LIVING TOGETHER: A QUESTION FOR RELIGIONS

LIVING TOGETHER: A QUESTION FOR RELIGIONS 

Musdah Mulia

As a woman faith, I am greatly convinced that religion passed down by God is meant to give us better hope in life. That is why every religion always teaches values of righteousness as the basis for humans to live together in this world. I truly believe that all religions teach us universal humanistic values such as justice, honesty, peace, piety and compassion.

The aim of religion is to promote human dignity and the principles of human rights. The more religious a person or a community is, the more humane that person or community should be. Thus the more just and peaceful that individual or community becomes.

Religion forbids us to become the scum of society. Religion should prevent its followers from being carrying out acts of discrimination, exploitation and violence that cause conflicts, war, and other brutalities that bring suffering to human being. Religion should prevent its followers from carrying out acts of terrorism that devastate so many lives.

On the contrary, religion should drive its followers to adopt a critical and rational attitude, so that injustice is not permitted to prevail in society. Religion should make its followers care for and preserve the environment to prevent exploitation that causes global warming and threaten the existence of human being. Religion should cause its followers to always be dynamic, to adopt a positive-constructive attitude, to work hard for a prosperous and civilized society.

But the facts prove otherwise. The social reality around us gives us clear examples of violent and depraved behaviors, including violence in the name of religion. People kill each other in the name of religion, and some wars are even called holy wars.  Is there such a thing as a holy war? Of course not. Because, I believe that all wars bring tragedy to human life. All wars definitely cause devastation, and war always ends in bloodshed and material losses, both for the victors and the losers of the war.

The Principles of Living Together

So how do we use religion as a tool to ensure that we can live together in peace and harmony? In my opinion, there are at least three fundamental principles that must be fulfilled.

First, the principle of humanity. Frankly speaking as religious community we tend to take on the position of God, by acting arrogant and being judgmental. In all honesty, we tend to judge and find fault in others instead of devoting ourselves to each other and caring for each other. We always claim to be in the right and others are always wrong, misguided and infidels. As a result, religion-based wars and conflicts become the main stories in the media. Taking on the position as God in living together will be very perilous because we will always look at other people from a wrong perspective. We see people of other faiths as infidels and misguided. Consequently, we are taken over by the urge to execute them.

In living together, we must always maintain our position as human beings, not as God. Our duty is to contend for goodness, and leave judgment on whether our devotion is acceptable or not to God. So, our task as humans is only to try our utmost to do good as much as we are able to do. And then we leave everything to Him. We don’t know who among us will be saved, who among us will have our devotion accepted, only God knows that.

Second, the principle of one family. As religious community we must consider other people, of whatever faith, as our brothers and sisters, as part of one family. We must realize that we all come from the same origin, namely from God. Although we call Him by different names. All of us come from the One and because of it we are family. This affinity can become a force that has unprecedented meaning in building peace among different human beings. This kinship will give birth to love and affection among us, and in turn, eliminate hatred and hostility.

A sense of affinity will generate sincere respect and appreciation for others. Because of this feeling of unity, there is a sense of caring and a desire to help each other. This feeling of kinship and being of one family will distance us from behaviors of violence and crime. If we feel pain when we are hit, then we will not hit other people.

This feeling of affinity will eventually lead us to social solidarity. We don’t want to see other people in trouble or in pain. Ultimately, we will realize that, as brothers and sisters, we have a common enemy. The enemy of all religions is no other than injustice, oppression, greed, ignorance and poverty. Once we have this awareness, as people of faith we can work together to eradicate the common enemy.

 We can work together to rid the world of injustice, we can cooperate to eliminate oppression, greed, ignorance and poverty. Doesn’t cooperation and working hand in hand make our tasks much easier and less arduous?

Third, the principle of democracy. As religious community we should actively promote the principle of democracy. Democracy stems from respect and appreciation for other people. The essence of democracy is respect for the nature and dignity of human beings as noble beings. In a society that upholds democracy, all citizens are treated the same in the eyes of the law. The terms majority and minority don’t exist. All communities have the same basic rights, which is to live as human beings.

In a democratic nation, we must not be anarchic. Even if other people commit sins, we should not take the law into our own hands. Leave it to the law enforcers to punish them accordingly. In this context we should urge the state and the government to enforce the law fairly and take a neutral stance. There should be no public policies or legal decisions that are discriminative to any groups, especially to minority groups. The fact is that in a country, the government is often unable to be impartial and neutral, especially towards religious minority groups. This discriminative attitude can be very dangerous and may well become the starting point of numerous conflicts and humanitarian tragedies. In a nation with such a heterogeneous population in regards to religion and culture, such as Indonesia, the government should take a more prudent stance and apply the principle of human rights regarding religious freedom.

Religious leaders should actively create and promote religious interpretations that are democratic, that emphasize on the principles of tolerance and pluralism, and gender equity. My long experience in dealing with issues on women and religion brings me to the conclusion that religion and women has never been best friend, and they don’t complement each other. Religion has for far too long shown its masculine face rather than its feminine side.

In the name of religion, women are geared to become reproductive machines to increase the number of human beings. In the context of Indonesia, it is no secret that both Islam and Christianity are always in competition to increase the number of their followers. As a result, claims of Islamization and Christianization are always a hot topic in Indonesia and more often than not, this becomes the root of conflict and violence in society. In the name of religion, women are dominated so that they become the sweet child in the family, a wife who is obedient to her husband, and a mother who takes care of the family. In contrast, boys are not obligated to become the sweet child in the family, to be an obedient husband to his wife and a father who takes care of family matters. Doesn’t this reality show that discrimination and injustice exist? It is even in contradiction to the essence of religion.

I believe that the core aim of all religion and faith is for all human beings, both women and men, to be pious and useful, for them self, the family and the community in general. A number of studies have shown that there are many cases of domestic violence that stem from religious interpretations that are discriminative towards women. It is my sincere hope that religious leaders can transform religion’s masculine face so that women feel more comfortable and feel that their interest is accommodated within it.

Forth, the principle of pluralism

One of the major problems faced by religious community in this era of globalization is religion-based conflict and violence, both internally as well as between congregations of different religions. Certainly, in every conflict, women are the ones most vulnerable to become victims.

Why do conflicts happen? It is because people with religion no longer live in isolated blocks, but interacts with each other so it is very possible that frictions happen with the potential to cause conflict. The relationship between inter-religious groups is not always peaceful. Religion-based conflicts and violence frequently occur in a number of areas, including in Asian countries. Religion-based conflict and violence usually occur as a result of growing politics of identity. In other words, it is the mobilization of religious identity for the political interest of certain parties.  Ironically, religious provocation is often carried out by those who claim to speak in the name of religion.

In order to achieve peace and harmony in living together, all parties in society should adopt a tolerant and pluralistic attitude. Tolerance is the ability to constrain oneself and one’s emotions in order to minimize and eliminate potentials of conflict. Meanwhile, pluralism is much more than tolerance.

Pluralism is the willingness to recognize differences and accept diversity as a natural force in life to subsequently be committed to build solidarity and cooperation for the sake of peace and harmony. Pluralism must be built upon a principle of love, caring, equality and the recognition of human dignity. Pluralism urges for the fulfillment of human rights, including women rights.

Pluralism is a process of active seeking of understanding across lines of difference. To sum it up, pluralism does not mean that one has to shed one’s own religious identity and disclaim one’s own commitment to the religion embraced, and it also it doesn’t mean syncretism that one mixes teachings of different religions. The core of pluralism is the strong commitment to build a synergic relationship with each other in order to ensure peace and harmony.

When one is a pluralist, it does not mean that one does not recognize the existence of religious differences, because such differences are natural, intrinsic, and given and can’t be avoided. But such religious differences can become the source for a healthy inter-religious relationship as a uniting force, and not as a divider that threatens certain religious identity and culture. Pluralism is built upon a foundation of inter-religious dialogue.

Pluralism can be achieved, at least through two activities: The first one is that intensive dialogue. The problem is the dialogue between people of different religions has been too frequently done but it is not effective. Why? Most dialogues end at the level of elites, which means only among prominent religious leaders at the national level.

So, dialogue should not only be carried out among the elite, but should be done at the “grass root” level. It must involve all elements of society, namely youth, women, entrepreneurs, cultural and educator organizations. Moreover, the process should involve marginalized groups. And also, the topics of the dialogue should be based on religious universal values and humanist religious interpretations.

Through this dialogue, those who embrace different religions and faiths learn more about each other, and this will subsequently lead to a better understanding between them. Mutual understanding ultimately leads them to seek common factors between the different religions to be then rendered as the foundation for living together in peace and harmony. 

Secondly, it is very important to create participatory activities. This strategy must be carried out following dialogue. Through participatory activities, religious leaders and religious communities from different religions are able to experience living or working together. This can be realized in the form of, for instance, a jamboree, or in activities involving the provision of humanitarian aid or medical aid for victims of disasters. The experience of living or working together will open their minds and encourage them to eliminate all forms of prejudice and to eradicate all the tendency to stereo-type other groups.

Solution and Recommendation

The first step is to redirect religion’s position by putting more emphasis on multi-cultural principles and teaching of universal values, not by teaching the ritual aspects that are legal-formal in nature. It is no longer time for dogmatic religious teachings that are full of myths and horror stories of doomsday. Religious teachings should encourage students to do good deeds, to care for each other, and should urge us to build a human civilization that is peaceful and harmonious.

Second, it is very important to urge religious leaders to promote humanistic, inclusive religious interpretations. So that, there will no longer be any interpretations that are discriminative against women and other minority groups. We have to promote religious interpretations that in line with principles of democracy and human rights. Interpretation of religion should be accommodative towards humanistic values. Religious leaders should return to their prophetic task which is to push for transformation of society in order to attain a civilized society.

Third, it is time to encourage inter-faith dialogues through international, national and regional meetings such as this one which was initiated by the Sant’ Egidio. It is my hope that this meeting shall not end merely as a meaningless ceremonial activity, but as a tool for introspection, reflection and evaluation. So that, we can all learn and pick the benefits from our own experiences as well as from other people’s experiences for a better future in living together.

I’m Objected if Headscarf is Imposed

I’m Objected if Headscarf is Imposed

Musdah Mulia

Known as a feminist, Dr. Musdah Mulia who leads the Institute of Religious and Woman Studies has a strong opinion about various matters, not only regarding woman, but also other social matters. She criticized several regional regulations made without the involvement of women. She argues that regional regulation is very discriminative towards women and “not sensitive toward woman’s aspiration.” The following interview was conducted by Ulil Abshar-Abdalla from Liberal Islam Network.

What is the implication of Islamic sharia enforcement upon woman?

Firstly I want to affirm that whatever regulation is, wherever it is, this question should be aroused: does it involve women or not? Here, we can see whether it carry consequences for the woman’s life or not, since in fact, various regulations were instituted without involving woman. We have to pay attention to the fact that women compose 50% of society. Many regional regulations are not sensitive of women’s aspirations or interests.

Have you seen any proposals involving woman?

Unfortunately I haven’t. The government usually says: “It has been discussed in DPR (Indonesian legislative assembly)”. We see that woman make up less than 2% out of the total number of DPR members in provinces or regencies. Even in Aceh, only one woman is involved. How can women’s aspirations be represented if there is only a single female member of DPRD.

Are there any articles of regional regulation which directly harm woman?

Firstly, laws of anti-maksiat (immoral deeds).  Definition of maksiat explained here is gambling, zina (illicit sex), prostitution, and so on. It excludes the category of rape, despite the fact that it occurrs everywhere. That’s why I think the regional regulation should be broadened: what is meant by maksiat.

Secondly, why should regulation be focused upon woman? For instance to prevent maksiat, woman are forbidden to go out at night. In several regions curfew has been put into effect from 9 PM-4 AM, or from 10 PM-4 AM. The problem is this: why it is focused on women whereas statistically the males are the main actors in maksiat. To me it’s unfair. The regulation is gender biased.

What is another crucial aspect?

It’s about clothing. In several regional regulations, woman have to wear Islamic jilbab (headscarf). I don’t know what its source is.

Where is the crucial point here?

The crucial point is that I agree that woman Muslims should wear headscarf. But if it is forced, it is not Islamic anymore, since to me all compulsions are against the essence of Islamic teaching. Religion should be performed voluntarily, not by force. When there is regulation, there is force.

Had we return to the legal base of our state, our state is not a Muslim country.  If it is affirmed that Islamic sharia should be enforced, I think the legal base of our state is debatable.

Back to the matter of curfew, are you with it?

It doesn’t matter if it is for protection. But the reason differs in the debates. For instance in West Sumatra one said: “the curfew for woman is to prevent prostitution.” I say: if actually prostitution can be prevented, practically, they will not be wandering around. And it happens not only in the night, but also in the day. So it is illogical. Moreover it is women that are banned. To eliminate prostitution, women are raided by the police. If it is men who were raided, the result will be amazing. I think it is important.

So it is because woman’s voice is not accommodated in regional regulation?

Yes, the government’s approaches in handling prostitution are very much biased and discriminative; why is it always directed towards woman. Yet, there are several factors behind prostitution. I’m not pro prostitution, and I think it differs. But I want to say that government should see reality that prostitution occurred not only because of woman, but there are many factors; economical, structural, and many things surrounding this matter. Therefore if we want to eliminate prostitution, retribution should not be effective merely upon woman, but also upon the customer, the taxi driver. The root of the problem should be taken care of.

How do you see religious doctrine in classical books?

Classical books also vary. But most of view in those classical books also discredit woman. I want to say that ulema (muslim scholars) coincidentally discredit woman in their interpretation due to the cultural and the socio-historical background. For instance woman have to wear Islamic outfit because the conditions are very patriarchal.

Secondly, woman should not perform any activity in public area, since the situation was not conducive. But when the culture changes and experiences a very progressive process, such views must be changed.

Back to the matter of Islamic sharia, is there any guarantee if sharia enforced then everything will be solved?

The matter is this: what is called as Islamic sharia? It must be defined. Since what is meant by Islamic sharia is fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). Fiqh is very interpretable. There are two matters regarding Islamic sharia: sharia in the wide meaning, or in the narrow meaning. Islamic sharia in the wide meaning is mentioned in Alquran and sunnah, while sharia in the narrow meaning is fiqh views. Our understanding seems to be influenced by the narrow Islamic view.

So, which kind of interpretation must be taken?

If there are many opinions, we can take all of them. The problem is that government shouldn’t determine whether this opinion is right and that opinion is wrong. Hence, what is meant by opinion here is an interpretation of teaching, interpretation of sharia. Regarding interpretation, nobody claim that his opinion is absolutely right.

Back to the matter of the headscarf, you are wearing one, but why are you objecting?

I object if the headscarf is imposed on everyone. There is no freedom to choose, since in Islam itself there are many opinions regarding jilbab/headscarf. One says that jilbab is like what I am wearing, other says that it should cover the whole bodies, except the eyes. One says that Islamic outfit is only covering some parts of body. Wearing skirt down to the knee is according to Islamic teaching, since it is considered covering the principle parts of body.

Will you give illustration about the real Islamic outfit?

There is no precise criterion, but its basic principles are to not tempt and to not disturb people. And it is interpretable. Therefore I think it is impossible for government to enforce an opinion, a type of outfit. Based on regional regulation of Cianjur, the Mayor of Cianjur forces his employees to wear Islamic outfit; headscarf for women and koko shirt for men. A friend of mine has satirized this saying that it is all about having to buy the Islamic shirt in the Mayor’s shop --

My last point is that whatever regulation is maintained in each region, woman should be involved and should be accommodated in those regulations, because to me the essence of regional autonomy is how to involve social participation as much as possible. And when we are talking about society, don’t forget that half of them are woman.

BIAS GENDER DALAM PENAFSIRAN AL - QUR’AN

Prof. Dr. Musdah Mulia

Al-Qur’an sebagai petunjuk manusia

​Al-Qur’an adalah firman Allah SWT. yang diturunkan kepada Nabi Muhammad SAW. sebagai pedoman umat manusia dalam menata kehidupannya, agar memperoleh kebahagiaan lahir dan batin, di dunia dan akhirat kelak. Konsep-konsep yang ditawarkan Al-Qur’an sepenuhnya untuk kemaslahatan manusia karenanya selalu relevan dengan problema yang dihadapi manusia dari sejak awal turunnya sampai akhir zaman. Al-Qur’an turun untuk berdialog dengan manusia dalam segala zaman, sekaligus menawarkan pemecahan masalah terhadap problema yang dihadapi.

​Sebagai pedoman hidup bagi umat manusia, pembicaraan Al-Qur’an terhadap suatu masalah sangat unik, tidak tersusun secara sistematis seperti halnya buku-buku ilmu pengetahuan karangan manusia. Di samping itu, Al-Qur’an juga sangat jarang menjelaskan suatu masalah secara terinci dan detail. Pada umumnya uraian dan pembicaraan Al-Qur’an bersifat global, parsial, dan seringkali menampilkan suatu masalah dalam prinsip dan pokoknya saja. 

​Keadaan Al-Qur’an yang tidak tersusun secara sistematis seperti halnya buku-buku ilmu pengetahuan ini, sama sekali tidak mengurangi nilai  keagungan dan kesucian Al-Qur’an. Sebaliknya di sanalah letak keunikan sekaligus keistimewaan Al-Qur’an. Dengan keadaan semacam itu Al-Qur’an menjadi objek kajian yang tidak kering-keringnya oleh para cendekiawan, baik muslim maupun non muslim, sehingga ia tetap aktual sejak diturunkannya empat belas abad yang lalu. 

Memahami  ayat-ayat qath`i dan zhanni

Agama memiliki pengaruh yang cukup besar dalam menentukan perilaku, sikap, dan pandangan hidup manusia. Mayoritas bangsa Indonesia beragama Islam. Perilaku, sikap, dan pandangan hidup mereka banyak dipengaruhi oleh nilai-nilai ajaran Islam. Sumber pokok ajaran Islam adalah Al-Qur’an dan Hadis. Al-Qur’an diturunkan kepada Nabi Muhammad secara berangsur-angsur dalam kurun waktu lebih sedikit dari 22 tahun: 12 tahun, 5 bulan, dan 13 hari di Makkah, selebihnya di Madinah. Sebagian ayat-ayat Al-Qur’an turun begitu saja tanpa sebab, seperti turunnya wahyu yang pertama yaitu surat Al-‘Alaq ayat 1-5. sementara yang lainnya diwahyukan dalam meresponi permasalahan yang muncul pada masa Rasulullah SAW. Contohnya surat Al-Mujadilah ([58]:1-3) diwahyukan dalam merespon kasus zhihar yang diadukan Khaulah bin Tsa’labah kepada Nabi SAW.

Sebagian ayat-ayat Al-Qur’an dapat dipahami maknanya dengan mudah dan pasti (qath`i dalalah-nya). Sedangkan lainnya, karena zhanni dalalah-nya, untuk diterapkan dalam kehidupan sehari-hari pada konteks yang berbeda-beda diperlukan penafsiran. Penafsiran ini dilakukan oleh para ulama yang berkompeten di bidangnya. Ada yang menafsirkan ayat-ayat tersebut dengan menggunakan ayat-ayat Al-Qur’an lainnya, hadis-hadis, keterangan sahabat, dan para tabi’in (tafsir bi al-ma’tsur). Ada pula yang menafsirkannya dengan ijtihad (tafsir bi al-ra’yi). Ijtihad adalah mencurahkan seluruh daya untuk mencapai hukum yang dikehendaki nash yang zhanni dalalah-nya. Karena perannya yang sedemikian penting, ijtihad kemudian menjadi sesuatu yang penting dalam Islam.

Terdapat perbedaan dalam memahami definisi ayat-ayat yang qath’i (muhkamat) dan yang zhanni (mutasyabihat). Sebagian memahami ayat-ayat muhkamat sebagai ajaran yang disampaikan dalam teks-teks bahasa yang tegas (sharih), dan mutasybihat sebagian ajaran yang dikemukakan dalam teks bahasa yang tidak tegas atau memiliki lebih dari satu pengertian. Ajaran yang qath’i adalah ajaran yang fundamental, prinsipil, bersifat absolut dan universal. Contohnya, ayat-ayat tentang keadilan, kesetaraan manusia di hadapan Allah tanpa memandang jenis kelamin, warna kulit dan bangsa, persamaan manusia di hadapan hukum, tidak merugikan diri sendiri dan orang lain, musyawarah, dan yang lainnya. Jadi, seseorang tidak perlu melakukan ijtihad untuk menentukan hukum tentang penegakan keadilan di antara sesama karena siapa pun, kapan pun, dan di mana pun manusia mengetahui bahwa keadilan perlu  ditegakkan, adapun pelaksanaannya disesuaikan dengan siatuasi dan kondisi.

Sementara ajaran yang zhanni adalah ajaran yang merupakan penjabaran dari ajaran yang qath’i (implementasi). Ajaran yang zhanni tidak mengandung kebenaran dengan sendirinya (tidak self-evident). Kebalikan dari ajaran yang qath’I yang bersifat universal, ajaran yang zhanni terkait oleh ruang, waktu, siatuasi, dan kondisi. Contohnya, tentang bagaimana hendaknya perempuan berpakaian dan berapa banyak mereka harus menerima warisan. 

Pada konteks Arab ketika laki-laki menjadi penanggung jawab nafkah keluargnya, adil baginya untuk mendapatkan warisan dua kali lipat dibanding perempuan. Namun pada konteks ketika perempuan sama-sama menjadi pencari nafkah keluarga, atau satu-satunya pencari nafkah dalam keluarga, pembagian waris seperti itu perlu diijtihadi. Demikian halnya dalam kesaksian perempuan pada transaksi utang-piutang yang melibatkan orang yang pikun atau lemah akalnya. Dalam Al-Qur’an (2: 282), pencatatan transaksi tersebut hendaknya disaksikan oleh dua orang laki-laki atau jika tidak ada maka satu laki-laki dan dua perempuan. Ini sering digunakan untuk membenarkan kepercayaan bahwa nilai satu laki-laki sama dengan dua perempuan. Padahal dalam konteks Arab saat itu, ketika posisi perempuan baru saja diangkat oleh Islam, penunjukan mereka sebagai saksi sudah merupakan penghargaan yang tak terhingga. Namun konteks Arab saat itu berbeda dengan konteks Indonesia sekarang ini. kaum perempuan Indonesia sekarang ini secara berangsur-angsur banyak berpartisipasi pada lingkup publik karena tingkat pendidikan mereka yang semakin membaik, sehingga penunjukan saksi semacam itu perlu ijtihadi. 

Dan yang terpenting, proses ijtihad tersebut harus senantiasa mengacu pada nilai-nilai ajaran Islam yang prinsipil dan fundamental. Dalam kasus transaksi ini, tujuan akhir yang ingin dituju adalah penegakan keadilan dan perlindungan terhadap yang lemah, supaya yang berutang membayar utangnya sesuai dengan perjanjian yang tercatat. Supaya satu pihak tidak merugikan atau dirugikan oleh pihak yang lain. jadi,  ayat ini bukan untuk digunakan sebagai dasar perbandingan nilai seorang laki-laki dengan dua perempuan, karena Islam telah menegaskan kesetaraan semua manusia di hadapan Allah SWT. kecuali tingkat ketaqwaannya (QS. Al-Hujurat: 49: 13).

Dalam upaya memahami Al-Qur’an, para ulama tafsir umumnya menafsirkan ayat demi ayat sesuai dengan susunannya dalam mushaf. Tetapi dalam perkembangannya, muncul gagasan untuk mengungkap petunjuk Al-Qur’an terhadap suatu masalah tertentu, dengan jalan menghimpun seluruh atau sebagian ayat dari beberapa ayat yang berbicara tentang topik dimaksud untuk kemudian dikaitkan antara satu ayat dengan yang lainnya, sehingga pada akhirnya dapat diambil kesimpulan menyeluruh tentang masalah tersebut menurut petunjuk Al-Qur’an (Quraish Syihab: 1992: 144).

Isu perempuan dalam Al-Qur’an

Salah satu masalah yang banyak diungkap Al-Qur’an adalah perempuan. Bahkan ada dua surat dari Al-Qur’an yang diberi nama surat perempuan, yaitu surat Al-Nisa’ (surat ke-4), yang biasa disebut dengan surat Perempuan Besar (Al-Nisa’ al-Kubra) dan surat Al-Thalaq (surat ke-65), yang biasa disebut sebagai surat Perempuan Kecil (Al-Nisa’ al-Shughra).

Al-Qur’an sudah menginformasikan bahwa tinggi rendahnya martabat seseorang di hadapan Allah SWT. hanyalah karena nilai pengabdian dan ketakwaannya kepada Allay Yang Maha Esa, seperti telah disinggung di muka bukan karena jenis kelamin atau tinggi rendahnya status sosial, atau dari bangsa mana berasal. Pemahaman ini berdasarkan informasi Al-Qur’an dalam surat Al-Hujurat, 43: 13;

“Wahai  manusia, sesungguhnya kami menciptakan kamu dari seorang laki-laki dan seorang perempuan dan menjadikan kamu berbangsa-bangsa dan bersuku-suku, supaya kamu saling kenal-mengenal. Sesungguhnya orang yang paling mulia di antara kmu di sisi Allah SWT. ialah orang yang paling bertakwa di anatara kamu. Sesungguhnya Allah Maha Mengetahi dan lagi Maha Mengenal:”. (QS. Al-Hujurat, 49: 13).

Ayat tersebut mengisyaratkan betapa penilaian terhadap manusia tidaklah dilihat dari sisi fisik material, akan tetapi pada aspek kualitas ketakwaannya. Perspektif Al-Qur’an ini menghapus semua bentuk diskriminasi yang sudah demikian membudaya pada era jahiliyah sebelum datangnya Islam. Dan masih banyak ayat lain yang menunjukkan bahwa perempuan dan laki-laki mempunyai martabat yang sama, terutama secara spiritual.

Meskipun Al-Qur’an adalah kebenaran abadi, namun penafsirannya tidak bisa terhindar dari sesuatu yang relatif. Perkembangan historis berbagai mazhab kalam, fiqih, dan tasawuf merupakan bukti positif tentang kerelatifan oenghayatan keagamaan umat Islam. Pada suatu kurun, kadar intelektualitas menjadi menonjol, sdemetara pada kurun lainnya, kadar emosionalitas menjadi menonjol. Itulah sebab pesrsepsi tentang oerempuan di kalngan umat islam sendiri juga berubah-ubah.

Ayat Al-Qur’an yang populer dijagikan rujukan dalam memahami posisi dan status perempuan adalah ayat 1 surat an-Nisa: 
“Hai sekalian manusia bertakwalah kamu kepada Tuhanmu yang telah menciptakan kamu dari nafs yang satu (sama), dan dari zat itu pula Allah menciptakan pasangannya, dan dari keduanya Allah memperkembangbiakkan lelaki dan perempuan yang banyak.”

​Kalangan mufassir klasik memahami nafs sebagai Adam. Bahkan al-Thabari, mengemukakan, seluruh mufassir sepakat mengartikan nafs dengan Adam, mereka juga mengartikan zawjahasebagai Hawa. Dengan demikian, para mufassir klasik menafsirkan, istri Adam diciptakan dari Adam sendiri, yakni dari tulang rusuk Adam yang bengkok. Inilah yang membawa pemahaman bias terhadap Al-Qur’an. Dengan pemahaman seperti itu lalu diyakini perempuan itu posisinya rendah, lebih rendah dari laki-laki karena diciptakan dari tulang rusuk lelaki.

​Namun, sejumlah ulama membantah cara penafsiran misoginis tersebut.  Contohnya, mufassir kontemporer seperti Muhammad Abduh justru mengartikan nafs dengan jenis. Sedangkan, menurut Rasyid Ridha istri Adam diciptakan dari tulang rusuk, serupa dengan pandangan dalam Perjanjian Lama, yang menyebutkan, Tuhan mencabut tulang rusuk Adam dan membalutnya dengan daging kemudian diciptakan seorang perempuan.

​Pandangan-pandangan seperti itu tidak beda dengan cerita israiliyat yang bersumber dari agama samawi sebelumnya. Tiga asumsi teologis yang menyebabkan ketidaksetaraan laki-laki dan perempuan adalah sebagai berikut: Pertama, manusia utama adalah laki-laki, karena perempuan hanya diciptakan dari tulang rusuk, sehingga keberadaannya derivatif dan hanya sebagai pelangkap. Kedua, perempuan merupakan faktor penyebab utama diusirnya manusia dari surga, sehingga harus dipandang  dengan penuh benci, curiga, dan jijik. Ketiga, perempuan tercipta juga diperuntukkan bagi laki-laki, sehingga eksistensinya hanya bersifat instrumental dan tidak memiliki nilai mendasar.

​Bagi kelompok yang meyakini keadilan Allah swt, tetap yakin bahwa Al-Qur’an sama sekali tidak menyatakan asal kejadian perempuan dari tulang rusuk, dan justru sangat mendukung prinsip keadilan dan kesetaraan dengan menekankan unsur persamaan dalam kejadian Adam dan Hawa. QS. Ali’Imran (3:195): “Sesungguhnya Aku tidak menyia-nyiakan amal orang yang beramal, baik laki-laki maupun perempuan.”

​Ayat di atas berusaha mengikis perbedaan berdasarkan jenis kelamin. Pandangan yang menyatakan Adam terlempar dari surga karena ulah Hawa adalah sebuah konspirasi (persekongkolan) untuk merendahkan perempuan. Al-Qur’anjustru  berusaha meluruskan pandangan yang banyak dipengaruhi cerita israiliyat yang berasal dari kitab Talmud, di mana perempuan digambarkan sebagai obsinator (pembangkang) dan templator (penggoda). Juga dipengaruhi pandangan Kristen lama yang mengidealkan laki-laki, dengan menghubungkannya dengan Tuhan (Bapak) dan Yesus Kristus (Tuhan anak laki-laki).

Perlunya penafsiran tematis (tafsir al-maudhu’i)

Tafsir sangat terkait dengan metodologi yang digunakan mufassir. Metode paling dominan dalam sejarah intelektual Islam adalah tahlili (analisis) yang menafsirkan Al-Qur’an secara kronologis dengan lebih banyak menggunakan pendekatan tekstual (‘umum al-lafadz). Dengan segala kelebihannya, metode ini sangat sulit mengeluarkan persoalan perempuan dari konteks sosial-budaya Timur Tengah yang androsentris. Karena itu, perlu pendekatan maudhu’i, penafsiran tematis yang cenderung memakai pendekatan semantik dan hermeunetik sehingga dapat menghadirkan pandangan berkeadilan antara lelaki dan perempuan.

​Hal ini karena ayat-ayat tentang perempuan mengarah pada suatu konsep yang mudah terungkap dengan metode maudhu’i daripada tahlili. Misalnya, ayat tentang poligami. Jika hanya merujuk pada QS. an-Nisa (4:3), tentu kesimpulannya, poligami diijinkan. Namun, jika rujukan diarahkan kepada QS. an-Nisa (4:129), peluang untuk poligami menjadi berat sekali, bahkan mustahil. Di sisi lain, tafsir ayat perempuan sangat dipengaruhi cerita israiliyat, yang bisa jadi, sengaja dimasukkan para mufassir yang berlatar belakang Yahudi dan Kristen atau sengaja disusupkan ke dalam tradisi Islam.

​Karena itu, untuk menafsirkan ayat-ayat itu, khususnya ayat 1 surah an-Nisa, perlu digunakan metode tafsir yang dapat menangkap maksud dan tujuan ayat tersebut. Penting diperhatikan, justifikasi Al-Qur’an atau hadis terhadap suatu persoalan perempuan, apakah memang demikian maksudnya, atau masih memiliki kaitan dengan ayat atau hadis lain. Pandangan para mufassir, meski banyak benarnya, tapi juga sangat terkondisikan ruang dan waktu, dan ditentukan sejauh mana pengetahuan mereka terhadap cerita-cerita israiliyat.

​Karena itu yang perlu dilakukan adalah merekonstruksi tafsiran ayat-ayat yang berbicara tentang relasi gender, khususnya tafsiran ayat 1 surat An-Nisa tersebut dalam hal ini perlu digunakan metoda penafsiran yang lebih mendekati maksud dan tujuan diturunkannya ayat tersebut (maqashid al-syari`ah). Dalam kaitan ini perlu dicermati justifikasi yang berasal dari ayat Al-Qur’an maupun nash hadis yang dianggap atau dirasakan mendiskreditkan hak perempuan. 

Kesimpulan

Sebagai kesimpulan dapat dikemukan hal-hal berikut:  Pertama, Al-Qur’an adalah firman Allah SWT, yang diturunkan sebagai pedoman hidup dengan penawaran konsep-konsep yang selalu relevan dengan problematika yang dihadapi manusia sekaligus pemecahannya. Kedua, dalam penafsiran ayat-ayat Al-Qur’an terutama ayat-ayat yang berkaitan dengan pembicaraan tentang perempuan perlu diperhatikan aspek sosio-historis dan sosio-politik yang mengitarinya, terutama dalam konteks keindonesian kita tanpa terlepas dari penafsiran para mufasir terdahulu dengan satu kerangka pemikiran yang jelas. Ketiga, penafsiran ulang perlu dilakukan sebagai sebuah upaya penyadaran (ijtihad) yang ditempuh dengan menafsirkan kembali pemikiran dan pemahaman yang diskriminatif dan membelenggu perempuan. Tujuannya, menggali ajaran yang menempatkan perempuan pada posisi proporsional sesuai dengan esensi ajaran Islam yang mengedepankan keadilan dan menjadi rahmatan lil alamin.