ATTITUDES TOWARD OTHER RELIGIONS

One common feature among Islamic preachers was the belief in the truth of Islam. Most, if not all were ‘theologically exclusive’, to use a contemporary term. They tended to see Islam as the only true religion without allowing some possibility about the truth in other religions.^[1541] However, preachers in South Sulawesi and Kelantan expressed their exclusivity differently.

verbally, but does not believe it in his heart (kafir nifaq); and lastly, the one who knows God in his heart, and says it verbally, but does not obey Him in practice, such as Abu Thalib (called kafir ‘inad).^[1543] When asked if it is allowed to read the books authored by non-Muslims, such as an Arabic dictionary al-Munjid by Louis Maloef, the NU fatwa states: ‘It is not allowed to read works by non-Muslims except for a Muslim who has adequate knowledge and can distinguish the truth from the untruth.’^[1544] Another fatwa proclaimed that ‘a Muslim who converts to Christianity and does not return to Islam before death is not allowed to be buried in the Islamic way and in a Muslim cemetery’.^[1545] In another judgment, the NU decided that when a non-Muslim (kafir) says ‘there is no god but Allah’ right before death, but does not say that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, then he/she remains a non-Muslim.^[1546] Also, there is a fatwa which states that a Muslim parent should not agree to allowing his/her child to become non-Muslim.

To the question whether Indonesia remained an Islamic country, the NU issued its fatwa in 1935, stating that ‘Indonesia remains an Islamic country (negeri Islam) because it was governed by Muslim rulers although it has now been taken over by the infidel (kafir) colonizer; Indonesia remains an Islamic state and it will be so forever’.^[1549] One year after the proclamation of Indonesian independence in 1945, there was a question whether to fight against the colonizer was an obligation for every Muslim or only for some of them. The NU fatwa in 1946 stated that to fight against the colonizers and their collaborators is an obligation for everyone, male and female, old and young, within an area of 58 miles (94 km), and becomes an obligation beyond the area in order to assist those unable to undertake the fight alone.^[1550]

The Muhammadiyah did not issue fatwa specifically regarding the attitude toward other religions. However, they had speeches and decisions in the conferences related to the issue. According to one speaker, the Muhammadiyah asked the Dutch colonial government to assure the security, peace and freedom to Muslim preaching and educational activities. The Muhammadiyah invited non-Muslim communities to return to the basic doctrine of belief in one God (tauhid) and to respect all prophets, and to help the Muhammadiyah to undertake these tasks since they were intended for all religions.^{[1551] [1552] In Netherlands Indies, they interpreted the concept of kafir by associating it with the Dutch colonial power.[1553] A Bugis Muhammadiyah preacher named Haji Abdullah expressed his hatred openly against the Dutch government and called them kafir: ‘Think, my friends, Islam will not develop (in this country) if the Dutch kafir remains in control.’[1554] For some preachers in South Sulawesi, the Dutch were regarded as kafir harby (infidels warring against Muslims), unlike the Japanese rules who were also kafir, but not engaged in a war against Muslims.[1555] This is not the only attitude toward the Dutch among Muslims however.}

In Kelantan, there was little attention paid in the sermons and edicts to Buddhism, let alone Christianity. The fatwas and sermons in the colonial era contained nothing on other religions. The possible reasons are that in Kelantan, the Malay Muslims were a large majority and did not see the Siamese or the Chinese as threats. Buddhist temples (wat) were erected without objection from the surrounding Malay community. The Buddhist monks had great freedom to preach in their temples and performed their rituals without opposition. Despite the assertion of ethnic and religious difference, there were no reports of open conflicts in Kelantan between Buddhists and Muslims during the colonial period.^[1556] As for Christianity, the Kelantanese ulama hardly discussed it during this time, except when it related to the British. Although the preachers must have had strong views about Christianity as kafir, they did not express this view in their sermons and edicts, at least insofar as our sources allow us to infer. One possible explanation is that when an ethnic and religious group became an overwhelming majority, divisions arise within the majority group, rather than between a majority and a relatively insignificant minority. These decisions whether to engage certain issues in sermons and edicts were significant since these vehicles for transmission of Islamic know­ledge were contested sites of power. To determine what the attitudes were toward other religions, therefore, required an examination of both texts and contexts. In short, Muslims in Kelantan and South Sulawesi had some shared but more different concerns.

VI.