Second, Geertz characterizes Muslim Java as an amalgam of different traditions, including Animism, Hinduism, and later, Islam, which he argues evolved into a form of syncretism. However, this assertion is erroneous. What actually transpired was not a reconciliation of these traditions, but a process of settlement. Islam is a religion that allows for cultural flexibility; it is not Arab-centric. As a Santri, I am reminded of the oft-quoted phrase from the Kiai in Pesantren: Islam (shaalih likulli zamaan wa-l-makaan).
Ever since Geertz conducted his study on Java’s religion, scholars have continued to examine his findings, leading to a range of interpretations, both supportive and critical. While his concept of trichotomy has stirred debate among scholars, it is vital to acknowledge that Geertz’s conceptualization of Muslim Java has profoundly influenced the study of Indonesian Islam.
Subsequent studies on Muslim Java have continued in the wake of Geertz’s research. Despite the controversies his trichotomy has sparked among scholars, his work remains a seminal reference in Indonesian Islam studies.
One Reply to “Revisiting Geertz’s Muslim Java”