Terang Bulan

The song below shadowed the chilly night of Ramadhan in Melbourne. It tells the moonlight and a critique of a man who tends to make a vow but is afraid to die for it.

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

Indonesia's Birthday

17 August 2008 marks the 64th anniversary of Indonesian independence. Myriads of hopes have been muhsroming from the bottom of many Indonesian people. Long live Indonesia! March forward with joy and prosperity!

Islam's Dr. Ruth and her campaign for good sex

Can this marriage be saved? Yes, says a Dubai counsellor, if husband attends to his wife's needs

August 09, 2009
Jessica Hume
Special to the Star

Wedad Lootah is fighting for women's sexual rights from behind the full niqab.

A marriage counsellor in the family guidance department of Dubai Courts, Lootah sees couples who are considering divorce or want to revive their relationship. She is also the author of the shocking, for the United Arab Emirates, Top Secret: Sexual Guidance for Married Couples, a book published in January.

And much of the advice she dispenses involves teaching husbands that their wives deserve sexual pleasure too.

The idea of anyone, let alone a female, practising sex therapy may seem at odds with the ethos of the U.A.E. – a country in which hand-holding and other displays of public affection can result in prison terms, where premarital sex among Western expats is a deportable offence.

But Lootah is able to get away with talking about this taboo subject because she bases her advice firmly on the teachings of the Qur'an, which is decidedly more forthcoming about sex than the Bible.

And she insists her motivation has much less to do with sexual liberation than with helping married couples avoid divorce.

"My subject is not sex; people always misunderstand that," says the married, 45-year-old mother of three, a marital counsellor for nine years. "I'm trying to guide people about how to satisfy each other and save society from illegal relations – girlfriends, boyfriends.

"We're talking about Islam. We're not talking about sex."

Still, the reality is that she and her clients are talking about sex. During a recent, two-hour interview – in English and with an Arabic translator – in her tiny office, she said the most important piece of advice she can give is, "Don't forget that there are 22 positions to have sex in. Use them all."

Although the Qur'an states explicitly that both husbands and wives deserve sexual gratification in marriage, sex remains an intensely private subject.

Sex education in Emirates high schools consists of little more than a heads-up for girls about menstruation and a reminder that in Islam, sex may only take place in marriage.

And because many couples in the Emirates are loath to discuss sex with their partners, says Lootah, marriages suffer. Meanwhile, infidelity is forbidden in Islam, and divorce is frowned upon.

Sharia law urges couples considering divorce to make every effort to save their marriage. And Lootah, born and raised in Dubai and studied Islamic jurisprudence in college, sees herself as complying with that guideline by getting men and women to talk about their sex lives.

The truth is that if the Qur'an didn't factor so largely into her work, she probably would not have been personally appointed by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum as the first and only woman family counsellor at the court and in Dubai, nor does it seem likely that Top Secret would have been published.

After all, her book deals with subjects ranging from female orgasm to homosexuality and anal sex.

Lootah condemns the latter two, as they are forbidden in the Qur'an. Indeed, she sees herself as neither provocative nor revolutionary, a self-image bolstered by her wearing of the full niqab, which exposes only her eyes and hands.



THE DIVORCE RATE in the U.A.E. is about 30 per cent. And the process leading up to traditional Muslim marriage makes it particularly vulnerable to breakdown.

Many unions are decided upon by the parents of the prospective bride and groom, who often don't even meet before the wedding.

Once the families agree on the union, it is confirmed legally in a written agreement.

"Then the marriage is legal, but it is without sex," she says. "That's not until the wedding.

"The Prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him, said before you marry, you need to see each other, you need to understand if you like each other.

"I advise people to visit each other before the wedding, spend time together, get to know each other."

Lootah says that it's mainly women who go to see her. "And they're here because the men don't always understand that they have responsibility in the marriage beyond working; they have a responsibility to make sure the wife gets pleasure.

"If he has two or more wives, it has to be equal among them all."

The problem, she continues, is that in a culture where a woman's modesty is among her most prized traits, more conservative women are reluctant to bring up a subject as racy as sex with their husbands, or even with friends.

The ebullient Lootah says her greatest asset at work is her ability to put those on the other side of her desk at ease. She approaches her subject with empathy, a sense of humour and an unfazed candour.



NOT SURPRISINGLY, Lootah's openness about a topic generally considered taboo within Islamic culture has stirred up controversy.

She first encountered threats and opposition in 2004, after an interview on the Al Arabiya TV network.

Death threats and accusations of blasphemy followed the release of her book. The anger came from men in the Gulf, who said her openness about sex was un-Islamic.

Her view is that they feel threatened that a woman in niqab would empower other women to demand better sex from their husbands.

The idea for her book arose after she'd met women whose stories about marital sex shocked her.

"One couple lived together for 35 years, they had children, and in discussions I found that the woman had had no sexual pleasure in all that time," she recalls. "Another woman told me that during the 20 years of her marriage, her husband only ever had anal sex with her except for the times they wanted to have children."

Another woman said her husband had asked for oral sex, and she wasn't sure if that was allowed by the Qur'an. (The Qur'an, explains Lootah, has no problem with it.)

Her book is the only one of its kind to have been published in the U.A.E..

The number of people she sees – and not all are Muslims or Emiratis – has increased over her time as a counsellor, she points out. Now she has five or six appointments a day.

"From 2001 to 2004 it was almost always on the phone; couples were ashamed to talk, or they would talk but they wouldn't reveal everything. Since 2004, when I went on Al Arabiya and started giving lectures, and then the book, now people know there is someone who will listen. Even the most religious couples tell me everything now."



THERE MAY BE increased openness to talking about sex in other Arab countries too. Heba Kotb, 49, is an Egyptian sex therapist whose decidedly frank sex show is broadcast weekly across the Arab world. Like Lootah, Kotb bases her advice on the Qur'an. And like Lootah, her work has stirred up some vociferous opposition.

One point of pride for Lootah is the fact that among the six family therapists working at the Dubai Court, she is the one whose appointment book fills up quickest. She has the highest success rate, she contends.

And some of her best moments are when the people she has counselled come back to thank her, crediting Lootah for saving a marriage.

Lootah herself has been married 21 years. Her bond with her husband is strong, she says, and he is "very supportive, very proud" of her.

Other than a lack of communication and variety, Lootah says a not making an effort to stay desirable can hurt a marriage.

"My advice for married women is to buy lots of dresses. Look beautiful. Be clean. Use the perfume.

"I give the same advice to men. Be like what you want your wife to be like. Brush your teeth."



– The National, Dubai

Indonesia Must Hit Terrorism at Its Roots by Tackling Recruitment at Islamic Schools

August 09, 2009
Joe Cochrane

Indonesia Must Hit Terrorism at Its Roots by Tackling Recruitment at Islamic Schools
Analysis

Noordin M Top has certainly lived by the sword, so it would have been fitting if he had met his demise amid a hail of bullets and bomb explosions inside a farmhouse in Central Java over the weekend.

It seems certain that the alleged mastermind of the July 17 twin suicide bombings in South Jakarta — as well as other attacks in the capital and on Bali — is still at large. Aside from his fanatical, extremist interpretations of Islam and willingness to kill scores of civilians in pursuit of his goals, Noordin is considered even more dangerous for his ability to recruit pawns to carry out attacks, in particular young suicide bombers.

It was likely his followers would attempt to carry on his work in the event he was captured or killed.

“His legend would rise. It would be a great recruiting tool,” said Ken Conboy, author of “Inside Jemaah Islamiyah, Asia’s Most Dangerous Terrorist Network.”

Tracking down and rolling up Noordin’s network — and the man himself given that DNA tests are expected to come back negative — is the job of Detachment 88, the National Police counter-terrorism unit. But analysts say the central government must take a long-term view of the country’s terrorism problem and begin tackling it at its source.

Terrorism’s roots, they say, lie within the country’s Islamic boarding schools. According to Sidney Jones of the International Crisis Group, about 50 pesantrens are believed linked to Jemaah Islamiyah, the regional terrorist network of which Noordin was once a key member.

“The schools are still important, less for what they teach than for the connections made there,” said Jones, a JI expert. “It’s not so much ‘massive’ recruiting that’s the problem, but more that I would place the santri [orthodox Muslims] at these schools near the top of vulnerable populations for recruitment. And it only takes a visit by one extremist to bring a couple more on board.”

Indonesia has as many as 45,000 Islamic boarding schools, Jones said, but only about 15,000 are registered with the Ministry of Religious Affairs. Analysts have criticized the ministry for not overseeing the schools’ curriculums, which could be blinds for private study sessions for handpicked students with extremist teachers.

Despite the difficulties the government would have intervening in Islamic schools, Nasaruddin Umar, the Religious Affairs Ministry’s director general for mass guidance on Islam, said expanded oversight was inevitable. “We have to control the curriculums of all the pesantrens. I have found many, many problems,” he said.

Petruk Dadi Ratu

BENEDICT ANDERSON

In the early 1930s, Bung Karno [Sukarno] was hauled before a Dutch colonial court on a variety of charges of ‘subversion’. He was perfectly aware that the whole legal process was prearranged by the authorities, and he was in court merely to receive a heavy sentence. Accordingly, rather than wasting his time on defending himself against the charges, he decided to go on the attack by laying bare all aspects of the racist colonial system. Known by its title ‘Indonesia Accuses!’ his defence plea has since become a key historical document for the future of the Indonesian people he loved so well.

Roughly forty-five years later, Colonel Abdul Latief was brought before a special military court—after thirteen years in solitary confinement, also on a variety of charges of subversion. Since he, too, was perfectly aware that the whole process was prearranged by the authorities, he followed in Bung Karno’s footsteps by turning his defence plea into a biting attack on the New Order, and especially on the cruelty, cunning and despotism of its creator. It is a great pity that this historic document has had to wait twenty-two years to become available to the Indonesian people whom he, also, loves so well. [1] But who is, and was, Abdul Latief, who in his youth was called Gus Dul? While still a young boy of fifteen, he was conscripted by the Dutch for basic military training in the face of an impending mass assault by the forces of Imperial Japan. However, the colonial authorities quickly surrendered, and Gus Dul was briefly imprisoned by the occupying Japanese.

Subsequently, he joined the Seinendan and the Peta in East Java. [2] After the Revolution broke out in 1945, he served continuously on the front lines, at first along the perimeter of Surabaya, and subsequently in Central Java. Towards the end he played a key role in the famous General Assault of March 1, 1949 on Jogjakarta [the revolutionary capital just captured by the Dutch]: directly under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Suharto. After the transfer of sovereignty in December 1949, Latief led combat units against various rebel forces: the groups of Andi Azis and Kahar Muzakar in South Sulawesi; the separatist Republic of the South Moluccas; the radical Islamic Battalion 426 in Central Java, the Darul Islam in West Java, and finally the Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Indonesia [CIA-financed and armed rebellion of 1957–58] in West Sumatra. He was a member of the second graduating class of the Staff and Command College (Suharto was a member of the first class). Finally, during the Confrontation with Malaysia, he was assigned the important post of Commander of Brigade 1 in Jakarta, directly under the capital’s Territorial Commander, General Umar Wirahadikusumah. In this capacity he played an important, but not central, role in the September 30th Movement of 1965. From this sketch it is clear that Gus Dul was and is a true-blue combat soldier, with a psychological formation typical of the nationalist freedom-fighters of the Independence Revolution, and an absolute loyalty to its Great Leader. [3]

His culture? The many references in his defence speech both to the Koran and to the New Testament indicate a characteristic Javanese syncretism. Standard Marxist phraseology is almost wholly absent. And his accusations? The first is that Suharto, then the Commander of the Army’s Strategic Reserve [Kostrad], was fully briefed beforehand, by Latief himself, on the Council of Generals plotting Sukarno’s overthrow, and on the September 30th Movement’s plans for preventive action. General Umar too was informed through the hierarchies of the Jakarta Garrison and the Jakarta Military Police. This means that Suharto deliberately allowed the September 30th Movement to start its operations, and did not report on it to his superiors, General Nasution and General Yani. [4] By the same token, Suharto was perfectly positioned to take action against the September 30th Movement, once his rivals at the top of the military command structure had been eliminated. Machiavelli would have applauded.

We know that Suharto gave two contradictory public accounts of his meeting with Latief late in the night of September 30th at the Army Hospital. Neither one is plausible. To the American journalist Arnold Brackman, Suharto said that Latief had come to the hospital to ‘check’ on him (Suharto’s baby son Tommy was being treated for minor burns from scalding soup). But ‘checking’ on him for what? Suharto did not say. To Der Spiegel Suharto later confided that Latief had come to kill him, but lost his nerve because there were too many people around (as if Gus Dul only then realized that hospitals are very busy places!). The degree of Suharto’s commitment to truth can be gauged from the following facts. By October 4, 1965, a team of forensic doctors had given him directly their detailed autopsies on the bodies of the murdered generals. The autopsies showed that all the victims had been gunned down by military weapons. But two days later, a campaign was initiated in the mass media, by then fully under Kostrad control, to the effect that the generals’ eyes had been gouged out, and their genitals cut off, by members of Gerwani [the Communist Party’s women’s affiliate]. These icy lies were planned to create an anti-communist hysteria in all strata of Indonesian society.

Other facts strengthen Latief’s accusation. Almost all the key military participants in the September 30th Movement were, either currently or previously, close subordinates of Suharto: Lieutenant-Colonel Untung, Colonel Latief, and Brigadier-General Supardjo in Jakarta, and Colonel Suherman, Major Usman, and their associates at the Diponegoro Division’s HQ in Semarang. When Untung got married in 1963, Suharto made a special trip to a small Central Javanese village to attend the ceremony. When Suharto’s son Sigit was circumcised, Latief was invited to attend, and when Latief’s son’s turn came, the Suharto family were honoured guests. It is quite plain that these officers, who were not born yesterday, fully believed that Suharto was with them in their endeavour to rescue Sukarno from the conspiracy of the Council of Generals. Such trust is incomprehensible unless Suharto, directly or indirectly, gave his assent to their plans. It is therefore not at all surprising that Latief’s answer to my question, ‘How did you feel on the evening of October 1st?’—Suharto had full control of the capital by late afternoon—was, ‘I felt I had been betrayed.’

Furthermore, Latief’s account explains clearly one of the many mysteries surrounding the September 30th Movement. Why were the two generals who commanded directly all the troops in Jakarta, except for the Presidential Guard—namely Kostrad Commander Suharto and Jakarta Military Territory Commander Umar—not ‘taken care of’ by the September 30th Movement, if its members really intended a coup to overthrow the government, as the Military Prosecutor charged? The reason is that the two men were regarded as friends. A further point is this. We now know that, months before October 1, Ali Murtopo, then Kostrad’s intelligence chief, was pursuing a foreign policy kept secret from both Sukarno and Yani. Exploiting the contacts of former rebels, [5] clandestine connexions were made with the leaderships of two then enemy countries, Malaysia and Singapore, as well as with the United States. At that time Benny Murdani [6] was furthering these connexions from Bangkok, where he was disguised as an employee in the local Garuda [Indonesian National Airline] office. Hence it looks as if Latief is right when he states that Suharto was two-faced, or, perhaps better put, two-fisted. In one fist he held Latief–Untung–Supardjo, and in the other Murtopo–Yoga Sugama [7]–Murdani.

The second accusation reverses the charges of the Military Prosecutor that the September 30th Movement intended to overthrow the government and that the Council of Generals was a pack of lies. Latief’s conclusion is that it was precisely Suharto who planned and executed the overthrow of Sukarno; and that a Council of Generals did exist —composed not of Nasution, Yani, et al., but rather of Suharto and his trusted associates, who went on to create a dictatorship based on the Army which lasted for decades thereafter. Here once again, the facts are on Latief’s side. General Pranoto Reksosamudro, appointed by President/Commander-in-Chief Sukarno as acting Army Commander after Yani’s murder, found his appointment rejected by Suharto, and his person soon put under detention. Aidit, Lukman and Nyoto, the three top leaders of the Indonesian Communist Party, then holding ministerial rank in Sukarno’s government, were murdered out of hand. And although President Sukarno did his utmost to prevent it, Suharto and his associates planned and carried out vast massacres in the months of October, November and December 1965. As Latief himself underlines, in March 1966 a ‘silent coup’ took place: military units surrounded the building where a plenary cabinet meeting was taking place, and hours later the President was forced, more or less at gunpoint, to sign the super-murky Supersemar. [8] Suharto immediately cashiered Sukarno’s cabinet and arrested fifteen ministers. Latief’s simple verdict is that it was not the September 30th Movement which was guilty of grave and planned insubordination against the President, ending in his overthrow, but rather the man whom young wags have been calling Mr. TEK. [9]

Latief’s third accusation is broader than the others and just as grave. He accuses the New Order authorities of extraordinary, and wholly extra-legal, cruelty. That the Accuser is today still alive, with his wits intact, and his heart full of fire, shows him to be a man of almost miraculous fortitude. During his arrest on October 11, 1965, many key nerves in his right thigh were severed by a bayonet, while his left knee was completely shattered by bullets (in fact, he put up no resistance). In the Military Hospital his entire body was put into a gypsum cast, so that he could only move his head. Yet in this condition, he was still interrogated before being thrust into a tiny, dank and filthy isolation cell where he remained for the following thirteen years. His wounds became gangrenous and emitted the foul smell of carrion. When on one occasion the cast was removed for inspection, hundreds of maggots came crawling out. At the sight, one of the jailers had to run outside to vomit. For two and a half years Latief lay there in his cast before being operated on. He was forcibly given an injection of penicillin, though he told his guards he was violently allergic to it, with the result that he fainted and almost died. Over the years he suffered from haemorrhoids, a hernia, kidney stones, and calcification of the spine. The treatment received by other prisoners, especially the many military men among them, was not very different, and their food was scarce and often rotting. It is no surprise, therefore, that many died in the Salemba Prison, many became paralytics after torture, and still others went mad. In the face of such sadism, perhaps even the Kempeitai [10] would have blanched. And this was merely Salemba—one among the countless prisons in Jakarta and throughout the archipelago, where hundreds of thousands of human beings were held for years without trial. Who was responsible for the construction of this tropical Gulag?

History textbooks for Indonesia’s schoolchildren speak of a colonial monster named Captain ‘Turk’ Westerling. They usually give the number of his victims in South Sulawesi in 1946 as forty thousand. It is certain that many more were wounded, many houses were burned down, much property looted and, here and there, women raped. The defence speech of Gus Dul asks the reader to reflect on an ice-cold ‘native’ monster, whose sadism far outstripped that of the infamous Captain. In the massacres of 1965–66, a minimum of six hundred thousand were murdered. If the reported deathbed confession of Sarwo Edhie to Mas Permadi is true, the number may have reached over two million. [11] Between 1977 and 1979, at least two hundred thousand human beings in East Timor died before their time, either killed directly or condemned to planned death through systematic starvation and its accompanying diseases. Amnesty International reckons that seven thousand people were extra-judicially assassinated in the Petrus Affair of 1983. [12] To these victims, we must add those in Aceh, Irian, Lampung, Tanjung Priok and elsewhere. At the most conservative estimate: eight hundred thousand lives, or twenty times the ‘score’ of Westerling. And all these victims, at the time they died, were regarded officially as fellow-nationals of the monster.

Latief speaks of other portions of the national tragedy which are also food for thought. For example, the hundreds of thousands of people who spent years in prison, without clear charges against them, and without any due process of law, besides suffering, on a routine basis, excruciating torture. To say nothing of uncountable losses of property to theft and looting, casual, everyday rapes, and social ostracism for years, not only for former prisoners themselves, but for their wives and widows, children, and kinfolk in the widest sense. Latief’s J’accuse was written twenty-two years ago, and many things have happened in his country in the meantime. But it is only now perhaps that it can acquire its greatest importance, if it serves to prick the conscience of the Indonesian people, especially the young. To make a big fuss about the corruption of Suharto and his family, as though his criminality were of the same gravity as Eddy Tansil’s, [13] is like making a big fuss about Idi Amin’s mistresses, Slobodan Miloševic’s peculations, or Adolf Hitler’s kitschy taste in art. That Jakarta’s middle class, and a substantial part of its intelligentsia, still busy themselves with the cash stolen by ‘Father Harto’ (perhaps in their dreams they think of it as ‘our cash’) shows very clearly that they are still unprepared to face the totality of Indonesia’s modern history. This attitude, which is that of the ostrich that plunges its head into the desert sands, is very dangerous. A wise man once said: Those who forget/ignore the past are condemned to repeat it. Terrifying, no?

Important as it is, Latief’s defence, composed under exceptional conditions, cannot lift the veil which still shrouds many aspects of the September 30th Movement and its aftermath. Among so many questions, one could raise at least these. Why was Latief himself not executed, when Untung, Supardjo, Air Force Major Suyono, and others had their death sentences carried out? Why were Yani and the other generals killed at all, when the original plan was to bring them, as a group, face-to-face with Sukarno? Why did First Lieutenant Dul Arief of the Presidential Guard, who actually led the attacks on the generals’ homes, subsequently vanish without a trace? How and why did all of Central Java fall into the hands of supporters of the September 30th Movement for a day and a half, while nothing similar occurred in any other province? Why did Colonel Suherman, Major Usman and their associates in Semarang also disappear without a trace? Who really was Syam alias Kamaruzzaman [14]—former official of the Recomba of the Federal State of Pasundan, [15] former member of the anti-communist Indonesian Socialist Party, former intelligence operative for the Greater Jakarta Military Command at the time of the huge smuggling racket run by General Nasution and General Ibnu Sutowo out of Tanjung Priok, as well as former close friend of D. N. Aidit? Was he an army spy in the ranks of the Communists? Or a Communist spy inside the military? Or a spy for a third party? Or all three simultaneously? Was he really executed, or does he live comfortably abroad with a new name and a fat wallet?

Latief also cannot give us answers to questions about key aspects of the activities of the September 30th Movement, above all its political stupidities. Lieutenant-Colonel Untung’s radio announcement that starting from October 1st, the highest military rank would be the one he himself held, automatically made enemies of all the generals and colonels in Indonesia, many of whom held command of important combat units. Crazy, surely? Why was the announced list of the members of the so-called Revolutionary Council so confused and implausible? [16] Why did the Movement not announce that it was acting on the orders of President Sukarno (even if this was untrue), but instead dismissed Sukarno’s own cabinet? Why did it not appeal to the masses to crowd into the streets to help safeguard the nation’s head? It passes belief that such experienced and intelligent leaders as Aidit, Nyoto and Sudisman [17] would have made such a string of political blunders. Hence the suspicion naturally arises that this string was deliberately arranged to ensure the Movement’s failure. Announcements of the kind mentioned above merely confused the public, paralysed the masses, and provided easy pretexts for smashing the September 30th Movement itself. In this event, who really set up these bizarre announcements and arranged for their broadcast over national radio?

Most of the main actors in, and key witnesses to, the crisis of 1965, have either died or been killed. Those who are still alive have kept their lips tightly sealed, for various motives: for example, Umar Wirahadikusumah, Omar Dhani, Sudharmono, Rewang, M. Panggabean, Benny Murdani, Mrs. Hartini, Mursyid, Yoga Sugama, Andi Yusuf and Kemal Idris. [18] Now that thirty-five years have passed since 1965, would it not be a good thing for the future of the Indonesian nation if these people were required to provide the most detailed accounts of what they did and witnessed, before they go to meet their Maker?

According to an old popular saying, the mills of God grind slowly but very fine. The meaning of this adage is that in the end the rice of truth will be separated from the chaff of confusion and lies. In every part of the world, one day or another, long-held classified documents, memoirs in manuscript locked away in cabinets, and diaries gathering dust in the attics of grandchildren will be brought to His mill, and their contents will become known to later generations. With this book of his, ‘shut away’ during twenty-one years of extraordinary suffering, Abdul Latief, with his astonishing strength, has provided an impressive exemplification of the old saying. Who knows, some day his accusations may provide valuable material for the script of that play in the repertoire of the National History Shadow-Theatre which is entitled . . . well, what else could it be?—Petrus Becomes King.

In traditional Javanese shadow-theatre, Petruk Dadi Ratu is a rollicking farce in which Petruk, a well-loved clown, briefly becomes King, with predictably hilarious and grotesque consequences. For Petrus, read Killer—see note 12 above. Suharto notoriously saw himself as a new kind of Javanese monarch, thinly disguised as a President of the Republic of Indonesia.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Kolonel Abdul Latief, Soeharto Terlibat G30S—Pledoi Kol. A. Latief [Suharto was Involved in the September 30 Movement—Defence Speech of Colonel A. Latief ] Institut Studi Arus Informasi: Jakarta 2000, 285 pp.
[2] Respectively: paramilitary youth organization and auxiliary military apparatus set up by the Japanese.
[3] Ironic reference to the title Sukarno gave himself in the early 1960s.
[4] Nasution was Defence Minister and Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, Yani Army Chief of Staff. Yani was killed on October l, and Nasution just escaped with his life.
[5] From the 1957–58 civil war, when these people were closely tied to the CIA as well as the Special Branch in Singapore and Malaya.
[6] The legendary Indonesian military intelligence czar of the 1970s and 1980s.
[7] A Japanese-trained high-ranking intelligence officer.
[8] Acronym for Surat Perintah Sebelas Maret, Decree of March 11, which turned over most executive functions ad interim to Suharto; the acronym deliberately exploits the name of Semar, magically powerful figure in Javanese shadow puppet theatre.
[9] ‘Thug Escaped from Kemusu’: the Suharto regime regularly named all its supposed subversive enemies as GPK, Gerakan Pengacau Keamanan, or Order-Disturbing Elements. The wags made this Gali Pelarian Kemusu—Suharto was born in the village of Kemusu.
[10] Japanese military police, famous for war-time brutality.
[11] Then Colonel Sarwo Edhie, commander of the elite Red Beret paratroops, was the operational executor of the massacres; Mas Permadi is a well-known psychic.
[12] The organized slaughter of petty hoodlums, often previously agents of the regime. A grim joke of the time called the death-squads of soldiers-in-mufti ‘Petrus’, as in St. Peter, an acronym derived from Penembak Misterius or Mysterious Killers.
[13] Famous high-flying Sino-Indonesian crook who escaped abroad with millions of embezzled dollars.
[14] Allegedly the head of the Communist Party’s secret Special Bureau for military affairs, and planner of the September 30th Movement.
[15] In 1948–49, the Dutch set up a series of puppet regimes in various provinces they controlled to offset the power and prestige of the independent Republic. Recomba was the name of this type of regime in Java, and Pasundan is the old name for the Sundanese-speaking territory of West Java.
[16] The Movement proclaimed this Council as the temporary ruling authority in Indonesia, but its membership included right-wing generals, second-tier left-wingers, and various notoriously opportunist politicians, while omitting almost all figures with national reputations and large organizations behind them.
[17] Secretary-General of the Communist Party.
[18] Omar Dhani: Air Force chief in 1965, sentenced to death, had his sentence reduced to life imprisonment, and was recently released. Sudharmono: for decades close aide to Suharto. Rewang: former candidate member of the Communist Party’s Politbureau. Panggabean: top general in Suharto’s clique and his successor as commander of Kostrad. Hartini: Sukarno’s second wife in 1965. Mursyid: Sukarnoist general heading military operations for the Army Staff in 1965, subsequently arrested. Yusuf and Idris: both these generals played central roles in the overthrow of Sukarno.

Formulating a Vision for Muslim America

The earlier published article (“The Future of American Muslims – Is there a Vision?”) highlighted the need for a strategic vision for Islam and Muslims in America and raised a few questions that need to be discussed, and debated to get their efforts on the right track. This post further expands on those questions and highlights 6 areas which American Muslim leaders must focus on at a minimum to get clarity on a roadmap for a better Muslim America.

1. Get American Muslims back in Mosques
Many studies indicate that a large number of American Muslims are absent from the masjid or are mere seldom visitors. According to the Pew Forum on religion and Public Life, only 17% of Muslims go to mosques more than once a week. This compares with 30% for evangelical Christians (largest religious group in the US). According to the study, 34% of Muslims seldom or never attend mosques and Islamic centers. On the other hand, this compares with only 13% for evangelical Christians.

Simply put, practising Muslims cannot stay disconnected from mosques and masjids. In Islam, a masjid or a mosque is the epicentre of all spiritual and physical rejuvenation. Amongst other things, a masjid provides a place of worship for the daily 5 and the weekly Friday prayers – one of the required and primary pillars of Islam. A masjid facilitates social interaction between individuals and also provides avenues for spiritual, family and other forms of counselling thus providing for healthier minds. Furthermore, a good masjid facilitates learning of knowledge thus paving the way to build sound Muslim leaders.

The low number of Muslims attending mosques should be a cause of concern for the Muslim leaders. With hundreds and thousands of mosques and Islamic centers built in the US over the past many years, why are those Muslims not heading to the masjid? Whether their spiritually needs are being met elsewhere or whether there are other reasons, Muslim communities in America cannot afford the exodus of such a large percentage of Muslims from the Islamic centers and this is where Muslim leaders should step in to think through reversing this exodus.

Another study conducted last year in a western country saw an increase of 21% in the number of Christian church goers from the year before. One of the reasons cited was that churches specifically were reaching out to their local communities to offer people help in their practical lives and to provide spiritual guidance. They found that “In this country, we work with lots of churches who offer vital family support to parents and careers, give advice and counseling around debt and financial management, help refugees to settle into the community, provide companionship for older people, and offer networks of friends to young adults.” Didn’t Muslims always pride themselves being part of a religion that is “complete” offering solutions for their daily lives? Shouldn’t Islamic centers and mosques in the west be doing the same thing or even excelling in building better individuals and useful members of their local communities?

Muslim leaders therefore must address this issue. So, here is the good news. The same forum also reports that while only 17% of Muslims attend mosques and Islamic centers more than once a week, 71% pray atleast once daily (pray outside mosques and Islamic centers). So, all that absence cannot be blamed on American Muslims’ dwindling levels of faith. Why such Muslims do not see any value or a religious requirement to be closely part of Islamic centers is an issue that Muslim leaders need to tackle and find ways to bring these Muslims back to the Islamic centers and masjids.

2. Re-introduce Islam to America
Islam has existed in America for many decades, yet it continues to be a foreign religion to the non-Muslim communities of America. Study after study shows that a large percentage of non-Muslim Americans hold a negative view about Islam. It is obvious that whatever has caused the building of these stererotypes over the years hasn’t gone away and whatever Muslim leaders are doing to cast away those stereotypes is not working.

Muslim communities have taken certain steps to counter some of these stereotypes. Interfaith dialogs and conferences, holding open mosque days and distribution of free Qurans are some of the methods that Muslims have sought to introduce Islam and Muslims to the non-Muslim America.

However, Muslim leaders need to gauge the effectiveness of these tactics. Does simply handing out a 600 page Quran translation answer the basic questions that an average American may have about Islam? Instead, wouldn’t distributing a 50 page factual guide with basic questions and answers and the one that debunks the falsehoods propagated in many media circles could be more of an effective tool to make non-Muslims aware about Islam? Similarly, how effective are one time introductions to Islam on open mosque days? Wouldn’t alternative sustained efforts be sought that can better disseminate the message of Islam within the non-Muslim communities of America? These are some of the questions that Muslim leaders ought to ask amongst themselves to help improve the image of Islam and Muslims.

This dilemma does beg the question as to how Islam was introduced within the communities of early Muslims hundreds of years ago. Quran’s linguistic miracle was one of the many factors as it drove many to understand Quran better and in the process got the message. But the key in getting the Islamic message out during those times was that Muslims of those times lived as Muslims not just amongst their fellow Muslims but amongst non-Muslims as well. A Muslim’s life was therefore open to non-Muslims and Muslims alike. Their lives that embodied the message of Islam provided non-Muslims with a glimpse of Islam on a daily basis. That not only resulted in non-Muslims to appreciate and respect Islam and its inherent values but was the key reason for people to become Muslims.

This poses the question whether the life of an American Muslim symbolizes that lifestyle. Is it the case that while Muslims may be living as Muslims within their own communities but could be masking out some of that lifestyle when they meet and engage with non-Muslims? When called for, do Muslim Americans feel proud introducing themselves as Muslims or does the Islam hysteria make them shy away from such introductions? Because, when Muslims try to hide their identities from their neighbors and non-Muslim friends, it is only natural that such non-Muslims too will shy away from asking more questions about Muslims and Islam. If Muslims keep their Islam hidden away in mosques and in their homes, then the situation won’t improve in anyway.

Non-Muslims need to see Islam and its values in action amongst Muslims before they can appreciate and understand the message of Islam. This living of Islam on a daily basis will introduce Islam to America in ways that no open mosque demonstration, Islamic lecture or newspaper article can ever do. This mode of living therefore has to change and Muslim leaders and Imams must start addressing this topic within the non-Muslim communities of America.

3. Work and Improve Relationship with the Government
Many American Muslims have questioned and complained, and more so lately, about some of government agencies’ alleged tactics to intimidate various communities of Muslim America. This intimidation according to many has come in the form of spying in mosques, recruiting informants, using of provocateur methods or simply uncalled for questioning of peace loving citizens. Factual or not, but the concerns are real. The question is what are Muslim leaders doing to improve the atmosphere?

It can be difficult for any community to taste the fruits of freedom under such conditions and to live in the shadows of perceived intimidation. Living freely requires minds free of such stresses. But, the reality is what it is – and under such conditions Muslim leaders must find a way to free Muslim communities of such stresses by helping the government achieve its goals in parallel. This is because government agencies do have an important job to do in protecting the nation from all threats. Muslim leaders therefore should do both – cooperate fully to help these agencies achieve their goals, and in parallel work with these agencies to understand the underlying reasons of the concerns that Muslims have and wherever possible to work with them to find alternate ways to meet those goals. This also provides Muslim leaders with needed opportunities to educate their communities to improve the overall atmosphere.

This doesn’t mean that Muslim organizations have not done anything on this front. They have – but beyond the basic steps of opening communication channels with these agencies, there is a need to foster relationships on an ongoing basis. That is important for many reasons. We know that for any agency or institution to find more about certain groups of people, they have to rely on experts. But, which experts are these agencies relying on to find more about Muslims? If it’s any of the so called anti-Islam experts who also give their opinions on mainstream media, then that explains the bias, concerns and fear of these agencies regarding Muslims. Logic dictates that Muslim leaders selected from the overall population would be better at explaining more about Muslims than any of the non-Muslim experts themselves.

So, as long as Muslims are being put under the microscope and the government needs to learn about Islam and Muslims, Muslim leaders should seize the opportunity to educate the government agencies about Islam and Muslims. If the government needs to know the truth about Muslims, it can get more accurate information from Muslims themselves rather than relying on the so called Muslim experts with an anti-Islam agenda.

4. Reorganize Muslims through well governed Masjids and Islamic Institutions
Every center needs to be organized and governed effectively to be able to achieve the overall vision of Muslims of America. By some estimates there are more than 2000 mosques in America some of which date back to decades. Yet, the same problems that haunted the earlier mosques, exist today as well. For one reason or another, national American Muslim establishments have failed to suggest working blueprints for the running of Islamic centers. As a result, the founders have always chosen to impose their wills and philosophies on each of the centers, some of which though may have worked but then again have alienated its patrons in other cases. There is no reason why national Muslim leaders should not be able to recommend workable solutions for a core set of services required for each mosque. Whether they choose to implement them or not is upto the discretion of local mosques but then there won’t be any legitimate excuse for having badly run centers.

Plans with workable solutions can address issues related to setup of basic services for worship, funerals, Muslim marriage, Islamic schools, adult education, family counselling, etc. They can also include models for instituting non-Muslim awareness programs to help local non-Muslims learn more about Islam. However, the most important of all has to do with crafting recommendations of tested governance models for mosques and Islamic centers. Masjid-goers in many masjids complain of poor governance structures that prevent building of better institutions needed to build better Muslims for the future. They complain of the politics and power struggles present in some of these masjids that in turn thwarts real progress. The debates around whether these centers should be based on memberships, or democratic in nature, or have a shura-like governing body, etc. rage on. A few tested governance models thus can provide centers with options that may help some of such woes.

5. Bring Forward the Right Imams and Muslim Leaders
Because an Islamic center or masjid is a critical and inherent part of a Muslim’s ongoing and daily religious experience, the role of an Imam by default becomes just as important. Imams are spiritual leaders who are supposed to be knowledgeable in religious matters, deliver the weekly Friday sermons and are depended on by their communities for guidance on spiritual as well as worldly matters. Imams are expected to provide leadership to local Muslims by walking their talk (sometimes missing from a lot of Islamic centers) – rather than piling worshippers with emotional and empty talk while standing on the podium during Friday khutbahs (sermons). Imams need to uplift the morale of their communities by being role models. That is naturally a higher calling – more than them merely uplifting prayer-goers’ moods with beautiful Quranic recitations.

But such Imams are not easy to find. Others, who step forward to fill that void temporarily – or in some cases try to provide that leadership, end up being – for the lack of a better word – controversial – not just within the mosques but outside the mosques as well. Within their local communities, such Imams ultimately get blamed for failing to prove their leadership. Some get blamed for their outdated thinking and not being in tune with the challenges of the present day Muslim Americans. Others with little religious education get the blame for not being knowledgeable about Islamic issues thus risking giving of “bad advice” to their local Muslim communities. Some of them even get blamed for compromising on basic Islamic values. And, to top it all off, some Imams also get in hot water with the government who may monitor them for ensuring that their speeches and messages are not stirring trouble.

All this has the potential to cause intractable damage to the next generation of local Muslims. Muslim leaders must find a fix for this. After all, this is about the future and that cannot be risked.

6. Get Muslims engaged in the democratic process
It took Muslims many years before they realized the need to start participating in America’s democratic process. More Muslims have voted in the past two Presidential elections than anytime earlier. American Muslims have finally realized that disagreeing with the democratically enacted policies without having their voices heard through the democratic process translates to empty talk.

Various polls reflect the above trends. According to a Zogby poll, 86% of Muslims surveyed said it is important for them to participate in politics – seven times as many as who say it is not important. By similar numbers, according to the same poll, Muslims say it is important to them for their children to participate in politics.

Despite all this progress, with a few minor exceptions, Muslims have not managed to penetrate in the federal and state legislative, judicial and executive branches. Support from well governed Islamic centers can help the new generation come forward to represent Muslims at state and national levels, thus paving the way to make the Muslim voices heard nationwide more effectively. For this to happen, strategic planning needs to begin now to make this a reality in the years to come.

It is time for American Muslims to start thinking big – to widen their horizons – to think about excelling in their local communities and make them better while not compromising on their values. It is time for American Muslims to own the quality of the Islamic message that is being disseminated throughout America. The damage needs to start reversing now and every American Muslim is responsible to make that happen.

IQRA

The Future of American Muslims – Is There a Vision?

Last month in July 2009, Rick Warren, a popular evangelical Christian pastor was the keynote speaker at the ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) conference. Pastor Warren’s speech was welcomed by many American Muslim organizations, leaders and community members. This is because the expression of friendship by such a leader in a conference attended by 45,000 Muslims was first of its kind in America. His speech was perceived by American Muslims as a positive step in helping to bridge any misunderstandings between Muslims and Christians of America.


However it can be easily argued that to many American Muslims, his coming to the conference signified a symbol of their acceptance in the American society. While Pastor Warren’s friendly presence may have sent that message, the contents of his speech underscored how American Muslims’ efforts to position themselves in the American society may have been falling short. This was clear from many of his comments. For example, during the past few years American Muslim leaders’ mantra has been to demand tolerance in response to the intimidation that Muslims have suffered on various fronts. However, Pastor Warren reminded Muslims that “Tolerance is not enough. People do not want to be tolerated, they want to be respected. They want to be treated with dignity. They want to be listened to.” This therefore was a clear wakeup call that American Muslims should not have merely stopped at demanding tolerance, whereas respect and dignity should have been a right that American Muslims should never have compromised on.

American Muslims have also complained about the media’s bias toward them in recent years. While American Muslims have been trying to fix that image, their efforts surely have fallen short. Pastor Warren further validated this by stating “And since today much of the press is actually clueless of what you believe, and as to what I believe, and then there are frequent mischaracterizations in the media, frequent ignorant generalizations, generalizations are generally wrong, and frequent stereotyping, of all of us”. This told American Muslims and their leaders about how far they are from “clueing in” the media and others to prevent, or at a minimum curb such mischaracterizations and ignorant generalizations.

Among other things, American Muslim leaders have also been focusing on “Interfaith Dialog” as one of the avenues to bridge gaps with other faiths in America. However, Pastor Warren’s suggestion that in such matters action goes further than dialog was more appealing. He commented: “And I will tell you that I am not interested in interfaith dialogue, I am interested in interfaith projects. There is a big difference. Talk is very cheap. And you can talk and talk and talk and not get anything done.”

Finally, for those few American Muslims who have wrongly believed that assimilation within the American society can only be achieved by compromising ones Islamic values and principles, the statement by Pastor Warren “maintaining our separate traditions, maintaining our convictions without compromise” echoed what mainstream Muslims believe in but is doubted by a certain segment of American Muslims

The above clearly highlights the need to fill the voids and gaps in the vision for American Muslims. Although American Muslim organizations have been undertaking a number of focused and proactive steps to better American Muslims’ positioning for the future, there are a number of questions that must be asked to gauge their efforts. Some of the key questions are as follows:

1) Are American Muslims any closer to Islam and their mosques today than before?

2) Are the outreach efforts and tactics of Muslims making a difference in clarifying the message of Islam?

3) Does the Muslim leadership have a strategic vision to improve the relationship with the US government that is constantly being viewed by many American Muslims as challenging or are the efforts of American Muslims merely reactive and stop-gap in nature?

4) Are the Islamic centers, mosques, masajids, etc. organized well enough to attract Muslims and non-Muslims alike for transparent dissemination of the message of Islam?

5) Who are the Imams and leaders who American Muslims have put on the podiums and how effective have they been in uniting their local communities?

6) And finally, what specifically is being done to get Muslims involved in the democratic process of America to be able for them to make their voices heard?

These questions must be debated and discussed strategically to be able to craft a vision for the American Muslims for this century. The next article “Formulating a Vision for Muslim America” expands on the above questions that American Muslim leaders must focus on to better Muslims’ positioning in America.

IQRA

Sajak Sebatang Lisong

menghisap sebatang lisong
melihat Indonesia Raya
mendengar 130 juta rakyat
dan di langit
dua tiga cukung mengangkang
berak di atas kepala mereka

matahari terbit
fajar tiba
dan aku melihat delapan juta kanak – kanak
tanpa pendidikan

aku bertanya
tetapi pertanyaan – pertanyaanku
membentur meja kekuasaan yang macet
dan papantulis – papantulis para pendidik
yang terlepas dari persoalan kehidupan

delapan juta kanak – kanak
menghadapi satu jalan panjang
tanpa pilihan
tanpa pepohonan
tanpa dangau persinggahan
tanpa ada bayangan ujungnya
……………………..

menghisap udara
yang disemprot deodorant
aku melihat sarjana – sarjana menganggur
berpeluh di jalan raya
aku melihat wanita bunting
antri uang pensiunan

dan di langit
para teknokrat berkata :

bahwa bangsa kita adalah malas
bahwa bangsa mesti dibangun
mesti di up-grade
disesuaikan dengan teknologi yang diimpor

gunung – gunung menjulang
langit pesta warna di dalam senjakala
dan aku melihat
protes – protes yang terpendam
terhimpit di bawah tilam

aku bertanya
tetapi pertanyaanku
membentur jidat penyair – penyair salon
yang bersajak tentang anggur dan rembulan
sementara ketidak adilan terjadi disampingnya
dan delapan juta kanak – kanak tanpa pendidikan
termangu – mangu di kaki dewi kesenian

bunga – bunga bangsa tahun depan
berkunang – kunang pandang matanya
di bawah iklan berlampu neon
berjuta – juta harapan ibu dan bapak
menjadi gemalau suara yang kacau
menjadi karang di bawah muka samodra
……………………………

kita mesti berhenti membeli rumus – rumus asing
diktat – diktat hanya boleh memberi metode
tetapi kita sendiri mesti merumuskan keadaan
kita mesti keluar ke jalan raya
keluar ke desa – desa
mencatat sendiri semua gejala
dan menghayati persoalan yang nyata

inilah sajakku
pamplet masa darurat
apakah artinya kesenian
bila terpisah dari derita lingkungan
apakah artinya berpikir
bila terpisah dari masalah kehidupan

RENDRA
( itb bandung – 19 agustus 1978 )

* ) Sajak ini dipersembahkan kepada para mahasiswa Institut Teknologi Bandung dan dibacakan di dalam salah satu adegan film “Yang Muda Yang Bercinta” yang disutradarai oleh Sumandjaya.

Duka untuk Indonesia

Setelah Pergi, Baru Menyadari Betapa Pentingnya Rendra




Jumat, 7 Agustus 2009 | 06:06 WIB

Duka datang berendeng menghampiri kita. Setelah pada Selasa (4/8) kemarin penyanyi Mbah Surip pergi, pada Kamis malam (6/8) pukul 20.30 WIB, giliran budayawan dan WS Rendra menyusul menghadap Sang Khalik.

Seperti telah saling janjian, kedua seniman yang telah mendahului kita itu menempati "rumah" abadi yang sama hanya selisih dua hari, yakni di pekarangan rumah WS Rendra di daerah Cipayung, Depok, Jawa Barat.

Willy Brodus Surendra Broto yang kemudian berganti nama menjadi Wahyu Sulaiman Rendra setelah dirinya muslim, menjalani perawatan jantung sejak setahun lalu. Berkali-kali ia masuk rumah sakit, sebelum akhirnya mengembuskan nafas terakhirnya di kediaman salah satu putrinya, Clara Shinta, di Perumahan Pesona Kayangan, Depok, Bogor.

Sebagai pengagumnya, tentu saja saya amat sangat kehilangan dia. Gara-gara salah satu puisinya yang terangkum dalam Potret Pembangunan Dalam Puisi, saya bersikeras kepada ayah untuk tak lagi repot-repot mengongkosi kuliah saya. Saya pilih berhenti sebagai Sarjana Muda dan memulai "kuliah" di jalanan bersama para seniman, buruh-buruh pabrik di Srondol, dan gelandangan di Simpang Lima, Semarang, di pertengahan tahun 80-an. Puisi itu kurang lebih bercerita tentang pendidikan. Pendidikan kita berkiblat ke Barat. Di Barat, anak-anak dididik untuk menjadi mesin industri, sedangkan kita? Dididik untuk menjadi kuli! Wah..., jiwa muda saya yang membara pun langsung bergetar.

Pertama kali melihat ia membacakan puisi-puisinya di Semarang pada tahun 1985. Sungguh menggelorakan jiwa muda saya saat itu. Masih saya kenang hingga kini, bagaimana ia membawakan sajak-sajaknya dan lalu melemparkan ke udara setelah rampung dibaca.

Dengan tangan terkepal meninju udara, ia melangkah membelah panggung, lantas suaranya yang parau itu pun meneriakan judul puisi yang akan dibacakannya:

Sajak Sebatang Lisong

menghisap sebatang lisong
melihat Indonesia Raya
mendengar 130 juta rakyat
dan di langit
dua tiga cukung mengangkang
berak di atas kepala mereka

matahari terbit
fajar tiba
dan aku melihat delapan juta kanak - kanak
tanpa pendidikan

aku bertanya
tetapi pertanyaan - pertanyaanku
membentur meja kekuasaan yang macet
dan papantulis - papantulis para pendidik
yang terlepas dari persoalan kehidupan

delapan juta kanak - kanak
menghadapi satu jalan panjang
tanpa pilihan
tanpa pepohonan
tanpa dangau persinggahan
tanpa ada bayangan ujungnya

Meski ia telah nampak sepuh karena usia telah menginjak limapuluh, toh sihir suara dan ekspresinya sungguh-sungguh telah menjadi racun bagi saya untuk makin dalam bergulat dengan dunia teater dan susastra.

Saya pun mulai melahap puisi-puisi karyanya. Beberapa puisinya bahkan pernah saya hafal di luar kepala. Nyanyian Angsa, itulah salah satunya. Saya pun terkesan dengan gaya bercerita Rendra yang kuat dalam kumpulan puisi Balada Orang-Orang Tercinta yang ia bukukan di pertengahan tahun 50-an. Bahasanya yang lentur dan keseharian, membuat puisi-puisinya yang getir tetap enak dinikmati.

Balada Terbunuhnya Atmo Karpo yang berkisah tentang matinya seorang perampok bernama Atmo Karpo di tangan anaknya sendiri, Joko Pandan, adalah puisi yang amat dramatik.

Dan inilah ujung puisi Balada Terbunuhnya Atmo Karpo yang selalu saya kenang,

Berberita ringkik kuda muncullahJoko Pandan
segala menyibak bagi derapnya kuda hitam
ridla dada bagi derunya dendam yang tiba
pada langkah pertama keduanya sama baja
pada langkah ketiga rubuhlah Atmo Karpo
panas luka-luka terbuka daging kelopak-kelopak angsoka

Malam bagai kodok hutan bopeng oleh luka
pesta bulan, sorak sorai, anggur darah

Joko Pandan menegak, menjilat darah di pedang
ia telah membunuh bapaknya

Hmm... saya juga tak bosan-bosannya menikmati romantisme hitam puisi Balada Ibu yang Dibunuh

Ibu musang dilindung pohon tua meliang
bayinya dua ditinggal mati lakinya.

Bulan sabit terkait malam memberita datangnya
waktu makan bayi-bayinya mungil sayang

Lalu, hingga kini.. saban kali kangen pada ibu, saya pun lantas teringat pada puisi Nyanyian Bunda yang Manis.

Kalau putraku datang
ia datang bersama bulan
kena warna jingga dan terang
adalah warna buah di badan

Wahai telor madu dan bulan!
Perut langit dapat sarapan

Ia telah berjalan jauh sekali
dan kakiknya tak henti-henti
menapaki di bumi hatiku
Ah, betapa jauh kembara burungku!

Awal tahun 90an, saya bertemu dan berkenalan dengannya. Saya pun memanggilnya Mas Willy, sebagaimana orang-orang menyapanya. Tubuhnya yang selalu wangi, roman mukanya yang ganteng, serta tutur katanya yang terjaga dalam kecerdasan, membuat siapapun akan menyimak hikmat tiap kali ia bicara.

Rendra bak kamus berjalan. Ia, kendati tak kelar kuliah, adalah pemikir ulung untuk urusan sejarah bangsa ini. Ia jabarkan dengan detil riwayat kekuasaan raja-raja Jawa. Ia pun paham benar mengenai kultur orang darat dan air. Saya masih ingat dengan statemen dia tentang kekuasaan di negeri ini, menurutnya dari dulu hingga kini negeri ini dikuasai oleh preman. "Anda kira siapa itu Gajah Mada? Ken Arok, Soeharto... preman!" kata Rendra dalam sebuah diskusi.

Di Makassar pada tahun 1998, saya kian dekat dengan Rendra. Kami makan malam bersama di sebuah rumah makan dekat Pantai Losari yang menyajikan ikan bakar. Bagai tokoh kuliner, ia pun berkata, "Yang gosong jangan dibuang, itu justru yang enak. Hmmm," Rendra mengupas kulit ikan yang gosong lalu langsung mengudapnya.

Setelah itu, kami kian kerap bertemu. Kadang di rumah Setiawan Djody, atau di acara diskusi, tapi sekali-sekala saya juga menyempatkan diri datang ke kediamannya yang asri di Cipayung.

Pernah pada sebuah sore di tahun 2003, di halaman sebuah gedung pertemuan di kota Jambi, kami bersitatap sambil bersalaman. Kala itu kami bersepakat, untuk mengaku saya sebagai anaknya dan ia sebagai bapak saya.

Entah apa sebabnya tiba-tiba kesepakatan itu terjadi. Yang terang saat itu saya terharu kala melihat Rendra bicara tentang kesehatan masyarakat terutama untuk mereka yang terkena penyakit TBC. Bukan materi pembicaraan dia yang membuat saya tertegun, tapi gerak tubuhnya yang telah lamban itulah yang membikin saya ingin melindunginya.

Saya sungguh trenyuh kala itu. Dalam hati saya berucap, inikah orang yang dulu pernah menaklukan beribu-ribu mata dan jiwa penggemarnya ketika dirinya di panggung. Inikah orang yang dulu galak memimpin kawan-kawan demonstran melawan rezim Soeharto? Pertanyaan berjubal-jubal di kepala saya.

Begitu selesai bicara di muka forum, saya pun langsung bergegas menghampirinya seraya menuntun tangannya keluar ruangan. Di Belakang kami ada Ken Zuraida, istri Rendra, serta beberapa anak Bengkel Teater, mengiringi kami.

Di luar, seorang wartawan mencegat Rendra untuk memberitahu, sebentar nanti ada acara diskusi bersama kawan-kawan seniman Jambi. Lantaran Mba Ida, demikian Ken Zuraida biasa disapa, tak bisa mengikuti acara diskusi, ia pun meminta saya untuk mengiringi Mas Willy, "Tolong dijaga Mas Willy," kata Mba Ida sebelum kami berangkat ke acara diskusi.

Sejak saat itu, saya pun kerap memanggil Mas Willy dengan sebutan Pak Rendra.

Dari Jambi kami meneruskan perjalanan ke Medan untuk acara yang sama dengan di kota Jambi. Pak Rendra nampak kelelahan setibanya di Medan. Sebab, karena cuaca buruk, dari Jambi pesawat yang kami tumpangi harus menuju ke Jakarta lebih dahulu, sebelum akhirnya terbang ke Medan.

Di tengah-tengah road show itu, saya sempat berterus terang kepadanya, mengapakah dirinya tampak begitu letih. Dengan mata yang berkaca-kaca, ia pun berterus terang bahwa dirinya bukan bapak yang baik bagi anak-anaknya, dan ia sangat ngungun karenanya.

Kini Rendra telah pergi. Ia tak cuma meninggalkan catatan-catatan susastra yang diakui komunitas sastra dunia, tapi juga pemikiran-pemikiran brilian tentang bangsa ini. Dialah yang senantiasa mengingatkan para penguasa negeri ini agar selalu berpihak kepada rakyat. Dia pula yang selalu membela orang-orang tertindas untuk bangkit.

Rendra telah berpulang. Bukan cuma ini kali kita ditinggal pergi oleh orang-orang besar macam Rendra. Sebelum Rendra ada Ali Sadikin, Soekarno, Mbah Surip, dan tokoh-tokoh lainnya. Tapi selalu saja kita tak pernah belajar bagaimana kita menghargai dan memulyakan orang-orang besar itu secara sepatutnya semasa hidupnya. Lihatlah Drs. Sujadi yang tokoh Pak Raden dalam film si Unyil itu yang telah mengabdikan seluruh hidupnya untuk dunia anak-anak; ia masih mengontrak rumah padahal usianya telah senja. Pandanglah juga Pak Gesang yang baru diingat justru setelah orang Jepang mengingatnya. Lihatlah juga para atlet yang telah mengharumkan bangsa ini yang sebagian di antaranya hidup terlunta-lunta, dan masih banyak orang-orang besar lainnya yang dilupakan.

Sesal apa yang harus kita sesali. Rendra telah kembali menghadap Ilahi. Satunya yang sisa adalah harapan akan lahirnya Rendra Rendra baru yang sanggup menggedor ketidakadilan dengan pena dan suara.

Begitulah, kita merasa kehilangan Rendra justru ketika dia telah tiada.

Jodhi Yudono