The School of Ahl al-Sunnah

THE SCHOOL OF AHL AL-SUNNAH WA’L-JAMA’AH
AND THE ATTACHMENT OF INDONESIAN MUSLIMS
TO ITS DOCTRINES

By Fauzan Saleh*)

Abstract

Madzhab Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah adalah suatu sekte keagamaan dalam Islam yang utama dan dianut oleh mayoritas Muslim di dunia. Di Indonesia, madzhab ini telah dikenal sejak masuknya Islam pertama kali di kepulauan Nusantara, dan dianggap sebagai madzhab resmi yang harus diikuti oleh setiap Muslim. Sekalipun demikian tidak semua kelompok atau organisasi Islam di Indonesia secara eksplisit mengakui bahwa kelompoknya adalah penganut setia dari madzhab ini. Keharusan mengikuti ajaran Ahl al-Sunnah di kalangan umat Islam di Indonesia secara tegas dinyatakan oleh kelompok NU, suatu organisasi keagamaan yang didirikan pada tahun 1926 dengan tujuan untuk membela doktrin madzhab ini. Dengan menganut madzhab Ahl al-Sunnah tersebut NU menganggap dirinya sebagai representasi Islam yang sebenarnya. Klaim ini, menurut pengakuan mereka, didasarkan pada sumber-sumber Hadits atau Sunnah yang menunjukkan keharusan bermadzhab dalam mengamalkan ajaran agama. Namun seperti apa implementasi doktrin Ahl al-Sunnah tersebut dalam kehidupan keagamaan umat Islam secara umum di Indonesia? Dan apakah kelompok umat Islam lain di Indonesia tidak memiliki kepedulian terhadap keharusan mengikuti doktrin Ahl al-Sunnah? Hal-hal inilah kiranya yang perlu dicermati lebih lanjut. Paper ini berusaha mengkaji sejauh mana attachment umat Islam di Indonesia terhadap doktrin Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, dan seperti apa implementasinya dalam kehidupan keagamaan umat Islam di Indonesia secara umum, dengan menyoroti rumusan doktrin yang terdapat pada beberapa organisasi keagamaan yang berkembang di Indonesia hingga dewasa ini.

Introduction

For Indonesian Muslims, the term ahl al-sunnah wa’l-jama’ah has been used as a prototype of their religious attachment since the earliest history of Islam in Indonesia. Almost all religious affiliations in Indonesian Islam are connected to the teachings of this school. The Nahdlatul Uama’ or NU, for instance, explicitly mentions in its institutional constitution that they have adopted this doctrine with an additional advocation to struggle for the sake of Islam in accordance with one of the four Islamic legal schools, the Hanafite, Malikite, Shafi’ite, and Hanbalite. The earliest constitution of this organization (1930) stated that NU was established with the aim of upholding the teachings of the four madhhabs and to undertake all possible endeavors for the advantages of Islam. The constitution also insisted that it was necessary to examine all books that would be used for religious instructions to assure that they were entirely in agreement with the teachings of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, and were not the books of heretics. The Muhammadiyah, on the other hand, although less explicitly, also adopts this doctrine as one of its Tarjih’s decisions on the principles of belief which are to be based on the precepts of ahl al-haqq wa’l-sunnah.
Although these organizations claim that all valid Islamic groups in Indonesia should adhere to the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah, they never clearly defined the term ahl al-sunnah wa’l-jama’ah or what an affinity to this school of thought actually entails. This paper will discuss a detailed description of the term Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah followed by an examination of the ways in which religious groups in Indonesia, both traditionalist and modernist camps, attach themselves to this school of thought. More specifically, although the NU deliberately links itself to this doctrine, it is still significant to examine to which extent the members of this traditional religious association apply the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah in their daily life, since in general they tend to incorporate some practices that have no valid foundation in the textual resources, essentially those originating from the local customs which are largely of the influence of Hindu, Buddhist or animistic traditions. They do so, more or less, in order to support the idea of tolerance and flexibility, especially with regard to their claim of representing the majority of Indonesian Islam.

The Ahl al-Sunnah, a general overview
Generally speaking, the use of the term ahl al-sunnah wa’l-jama’ah indicates the Islamic school of thought followed by the majority of the Muslim ummah, “to distinguish themselves from other Islamic sects whose views, they maintain, constitute bida’ (sg. Bid’ah, “innovations”), departures from what the community at large holds.” A.J. Wensink writes that Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah or “the people of the Sunnah and the Community” are those who refrain from deviating from orthodox dogma and practice; this expression is used specifically in opposition to the Shi’ah. But historically, it has been closely related to the development of political Islam since its early formative period. Like other general issues discussed in Islamic theology, this term is primarily related to the problem of the imamate, an issue which marks the first instance of a clear distinction in Islamic identity. At this time, some Muslims began to label themselves “Sunni” in contrast to the Shi’i.
The most serious issue dividing the Sunni from the Shi’i is this very question of the imamate, concerning the controversy over who was eligible to be elected caliph of the Prophet. For the Sunnis, the accession of the first four caliphs represents the true order of excellence. The problem actually stems from a discussion of the relative merits of Uthman and Ali and the question of whether or not it was appropriate for Uthman to hold the caliphate prior to Ali. Abu Hanifah, in his treatise al-Fiqh al-AkbarI, states: “We leave the question of ‘Uthman and ‘Ali to Go,” which implies that he inclined to accept the ideas expressed by the Murji’ites. More significantly, this shows his opposition to Shi’i point of view which gave a special place to Ali ahead of the other three caliphs. Abu Hanifah reportedly explained further: “We do not dissociate from any of the companions of the Messenger of God, nor do we associate with one rather than another.” This idea is generally supported by the Sunnis’ acceptance of the position of the first four caliphs after the Prophet, in contrast to that of the Shi’is who believed that Ali was the only rightful successor to Muhammad. All Shi’is, except the Zaydis, considered the first three caliphs usurpers of the caliphates.
Although Sunni Islam is usually claimed to related to the Ash’arite school of theology, there is evidence for the use of this term prior to Ash’ari. Usually it refers to those who sought direct reference to the text of the Qur’an and the Sunnah for solutions to problems that arose; when they could not find any reference in either, they kept silent, because they did not want to transgress or go beyond the divine sources. They were better known as ahl al-hadith, representing the companions of the Prophet and their followers. They were also known as al-salaf (predecessor, ancestry), to be differentiated from the ahl al-ra’y or the people of “reasoned opinion” who tended to rely on intellectual exercises in solving problems through the use of qiyas or analogical reasoning. Their dispute initially began with the problem of the attributes of God. The salaf, or ahl al-hadith, maintained that God possesses eternal attributes of knowledge, power, life, will, hearing, seeing and speaking, among others, and they did not differentiate between the attributes of essence (sifat al-dhat) and the attributes of activities (sifat fi’liyah). Rather they noted that these attributes were mentioned in the Shari’ah, and therefore should be simply described as “testified attributes” (sifat khabariyah). They were also unwilling to interpret those attributes. Malik b. Anas, for instance, when asked for the meaning of the Qur’anic verse which describes God as sitting on a throne (al-‘arsh), simply replied: “The sitting is known, but the modality of His sitting is unknown, and the belief in it is obligatory, and questioning on it is a heresy.” This idea was supported by other jurists, including Ahmad b. Hanbal, Sufyan al-Tahawri, Dawud al-Isfahani, and their followers.
In addition to the above explanation, the use of the term ahl al-sunnah wa’l-jama’ah is also based on some traditions of the Prophet which state that the Muslim ummah would split into seventy-three groups after the age of the Prophet, all of which would go to hell, except one. That single group, according to the Prophet, consists of those who maintain (the sunnah of) the Prophet and of his companions. The last phrase “those who maintain the sunnah of the Prophet and of his companions” becomes very important because it represents the standard measure by which Muslims evaluate the possibility of attaining salvation. This statement is further clarified in another hadith stating that the one group who will gain salvation is al-jama’ah, meaning the community (of believers). The term “community,” in turn, also signifies the majority, as indicated by another saying of the Prophet that God will never allow the ummah of Muhammad to agree on an error (dalalah), and the hand of God is above the community. Whoever isolates him or herself from the community will be left alone in hell. An additional comment was given in a hadith narrated by Ibn Majah saying that whenever a dispute takes place, the believer should associate with the majority who maintained the truth and the community (fa-‘alaika bi’l-sawad al-a’zam ma’a al-haqq wa’l-jama’ah).
In addition to the above exposition, Ibn Tahir al-Baghdadi summarizes the general features of the followers of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah as those who believe in the unity of God, hold the dogmas of promise and threat (al-wa’d wa’l-wa’id), reward and retribution. They tread the path of the Sifatiyah who accept the doctrine that God has eternal attributes, declare themselves free from anthropomorphism as well as divesting God of His attributes and steer clear of the Qadarite views and of Mu’tazilism. They affirm the possibility of seeing God with human eyes without falling into the error of tashbih (anthropomorphism). They acknowledge the resurrection from the grave, and recognize the truth of the pool (al-hawd), the bridge (al-sirat), the intercession (al-shafa’ah), and the forgiveness of sins except for polytheism. They recognize the imamate of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and ‘Ali, and they venerate highly the pious ancestry (al-salaf al-salih) of the ummah. They realize the necessity of congregating for prayer on Fridays under the leadership of the imams. They also realize the necessity of extracting the precepts of law from the Qur’an, the Sunnah and the consensus of opinion (ijma’) among the Companions. They urge obedience to the Sultans in whatever does not involve sinfulness. Also included in this group are those who possess a comprehensive knowledge of the Hadith and the Sunnah of the Prophet and can discern the sound from the fabricated ones; and the Sufi ascetics who indulge in learning and abstain from pleasure, resign to fate and are content with the obtainable. Their way of life is to entrust themselves to God, submitting to His command, feeling satisfied with whatever has been bestowed upon them and abstaining from rebelling against Him. Finally, included to this group are those of the general population among whom the practices of the orthodox prevail while they do not attach themselves to any innovation or heresy, but only to the doctrines approved by the orthodox in relation to the problems of justice and unity, reward and punishment.
With reference to the above explanation, it seems clear that Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah was a term commonly used to legitimize a theological point of view. It also inferred that other schools of thought which did not agree with this has allegedly strayed away from the true path of God and the Sunnah of the Prophet. It can be derived from the above explanation too that the use of the term Sunnah indicates that the followers of this school should adopt the Sunnah or the traditions established by the Prophet and his companions, usually called the salaf or predecessors (of the Muslim community). Moreover, their traditions are considered to have been representing pure Islam, free from any form of heresy. As they also used the term ahl al-haqq, they claimed that their religious doctrines are the only truth which should be accepted and observed by all Muslims. They also claimed that they consistently maintain the truth, as they called themselves ahl al-istiqamah. Finally, the use of the term jama’ah, or community, emphasizes their historical consciousness on the basis of the support of the majority of Muslim people. In other words, they should maintain the historical continuity of the ummah in order to avoid disintegration. Consequently, this group accepted the caliphate of al-Ma’mun, although the latter was too much inclined to support the Shi’is and and suppress those who opposed Mu’tazilite doctrines, like Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal, who was celebrated as the leading figure of the salaf school.

Claims of Attachment to the Doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah
The attachment of Indonesian Muslims to the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah can be scrutinized through several Islamic religious groups prevailing in this country. But for the sake of simplification, I will focus on the NU and Muhammadiyah groups as the major representatives of Indonesian Islam, the first representing the traditionalist point of view, and the second being the representative of the modernist trends.
For the NU members, as has been indicated above, the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah are very central. They claim those doctrines to be the main core of their religious identity. The establishment of NU was primarily meant to uphold the doctrines of this school of thought among Indonesian Muslims. Choirul Anam, in the work cited above, also emphasizes this idea. He states that among the basic considerations that led to the founding of this organization in 1926 was a desire to respond the demands of traditionalist Muslims to propagate the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah in Indonesia. It is not surprising to see that NU members are more concerned with this issue than those belonging to other groups. They constantly stress their affiliation with the doctrines of this school, and tend to claim that it is only their group that has an authentic attachment to it. For them, the true Islam is that of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, although they do retain their own interpretation of this assertion.
Anam begins his discussion with an intense look at the early development of Islam in Indonesia. He suggests that the spread of Islam in Indonesia (especially in Java) was mainly promoted by the Nine Saints, better known as Wali Songo, who applied several different approaches to their propagation (da’wah) of Islam. Each wali should have taken a particular approach due to their varied perceptions of the nature of the Indonesian people at that time. More notably, Anam examines two different approaches: one held by Raden Rahmat or Sunan Ampel of Surabaya and by Sunan Giri of Gresik, and the other held by Sunan Kalijaga. According to the first two walis, Islam should be introduced to the indigenous people of Java directly in its pure and pristine form, free from every element of heresy and syncretism; and all indigenous customs deviating from the spirit of Islam should not be tolerated. All forms of obscurantisms, superstitions, idolatries and heresies must be suppressed immediately. But, for Sunan Kalijaga, who once lived in the agrarian region of Central Java, and was culturally close to the Javanese Court, considered the above approach held by Sunan Ampel and Sunan Giri as inappropriate to be applied in an area where the population was heavily overwhelmed by Hindu-Buddhist traditions for many centuries. The approach in preaching Islam held by both Sunan Ampel and Sunan Giri could be suitable only for people living in coastal regions, who were by nature more open to different currents of ideas and culture, due to their straightforward access to wider communication with varied people coming from many different countries by the way of sea. Kalijaga maintained that the propagation of Islam could not be undertaken abruptly against local culture. Instead it should be carried out through persuasion by providing a broad tolerance of local customs. Kalijaga went even further in trying to accommodate or revive local culture. He argued that through this broad tolerance he could invite more converts peacefully; once they had accepted Islam, he would lead them towards its pure teachings gradually, although it might take a long time. However, he reduced some of the severe challenges presented by mass conversion by avoiding a contrast that was too drastic.
Anam suggests that Sunan Kalijaga’s approach is more appropriate for the NU, and is frequently applied by the ulama’ who teach in Pesantren, or traditional Islamic boarding schools. In their propagation of Islam, the ulama’ associated with the NU usually become more tolerant of certain deviations from orthodox Islam, a result of the influence of indigenous customs. They have even argued that local cultures could be used as a vehicle for spreading Islam more extensively. This tendency is clearly manifested in several events related to local customs and adapted to religious ceremonies, such as marriage, circumcision, the celebration of the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad, and certain ceremonies devoted to a deceased persons (tahlilan, slametan) on the third, seventh, hundredth, and thousandth anniversary of the day of his or her death. These ceremonies are still popularly practiced among the members of the NU.
This tendency was severely criticized by the modernist Muslim movement in Indonesia, especially by the Muhammadiyah and Persatuan Islam or PERSIS, the two leading organizations promoting Islamic reform in Indonesia. Even prior to the establishment of these organizations in 1912 and 1923 respectively, the idea of reform had influenced some Indonesian leaders who went to Mecca for pilgrimage, due to easier transportation facilitated by the Dutch Administration, the idea of reform grew and spread until it was finally embodied in new movements like those of the Muhammadiyah, al-Irshad and PERSIS. They encouraged Muslims to revive their understanding of religion through direct reference to the principal sources of Islamic doctrines, the Qur’an and Hadith, and to avoid all elements of heresy, superstition and idolatry. Anam does not specifically mention that the establishment of NU was in fact a reactionary measure against the reform movement launched by the Muhammadiyah and PERSIS, but rather indicates that NU was established in response to the general Islamic reform occurring in the Islamic world, particularly that promoted by the Wahhabi movement in the Arabian Peninsula.
But Achmad Farichin Chumaidy, writing his M.A. thesis in 1976 on the Jam’iyah Nahdlatul Ulama’, emphasizes that in addition to the development of Wahhabi movement in the Hijaz, the establishment of the NU actually could not be separated from the conflicts and disputes between the orthodox and reformist groups which had been taking place in Indonesia for a considerable period of time. The orthodox group realized that their dispute with the reformists would never be solved and felt that the latter’s attack undermining the madhhab teaching was becoming more effective and fierce. The reformist groups, in order to strive toward their ideal and unify their followers, had established organizations, such as Muhammadiyah, Persatuan Islam and al-Irshad. Stimulated by what had been done by their opponents, the orthodox group intended to establish their own organization as a forum for discussing religious matters and a channel for maintaining and spreading madhhab teachings among the Indonesian community. Chumaidy supports his idea with a statement made by K.H. Masykur, one of the NU’s leading figures, when the latter justified the NU’s withdrawal from the Masyumi, in 1952: “The organization of the Nahdlatul Ulama’ was created in reaction to the emergence of the movement whose desire was to abolish the madhhab school in Indonesia, as well as in Hijaz where Ibn Sa’ud wrested the power.”
Nevertheless, the Indonesian ulama’ were worried that the advancement of the Wahhabi movement under the patronage of the Sa’ud dynasty would cause unfavorable changes in terms of performing the religious rites in the Hijaz. They heard that the Wahhabi, through its purification campaign, had abolished the madhhab system, forbidden people to visit the tombs of Muslim heroes (including that of the Prophet) and prohibited Muslims from conducting pilgrimage rituals based on madhhab principles, among other things. They were even more threatened by a rumour that the Hijaz land was only secure for those who supported the Wahhabi movement, and that the lives of those who continued to subscribe to the madhhab system would be endangered there. All these issues aroused a great anxiety among the traditional ulama’ in Indonesia who considered the adoption of the madhhab system essential for the performance of religious duties. Accordingly, they convened to create a committee whose members could be sent as delegates to King Sa’ud in the Hijaz, demanding his guarantee of the freedom to adopt madhhab doctrines. They also requested that traditional religious practices, such as the erection of tombs on graves and the reading of certain prayers (dala’il al-khayrat), should be respected. The committee, called the Hijaz Committee, was set up in January 1926. Once the formation of the committee was completed, however, the question arose as to whom the committee would be responsible. Finally, it was agreed that the committee would be responsible to the body of ulama’ who associated themselves with the newly founded movement, named Nahdlatul Ulama’, or the resurgence of the ulama’. The foundation of the Hijaz Committee was celebrated at the same time as the establishment of the Nahdlatul Ulama’ or NU.
After all, the establishment of NU was meant to consolidate the Indonesian ulama’ who were concerned with the demand to maintain the madhhab institution as a legitimate way to understand as well as practice religious doctrines. K.H. Hasyim Asy’ari, for instance, the founding father and the great leader (al-rais al-akbar) of NU, vigorously emphasized the necessity of following a madhhab. In his celebrated speech known as Qanun Asasi Nahdlatul Ulama’, he reminded Muslims in Indonesia that there would be great benefit to adopting the four madhhabs, and serious evil in abandoning them. He argued that in order to be able to observe religious doctrines correctly, Muslims must follow their predecessors. This theory was exemplified by the second generation (tabi’in) of the early Muslims, who took their religion from their predecessors, and likewise the generations following them, known as tabi’ al-tabi’in. This is because, according to Asy’ari, the intellect has approved following a madhhab as a successful way of practicing Islam, adding that religion is not knowledgeable without transmission and inference. Yet, transmission is invalid without connecting one generation directly to the preceding generation; as for inference, it is necessary to be cognizant of the schools of the past, and not to deviate from their decisions, which would destroy the agreements reached by the ulama’ on religious matters. In addition, Asy’ari emphasized that the four madhhabs were only legitimate representatives of the majority of the ummah. Asy’ari supports this conclusion by referring to the saying of the Prophet that Muslims should follow the great majority (al-sawad al-a’zham). Since other righteous madhhabs already disappeared due to a lack of support from their adherents, Asy’ari pointed out, following the majority of the ummah as ordained by the Prophet means subscribing to one of the four legitimate madhhabs of the Sunni law: Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali. Asy’ari also emphasized the necessity of taqlid or the unquestioning acceptance and adoption of concepts or doctrines laid down by the leaders of the madhhabs.
It seems clear that NU’s attachment to the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah was decided by its founders as the principal tenets which members of this religious organization were required to adopt obediently. Their concept of being devout Muslims means one who sticks closely to the principles laid down by the madhhab leaders in jurisprudence, by Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi in theology, and by Imam Abu Qasim al-Junaid in Sufism. They maintain that following one of the four madhhabs is legitimate, and must be fortified, since they believe that the religious principles formulated by the madhhab leaders are based on the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet. The ulama’ of NU also maintain that certain religious practices like tahlilan, tawassul, slametan or giving charity for the interests of the deceased are based on religious principles, although they cannot find authoritative hadith mentioning any of these traditions. They simply insist that these traditions must be based on the practices of the companions of the Prophet which were accepted and ordained by the Prophet.

Muhammadiyah’s Attitude
With regard to Muhammadiyah’s attitude toward the concept of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, it can be said that this religious association, except in its Tarjih decision mentioned earlier, does not claim a special attachment to the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah. The Muhammadiyah movement, since its establishment in 1912, has always been most concerned with promoting the necessity of reform or tajdid in Indonesia Islam. However, when the organization was accused by other Muslim groups in the country of being beyond the bound of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, one of its prominent leaders, Djarnawi Hadikusuma, vehemently denied the accusation. In response, he wrote a small treatise entitled Muhammadiyah Ahlu Sunnah wal Djama’ah? in which he defends the Muhammadiyah’s position against that accusation. This small treatise was originally meant to be supplementary material for the Muhammadiyah proselytizers (muballigh), designed to allow them to respond correctly to questions as to whether or not the Muhammadiyah belonged to the Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah or followed the madhhab.
But the most significant attitude taken by Muhammadiyah on this issue is that it does not explicitly adopt a particular madhhab of jurisprudence. Muhammadiyah claims that it would be more appropriate, recognizing that it is quite possible for modern Muslims to learn and adopt several currents of thought at the same time. It is even more beneficial, since, by freeing itself from attachment to a particular madhhab, the followers of Muhammadiyah can anticipate the development of current tendencies of Islamic thought which appear to grow more pluralistic. Hence, they have freedom to broaden their minds without being psychologically constrained by the fear of violating the doctrines of a certain madhhab. In contrast with NU, Muhammadiyah is not obsessed with the claim of being encompassed within the sphere of Ahl al-Sunnah, although its constitution mentions that they advocate theological creeds which are evidently in line with the precepts of Ahl al-Sunnah. Accordingly, Muhammadiyah is fairly able to claim itself of being a “non-sectarian” movement.
By applying direct reference to the Qur’an and the Sunnah for concepts of religious matters, Muhammadiyah has called itself an Islamic reform movement since the early decades of the twentieth century. For Muhammadiyah, this reform movement is designed to restore the teachings of Islam in their pure and original form as manifested in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, free from any element of heresy and superstition, as true reflections of the principal characteristics of Islam. Muhammadiyah intends to use this reform to reconstruct religious life in the form of a pristine Islam. In this way, Muhammadiyah becomes the vindicator of Islamic precepts and all forms of ritual practices against deviant and heretical tendencies. Reform or tajdid of this type is accordingly called “purification.” On the other hand, as Islam encompasses universal values, the tajdid of Muhammadiyah also refers to the implementation of Islamic teachings in accordance with the demands of the developments of the modern age. This is specifically related to the non-ritual aspects of Islamic teachings which deal with social and humanitarian issues not strictly regulated by Islam but are relinquished to human reasoning, except for general guidelines. Tajdid of this type is called “renewal.” With regards to the first form of tajdid, Muhammadiyah realizes that there are always some tendencies among Muslims themselves to deviate from the original teachings of Islam. This does not mean hat Islamic teachings are defective, however, since Muslims believe that Islam as religion is complete and perfect. Nevertheless, deviation might occur in implementing the true doctrines of Islam, due to some influences originating from local culture or the Muslim’s lack of understanding in terms of their true belief. On the other hand, Muhammadiyah believes that Islam as a religion is suitable for modern society. Islam, in other words, does not contradict modernism and is applicable to modern life. This is because Islam has laid down its principal teachings in accordance with the development of mankind. More clearly, Abdu’l Mu’ti Ali, who wrote his M.A. thesis on Muhammadiyah in 1957, notes that the main factors which led to the establishment of this religious movement were the impurity of religious life, the inefficiency of religious education, the activities of Christian activities, and the indifferent and even anti-religious attitude of the intelligentsia, which were very common among Indonesian people. These are the main areas where Muhammadiyah endeavoured to introduce reforms.
Muhammadiyah asserts in its constitution that it is an Islamic movement designed to propagate Islam through ordaining goodness and forbidding evil (al-amr bi’l-ma’ruf wa’l-nahy ‘an al-munkar) based on the precepts of Islam as manifested in the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Accordingly, the main objectives of the establishment of this movement are the purification of Indonesian Islam from corrupting influences and practices, the reformulation of Islamic doctrines in the light of modern thought, the reformation of Muslim education and the defence of Islam against external influences and attacks. After all, this organization is aimed at fortifying and upholding the religion of Islam for the sake of achieving a noble, righteous and prosperous community under the favour of God. It seems clear that although Muhammadiyah does not explicitly express its attachment to the school of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, the principles laid down by this organization are not contradictory to its doctrines as they are initially defined. More specifically, Muhammadiyah is, to a particular extent, similar to orthodox Islam, which is also called ahl al-hadith, in its ritual practices, ethics, as well as in its theological point of view.

Concluding Remarks
Indonesian Muslims’ attachment to the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah has been explicitly claimed by the NU, as manifested in the objectives of the establishment this organization, as well as in several works of its writers. Some NU writers have tried to reformulate the principal doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah, although these attempts tend to be somewhat cursory and less academically researched. Nevertheless, these works represent the general features of the NU today and its strict adherence to the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah.
Their attachment to these doctrines is another factor which distinguishes the NU members from those of the other Islamic organizations developed in Indonesia. It is evident that the NU members adhere to their own understanding of the concept of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah and entirely implement the teachings of Islam according to that understanding. So far, there has been no problem in this matter, except that the advocates of this organization tend to monopolize the claim as the only legitimate adherents of the teachings of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, and thus exclude the other Muslim groups, even accusing of being outside the pale of Islam. This claim can be seen, for instance, in the following quotation:
The teachings of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah in Indonesia will flourish more rapidly, because we realize that among the programs of the NU is primarily to defend and fortify the teachings of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah. While the majority of the Indonesian Muslims are members of the NU, it involuntarily implies that the Islamic doctrines adopted by the Indonesian Muslims are those belonging to the Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah.

However, the advocates of NU consistently claim to have implemented Islamic doctrines based on the Sunnah of the Prophet and that of his companions. Adopting the Sunnah of the companions is considered very instrumental for them, because it is through the Sunnah of the companions that they suppose to justifiably perform some specific ritual practices not adopted by other Muslim groups in Indonesia. These specific practices include performing tarawih prayers with twenty raka’ats (instead of eight), reciting qunut in the morning prayer (subh), making two adhans for Friday prayers (rather than one), performing ‘idul fitri and ‘idul adha prayers in the mosques (instead of in the courtyards) and practicing some slametan, tahlilan and other popular traditions unknown in the original teachings of Islam. These are some of the ritual and traditional practices which generally differentiate the NU from Muhammadiyah and other religious reform movements in Indonesia.
Muhammadiyah, maintaining its reform ideology and religious purification, is reluctant to consider these popular practices valid, since they are not clearly ascribed to the real teachings of the Prophet. The members of this reform movement prefer not to speculate on the matter of ritual doctrines by assuming that certain traditions, although they have no valid reference to the Prophet, are favourable merely because the majority of Indonesian Muslims have performed them in their daily practices. Muhammadiyah, in contrast, emphasizes rigid practices in ritual matters, accepting only the proven traditions obviously taught by the Prophet.
Although the NU exclusively claims their attachment to the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunnah, this does not necessarily mean true that other Muslim groups in Indonesia do not perform their religious duties correctly, and vice versa. And this, in turn, requires further examination to verify which one of them is actually closer to the real belief of Islam, or at least as designed by the Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah. The claim made by NU members that their religious practices to be the sole authentic expression of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah dogma has served the organization well in its recruitment of the largest number of followers among Indonesian Muslims. Yet, at the same time, their adherence to the Ahl al-Sunnah is also used to legitimize ritual practices that cannot be authoritatively ascribed to the Prophet. For the sake of maintaining their popularity, they extend their tolerance to traditions that were unknown in the pristine Islam. The real difficulty, however, is the fact that the NU’s bold claim to the Ahl al-Sunnah tends to exclude other Muslim groups from the pale of Sunnism, and thus effectively delegitimizing them.
Nevertheless, despite some differences in traditions and practices, both the Muhammadiyah and NU remain outstanding representatives of Indonesian Islam. Each of them maintains that it follows only the religion of Allah, which is, as noted by one of the NU leading figures, nothing other than His revelation, His doctrine, as well as His law or the shari’ah. As the greatest Muslim organizations in Indonesia, both the NU and the Muhammadiyah are generally known as representing the traditionalist and modernist camps, respectively. Once, it is evidently true, they were perceived as symbolizing the doctrinal conflict prevailing among Indonesian Muslims. However, although the strife could sometimes grow serious, in subsequent years the advocates of these two factions came to understand that in reality their differences were without depth, not even touching upon the more fundamental principles, and did not jeopardize their respective reputation as devout Muslims. It is also impossible to see any member of these organizations accusing a person belonging to a different school of thought of being infidel, something that might have happened in the 1950s. The late Nurcholish Madjid, one of the most prominent Indonesian Muslim scholars, suggests that both the Muhammadiyah and NU actually have exemplified the two wings of a single eagle. It may in fact likewise have been historically willed by God that they should coexist within the Indonesian Islam. Madjid argues that according to the Qur’anic decree God has created all existing beings in pairs, consisting of two contradictory parts. They should, therefore, not exaggerate their differences but rather try to come closer together and cooperate in the attempt to actualize the ideals of Islam for the well being of all people in their homeland.
According to Madjid, Indonesian Muslims should learn much from history how Muslims in the past responded to challenges they encountered in every era and locality. Among the early Muslim scholars who successfully resolved the problems they were encountering were Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd in philosophy, al-Junaid and al-Bistami in Sufism, and the four madhhab leaders in jurisprudence. But in spite of discrepancies in their approaches and the results they had achieved, there was always a “common denominator,” that unified their spirits in the school of jama’ah, which later on became the foundation of the school of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah, the very term being the subject matter of this current discussion. Madjid agrees with the fact that Indonesian Sunnites are the followers of Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari in their doctrinal precepts (usul al-din), of one of the four madhhabs in jurisprudence, and of al-Junaid and al-Bistami in Sufism.
He emphasizes that Indonesian Muslims should avoid reiterating the disputations over controversial issues that had been inherited from the medieval era. It would be better for Indonesian Muslims to direct their energy toward establishing a new Weltanschaung (worldview) in the theological, cosmological and anthropological realms. He hopes that by establishing this new Weltanschaung Muslims will be able to discover the specific paradigms that will allow them to respond better to current challenges. Muslims should be able to benefit from the achievements of medieval scholars who were deeply rooted in Islamic traditions so that they can broaden their religious horizons. In making this assessment, Madjid insists that it is not necessary for Muslims to begin everything in their religious matters from zero. To support his idea he frequently refers to a saying popularly circulated among the traditionalists, al-muhafazat ‘ala al-qadim al-salih wa’l-akhdh bi’l-jadid al-aslah, “maintaining the old (traditions) which are good, while accepting the new (matters) which are better.” He seems thereby to be implicitly criticizing the position of the Muhammadiyah. Madjid maintains that due to its unyielding emphasis on the necessity of purification by solely returning to the Qur’an and Hadith, and its efforts to eradicate all religious innovations (bid’ah), the Muhammadiyah has unduly undermined certain Islamic traditional legacies. Although the Muhammadiyah has developed deeper insights concerning current world issues, Madjid argues, it nevertheless lacks a traditional basis. Accordingly, Madjid suggests that it would be better if Indonesian Muslims could combine the merits possessed by both the modernists and the traditionalists, for the advancement of Muslims’ role for the betterment of the people’s well being in this country.


Bibliography

Ali, Abdul Mu’ti. “The Muhammadiyah Movement: A Bibliographical Introduction.” MA Thesis, McGill University, 1957.

Ali, H. Amin. Ahlussunnah wal Jama’ah dan Unsur-unsur Pokok Ajarannya. Semarang: Wicaksana, 1980.

Anam, Choirul. Pertumbuhan dan Perkembangan Nahdlatul Ulama’. Sala: Jatayu, 1985.

Arfin, M.T. Gagasan Pembaruan Muhammadiyah. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya, 1987.

Ash’ari, Abu al-Hasan. Al-Ibanah ‘an Usul al-Diyanah. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-Arabi, 1990.

Asy’ari, K.H. Hasyim. Qanun Asasi Nahdlatul Ulama’. Kudus: Menara, 1969.

Aziz, Rs. Abd. Konsepsi Ahlussunnah wal-Jamaah dalam Bidang Aqidah dan Syari’ah. Pekalongan: Bahagia, 1990.

Al-Baghdadi, Ibn Tahir. Kitab al-Farq bayn al-Firaq wa-Bayan al-Firqat al-Najiyat Minha. Egypt: al-Ma’arif, 1910.

--------. Moslem Schisms and Sects (al-Fark Bain al-Firak) Being the History of the Various Philosophical Systems Developed in Islam, translated by Abraham S. Halkin. Tel-Aviv: Palestine Publishing Co., 1935.

Chumaidy, Achmad Farichin. “The Jam’iyah Nahdlatul Ulama: Its Rise and Early Development (1926-1945).” MA Thesis, McGill University, 1976.

Dhofier, Zamakhsyari. Tradisi Pesantren: Studi tentang Pandangan Hidup Kyahi. Jakarta: LP3ES, 1985.

Federspiel, Howard M. Persatuan Islam: Islamic Reform in Twentieth Century Indonesia. Ithaca, New York: Modern Indonesia Project, Cornell University, 1970.

--------. “The Muhammadiyah: A Study of an Orthodox Islamic Movement in Indonesia.” Indonesia, no. 10 (October 1970), pp. 57-79.

--------. A Dictionary of Indonesian Islam. Athens, Ohio: Center for International Studies, 1995.

Hadikusuma, Djarnawi. Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah, Bid’ah, Khurafat. Yogyakarta: Persatuan, 1996.

Haidar, M. Ali. Nahdatul Ulma’ dan Islam di Indonesia: Pendekatan Fikih dalam Politik Jakarta: Gramedia, 1994

Hasyim, Umar. Muhammadiyah Jalan Lurus dalam Tajdid, Dakwah, Kaderisasi dan Pendidikan: Kritik dan Terapinya. Surabaya: Bina Ilmu, 1990.

Jainuri, Achmad. “Landasan Teologis Gerakan Pembaruan Islam.” Ulumul Qur’an, vol. 6, no. 3 (1995), pp. 34-48.

Madjid, Nurcholish. “Reorientasi Wawasan Pemikiran Keislaman: Usaha Mencari Kemungkinan Bentuk Peran Tepat Umat Islam Indonesia di Abad XXI,” in Yunahar Ilyas et el. (eds.), Muhammadiyah dan NU: Reorientasi Wawasan Keislaman. Yogyakarta: Kerjasama LPPI UMY, LKPSM NU dan PP Al-Muhsin, 1993.

--------. “Aktualisasi Ajaran Ahlussunnah Wal Jama’ah,” in Muntaha Azhari and Abdul Mun’im Saleh (eds.), Islam Indonesia: Menatap Masa Depan. Jakarta: Perhimpunan Pengembangan Pesantren dan Masyarakat, 1989.

--------. “Menegakkan Faham Ahlus-Sunnah ‘Baru’,” in Haidar Bagir (ed.), Satu Islam, Sebuah Dilema. Bandung: Mizan, 1986.

Marmura, Michael E. “Sunni Islam.” The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, vol. 6, pp. 139-141.

Mas’udi, Masdar Farid. “Menuju Keberagaman yang Populistik: Reorientasi Pemikiran Keagamaan Nahdhatul Ulama – Muhammadiyah,” in Yunahar Ilyas et el. (eds.), Muhammadiyah dan NU: Reorientasi Wawasan Keislaman. Yogyakarta: Kerjasama LPPI UMY, LKPSM NU dan PP Al-Muhsin, 1993.

Mughni, Syafiq A. “Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah dan Posisi Teologi Muhammadiyah,” in Din Syamsuddin (ed.), Muhammadiyah Kini & Esok. Jakarta: Pustaka Panjimas, 1990, pp. 259-279.

Muhammadiyah, Pimpinan Pusat. Himpunan Putusan Tarjih. Yogyakarta: PP. Muhammadiayh, n.d.

--------. Pedoman Bermuhammadiyah. Yogyakarta: PP. Muhammadiyah Badan Pendidikan Kader, 1990.

Salam, Solichin. Wali Sanga dalam Perspectif Sejarah. Jakarta: Kuning Mas, 1989.

Al-Shahrastani, Abu al-Fath Muhammad Abd al-Karim. Kitab al-Milal wa’l-Nihal. Cairo: al-Halabi, 1968.

Sunyoto, Agus. Sejarah Perjuangan Sunan Ampel: Taktik dan Strategi Dakwah Islam di Jawa Abad 14-15. Surabaya: LPLI Sunan Ampel, n.d.

Tayob, Abdulkader. Islam: A Short Introduction Signs, Symbols and Values. Oxford: Oneworld, 1999.

Wahid, Abdurrahman. Muslim di Tengah Pergumulan. Jakarta: LEPPENAS, 1981.

Watt, W. Montgomery. The Formative Period of Islamic Thought. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1973.

Wensinck, A.J. “Sunna.” Encyclopedia of Islam, first edition, vol. 7, pp. 555-557.