‘they are not all alike’

This article was downloaded by: [UZH Hauptbibliothek / Zentralbibliothek Zürich]On: 07 July 2014, At: 13:16Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Indonesia and the Malay WorldPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cimw20

‘THEY ARE NOT ALL ALIKE’Muhamad AliPublished online: 09 Oct 2010.

To cite this article: Muhamad Ali (2010) ‘THEY ARE NOT ALL ALIKE’, Indonesia and the Malay World,38:112, 329-347, DOI: 10.1080/13639811.2010.513845

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13639811.2010.513845

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cimw20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13639811.2010.513845

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13639811.2010.513845

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Muhamad Ali∗

‘THEY ARE NOT ALL ALIKE’

Indonesian Muslim intellectuals’

perception of Judaism and Jews

Contemporary Muslim perceptions of Jews and Judaism are not always as negative and hom-ogenous as when one thinks of ‘Arab-Muslim anti-Semitism’. The ambiguity and complexityof Indonesian Muslims’ views of Judaism and Jews can be found in a number of publicationsby Muslims associated with interfaith organisations and Islamic universities. This articleseeks to explore some nuanced, if ambivalent, perceptions of Judaism and Jews and examinesfactors that contributed to such perceptions among Indonesian Muslim intellectuals andauthors of textbooks on religion. In most representations, the concepts of Judaism as religionand of Jewishness as ethnicity are often not distinguished. Moses, Torah, Israel and Muham-mad’s relationship with Jews in Medina and in medieval Spain are often discussed in theworks of Indonesian Muslim intellectuals. The perceptions of Jews are based on their viewof ‘Jews of Islam’ – be it in classical Medina, medieval Spain or contemporary Palestine,rather than recognising them as independent with their own dynamic history. However,Indonesian Muslim intellectuals’ promotion of tolerance and pluralism serves as a responseto the widely held perceptions of Judaism and Jews.

Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right):They rehearse the Signs of Allah all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration.

(Qur’an 3: 113)

Introduction

Muslims’ perceptions of Jews and Judaism are not always as negative and homogenous aswhen one thinks of ‘Arab-Muslim anti-Semitism’ which often neither makes a distinc-tion between Jews, Israelis, and Zionists, nor between theology and politics.1 The

∗The author thanks Michael Alexander, Associate Professor of Judaism, University of California, Riv-erside, and Ronit Ricci at the Australian National University, for their valuable comments on earlierdrafts of this article.1See for example, Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center of the Israel Intelligence Heritage &Commemoration Center (IICC), 27 April 2008; Burhanuddin (2007: 53–76).

Indonesia and the Malay World Vol. 38, No. 112 November 2010, pp. 329–347

ISSN 1363-9811 print/ISSN 1469-8382 online # 2010 Editors, Indonesia and the Malay World

http://www.informaworld.com/journals DOI: 10.1080/13639811.2010.513845

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

ambiguity and complexity of Indonesian Muslims’ views of Judaism and Jews can befound in an increasing number of publications by progressive Muslims associated withinterfaith organisations and Islamic universities, whether or not they had real encounterswith Jews in Indonesia or elsewhere.2 This article seeks to explore nuanced perceptionsof Judaism and Jews and examines factors that contributed to such perceptions amongIndonesian Muslim intellectuals and authors of textbooks on religion. It discusses, forexample, the way in which these publications attempt to explore, if not reconcile,ambiguous passages of Islamic texts and history regarding Judaism and Jews. Themain theme of these writings is that Jews are not all alike.

Scholars and students can now fruitfully study Jewish–Islamic relations in Indonesiawithin the historical and global context of Jewish–Islamic relations. For example,Bernard Lewis’ The Jews of Islam (1984) and Mark R. Cohen’s Under crescent and cross(1994), which compare Jews under Christian and Islamic rulers in the Middle Agesshow how Islamic–Jewish relations were less confrontational and violent than thosebetween Christians and Jews in the West. Lewis argues that ‘partly because of thenon-theological nature of the hostility directed against Jews, partly because theJewish minorities in Islamic lands, unlike those of Christendom, were one amongmany minorities in a diverse and pluralistic society, they were far less noticeable’(Lewis 1984: 85). For Lewis, the lack of noticeability of the Jews offers them anadvantage in terms of being treated more favourably by Muslim rulers in classical andmedieval times. He suggests,

In general, Muslim polemicists pay little attention to the relatively insignificantJews. Insofar as they deign to discuss the superseded religions, they are far moreconcerned with the Christians, who, as bearers of a competing proselytizing religionand the masters of a rival universal empire, offered a serious alternative and there-fore a potential threat to the Muslim dispensation and the Islamic oecumene. TheJews offered no political threat to the Islamic world order, no religious challenge tothe Islamic faith; nor, like Christians, did they compete with the Muslims for theadherence of the still unconverted heathens.

(Lewis 1984: 86)

This general picture is not necessarily applicable to Muslims in the modern world.However, Lewis (1984) and Dimont (1973) have been cited in Indonesian works thatinclude some discussion about the Jewish–Islamic relationship. In the attempt torebuild interfaith harmony, progressive Indonesian Muslims at the Paramadina Foun-dation, Jakarta, refer to Max I. Dimont’s view of how Jews integrated well intoIslamic civilisation. Dimont (1973: 189–90) says, ‘instead of rejecting the Muslim civi-lization, they accepted it. Instead of keeping themselves apart, they integrated it. Arabicbecame their mother tongue; wine, women, and secular songs their part-time avoca-tions; philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, diplomacy, medicine, and literature, theirfull-time vocations. The Jews never had it so good’.3 Lewis and Dimont’s historical

2Although Jews were and are present in Indonesia, the absence or lack of encounters of most Muslimsin Indonesia with Jewish communities did not imply a complete unfamiliarity with Jews and Judaism.See Jeffrey Hadler (2004: 291); Ronit Ricci (2008: 481).3Cited in Sirry (2004: 197).

3 3 0 I N D O N E S I A A N D T H E M A L A Y W O R L D

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

reconstruction of Jewish–Islamic relationship in the medieval ages has particularlyappealed to Indonesian Muslim scholars defining themselves by their favourable attitudestowards progress and reform. These progressive Muslims, in their diverse backgrounds,approaches, and means, generally perceive Judaism and Jews as being ‘not all alike’, andattempt to locate Judaism and Jews within their own textual and historical tradition.

The Qur’an-based representations

Different patterns of Muslim representations of Judaism and Jews can be discerned incontemporary Indonesia. The first of these are the Qur’an-based depictions, character-ised by defining Islam as a confirmer of previous Abrahamic religions, including that ofJews, as the People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab) along with Christians, with Moses being aprophet for the children of Israel, who are divided into those who followed God’s pathand those who did not. A proponent of this representation is the Arab-Indonesian Azhar-graduate and Qur’anic interpreter Muhammad Quraish Shihab (b.1944) whose work onthe Qur’an and its themes continue to have a wide and significant impact in shaping thethought and lives of contemporary Indonesian intelligentsia and public.4 QuraishShihab’s representation of Judaism and Jews is not polar, but quite ambiguous,drawing on a variety of sources that include Qur’anic verses, interpretations (tafsir)by medieval and modern Islamic scholars (such as Muhammad Abduh, MahmudShaltut, and Abdullah Darraz) and comments of Orientalists (such as Richard Bell)on Qur’anic text and history (Quraish Shihab 2000: xv–xxv).

In Quraish Shihab’s view, Judaism was not a proselytising religion, and Jews tendedto be exclusive in the sense that they did not encourage conversion (Quraish Shihab1996: 351). He reinforces the notion of Jews as the People of the Book. Nonetheless,there are People of the Book whose community was divided into those who deviatedfrom the true message of God (consequently, they received criticism and condemnationin the Qur’an) and those who remained true to the fundamental message of their HolyScripture, Torah (Taurat; Quraish Shihab 1996: 347–51). In his interpretation of ‘thosewho received God’s wrath’ (al-maghdubi ‘alaihim) in verse 7 of the chapter al-Fatihah(the Opening), he comments that references to Jews were based on Prophet Muham-mad’s saying (hadith), ‘they knew, but did not follow the truth’ (Hadith Bukhari).However this chastisement of Jews is not generic; Prophet Muhammad, QuraishShihab (2000 I: 71–2) continues, ‘obviously did not mean that all of the children ofIsrael, or Jews, received God’s wrath. Only those who disobeyed received it. Also,non-Jews who disobeyed would receive the same wrath. The wrath and blessing fromGod was not based on one’s race, nation, or birth, but on intention and behavior’.

Quraish Shihab (ibid) further elaborates on some instances of the Jews’ disobedienceof God’s word (such as denying divine signs, murdering prophets without true reasons,

4M. Quraish Shihab or Pak Quraish Shihab to Indonesians, is a former rector of the State Islamic Uni-versity of Jakarta, a former Minister of Religion, and is currently a director the Lentera Hati Foun-dation in Jakarta, focusing on Qur’anic studies and contemporary issues. When I conductedinterviews in Makassar, South Sulawesi, in September 2009, I found local scholars appreciated hisinterpretations of the Qur’an. In Indonesia, his works on the Qur’an are available in bookstoresand he is a popular reference on Qur’anic interpretations.

INDONESIAN MUSLIM INTELLECTUALS’ PERCEPTION OF JUDAISM AND JEWS 3 3 1

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

and making cows God’s associates) while remaining silent on acts of goodness thatendear Jews to God. He asserts that God blessed Jews with many bounties and advan-tages, but they ‘didn’t thank God for that and instead they demonstrated disobedience,jealousy, and arrogance so that God attributed them with bad qualities such as stubborn-ness, breaking promises, desiring the worldly and so forth’ (Quraish Shahib 2000 I:180). His interpretation of the passages is an example of the commonly held viewamong Muslim scholars that Jewish deficiencies would become the main reason whyMuhammad was sent to the Arabs with the Qur’an, confirming and yet correctingJews as well as Christians.

Quraish Shihab is preoccupied more with explaining Jews of the Qur’an (eitherthose who lived at the time of Moses or Prophet Muhammad) than providing a represen-tation of contemporary Judaism, Jews and their scripture (later called the OldTestament by Christians). His contextualisation of the Jews to the time of revelationserves an illustrative purpose in a parable with a moral that highlights the consequencesof disobedience and ingratitude to all believers in general, and Indonesian Muslims, inparticular.5

Quraish Shihab tries not to generalise that all Jews are the same regardless of timeand place, but this is what contributes to the ambiguity in his stance. The Qur’an,Quraish Shihab points out, uses the term Ahl al-Kitab (People of the Book) 31 times,but also Utu al-Kitab, Utu Nasib min al-Kitab, Al-Yahud, Al-ladhina hadu, and BanuIsrael. When the Qur’an uses Al-Yahud (Jews), it usually gives a negative descriptionabout them (Qur’an 5: 82; 2: 120). When it uses Al-ladhina hadu, it sometimes criticisesand sometimes offers a neutral position about Jews (Qur’an 4: 46; 2: 62). Criticism ofthe Jews in the Qur’an is relative to time; negative verses are followed by episodes ofconversion (e.g. that of Abdullah ibn Salam). Here, although the potential of Jews to begood is hinted at, it is unclear whether the realisation of this potential is dependent onconversion to Islam.

In Quraish Shihab’s interpretation, many of the criticisms and warnings in theQur’an are against Jews rather than against Muslims because ‘the former have morepower and influence in covering the falseness than the latter in covering the truth’(Quraish Shihab 2000 I: 227). He cites the Qur’an (2: 62): ‘verily, the believers, theJews, the Christians, and the Sabeeun, who believe in God and in the hereafter anddo goodness, will be granted their benefits, and will not worry about anything norbe sad’. But he returns to the thrust of his interpretation in later verses that Jewswere generally stubborn: ‘the hearts of the Jews were harder than stone’ (QuraishShihab 2000 I: 225). Initially, he comments that ‘although many assume that all Jewswere disobedient, the Qur’an objectively states that they were not the same: “Not allof them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right):They rehearse the Signs of Allah all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adora-tion’ (Quraish Shahib 2000 I: 206–7; 1996: 357). Accordingly, the censure of Jews inthe Qur’an focuses in Quraish Shihab’s view, on their political and economic behaviouras well. If this is the basis of the criticism, then, regardless of religious difference, justice

5Only occasionally does Quraish Shihab (2000 I: 189–94, 198–220) mention Jerusalem, Baital-Maqdis, Hebron, or the Old Testament, such as when he tries to identify ‘this town’ (hadhihial-qarya) in the Qur’an (2: 58, 2: 72).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

has to be shown. Therefore, he suggests, cooperating with Jews (and Christians) insocial, cultural, and economic fields is not prohibited (Quraish Shihab: 1996: 371).

Based on the Qur’an, Jews and other People of the Book are invited to build acommon platform (kalima sawa), and if no common platform is achieved, it is sufficientfor Muslims to demonstrate that they are Muslims. Quraish Shihab (1996: 357) com-ments that Muslims should not harm or prevent Jews from worshipping God in theirown way but suggests that Judaism, Christianity and Islam cannot be regarded assharing faith and ritual. Thus, it is not necessarily true that adherents of these faithsare guaranteed salvation.

It is true that paradise and hell are God’s prerogative, but this does not mean thatevery religious community is the same before God. It is true that for different reli-gious it is a religious duty to live harmoniously, but the way to achieve that harmonycannot jeopardize fundamental religious doctrines. The true path is to live harmo-niously and let God alone decide which faith He likes and which He likes not.

(Quraish Shahib 2000 I: 208–9, translation Muhamad Ali)

Quraish Shihab’s views of Jews and Judaism is ambiguous as he hardly explains what makesGod happy about them and refrains from suggesting that Judaism is as true as Islam beforeGod (although the Qur’an recognises diversity of faith). It can be argued that like many ofhis predecessors, Quraish Shihab was influenced more by previous Muslim interpretersand scholars than by a more comprehensive study of Jewish, biblical and historical scholar-ship. For him, the Qur’an serves more to correct the distortions created by Jews (andChristians) and remind new believers, rather than confirm the fundamentals of Mosaiclaw and Judaism. It is not clear in his interpretation whether post-Qur’anic Jews remainedoriginal and true followers of Moses and the Torah. For him, Jews become the necessary‘other’ in the process of the formation of a new faith, religion, and community calledMuslim. Thus, by implication, as a local Muslim scholar told me in an interview,‘there are good Muslims and bad Muslims as well as good Jews and bad Jews, but ifyou want to be a good Muslim, don’t follow the qualities of bad Jews’.6

Perhaps, it is Nurcholish Madjid (1939–2005) or Cak Nur as he is known in Indo-nesia, who provides more historical and contemporary inclusive views of Judaism andJews.7 As for Judaism and Jews, Madjid recognises the difference in ritual and thenotion of sacredness between Muslims and Jews, such as the Hebrew Shabbat(Arabic: al-sabt; Malay: sabtu, Saturday). Jews sacralise Saturday, whereas Muslims,Friday. As there are Muslim fundamentalists, there are also ‘Jewish fundamentalists’who, in Madjid’s words (2005: xxx–xxxi), ‘observe the Sabbath as a total rest, includ-ing abstinence from watching TV’. The Qur’an, according to Madjid, states that theessence of all true faiths is similar even though their forms and paths differ. Judaism,

6Dr Hashim Aidit, interview, Makassar, South Sulawesi, 28 August 2009.7Madjid was a Javanese, educated in a pesantren (religious boarding school) in East Java, the State Insti-tute of Islamic Studies in Jakarta, and the University of Chicago under the supervision of FazlurRahman. Madjid was well known for his reformist ideas on ‘secularization of Islam’, ‘Islam Yes,Islamic Party No!’, tolerance, democracy, and pluralism. As Rector of the Paramadina Universityuntil his death, Madjid promoted an inclusive Islam in his lectures and publications, inviting tolerance(kerukunan) towards religious denominations in Indonesia and beyond.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

Christianity, and Islam are Semitic and Abrahamic religions because in their fundamentalteachings, they share the patriarch Abraham. Like Quraish Shihab’s views based on theQur’an, Madjid invites peoples of different religions to emphasise similarities in acommon platform mentioned in Qur’anic phrase (3: 64)8 rather than differences, andto avoid absolutism of belief because tauhid means only God is absolute and everythingelse is relative. Unlike Quraish Shihab, Madjid is more prepared to accept bothabsolutism and relativism of a Muslim’s belief in God and practice. For him, althoughone’s faith is fundamental, a believer could only approach God and never comprehendHim. ‘Religion will not exist without symbolization, but symbols without meaning isabsurd, meaningless, and even dangerous. Religion is approaching God and goodaction . . .’ (Madjid 1994a: 451–8).

Referring to modern scholarship of the history of religions, such as Dimont’s Theindestructible Jews (1973), and selected Qur’anic verses, including the verse mentionedonly by Quraish Shihab above (2: 62), Madjid defines Islam as the path within the con-tinuous line of great religions, advocates religious similarity in substance (that is, faith inthe same true God) and sees pluralism in form as the law of God (sunnatullah) that doesnot and will not change (Madjid 2005: lxxxii– lxxxiii, 60–1). Unlike Quraish Shihab’sinterpretation, Madjid cites some modernist interpretations by Abdullah Yusuf Ali andMuhammad Asad as well as the medieval scholar Ibn Taimiyya, in allowing salvation forJews and other peoples as long as they believe in God, and do good deeds, at any timeand place.9 Jews were and are asked to follow their Torah, demonstrating that they alsosubmitted to the law of God. All communities have their own legal system (shari’a) andway of life (minhaj) so that they can compete in goodness by using all the advantages theyhave; it is only God who decides on their differences in this world. Madjid (2005: 310–11) then quotes Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s interpretation of the Qur’an: ‘as our true goal isGod, the things that seem different to us from different points of view, will ultimately bereconciled in Him. Einstein is right in plumbing the depth of Relativity in the world ofphysical science. It points more and more to the need of Unity in God in the spiritualworld’. Unlike Quraish Shihab, Madjid accepts the possibility of Jewish as being Islamicin a substantive sense, and, thus, of the salvation of Jews even after Muhammad.

On Abrahamic religions, Madjid agrees that owing to different contexts, Judaismhas become a justice-oriented path and Christianity more grace-oriented, whereas theIslam of Muhammad represents a balance, and a middle path between the two (themiddle community, umma wasatha). Thus Judaism, he stresses, is a religion orientedtowards law, as stated in the Ten Commandments, and this learning is reflected inthe name of the scripture, Torah (meaning Law); the emphasis on abiding by the law

8Kalima sawa (Qur’an 3: 64) has become an adage for Muslim scholars including Quraish Shihab andMadjid. The Qur’anic verse: ‘Say: “O People of the Book! Come to Common Terms [kalima sawa] asbetween us and you: that we worship none but God; that we associate no partners with Him; that weerect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than God.” If then they turn back, say ye:“Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to God’s will)”’ (Ali 2006).9Abdullah Yusuf Ali (1872–1953) was a South Asian Qur’anic interpreter, whose 1938 publication ofQur’anic commentaries (Ali 2006) is popular internationally, including among English-literate Indo-nesian students and scholars, such as Madjid who used his commentaries quite extensively. Muham-mad Asad was a Jew who converted to Islam and author of Message of the Qur’an (1980), making himone of the reformist scholars who appeal to Indonesian intellectuals such as Madjid (2005: 183–4).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

could be because the Jews were formerly slaves who needed self-discipline and lawenforcement.10 Islam and Judaism are seen as religions of law, in contrast to Christianity,although Jews and Christians are regarded as People of the Book.11 However, the threeAbrahamic religions teach the same basic message (washiya). As with Abdullah Yusuf Ali,Madjid emphasises that ‘God’s religion is the same in essence, whether given, forexample, to Noah, Abraham, Moses, or Jesus, or to our Holy Prophet’ (Madjid2005: 429, 493 note 13, 501). Following medieval scholar Ibn Taimiyya, he arguesthat ‘most of the contents of the Old and New Testaments, as far as laws are concerned,are still authentic’. A small part of the Bible was ‘altered’, but Madjid adds, that thiscomprises only a small fraction of the original (e.g. predictions of the coming of Muham-mad and food prohibitions such as the eating of pork) (Madjid 1994b: 75).12 HereMadjid provides a nuanced view of Judaism – not only that it is as authentic as Islambut some of its teaching remain relevant to the followers of Muhammad. BecauseIslam is, to Madjid, inclusive of previous revelations, there is no reason not to seeJudaism as bringing salvation to its believers as long as they are true to its law and teach-ings. In Madjid’s interpretation of a Qur’anic verse (5: 44), if Jews did not submit(pasrah) to God by not following Torah they would be considered as those who rejectedtruth (kafir). If they did not obey the law revealed to Moses concerning such issues as ‘aneye for an eye, a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear’, they would become transgressors(zalim), according to Madjid (1994c) when interpreting the next verse (Qur’an 5: 44).

Madjid’s view is at odds with Salafi scholar-activists who recognise the plurality ofreligious communities including Jews (and Christians), but reject pluralism as mandatingan acceptance of others as equally true and authentic. Although diverse and changingover time, Salafis, literally meaning ‘the followers of the old’, are Muslims whoregard themselves as the maintainers of the old yet original ways of Muhammad andhis Rightly Guided caliphs. In Indonesia, voluntary associations such as Hidayatullah,Dewan Dakwah Islamiyah (Islamic Propagation Council), and Wahdah Islamiyah, andthe journal Sabili, perceive themselves as Salafi.13 For the Salafis in general, Muhammadconfirmed all truths but, specifically, corrected Jewish and Christian distortion of truebelief in tauhid. For them, Abraham was an elect, true servant and the beloved of theone God, and Moses was the true prophet, but after Muhammad there should be onlyone true path, his Islam, and other previous paths are dissolved. The Salafis emphasisethe Quranic verse that says ‘there is no religion in the view of Allah other than Islam’,and a hadith saying, ‘prophets are brothers, children of the highest mothers, but theirreligion (din) is one’.14 They also refer to the Qur’anic invitation to the People of the

10Madjid (2009: 148–50), ‘Orang Islam sudah mirip Yahudi’, an interfaith Friday dialogue held at theFoundation of Paramadina, Jakarta, 18 June 1999.11 There has not been a serious focused Jewish-Muslim dialogue in Indonesia. Such works as Neusneret al. (2000) and Selengut (2001) which attempt to compare Islamic and Jewish laws, and trace theirrelationship, have yet to be translated and disseminated in Indonesia.12Madjid (1994: 75) provides this view and refers to Ibn Taimiyya (n.d. I: 271–5).13For the Salafi views of Judaism, Jews, and Israel in the modern time, see Martin van Bruinessen(1993); Burhanuddin (2007: 53–76).14As narrated by Imam al-Bukhari, this hadith (Book #55, hadith #651) reads, ‘I heard Allah’sApostle saying, “I am the nearest of all the people to the son of Mary, and all the prophets are paternalbrothers, and there has been no prophet between me and him (i.e. Jesus)”.’


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

Book to ‘hold firm to the common word (kalima sawa) which no one would disagree,that is, worshipping only one God and not associating Him with anyone or anythingelse’. They also justify this belief by referring to a hadith indicating to them that aMuslim should not even bring, let alone follow, the teachings of a previous scripture:‘Prophet Muhammad once saw Umar ibn Khatthab carrying a Torah, and Muhammadgot mad at him right away, warning him: “By God who holds Muhammad’s soul inHis hand, if Moses came to you and you followed him and left me, you would havegone astray from the straight path; if Moses were alive and knew my prophethood hewould have followed me”’.15 This hadith has been emphasised as justifying that Islamof Muhammad is the only possible path to get God’s salvation. Followers of Judaism,as well as of other religions, after Muhammad, will not receive God’s salvation.

Madjid’s view of Judaism is theologically inclusive. On non-theological matters,Madjid points to Jews having enjoyed good living conditions under Muhammad’s leader-ship within the Constitution of Medina and, then, in medieval Spain. Referring tovarious Arabic and western sources, including Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, AminSaid’s Nash’at al-Dawlat al-Islamiyya and A. Guillaume’s The life of Muhammad, Madjidhighlights that the people in Medina were pluralistic with shared rights and obligations.He says that it is historically true that Jewish factions disobeyed the Constitution andthey were, therefore, expelled by Muhammad. Particularly important to Madjid isthe solidarity between Muslims and Jews in Medina. During the Battle of Uhud, forexample, Muhammad asked Jews to defend the city from attacks, and one of theJews named Mukhayriq participated and died in defending the city alongside Muslim sol-diers. Muhammad was impressed and said, ‘Mukhayriq is the best of the Jews’ (Madjid2005: 121 note 3, 309). Madjid (2005: xci, xciv) further asserts that in medieval Spain,as part of Ahl Dhimmi (the Protected People), Jews under Muslim rulers experiencedbetter social lives than under Catholic Spain, drawing upon Dimont (1973), AbrahamS. Halkin (1956) and a saying of the Prophet: ‘one who hurts the people of dhimmidoes not belong to my community’. Muslim rulers in medieval Spain protected theJews who therefore flourished in philosophy, medicine, science, mathematics, and lin-guistics. Madjid’s reluctance to elaborate on other (less convenient) experiences of Jewsin Spain can be attributed to his objective in emphasising Islamic–Jewish harmony andproductivity rather than conflict and mutual destruction (see Cohen: 1994).

In the light of the Qur’an (29: 46 and 42: 15), Madjid (2005: xcix) urges Muslims‘not to debate and quarrel against the People of the Book except when they are unjust(aggressive, offensive, and so forth)’. In other places, like Quraish Shihab, he emphasisesthat in the Qur’an (3: 113–15), the People of the Book were and are not alike in thatsome verses’ criticisms of certain acts of Jews are equally applicable to Muslims andother peoples. At the same time, Madjid is aware of the complexity of the attitudesof Muslims towards Jews, either because Muslims do not know the Qur’anic verses,do not understand them, or are more influenced by a socio-psychological expediencythat rejects the meaning of these verses on account of their being modified by otherverses of the Qur’an. However, Madjid maintains, the verses which state that thePeople of the Book are not the same, needs to be considered and emphasised.

15The particular hadith is said to be narrated by al-Bukhari. Other Bukhari hadiths relating to a coex-istent relationship between Moses and Muhammad are not cited. See Al-Bashirah (2003: II, 1423: 5–6).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

Simplifying generalisation, he warns, is not appropriate to understanding a complextruth (Madjid 2005: civ–cv; 109 note 37).

Madjid observes that Muslims’ stereotyping of Jews was historically less negativeand significant than Christian and European anti-Semitism. In his view, Zionism playsan important role in the Muslim views of Jews and western imperialism in general.He contends that in classical and medieval times, Muslims felt an affinity with Jews,but modern Muslims seem to have less closeness: ‘Tolerance and accommodative atti-tude of Islam turned out to be ironical in the modern age, because of Western coloni-alism, and the uneasy relationship between Muslims and Jews in Palestine . . .’ (Madjid2005: 217). He argues that the antecedents of Muslim–Jewish coexistence should giveMuslims today confidence in recreating modern pluralism (Madjid 2005: xciii–xciv).Accordingly, a historical reading of Jewish–Muslim coexistence and mutual enrichmentwould make a constructive relationship between the two communities in the moderntime more feasible. Zionism and Judaism should to be viewed separately, althoughfor many if not most Jewish scholars and people in modern times, Zionism andJudaism are indivisible.16

Quraish Shihab’s views of Jews is particularly shaped by his interpretation of theQur’an that has been influenced by previous Islamic scholars as Madjid’s is by hisreading of history with Qur’anic support. Quraish Shihab’s brother, Alwi Shihab,who was educated at Al-Azhar University and Temple University, provides someaccounts of Jews today. One of Alwi Shihab’s essays in Islam inklusif (1997) commentson the murder of Yitzhak Rabin by Yigal Amir, whom he describes as a Haredi Jew,one of the Jewish ‘fundamentalists’, or ‘ultra-orthodox’, terms that may or may notbe pejorative.17 Here one can read in Alwi Shihab’s view that adjectives are necessaryto describe the religious diversity within Jewish community: there are Haredim,some of whom are willing to negate another Jew. In Alwi Shihab’s term, theHaredim show their intense commitment to God (Yahweh) to the extent that ‘theirbody becomes shaken when they hear the name of God’, that they do not assimilatewith other cultures, and that they regard secular others as anti-Jewish and they couldbe considered ‘radical fundamentalists’. Among the fundamentalist Jews, Alwi Shihabcontinues, there are passive and active ones; the latter being active opponents of secu-larism and defending Judaism in Israel and the United States. Some of the Haredim, AlwiShihab (1997: 138–42) observes, are successful businessmen or highly respected byAmerican politicians who need to attract Jewish votes. The Haredim in turn gain ahigher public profile, shifting from being radical to being part of the public in Israel.This shift resulted in responses from non-Haredim which have shaped Israeli politics.Alwi Sahib’s distinction between the theological and political dimensions of Jewish–Islamic relations can be read as follows:

Islam’s theological view of Judaism and Jews is clear: Judaism, as Christianity, is thePeople of the Book, to whom Muslims should show their kindness. The bad

16I would like to thank Professor Michael Alexander for this observation on the connection betweenZionism and Judaism in modern times.17Alwi Shihab does not explain his use of the adjectives, fundamentalist or ultra-orthodox. Perhaps heassumed these terms were common among some people. However, others may not agree withdescribing Yigal Amir as an ultra-orthodox Haredi Jew.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

relationship between Muslims and Jews is political, as it happened during the time ofProphet Muhammad and when the State of Israel was born . . . Muslims todayshould go beyond a monolithic perception of Jews as being ‘permanent enemy’(musuh abadi), not ignoring a positive relationship in the past. Thus, every effortto bringing peace between Israel and Arab should be strongly supported.

(Alwi Shihab 1997: 143–5; translation Muhamad Ali)

In these essays, Alwi Shihab’s representation of Jewish denominations while not detailedprovides some indication of Jewish internal diversity and change as well as some distinc-tion between theology and politics.

Pluralist responses to the exclusivist view of Judaism/Jews

Madjid and Alwi Shihab’s intellectual contributions as elaborated above are based onIslamic and western scholarship concerning Islamic and Muslim–Jewish history.Madjid locates Judaism/Jews within the context of his search for Indonesian andmodern pluralism consisting of different religious traditions, including Hinduism andBuddhism. His contemporary, Abdurrahman Wahid (1940–2009), was the closestfriend of Jews and Israel, perhaps the most popular intellectual tolerant of Jews and par-ticularly religious minorities in Indonesia, including Confucian Chinese, the Shi’ite, andthe Ahmadi. Abdurrahman Wahid was educated in a pesantren, as well as at universities inEgypt (Al-Azhar) and Iraq, although he did not complete his studies in all these places.He became a leader of the ‘traditionalist’ Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), the biggest Islamicorganisation in Indonesia established in 1926 in East Java, the President of Indonesia(1999–2001), and the founder of the National Awakening Party. Until his death, hetaught in his private pesantren in Jakarta and gave lectures internationally on Islam,democracy, and pluralism.18 In his speeches and writings, Gus Dur as he is knownlocally, criticised widely held negative views of ‘non-Muslim communities’, based oncertain Qur’anic verses, such as ‘ashidda’u ala al-kuffar ruhamaau bainahum’ (Qur’an48: 29: ‘be harsh toward the unbelievers and be compassionate among yourselves(believers)’ and ‘Jews and Christians will not be pleased with you until you followtheir religion’ (Qur’an 2: 120). The first verse should not be generalised to all non-Muslims as enemies because it addresses the kafir who waged wars against Islam (i.e.the kafir of Mecca). On the second verse, Abdurrahman Wahid comments, ‘that Chris-tians and Jews would not accept the fundamental concepts of Islam is an undeniable fact,because if they accepted Islam, they would not be Christians or Jews’. This verse impliedto him that Muslims would also not accept Christianity and Judaism. He said, ‘we,Muslims, don’t accept their theology (konsep ketuhanan) . . . we do not need to have anegative thinking of theology of other religions . . . there are internal religious

18Abdurrahman Wahid visited Israel several times, the first in 1980, and he met Simon Peres in hisOctober 1994 visit. He served as a member of the Board of Directors of the Peres Center for Peace.He received an honorary degree from Netanya Academic College, and a Medal of Valor from theSimon Wiesenthal Center, a California-based Jewish human rights organisation. The latter was forhis efforts in promoting peace and tolerance, a move that triggered criticisms from many Muslimsin Indonesia. See Fachrizal Halim (2010).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

matters that are exclusive to a religion that cannot be debated by other religious persons. . . However, it does not follow that we show enmity . . . We have to cultivate peacefulcoexistence (rukun) (Wahid: 1999: 171–9). During his presidency, there was controversyover his intentions to open diplomatic and economic relations with Israel, and Alwi Shihabwas then the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Many argue that the President sought genuineharmony between Muslims and Jews as commanded by the Qur’an. He urged everyoneto see the Jews as human and religious communities, not just political entities, anddeserving of tolerance and peace like everyone else. He promoted dialogue for theIsraeli-Palestinian crisis in the hope of a just and diplomatic solution (Halim 2010).

More recently, especially after 1998, with the post-Suharto political openness andincreasing access to education and information, a number of young intellectuals, such asZuhairi Misrawi and Abdul Moqsith Ghazali (known as Abdul Moqsith in Indonesia),have emerged to participate in the public debate on Muslim–Jewish relationshipswithin the context of religious pluralism in Indonesia (Misrawi 2007; Ghazali 2009).Realising that Judaism is currently not one of the six religions recognised by the Indo-nesian government due to its insignificant presence, Ghazali for example, represents aprogressive voice in the debate on Muslim attitudes towards Judaism. In an effort tochallenge the more widely held perceptions of Judaism and Jews among IndonesianMuslims, and still in the spirit of Madjid and Abdurrahman Wahid, he, Misrawi andother young progressive scholars attempt to emphasise past amicable Jewish–Muslimrelations, Qur’anic passages that they see as inclusive, as well as the Indonesian practiceof pluralism. Ghazali observes that contemporary Muslim perceptions of Jews as dishon-est, stubborn, and evil, are based on Qur’anic descriptions of some Jewish groups inMedina who violated the contract with Muslims and tried to murder Muhammad.However, these epithets have been applied to Jews because of the unresolved politicalconflict in Palestine and critics cite the Qur’an (2: 120 and 2: 109),19 among others.Ghazali argues that these verses have a socio-political rather than theological contextas they were responses to Jewish figures of the time such as Ka’ab ibn al-Ashraf, andAbu Yasir ibn Akhthab who tried to convert Muhammad’s followers to Judaism.History, he says, proves that not every Jew is liable to treat Muslims badly, pointingto Muhammad’s meeting with the rabbis Buhaira and Nestor, Mukhairiq’s death inthe Uhud battle and periods of cooperation between Jews, Christians and Muslims inAndalusia, Spain. The story of Mukhairiq was particularly compelling to Ghazali.When Mukhairiq, a smart and rich Jew from Bani Tha’laba, heard that Meccan polythe-ists were planning an attack on Muslims, he told his followers to support Muslims andthe Medina charter. And faced with protest that the battle was taking place on theSabbath, Mukhairiq replied that helping Muhammad would not disgrace the Sabbathand affirmed that Muhammad was his heir. ‘If only I die in this battle, all of my treasureswill go to Muhammad for a matter which God shows him,’ Mukhairiq asserted.

19Qur’an 2: 120: Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow theirform of religion. Say: ‘The guidance of God that is the only guidance. Wert thou to follow theirdesires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then would thou find neither protector norhelper against God.’Qur’an 2: 109: Quite a number of the people of the book wish they could turn you (people) back toinfidelity after ye may have believed. From selfish envy, after the truth hath manifest unto them: butforgive and overlook, till God accomplish His purpose: for God hath power over all things.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

He, then, prepared his sword, went to Uhud hill, where he died in the battle against thepolytheists. Mukhairiq was a prototype of Jews who strongly upheld the agreement. ‘Itis important to expose the historical fact to let Muslims know that some Jewish groupshave an objective perspective and were fair in building relationships with Islam. They arenot like what the Muslims think,’ Ghazali (2009: 366–7) concludes in his essay.

Ghazali outlines his interpretation of tolerance towards Jews based on his contextualapproach to the Qur’an and Islamic history. Normatively, for him, Judaism is a true pathto salvation, as the Qur’an states (22: 17), and historically Jews have their own qibla(ritual direction) and laws as indicated by medieval Muslim exegete Al-Thabari andmodern exegete Al-Zamakhshari. Muhammad emerged to confirm and complete pre-vious revelations. Muhammad also married a woman named Shafiya whose father(Huyay) was Jewish. Ghazali’s elaboration of Judaism is also shaped by his readings ofmodern progressive scholars such as Farid Esack (South African), Asghar Ali Engineer(Indian), and Mohamed Arkoun (Algerian), as well as Indonesians such as Madjid,Abdurrahman Wahid, Mukti Ali, Alwi Shihab, and Djohan Effendi. In disagreementwith another Indonesian jurist Muhammad Amin Suma who views Islam as theperfect, final, and only religion recognised by God, Ghazali (2009: 5–9, 89) seesthat Islam is also a continuation and a confirmer of the existence and truth ofJudaism and Christianity. Drawing from Kamil a-Najjar, he notes that Islamic rituals,such as prayer, almsgiving, fasting, and pilgrimage, draw much from Judaism, withsome modification (Ghazali 2009: 182–3). He agrees with the view of Judaism asmonotheism, the Torah as the true book, Moses as the Prophet, Jews as the Peopleof the Book, and Jerusalem as the holy place. At the same time, Ghazali (2009:210–11) contends that the Qur’an also criticises some Jewish and Christian beliefsand practices as deviant since the Old Testament contains some verses that literally indi-cate Jewish exclusivism, such as the notion of the chosen people and the divine instruc-tion to defeat other nations. For Ghazali, it is understandable that some Jews show theirexclusive attitude towards others but he notes that religious exclusivism is not specific toJudaism (Ghazali 2009: 54–5). There were Jews who wanted Muslims to follow theirpath, and there were other Jews who studied God’s verses, enjoined the good andforbade the evil. The Qur’an does not require Jews to be Muslims in order toreceive salvation. Thus, Ghazali views tolerance of Judaism as well as other religionsas an Islamic, yet universal principle that needs to be disseminated in Indonesia. Hesees that Muslims and Jews should respect and cooperate with each other, and defendeach other as they did under Muhammad in Medina. Muslims, Jews, and otherPeople of the Book, are invited to pursue dialogue and find a common platform. Hisconclusion asserts that an exclusive religious interpretation which tends to stereotypeor discriminate against other religions does not fit into a harmonious social life inIndonesia (Ghazali 2009: 215–16, 227, 283, 391).

Zuhairi Misrawi, a young NU-based intellectual activist, graduate of Al-Azhar Uni-versity and currently director of the Moderate Muslim Society in Jakarta, offers anothernarrative and perspective of Judaism and Jews in his book on the Qur’an, tolerance, andpluralism. The opening line of his book (Misrawi 2007) asked: ‘Are there Christians andJews who are believers and do good deeds today?’ One of his stories was of a visit toWashington DC in 2004 where he met members of the Jewish community. Hewrote, ‘they [the Jewish community] chatted with me with great politeness and highrationality: “We, the Jewish community, have the doctrine of charity (sedekah), not


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

only as an obligation but the right of the poor,” said the leader of this Jewish communityin Washington. He added, Jews and Muslims often work together to feed the elderly.Isn’t it beautiful?’ (Misrawi 2007: 8). For Misrawi, diversity is a fact that has to beaccepted as a Law of God (sunnatullah). God creates everyone with wisdom andnoble intention. Like others referred above, he emphasises the Qur’an term, kalimasawa, which he defines as encompassing a meeting point (titik temu), coexistence (al-ta’amul al-silmi) and acceptance of others (qabul al-akhar). The latter was coined byan Egyptian Coptic scholar Milad Hanna whom Misrawi met at Al-Azhar University.Misrawi (2007: 13) feels that ‘even though the shari’a are different, the foundation ofthe religions are the same’ and maintains that the verse ‘Jews and Christians will notbe pleased . . .’ (Qur’an 2: 120) has become an object of ‘authoritarian manipulationof the Qur’an’ which does not do justice to the explicit and implicit meanings of theverse. Such ‘political interpretation’, he argues, has three problems. First, it createsan assumption that Jews and Christians are eternal enemies of Muslims. Second, sucha confrontational relationship is to be applied permanently. Third, it overlooks otherverses that explicitly suggest tolerance and even pluralism. The solution to these pro-blems according to Zuhairi Misrawi is to understand the historical context (asbabal-nuzul): the ongoing conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians should not be per-petuated by textually referring to the Qur’anic verses relating to Jews because the con-flict is not a religious one. Views on Jews and Christians should not be partial and shouldnot concentrate on ‘negatives’ as by applying mind and heart, common ground can befound even on doctrines (Misrawi 2007: 382–8). In line with these young intellectuals,Muhammad Qasim Matar, Professor of Islamic Studies at the State Islamic University ofMakassar, South Sulawesi, gave the following view on Judaism:

The Qur’an can be interpreted exclusively or inclusively depending on one’s per-spective of the key concepts, such as Islam and din. Islam is an inclusive path, embra-cing everyone who believes in God and does good deeds. Jews are no exception.Jews of today mostly live in the State of Israel, so this means more opportunitiesfor Muslims to understand the complexity of the State: its diplomacy, government,military, and human resource development. Arabs are still not able to defeat thesmall State of Israel because they do not know how to build the state. Don’tblame Israel for the weaknesses of the Arabs. I understand why former PresidentAbdurrahman Wahid wished to open a diplomatic relationship with Israel. AfterGeorge W. Bush, hopefully now American President Barack Obama can restoreJewish–Muslim–Christian relations.20

As can be seen, one’s view of Jews can be multi-faceted: Qur’anic, historical, con-temporary, theological, and political. The view of the Qur’an and the definition of Islamhave become crucial factors shaping Muhammad Qasim Matar’s perceptions of Judaism,but his reading of the Israeli–Arab conflict has also influenced an objective and inclusiveoutlook. Finally, this article considers a historical view of Judaism and Jews espoused inIndonesian textbooks written by Muslim scholars which though limited in circulation,serve as the main source for the perceptions of Judaism and Jews among the educated.

20Author’s interview with Professor Muhammad Qassim Matar, 25 August 2009.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

Textbook on Judaism and Jews for Muslim and general students

Presentations of Judaism in local textbooks which include world religions are intention-ally neutral. These textbooks are used in private and public, Islamic and ‘secular’ uni-versities. To the best of my knowledge, these textbooks have not been contested byother scholars. One of them is Menguak misteri ajaran agama-agama besar (Revealingthe mysteries of world religions) by H.M. Arifin who was educated locally andabroard.21 Written and first published in the New Order era, the book aims to describe‘objectively’ how religions have played an important role throughout history andattempts to broaden religious understanding among various religious adherents and toenhance an awareness of plurality in the context of the Pancasila state philosophy(Arifin 2002: xi–xiii). Judaism, in particular, is presented as an Abrahamic religionadhered to by the Israelis who have a long history. This textbook outlines the ‘fundamen-tal teachings’ of Judaism as a revealed religion to Moses, including monotheism and theTen Commandments, shared by all other prophets. The textbook claims that ‘theconcept of monotheism in Judaism is similar to Islam, but the Christian Trinity ismore difficult to understand in comparison to Jewish and Muslim monotheism’(Arifin 2002: 124). However, it states that ‘Judaism in later times and today can nolonger be regarded as the revealed religion because it has undergone changes conductedby its priests (rabbi) and followers, from either the orthodox or the rationalists . . . his-torically it doesn’t have reliable written documents from Moses himself or during histime, in contrast to the documents from Muhammad written during his time’ (Arifin2002: 121). Although the Torah, which consists of the Five Books, or Pentateuch, isrecognised by Islam as the Jewish holy book, its later forms are not entirely originaldue to human interventions (Arifin 2002: 126–7). Not only does this textbook notdifferentiate between the Torah, Talmud, Mishna and other Jewish religious books, italso does not regard them as original compared to the Qur’an. These simplifying andnegative depictions of Judaism and Jewish scriptures seem to contradict the aim ofthe book.

The textbook highlights three Jewish divisions: Sadducees, Pharisees, and Chassi-disses. The Sadducees, the book explains, were followers of Zadok who did not wantchange in the law and used a literal interpretation of the Talmud in forbidding a trans-lation from its original Hebrew. The Pharisees (which means isolating from the group)from Perishim included lay Jews and aimed at modernising Judaism according to chan-ging cultures. The third sect, Chassidisses, or Hasidic Jews was a reaction to the othertwo sects, presenting itself as more mystical and influenced by Greek philosophy,Gnosticism, and Christianity (Arifin 2002: 128–9). Using the different labels withouta detailed elaboration, the textbook tries to look more nuanced in its portrayal of thediverse and dynamic nature of Judaism.

On modern Judaism, the book associates Judaism with Zionism. ‘Strangely,’ theauthor comments, ‘Judaism today has only a limited number of followers, probablybecause of their chauvinism or fanatic nationalism, Zionism and traditionalism’(Arifin 2002: 118). Jews had been tested with calamities throughout ancient, medieval,

21H.M. Arifin (2002). The first edition was published in 1986. This book is a collection of lecturesinitially delivered by Arifin at the University of Jenderal Sudirman and the State Institute of IslamicStudies and it was later refined when he was studying at the University of Washington (1968–1970).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

and modern history, ‘a fact that has amazed us’ (Arifin 202: 131). Quoting historianArnold Toynbee, Arifin (2002: 132) wrote, ‘Jewish history proves to us that Judaismhas survived a long history’ and concludes the chapter on Judaism by citing a leaderof the Reform Movement of American Judaism, Maurice Eisendrath, ‘out of 2.5millions of Jews who live in New York, not one fourth is associated with an establishedJudaism, but has adhered to paganism and de-moralization’.22

The other textbook by Joesoef Sou’yb (1983: 268–315), has a chapter on Judaismthat briefly explains definition, scriptures, law and sects and ends with a sub-section onZionism that tells the story of its rise culminating in the creation of the State of Israel.Using sources in English, including The Ten Commandments by A. Powell Davies (1957),The living Talmud by Judah Goldin (1960), and The world’s living religions by Robert Hume(1930), the chapter does not make a value judgment about whether or not Jews weregood or bad, exclusive or inclusive, humble or arrogant. It is historical and compara-tively more objective than Arifin’s book.

Yet another textbook aimed at Muslim students and Indonesians, Sejarah agama danbangsa Yahudi by Hermawati (2005), claims to give an ‘objective and factual perspective’on the history of Judaism and Jews, including of the creation of the State of Israel and themodern conflict. The author says that the approach is historical, but it is based on theQur’an and the Old Testament as well. It aims ‘to avoid misperception toward Israel-Zionism which has up till now occupied Palestine’ and contends that the storiesprovide religious instruction for believers (Hermawati 2005: v, 38).

In the Hermawati book, Judaism is defined as a religion based on a contract betweenGod (YHWH) and the children of Israel, formulated in the Ten Commandments. Theauthor also observes change, diversity, and dynamics among Jews, reconciling their reli-gious and ethnic identities as well as balancing orthodoxy and modernity. The bookmaintains that Jews became ‘exclusive’ because of their suffering and being in exileamidst other peoples (Hermawati 2005: 35, 60–1). From exile came the idea ofdiaspora and return to homeland, Palestine (Hermawati 2005: 62–7). Jews deviatedfrom the Law of Torah because of their arrogance and extravagance (as epitomised bymurdering their own prophets) and they received God’s wrath and punishment. Oneof the reasons why Jesus was sent to them was to convince them to return to theway of God. Thus, Hermawati (2005: 21, 67) follows the definition of Judaism as‘those who repent’ (Hebrew: hada, sic). In Medina, Jews in exile lived in conflictwith each other and with Arab tribes. For Hermawati (2005: 35, 68), Jewish exclusi-vism was the cause of conflict with other communities as Jews liked to divide Arabsand keep them in mutual conflict until Muhammad became their ruler in Medina.Here, the lack of nuance in the description of Jewish history is all too apparent.

In her exposition, expulsion and Holocaust have become part of Jewish historybecause ‘perhaps Jews always showed their exclusivism or their dominant intellectualand economic power wherever they live which created social jealousy and conflict . . .and at the same time, led them to defend their existence to the extent that theyowned their own homeland and live freely in one state (Hermawati 2005: 74).Zionism, in the author’s accounting, emerged as a response to Jewish diasporic sufferingbut, with Theodor Herzl, it developed as an international movement to create a Jewishstate in Palestine, regardless of criticisms of Jewish politics by some Jewish scholars such

22Arifin does not provide notes on this statement.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

as Albert Einstein and Martin Buber. Hermawati argues that the birth of the State ofIsrael in 1948 was dominated by secular and pragmatic rather than religious Zionists.Their claim of Palestine as ‘the promised land’ has led to ethnic cleansing and the viola-tion of international law. Jewish immigration to and colonisation of Palestine createsresistance from Arab Palestinians who see themselves as the indigenous peoples(Hermawati 2005: 90–100). Hermawati’s representation of Jewish history tends todemonstrate how the State of Israel was made possible by its persistent exclusivism.

Hermawati traces the history of Palestinian people from the early times to the riseof the Islamic Resistance Movement (Harakah al-Muqawwah al-Islamiyyah, HAMAS) and,in the last part of the book, discusses the role of Islamic countries in resolving theIsraeli–Palestinian conflict. In her conclusion, she argues that although differentparties have tried to resolve the problem, it has been thwarted by persistent conflictof interests. She attributes the lack of resolution to the power of Israel’s lobbies inthe United States and the United Nations, internal conflict among Arab countries,and the rejectionist factions among Palestinians such as HAMAS. Peace in the MiddleEast, Hermawati suggests, would be unachievable if Israel and Palestine cannotresolve their conflicts and if Palestinian and Israeli hardliners resort to weapons. Thenan open conflict between Jews and Muslims in other parts of the world, she concludes,would be possible (Hermawati 2005: 195–9). The author’s representation of Jewishancient and modern history indicates that she acknowledges a historical connectionbetween Judaism, Jews, and Israel. Behind the problem lies a Jewish worldview ofexceptionalism created and reinforced by their minority status in history.

Apart from the university books, some educational comic books for elementary andsecondary students, such as the ones produced by Mizan Publisher to create a ‘peacegeneration’, contain the importance of values of tolerance and pluralism. One suchbook for students, Different in faith, but not hostile, has on its back cover ‘religious differ-ence should be dealt with in peace and mutual respect, with exchange of ideas and realexamples’. It contained a comic strip, entitled ‘To remain just despite religious differ-ence’ which tells a story of Caliph Umar ibn Khatthab, a Muslim group, and a Jewishman. The Muslim group demolished a house owned by a Jewish man because theywanted to build a mosque in the area. The Jewish man reported this to Caliph Umarand the latter required the Muslims to rebuild the house. The Caliph asked Muslimsto ‘act justly and straightly, as straight as the line drawn on the bone’ (Lincoln andAmalee n.d.: 9–10).23 Here, the story of interaction between Jewish man and Muslimruler is retold to teach a moral lesson about harmony and justice.

In contemporary Indonesia, apart from the books discussed here, there are virtuallyno other translations of books on Jewish history and culture into Indonesian. The reasonsfor this require further research, but one can speculate that there are hardly any Indo-nesian scholars specialising on Judaism. The other reason may be socio-political: workson Judaism are seen within global tensions and not in their own right. It is also difficultfor Indonesians to study in Israel because the Indonesian government does not recogniseits existence. This condition has yet to change and is dependent on a future when stu-dents of comparative religions in Islamic and other universities are able to pursue theirstudies abroad and are willing to translate books on Judaism and Jewish history andculture into Indonesian.

23Erik Lincoln and Irfan Amalee (n.d.: 9–10).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

Concluding remarks

This article aims to identify and explain alternative, important and influential perspectivesbased on Muslim textual traditions and history which are more nuanced, although oftenambivalent towards Judaism and Jews. It does not seek to challenge the contention thatthe popular view of Jews and Judaism among Indonesian Muslims tends to be monolithicand predominantly negative. Much of Muslim contemporary perceptions are based on theparticular reading of the Qur’an, early and medieval Islamic history, and news of contem-porary global politics rather than on their actual interaction or encounters with contem-porary Jews in Indonesia. Nonetheless, the Jews are not necessarily unreal in the minds ofIndonesian Muslims. Although Judaism is often viewed with other religions in relation toIslam rather than on its own terms and history, it has taken a significant amount of place inthe works of Muslim scholars and activists promoting tolerance and pluralism as aresponse to the widely held, and generally unfavorable perceptions of Judaism and Jews.

In most representations, the concepts of Judaism as religion and of Jewishness asethnicity are often not distinguished. Moses, Torah, Israel and Muhammad’s relationshipwith Jews in Medina and Muslims–Jews in medieval Spain are often discussed in theworks of Indonesian Muslim intellectuals. Muslims’ perceptions of Jews are based ontheir view of ‘Jews of Islam’ – be it in classical Medina, medieval Spain or contemporaryPalestine, rather than recognising them as independent with their own dynamic history.In other words, Muslim perceptions of Jews and Judaism depend on how they defineIslam and read Islamic texts and history.

In Indonesia, an increasingly progressive view of Jews and Judaism can be attributedto different textual and contextual factors. These include a greater need for cross-reli-gious understanding and dialogue supported by the government, but largely pioneeredby non-governmental individuals and organisations; nationalist awareness of Indonesia’shistorical diversity (regardless of Jews being absent in such nationalistic memory);increased interactions with progressive ideas that have travelled across religious andnational boundaries; and the progressive Muslims’ project amidst the perceived andreal challenges of conservatism and violence in parts of Indonesia and the world. Onemay well wonder if Indonesians can provide a viable alternative to the generally per-ceived and real antagonisms between Arabs and Israelis.

References

Al-Bashirah 2003 II: 1423: 5–6 [Makassar].Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. 2006. The Holy Qur’an: text, translation, and commentary. New Delhi:

Goodword Books. First published 1934.Arifin, H.N. 2002. Menguak misteri ajaran agama-agama besar. 10th edn. Jakarta: Golden

Trayon Press.Asad, Muhammad. 1980. Message of the Qur’an. Chicago: Kazi Publications.Bruinessen, Martin van. 1993. Yahudi sebagai simbol dalam wacana Islam Indonesia masa

kini. Paper presented at the Institute for Interfaith Dialogue in Indonesia, Yogyakarta,9 October and at the Mosque of Shalahuddin, Yogyakarta, 17 October.

Burhanuddin. 2007. The conspiracy of Jews: the quest for anti-Semitism in Media Dakwah.Graduate Journal of Asia-Pacific Studies 5 (2): 53–76.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

Cak Nur. See Madjid, Nurcholish.Cohen, Mark R. 2008. Under crescent and cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press.Dewan Syariat PP Wahdah Islamiyah. 2003. Hakikat Agama Ibrahim: Ketegasan meyakini

aqidah tauhid dan berlepas diri dari orang-orang musyrik serta konsisten terhadapsyari’at Allah. In Al-Bashirah, Vol. II. Makassar: Departemen Informasi danKomunikasi.

Dimont, Max I. 1973. The indestructible Jews. New York: New American Library.Ghazali, Abdul Moqsith. 2008. Islam and Judaism. ,http://islamlib.com/en/article/islam-

and-judaism..Ghazali, Abdul Moqsith. 2009. Argumen pluralisme agama: membangun toleransi berbasis al-

Qur’an. Depok: Katakita.Hadler, Jeffrey. 2004. Translations of antisemitism: Jews, the Chinese, and violence in colo-

nial and post-colonial Indonesia. Indonesia and the Malay World 32 (94): 291–313.Halim, Fachrizal Halim. 2010. Abdurrahman Wahid on Jewish Muslim relations. 14 January

,http://nu-usacanada.org..Halkin, Abraham S. 1956. The Judeo-Islamic age: the great fusion. In Leo W. Schwartz

(ed.), Great ages and ideas of the Jewish people. New York: Random House.Hermawati. 2005. Sejarah agama dan bangsa Yahudi. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.Ibn Taimiyya (d.1328). n.d. Al-Jawab al-Shahih liman Baddala Din al-Masih [The correct

answer to those who change the religion of the Messiah]. 4 vols. Beirut: Matabi al-Majd al-Tijariyah.

Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center. 2008. Contemporary Arab-Muslim anti-Semitism: its significance and implications. Tel Aviv: Israel Intelligence Heritageand Commemoration Center (IICC). ,http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/a_s_170408e.pdf.

Lewis, Bernard. 1984. The Jews of Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Lincoln, Erik and Amalee, Irfan. 2007. Peace generation: 12 Nilai Dasar Perdamaian: Buku

Panduan Untuk Guru. Bandung: Pelangi Mizan.Lincoln, Erik and Amalee, Irfan. n.d. Tetap adil walaupun pada orang beda agama. Beda

keyakinan nggak usah musuhan: #4 Tentang perbedaan agama. Bandung: Pelangi Mizan.Madjid, Nurcholish. 1994a. Masalah simbol dan simbolisme dalam ekspresi keagamaan. In

Budhy Munawar-Rachman (ed.), Kontekstualisasi doktrin Islam dalam sejarah. Jakarta:Yayasan Paramadina.

Madjid, Nurcholish. 1994b. Islamic roots of modern pluralism. Studia Islamika 1 (1).Madjid, Nurcholish. 1994c. Kerukunan dan kerjasama antar umat beragama dalam pengem-

bangan unsur etika sumber daya manusia Indonesia. Paper presented at the NationalConference on Human Resources, Jakarta, 11–13 August.

Madjid, Nurcholish. 2005. Islam doktrin dan peradaban. Jakarta: Paramadina & P.T DianRakyat.

Madjid, Nurcholish. 2009. Atas nama pengalaman beragama dan berbangsa di masa transisi. 2ndedn. Jakarta: Dian Rakyat & Paramadina.

Misrawi, Zuhairi. 2007. Al-Qur’an kitab toleransi: inklusivisme, pluralisme, dan multikulturalisme.Jakarta: Penerbit Fitrah.

Moqsith. See Ghazali, Abdul Moqsith.Neusner, J., Sonn, T. and Brockopp, J.E. 2000. Judaism and Islam in practice: a sourcebook.

New York: Routledge.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

http://islamlib.com/en/article/islam-and-judaism

http://islamlib.com/en/article/islam-and-judaism

http://nu-usacanada.org

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/a_s_170408e.pdf

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/a_s_170408e.pdf

Ricci, Ronit. 2008. A Jew on Java, a model Malay rabbi and Tamil Torah scholar: Represen-tations of Abdullah Ibnu Salam in the Book of One Thousand Questions. Journal of theRoyal Asiatic Society 18 (4): 481–95.

Selengut, Charles (ed.). 2001. Jewish–Muslim encounters: history, philosophy, and culture.St. Paul, MN: Paragon House.

Shihab, Alwi. 1997. Islam inklusif. Bandung: Penerbit Mizan.Shihab, M.Quraish 1996. Wawasan al-Qur’an. Bandung: Penerbit Mizan.Shihab, M.Quraish 2000. Tafsir Al-Mishbah. Vol. 1. Jakarta: Penerbit Lentera Hati.Sirry, Mun’im A. 2004. Fiqih lintas agama. Jakarta: Yayasan Wakaf Paramadina & Asia

Foundation.Sou’yb, Joesoef. 1983. Agama-agama besar di dunia. Jakarta: Pustaka Al Husna.Wahid, Abdurrahman. 1999. Dialog agama dan masalah pendangkalan agama. In Kacung

Marijan and Ma’mun Murod Al-Brebesy (eds), Mengurai hubungan agama dannegara. Jakarta: Grasindo.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UZ

H H

aupt

bibl

ioth

ek /

Zen

tral

bibl

ioth

ek Z

üric

h] a

t 13:

16 0

7 Ju

ly 2

014

‘they are not all alike’

Documents