In the previous editorial, we have already discussed, is it true that religion is the great enemy of Pancasila? And in essence, the answer is: No. Now we will review, should Assalamualaikum be replaced Salam Pancasila? These two issues were sourced from one figure, namely Prof. Yudian Wahyudi, Head of BPIP. Also twisted from one recorded interview, which is between Yudian with Detik reporter.
This time no longer needs to be reviewed about, for example, Prof. Yudian’s personality. In the previous editorial, we have reviewed it. But it needs to be underlined, understanding the issues about BPIP today cannot forget the character of the Head of BPIP itself. This is clearly in line with the fact that today the effort to silence or dissolve BPIP is indeed from various parties.
The Blunt-style blunt video was honestly a long time ago, which was last February 12th. Minutes 29.08 to 32.56 ignite the issue of Assalamualaikum and Salam Pancasila. Prof. Yudian, once again, like the previous issue, departs from academic discourse, that greetings are dynamic. Between the time of the Prophet, the agrarian era, and our age, the age of industrial technology, it is not impossible that greetings will also adjust. Experiencing contextualization, that is.
Responses arrive, one of them is from a Buya Yahya. Through his YouTube channel, Al-Bahjah TV, Sunday (2/23) yesterday, he created content entitled “Chairman of the BPIP: Assalamualaikum Replaced Salam Pancasila? Buya Yahya Answering .” Buya began his remarks with lafaz Innalillah, then emphasized that BPIP’s statement did not reflect wisdom, and was impressed to teach interfaith people to be prejudiced with each other.
The response from politicians was no less scathing. Fadli Zon, Deputy Chairman of the Gerindra Party DPP, asked BPIP to be dissolved. “This institution (BPIP) Is indeed feasible to be dissolved. In addition to creating national upheaval it also has the potential to distort the values of the Pancasila itself,” he explained, as reported by Warta Ekonomi, on Friday (21/2) ago.
Actually Salam Pancasila is not a new issue. A month before Prof. Yudian went viral and responded by various groups, even before he was appointed as the Head of BPIP, Prof. Hariyono as Acting Head of BPIP had Salam Pancasila and even demonstrated it.
Greetings Not Theological Doctrine!
If we listen carefully, what is considered problematic from the statement of the Head of BPIP Prof. Yudian is his idea of the dynamics of greetings. That is, greetings have absolutely no connection as a theological doctrine, just a consensus about praying for one another’s salvation. Therefore, as long as the essence of prayer is not lost, the expression may be of any form. Including, for example, not lafaz ‘Assalamaualaikum’, but lafaz ‘Salam Pancasila’.
“We have found agreements that this sign is a greeting. So if we want to make it easier now, as Daud Jusuf did, then for public service, it is enough to do with a national agreement, for example Salam Pancasila. That’s what is needed these days. Rather than the fuss the scholars, if you say Shalom you are becoming a Christian,” explained Prof. Yudian.
“Wong the Prophet Muhammad. just pray for the Christian king Najasi when he dies. There is an element of humanity. So do we, too, speaking of Shalom there is no theological element. We convey (greetings) so that we are peaceful. Sorry, for Christians to say hello also does not become a theological part. That national code is not included in the creed. If it can be used, it is not a problem,” concluded Prof. Yudian, as reported by Detik.
In the academic climate, what Prof. Yudian expressed was not wrong. Every religion has a characteristic in praying for salvation. Muslims with lafaz Assalamualaikum, Christians with lafaz Shalom, and so on other religions also have their respective greetings. But it is not in the area of creed, justifying the agreement of each religion regarding greetings.
Even so, in public space, once again, in public space, or what Prof. Yudian called public service, is different again. For the sake of diversity, on top of the agreement of each religion, there must be a ‘national agreement’, that is, the same greeting, the same lafaz. So that in the public sphere, the diversity of greetings was blurred, and what emerged was the uniformity of greetings, under the national principle called the Indonesian people.
The Head of BPIP actually only suggested, not intending to replace Assalamualaikum with Salam Pancasila. Then how is the problem?
The problem is, the Head of BPIP forgets that his audience has diverse religious expressions as well. Deep within internal interreligious entities, Indonesian society has a fairly close relationship with its own religion. Prof. Yudian forgot that some Muslims would not agree to tamper with Assalamualaikum for any reason.
Plus the misunderstanding between him as Head of BPIP with Islamic religious leaders. The preachers, for example. Not to mention the response that is laden with political interests, which usually come from political opponents. If we observe the narration that was born from the latter party, there is a kind of hard effort to, possibly, arrest BPIP. The latter clearly has its own reasons.
Besides that, there is truth in what Buya Yahya said. Pancasila, Unity in Diversity, in us is not a new identity. We have always been taught to accept diversity. After all, greetings in any lafaz, both Assalamualaikum, Shalom, and others, are fine. Never a problem. And no one questioned it.
The internal agreement of religion, for example Islam, about greetings, is left as it is. Want to say in the public space Assalamualaikum, Salam Pancasila, or just Good Morning, go ahead. What is wrong is to consider the internal agreement as a source of intolerance. That is wrong. And that’s where what was delivered by Prof Yudian became controversial.
The good thing is, returning the idea is purely an academic idea. Prof. Yudian’s position today, no matter how academic the Harvard alumni are, is the Head of BPIP. What was said from him was digested by the public at large, so it would be wise to avoid expressions that create public upheaval. Often what is worthy of academic study is not worthy of being conveyed to the public.
Both Assalamualaikum, Shalom, Om Swastyastu, Namo Buddhaya, and Salam Pancasila, both contain prayers of kindness. So, if asked, is it true that the Head of BPIP wants to change greetings? The answer is no. But if we ask, should we replace ‘Assalamualaikum’ with ‘Salam Pancasila’? The answer is up to you. Yes, you are. Wa Allah A‘lam bi ash-Shawab!