Foreword
Abdurrahman Wahid

  This is the first non-Indonesian book to discuss Nahdlatul
Ulama (NU) in detail. It gives an interesting picture of the
organisation as it has developed both politically and morally.
  One of the aims of the book is to explain the characteristics
of NU as a traditionalist Islamic movement. Traditionalists are
widely supposed to be rather backward in orientation and ossified
in their understanding of Islamic society and thought. It is held
that their persistence in upholding orthodox Islamic law (i.e., the
Sunni mazhab or legal schools) leads them to reject modernity
and a rational approach to life. Similarly, in matters of theology,
their determined adherence to the scholasticism of al-Asy'ari
and al-Maturidi is said to have resulted in a fatalistic
understanding of submission to God's will and a disregard for the
exercise of free-will and independent thinking. Traditionalists
are furthermore accused of being too other-worldly in their
practice of ritual Islamic mysticism (tasawuJ). Their activities
within the suJi orders (tarekat) give the appearance of forsaking
the present world in the hope of gaining eternal happiness in
heaven. Thus, the commonly held view of traditionalists is that
they are a wholly passive community unable to cope with the
dynamic challenges of modernisation, the sort of community
that scholars regard as belonging to a dying tradition.
  The articles in this book in fact give another picture: that of
a community with sufficient vitality to be able to absorb and deal
with social change in a rational fashion. This includes the ability
to be able to make adjustments in areas of profound importance.
For example, the relatively easy acceptance of the right of
women to obtain an education equal to that of their male
counterparts testifies to an ability to rethink the archaic
concepts previously embedded in traditional culture. One might
also cite the readiness to apply the principles of Islamic law to
issues such a family planning, birth control and modern banking
practices as demonstrating a capacity to adjust religious
imperatives to the realities of life. These are evidence of a
community able to confront the modern world in a dynamic way
without losing its moral anchors.
  In contrast to the rigidity of thought evident in certain
puritanical movements in the Islamic world--movements often
referred to as 'modernist'--NU's religious teachings allow
flexibility. These teachings, which the traditionalists refer to as
'aqidah ahlus sunnah wal-jama'ah', demonstrate the depth of
NU's ability to sustain its own tradition in the face of the
turbulent changes which have shaken the Muslim world over the
past one and half centuries. This does not mean that
modification to the established teachings of Islam takes place in
an easy manner. On the contrary, dramatic and bitter debate has
frequently occurred. One instance was at the 1984 National
Congress when the issue of whether NU should have Pancasila or
Islam as its sole foundation (asas tunggal) was considered. It was
only after clarifying that Pancasila should neither be treated as a
religion in the life of the nation nor be made to contradict
religion that the congress was able to adopt the state ideology as
its sole basis. The doctrine of ahlus sunnah wal-jama'ah was
retained as NU's creed. This placed both in a unique and
complementary relationship.
  The sufi or mystical orientation of NU members provides a
moral discipline and degree of social cohesiveness which enables
them to endure change, even when it encompasses the structure
of the state. Thus, the recent far-reaching changes to the
educational system, which could potentially give rise to
traumatic experiences, have seemingly caused minimal disruption
for NU as a community. The age-old and somewhat archaic
educational institution of the pesantren, a kind of Muslim
boarding school and community learning centre which can be
found in many Indonesian villages, has proven capable of co-
existing in a 'give and take' manner with modern Westernised
schools.
  NU's role in contemporary Indonesia has been to bring about
changes in the attitudes and world-views of a very large number
of Muslims, especially in adapting to the challenges of
modemisation. This role is sometimes misunderstood by
observers, leading them to see NU as an intermediary between a
modernising state and traditional society. Clifford Geertz, for
example, described NU kiai (religious scholars) as 'cultural
brokers'. But this usage, as well as denoting a process in which
the 'cultural brokers' select which aspects of modernisation to
accept and which to reject, also implies that the 'cultural
brokers' are themselves lacking in original opinions and
approaches. This view of the role ofpesantren kiai, which was
held to.constitute one of the most important elements of NU
leadership, was refuted by the research of Hiroko Horikoshi. She
showed in her study of the social function of kiai in West Java,
that the impetus for change comes from within the core of
religious thought following a prolonged interaction with the
process of modernisation itself. (Editorial note: see Hiroko
Horikoshi,'A Traditional Leader in a Time of Change: The
Kijaji and Ulama in West Java', PhD dissertation, University of
Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, 1976.)
  As an illustration of the kind of role played by NU in dealing
with social change we may examine its decision to organise,
through the Association of Pesantren (Rabitat Al-Ma'shid Al-
Islamiah), a series of forums to discuss the relationship between
established Islamic teaching and different aspects of modern life
such as science and technology, law reform, the role of
parliament and local legislatures, organ transplantation for
human beings, and the functions of modern economic
institutions like insurance companies and stock exchanges.
These discussions involving kiai from different levels of NU,
who are involved in a wide range of activities, have already
brought about many changes in the outlook ofthe community as
a whole. One example of this was the acceptance, at the 1989
NU National Congress in Yogyakarta, of the idea of establishing
a chain of small farmers' banks (called Bank Perkreditan Rakyat
- BPR). In adopting this concept, which involved plans for a
network of 2000 such banks by the year 2013, remarkably little
resistance was encountered from NU's conservative wing, despite
the fact that these were modern-style banks charging modest
rates of interest.
  This ability to develop positive responses to the challenges of
modernisation is dependent upon the resilience of NU's core
teachings in withstanding the full impact of Westernisation of
society. It has, however, been severely tested by developments
over the past five years, when NU has stood accused of infidelity
to the established understanding of the 'Islamic concept of life'.
This has occurred in the face of a push for the 'Islamisation of
society' on the part of those who wish to legislate the teachings
of Islam into national life. Included in this group are the
politically active sections of the Association of Indonesian
Muslim Intellectuals (ICMI). The callto 'Islamise' important
aspects of modern life, including technology and science and
even the economy (through the development of an 'Islamic
Economics'), clearly demonstrates a serious challenge to the
kind of'nativisation ofIslam' that NU has strived to achieve.
The Islamists, as the proponents of the 'Islamisation of society'
in tote are called, cannot accept the abandonment of the ideal of
achieving a fully 'Islamic society' in Indonesia. Consequently,
NU's concept of developing an 'Indonesian society where
Muslims are free to follow the teachings of their religion
voluntarily' has met with considerable opposition. This concept
calls for the development of Islamic teachings so that they serve
as the source of'social ethics' rather than as material for
legislation. This notion of'the Islamic way of life' (syari'ah)
operating as moral force in society rather than as a set of formal
rules, is at odds with the ideal of achieving an 'Islamic society'
which has become an article of faith for the Islamists. The
passionate discourse between the two approaches is a sign of the
mutual suspicion between NU and a large part of the Islamic
movement in Indonesia today. Of course, we can resolve the
contradiction between these two approaches in a more positive
fashion by saying that many Muslims in Indonesia welcome both
the Indonesianisation ofIslam and the Islamisation ofIndonesia.
  The importance of this book arises from the way in which it
sheds light on both the essential character of NU and on its
historical development. This is very useful in helping us to
understand the reasons why NU's particular point of view differs
from those of other Islamic movements. As such, this book is a
valuable guide to understanding the collective mind of NU
members and is essential reading for achieving an in-depth
knowledge ofIslam and its adherents in modern Indonesia.

Jakarta
February 1996