To observe the world of Islam would be an exciting, challenging and enduring project due to Islamic world is rich culturally and colorful sociologically. In fact, the study of Islam around the world is not only dealing with a wide range of symbols, beliefs, rituals, and other religious practices but also concerning with the religious values, norms, motives, ethos and world views which influence deeply toward human’s civilization.
However, some scholars try to carry out research digging Islamic phenomena in some regions. Firstly, Riaz Hassan focused his study on the conception of Islam and society in Indonesia, Egypt, Pakistan, and Kazakhstan. Then, James L. Peacock conducted the survey on Muslim Puritans phenomena in Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia. Lastly, Mark R. Woodward interested in researching normative piety and mysticism in Java, Indonesia. The main questions properly addressed to those studies will be; beside the differences among them, what are, if any, the common issues among them? What are their uniqueness and distinct ideas? How do they show the Islamic concept of the world and the image of Islam? This paper besides aims to elucidate some points answering questions above, it also in turn intends to attach brief critics and comments strengthening some approaches and propositions in those works.
The Common Grounds and the Strengths
In the first place, it appears that the spirit of reformism within religion and society is the shared issue among Hassan, Woodward, and Peacock. It can be grasped from their accounts which show in certain extents some similar evidences, terminologies, and findings. The first scholar, as sociologist, characterizes a certain type of religiosity which holds a strong religious commitment (piety) and practice Islam rigorously as “Scripturalist-Puritanism” or fundamentalist. This style of religiosity is generally represented by Ulama. Similarly, the second researcher, better known as an Indonesianist, notices that people who highly concern with the shari’ah, ritual, and certain modes of behavior are considered as normative piety or normative Islam. They prefer to perform shari’ah manner in order to guide their daily life rather that other moral conducts. Then the third social scientist finds the trend of religious behavior which is more paying an attention towards the idea of salvation, collectivism, legalism, scripturalism, and purification. He employs an appropriate terminology to call this phenomenon, namely religious reformism or Puritanism.
 Furthermore,    they also indicate an agreement in identifying the opposing criteria of religious    behavior. According to Hassan following Ernest Gellner, unlike fundamentalist,    which is well represented by Ulama, there are also people who carry out hierarchical    ecstatic medianist style in Islam which is introduced by Saints. The predicate    for this style of religiosity is syncretism. In consonant with this respect,    Woodward also finds some religious practices which are based on the ‘secrete    doctrine’. It is a mystical path to gain the truth and salvation which    is usually used by Sufi.
  In addition, it is certain that each methodological approaches employed by social    scientist above demonstrate certain precious insights. The different point of    departure and also the diverse aims of the study carry special uniqueness. Below    is the description of the strengths and merits that those scholars have made.    
Firstly, it is comparative sociological studies of contemporary Muslim societies. By this way, Hassan undertakes a systematic comparative investigation of everyday beliefs of Muslims with special reference to the middle classes in a number of social settings. As a result, he found that Muslim World is undergoing a religious renaissance with the evidence that the number of religious piety is increasing in many countries. Nevertheless, such piety is actually constructed by the influence of global and societal condition. Global condition is mainly characterized by a hegemonic cultural pattern of the West. It renders Muslim communities to reassert their Islamic identity. While social condition refers to the social construction includes dissatisfaction with the slow and often negligible progress made by national government. It also makes people to strengthen their own ideology and in-group feelings.
 Secondly,    axiomatic structuralism is an inspiring approach toward religious studies. This    analysis might be a critique toward Geertz and Durkheim since the first concerns    with the social basis of individual behavior and symbolic communication while    the second emphasizes on the relationship between system of social relations    and those of religious belief and action. Axiomatic structuralism, in fact,    pays much attention to the power of an axiomatic organized system of knowledge    instead of social basis or social relation thereby social organization, political    constellation, and some others can change.
  Luckily, Woodward succeeds employing this theory to observe Islam in Java in    excellent way. He perceives religion as an axiomatic organized system of knowledge    by which social condition could be transformed. To Woodward, it is simply because    axiomatic structures are located in cognitive rather than social sphere. Therefore,    it was proven that religious concepts are able to form the basis for social    structure and political organization in Java. Indeed, the intellectual and mystical    systems of classical Islam have transformed Javanese culture to certain hybrid    tradition which is still Islamic.
  Thirdly, combining cultural and psychological analysis to explore deeply Islamic    tradition in many countries is incredibly fabulous work. It is James L. Peacock    who carries out the great research on Islam by harnessing both cultural and    psychological approaches. By cultural analysis, it is possible to conduct an    interpretative understanding of explicit doctrines, philosophies of life, and    also the actor’s essential structure of meaning including values, symbols,    and world view. In turn, it will disclose the construction of layers of subjective    meaning which illuminate the event. The result of applying this analysis to    the study is that Muslim reformism as a cultural category in the lives of Southeast    Asian can be grasped. Nevertheless, cultural analysis is still incapable of    uncovering the unconsciousness layers of the individuals. Consequently, psychological    analysis is needed to unfold the linkage behavioral patterns and conceptions,    which are not recognized by subject. In the light of Muslim attitude observation,    it makes the study be able to detect behavioral correlates of reformism that    are not necessarily recognized by the reformist them selves. 
The world view
 The World    view is a conception of the world rather that behavioral inclinations. It can    be seen from Hassan’s Faithlines that question about how to be ideal Muslim    as individual or social is very important. The idea of Muslim piety refers to    the notion of how to be a good Muslim as a person and the concept of Muslim    ummah indicates a great endeavor of Muslims as a community to form high civilized    society. In turn, it will influence the image of Islam in public domains.
  It seems that Muslim people tend to formulate a distinctive notion in the respect    of relation among individual, society, religion, and state. In personal level,    Muslims strives to reach a high degree of religious commitment. In the level    of society, the community of believers holds primordial loyalties and at the    same time they live among other communities respectfully and peacefully. Nevertheless,    in conjunction with connection between religion and state there are two main    configurations. Firstly, people who assert that religion and state are separated    because they have different space. It is differentiated social formation. Secondly    is the belief that religion and state are integrated. This category is undifferentiated    social formation. Above all, Hassan points out that in order to promote constructive    social-cultural, political, moral, and religious role for religion, it may be    prudent to keep faithlines separate from the state and thereby prevent them    from becoming faultlines of the political terrain.
  In addition, according to Woodward, the world view of Islam in Java is a coalition    between mystical path and pious religiosity. In the case of modern mystics,    the inner (batin and isi) domains of religiosity play a dominant role in the    construction of personal world views and inform social behavior, while in that    of the reformist Muslims which hold pious religiosity emphasis on the outward    (lahir and wadah) that orients behavior. Nevertheless, Javanese religion and    society are Islamic because aspects of Muslim doctrine have taken the place    of those of Hinduism and Buddhism as the axioms of Javanese culture. Furthermore,    Sufi concepts of sainthood, the mystical path and the perfection of man are    employed in the formulation of an imperial cult. Therefore it can be said that    Islam has penetrated so quickly and so deeply into the fabric of Javanese culture    because it was embraced by the royal courts as the basis for a theocratic state.
  Meanwhile, Peacock notes that Muslims conception of the world is certainly dominated    by the vision of Muslim reformists. It is collectivist than private although    their goal is salvation of the soul and rather stricter in purging of ritual,    scheduling of time, and streamlining of work. It is due to their tendency for    contributions to the wider society, religion, and ethnic group rather than personal    and domestic happiness and intimate association with friends. In comparison    to Protestant, collectivism and legalism as opposed to individualism and dramatizing    the Christ are among the features that distinguish the South Asian Muslim reformist    psychology from that of the Protestant ethic. 
The Self-Image
 It is    apparently clear that the image of Muslims society is colored by binary oppositions    which is made by scholars themes regarding the existing phenomena. Montgomery    Watt which is quoted by Riaz Hassan categorize Muslims into two types of self-image,    namely; fundamentalist and liberal. The first maintains intact the belief that    Islam is a complete, sufficient, and final religion whereas the second tries    to correct that conviction in some respects. Another categorization made by    Hassan is the differentiation between High Islam and Folk Islam which resemble    to the scripturalist-puritan and pluralistic-flexible in their religious orientation.   
  Similarly, the distinction between normative piety and syncretism which arisen    by Woodward. The piety usually follows Ulama who taught the shari’ah as    the guidance of way of daily life and the syncretism seemingly ascribes to those    Saints (Sufis) who introduce thariqah as the way of mystical life. Each recognized    the importance and legitimacy of the other, the Sufis being concerned with the    inward (batin) personal aspects of religious life and the ulama with the outward    (zahir) forms of religion and social order.
  Likewise two scholars above, Peacock also records such binary opposition as    the image of Islam in certain countries. It is reformist (or progressive) and    conservative category. The reformist style of religiosity is considered as young,    being urbanized, and educated. Their goal in this worldly life is to practice    Islam well to gain salvation in the day after and also to reform the belief    of non-reformist. In contrast, the conservative one is usually recognized as    old, rural, and poorly educated and their aim in this life is to preserve the    harmony of the self, society, and the cosmic order. 
Conclusion
 To conclude,    in spite of various point of departure of studying Islam, the three scholars    share similar issues when citing the socio-cultural category of Muslim societies,    namely Puritanism. Hassal labels this type as Fundamentalist (following Watt’s    notion of self image of Islam) while Woodward calls it normative piety and Peacock    explicitly names this category as Muslim Puritan. This term refers to certain    religious behavior and culture ranging from religious purification, psychology    of rationalization, purging of rituals to hold firmly al-Qur’an, al-Hadits,    and Islamic Shari’ah generally.
  Each of them, however, harness advance theoretical frameworks to explore more    about Islam. Hassan strives to compare sociologically the condition of Islam    and its conjunction with society in many countries. Woodward utilizes an axiomatic    approach to prove that Islam influences deeply to the social and political organization    in Javanese culture. Peacock certainly insists psychological analysis, in addition    to cultural perspective, to disclose unconsciousness layers of individuals thereby    the process of rationalization can be achieved.
 Moreover,    they also conceptualize certain type of Muslim ideas and images. In fact, Muslim    world in Hassan’s account endeavors to be an ideal Muslim either in individual    level or community ones. To Woodward, the predicate of Muslim is not only belonged    to those who practice a piety normatively but also attributed to who hold modern    mysticism or syncretism. All of them are Islamic in Javanese society. For Peacock,    the world of Muslim reformists is fuelled by the idea of salvation, a sense    of community, and a sense of strictness toward rule and time scheduling. Those    notions subsequently derive the portrait of Islamic world. Indeed, Islam seems    to be more colored by binary opposition ranging from fundamentalist-liberal    (Hassan), normative piety-mystical orientation (Woodward), to purists-syncretists    (Peacock).
  Therefore, here I note some methodical obstacles in which criticism could be    addressed. By such criticism, hopefully, the method or the result of the study    will be more appropriate, accurate and comprehensive. Firstly, it is questionable    why Hassan does not include the lower and the high class besides the middle    class as respondent in his sociological research. By picking merely the middle    class up as the sample of the survey, it is obviously difficult to gain “thick    description” of Muslim perception toward religion and society. Hence,    it is plausible to embrace all social categories thereby we will reach more    comprehensive perspectives and wider understandings of Muslim societies. Secondly,    Woodward’s axiomatic structuralism rather abandons the phenomenon of why    the idea and the movement of Puritanism could penetrate and infiltrate to the    ’mysticism world’ which was hold by the royal and its people, and    even subsequently live hand in hand with them. It is interesting to see through    Foucaultian lens, especially the notion of power, how an economic power, which    is associated to the groups of normative piety, operate over political power    linked to the Sultanate. Thirdly, cultural and psychological offered by Peacock    appears failed to unfold global hegemony as a determinant factor in forming    such puritan style of religiosity. If the global politic consideration taken,    the finding of the survey might be more, complete and perfect. Wallahua`lam.
  Bibliography
Hassan, Riaz, Faithlines: Muslim Conceptions of Islam and Society, Karachi. Pakistan: Oxford Pakistan Paperbacks, 2003.
Woodward, Mark. R., Islam in Java: Normative Piety and Mysticism in the Sultanate of Yogyakarta, Arizona: The University of Arizona Press, 1989.
Peacock, James L., Muslim Puritans: Reformist Psychology in Southeast Asian Islam, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London: University of California Press, 1978.
Ibrahim, Anwar The Asian Renaissance, Kuala Lumpur: Times Books International, 1996.
Pals, Daniel L., Seven Theories of Religion, New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Connolly, Peter (ed.), Approaches to the Study of Religion, London and New York: Cassel, 1999.
Paden, William E., Interpreting the Sacred: Ways of Viewing Religion, Boston: Beacon Press, 1992.
Geertz, Clifford, The Religion of Java, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1976.

 
   



