There are two formal institutions through which the kiai's relationship with society is established. These institutions have simultaneously created two different patterns of relationship; and they constitute important avenues which sustain the kiaiship in Java. The two institutions are pesantren and tarekat. Although the pesantren and the tarekat constitute two important institutions associated with kiaiship, each of them has its own character. In addition, there exists variation and nuances that differentiate one pesantren or tarekat from another.

The pesantren in Jombang are not stereotypical. In addition to the traditional pesantren, there are some modern pesantren as far as their educational system is concerned. The large pesantren in Jombang constitute modern educational institutions with little of their traditional character remaining. In the tarekat, emerging variation is marked by an increasing number of aliran (factions), each of which has different ritual practices. Both the pesantren and the tarekat are led by kiai. The pesantren and tarekat worlds in Indonesia are associated with NU society. They are, however, not structurally established within the NU organisation. They are culturally recognised as associated with NU because the kiai of the pesantren and of the tarekat are members of NU. Since NU has two (informal) affiliated institutions, the pesantren and the tarekat, we can infer that within NU there exist various sub-cultures, each of which differs from others in many respects. Although all of these institutions remain under the umbrella of NU, their differences are indicated through the attitudes and behaviour displayed by their followers. 

As the roles of the pesantren and the tarekat are so dominant in the life of some NU members in Jombang, their allegiance is given to the pesantren and the tarekat rather than to NU itself. This means that NU's strength, in practice, lies in its sub-institutions. To put it another way, the strength of NU leadership has been established and centred on the leadership of the kiai in these two institutions. Popular emotional attachment towards NU has for a long time been built through the pesantren and tarekat. It is the kiai, as leaders of pesantren or tarekat who, due to their closeness to local society, have established an ideological commitment among NU members and related them to NU as an organisation. In other words, it is the kiai who run pesantren or lead tarekat, not NU itself, who have mass followers identified as NU members.

There are several main points which arise from my discussion in regard to kiai leadership in Jombang. Firstly the relationship between the kiai and his society is extremely strong, marking a special characteristic of Muslim lives in Jombang. The kiai occupy a highly respected position in this society. This is because Muslims in Jombang have a society which has been moulded by the existence of so many pesantren. The kiai's knowledge of Islam is hence an important factor which makes him a respected person in his society. Compared to that of the pesantren kiai, however, the relationship between the tarekat kiai and their followers is stronger. The emotional attachment, imbued with religious overtones, is more clearly expressed. The murshid in the tarekat, who is seen as a spiritual guide who would bring those individuals involved in the tarekat closer to Allah, is very decisive in establishing this relationship. That is why the influence of the murshid in the tarekat is so strong, enabling the  murshid and his khalifa to build a cohesive community held together by the same emotion. Certain members of society hope that they can receive baraka by getting in touch with the kiai. It is commonly believed that baraka flows from the hand of the kiai.

However, each kiai, as an informal Islamic leader, is independent from another. Thus conflicts which may arise from the kiai's different political views can lead to indirect conflict between their followers. This conflict, which does not usually impinge on the ideological domain, actually constitutes an expression of the tension among the kiai as leaders of pesantren or of tarekat. The conflict which emerged in the Tarekat Qadiriyah Wa Naqsyabandiyah when its leader joined the government party is a good example. This conflict demonstrated the power of the kiai in influencing Muslims in Jombang. Kiai Musta‘in, the leader of the Tarekat Qadiriyah Wa Naqsyabandiyah and the national leader of the Jam‘iyah Ahli Thoriqoh Al-Mu‘tabaroh, was abandoned by a large number of his followers who left him to follow other kiai. This case indicated that the authority of even a greatly admired kiai to influence society is limited. The kiai who held a different political opinion at that time left their colleague, Kiai Musta‘in, and tried to establish another tarekat from the one that he led. Followers who left Kiai Musta‘in joined the new tarekat led by these kiai. Another example of the independent authority of a single kiai was the conflict which followed the introduction of free political affiliation after NU launched its ‘back to khittah’ policy. The kiai in Jombang split into three groups, followed by their followers or sympathisers. In addition, these conflicts also indicate that NU as an organisation in Jombang does not have a monopoly of power. In certain cases it might be powerless, since the existing power is spread among the  kiai running the pesantren or heading the tarekat. Such dispersion of power indicates the fragility of the social structure in NU society. This structure can easily incur social tension, or even lead to conflict, when the different attitudes held by the kiai of the various pesantren, the kiai of the tarekat, or differences between the kiai of the pesantren and the tarekat, cannot be reconciled.

Secondly, Islam in Jombang was, and to a certain extent still is, embedded in the life of its society. This is a result of long established pesantren there. The kiai through their pesantren had an important role in inculcating Islamic values and norms into the lives of Muslims in Jombang. This was so, not only because the kiai were informal charismatic leaders in Indonesian society, but also because they were committed to the formation of a society characterised by Islam. In other words, the institutionalisation of Islamic values was made possible by the contribution of the kiai. Through their informal leadership role, the kiai made society more religious, as conceptualised by Islam, in all aspects of life. The kiai, as a group, tried to make the existing social order compatible with religious ideals or to nativise these religious ideals to be compatible with the existing order. The religious requirements which the kiai believes in have created ideals which he must strive to realise, for, as Geertz (1965) suggests, those who accept religion as their ultimate source of authority are obliged to bring their worldly experiences into harmony with the world symbolised in religious behaviour.

The success of the kiai in inculcating Islamic values owes much to the fact that their leadership is different from other formal and informal leaders in Indonesia. With a charismatic pattern of leadership, the kiai form good, close relationships with their followers, a situation which cannot be created by other leaders. Especially in the tarekat, the relationship can be described as a ‘guru-murid’ (master-student) relationship, or more theoretically, clientilism, in which subordination of the clients is a necessity.

Finally, Muslims in Jombang have access to the wider socio-political life of the nation, since they have for a long time included figures with a national reputation. Some kiai from Jombang have been national leaders of NU and of PPP, which placed them among the national political elite. It is understandable that the vicissitudes of national politics have often been felt by Muslims in Jombang. In addition, any political conflict among Muslim figures or groups at the national level has also been followed by conflict between various related groups in Jombang. The conflict within the NU faction in the PPP national leadership which occurred at the end of the 1980s is the most obvious example. This conflict gave rise to conflict among kiai in Jombang. Two leaderships positions appeared in NU, and Muslims at the grassroots level split according to the line taken as a result of their kiai's different political attitudes.

There are some interesting points which need to be presented here in relation to the kiai's political leadership among Muslims in Jombang. Muslims in Jombang exhibit a strong Islamic attitude in relation to their political performance. The close attachment of Muslims to the Islamic political party was not merely because Islam was embedded in their lives but can also be attributed to and influenced by the kiai's continued support for the Islamic party. The kiai, as persons who had great concern about Islam, tried to established what was called ‘Islamic politics’. The convergence between the Muslim tendency to support the Islamic party and the kiai's support for it was an important factor which contributed to the popularity of the Islamic party in the eyes of Muslims in the core kecamatan in Jombang. This was evidenced by the fact that in this core the Islamic parties took the lead in the 1971 general election. For example, although it did not represent a majority, the Islamic parties received more that 40 percent of the vote in nine out of 17 kecamatan in Jombang. In five kecamatan, they received more than 50 percent. This figure continued at nearly the same level in following general elections until the 1987 general election when PPP's share of the vote declined significantly in almost all kecamatan.

The kiai leadership in Jombang is, however, changing. The change derives particularly from the changing situation in relation to pesantren education. The pesantren have been transformed by establishing a schooling system that has created a santri society which is more modern in character. The same holds true in the wider society in Jombang since the Muslim population is readily influenced by the inevitable change occurring in society at large. These changes in the pesantren and in Muslim society in Jombang have impacted on the leadership of the kiai in general. There emerges a process of profanisation of charisma. By profanisation I mean that the kiai's charisma, which gives them a respected social position in their society, has become less influential. The santri demonstration that occurred in Pesantren Darul Ulum is an obvious example. A similar event also occurred in Pesantren Tebuireng. Such demonstrations would have previously been unthinkable in the world of pesantren. It needs to be underlined, however, that this change in regard to kiai leadership, as a result of changes in society, has been gradual, since the change in the society itself has been partial, in the sense that it has happened mainly among the younger Muslims, such as the students of the Universitas Darul Ulum.

The change in the kiai political leadership began when NU launched its ‘back to khittah’ policy. This change in the kiai's politics gave rise to the change in the position of Islamic politics. The kiai who introduced the religious obligation on Muslims in regard to politics cancelled this injunction when they freed politics from any religious involvement. Thus despite the external factors which contributed to the decline in political Islam in Jombang, such as the introduction of ‘Azas Tunggal’ by the government, by which Islam was no longer an ideology for any political party, the change in the kiai's politics was actually a decisive factor. The political attitude of the few kiai who became affiliated with Golkar gave rise to various political affiliations among devout Muslims in Jombang. As the kiai through NU's ‘back to khittah’ freed themselves and Muslims in general from affiliation with a particular political party, their politics has given rise not only to the emergence of various political orientations among devout Muslims but has also resulted in a redirection decline in Islamic politics and in the kiai's political influence as well. It is not surprising that in almost all cases, the politics of individual kiai’ were not followed by all their followers. While some followers of the kiai who have supported Golkar since 1987 copied their lead, others continued to support PPP. In the same way, although a large number of followers of individual kiai who supported PPP have continued to support this party, a few of them have deviated from their kiai by joining Golkar. These facts indicate that an individual kiai's political lead is not necessarily followed by all his followers. To put it differently, in present day Jombang, following the kiai's political example is not an absolute obligation for all Muslims. Not only is there no longer a convergence between Muslim ideas of politics and that of the kiai, there is also no longer a moral obligation in regard to politics.

Looking at this change in regard to kiai political leadership in Jombang, we can assume that a similar pattern has occurred in other regions of Indonesia. As the embeddedness of Islam in the life of Muslims and their politics is not a characteristic solely applicable to Jombang, the change in political Islam brought about by either the introduction of ‘Azas Tunggal’ or by the change in kiai politics has generally affected Muslim politics in other regions. The pattern of local conflict which has occurred in Jombang may also have occurred in other regions. A pattern of kiai leadership similar to that in Jombang is also found in other regions. One can therefore infer that a change in the pattern of political leadership is also occurring in other regions, especially in East Java.

It is interesting to note that although the change in Islamic politics in general actually marks an apparent decline in Indonesian Muslim politics, the conflict of NU members with those of other components in PPP has enabled NU leaders and the kiai in general to rethink the principle of the ‘struggle for Islam’. The ‘back to khittah’, which essentially pushes kiai and NU leaders to focus on developing NU society's religiosity, has encouraged NU kiai not just to be politically oriented. They focus now on expanding their da‘wa activities and developing their Islamic educational programs. This means that their efforts can be directed to the benefit of Islamic society in general. This tendency has had an impact on improving the relationship of NU members with members of other Islamic groups. The ideological line which demarcated various Muslim groups became blurred after NU's involvement in politics was altered.

The efforts not to be politically oriented has benefited the NU society at the grassroots, because kiai can now focus their attention more on developing society, and has consolidated the kiai's position in their society. The conflict in PPP highlighted the kiai's changing political position, as expressed by the decrease of NU influence in this party. NU's return to being a socio-religious organisation can thus be seen as an effort to retain a position for kiai in the society. This means that although the kiai's position in the formal electoral process is less influential since they have offered Muslims an open political orientation and affiliation, through ‘back to khittah’ the kiai have consolidated and restrengthened their moral position. Furthermore, this restrengthening of their moral position means also restrengthening their political position in a wider context, since by retaining their moral position the kiai retain their position as the leading figures in Javanese Muslim society.

The efforts of not being politically oriented received support especially from a large part of NU's younger generation. Nevertheless, a number of NU kiai in Jombang and Java in general tried to revive the old paradigm which encouraged NU to be involved in politics after almost a decade of NU's ‘back to khittah’ policy. The enthusiasm of these kiai in politics was expressed by their eagerness to seize the position of President in the PPP national leadership. They held a meeting in a pesantren in Rembang, East Java, preceding the PPP congress in the second half of the 1994s. This indicated not only their inclination to be politically oriented as shown by their being continuously active in PPP but also their efforts to bring NU's flag into PPP. Thus despite the formal NU decision not to be politically oriented, the old perspective of a close relationship between Islam and politics or, in a more precise words, of using politics as a means of struggling for Islam remains strong among kiai.

Having two distinct political orientations among its members, one can speculate that for the near future the NU's kiai will remain important figures. They will play an important role socially and politically. This is because Muslims' willingness to regard the kiai as the guardians of the morality of society will continue their dependence on kiai legitimation. It is not surprising that the government, for example, will also continue to seek the kiai's legitimation for the acceptance of sensitive and crucial policy. Thus the success of kiai efforts in introducing an open political orientation, which led to the decrease in their political influence as shown by the changing pattern of electoral behaviour, does not necessarily mean a loss of kiai influence in society. Instead, it gave a chance for the kiai to consolidate and strengthen their position in society. As ‘back to khittah’ has enabled NU members to be affiliated with any political party, it means also that the kiai's influence is not confined to members of the former Islamic party but also includes those in Golkar and PDI.