ABDURRAHMAN WAHID’S CONTRIBUTION FOR INTER-RELIGIOUS DIALOGUE IN INDONESIA

: By understanding the historical development of inter-religious dialogue in Indonesia and its global setting since 1970s from rhetoric strategy to meaningful encounter, this paper seeks to situate important contribution of Abdurrahman Wahid’s legacy besides those of other key figures in the field. The paper will critically analyze how and why Abdurrahman’s ideas and works in inter -religious dialogue are intertwined with his family and personal biography, socio-political context of the New Order and after and his traditionalist Muslim background. In particular, Abdurrahman’s reinterpretation of Islamic texts, doctrine and tradition will be discussed in the light of his vision for Indonesian democracy. His notion of religious pluralism, tolerance, peaceful co-existence, mutual understanding, and indigenization of Islam will be explained as intellectual and political enterprises by which he navigates and challenges all forms of injustices especially created by the New Order’s politics of fear, exploitation of anti-Communist sentiment, ethnicity, religion, race and inter-social groups (SARA) and developmentalist ideology under Suharto’s presidency. His engagement in inter - religious dialogue will be read against the developing context of the New Order’s post - 1965 politics of religion to the 1990s re-Islamization, the persistent growth of Islamic sectarianism, exclusivism, and identity politics that eventually results in interreligious tension and mutual suspicion, especially between Muslims and Christians. The paper seeks to understand how and why Abdurrahman Wahid as a prominent leader of Muslims as majority group explores inter-religious dialogue as a means by which religious communities are supposed to contribute and work together in overcoming common problems faced by the society. His commitment for and advocacy of the local culture, tradition, minority rights, and Islamic inclusivism will be understood as his struggle as statesman, religious leader, public intellectual and social activist for the creation of equality and justice for all citizens and human dignity in accordance with Islamic teaching and principles of democracy.


Introduction
Despite the fact that religious diversity has been part of Indonesian life from the very beginning, the idea of inter-religious dialogue emerge gradually as public discourse only in the 1970s.Particularly, the introduction of "comparative religion" by Mukti Ali at IAIN (State Islamic Institute) in Yogyakarta was a groundbreaking step1 .However, even until the 1980s, interreligious dialogue was understood and practiced mostly as a "rhetoric strategy" to prevent conflict among the existing religious groups.More specifically, it was primarily used to set up the 'rule of the game' for proselytization projects, especially among Muslims and Christians as the two largest religious groups2 .Only since the 1990s, interreligious dialogue has become more meaningful encounter for members of different religious communities both as instrument for overcoming real problems between them as well as a bridge for working together as equal citizens.
Obviously, this remarkable progress of inter-religious dialogue in the country was achieved through long winding road and hard works of so many actors and countless historical events.Abdul Mukti Ali, Nurcholish Madjid, Th.Sumartana, YB Mangunwijaya, Djohan Effendi, Abdurrahman Wahid, Bikkhu Sri Panyavaro Mahathera, Franz-Magnis Suseno, Mother Gedong Bagus Oka 3 are among important figures who have laid foundation for that.Together with many others, they are the founding parents of inter-religious dialogue in Indonesia.This paper will focus on Abdurrahman Wahid's ideas and his contribution to the development of inter-religious dialogue in the country.In fact, this paper is a part of my larger effort to map out the intellectual legacy of key thinkers of inter-religious dialogue in Indonesia 4 .I hope that my account will shed some lights on important issues, ideas, perspectives and analysis on the topic that might push both academic discussion and the practice of interreligious dialogue in the country moving forward.

A Biographical Sketch
Abdurrahman Wahid, the forth Indonesian President, was born in Denanyar, Jombang, East Java, on September 7, 1940, among the elite family of traditionalist Muslim environment.His father, Wahid Hasyim 3 Abdurrahman Wahid is well-known for his idea of the promotion of 'culture of dialogue', like Nurcholish Madjid is for his 'inclusive theology', Th.Sumartana for his 'theologia religionum', YB Mangunwijaya as 'the father of the poor', Bikkhu Panyavaro Thera is for his 'sincerer heart, better world', and Mother Gedong Bagus Oka is for her Ashram Gandhi and 'spiritual journey through prayer'.For further discussion, please read Achmad Munjid, Building a Shared Home Investigating the Intellectual Legacy of the Key Thinkers of Inter-Religious in Indonesia, a PhD dissertation at Religion Department, Temple University, 2014 4 Achmad Munjid, Building a Shared Home... (1914-1953)  It was also while Abdurrahman was accompanying his father to a NU meeting in West Java that a tragic car accident happened causing the death of his father in a slippery rainy night in 19536 .A bitter-sweet memory that never leave Abdurrahman resulting from his father's death is the fact that there was always a large crowds of people lining on the streets to pay tribute while Wahid Hasyim's dead body was transported by car the next day from Bandung to Jakarta and from airport in Surabaya to Jombang."What could one man do that the people would love him so much?Was there any finer achievement in life than this?" are among his questions that motivate Abdurrahman later in his human relations.
In 1954, now being an orphan and poorly doing in school, Abdurrahman then was sent by his mother to Yogyakarta, the center of education in Indonesia, to continue his study at junior high school.There he stayed in the house of his father's friend, Haji Junaidi, who was a member of Religious Advisory Board of Muhammadiyah 7 .During these years, three times a week he would also go to the Pesantren, i.e. traditional Islamic boarding school, of Ali Ma'shum of Krapyak, just outside the city.In 1957, after finishing his Junior Economic High School (SMEP) in Yogyakarta he commenced formal full-time pesantren studies at Pesantren Tegalrejo in Magelang, in addition to his part-time studies at his maternal grandfather's pesantren in Denanyar, Jombang.
He, then, moved to Jombang in 1959 to become a full-time student at Pesantren Tambakberas under Kiai 7 Muhammadiyah, the second largest mass-based Muslim organization, is a modernist movement organization founded in 1912 by Ahmad Dahlan, a schoolmate of Hasyim Asy'ari while they were in Mecca.However, since the main goal of the inception of Muhammadiyah is to carry out religious purification among the Indonesian Muslims, While NU, overwhelmed by Sufi tradition, is well known for its generous accommodation for the local culture-or even syncretic, according to certain perspective-the relation between Muhammadiyah and NU is frequently in tension from time to time.To some extent, it is analogous to the relation between Protestantism and Catholicism among the Christians.student in Baghdad (1966-1970), i.e. after his unhappy studentship at Al Azhar University, Cairo (1964-1966), illustrates this pluralistic view.Meanwhile, his social roles later in his career, such as being the Chairman of Jakarta Art Council (1982-1985) and of Forum Democracy, in addition to his three times re-elected presidency of NU (1984-1999), demonstrate how serious he has made any effort in achieving his dream concerning the pluralistic and democratic society of Indonesia.After his short-term presidency, Abdurrahman was back to his lifetime dedication as religious leader, public intellectual and social activist 10 .He spent the rest of his life by engaging and standing at the frontline on issues of inter-religious dialogue, including intrareligious dialogue among Muslims.His unconditional advocacy for the minority groups, the persecuted and victims of injustice remained unwavering.He passed away in December 30, 2009 due to several health problems but his legacy lives on 11 .Millions of people gather in many cities across the country every December to commemorate him, to take inspiration and learn important lessons from his life 12 .Several 10 His removal from power has been subject of controversy even until today.For an insider perspective on the last day of Abdurrahman's presidency, read Bondan  Gunawan et.al.Hari-Hari Terakhir Bersama Gus  Dur (Jakarta: Penerbit Buku Kompas, 2018)  communities around the world.However, in my opinion, the roots of his ideas in this subject of inter-religious dialogue in fact can be traced even back to the earlier years.This is reasonable with regard that, for him, the exchanges and dialogues are part of the educational process needed by the Indonesian society about modernity and democracy, as well as part of his mission as leader of NU to set an example of how Muslim society should develop 17 .What I am going to do in the following pages is to reconstruct his main ideas on inter-religious dialogue based on some key points from his spread articles, interviews and speeches, as well as his own engagement in many inter-religious dialogue works.
As a caveat, with regard to Abdurrahman's position as organic thinker and social activist who is always engaged in empirical problems of his people, his thoughts on inter-religious dialogue should be understood within a particular framework: the establishment of Indonesian democracy and its challenges.Abdurrahman's thoughts are part of his efforts in navigating the complicated challenges to establish a true democracy based on the reality of local culture, religious diversity, and the common ideal set up by Indonesian founding fathers.For him, inter-religious dialogue is never for itself, but a means to achieve the embodiment of a democratic modern Indonesia.
Inter-religious dialogue should not only be a project of building superficial peaceful coexistence among religious communities, like the one This has been his position from the very beginning.That is why Abdurrahman rejected when, being a member of the Executive Board of government-sponsored Council of Indonesian Ulama (MUI) 19 , he was designated to represent the Council in the Forum for Religious Harmony.It is exactly because, for him, there is no dialogue in such a forum.What happened there, instead, is a series of monologue where each party talks only 18 Abdurrahman Wahid, "Dialog Agama dan Masalah Pendangkalan Agama" [(Inter-)Religious Dialogue and the Problems of Religious narrow-mindedness Process] in Komaruddin Hidayat and Ahmad Gaus AF (eds.),Passing Over, Melintasi Batas Agama (Jakarta: PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama and Paramadina Foundation, 1998), p. 56. 19 He was appointed as a MUI Board member (1985-1990) and was never reappointed since then.MUI itself was established by the New Order regime in 1975 as a stamping body from the Muslim communities for the government's programs.Read also Greg Fealy (eds.),Tradisionalisme Radikal…, p. 166, and also Darul Aqsha (eds.),Islam in Indonesia: A Survey of Events and Developments from 1988 to March  1993, (Jakarta: INIS, 1995, p. 200).
for itself without listening to others."We do not need that type of dialogue," he once insisted 20 .Moreover, he argues that tolerance among the existing religious communities is only a lip service."Our tolerance and solidarity are not sincere," he argues 21  on the issues that will easily trigger inter-religious, racial and other conflicts and eventually open the door for the communist to return 24 .In fact, during the New Order, as noted by Th.Sumartana, instead of being positively perceived as fact of diversity, ethnicity, religion, race and different groups or classes are kept away from public discourse.SARA is suspected as a threat, political subversive force and frequently a scapegoat for the survival of Indonesia.Inter-religious issues are treated in such a way as being super sensitive.An example is when MUI in March 1981 issued a fatwa (statement of opinion on legal issues) that prohibits Muslims participation in Christmas celebration 25 .SARA is positioned as the enemy of the New Order's developmentalist ideology emphasizing on stability, security, order and unity 26 .Since inter-religious and racial problems were never properly addressed under the New Order and when they come to surface in most cases were solved immediately by military force, the so-called harmonious and peaceful coexistence among different religious, ethnic and racial communities were very superficial 27 . 24For instance read Michael R. J. Vatikiotis, Indonesian Politics under Suharto: Order, Development and Pressure for Change (New York: Routledge, 1993). 25See Darul Aqsha (eds.), p. 199.Over time the fatwa has even been misunderstood as MUI prohibition for Muslims to say "Merry Christmas" to their Christian friends, neighbor and colleagues.Read my article, Achmad Munjid, "The Controversy over Merry Christmas: Where is the Fatwa" in The Jakarta Post, 23 December 2013. 26Th.Sumartana, Pluralisme, Konflik dan Pendidikan Agama …., p. 92.
27 For a brief discussion on this topic and its long-term impact on inter-religious relations in Indonesia, read my article "Between fake tolerance and pseudo freedom of religion" in The Jakarta Post, 22 Agustus 2013.Accessible here: https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2013/0From time to time inter-religious relations grow from bad to worse, from mutual suspicion to increasing tension.Suharto and his New Order benefited from the fragility of inter-religious relations to keep them in power that lasted for over three decades.Abdurrahman Wahid wanted to make the superficial peaceful coexistence real by creating mutual understanding and promoting inter-religious dialogue as an effective tool for democracy 28 .
Mutual understanding in interreligious dialogue, for Abdurrahman, has three interrelated aspects.The first is critical attitude towards one's own religion so to avoid any possible narrow-mindedness and religious politicization 29 .The second is proper understanding on the main principles and historical developments belong to other religious communities so to avoid any possible misunderstanding resulting from one-sided perception.The third is sufficient understanding of both sides on the context where their social interaction takes place.Ill conversation about other religion should be avoided.Instead, within the spirit of being religious, such as the concepts of humanity and the role of religion in social life could be studied, to 8/22/between-fake-tolerance-and-pseudofreedom-religion.html 28 Even when he became President, Abdurrahman Wahid consistently used nonviolent and non-military approach in solving conflict problems in the country, including that of Aceh and Papua.For a comprehensive discussion on this issue, read Ahmad Suaedy, Visi Kewarganegaraan Kultural Abdurrahman Wahid dalam Penyelesaian Konflik Aceh dan Papua, 1999-2001, a PhD dissertation at UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, 2018. 29The ninth commandment of Swidler's "Dialogue Decalogue" in Swidler, Leonard.After the Absolute, the Dialogical Future of Religious Reflection (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990), p. 45.
be further developed and even to be debated among them 30 .

Three Aspects of Mutual Understanding
Let us examine more carefully the three aspects of mutual understanding through inter-religious dialogue as proposed by Abdurrahman Wahid.The first is critical attitude towards one's own religion, especially in public life.Historically, this first aspect is important with regard that power relation between religion and state has demonstrated a kind of symbiotic relation in providing mutual legitimacy 31 .In such a pluralistic society as Indonesia, relation between religion and state should be carefully maintained so to prevent it from resulting in mutual suspicion among the existing communities on the one hand and to achieve mutual symbiosis for the sake of common good on the other hand 32  33 Pancasila is the five principles declared in 1945 as the national foundation of Indonesia.During his presidential term, Soeharto implicitly forced any political and social organization to adopt it as the 'sole foundation'.Under his dictatorship, the acceptance of this is affirmation and the rejection of it is subversion to his power.Many Islamic organizations chosen to dissolve themselves instead of accepting Pancasila, which is considered to be un-islamic, as their sole foundation.
Pancasila as the sole foundation of the organization, from time to time the relationship between NU and the New Order government was characterized by mutual suspicion.The situation became much more positive after that.Here, through NU, Islam gives acceptable legitimacy to the State, and thus vice versa.The point is how each part does not intervene in other's business with regard that both religion and state has each own separate domain 34 .Meanwhile, any alliance between the two where one or both sides make use of the other at the cost of equal rights of certain (religious, political or other) group, like favoritism of the majority Muslim by the New Order since the end of 1980s, should be denied.In particular, therefore, he denounced ICMI as a sectarian organization 35 .For Abdurrahman Wahid, the establishment of ICMI in the 1990 that marked the rising tide of Islamic formalism is an evident of hardening of Islamic exclusivism that seriously endangered 34 Greg Barton, Abdurrahman Wahid…, p. 137.
35 ICMI (Ikatan Cendekiawan Muslim Se-Indonesia, Association of Indonesian Muslim Intellectuals) was founded by the end of 1990 by a number of leading Muslim intellectuals under the full sponsor of Soeharto while his supporters among the military kept on decreasing.Many books have discussed about the consistent criticism of Abdurrahman about this organization.According to Abdurrahman, relation between ICMI and Soeharto's regime is only a short-term marriage of convenience.ICMI is primarily established as 'political vehicle' by using Islam as the commodity.This organization represents manipulation of Islam to support the government.It also shows that Islamic activists are allowing themselves to be used by Soeharto in order to advance their own goal of Islamizing the government and society.In the long run this obviously endangers the multi-religious and multi-cultural society of Indonesia as a democratic nation.See, for example, Douglas E. Ramage, Politics in Indonesia, pp.62-74 and Adam Schwarz, A Nation in Waiting, Indonesia in the 1990s (St.Leonards, NSW, Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd., 1994), pp.185-188.

Indonesian
democracy 36 .The establishment of MUI by the New Order government is another example on how religion is co-opted by the state to justify a political regime, as mentioned earlier.
In relation to the previous reason, theologically, critical attitude is also needed to eliminate exclusive tendency belong to each religion, especially in term of truth claim.In Abdurrahman's opinion, Islam does not have absoluteness to judge others whosoever37 .
In the Islamic faith, God frequently insists that we are (only) the last part of a long journey.That these human beings have passed through various experiences in searching for the One God.Qur'an itself recognizes that.It is true that Qur'an and Hadith say that Islam is revelation of the truth.However, we should not forget that while saying so, there is no negation to the right of those with different belief38 .

As
Barton records, Abdurrahman's Islam, by definition, is fundamentally tolerant, egalitarian, dynamic and cosmopolite.It recognizes diversity and thus is a religion that rejects any unjust treatment based on class, ethnicity, race, gender and other forms of grouping in the society.He even further argues that Islam is a faith that recognizes the equality of human being before God, regardless of being Muslim or non-Muslim 39
In that connection, to interpret such "exclusivist" texts as Qur'an 2:120 40 and 48:9 41 should be carried out by doing a careful examination on their contexts rather than merely reading them literally.On the first verse, that Christian "never will be satisfied with thee", there are two interpretations.First, this means that each side cannot accept the basic concepts of the other, which is definitely reasonable.That is exactly also the same attitude of Islam to Christianity.If both are satisfied with or accept the basic concept of the other then what does it mean to be Christian or Islam? 42Both in fact are different and that is the raison d'être of each.However, it does not necessarily mean opposition.Second, the addressee here is "thee", Muhammad, and not "all human being" or "all believers" in general, for example.At that time, the powerful Christians were politically challenged by Muhammad.It does make sense therefore that they were not satisfied with him unless he followed them.So, it will be mistaken to generalize the "thee", Muhammad, to the Islam and thus meaning that the Christians will never be satisfied with Islam simply because their faith avoid xxx.On Abdurrahman Wahid's idea of humanism, read for instance, Syaiful Arif, Humanisme Gus Dur, Pergumulan Islam dan Kemanusiaan (Yogyakarta: Penerbit Ar-Ruzz Media, 2013).
40 "Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of Religion." 41 "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other." 42 Paul Knitter, however, describes that to accept other religion as it is, including its basic concepts, is just fine for those who take the position of "the acceptance model".See Paul F. Knitter, Introducing Theologies of Religions, 173-190.Islam as a religion 43 .There the point is not religious issue per se, but more about power contestation 44 .
As with the second verse, here "unbelievers", according to Abdurrahman, does not refer to non-Muslim in general, an anonymous subject, but rather "the Meccan unbelievers" who fought against Islam as a religion.There is a clear-cut difference between non-Muslim and the "categorical" unbelievers of Mecca.Generalization as frequently made by many Indonesian Muslims to assume that both of them are identical is misleading.In addition, "compassionate amongst each other" does not necessarily mean uncritical.If the above verse will be taken literally, ask Abdurrahman rhetorically, why did Muhammad once say "(Even) If Fatima, the Prophet's daughter, steals, I will chop off her hands"? 45durrahman needs to reiterate this interpretation in many occasions because he himself is frequently accused of by certain Indonesian Muslim groups, including within NU, as being care more about his inter-faith dialogue initiatives 43 Abdurrahman argues that some Muslim has made mistake by generalizing the "thee", Muhammad, as the addressee, to be the whole Muslims.and his friendships with Christians than he did about supporting Islam.Some, including those within ICMI, even speak of him as "collaborator" of the Christians and non-Muslim groups and mockingly ask "How to Islamize Abdurrahman?" 46 So serious the accusation was that its controversy almost prevented him from being re-elected in his second term of NU presidency in the 1989 muktamar (five-yearly congress) 47 .In short, in Abdurrahman's opinion, without a critical reading on each own religion, religious people will be prone to narrow-mindedness and thus also politicization of religion for the sake of short term gains or self-interest.
The second aspect, each side also needs to properly understand the main principles and historical development belong to the other(s).For instance, most of Indonesian Muslims, do not know about the main principles of Christian theology that enable them to appreciate their fellow Christian's faith.The same is the case with the Christian.As found in most of the Muslim world, 46 Douglas E. Ramage, Ibid., p. 50.In later year, he was also accused to be the Zionist Agent and supported Benny Moerdani, a leading Christian Army General at that time, to be the next Indonesian President.Abdurrahman is also widely criticized to defend the Christian groupowned Monitor Tabloid when it was banned by the government due to a controversial polling publication in 1990 considered by Indonesian Muslim as a serious humiliation to the Prophet Muhammad.In 1990  Bible is frequently compared with the Qur'an as if both of the sacred texts are equal.Similarly, Jesus is also compared to Muhammad without trying to understand the real significance in the respective tradition.In addition, many Muslims in Indonesia also do not know about such historical development of the Christianity as Vatican Council II or Ecumenical Movements and their consequences that may decrease their suspicion to the Christians.Interreligious dialogue, according to him, should assume a serious effort made by each side to comprehensively understand the dialogue partner.If not, than it is just a monologue 48 .
Another simple example due the lack of understanding, according to Abdurrahman, is the frequent controversy commonly found around the erection of a church among majority Muslim neighborhood.Until recently, many Muslims do not know that, in term of congregation, Christians are organized based not on territory, but on denomination.Therefore, the erection of a new church in a certain place where only a small number of Christians exists would be interpreted as a program of Christianization 49 .Furthermore, due to the long history of competition for more followers between the two groups since the colonial time, Muslim-Christian mutual suspicion in the wake of 1965 communist massacre, as well as the use of military style by the New Order in its early years when inter-religious problems emerged, there has been unresolved growing misunderstanding between the two religious communities especially on issues related to proselytization and the establishment of 48
house of worship50 .Again, here, the policy of SARA, plays a significant role in discouraging religious people from knowing each other 51 .Whereas in fact, in Hugh Goddard's words, this second aspect, along with the first one, are needed to avoid the application of "double standards", namely comparing only the ideal principle of "our" religion with the empirical, let alone the negative historical, reality of other religion, that has frequently resulted in mutual misunderstanding 52 .
The third aspect-and presumably the most significant contribution of Abdurrahman Wahid in inter-religious dialogue in Indonesia-is the proper understanding on the context where social interaction between different religious communities takes place.With regard to the defined scope of this research, by context here means real problems encountered by the pluralistic Indonesia in establishing its democracy in relation to the implementation of national modernization project of development by the New Order.
As a person who was born in, grew up and then become a prominent leader of the Byzantine world of Indonesian traditionalist Muslim, he finds that his beloved world is being shaken from every direction 53 .
Vertically, from the state's direction, being faithfully attached to tradition and local culture, traditionalist Muslims was considered as the hard target of the development project.They are accused of being backward and suffered from ignorance, static-minded, parochialism, as well as fostering established understanding both on Islamic thought and society 54 .The traditionalist Muslims are also perceived as administratively poor, lack of effective management and politically opportunistic 55 so that they are judged as being incapable of bearing the tasks for modernizing Indonesia.Horizontally, their Islam is also accused as being syncretic that cost vitality of the religion as an alternative "total system of life" before the secularizing world.
According to Abdurrahman, on the contrary, here is exactly the core of the problem: the right approach to the tradition and culture.In that connection, misunderstanding between Muslim and Christian in Indonesia, according to Abdurrahman, results from two factors.First, Indonesian society is undergoing a difficult transitional era, i.e. from traditional agrarian to modern industrial era, that has created psychological and cultural deprivation 56 .In fact, modernization, as implemented through national development project in Indonesia, has resulted in various traumatic situation he loves his traditional Islamic World without losing his critical attitude.On this topic see Greg Barton, "Liberalisme: Dasar-Dasar Progresivitas Pemikiran Abdurrahman Wahid" [Liberalism: Foundations of Abdurrahman Wahid's Thought  Progressiveness" in Traditionalisme Radikal…,  pp.162-193 and also the introduction by Greg Fealy and Greg Barton in Ibid., pp.xxv-xxviii.

Abdurrahma
Wahid, "Dialog Agama…", p. 52 among the people such as alienation of individual from other members of the society due to the mobile and compartmentalized life, anxiety resulting from the high competition, difficulty in fostering intimate life even with the close relatives due to the penetration of the new cultural pattern, unprepared condition before the rapid changes of values, and so on 57 .
In that regard, instead of being pushed aside, tradition and local culture should be reshaped wisely.In fact, this is a typical view of his background, i.e.Sunni Traditionalist in general and NU in particular 58 .One of the principles characterizing NU as traditionalist is its well-known proverb "to maintain good traditions, to adopt better inventions".Henceforth, tradition, for Abdurrahman, is continuation that cannot be eliminated as such without causing huge impacts on the life of both individual and society.Therefore being proud of the self-tradition accompanied by a mature attitude without over-idealizing the existing norms is needed in front of the modernization process 59 .Meanwhile, culture is the art of living that organizes the survival of the society and creates the pillars needed to maintain social order 60 .In his view, the New Order has made serious mistakes.It underestimates tradition and local culture as obstacle for modernization, while at the same time centralizes and uniforms the culture by subduing it under the tight control of the state.In fact, the technocratic motif and pragmatic orientation of the New Order's developmentalism in treating people primarily as numeric facts rather than as living person attached to certain tradition and culture have seriously deteriorated the psychological and cultural deprivation.This, as was getting evident since the late 1970s, in turn, has enhanced conflict potentials, including matters connected to Muslim-Christian relation 61 .
Worse than that, due to the distortion of concepts used to social life through the national modernization project of "developmentalism" (pembangunan), mutual alienation among elements of the society occurred inevitably.From Muslim perspective, Abdurrahman recognizes, indeed since the last several decades, Islam found that the so-called "developmentalism" has been very difficult 62  anti-Islam.To Abdurrahman, this is exactly because Islam, supposed to be the universal religion for human being, has been treated as an alternative system.There has been a strong tendency to demonstrate that Islam is an "alternative culture" for any forms of the existing culture in Indonesia 65 .That is supposed to be the true Islam, which 'unfortunately' means the Arab Islam.Consequently, many aspects of life should be Islamicized, which means to be Arabicized.Islam as "the ideal culture" means Islam that is sterile from local cultures.If mismanagement of culture and tradition by the New Order regime has caused psychological and cultural deprivation, this misjudgment of culture and tradition by certain Muslim group(s) has resulted in cultural alienation.Therefore, the need for demonstrating a strong self-identity of Islam as an exclusive group seems inevitable for some Indonesian Muslims.Obviously this very political articulation of Islam finally lead only to misunderstanding, or even worse mutual suspicion, between Muslims and Christians.Over the years, many Muslims are so preoccupied with debate around the danger of Christianization 66 , while the threat of Islamic State keeps haunting many Christians 67 .

Cultural Approach
Abdurrahman Wahid strongly believes that a (socio-) cultural approach in practicing religion, including in inter-religious relation, is extremely vital.What does he mean?Religion cannot be separated from culture.Religion, including Islam, is relevant and meaningful only when it has become part of the existing culture.Since cultures are different and changing over time, despite the fact that religious teaching remains the same, its application can be different depending on the cultural context.Therefore, within the context of Indonesia, "we bring back religion [Islam] to foster the pluralistic cultures, the culture that refers to the plurality of the nation.In other words, the approach is a cultural one", Abdurrahman says 68 .
Religion, he argues further, basically cannot regulate the worldly life comprehensively.It provides foundations to live righteous life.As the foundation therefore religion cannot be demanded too much so to avoid its over-claim.Religion only has legitimate claim on the fundamentals of life.When over-claim takes place, when religion is dragged to go beyond its territory, it will become a contending factor for other sectors of life, whereas in fact, religion is the foundation of all and thus does not compete against anything (that is not contradict its principles) 69 .Instead of being an alternative, religion should become the inspiring power, a moral force of the society.Its role is to create social ethic 70 .With regard to the For Abdurrahman Wahid, this socalled socio-cultural approach of practicing Islam includes the capability of the Muslims to appropriately understand the fundamental problems encountered by the society as a whole, 71 For a more detailed discussion see Abdurrahman Wahid,Prisma Pemikiran…, He was then much criticized for this.One of the most controversial is his misunderstood idea to replace "assalamu alaykum" (peace be upon you; a greeting expression assumed to be Islamic) with "selamat pagi" (good morning).See M. Saleh Isre,  Tabayun Gus Dur, Ibid., p. 148.  itead of imposing their own agenda 73 .Within the context of social life in a pluralistic society like Indonesia, Islamic teaching should be treated as complementary factor, instead of being a contending factor that will disintegrate the entire nation 74 .Universality of Islam should be found in the eternity of Islamic messages rather than in physical manifestation of the cultures.For him, it is more important to change the people's behavior without necessarily mean the change of the formal or physical aspect of their culture.
If Muslims are preoccupied with physical or symbolic manifestations of the culture and, in turn, also the formal aspects of religion 75 , it may only lead to two consequences.First, "regimentation of Islam" 76 , which that Islam becomes a regime repressing anything considered as un-Islamic through the 73 Abdurrahman Wahid, "Pribumisasi Islam….",Ibid, p. 91.

74
Abdurrahman Wahid, "Massa Islam….",p. 8 75 In fact, the Snockian policy of the New Order in handling Islam by promoting ritual Islam on the one hand and suppressing political Islam on the other hand has resulted in two consequences: (1) deconfessionalization of politics, which is good in Abdurrahman's opinion, and (2) Muslims' preoccupation of formal aspect of their religion, which is bad.YAMP, a Soeharto's foundation, for instance is well known for its contribution in building some 700 mosques spreading all over the country, while his Dharmais Foundation is claimed to have sent hundreds of dai (Islamic preachers) to the trans-migrant areas outside the Java Island.Cf.Adian Husaini, Soeharto 1998 (Jakarta: Gema  Insani Press, 1996)  78 .Muslims should be ready to live peacefully together with people from different religions, political ideologies, cultural views and others.A new universalism in Islamic teaching and new cosmopolitanism in the worldview of the Muslims are sine qua non for Islam to play its role as liberating force in the more pluralistic society of the future 79 .
According to Abdurrahman, there is exactly the place and the significance of inter-religious dialogue.

Conclusion
Many of what have been achieved in the field of inter-religious dialogue in Indonesia today is possible thank to the foundation laid by key figures in the past.Among Indonesian most important figures of inter-religious dialogue is Abdurrahman Wahid.His ideas and practice in the field represent 77 was a five times reelected Minister of Religious Affair during the period of Soekarno, the first Indonesian president.While his grand father,

Inter-Religious Dialogue and Democracy
Indonesia: Democracy, Islam and the Ideology of Tolerance (London and New York, Routledge, 1995), p. 45.See also Abdurrahman's interview with Kompas Daily, November 27, 1994.
out by Suharto's New Order government.Instead, it should be oriented to develop a real sense of solidarity and mutual understanding among faith communities.
. One example, according to Abdurrahman, is the acceptance of Pancasila as the sole foundation by NU in 198433.Before NU's acceptance of Islamic struggle" into the "national struggle" by placing it within the long-term context of democratization77.Not only that Islamic struggle should be in line with Indonesian national struggle, it also should be part of the struggle for humanity Abdurrahman Wahid, "Menetapkan  Pangkalan….", p. 118.Pergulatan  Negara..., p. 188.notonly his broad knowledge of what it means to be a modern Muslim, but also his strong commitment to his country and to humanity.Through interreligious dialogue, he promotes democracy, setting an exemplary model for the Muslims as majority group, defending the rights of the minorities, seeking justice against dictatorship of Suharto and the New Order in creating a better and world for all through recognition of religious pluralism and peaceful co-existence.His ideas and practice of inter-religious dialogue represent his vision as organic intellectual, social activist, committed religious leader and visionary statesman who wholeheartedly engages with the most fundamental problems of his people.His legacy of inter-religious dialogue in the forms of theological rethe ruling elite are common enemy for all religions.Religious people should promote meaningful dialogue and collaborative work in solving common problem by taking side for the weak, marginalized.To promote inter-religious dialogue, for him, means to accomplish three aspects of mutual understanding among the existing religious communities, i.e. selfcritical attitude, sufficient mutual understanding on the main theological concept and historical development of the other's and the proper understanding on the context of interreligious relation.In that regard, interreligious dialogue in Indonesia should be put within the context of democratization and the establishment of the Indonesian nationhood.Instead of being put against culture, religion should be practiced in fruitful dialogue with the local culture.Islam should be indigenized, being immersed into the local culture.Instead of competing with other religions to get more followers, Muslim should be engaged in real dialogue with people of other faiths in overcoming the common problem of the society.