Exploring the Pancasila-the five state principles of Indonesia-again

“There is not only Indonesian has God, but every Indonesian should be belief to theirs God” _ Soekarno, Pancasila’s birth day, June 1, 1945

We live in an era, which should more realize to the imperfection of destiny. The thought of scientific socialism, which was offered by Marx and Angels, had ever forecasted the reaching of the heaven in the earth”, a society where the capitalism has gone, and contradiction was not met again. However, that idea was against the serious fact in the end of eight decades of the twenty-century: Soviet Union and China changed their course, by accepted “capitalism way”, which was criticized early. Socialism was concealed: in fact, scientific is not meant “without mistake”, Actually Marxism as an idea must recognize that the world is not able to free from contradiction eventually.

Recently the aspiration to uphold the “Islamic State” maybe only single idea which still believes that ideal to be implemented. If the God law is a law, which want to be implemented, wants to or not the expected result is a social life without a defect.

In the other word, the proponents of “Islamic state” are designers who do not read to the history which has been spread in more than twenty centuries. A history where are expectation and disappointed rotate, a history of idea and sparkle planning that is crashed eventually, a tale of leaders and khalifahs who do not know forever how to away from the drunk power.

The idea designers of “Islamic State” forget that religion always promises an alternative of life: beside the “duniawi” (the worldly) undergoing now, there is later the “ukhrowi” (the day hereafter), which is better. Then, an “Islamic State” which does not recognize its imperfection itself will mistake to read “akidah” (the faith). However, an “Islamic State” which recognizes its imperfection itself will make problem: Is not the adjective of Islam assumes to a perfect?

That dilemma comes from our experience: the earth is the earth; it is not paradise. Imperfection, even it is a defect, continues, turns over with the amazing period. It seems will like such that forever.

In 1929, Francis Fukuyama said we were in “the end of history”. However, he did not say that live would not be dogged with blemish once more. Indeed, he is celebrating the win of economy capitalist and liberal democracy appearing in many angles. He wants to show that the alternative thought which is sure to replace capitalism and liberalism has lost its attractiveness: Ideology has been ruined as Raymond Aron in 1955 and Daniel Bell in 1960 were said. People are supported to be pragmatist, but there must be paid.

“The end of history will be a tragic,” wrote Fukuyama. “The struggle to be recognized, an aspiration takes the death risk for a idealism which is abstract absolutely, an ideology wrestling in the world which arouses an adventure, braveness, imagination, and idealism, will replace with economic calculation, the environmental concern, and consumer need satisfaction which is more complicated”

Fukuyama is not completely right. Now, there are many people who is furious by “ambition” to take the death risk for an desire”; we know every time there was someone, who exploded himself as a tool to kill the enemy.

Even, in a “normal” political process, all of that replace by “economic calculation”, and “consumer need satisfaction”. However, wrong or right in the Fukuyama’s conclusion has been pointed to this understanding of age: the human’s fate is imperfection.

We remember to Pancasila. When Bung Karno explained, while persuaded, Indonesia needed a weltanchauung, a vision of the world and life. Actually, he was walking in the froth for safe until to the across.

Because of that, if truly to explore, the speech of Lahirnya Pancasila (the birth of Pancasila), which is popular in June 1, 1945, it contains some many contradictions, actually, Bung Karno was trying to cope many problems faced by Indonesia.

The most important of the contradiction is exactly about that weltanchauung problem. A view of the world and life, or a “ground philosophy” (Bung Karno said philosophische grondlag) that base of nation unity is a foundation, an adhesive, and an umbrella all at once. Here, there is implied a tendency that something must tough and perfect. “A tendency” which is harder in “Orde Baru (new orde) era” which consider that Pancasila is “sacred”.

If it is such like that, it is not be able to changed, however, it’s caused a problem: How this vision is possible to make a political life that, as Bung Karno said himself, always contains a “struggle of concept”? Bung Karno said, “there is not a state live which is not contain ‘Kawah Candradimuka’ (a hard training place) that burning, a place where is many concepts fight in the house of representative. There is not a dynamic state ‘if there is not a concept struggle’ inside.”

When Bung Karno said this sentence, when he recognized that a state wanted or not, contained “an intensive struggle” in concept matter, “he stared to an objective: he wanted to make peaceful the Islamic Political group. He suggested to Islamic group in order to accept the establishment of “one state for all, all for one”. He rejected “egoism of religion”.

However, he also opened from this possibility: “there is possible that one day Indonesia uphold Islamic law. If the Islamic representatives is seated the majority of the house representative. “

In here appeared, the struggle gets hegemony is recognized as an ordinary usual and legal action. However, by that, Weltanchauung formulated is not actually resistant, solid, final, and eternal, so that abolishing the possibility of one “thought” breaks through and take over position of “that ground philosophy”. In the other word, Pancasila is not something “sacred”.

Pancasila exactly means, because it is not “sacred”. There are three big mistakes of “New Orde” to show that five “principles”. Firstly, they make the Pancasila almost sacred, holly. Secondly, they make Pancasila as apart of language, even as exclusive symbol of the ruler. Lastly, they support Pancasila by forcing threat.

“New order” has treated Pancasila as Rahwana take over Sinta for couples years. Analogy from epos of Ramayana is not completely proper, but as after Sinta is released by Rama, Pancasila in sight of people, specially for they who are forced, after the falling of “the new order”, is tainted: it is remembered as apart of the symbol of Rahwana’s authority.

However we know, that impression is right and fair as not right and fair when Rama placed Sinta on fire place for testifying hers holly.

Now, we need Pancasila again, but it is not as Rama accepted Sinta when she returned: we do not need to question the “holly”, especially “its sacred”. Now, we need Pancasila again exactly because it is a short formulation from our nation’s effort, which is wrestling through the mud in order to safe to reach the unity in diversity. The speech of Bung Karno with expressive pictures that effort; its tone is touched: full with spirit, but it is not free from nervous also.

In another word, we need Pancasila again for toughing that we want or not need to live with a sight and humanity approach recognized the complexity of social life.

The proponents of “Islamic state idea” said, they are more like to choose Islamic base because Islam comes from Allah, while Pancasila is human creation. However, exactly because Pancasila is apart of human effort, it does not claim that it is holly and sacred, so that it is a picture, and also as a shine of a life together that recognizes contain its “imperfection”, because always fight between “eka” (single) and “bhineka” (diversity). That is right when Bung Karno used an analogy “to dig” when formulated of Pancasila. “ Digging involves earth and body. Pancasila born from hard work of history, and as the earth, offers something which can cook further. It is not “ready-for-use”. It does not reject a creative interpretation. It opens the possibility that it is not become a doctrine because every doctrine will be charged by the progress of history, and because of that Bung Karno recognized: there is no theory of revolution that “ ready-for-use”.

The appear thing in openness for creativity is its character which can not absolute. Every “sila” (base) wants or not must be balanced by another “sila”: this nation will not be able do “sila” of religion only (Belief in one God) without be balanced by “sila” of unity of nation (Nation of Indonesia), and on the contrary. We will not be proper also and will not be able to run if we want apply “sila” nationalism without be balanced humanism and like that as well.

Absoluteness one “sila” only, will achieve an arbitrariness. It can not be success, also. Live is too complicated.. Society is an in process building, until politic, with its all invalid, is an unavoidable, even it can be vanished by 100 years of torment.

We need Pancasila again because as if we has lost a language for shielding 100 year s of torment implied in an arbitrary demeanor, which is arrogance also: their demeanor, which is feel to represent the sound of God and Islam. Although there is not clear from where, and how that mandate comes to their hands; their demeanor burned by the “religion-egoism”, and denies to the Indonesia’s desire which is important in order to every Indonesia “belief to theirs God”, until religion is not forced, and the followers does not hide in hypocrisy.

We need Pancasila again because we need to talk with sure to them who directly feel higher than a republic which developed by blood and sweat every kind of its resident, Islam, Christian, Hindu, Buddha, Konghucu, or even, atheist. A struggle which is longer than 60 years.

We need Pancasila again because it is a process of continuous negotiation from a nation, which is never to be single., it can not be fully “eka” (solo). We need Pancasila again because there is no one, which is able to completely convinced that themselves, theirs group, represent a something who the most great and right, and can deny to imperfection of human destiny.