During their visit, they spoke at some events in Jakarta and Semarang. In Jakarta, they attended a roundtable discussion on sharia in the global context at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University (UIN) (Dec 11) and a public discussion on Israeli-Palestinian conflict at CDCC (Dec 14). Meanwhile in Semarang, they visited Walisongo State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) for an international seminar also on sharia (Dec 12), then visited a Muhammadiyah orphanage (Dec 12) and Central Java Provincial Board of Muhammadiyah for a discussion on transnational Islamic movements (Dec 13). In these programs, they also disseminated a booklet of the Indonesian translation of The Amman Message co-published by CDCC, The Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought and JICRC. The Amman Message is initially a detailed statement released by King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein in Amman on November 9, 2004, which tries to clarify to the modern world the true nature of Islam and the nature of true Islam. Prof. Murad is one of its drafters.

Prof. Murad and Prof. Al-Gharaybeh also visited the Central Board of Nahdhatul Ulama (PBNU) twice, firstly for a meeting with Prof. Masykuri Abdillah, and secondly for a meeting with Indonesian former president, Abdurrahman Wahid. Prof. Murad also gave a speech after a Friday service at the Central Board of Muhammadiyah’s mosque.

Discussing Sharia in the Global Context

At UIN Jakarta, the two professors spoke at a roundtable discussion jointly organized by CDCC and the Center for the Study of Religion and Culture (CSRC). The director of CSRC, Chaider S. Bamualim, served as the local speaker in this event. Around 60 participants many of which were UIN’s lecturers and postgraduate students joined the discussion. Among the participants were Dutch scholar, Prof. Dick van der Meij; deputy director of Graduate School, Dr. Sri Mulyati; member of the Parliament, Ir. Muhammad Najib, and a representative of Jordanian embassy.

Discussing sharia primarily in Indonesian context, Bamualim warned us of the negative impacts of formal implementation of so-perceived sharia law/ordinance by Indonesian provincial and district governments on human rights, particularly minority (non-Muslim) rights and women rights. He argued that research findings show that formalization of sharia has often violated minority and women rights. Therefore, he disapproved the idea of making sharia as a constitution. “There’s no solid or legitimate argument for this,” he said.

Prof. Al-Gharaybeh talked more about Muslims’ unnecessary exclusivism in terms of school of thought (madhhab). Many Muslims are still afflicted by fanaticism to the extent that this can worsen the social relationships among Muslims themselves. “The difference in school of thought should not lead to conflict,” Al-Gharaybeh insisted. Instead, we should promote unity among the adherents of different schools of thought, and even among the adherents of different religions. Instead of being hostile to different groups, we have to be open-minded and learn each other. The diversity of Muslim scholars’ views itself means that Islamic law could be flexible depending on social situation.

Meanwhile, Prof. Murad talked more about misunderstanding of Islam in the global context, both among non-Muslims and Muslims themselves. On the one hand, the West continuously presents Islam as not being a peaceful religion. On the other hand, some Muslims—which actually just constitute a very small number, Prof. Murad emphasized—misrepresent Islam as a violent religion. This is the opposite of the fact of Islamic civilization. Islam is a peaceful and tolerant religion. In fact, “Islam is peace,” Prof. Murad asserted.

The same topic was discussed at IAIN Semarang with a larger audience. In addition to the two Jordanian professors, Dr. Didin Nurul Rosyidin (lecturer at IAIN Semarang) served as another speaker.

Still in Semarang, they spoke about some Islamic movements in Jordan and the world, together with Prof. Dr. Suparman Syukur (Vice Secretary, PW Muhammadiyah of Central Java).

Searching for Peaceful Resolutions of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

On the day before their return to Jordan, they spoke about possible peaceful resolutions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. An expert on this subject, Broto Wardoyo, served as a local speaker.

An interesting point was made by Mr. Wardoyo. He said that the peaceful resolution of the conflict very much depend not on how Israel and Palestine can exchange their respective interests but on how Israel and Palestine can exchange their respective fears. Peaceful resolutions will only be possible if they could swap their fears, he insisted.

Mr. Wardoyo also reminded us of the fact that what has hampered the resolution is the existence of radical groups in each party. Therefore, what happened actually is a conflict between moderates and radicals in each society. The moderates in each party will be the backbone of the peace process. Wardoyo suggested that there must be an alliance of moderates which see negotiations as viable option for peace. As prerequisite, this moderate must be politically strong in both society and this will possible only when they are the majority in a well-managed political system.[]