Understanding the Trilogy as the foundation of indigenous people’s religiosity

By: Aris Shihabuddin

In general, a person’s religiosity is measured by the level of belief in God and behaviour following the principles set by religious teachings (KHAN, 2014; King & Hunt, 1990; McDaniel & Burnett, 1990; O’Connell, 1975). So, a person can be said to be a religious person or not, depending on how strong their faith in God is and how consistently they apply religious values and rules in their daily lives. At the same time, the political definition of religion in Indonesia includes the same requirements as the definition of world religion; the doctrine of one God, a prophet, scriptures, institutions, and international adherence (Maarif, 2017). Furthermore, the result of this definition has an impact on indigenous people who are labeled as irreligious, animist, and primitive citizens.

Based on the description above, the Indigenous People School (Sekolah Agama Leluhur) present on 5,6,7 June 2024 is one concrete form of struggle for the existence of indigenous people. by interpreting the indigenous people’s trilogy; Sangkan paraning dumadi, manunggaling kawulo gusti, and memayu hayuning bawono as the basis for their life guidelines. This article aims to show the side of religiosity in the trilogy concept of indigenous people that goes beyond the definition of the world religion paradigm. In turn, it will question and rethink the views of people who have been hegemonized by the world religion paradigm.

Interpreting the Trilogy of indigenous people

The three concepts mentioned above are interrelated and inseparable life principles that will form a holistic view of life for indigenous people. Sangkan Paraning Dumadi (human origin and purpose in the world), manunggaling kawulo gusti (merging with ilahi), memayu hayuning bawono (maintaining balance with nature). In the indigenous people trilogy, humans are guided to know themselves first, so that humans will be able to know the purpose for what humans are in this world. Then after knowing themselves, they will automatically release and remember that in every human and other (non-human) self-there is ilahi (nyawiji). After the two stages of the principle are realized in every human being, in turn humans will realize the relationship between humans, ilahi and other (non-human) selves. Thus, the relationship between the three principles will lead to how humans can maintain a balanced relationship with others so that they can become holistic humans.

Quoting Maarif (2023) relational verifies the cosmology of the trilogy that existence is relational. The principle that indigenous people uphold is the relationship of the self (human) with the Ilahi and also with other selves (non-human) connected in harmony and balance. The first principle translates that everything on earth comes from the same origin and has the same value. This is followed by the second principle that every self is a manifestation of the Ilahi, and in turn the third principle will lead humans to have an attitude of responsibility, ethics (in behavior), and realize the reciprocal relationship between the three elements (Ilahi, humans, nature).

Religiosity: indigenous people VS world religion

Religious means the relationship between humans and God, which is vertical in nature, manifested in the form of worship and obedience. This definition was born from western monoistic hegemony (world religion paradigm) that continues to be perpetuated today. However, Maarif (2019) views that the world religion paradigm creates a hierarchical system that directly or indirectly leads to the act of power and control between the three elements (Ilahi, humans, Nature). Seeing from the existence of this hierarchical system, God occupies a position above everything (supernatural), humans are positioned as subjects, and nature occupies a position as an object (not equal or not higher than humans). Then, the relationship between humans and nature implies that humans are created to manage, control, and exploit nature according to human needs. As a result, the understanding of religiosity is limited and ignores other aspects.

While indigenous people in interpreting religiosity are not only vertical relationships between humans and God, but they hold fast to the trilogy principles described above. To become a religious human being, humans must establish a good relationship with the Divine and the surrounding environment in harmony and balance. This means that religiosity is not something static and limited to the practice of worship and obedience, but religiosity is something alive and dynamic, which is reflected in the way we relate to the three elements. This is in line with the indigenous people paradigm described by Maarif (2019) which suggests that there is an inter-subjective relationship between the three elements. The inter-subjective relationship is illustrated in one of the behaviors of the Kendheng community in Central Java (Indonesia), which was previously discussed by Maarif (2019) as a manifestation of the indigenous people trilogy principle. The community is fighting for its land that will be exploited by PT Semen Indonesia. Furthermore, the Kendheng community realizes that maintaining relationships with land, trees, water, forests and so on is a form of their responsibility.

In the end, the indigenous people trilogy does not only emphasize the meaning of religiosity but invites us to question and rethink the hegemony that has long been produced continuously throughout the world religion paradigm. In turn, the understanding of religiosity does not only dwell on the relationship of worship and obedience, but exceeds this relationship, namely religiosity will be interpreted as a form of behavior of everyone to establish relationships (inter-subjective) in harmony and balance. Then, the labeling of indigenous people described above is less relevant, because they also practice the side of religiosity that describes religious practices by maintaining relationships between Ilahi, humans and nature. In closing, to quote Samsul Maarif, “A person who is concerned with her/his own well-being only and ignores that of other selves is irreligious.”

Bibliography

KHAN, M. J. (2014). Construction of Muslim Religiosity Scale. 53(1), 67–81.

King, M. B., & Hunt, R. A. (1990). Measuring the Religious Variable: Replcation. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 29(4), 531. https://doi.org/10.2307/1387319

Maarif, S. (2017). Meninjau Ulang Deinisi Agama, Agama Dunia, dan Agama Leluhur.

Maarif, S. (2019). Indigenous Religion Paradigm: Re-interpreting Religious Practices of Indigenous People. Studies in Philosphy, 44, 1–20.

Maarif, S. (2023). Human ( Relational ) Dignity : Perspectives of Followers of Indigenous Religions of Indonesia. 97.

McDaniel, S. W., & Burnett, J. J. (1990). Consumer Religiosity and Retail Store Evaluative Criteria. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(2), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/009207039001800201

O’Connell, B. J. (1975). Dimensions of Religiosity among Catholics. Review of Religious Research, 16(3), 198. https://doi.org/10.2307/3510357