TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - SUKIDI did not find real Islam in Indonesia. He found it in the United States instead, a country with a non-Muslim majority and the place of the three campuses where he researched Islam for almost two decades. It is also the place where the 47-year-old Muhammadiyah intellectual conceived a new approach to interpreting the Qur’an.
At Harvard, he wrote the dissertation titled The Gradual Qur’an: Views of Early Muslim Commentators that peeled away the layers of diverse views by early commentators of the holy book. It later became his foothold in his criticism against the views of today’s Islamic reformists including Muhammadiyah that was calling for a “return to the Qur’an and sunnah (the practices of Prophet Muhammad).” Sukidi also questions what he believes are fallacies such as the meaning of Idul Fitri as well and also the regulations for building houses of worship.

Sukidi once identified himself as Cak Nurian, a moniker for the followers of Nurcholish Madjid or Cak Nur, one of the three Islamic reformists nicknamed the Three Warriors of Chicago. However, following his studies in the US, he felt his views had shifted. “I found my own path particularly after I started at the Harvard Divinity School. I am totally different from Cak Nur,” he said during an interview with Tempo on Tuesday, April 11.

Your dissertation is about different interpretations of the Qur’an in the early days of Islam. What is so interesting about this topic?

A more urgent reason is about how we understand the past that was so far from the period of the revelation. How do we know for certain of a given event in the past? Islamic reformist groups in Indonesia would immediately jump back to the Qur’an and Sunnah. That’s what I criticized.

Where did you find the literature sources?

Everything is available at Harvard. We should know that the best Islamic campus is actually located in the United States, whether it’s at Harvard, Princeton or Chicago. The entire 6th floor of Harvard’s Widener Library is dedicated to Islamic studies. It’s all about preserving manuscripts, books, of such a long civilization. We cannot find this in the Islamic world.

What’s wrong with going back to the Qur’an and Sunnah?

Here is the drawback: where actually is the locus of the meanings? Are they embedded in the texts? And did these reformists find the meanings by going back to the Qur’an? That’s what the reformists and the majority of Muslims believe. But I disagree.

What is your basis?

Because the locus is not in the texts. It existed in the minds of the interpreters who produced their own interpretations.

Based on what?

Their experience in interacting with the Qur’an, their geographic locations when they interpreted the verses and also their own subjectivity. This is a new phase after I returned from Harvard. I had not said in the dissertation that the verses had no meanings. Only after returning from Harvard, I affirmed that in my lecturers. The meanings came from the minds of the commentators.

Why do the reformists refer directly to the Qur’an and Sunnah?

First, this is partly due to the influence of the Protestants’ spiritual renewal. Their spirit to go back to the scripture, the holy Bible, led them to sever their long chain of tradition. That’s why Muhammadiyah was described as an Islamic reformist similar to Protestants because of their eagerness to return to the Qur’an. Returning to Qur’an has problems because of the referential nature of Islam which often refers to a certain incident but never mentions what incident it is, or refers to identities but we don’t know who they are.

Is this kind of interpretation tradition still preserved in Islamic organizations like Muhammadiyah or Nahdlatul Ulama (NU)?

That precisely is the weak point of Muhammadiyah. In going back to the Qur’an and Sunnah, valuable Islamic traditions were pushed aside.

Doesn’t Muhammadiyah have a tarjih (determining the correct or preferred opinion) assembly?

It is partly for deriving laws from the Qur’an and sunnah. But that is different from how I understand it. I can assure that not a single Islamic tradition in Indonesia or the Islamic world dares to say that “the Quranic texts have no meanings. I explained in detail the revelation, the Qur’an and its widely diverse interpretations (in the column of Surara Muhammadiyah).

What makes it any different if they directly refer to the Qur’an instead of going through interpreters?

If people don’t have adequate knowledge of the Arabic language or understand its historical contexts, they could fall into a trap of textual reading because the Quranic texts are quite ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations.

For example?

Surah An-Najm. Wannajmi ida hawa. If you directly refer to the Qur’an or read the translation, you will get “By the star when it goes down.” But it is just one of the scores of interpretations. Abdullah bin Abbas, a companion of the Prophet, for example, said it meant, “By the Qur’an when it descends gradually.” Muqatil Sulaiman interpreted it, “By the Qur’an that descends gradually.”

So, what is your primary criticism against the Islamic reformist groups?

I actually want to offer a new direction for Islamic reforms through the rectification of Cak Nur’s reform ideas. His reform ideas follow scripturalism.

What kind of direction?

I want to advocate the return to the plural, multivocal and contradictory interpretation tradition. The meanings of the Quranic texts are not found in the Qur’an or sunnah because they are the products of the minds of early commentators. The Islamic renewal ideas proclaimed by Cak Nur or Muhammadiyah ignore the creative process of interpretation that had developed within the Qur’an interpreter community itself. I’m rather humbled to see that this interpreter community enjoyed the authority. That community from the beginning preserved the texts, presented books and produced such multiple meanings so readers can acquire information and diverse understandings. I have two directions for the renewal. First, in the context of understanding Islam and the Qur’an. Second, in the context of the state.

<!--more-->

Please explain.

To revive common sense to comprehend the texts. Those who lean towards scripturalism tend to disregard common sense. For me, guidelines are in your reasoning power, a mechanism to understand the texts and to live in this world at the same time. Consequently, Muslims can live based on rational calculation.

I am inspired by the Calvinism tradition that emphasizes so-called the double predestination doctrine. Calvinists don’t know whether they will be among those who would be saved to go to heaven or among those who would be damned to go to hell. They experience theological uncertainty when they have to work hard to be successful in this world because, Benjamin Franklin (a Calvinist), said success in this world is a sign of God’s blessing. I want Islam to be understood as a doctrine that encourages its followers to be successful in this world. So, success in this world purely arises from the understanding that rational calculation is a necessity to live this life.

Another difference (from Cak Nur) is that I don’t advocate secularism as he did. Secularism at that era was intertwined with the spirit of the West, and colonialism.

But people in general want definite meanings.

That’s the modernity bias that wants uniformity. The Islamic tradition in the early period was precisely a tradition of polyvalence and pluralistic and contradictory interpretation. Here’s another example. How for instance Cak Nur interpreted Idul Fitri? Idul Fitri according to Cak Nur is returning to a pure state. This is a widely accepted notion. Not one criticized it openly. It is the view that makes all the corruptors in this country very happy. They return back to a pure state each Idul Fitri (the end of the fasting month—Ed.). This is a misguided view in my opinion.

What is an alternative interpretation?

Idul Fitri is the day of feast. A festival of ending the fast. Idul Fitri means holiday and fitrah means eating. That’s why we are forbidden to fast on the first of the Shawal month. Like Idul Adha is the day of sacrifice, it’s not returning to sacrifice.

Then what is the spiritual meaning of Idul Fitri?

In order that you may become pious. The problem is oftentimes, Muslims only understand the symbolic meaning of piety and piousness whereas piety in Islam demands sincerity.

You focus on echoing the renewal ideas in Muhammadiyah. You don’t want their views to influence others, for example, NU?

I don’t specifically direct (my criticism) at them. There are quite a lot of responses from NU. They suspect I’m closer to NU because of (my advocacy) to return to the traditions. But actually, we are different.

Does the Qur’an have the answers to all the problems?

I criticize Cak Nur particularly for this because he, with his scripturalism, said that the Qur’an provided all the answers. Even though it doesn’t offer answers, they still draw (answers) from the Qur’an. As regards Idul Fitri, for instance. The Qur’an doesn’t talk about it. So, I want to say that the Qur’an doesn’t provide all the answers. It is in fact limited to the historical context of the time.

Why return to the traditions? Because with that, I can use my common sense to deal with the problems that we have now. How did humans distinguish right and wrong before the revelation came? In the mu’tazilah tradition, and I agree with this tradition, by using common sense. That’s why common sense is a noble instrument on par with the Qur’an to define every problem humans face today.

So, religious experts are all wrong?

In the historical context, many parts of the Qur’an were sent down in response to the statements, objections, and complaints addressed to Prophet Muhammad. That’s why it came down in stages, little by little.

Read the Full Interview in Tempo English Magazine