Pancasila, a Religion-Friendly Ideology

Azyumardi Azra: Pancasila, a Religion-Friendly Ideology

Indonesia, as the world's third-largest democracy after the United States and India, possesses its own unique characteristics. The majority of Indonesia's population is Muslim. Therefore, the discourse surrounding democracy and Muslims will remain strategically important in the future. However, in reality, Muslims in Indonesia are not monolithic.

Various responses and criticisms have emerged concerning the concepts of Islam and democracy, particularly regarding the patterns of relationships both internally and externally within the Muslim community concerning citizenship rights. In fact, since 1998, a phenomenon of Islamic symbolism briefly emerged with the appearance of Sharia-based regional regulations (perda syariah), which clearly contradicted the nation's diversity. Below are excerpts from a recent interview with Prof. Dr. Azyumardi Azra, CBE.

Why, when we talk about the concept of the nation-state in Indonesia, which is a Muslim-majority country, does it still frequently encounter serious obstacles? The discussion about the nation-state and nation still divides the ummah (Muslim community). This is because a handful of Muslims still cling to utopian classical concepts of the state. There are at least three models of the relationship between Islam and the state (al-din wa al-siyasah):

1. Separation between religion and politics, resulting in a 'secular' state—not based on religion. Between dien (religion) and siyasah (politics), they are separate. The separation between religion and politics is often accompanied by ideologies unfriendly to religion, as seen in many Arab countries. In Indonesia, when talking about a 'secular' state, people usually react allergically. However, a secular state is not monolithic. Indonesia itself, by definition, is a 'secular' state because it is not based on religion. But even though 'secular', Pancasila as the foundation of the state, particularly its first principle, makes this ideology religion-friendly (religiously friendly basis of the state).

   Now, this is what actually makes Indonesia different from Muslim-majority countries in the Middle East. Since post-WWII, there has always been insurgency in the Middle East, but not here. This is partly because most of their ideologies are unfriendly to religion (religious unfriendly basis/ideology of the state), which is why there are many resistance or even separatist movements that want to replace regimes and state ideologies because their ideologies are not Islamic or are unfriendly to Islam. There are also theocracies based on Islam, but their constitutions are not derived from the Quran.

Does this mean the concept of the nation-state is incompatible with Islam? Indeed, some circles consider the nation-state incompatible with Islam, arguing that Islam's nature is universal. However, I agree more that universality is limited to the pillars of Islam. The existence of various schools of thought (mazhab) demonstrates particularity within Islam and among Muslims. Islamic orthodoxy is also diverse; it is no longer dominated by Mecca.

Indonesian Islamic orthodoxy consists of three components: Ash'ari theology, Shafi'i fiqh (jurisprudence), and Al-Ghazali and Al-Baghdadi's Sufism. Therefore, it is very legitimate to call it Indonesian Islam. I believe Islam here is indeed influenced by Indonesian Islamic orthodoxy, which is more inclusive, and by a more tolerant culture. Compare this, for example, with the Islamic orthodoxy of Saudi Arabia, which consists of theology that is basically Khawarij and Hanbali fiqh, which is the most rigid among the four Sunni schools of fiqh.

What about the idea of the caliphate, which has recently resurfaced? Indeed, some argue that the current decline of Islam is linked to the absence of a caliphate, which is a single political entity for all Muslims worldwide. A Syrian thinker, Abdurrahman Al-Kawakibi, agreed that there should be some form of single authority because Muslims tend to have differing views. However, in Indonesia, ideas like the caliphate have never entered as a mainstream concept and discourse, for example, within Muhammadiyah, NU, or other mass organizations.

What is called the caliphate is basically a kingdom. In 1924, when Haji Agus Salim was in Indonesia, Muhammadiyah scholars and pesantren kiaï (religious leaders) who later joined NU in 1926, convincingly stated that the concept and institution of the caliphate were actually irrelevant to Indonesia because they were identical to despotic kingdoms, as seen in the Ottoman Dynasty dissolved by the Young Turks in 1924.

I refute the argument that Indonesia will move towards a radicalism-dominated country like Pakistan. In my opinion, Indonesian Wasatiyyah Islam, which is moderate, is still too strong to be defeated; in English, I would say: "Indonesian Wasatiyyah Islam is too big to fail."

What is the key to Indonesia's success in implementing the nation-state concept? The nation-state among Muslims is not uniform, but most pair it with democracy. Democracy here refers more to regular elections than to partisanship, for example, general elections. Post-Soeharto, I believe Indonesian democracy is relatively consolidated, although there are still small 'monarchies' and oligarchies in some regions.

I believe Indonesia can still succeed in its current state, firstly because it is rich in Islamic-based civil society that plays a mediating role between the government and society. Furthermore, they also serve as a medium for social cohesion through their various activities, especially charitable endeavors, including hospitals, schools, madrasahs, pesantren, and others.

Lastly, they prepare alternative leadership when the country experiences social, political, and economic turbulence, as Indonesia did from 1997 to 1999. Such phenomena are rare abroad. In Egypt, there is primarily the Muslim Brotherhood, while other forces are military, leading to 'head-on collisions' between the two sides, with no mediating power.

In Indonesia, Islamic-based parties also tend to be less popular because society does not perceive Islam as a political identity. This differs from Malaysia, where Islam is the sole political identity for the Malay ethnic group. Therefore, in Indonesia, we must abandon the very narrow understanding of the ummah, that the political representation of the ummah is solely Islamic political parties. The Muslim ummah is not only represented by Islamic parties—political parties not based on Islam, where the majority of elites and members are Muslims, often also fight for Islamic and ummah agendas. (Arf)

The interview with the late Prof. Dr. Azyumardi Azra CBE was published on Ibtimes.id (https://ibtimes.id/pancasila-ideologi-ramah-agama/) on November 26, 2019, and re-published as material for reflection on Pancasila's Birthday, June 1, 2025. The late Professor Azyumardi Azra was the Rector of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta from 1998–2006.