Interfaith Dialogue at The Grassroots Level :: A Case Study of Interfaith Empowerment Programs in East Java

MUWAHIDAH, Siti Sarah, Dr. Zainal Abidin Bagir

2007 | Tesis | S2 Ilmu Perbandingan Agama

Dialog antariman umumnya digunakan dalam membangun perdamaian dan pengertian antar kelompok-kelompok agama. Swidler (2000) mengatakan bahwa program antariman tidak bisa hanya dilaksanakan oleh kaum akademisi dan elite agama. Ide dan problem dari komunitas akar rumput haruslah disuarakan dan didengar. Program-program semacam ini harus dilakukan di ketiga tingkatan: akademisi, pemimpin agama, dan masyarakat akar rumput, atau program tersebut akan gagal. Dalam tesis ini, saya melaporkan hasil riset lapangan saya di sebuah dusun kecil di Jawa Timur, Banyu Urip, dimana masalah kepemilikan tanah menjadi common ground (dasar) terlaksananya kerjasama antariman. Saya meneliti upaya pemberdayaan antariman yang dimulai oleh sekelompok aktivis Katolik pada tahun 1997. Program ini berhasil mendukung warga dusun mengklaim hak atas tanah mereka. Menurut Paul Knitter (1995), kerjasama antariman di level akar rumput niscaya akan memunculkan dialog antariman. Pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang diajukan dalam tesis ini adalah: apakah dialog yang mengikuti kerjasama antariman di Banyu Urip bisa dinyatakan sebagai dialog antariman? Dan apa signifikansi program antariman di Banyu Urip? Pelaksanaan program antariman di Banyu Urip menjadi lebih sulit karena alasan-alasan berikut. Pertama, warga Banyu Urip telah menderita secara ekonomi dan politik di bawah kepemimpinan berbagai rezim, dari zaman kolonial Belanda, PKI, dan pemerintah lokal. Warga Banyu Urip juga tidak memiliki kontrol dan penguasaan atas tanah tempat tinggal mereka. Oleh karena itu, mereka seolah tersisih di negaranya sendiri. Lebih jauh lagi, pilihan agama mereka banyak dipengaruhi tekanan dari pihak luar: tradisi Kejawen yang dulu dipraktekkan oleh sebagian besar warga telah dibatasi, dan mereka diharuskan untuk memilih salah satu dari lima agama yang diakui pemerintah. Kombinasi tekanan dari luar inibaik dari segi agama dan politik-membuat penduduk Banyu Urip tertindas dua kali. Hal ini menyebabkan munculnya ”sinisme” terhadap agama formal dan pemerintah. Meskipun begitu, umumnya warga Banyu Urip merasa bahwa umat Kristen dan Muslim menyembah Tuhan yang sama. Pendekatan pragmatis ini mungkin terbangun karena kecurigaan yang lama terhadap agenda pihak luar; warga menjadi lebih nyaman bergaul dengan orang sedusun, dibanding dengan orang dari daerah lain seperti para misionaris, aktivis LSM, dan kelompok lain yang mencoba masuk dalam kehidupan mereka. Namun ini juga berarti mereka tidak memikirkan problem keimanan mereka dengan serius. Temuan umum saya adalah bahwa dalam masyarakat yang miskin pengetahuan akan agama yang mereka anut, dialog tentang agama yang muncul menjadi berbeda dengan apa yang telah dideskripsikan Knitter. Sebuah dialog liberatif menjadi penting untuk mengatasi kesinisan dan kecurigaan warga, dan untuk membentuk suatu forum dimana warga dapat memperjuangkan kontrol atas dusun dan kehidupan mereka, dan untuk memperkuat hubungan antaragama diantara mereka. Keberhasilan di bidang ekonomi dan politik akan mendorong keberhasilan hubungan antariman, dan sebaliknya.

Interfaith dialogue is commonly used in building peace and understanding among religious groups. Swidler (2000) claims the interreligious project cannot be carried out only by scholars and leaders of the world religions; the ideas and concerns of the grassroots communities must also be voiced and heard. Such a project must work on all three levels-scholars, leaders, and grassroots-or it will not work at all. I present findings of my fieldwork in a small village in East Java, Indonesia where land authority problems became a common ground for conducting interfaith cooperation. I observed interfaith empowerment efforts led by a group of Catholic activists and students who arrived in 1997, which successfully supported the villagers in claiming their land. According to Paul Knitter (1995), grassroots interfaith cooperation will necessarily be followed by interfaith dialogue. In this thesis, my first question concerns whether the subsequent dialogue that follows interfaith cooperation in Banyu Urip can be claimed as interfaith dialogue; my second question concerns the significance of the interfaith program in Banyu Urip. The feasibility of starting and maintaining interfaith programs in Banyu Urip was made more difficult for the following reasons. In the first place, the villagers had suffered economically and politically under a variety of regimes, from the Dutch colonials to interference from the PKI, and eventually local governments. They had no control or authority over the very land they had lived on, and derived their living from. Thus, they were like displaced persons in their own country. Further, religion was imposed on them from outside: their native Javanese practices were proscribed by the Indonesian government and they were forced to convert to one of the five acceptable religions. This combination of forces – both political and religious, and both imposed from outside – meant that the villagers were doubly oppressed. This has led to cynicism concerning religion and government. However, the villagers generally feel that both Christians and Muslims worship the same God, a pragmatic approach that probably was developed due to the villagers’ long suspicion of the intentions and agendas of the outsiders; i.e., the villagers had more in common with each other than they did with the missionaries, NGOs, and other groups that tried to interfere in their lives. But it also meant that they would not take the strictures of their faiths very seriously. My general finding is that in communities that have a lack of knowledge of their own particular religions subsequent dialogue may take other forms which are different from that of Knitter's description. A kind of liberative dialogue became necessary to overcome this cynicism and suspicion and to create a forum where the villagers could exert some control over their village and their lives, as well as strengthen the interreligious relationship among them. Success in the economic and political sector encouraged success in the interfaith sector, and vice versa.

Kata Kunci : Dialog antar Iman,Akar Rumput,Identitas agama, interfaith dialogue, grassroots empowerment, religious identity