This Is Why They Rejected The “Pancasila”

.
Long before the affirmation of the Pancasila as the sole foundation of the New Order was criticised by Muslims, this Pancasila which was “extracted” by Sukarno also received stiff opposition from Islamic figures, whether it be in the early days of independence or during the meeting in the Constitutional Assembly, the meeting conducted to formulate the foundation of the State.

Islamic leaders in the Constituency fiercely opposed the Pancasila and proposed Islam as the foundation of the State. On the first speech in the Constituent, on 12th November 1957, a figure of the Masjumi, Mohammad Natsir as one of the founders of the modern Islamic movement in Indonesia and the leader of the only party (Masjumi) in Indonesian politics that took a clear stand against Sukarno, when he sought to move away from a democratic parliament, said that the political goal of the Masjumi from the beginning was to make Islam as the foundation of the State.

“Not only because Muslims are the majority among the entire population of Indonesia that are promoting Islam as the state foundation, but it is based on our belief that the Islamic teachings on state administration and community management can guarantee a life of diversity based on mutual respect between the various groups in this country,” Natsir explained. In a beautiful language, Natsir reflected the wish of the Islamic Ummah, “Even if it's huge, it wont knock over. Even if it's tall, it instead protects.”

In that speech, Natsir also criticized the Pancasila as an idea that originates from the human extraction, which is not rooted in religion.

“Even if there is a “Precept of Divinity”, the source is secular, "laadieniyah", without religion,” he asserted. For the Islamic ummah, Natsir said, making the Pancasila as the state foundation is similar to jumping from the earth as a foothold into the empty space, the vacuum, no air. It is because the Pancasila wants to be a stand-alone ideology, that is neutral of religion and is above everything else. Natsir said that the state foundation must be something that is already rooted in the society, and history has shown that Islam as the religion adhered to by a majority of the people in Indonesia, is sufficiently rooted in the society. Islam have a clear source, derived from the revelations, unlike the Pancasila which has many interpretations, depending on one's philosophical outlook.

Besides Natsir, Buya Hamka (a renown writer and ulama' in Indonesia), who became a member of the Masjumi said that the Pancasila is only acknowledged by a few people, whereas the majority of the Indonesian population adhered to the original foundation, i.e. Islam

“Islam is the the original foundation in our motherland and the true personality of the Indonesian nation,” he asserted. Hamka in fact said, “The Pancasila has no foundation in the history of Indonesia”. Hamka also rejected the argument that the Pancasila is fundamental to the spirit of the proclamation.

Hamka explained that since the 19th century, the struggle of the Muslims for independence was motivated by the struggle to establish a state based on Islam. The war inflamed by Pangeran Diponegoro, Imam Bonjol, Teuku Cik Ditiro, Pangeran Antasari, Sultan Hasanudin, and etc. to expel the Dutch colonialists, was aimed at realizing the aspiration of the state based on Islamic ideals.

“We are the ones who continue their wills,” Hamka asserted while calling those who betray the ruh of the former leaders as people who exchanged their (the heroes') struggle with the Pancasila.

The support for Islam as the state foundation was also delivered by the original constituent members of the Nahdlatul Ulama' (NU). KH. Ahmad Zaini for example, also doubted the Pancasila as the foundation that has a strong basis and if it could be made as a concrete reference for the life of this nation. Zaini said that the five slogans in the precepts of the Pancasila were really nice and interesting, but the Pancasila has no guidelines for practising its teachings with boundaries, as well as channels that are concrete. Due to that, Zaini said that the slogans in the Pancasila are difficult to prove in any concrete way.

Besides Zaini, other figures of the NU such as KH Masjkur and KH Saifuddin Zuhri also doubted if the Pancasila could be made as a concrete reference for a national and state life. Masjkur called the Pancasila as an empty formula without direction.

“The Pancasila will be the embodiment of the people who fill it. Supposing that The One and Only God, listed as the first principle in the Pancasila is filled by people or groups who acknowledge that God is a stone, then the The One and Only God will be filled in with the stone. When filled by persons or groups who deify the tree, the Divinity in the Pancasila will be filled in with the tree,” Masjkur asserted. While according to Zuhri, the Pancasila have many deficiencies due to the absence of an unanimity of thought. The Pancasila is difficult to be claimed as a philosophy and state foundation. Its highest position is as a political agreement for the existing factions of ideologies.

Of late, the speech by Kiai Masykur which said that the Pancasila is an empty formula without direction, where the manifestation of it is depending on who fills it, is evident. The Pancasila has been interpreted in exclusive and hegemonic ways by the rulers, for the interests of their power. Sukarno interpreted the Pancasila, so the ideologies of Nasakom (Nationalist, Religious, Communist) and the authoritarian Guided Democracy, were born. Soeharto interpreted the Pancasila, so the term “Pancasila Democracy” was born, a democratic system which bowled over the values of democracy itself, because the regime of Soeharto made the Pancasila as the sole foundation for the nation. The Pancasila has become a tool of the ruling parties to satisfy their political lusts!

The hunches of the Islamic figures on the ideology of Pancasila, that it is “hollow” and could be interpreted by anyone depending on his political interests and desires, is of late proven true. In the Indoctrination Mandate of President Sukarno given to the cadres of the Nasakom, on 1st June 1965, Sukarno himself uncovered the veil behind the idea of the Pancasila. With full confidence, Sukarno said:

“Brothers, of late I am also saying that this Pancasila could also be squeezed again in any other way, not in The One and Only God, Socio-Nationalism, Socio-Democracy, but can also be squeezed in another way, and this squeezing in another way is the Nasakom. The Nasakom is also the “juice” squeezed out from the Pancasila, consequently Nasakom as a matter of fact is also a true mutual cooperation, because mutual cooperation is de totale “juice” squeezed out from the Pancasila, therefore the “juice” squeezed out from the Nasakom is also the Pancasila,” Sukarno asserted.

A statement that increasingly makes this ideology able to be dragged to anywhere, interpreted into anything and in the end, it gives birth to a very “dangerous” confusion.

Wallahu’alam.

Sources:
www.hidayatullah.com
www.swaramuslim.net
original writer: Artawijaya
A Journalist Of Majalah Al-Mujtama’ and the Author of the Book “The Dilemma of The Majority (transl.)”