Written By: Anthon Jason

Have you ever wondered how a blind person dreams? How does a blind person know whether he is awake or asleep? The reflective questions that emerged in the presentation of Wednesday Forum 12 March 2025 with Dr. Budi Irawanto tickled and made us realize how little we know about disability. The care and attention given are also often causing new problems because of the lack of willingness and ability to understand disability. Through the 2011 Indonesian film Hafalan Shalat Delisa (Delisa’s Prayer Memorization), directed by Sony Gaokasak and based on a novel by Tere Liye, Dr. Budi provides a critical analysis through the perspective of religious studies and communication science. The movie tells the story of a young girl’s resilience after losing her leg in the 2004 Aceh tsunami. Although it received praise for being able to attract audience sympathy and convey Islamic messages while also raising the theme of disability, there are some critical notes conveyed by Dr. Budi Irawan, who is an associate professor in the Department of Communication Science at the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada.

Religious Framing of Disability: Piety as Redemption

Dr. Budi argues that the film positions Delisa’s disability as a spiritual trial ordained by Allah, framing her perseverance in prayer as a moral victory. By situating disability within an Islamic theological framework, the film frames Delisa’s amputation as a divine test of faith. While the Quran and Hadith emphasize compassion toward disabled individuals, the film’s emphasis on fatalistic acceptance (“this is a test from Allah”) risks normalizing societal neglect by framing disability as an individual challenge to overcome through piety alone. Such narratives echo medical model paradigms, which locate disability within the individual’s body rather than societal failures to provide accessibility. The tsunami’s aftermath, for instance, is depicted through Delisa’s grief over her family’s loss. However, the film neglects to critique the lack of inclusive infrastructure (e.g., ramps, accessible housing) in post-disaster rebuilding—a glaring omission given Aceh’s real-world struggles with disability inclusion.

Dr. Budi explained that while religious attitudes and responses to disability are quite diverse, it is not uncommon for Jewish, Christian, and Islamic perspectives to mimic the medical model by connecting disability bodily conditions with individual deficiency. Moreover, there is a persistent tendency to associate disability with individual sin (Schumm & Stoltzfus, 2011: xi). However, according to Al-Aoufi et al. (2012: 2026) Islamic philosophy has a positive attitude towards needy individuals and those who are in a disadvantaged situation. The Qur’an and the Hadith not only declared the existence of disabilities as a natural part of human nature but also provided principles and practical suggestions for caring for disabled people, as well as discussing the significance of such care.

The interesting thing is that we cannot find even a single word ‘disability’ in the Quran. But the word used is ‘disadvantaged people’. In the context of this term, Islam urges nondisabled Muslims to deal equally with disabled people. The Islamic perspective declares the right of the disadvantaged individuals and establishes the responsibility and duty of society towards such disadvantaged members (Al-Aoufi et al., 2012: 2016). Furthermore, the civil responsibility of society is illustrated in the Quran, which stresses that society is responsible for taking care of each of these individuals and is responsible for improving their conditions. The same applies not only to disabled persons but also to orphans and widows, who should be treated well and equally.

Drawing from these Quranic principles that emphasize the care of disadvantaged individuals, the narrative positions Delisa’s perseverance in memorizing prayer rituals as a marker of spiritual triumph. However, this portrayal aligns with what disability scholars call the ‘charity model’, where disabled individuals are objectified as vehicles for moral instruction rather than autonomous subjects. By focusing on Delisa’s unwavering devotion, and her ability to perform salat (prayer) despite physical limitations, the film reduces her agency to a narrative device that reinforces religious dogma. This mirrors critiques of how Islamic texts often address disability indirectly through metaphors of ‘disadvantage’ rather than structural advocacy, bypassing systemic barriers faced by disabled communities.

Cinematic Representation: Cripping Up and Inspiration Porn

Dr. Budi’s critique of Hafalan Shalat Delisa highlights two significant issues in cinematic representation: cripping up and inspiration porn. These concepts are central to understanding how disability is portrayed in the media, often reinforcing problematic stereotypes and neglecting authentic representation.

Cripping up refers to the practice of casting non-disabled actors in roles that involve characters with disabilities. This practice is criticized for reducing disability to a performative act, where actors mimic behaviors without lived experience, perpetuating stereotypes and excluding disabled actors from opportunities. In Hafalan Shalat Delisa, Chantiq Schagerl, a nondisabled actress, plays Delisa, exemplifying this issue. Budi argues that such casting decisions erase authentic representation and reinforce ableist norms in Indonesian cinema.

Inspiration porn involves portraying disabled individuals as inspirational figures primarily for the benefit of non-disabled audiences. This trope objectifies disabled people, framing their daily activities or achievements as extraordinary solely because of their disability. In Hafalan Shalat Delisa, Delisa’s perseverance in prayer rituals is celebrated by her community, reducing her to a source of inspiration rather than a multidimensional character. Dr. Budi critiques this portrayal for reinforcing the idea that disabled individuals exist primarily to motivate others, rather than advocating for systemic change or inclusive policies.

Both cripping up and inspiration porn contribute to the marginalization of disabled individuals in the media. They perpetuate stereotypes, reinforce ableist attitudes, and neglect the need for authentic representation and systemic advocacy. Dr. Budi’s analysis underscores the importance of shifting toward inclusive casting practices and narratives that center on disabled agency and critique societal barriers. Budi Irawanto’s critique of Hafalan Shalat Delisa highlights the need for more inclusive cinematic representations of disability. By addressing issues like cripping up and inspiration porn, media can move toward authentic portrayals that challenge societal norms and advocate for disability justice.

Conclusion: Toward Inclusive Representation

Hafalan Shalat Delisa succeeds in humanizing disability within an Islamic context but falters in its uncritical adherence to ableist norms. By privileging individual piety over structural critique and relying on non-disabled actors, the film perpetuates representational inequities that marginalize disabled voices. Dr. Budi Irawanto’s critique of Hafalan Shalat Delisa serves as a call to action for media creators to move beyond stereotypes and toward inclusive representation. By prioritizing authenticity, systemic critique, and intersectional advocacy, media can play a pivotal role in challenging societal norms and promoting disability justice. As Indonesia’s film industry grows, embracing intersectional approaches that center on disabled, religious, and cultural identities should transform how disability is framed, not as a test of faith, but as a call for collective justice.

Angie Wuysang

Human rights violations against Ahmadiyah in Indonesia reflect a broader struggle between constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and the influence of intolerant groups.  While Indonesia officially upholds religious pluralism through Pancasila and its constitution, in practice, Ahmadiyah communities have faced systematic discrimination, legal restrictions, and even violence.   In December 2024, the Jemaah Ahmadiyah Indonesia (JAI) planned to hold its annual gathering, known as Jalsah Salanah, in Desa Manislor, Kecamatan Jalaksana, Kabupaten Kuningan, West Java.  More than 6000 Jemaah Ahmadiyah from all over Indonesia will gather in Manislor to worship, learn about the values of peace, and bond with each other.  Men, women, children, and the elderly have started arriving since the day before the annual event begins, while many others are still on their way.  But then, the tense drama and tragedy that had long haunted Jemaah Ahmadiyah happened again on the afternoon of 5 December.  After previously obtaining an organizing permit, suddenly one day before the activity began, a letter was issued prohibiting the activity by the Regent of Kuningan.  The situation in Manislor was tense.  Hundreds of police and also the military district commander (Dandim) arrived at Manislor, escorting about 30 people from several mass organizations who rejected the Ahmadiyah meeting.  Then the police blockaded all the entry points of the village, whether the highway or every small alley.  This blockade caused JAI members still arriving to be stranded at various points, including thousands of them in the train station.  Not only that, but the authorities also intimidated JAI members who were already present at the event location.

In response to the cancellation of the Jalsah Salanah event in Manislor in December 2024, the online press conference by members of the Indonesian Freedom of Religion and Belief (KBB) Advocacy Coalition was facilitated by Pusat Studi Agama dan Demokrasi or PUSAD Paramadina.  According to the Director of PUSAD Paramadina, Dr. Ihsan Ali Fauzi, PUSAD has been the co-host of the KBB coalition for the past 2 years.  The purpose of this event is to provide an opportunity for those members of the KBB coalition to express their opinions or criticisms of what was happening in Manislor.  The coalition issued a statement condemning the actions taken by both state and non-state actors.  Those present expressed their stance were; Jemaah Ahmadiyah Indonesia ((JAI) Youth, Lembaga Bantuan Hukum (LBH) Bandung, Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Indonesia (YLBHI), Lembaga Bantuan Hukum (LBH) Jentera, Persekutuan Gereja-gereja di Indonesia (PGI), Indonesian Consortium for Religious Studies (ICRS), Pusham UII, Sobat Jentera, IMPARSIAL, KONTRAS, and PUSAD Paramadina.  The press conference highlighted the deployment of security forces, including police and military, alongside members of mass organizations, to intimidate and prevent JAI members –among them the elderly, women, and children—from accessing the event venue.

At the opening of the press conference, Firdaus Mubarik, a young JAI member, recounted the chronology of the rejection and intimidation by authorities in Manislor.  He also stated that, as Ahmadiyah members, various forms of rejection and even threats seem to have become a fate they must accept.  Firdaus, like other members of the congregation, wonders what Indonesia wants with Ahmadiyah.  They are accused of having exclusive teachings, yet when they try to hold public discussion, they are forcibly disbanded.  Meanwhile, Muhamad Isnur, the chairman of YLBHI, stated that the incident in Manislor is a harsh blow to Indonesia’s diversity, as it clearly shows the state’s failure to commit human rights violations.  Bugivia Maharani from LBH Jentera regretted that the police acted as an agent of political stabilization for certain groups, whereas they should have been neutral mediators working to ease tensions.  In line with this, Reverend Jimmy Sormin from PGI emphasized that the church condemns the government’s decision to ban the Jalsah Salanah event.  He stated that this stance is unconstitutional and discriminatory, especially since there are clear indications that the state is yielding to pressure from intolerant groups.  Instead of taking action against those who oppose constitutional enforcement, the government is doing the exact opposite.  Angelique from Solidaritas Korban Tindak Pelanggaran KBB (Sobat KBB) recounted the deep trauma experienced by Ahmadiyah members who were intimidated by authorities, especially women and children.  She urged Komnas Perempuan to step in and protect hundreds of victims affected by this trauma.    All coalition members who read their statement agreed that the government and security forces in Manislor, Kuningan, had committed human rights violations through their unconstitutional treatment of Jemaah Ahmadiyah during the Jaslah Salanah event.  Therefore, they all urged the Ministry of Home Affairs (Kemendagri), the Ministry of Religious Affairs (Kemenag), and the National Police to reassess their commitment to national unity and the constitution.  They also called for strict action against the acting Regent (Pj Bupati) Kuningan and all authorities involved in the intimidation and blockade of the Jemaah Ahmadiyah.

From a human rights perspective, the forced cancellation of the Jalsah Salanah event by the government and police raises significant concerns.  Freedom of religion, assembly, and expression are fundamental human rights protected under international law such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Indonesia’s constitution.  The restriction of Ahmadiyah activities has been a recurring issue in Indonesia, often justified by maintaining “public order” or preventing social unrest.  However, such actions can be seen as discriminatory and a violation of religious freedom, especially when they are based on a regional regulation like West Java Governor Regulation No. 12 of 2011, which restricts Ahmadiyah activities.   While the government has a responsibility to maintain public order, it should also ensure that minority religious groups can practice their faith without fear of persecution or state intervention.  It seems like a situation that could escalate tensions rather than resolve them.  If the government keeps restricting Ahmadiyah activities without dialogue or legal clarity, it could deepen feelings of marginalization and even provoke stronger resistance from the community.

There have been cases where violence against JAI could have been prevented.  For example, in 2010, when the Jalsah Salanah was planned to take place in Manislor.  At that, challenges and opposition also came from various intolerant Islamic groups.  However, the police chief at that time who was a woman, Chief of Police Adjunct Senior Commissioner (AKBP) Yoyoh Indayah, was able to uphold the constitution and stand at the forefront in ensuring the occurrence of the scheduled event.  As a strong and capable leader, she handled a sensitive situation while trying to maintain peace.  Unfortunately, not all authorities have the same courage in upholding the Constitution. Dr. Zainal Abidin Bagir, director of ICRS Yogyakarta, who was also presented, stated that the government is mistaken if it thinks that its patterns of constitutional violations concern only Ahmadiyah.  In reality, this is an issue that affects many Indonesians across various societal layers.  According to him, this situation serves as a test for the new government.  Yet, so early in its term, it has already visibly failed in this case.

Is there any chance of change in how the Indonesian government handles religious minorities, or is it likely to stay the same?  It is really hard to predict, especially with Indonesia’s complex religious and political landscape.  Change could happen if there is enough pressure, legal challenges, or perhaps international attention.  But given past patterns, it might take a long time.  As for now, there is no public record of either from the Minister of Human Rights Natalius Pigai or President Prabowo Subianto himself commenting specifically on the cancellation of the Jalsah Salanah event by the Jemaah Ahmadiyah Indonesia (JAI) in Manislor, Kuningan, West Java, in December 2024.  While civil society organizations and some government figures advocate for reform, progress remains slow, and Ahmadiyah communities continue to live under constant threat.

Leonard Chrysostomos Epafras

The Association for Theological Education in Southeast Asia (ATESEA) held its much-anticipated General Assembly from March 10 to 13, 2025, at Central Philippine University (CPU) in Iloilo City, Philippines. This prestigious gathering united heads of theological schools from 13 countries, representing 94 schools, both in person and online, to discuss pressing issues in theological education, emphasizing the role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in shaping the future of theological discourse and pedagogy.

One assembly highlight was the keynote lecture delivered by Dr. Leonard Chrysostomos Epafras, a scholar and researcher associated with the Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) Graduate School and the Indonesian Consortium for Religious Studies (ICRS) in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. His keynote, titled “‘Gadgets Need Healing’: Problems and Prospects in the AI Revolution for Theological Education,” set the tone for the assembly’s discussions.

Dr. Epafras, who works at the intersection of technology, AI, religion, and theology, presented a thought-provoking exploration of how AI transforms theological education. Drawing from his extensive research and previous presentations, including at the Congress of Asian Theologians in Malaysia (2024), Dr. Epafras examined the challenges posed by rapid technological advancements and their implications for theological learning.

In his keynote, he raised critical questions about the role of AI in theological education, challenging traditional perspectives that view technology merely as a neutral tool. Instead, he argued that AI should be understood as part of a broader ecosystem fostering dynamic and reciprocal engagement between humans and technology. By transcending the dichotomies of reason (logos) and narrative (mythos), as well as reason and craft (tekhne), Dr. Epafras proposed a holistic framework as an ecosystem for integrating AI into theological pedagogy.

A central theme was the tension between AI’s promises and perils. Dr. Epafras highlighted how the rapid development of AI has reignited age-old fears of human creations becoming “like one of us,” as described in the Genesis narrative. He cautioned against viewing AI solely as a threat, urging theological educators to embrace its transformative potential while addressing ethical concerns and unintended consequences.

Dr. Epafras emphasized that integrating AI into theological education requires reimagining traditional pedagogical approaches. He introduced three key dimensions for a digital pedagogical framework:

1. Logomathia, the intellectual and conceptual foundation of learning, involves curating rigorous yet accessible content for digital platforms.

2. Praxamathia encompasses the practical, performative, and activity-rich aspects of learning that connect theory with praxis while incorporating digital tools such as AI-driven applications to create engaging and interactive learning environments. Additionally, it encourages students to engage in physical activities to boost the classroom vibe and beyond.

3. Pathomathia focuses on the emotional and relational aspects of learning, emphasizing the importance of building emotional connections and fostering a sense of community in theological education.

Dr. Epafras argued that these dimensions provide a comprehensive approach to navigating the complexities of teaching theology in an increasingly digital world.

The ATESEA General Assembly 2025 demonstrated the association’s commitment to fostering collaboration and innovation among its 94 member institutions. By inviting Dr. Epafras to deliver the keynote lecture, ATESEA underscored the importance of addressing the evolving landscape of theological education in Southeast Asia.

The decision to emphasize AI highlights ATESEA’s acknowledgment of its transformative potential in theological education. As Dr. Epafras points out, AI offers opportunities and challenges, making it essential for theological educators to engage with these developments thoughtfully and critically.

Dr. Epafras seized the opportunity to meet with Dr. Jerson Benia Narciso, an alumnus of ICRS and the UGM Graduate School, who also served as a faculty member at CPU to cherish the memory. He then met with Ms. Lesley Joy Dignadice, the Acting Director of the International Linkages and Affiliations Center at CPU, and Mr. Mudzakir, the Acting Attaché of Education and Culture at the Indonesian Embassy in Manila, while exploring a potential collaboration.

This activity promotes high-quality education, strengthens institutions, and cultivates partnerships that align with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 4, 16, and 17.

Anthon Jason

Just because one could not pronounce one word the same way, resulted in the death of forty-two thousand Ephraimites. This event is recorded in the Hebrew Bible, specifically in the Book of Judges 12:5-6. The word, “shibboleth”, was used to distinguish the Gileadites and Ephraimites. These two tribes of Israel were at war at the time, and this word became a linguistic test to differentiate between us and them, between friends and enemies. Those who could not pronounce “shibboleth” correctly (saying “sibboleth” instead) were identified as enemies and slaughtered. This ancient practice demonstrates the historical precedent for using language as a tool of identification and exclusion. Throughout history, similar linguistic markers have been employed during conflicts and social tensions to distinguish between insiders and outsiders. This is the historical context of how language polarized society was presented by Dr. Michael R. Quinlan at the CRCS-ICRS Wednesday Forum on February 26, 2025.

Modern Shibboleth

In his presentation, Dr. Quinlan warned the audience many times to be careful when using words. This applies to usage, spelling, and pronunciation. The discussion shows how language can function as both a unifying and divisive force in contemporary society through “modern shibboleths.” Dr. Quinlan explores how certain words and phrases have become powerful markers of cultural, ideological, and political identity, creating insider-outsider dynamics that contribute to societal polarization.

In contemporary discourse, the concept of shibboleth has evolved to encompass more than mere pronunciation. It has acquired a significance that extends to the lexicon, idioms, and linguistic framework that collectively signify ideological stance or group affiliation. These linguistic choices often go unnoticed but carry profound social implications. In contemporary society, shibboleths appear in various fields including politics, religion, academia, and social movements, serving to strengthen in-group solidarity while creating barriers to mutual understanding across different communities.

In contemporary society, the selection of vocabulary employed by an individual serves as a manifestation of their ideological stance. Dr. Quinlan asserts that the words selected serve to “signal our virtues to the world”. The selection of our position through shibboleth is made both consciously and unconsciously. In the context of a democratic society, the utilization of shibboleths has emerged as a significant instrument in the realm of identity politics. Capitalizing on the differences in views, ideology, and religion, politicians strategically employ shibboleths to garner support from specific demographic groups.

The Heavy Burden of a Word

Words in the public sphere today carry a heavy burden because they are related to ideology in relation to politics and religion. In the discussion session at the forum, Dr. Dicky Sofjan conveyed that the media currently has an important role. Social media algorithms generate echo chambers, resulting in the normalization of specific linguistic patterns and terminologies within certain communities while remaining unfamiliar or disconcerting to others. Media can be a framing tool for certain groups to teach people or manipulate people’s minds to favor certain ideologies.

Furthermore, realizing the burden of each word or term, what we can do is to be fully aware of this. It is important to be aware of the political correctness in choosing words. We must realize there is an ideological burden that preoccupies a word. By choosing the right words and diction, we can avoid unnecessary conflicts. On the other hand, we also need to think far more with a cool head whenever dealing with words or terms that are ideologically charged that divide and polarize society.

In response to this, Dr. Quinlan agreed and elaborated further. Political correctness in word choice depends on where our political position is. Where we can or cannot use certain words. For example, the term citizenship can refer to asylum seekers, undocumented citizens, refugees, or illegal aliens. The use of these words will show in which part of this issue we stand. Which then determines what is the politically correct word to say.

Another response coming from Dr. Lacroix advocates that in a democratic country, antagonism is inevitable. Dr. Lacroix states “Democracy is not the absence of antagonism, democracy is not seeking consensus, democracy is peacefully managing real genuine antagonism…” Therefore, the question remains: what course of action should be taken? In response to this, Dr. Quinlan stated that it is true that in real society, we often have to take sides, whether we do it ideologically, morally, or theologically. We are using shibboleth. However, what often happens is that we don’t realize the weight of the words or terms we use. Especially if we are scholars, then using the right words and terms to refer to things accurately is very important.

Language Awareness

One question posed as the last slide in Dr. Quinlan’s presentation was “how do we utilize language that is unifying instead of polarizing?” As scholars, our job is to bridge the gap between the polarized society. Our responsibility as scholars is to use language that is in line with ethics. Ethical language needs to balance between clarity and inclusivity. This balance includes the use of specific terms that will serve as genuine communication versus when these terms serve as boundary markers between groups. The choice of strategies in language can increase polarization, but it can also open up a genuine space to bridge differences. Good scholars should be responsible and aware of the choice of words used, whether it will reinforce or challenge existing societal polarization.

Once we have recognized that our choices in language can function as identity markers, we become aware of how words can unite as well as separate. This realization makes us more careful in our language. This does not mean that we then deliberately choose inappropriate words. Rather, we should build fluency and flexibility in communicating effectively across communities and contexts. In an era of increasing polarization, language awareness is a crucial skill for bridging divides and fostering understanding between different ideological, social class, political, religious, and cultural boundaries.

Photography plays a vital role in bringing people together emotionally and generating deep empathy. Photographs are proficient at touching emotions when highlighting the beauty of religious expressions—such as devotion, celebration, grief, or compassion. Photographs are also masters at fostering empathy when visualizing moments of togetherness—whether in interfaith activities, sharing common spaces, engaging in actions of solidarity, or through everyday engagements.

In other words, images are able to transcend language barriers to convey values and emotions among people of different religions—such as love, hope, devotion, and togetherness. Thus, photographs also perform as bridges: uniting divisions, promoting respect and togetherness in humanity, in a world often divided by religious differences. Therefore, photography can communicate hope and portray the possibility of peaceful coexistence.

In collaboration with Institut français d’Indonésie (IFI Yogykarta), ICRS held a photography exhibition and discussion entitled ‘From the Eyes of the Ordinary’ on the 20th of February 2025. The photo exhibition is based on ICRS photo competition with the theme “Everyday Interreligious Engagement” held during October and November 2024. This event aims to explore how photographs can build understanding and tolerance among religious communities, especially in Indonesia.

Acting as on of the speakers in the discussion session, Budi Irwanto, lecturer of UGM and the director of Jogja-NETPAC Asian Film Festival (JAFF), discussed the visual culture of photography, which he elaborated on, stating that photography is one of the most important factors that shape the way people understand and interpret the world they live in. In this context, photography is not just a medium to capture moments, but also a way to inform the understanding we have about the world around us. He emphasized that through photography, one is not only freezing a moment but also presenting a personal interpretation of reality, which is influenced by the photographer’s point of view and the technology used, thus forming the perspective of how the audience perceives the world and the story being told.

Looking at a photograph is actually only capturing pieces of imagery in the perspective of the photographer (shooter) and is also determined by the technological equipment (camera). This confirms that a photograph is not a completely objective representation but a result that is affected by the individual’s point of view and the tools used. Thus, the theme of ‘tolerance’ or inter-religious relations raised in this photo exhibition and discussion must be positioned as a ‘photographic representation’ rather than a ‘real picture’ of interreligious relations. In this case, the photo only presents one perspective, which certainly does not cover the whole reality.

The second speaker, Bari Paramarta, the ICRS photo competition judge and professional photographer, discussed the judging dynamics of the competition. He mentioned that during the competition he received 600 photos to be scored. Paramarta explained he used two components to score and curate the photos; those are technical aspects and theme suitability. The technical aspects include exposure and composition. Exposure ensures areas of good lighting, while composition positions visual components to create a balanced picture. On the other hand, theme suitability assesses how well each photo aligns with the intended message or concept of the competition. It considers whether the image effectively aligns with the theme through its subject matter, composition, and emotional resonance.

While technical skill is important, Paramarta underlined that the theme’s interpretation and visual representation are equally important in the scoring process. Regardless of its technical excellence, a photograph can stand out and increase its impact perfectly if it is in accordance with the theme. All in all, both technical and thematic considerations work together to create meaningful photographs.

The exhibition and discussion on “From the Eyes of the Ordinary” demonstrate the potency of photography to promote understanding about interreligious interaction in society. By capturing everyday moments of interfaith engagement, the photographs encourage viewers to reflect on the shared human experience and the values that unite people across religious divides. All in all, photography stands as a tool for promoting peaceful coexistence, offering a visual narrative that encourages respect, tolerance, and a deeper appreciation for diverse faiths.

Balinese Gringsing Weaving is highly respected by the Balinese because, as its name suggests, it wards off calamity. The words ‘gring’ and ‘sing’ combine to signify ‘sick’ and ‘not’ respectively; that ‘gringsing’ simply translates to “not sick.” The woven cloth is often used in wedding ceremonies or religious ceremonies to ward off disease and protect the wearer.

The ‘Gringsing’ woven fabric is particularly produced in Tenganan Pegringsingan Village, Bali, where the technique is unique since it uses double weaving. There are only two other fabrics woven this way; ‘patola’ in India and ‘kurume’ in Japan. Its defining feature is a twofold motif that creates a symmetrical design when expertly intertwined. Due to its complicated design, the production time can reach 2-5 years.

Prof. drg. Etty Indriati, PhD., a physical anthropometry professor, an environmental activist, and a philanthropist, reveals the profound philosophy underlying the patterns and weaving techniques of ‘gringsing’. The tradition is handed down through the years across generations by fusing anthropological, religious, and aesthetic viewpoints. She explores the strength and beauty of this unique fabric in her new book “Vitalitas Tenun Gringsing Bali” launched at the Postgraduate School of UGM earlier this month.

Gringsing, culture, and indigenous religion

Bali Aga community, the Balinese sub-tribe considered to be the indigenous people of Bali, consider themselves different from the Hindu Balinese and they worship ‘Dewa’ or Lord Indra. ‘Gringsing’ itself is strongly tied to Balinese beliefs for history has it that ‘Gringsing’ originated from Indra’s appreciation of the night sky’s beauty. He selected individuals in Tenganan to weave so the splendor of the sun, moon, stars, and night sky can be portrayed. Its woven fabric is mainly as dark and rich in color as the night sky. These days the fabric is worn during religious rituals in the woods as it is their religious sacred place of worship. The pattern of the cloth is also very much inspired by the life of woods, besides nature and the universe.

Prof. Indriati claims that ‘gringsing’ is a cultural material to express religiosity. Not only prayers, rituals, and practices, people have physical objects as religious and cultural materials. People are intertwined with other people and material objects in their daily encounters. Balinese people are entangled with ‘gringsing’ to build up religious experience. People could tell what religion a person belongs to by looking at the materials he or she wears, such as a rosary for a Catholic, tasbih for a Muslim, and in this regard ‘gringsing’ for Bali Aga indigenous community in Tenganan.

Fusion of nature and religion

G.R. Lono Lastoro from Pengkajian Seni Pertunjukan dan Seni Rupa (Center of Performing and Fine Arts Study) UGM as the responder at the launching describes the interdisciplinary factors discussed in the book. He highlights from the book that as important as humans, the materiality of ‘gringsing’ has a synergistic effect on the people with whom it interacts. The Gringsing weaving is also an entity that produces human’s religious experience.

As Prof. Indriati suggests, indigenous religion paradigm should not only cover reciprocity, ethics, and responsibility but also aestheticism. For the Tenganan indigenous community, ‘Gringsing’ as the art and aesthetic product, takes a major role in its continuity. In the development of the studies on indigenous religion where people see reciprocity, ethics, and responsibility as compulsory things, beauty, and self-satisfaction can also take form in aesthetic materials. It creates balance in the tasks that people should do and produces benefits that they could gain. Thousands of cultural and religious rituals have to be conducted in order and there is a need for particular respect to artistic nature and surroundings to ensure balance, and not to be in a rigid categorizing.

The question we should ask ourselves is how disciplined we are, as culture doers and creators, to take nature and spiritual matters into account. “Gringsing” has been a proactive agent in preserving the Balinese Tenganan community’s cultural identity, harmony, and balance of life. It is more than simply a piece of clothing; it is a cultural legacy that is incredibly vibrant in the contemporary period since it represents the fusion of spirituality and beauty.

Angie Wuysang

Is not God, or however we call God, the Most Infallible?   If that is the case, then why are human beings imprudent enough to limit their concept of understanding God through just one experience?  As we appreciate religions as evolving constructs instead of fixed entities, a new expression of faith is important as it encourages people to learn instead of judging.   So far, established religions have been so centered on a single reference that any factor outside of that reference is considered pagan.  Let us look at a simple example from two major world religions, Christianity and Islam. Many of the iconic images and depictions of Christianity were shaped by European and Western cultures, and this included religious figures being portrayed in ways that reflected the European people of that time, which influenced the global perception of “Christian” appearance.  We also find this in Islamic tradition. As the early centers of Islamic civilization were in the Middle East where Arab culture was dominant, many people still associate Islam with these early cultural markers.  This led to local influences on Islamic and Christian teachings having to deal with the so-called legitimacy.

We know how Theravada Buddhism with its emphasis on the earliest scripture and monastic life was born and spread from Myanmar and Thailand, while Mahayana Buddhism in Tibet emphasizes the bodhisattva path, so what about Buddhism in another place? Based on the concept of religious identity and negotiating hybrid religious identity written by Homi Bhabha that “identity construction is dynamic, it is not fixed or essentialist but emerges from various cultural, historical, and religious influences,”  Candra Dvi Jayanti, a graduate of CRCS UGM who grew up in a Javanese Buddhist family, conducted research in a Buddhist community within five viharas in Jatimulyo, located in Kulon Progo Regency, Yogyakarta.    In her work of examining how the Buddha Jawa community in Jatimulyo conceptualizes and constructs its religious identity as insights into the dynamic and negotiation of hybrid religious identity, Candra asks questions like, why and how do they construct Buddha Jawa identity, and, how they conceptualize Buddha Jawa in the new practices?   She aims to explore the construction and negotiation of identity in encountering hybrid realities in the community.

The homogenous narration tends to identify, categorize, and separate religion from the other belief systems. Homogeneity also tends to ‘purify’ Buddhists and reintegrate Javanesness into monastic activities.  As her research raises concern regarding the efficacy of homogenous religious identity, she observed that previous studies have not adequately discussed the identity struggles among the Javanese Buddhist community, which is, according to her, beginning to move towards purification efforts. Using ethnohistography as her research method, Candra combines aspects of ethnology with historical sources evaluation and time sequencing, which has characteristics including focusing on the past conditions of the culture, using tradition as the main data source, and paying attention to changes over time in the culture under study.

A hybrid religious identity is a situation where a person blends elements from multiple religious traditions to form a personal belief system.  It can also refer to individuals identifying with multiple religious traditions or creating a new spiritual identity, especially in diverse cultural backgrounds.  This can be influenced by living in multicultural societies, where individuals adopt aspects of various cultures or religions.  However, rather than simply combining elements, Buddha Jawa adapts and transforms as they interact.  In the context of the Buddha Jawa community, hybrid religious identity highlights the ability to adopt and adapt different religious identities, beyond limited labels.  Candra found that the Buddha Jawa community in Jatimulyo is able to negotiate Javanese Buddhist blending that intersects and is formed through their history and life experiences.

Buddha Jawa identity conceptualization provides an in-between space for the Jatimulyo community, namely the space for adaptation of Buddhist and Javanese identities through the process of constructing religious practices that accommodate the local cultural elements.  The fact that the Jatimulyo community recognizes (re) Buddhism after exploring the Kejawen brought by Mbah Slamet is a strong foundation in finding the compatibility of the teachings.  The Buddhist community in Jatimulyo faces the phenomenon of a hybrid identity landscape which is evident from Arab diction which is closely related to Islam, that is still used in the mention of various symbols and rituals like Kanjeng Nabi Rasul, tumpeng Rasul, semelah (bismillah), kamdulilah (alhamdulilah), although in different pronunciation and different meaning.

Another unique phenomenon she found was that the community recognizes the karmic law of ngunduh wohing pakarti, or the dukkha/suffering as urip iku panandhang. In terms of the rituals and practices, they celebrate kenduri and sedekah where they prepare sesajen (offerings), wear traditional Javanese attire, and speak Jawa inggil language.  The Jawa inggil or high Javanese language has also been used by the Giridharma monastery in their puja bakti inside the monastery.  What is also amazing about this community is that in a series of Vesak commemoration, they take tirta at seven water sources, nyekar, or sow flowers to the graves of their ancestors.  In Vesak puja, they will wear Javanese traditional clothes while karawitan or sesorah will accompany the puja.

From Buddha Jawa in Jatimulyo we learn how a local community realizes the community agency as an active subject in shaping its own religious identity.  As Surahman, a local Buddhist informant, stated that, “yang murni bagi orang Kulon Progo itu adalah yang bisa dipraktikkan, style mempraktikkan itu tidak menghilangkan identitas (lokal). Kami tidak harus seperti orang Thailand, Burma, Tiongkok, atau Tibetan (untuk menjadi umat Buddha), dharma kami serap tetapi identitas kami sebagai orang Jawa juga tidak lepas.”