MUHAMMADIYAH.OR.ID, YOGYAKARTA — Prominent Indonesian sociologist and Muhammadiyah leader, Haedar Nashir, has received well-deserved recognition from the Indonesian Sociology Association (Ikatan Sosiologi Indonesia). The association’s chairperson, Arie Sudjito, bestowed upon Haedar the esteemed honor of Honorary Member of the Indonesian Sociology Association.
In the “New Path of Religious Moderation: Appreciating 66 Years of Haedar Nashir” Discussion and Book Launch conducted at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) on Tuesday (April 23), Arie Sudjito emphasized that Haedar is a national figure with profound and insightful thoughts. Haedar’s thoughts on moderation are considered a relevant solution to various challenges faced in the context of Islam, nationhood, and humanity.
“I highly appreciate Prof. Haedar, who is also a UGM alumnus with a Master’s and Doctoral degree in Sociology. I’ve been reading his writings in newspapers since I was a student,” said Arie, who is also Vice Rector IV of UGM.
Besides, Haedar also discussed two distinct interpretations of the concept of moderation among Muslims.
According to Haedar, the first group perceives moderation as a concept that allows everything. This approach sometimes leads to the notion of religious syncretism. Meanwhile, the second group is not entirely in favor of using the term moderation, preferring instead the term “wasathiyah,” which they deem more appropriate. For this group, moderation is considered a concept influenced by Western perspectives, while wasathiyah is seen as authentically rooted in Islamic tradition.
Haedar clarified that in essence, moderation and wasathiyah hold the same meaning. He stressed that neither should be interpreted as concepts that permit everything. For Haedar, moderation or wasathiyah should be understood as a middle ground or balance in views and actions, avoiding extremism.
Furthermore, Haedar also highlighted the relationship between puritanism, radicalism, and the significance of moderation in the religious and social contexts of Indonesia. He maintained that puritanism does not automatically lead to radicalism. The spirit of making corrections or improvements does not necessarily equate to a penchant for violence.
Hence, in addressing the issue of radicalism, Haedar disagreed with the use of deradicalization approaches. He argued that the concepts of radicalism and deradicalization often fail to yield sustainable solutions and could even create new forms of radicalism.
In his view, Haedar emphasized the importance of countering radicalism with a moderation approach. He believed that Indonesia possesses a strong foundation in moderation. The historical transition from Hinduism and Buddhism to Islam in Indonesia serves as tangible evidence that such transformations can occur peacefully without resorting to violence.
“Indonesia needs to be built on a moderate foundation,” said Haedar, summarizing his views on the crucial role of moderation in fostering a prosperous and just society in Indonesia.
