Initiated by Nurcholish Madjid, the chairman of the Muslim Student Association, Himpunan Mahasiswa Islam (HMI) the advent of the renewal movement in the 1970s gained momentum and drew much attention from Muslim activists who had become disinclined to continue the struggle of Islam through political party channels.^[48] They changed their structural approach into a more cultural one, from a symbolic and formalistic approach to a substantive one. By promoting political accommodation, the prevailing tension between Muslims and the regime was gradually reduced. It was this cultural method of cooperation that enabled Muslims to influence the existing political system from within.^[49] Bachtiar Effendy pointed out that this change led to what he called the emergence of a “new Islamic intellectualism” in Indonesia. According to Effendy, the movement contributed to better relations between Muslims and the regime by focussing on three activities - religious renewal, political reformism and social transformation.^[50]

Religious renewal was carried out in an effort to solve theological and philosophical problems of political Muslims in their relations with the state. The understanding of the old generation of Muslims towards the lack of separation between Islam and the state was the main concern for the renewal group. Effendy explains that the older theological stance, which tended to be more formalistic, legalistic and literal for the younger generation needed to be adjusted to respond to the social and political realities in Indonesia. They did not intend to change the doctrines of Islam, but rather to mount an effort to refresh Muslims’ understanding of their religion. They did not believe that Islam constitutes an ideology, since the Qur’an and Hadith do not command Muslims to establish a state based on Islamic ideology. Therefore, Muslims had to be committed to the universal values of Islam, not to institutions and organisations, including political parties.^[51]

In addition, in order to revise critical relations between the state and Islam, the renewal movement’s solution was through involvement within the system. This political reformism meant that Islam should not represent an oppositional force against the state; the most important effort for Muslims was to push the state to guarantee their freedom in observing Islamic teachings. These required its activists to play a role in the policy making process by joining the state’s bureaucrats and political parties.^[52]

This approach brought a significant change that led most former activists of Islamic organisations to accept the ideology of Pancasila and some even became part of the regime.^[53] The chairman and secretary-general of the Partai Muslimin Indonesia (Parmusi), Mintaredja and Sulastomo, served as the Minister of Social Affairs and was a bureaucrat in the Soeharto regime during the 1970s. After that other former Muslim activists have joined the regime. Among them were Sularso, Bintoro Tjokroaminoto, Barli Halim, Bustanul Arifin, Madjid Ibrahim, Norman Razak, Zainul Yasni, Omar Tusin, Sya’adilah Mursid, Mar’ie Muhammad, Hariry Hadi and many others.^[54] In fact, their involvement within the system has not only brought about reconciliation between the state and Islam but also contributed to the bringing together other elements of Muslim forces from various backgrounds to exert influence on the state.

Another aspect of the renewal movement was the social transformation movement. The transformation movement aimed to strengthen the capacity of society in terms of social, cultural, political and economic improvement. Since the New Order regime was so effective in controlling the socio-political dimensions of the people at the grassroots, the transformation movement had to build communication and cooperation with the regime’s apparatus in order to run their programs.^[55] In addition, this approach also created good relations between traditionalist and modernist groups. Dawam Rahardjo, Sudjoko Prasodjo, and Adi Sasono were among the pioneers of the social transformation movement. For instance, the Institute of Social and Economic Research, Education and Information, Lembaga Penelitian, Pendidikan dan Penerangan Ekonomi dan Sosial (LP3S) was established in 1971 to strengthen the role of society and has become an important avenue for traditionalist and modernist activists to cooperate each other.

Many figures from modernist-affiliated movements have supported the idea of renewal Islam, such as Usep Fathuddin dan Utomo Dananjaya from the Indonesian Muslim Students, Pelajar Islam Indonesia (PII), Dawam Rahardjo, Djohan Effendi and Ahmad Wahib from the “limited group” discussions in Yogyakarta. Although the traditionalist camp had been absent in the earliest days of the discourse, many from a traditionalist background subsequently contributed to shaping and expanding the new intellectual orientation after the arrival home of Abdurahman Wahid in 1971 from his study in Baghdad. Through discussions and intellectual exercises among the new generation of santri in the 1970s, those involved succeeded in bringing Muslim resources together and contributing to the Indonesian developmental program. This was the arena of the phenomenon of convergence, in which traditionalist and modernist views and groups reached mutual understanding and cooperation. These younger Muslim intellectuals held regular series of discussion in Jakarta.^[56] As former chairman of HMI, Nurcholish Madjid enjoyed good relations with influential figures from the modernist Masyumi, whilst Abdurahman Wahid had impeccable “blue blood” (darah biru) in the eyes of traditionalist NU stakeholders.^[57]

Criticism has been directed towards the renewal movement and other associated movements, because they have not engaged with wider public issues but tend to be elite and urban oriented. They have not been able to respond the needs of the grassroots, most of the Indonesian people. In order to be understood by ordinary Muslims, their discourse has needed to be “translated” by a second layer of spokesmen.^[58] For this reason, Islamic predication movements emerged to respond the needs of grassroots in understanding Islam.

The predication movement represents yet another type of convergent santri. Disillusioned by the failure of their efforts to resurrect the Islamic party of Masyumi, certain modernist Muslims, led by M. Natsir, embarked on programs of propagation and predication. In May 1967 Natsir established an Islamic missionary institution, called the Indonesian Islamic Missionary Board, Dewan Dakwah Islam Indonesia (DDII). By promoting Islamic preaching, activists of DDII hoped to persuade more Muslims to be aware of their religious and political obligations as citizens. Since they were unable to participate in formal political activity or to take part in influencing the state, dakwah activity became an alternative strategy to prepare cadres who would struggle for Islam in the future. It was believed that this kind of predication project would have a longer-term impact on the formation of the national leadership in Indonesia. As stated in the organisational goals of DDII, the institution itself originally aimed to serve as “laboratory and consultation for the effective propagation of Islam in modern society.”^[59] The inclination of the organization to become engaged in political issues has contributed to the weakening of its progress in general.^[60] Nevertheless, DDII became fertile ground to seed oppositional attitudes against the New Order regime.

To realise its long-term goals, DDII needed to improve the social and educational levels of Muslim communities. DDII then worked closely with the Medical College of the Islamic Hospital Foundation, Yayasan Rumah Sakit Islam (Yarsi), a modernist oriented institution in Jakarta, in providing medical services for the urban poor and in helping to support the development of libraries in mosques, universities and in dakwah institutions. In addition to these programs, DDII assisted in developing modernist-oriented pesantren associations in Java and other areas, combining both Islamic and secular subjects.^[61] A private agriculture Pesantren of Darul Falah in Bogor, Dana al-Falah in Bandung, Wisma Tani in Payakumbuh and Yayasan al-Falah in Surabaya are examples of DDII-supported projects that are still well known up to the present time.

Another of the important developments in DDII’s predication program was its success in expanding its role in the secular university campuses. DDII held many cadre-training programs in order to support this campus predication. One of these was held in Jakarta, organised by Z.E. Muttaqin and Imaduddin Abdurahim, both important figures in Masyumi. Since the training took place on the premises of the Indonesian Pilgrim Committee, Panitia Haji Indonesia (PHI) in Jl. Kwitang, it was called the PHI training. More than 40 delegates, mostly from prestigious universities in Bandung, such as the Institute of Technology of Bandung (ITB), the University of Pajajaran (Unpad) and the Institute of Education (IKIP) attended the training. The recruitment process was conducted through a network of modernist organizations, such as HMI, PII and Muhammadiyah. This PHI training first aimed to provide campuses with religious lecturers to be posted in the state universities and subsequently to become informal liaison officers of DDII on the campuses.^[62]

In response to a growing numbers of PHI alumni, a campus network named the Indonesia Campus Mosque Supervision, Bina Masjid Kampus Indonesia (BMKI) was established throughout the universities of Java. Regional coordinators were appointed in order to manage predication programs and communications among the members. There were, for instance, Amien Rais, Kuntowijoyo and M. Mahyuddin as the coordinators for Yogyakarta; Ahmad Sadali, Rudy Syarif Sumadilaga and Yusuf Amir Feisal for Bandung; M. Daud Ali and Nurhay Abdurahman for Jakarta, Halidzi and Abdurrahman Basalama for Ujung Pandang, Kafiz Anwar for Semarang, and AM Saefuddin and Abdul Kadir Jaelani for Bogor.^[63] These leading figures subsequently have been widely acknowledged by university students, from both traditionalist and modernist families alike, as their patrons and main reference.

Within other DDII liaisons, it was Imaduddin Abdurahim who succeeded in expanding campus predication in the 1970s. Besides his involvement in campus networks managed by DDII, Imaduddin initiated mental training sessions at the Institute of Technology in Bandung (ITB). These were called Latihan Mujahid Dakwah (LMD) and succeeding in drawing many students into the programs. Their alumni were widespread throughout universities in Java and the outer islands. Until the 1990s, Imaduddin was recognised as the “grand mentor” of Muslim student activists in the secular campuses. In terms of political stance, LMD was similar to DDII, in so far as both became opposition forces against the New Order regime. Imaduddin developed close contact with M. Natsir. He was not only from a modernist family background but he was active in modernist organizations, such as the Indonesian Islamic Students, Pelajar Islam Indonesia (PII) and the Islamic Student Association, Himpunan Mahasiswa Indonesia (HMI) in Bandung. He occupied a central position on the Board of Muslim Student Proselytising, Lembaga Dakwah Mahasiswa Islam (LDMI) of HMI.

LMD was known for its opposition to the development of Islamic renewal and was to some extent considered to be a counterbalance to the rising renewal movement led by Nurcholish Madjid. Imaduddin opposed the liberal ideas promoted by Madjid,^[64] so that a serious polemic between the two men ensued. The polemic was actually sharpened by Endang Syaiffuddin Anshari, Imaduddin’s assistant at LDMI. It was Anshari who attacked Nurcholish Madjid, not Imaduddin.^[65] This is why, when Imaduddin put forward Madjid’s name as candidate chairman of ICMI in the 1990s, many of his followers who had opposed Madjid since the beginning were surprised and disappointed.^[66]

The mental training at ITB contributed to improving the image of Islam among the students and lecturers. Islam was no longer regarded as a backward-looking religion but was able to attract increasing numbers of educated people and professionals, of both traditionalist and modernist leanings, with its challenge to solve the social problems of modern times.^[67] However, LMD not only raised the religious consciousness of Muslim students in observing the obligatory practices but it also gave rise to a major threat to the political regime. Fired with modernist political aspirations, Imaduddin’s predication program was aimed at preparing leaders who would “take over” non-Islamic national leadership in Indonesia. He believed that the regime could not be changed unless there were dedicated and qualified Muslims, “the new generation to replace all of this.”^[68] According to Sugiat Ahmadsumadi, surprisingly both an activist of Muhammadiyah and a member of the Central Consultative Board of the traditionalist party, PKB, LMD in fact produced militant cadres who were critical of the regime.

In fact, both the renewal and predication movements contributed to shaping the face of Indonesian Islam, in which young Muslims became more interested in making Islam “more relevant to life in the modern world.”^[70] They were no longer attracted to either the traditional, ritualistic dogma of the conservative ulama or the “messianic fervour of some modernists who want Indonesia to become a theocracy.”^[71]

The Darul Islam movement, founded and led by Kartosuwiryo, who established an Indonesian Islamic State, Negara Islam Indonesia (NII) on 7 August 1949, was finally crushed by the Indonesian army in the early 1960s. However, its informal network has never been totally destroyed. DI-associated underground movements have persisted until the present day.^[90] Instead of uniting themselves under a single leadership, they became separated and fragmented under different leaders. Each group has tried to annul other groups while claiming still to represent the “real” DI.^[91]

When the imam of Darul Islam was captured and many of his top deputies pledged allegiance to the government in exchange for amnesty, DI became leaderless.^[92] There was no single person who was considered qualified to take over the leadership. According to DI regulations on the issue of the central leadership, it was stated that any successor to the imam must be chosen from among the regional commanders and the members of the high command.^[93] Since all of these had taken an oath of loyalty to the national government in 1963, the only person who remained committed to the struggle was Abdul Fatah Wirananggapi, but he had been in prison since 1953.^[94] This uncertainty surrounding the central leadership has resulted in confusion among DI veterans in determining to whom loyalty must be given. Some local leaders of DI, who did not abandon the struggle for an Islamic state, started to exercise independent leadership. For instance, Ahmad Sobari who was DI district head of Priangan Timur, West Java, founded the Islamic State of Tejamaya.^[95]

Many splinter groups of Darul Islam are not linked directly to DI leaders, but they carry on the struggle for an Islamic state under the leadership of independent, low-ranking comrades. The policy of repression of the New Order towards the movement has led it into considerable disorientation. The important concern for the remaining activists is how to maintain the survival of the struggle for an Islamic state.^[96] They use this analogy: “since the loss of the big ship of DI, which carried out the struggle of the Islamic State, small lifeboats – called sekoci (an Indonesian term) must be immediately responsible for saving the struggle of the movement.”^[97] Some Islamic activists of the 1980s have called those DI-associated movements that have recruited members from the campuses the Kelompok Sekoci (Sekoci Group), and therefore successors to NII. Among those Sekoci groups known for their involvement in violent action during the 1970s and 1980s was the Komando Jihad.^[98] Other groups have developed up to the present time under various leaders, such as Abdullah Sungkar, who died in Bogor, West Java in 2000 and was subsequently replaced by Abu Bakar Ba’asyir. Sekoci groups nowadays are known by their clandestine activities. They continue to recruit new members and to obtain financial support to carry out their struggle. Newly inducted members are obliged to make monetary contributions. “Paradise is cheap, my brother. It only costs 20% of our income.”^[99] Those who cannot comply with this obligation will receive some form of penalty. Some members even go as far as stealing or robbing banks.^[100]

The two best-known and allegedly central figures of Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) are Abdullah Sungkar and Abu Bakar Ba’asyir, both of Hadhrami Arab descent. Even though many Indonesian Muslims still question the existence of JI, it has become clear that both Sungkar and Ba’asyir developed a Muslim group, called Jemaah Islam in the 1980s (not Jemaah Islamiyah).^[101] Both terms, “Jemaah Islam” and “Jemaah Islamiyah” have the same meaning; the difference is that the first is Indonesian whereas the second follows Arabic grammar (al-jama’ah al-islamiyyah in full). JI is an expanded version of the Darul Islam organization, formed in part when Ajengan Masduki was appointed to hold the caretaker leadership of DI when most of its leaders were arrested during the case of the Komando Jihad.^[102]

The main focus of the Masduki cabinet was to develop international linkages and to support and strengthen DI military capacity. Abdullah Sungkar was appointed to assist Masduki in raising funds from Saudi Arabia and the Rabitah, while another member of the top staff, Mia Ibrahim was asked to send DI recruits to Afghanistan. In 1988, Masduki, accompanied by Abdullah Sungkar, Abu Bakar Ba'asyir and two others, left Indonesia with a DI delegation for Pakistan and Afghanistan. This travel linked DI with Abdul Rasul Sayaf of the Philippines and Abdullah Azam, a senior Mujahidin commander in Afghanistan.^[103] It exposed DI leaders to the challenge of extending their goals towards a broader, international caliphate. The trip gave rise to friction between Masduki and Sungkar, when Masduki, who could not speak Arabic, asked Sungkar to act as spokesman on behalf of the group. Sungkar did all the talking and deliberately excluded Masduki. This competition was intended to demonstrate the dominance of Sungkar over all Afghan veterans.^[104] What is more, Masduki, who was of traditionalist NU inclination, became the target of criticism from the more “pure” Salafi-oriented contingent; Abdullah Sunkar and his networks often accused Masduki of practising what they called “un-islamic mysticism.”^[105]

In the event, the Afghan veterans joined in strengthening JI on their return to Indonesia and contributed to defining the targets of violence as not limited to the local enemy (the Soeharto regime) but to include attacks on what they perceived as the global enemies of Islam, such as the United States, the West and the Zionist conspiracy. Since then, radical Islamic groups in Indonesia have shown their international concerns in terms of their networks and alliances.

One of the most interesting phenomena of Indonesian Islam in the 1990s has been the rise of the religious movement called Jemaah Tarbiyah in the campuses of secular universities. This name is not a formal name of a movement but rather Muslim activists in campuses reportedly acknowledged this group as Jemaah Tarbiyah or ikhwan.^[117] One activist of Jemaah Tarbiyah stated:

It emerged in the mid 1980s, when certain cadres made first contact with and experienced religious training under the moderate wing of the Muslim Brothers of Egypt. Jemaah Tarbiyah proved itself able to channel enthusiastic Muslim students in the state universities by providing religious training and outreach programs. Since the 1990s, activists of Jemaah Tarbiyah have succeeded in gaining control of intra campus student organisations. They have organised Islamic programs and activities for students based in small prayer rooms in campuses and have founded a Forum for Islamic Studies in many faculties. In order to organise Islamic activities among the universities in Java and the Outer Islands, they also began to control the Forum for Coordinating Campus Predication, Forum Silaturahmi Lembaga Dakwah Kampus (FSLDK). Subsequently, through student general elections, they have been able to take over the central leadership of student senate organisations at the faculty and university level. In 1998, after the fall of the Soeharto regime, Jemaah Tarbiyah activists who were active in FSLD founded an extra-campus organisation, the Indonesian Muslim Student Action Union, Kesatuan Aksi Mahasiswa Muslim Indonesia (KAMMI).

The pioneers of Jemaah Tarbiyah are neither from abangan families nor secular backgrounds. They have inherited santri traditions but have gone through different religious and intellectual experiences from their forbears. They are the children and grandchildren of both traditionalist and modernist santri of the 1950s and 1960s. In describing his family’s religious background, one Jemaah Tarbiyah activist who was a student of the Institute of Technology, ITS, Surabaya in 1982, stated

On relations between Islam and the state, this group tends to believe that Islam contains both dimensions of religion and state (al-din wa al-dawlah). While holding the view of the inseparable links between Islam and politics, Jemaah Tarbiyah believes that Islam does not provide a detailed explanation of political and governmental matters. The function of the state is to assure and maintain the survival of religion, while the Islamic parties are a necessary means to bring gradual changes in the state to take a more open stance towards Islam. It was for that reason that after Soeharto’s resignation and the end of his regime in 1998, Jemaah Tarbiyah transformed itself into a political party, assuming the name of the Justice Party, Partai Keadilan (PK). This was later changed in 2003 into the Prosperous Justice Party, Partai Keadilan Sejahtera (PKS).

The Salafi groups in Indonesia have much in common with Jemaah Tarbiyah in terms of its ideological and religious views – they are somewhat apart from mainstream Islam. They show a tendency to adhere strictly to the religious doctrines and views of “the virtuous forefathers” of the early Muslim scholars of two generations after the Prophet’s life (al-Salaf al-Salih) and other scholars from Saudi Arabia and Yemen.^[120] The members of Salafi groups make little or no acknowledgement of the authority of either traditionalist or modernist religious scholars in Indonesia.

However, in terms of achieving its aims, the Salafi groups differ from the Muslim Brothers-influenced Indonesian movement. In order to Islamise the state, adherents to this group reject involvement within any existing political regime that is democratically inclined. The system of political parties and other democratic practices have no legitimacy in Islam; so the integration of the group is unlikely. The reasoning behind this, they claim, is that the democratic system is one of human invention and has no precedence in the lives of the Prophet Muhammad and his Companions. Rather than directly involving themselves in any political system not based on the example of the great Traditions, the proponents of Salafism tend to withdraw from politics, yet they have developed a definite policy of compliance with the existing political rule. They believe in the significance of upholding the shariah in private and individual practice but do not urge for the establishment of an Islamic state. “As long as we can survive to follow our shariah, even though the government does not practise it, we do not care.”^[121] No matter how oppressive or unjust the ruler, he is deemed deserving of respect and obedience. Consequently, this group is more in favour of upholding the status quo than rebellion.^[111] It should not be thought that the Salafi’s convictions are by any means exploited by the regime. The group may be keen to give its support to the regime, as long as it envisions the introduction of shariah.^[123]

As a global orientated movement, Hizbut Tahrir is more political in so far as it holds to the ideal of the establishment of a global Islamic rule, the caliphate, throughout the Muslim world. In working towards this end, it prefers to effect radical changes in Muslims’ views and to propagate its ideas through very provocative dakwah. The caliphate is the only solution for the Muslim ummah. The establishment of an Islamic state, the implementation of Islamic law and the caliphate in all Muslim regions is obligatory. Since the members of HT have no faith in democracy, they will not carry out their ideas through political participation or urge to change the Indonesian democratic system with an Islamic one.^[124]

Be that as it may, the followers of this group denounce the use of violence and radical action. They believe in the process of transforming society through their predication activities. Inevitably, though, their rejection of existing political systems raises the question of just how they will implement their beliefs and ideologies. In fact, the key means to achieve their ideas has been through recruitment and the exertion of extra-parliamentary political pressure.^[125] In some cases, they have been involved in running strikes against rises in the price of fuel and oil and other non-religious issues. So even though they may deny their participation in current political developments, they still actively engage in some form of political praxis.^[126]

The emergence of various categories of santri dating from the early establishment of the Soeharto regime to the current situation in Indonesia has shown the dynamics of the santri in Indonesia. This phenomenon is not monolithic but rather has involved many forms of cultural interaction and adaptation. The case of Jemaah Tarbiyah also has shown this tendency, its global inclination, meeting at the interface with local Indonesian traditions. The processes of Islamisation in Indonesia are an interesting subject to study, as will be elaborated in our next chapter.