charge to answer: The answer lies with the ability of Kiai Ali to discern between issues which are of essential importance to religion and those which are not; the ability to arrive at an accommodation with the demands of the day without forfeiting the original persona that is the source of the profoundest of religious values.27 There is, in fact, a great degree of consistency in every aspect of Kiai All's life, Abdurrahman argues. This is evident in his attitude to change in the traditional pesantren curriculum. Despite his long association with pesantren education Kiai Ali is not about to lend his support to reactionary 'die hard' ulama who protest every effort to modernise the pesantren system: On the contrary, he established a rather 'strange' religious school: along with the classical religious texts the santri are encouraged to read modern Middle Eastern literature. Along with studying classical Arabic grammar the santri are encouraged to study contemporary literature. Together with deepening their knowledge of Islamic law through studies in classical fiqh texts, they are directed to also make a careful comparative study of the legal traditions followed in the west and in the east. 'Why do you order them to study Abduh's books, aren't you afraid that they might wander away from NU?' Kiai Ali replies, laughing in his inimitable fashion: 'Wide reading will result in a mature NU.'28 He sees in Kiai Ali's approach an important principle, a principle that finds frequent endorsement in Abdurrahman's writing: Here we encounter a personality who strives to seek pragmatic solutions to complex religious problems. This is a pragmatism born of a union of a rational outlook and a strong faith in the truth of religious teaching.29 A good illustration of Kiai Ali's pragmatic approach at work is seen in his attitude to the popular pesantren practice of tirakat, or fasting (or at least abstaining from all but liquids and a little fruit), a practice that seems injurious to healthy physical development in young santri, but is in line with the belief of the great medieval scholar, Al Ghazali, that such ascetic restraint benefits santri in their pursuit of religious insight. When asked what his opinion was of Imam Ghazali's call to fast in the manner described above, Kiai Ali's answer was 'well it is a good thing but it is not at all clear that it is of any benefit'. The ability to classify things based on a sophisticated system of classification is the key to the sort of adaptability demonstrated by Kiai Ali from Krapyak. Acknowledging that opinions formulated in the distant past can be good, whilst seeking new benefits, is one form of this adaptability. So, without doing violence to its roots, this adaptability is, all the same, pretty dynamic, is it not?30 'Kiai Razaq--The Flaming Kiai' In other cases the examples of what Abdurrahman calls 'dinamisasi' are not quite as extraordinary but the commitment to finding new answers for new problems is nevertheless clearly demonstrated, even if, by necessity, these new formulations are presented in old and familiar packaging. Abdurrahman depicts one example of this in an article entitled 'Kyai Razaq yang Terbakar' (Kiai Razaq-The Flaming Kiai).31 Thus Kiai Razaq, a rather provincial (Abdurrahman captures the thick Betawi dialect in his quotations), but shrewd, Betawi kiai, takes a public stand in support of transmigration (then much opposed by many kiai who felt that it threatened their communities). Why? Because if transmigration results in an improved standard of living, Muslims will have the means to pursue further education. Why did he not join his fellow kiai in their fear of the social change that modernity thrust upon their small communities? Evidently because he saw Islam not as a static entity, but rather as dynamic. Modernity, and the change that it brings, are not to be feared as long as Islamic learning does not stand still: Thus it is only right that he does not view modernisation as representing a threat. As long as there are ulama with a deep knowledge of religion, who lead the umat whilst filtering the impact of modernisation, there is no need for us to panic or become hysterical. So long as the young continue, as they have done until now, to make a study of religious learning to, as they say, search after knowledge, then there will be sound process of selection in operation.32 'Co-education and the Guileless Kiai' A fellow spirit with Kiai Razaq is Kiai Sobari from Tebuireng, the subject of a 1980 article entitled 'Kyai Ikhlas dan Ko- edukasi' (Co-education and the Guileless Kiai).33 Kiai Sobari is well into his seventies and has the respect of all for his sincerity and simple lifestyle, and yet is maddeningly 'old fashioned' (kolor) on issues such as Family Planning and school curriculums. Why then, Abdurrahman writes, was he not 'up in arms' over the introduction of co-education schooling to his district? Why does he not protest, as many of his peers do, that the mixing of girls and boys in the classroom contravenes Qur'anic guidelines regarding modesty in relations between the sexes? Because, Abdurrahman argues, the intent of the Qur'anic injunctions was clearly the preservation of moral standards, and where else could it be safer for girls and boys to mix than in the school class room? The rationality of traditional. not to say old fashioned, kiai is not insignificant: The flexible approach of this unique 'old-fashioned' kiai is most interesting. because it has a number of implications. What is clear is that it is not right for us to regard these 'old-fashioned' kiai as forming opinions without any rational basis, being only able to pass on the contents of classical fiqh literature without expanding upon it in any way. 'Old fashioned' kiai like Kiai Sobari have a logic and rationality that is all their own, even though it differs from that based upon modern thought. They also have an ability to apply principles drawn from religious conclusions to concrete cases in accordance with what they understand to be the needs of the day. If this sort of rationality does not lead to a rational outlook in things such as Kiai Sobari's view of Family Planning, is it not so likely that the children will adopt a rational approach, without having to sever their roots in the religious principles that they inherited from their fathers? Is it not enough that there are now many kiai who accept the concept of Family Planning even though their father; certainly did not?34 'That Well Known Figure, Kiai Syukri' Another 'eccentric kiai' from Abdurrahman's Tempo essays of relevance to the theme of dinamisasi is Kiai Syukri Gazali, portrayed in an essay simply titled 'Tokoh Kyai Syukri' (That well Known Figure, Kiai Syukri).35 Kiai Syukri's particular gift, general broadness of mind aside, is, Abdurrahman argues, a highly developed ability at resolving conflict amongst the plurality of Islamic views: Finding the optimal meeting -point between two opposing views through pointing to differences of opinion between the ulama of old is one of Kiai Syukri's specialities.36 When asked his opinion on whether special readings of the chapter of the Qur'an entitled Al Fatihah brought any benefit to the soul of the deceased loved one for whom it is read (a point of heated debate between members of NU and Muhammadiyah), Abdurrahman reports, Kiai Syukri gave an answer of Solomonic wisdom : 'According to Imam Syafi'i the gift of reading the Fatihah for the dead does not achieve its destination. According to leaders of the other three mazhab it does. We are simply following the majority opinion.' Everyone was relieved. Those from Muhammadiyah felt secure in the knowledge that their opinion was in accordance with that of the founder of the most influential mazhab in Indonesia. Those from NU felt relieved because they could continue to send their 'anniversary (of death) gifts' in accordance with the teaching handed down to them from the kiai of old.37 A clever answer indeed, but there is more, Abdurrahman contends, to Kiai Syukri's thought than mere cleverness alone: The key to his attitude is the intensely strong desire to search out the best for people, but in accordance with humanitarian considerations. In the language of fiqh, this tendency is encapsulated as follows: 'Striving for good outcomes is important, but preventing destruction is even more important'. How many of us can search out this sort of wisdom when faced with the normative values of our own religions?38 'Firm but Flexible' Very much of the same ilk as Kiai Ali Krapyak is Kiai Wahab Sulung of Rembang. Writing in Tempo in 1980, in an article entitled 'Ketat Tetapi Longgar' but Flexible), Abdurrahman portrays a man who, like Kiai Ali, at one level appears rather 'hard' and old fashioned but at a more fundamental level is directed by a passionate humanitarianism.39 In both men the typical sternness expected of a kiai is leavened with a maverick, almost maniacal, streak. In the case of Kiai Wahab this streak manifests itself in behaviour that is distinctly non-santri in nature. Indeed one might even be tempted to describe his behaviour as being somewhat irreligious, or at least seriously at odds with religious conservatism, until it is remembered that in the sufi tradition (a tradition of considerable influence in Javanese Islam) such eccentric behaviour is often taken to be indicative of the very highest levels of spirituality. The prevalence of such beliefs must have been an important factor in vouchsafing Kiai Wahab's reputation as a religious leader, and indeed Abdurrahman alludes to Kiai Wahab's well- known ability to heal the sick through prayer and alleged invulnerability to attack by weapons, in this context. Abdurrahman discards such alleged mystical powers as being the reason for Kiai Wahab's enduring good reputation in the face of his odd behaviour, and argues instead that it is his ability to 'toe the line' of religious consensus on important issues, whilst at the same time maintaining his own often unconventional line of thought, that keeps him within the bounds of respect. This tactic, Abdurrahman continues, is seen most clearly when Kiai Wahab is participating in a forum of ulama deciding on matters of jurisprudence--here his orthodoxy is beyond question. Similarly, on matters of non-negotiable religious dogma Kiai Wahab's acceptance of the line of consensus keeps him well clear of trouble. But this nominal orthodoxy is not the end of the story, rather it is merely the starting point: But the style described above does not limit Kiai Wahab Sulang to a totally legalistic or formalistic approach, without being able to develop a style that seeks to adapt to the needs of the day. And the really wonderful thing about this unique kiai lies in this very ability to find a religious foundation for adopting a flexible attitude to human need.40 Such sophistication in thought is hardly new or startling in a cosmopolitan urban context, Abdurrahman argues, but in an area where secular education is still treated with a degree of suspicion, and Family Planning initiatives are still being opposed on religious grounds, such thinking is remarkable indeed: And it is precisely here that we find a principle of key importance in Kiai Wahab's approach, that is the ability to reformulate religious law through considering the human needs of society, and with this in mind, re-examine the totality of legal-formalistic conceptualisation. Isn't this the basic point of departure for the humanistic life view so praised by people today? But Kiai Wahab has something that all these humanistic and cosmopolitan people don't have, that is, the fact that the origin of his humanism is firmly based on his strong religious belief and the truth of God's word: whilst for us, humanism and religious belief are the very things that we so often seek to set up as being in opposition to each other.41 ************* 11 Ibid., p. 176. 12 Ibid., p. 178. 13 'Menjadikan Hukum Islam sebagai Penunjang Pembangunan', in Prisma, No.4, August 1975, pp. 53-62. This article was also translated into English and published as: 'Making Islamic Law Conducive to Development', Prisma, (Jakarta, 1975), pp. 87-94. 14 Ibid., pp. 55-6. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid., pp. 57-8. 17 Ibid., pp. 59-60. 18 Ibid., p. 62. 19 The entry under dinamis (dinamisasi is not listed) in one of the main reference dictionaries simply reads: 'full of spirit and energy, being quick to respond and able to adjust itself to new situations and so forth' ('penuh semangat dan tenaga sehingga cepat bergerak dan mudah menyesuaikan diri dengan keadaan dan sebagainya'], (Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia, Balai Pustaka, 3rd edition, (Jakarta, 1990), p. 206). Whilst dinamis translates readily as dynamic, it is rather more difficult to find an English equivalent for dinamisasi-dynamisation to coin a word, probably best conveys the meaning. 20 'Dinamisasi Dan Modernisasi Pesantren', in Wahid, Muslim di Tengah Pergumulan, pp. 49-61. This paper was first presented at the Latihan Kepaniteraan Dewan Pertimbangan Agung Republik Indonesia, in Jakarta on the 25 May 1981. 21 Ibid. p. 52 22 Ibid., pp. 54-5. 23 Ibid., p. 61. 24 Ibid. 25 Tempo, April 1980, p. 37. 26 'Balk Belum Tentu Bermanfaat', Tempo, 1 November 1980, p. 61. 27 Ibid. 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid. 31 'Kyai Razaq yang Terbakar', Tempo, 20 September 1980, p. 27. 32 Ibid.,p. 27. 33 'Kyai Ikhlas dan Ko-edukasi', Tempo, 19 July 1980,p. 33. 34 Ibid.,p. 33. 35 'Tokoh Kyai Syukri', Tempo, 1 November 1980, p. 64. 36 Ibid. 37 Ibid. 38 Ibid. 39 'Ketat Tetapi Longgar', Tempo, 27 September 1980, p. 33. 40 Ibid., p. 33. 41 Ibid.