DISCOURSE ON POLYGAMY IN INDONESIA

Introduction

A heated public debate has been going on among Muslims in Indonesia about polygamy recently and allegations by feminists that the interpretation of the Koran is dominated by a male point of view are worth contemplating, particularly when it concerns women’s interest like polygamy.
This study tries to find out (1) how meanings are realized in the discourse on polygamy in Indonesia recently; (2) how ideologies are imbedded in the discourse; (3) what the implications of this study towards language and literacy education are.

Key words: allegation, polygamy, lust, unequal, divorce, elimination, infidels, distrust, grand narratives, betrayal, interpretation, intellect, genitals, hormones, solution, aspiration, perfect justice, ardent desire, construed, cultural transformation, epitome, dignity, compassion, protection, benefactors, mating, instinct, sexual drive, fertile periods, restrain, adultery, polyandry.

The Framework of Thoughts
Communication has been unsatisfactorily defined in spite of the fact that it is one of those human activities that everyone recognizes. There are two main schools in the study of communication. First, communication is seen as the transmission of messages – how senders and receivers encode and decode, with how transmitters use the channels and media of communication. Second, communication is seen as the production and exchange of meanings. It is concerned with how messages, or texts, interact with people in order to produce meanings. In other words, the role of text in our culture is the central idea.
We realize just how small our global society has become during this age of communication. We are aware of the ever-increasing knowledge base that exists today to be passed on to our students. The value of knowledge increases as it is shared. How can we begin to understand another way of thinking? How can we be sensitized to different cultural frames? One answer to put forward is by reading, writing and discussing texts. In Paulo Freire’s (1987) words, our challenge is to teach our students to read not only the word but also the world.
Literacy comes to suggest a capacity to talk and, hence, to think about complicated issues and abstract problems. The most important question is how are meanings made in talking in particular and in everyday linguistic interactions in general? To analyze and explain this question we need principles and techniques of a certain approach of language. The systemic Functional Approach is increasingly being recognized as providing a very useful descriptive and interpretive framework for viewing language as a strategic, meaning-making resource. Michael Halliday (1985), the linguist most responsible for the development of systemic linguistics, prefaces his 1985 systemic description of English grammar with an open-ended list of twenty-one possible application of systemic theory.
Common to all systemic linguists is an interest in how people use language with each other in accomplishing everyday social life. This interest leads systemic linguists to advance four main theoretical claims: that language is functional; that the function is to make meanings; that these meanings are influenced by social and cultural context around which they are exchanged; and that the language use is semiotic process, a process of making meanings by choosing.
Systemic linguistics does not only ask functional questions about how people are using language, but it also interprets the linguistic system itself from a functional-semantic approach. Language users do not interact in order to exchange sounds with each other, or even to exchange words or sentences. People interact in order to make meanings; to make sense of the world and of each other. The overall purpose of language then can be described as a semantic one, and each we participate in is a record of the meanings that have been made in a particular context.
Meaning production is a dynamic act. When the text and the audience are members of a tightly knit culture or subculture, the interaction is smooth and effortless, the connotations and myth upon which the text draws fit closely, if not exactly, with those of the audience members. Reader and the text together produce the preferred meaning, and this collaboration the reader is constituted as someone with a particular set of relationships to the dominant value system and to the rest of society. This is ideology at work.
But in other cases, the meanings are produced with a much greater sense of strain. The preferred reading texts may come easily to some, but for others it may be the cause of stress or disagreement. They made decode it by oppositional or negotiated codes, not by the dominant ‘easy’ one. In other words, their myths by which they understand the existing phenomena are different from those that the dominant one assumes.
Ideology theories stress that all communication and all meanings have socio-political dimension, and that they cannot be understood outside their social context. This ideological work always favors the status quo, for the class with power dominates the production and distribution not only of goods but also of ideas and meanings. The economic system is organized in their interest, and the ideological system derives from it and works to promote, naturalize, and disguise it. Whatever their differences, all ideological theories agree that ideology works to maintain class domination; their differences lie in the ways in which this domination is exercised, the degree of its effectiveness, and the extent of the resistance it meets.

The Method of Investigation
The data of this study is gained from The Jakarta Post published in the end of 2006 and the beginning of 2007. The data is in the form articles concerning polygamy following the announcement made by the famous Indonesian Muslim cleric, Aa Gym, that he had taken a second wife.
This study is a descriptive-qualitative and explanatory in nature. Qualitative, because it is connected with how well the phenomena are, rather than with how much of it there are. It is verbal explanation rather than numerical one. Descriptive, because it describes what a phenomena is like. It shows the social, cultural and language phenomena in verbal description. And explanatory, because it gives the reasons of the phenomena described.
In an attempt to find the answer to the first query, five key sets of resources for making meaning introduced by J.R. Martin and David Rose (2003) are employed. They are appraisal, ideation, conjunction, identification and periodicity. Appraisal is concerned with evaluation: the kinds of attitudes that are negotiated in a text, the strength of the feelings involved and the ways in which values are sourced and readers aligned. Appraisals are interpersonal kinds of meanings, which realize variations in the tenor of social interactions enacted in a text.
Ideation focuses on the content of a discourse; what kinds of activities are undertaken, and how participants undertaking these activities are described and classified. These are ideational kinds of meanings that realize the field of a text.
Conjunction looks at inter-connections between activities: reformulating them, adding to them, sequencing them and explaining them. These are also ideational types of meanings, but of the subtype ‘logical’. Logical meanings are used to form temporal, causal and other kinds of connectivity.
Identification is concerned with tracking participants: with introducing people, places and things into a discourse and keeping track of them once there. These are textual resources, concerned with how discourse makes sense to the reader by keeping track of identities.
Periodicity considers the rhythm of discourse; the layers of prediction that flag for readers what’s to come, and the layers of consolidation that formulate the meanings made. These are also textual kinds of meanings, concerned with organizing discourse as pulses of information.

The Debate
Sirikit Syah (The Jakarta Post, 12/08/06:6) remarked that polygamy breaks no rules and that is permitted by Islam. He said: “We have seen how Aa Gym smoothly handled the issue of polygamy. He and his first wife did not need to state in public that they still loved each other: their gestures already said it. In Islam, when the wife is ikhlas (accepts wholeheartedly), the husband loves her more, and treats her better. He quoted Aa Gym’s first wife as saying: “If you are ikhlas, Allah will help you and there will be a hikmah (blessing in disguise) behind all this seemingly painful experience”.
Daniel Hummel (The Jakarta Post, 12/08/06:7) pointed out that polygamy does serve a purpose. He said: “Polygamy plugs into a system of inheritance, the non-usury-economy, trade, child support, charity, etc., that seeks to stabilize the social economy. Polygamy is not for everyone, but its existence allows a man to take care of more than one woman, especially since Islam specifies that each wife must have a separate residence. He is of the opinion that polygamy is important. He said:
“There are some women who are widowed with no family support, who need a man who can support them. Charity only goes so far in this world. A good economy benefits many, but leaves many more out. Child support is helpful if proper laws exist to enforce it, and inheritance works if there is something to receive. Polygamy is important. It’s a solution to a problem, not an outlet for lust, and therefore not unequal.”

Zi Tjahjono (The Jakarta Post, 12/10/06: 1) believed that men and women were not created equal. She said: “I am not saying everyone should agree to polygamy and cheer it on, or follow the suits of those who practice it as a hobby and flaunt their polygamic achievement. If my husband wishes to marry another woman, I will let him do so, but only after his responsibility for the future of my child has been assured and he has granted me a proper divorce.”
On the contrary, Dewi Chandraningrum (The Jakarta Post, 12/12/06:6) pointed out that the Prophet Muhammad himself and the Koran strongly object to the practice of polygamy. She said: “Muhammad was faithful to the principle of monogamy with his wife Siti Khadijah. Only after her death and the political turbulence in Madinah did he decide to resort to polygamy for the sake of peace and the elimination of the old practice of having hundreds of wives in the Arab world.”
She remarked that a number of reasons have been used by those practicing polygamy that are irrelevant to the precious teachings of the Prophet Muhammad. She said:
“Why is the media’s coverage of Aa Gym’s second marriage as extensive as that of the scandal involving the House lawmaker and the singer? The media play a significant role in educating the public, including about the responsibility of public figure to set a good example. Why do most women’s activists protest against the practice of polygamy in this country? It is not because they are infidels or distrust the grand narratives of sharia interpretation. It is merely because a number of reasons are being used by those practicing polygamy that are irrelevant to the precious teachings of the prophet Muhammad.”

In line with Dewi, Julia Suryakusuma (The Jakarta Post, 12/15/06:6) pointed out that religion has for so long been irreligious, corrupted, manipulated for base political power motives and these incidents are just the latest in a long continuum. She said: “We’ve been in a crisis of leadership for such a long time, it hardly matters anymore when the latest betrayal of trust is revealed, does it? She then asked everybody to use his intellect, as she remarked:
“So the only thing to do is to press the religious “start” button and get back to basics. “The first thing created by God was the intellect” (Hadith), not the genitals or hormones, boys and girls! So let’s start using it! And yes, that means you too, Aa, my brother!”

Meanwhile, Muhammad Yazid (The Jakarta Post, 12/16/06:6) remarked that the an-Nisa (4:3) should be construed as a cultural transformation from polygamy to monogamy, instead of a free pass for men. He said:
“Polygamy looks to be a solution, not an aspiration because prior to the advent of Islam, it was quite common for someone in Saudi Arabia to have dozens to hundreds of wives. Then Islam came and the acceptable number of wives was reduced to four. This limitation must have been a shock to the Arabs, mentally and culturally, especially to those wishing to covert to Islam but already married too many wives.”

Muhammad Yazid pointed out that Islamic teaching is bent toward monogamy, not the other way around. He said:
“Therefore, the Koran touched on polygamy because in those days polygamy was a social reality and Islam was introducing radical changes to this reality. Essentially, Islamic teaching is bent toward monogamy, not the other way around, particularly given the demand that whoever practices polygamy must do perfect justice to all his wives.”

This perfect justice, according to Muhammad Yazid is impossible to have, as an-Nisa (4:3) says:
“You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision) so as to leave the other hanging (i.e. neither divorced or married)…”

Referring to Aa Gym’s statement that polygamy was a sacred institution within Islam, to do right thing by widows and orphans, Marianne Katoppo (The Jakarta Post, 12/17/06: 1) said:
“From my years of study, I remember a verse in the Surah an-Nisa says, “If you want to do right by widows and orphans, then you should take one wife, or two, or three, or four, but it is better for you to take one.” Who am I to understand this in such a narrow simplistic way, and to think that this means Aa Gym should stick to his first wife? I used to like to watch the Aa Gym family on TV. They seemed to be the epitome of the happy family, and he was the perfect husband.”

Then, Malgalina Avianty and Cornelis de Wolf (The Jakarta Post, 12/18/06: 6) pointed out that it is true, a long time ago polygamy may have given women in Arab society a certain measure of protection. They said:
“We are Muslims ourselves and we keep telling our children that Allah wants us to enjoy life, as long as we worship him, are in control of ourselves and live with dignity and compassion. True, a long time ago polygamy may have given women in Arab society a certain measure of protection, but why cannot we, within a great religion of Islam, find other, more dignified mechanism to protect women, that do not require them to sleep with their “benefactors”? “

Finally, Mangku Sitepoe (The Jakarta Post, 02/03/07: 7) said that in animal life, mating is an instinct that unleashes the sexual drive in both males and females within the same period. He pointed out:
“In animal life, mating is an instinct that unleashes the sexual drive in both males and females within the same period. The enjoyment of satisfaction in animal sexuality is a shared experience rather than egoism. The sexuality is identical with reproduction, which is polygamous as well as polyandrous in nature. No monogamy is found among animals because they lack proper intelligence.”

Mangku Sitepoe appealed human males to be able to restrain their sexual drive. He said:

Animal’s sexuality is guided by instinct, and there are natural signals that ensure mating only takes place between adult animals and during fertile periods. Human males, therefore, should also be able to restrain their sexual drive.”

Men’s inability to restrain their sexual drive, as Mangku Sitepoe remarked, has become the starting point for their polygamy. He said:
“Men’s inability to restrain their sexual drive, followed by the fact that adultery gives them added value in sexual enjoyment, has become the starting point for their polygamy. Polygamy and polyandry are found among animals, and polyandrous women are never found, so the question arises: are intelligent men engaged in polygamy through adultery willing to be equated with male animals?”

The Discussion
In an attempt to find the answer of the first query, five key sets of resources for making meanings introduced by J.R. Martin and David Rose (2003) are employed. They are appraisal, ideation, conjunction, identification and periodicity.
In an attempt to find the answer to the second query, analysis of the social practice and of the discourse practice is conducted. The analysis of the social practice is intended to find out the socio-cultural context, as well as the ideological context, in which the text was written. Since the text writers live in Indonesia, it is the social practice of Indonesian people that is analyzed. Analyzing the social practice of the text writers means examining the culture of the society in which they live.
Unlike Western culture where human life is paramount, for Indonesians human life is subservient to the greater ideology, religion, family, business, economy, political structure, or nation. Where there is a clash of interests, the individual must defer to “the greater good”. Life/the world is to be received (fate); it is to be adapted to; life/the world requires submission. Outcome is determined by any number of factors: fate, relationships, class, and supernatural. Roles, responsibilities, and opportunities are affected (and, at times, determined) by gender. Accepting status quo is the typical culture of Indonesians. Problems require resignation – not solutions. Truth is adaptable. Truth is dependent on the social context or relationship. Relationships are paramount – to be preserved at all cost.
Class structure is still very much evident in Indonesia (read: Javanese) society – a phenomenon which extends to the nation as a whole. In Java (as in all of Indonesia), although everyone has status people do not have equal status. The type or level of status depends mainly on birth, family connections, economic position, and occupation. For many, these are things they are born into. In short, social class and status are hereditary. This perception of inherent inequality among people is supported by a strong belief in God and fate. Thus, because of divine will and/or fate, individuals accept their lot in life.
It is indicated that, politically, the Indonesian society is dominated by men, which is considered as one that can accommodate the interest of most of Indonesian people. Since the group of people in power is usually highly influential in determining what is good and proper and what is not, then the life conditions of the Indonesian people must be the reflection of the ideology of these particular men.
Analysis of the discourse practice shows that the texts, which are published in the Jakarta Post, were delivered to individual people mainly by subscription. The readers are mostly highly educated people: high ranking officials, professors, businessmen, students of post graduate programs, etc. The writers seem to be trying to persuade the readers to adopt the same feelings as they do about and the same reaction towards polygamy. Logically, the writers also want the readers to take actions as a follow up of these feelings and reactions. It is only people having high position in offices, or those with high educational background that have the power and a chance of doing something about polygamy, but not common people. It is also an indication to promote the objectives of the writers, and it involves the process of controlling the information flow, managing public opinions and manipulating behavior patterns.
Such indications reflected upon ideologies are embedded in features of discourse on polygamy which are taken for granted as matters of common sense. Indonesian perception and interpretation about polygamy has been built entirely upon assumptions and expectations which control both actions of members of society and their interpretations of the action of others. Such assumptions and expectations are implicit, backgrounded, taken for granted, not things that people are consciously aware of, rarely explicitly formulated or examined or questioned. This study reveals at least eighteen “common-sense” assumptions about polygamy. The most effective form of ideological common sense has been “common” in the sense of being shared by most if not virtually all of the members of Indonesian Muslims.
In some cases the relationship to asymmetrical power relations may be a direct one, like the commonsensical assumptions referred to in Sirikit Syah’s article, that ‘polygamy breaks no rule; it’s permitted by Islam’ which disguises the fact that those in favor of polygamy do not interpret the an-Nisa (4:3) in a balanced way, as they emphasize the sentence, namely “marry (other) woman of your choice, two or three, or four” while the next sentence, “but if you fear you shall not be able to deal justly (with) them, then only one” is simply ignored.
Daniel Hummel’s statement that ‘polygamy stabilizes the social economy’ is ‘common sense sustaining unequal relations of power’ in the sense that it helps deflect attention away from the fact that males who practice polygamy marry much younger and more beautiful women than their first wives. This is the revival of harem (a space where highly ranked nobles in the Middle East collected hundreds of wives) and zenana (in Hinduism) in the Indonesian context. If those men use polygamy to address economic stability, why don’t they take women who live in miserable economic condition?
Zi Tjahjono probably speaks for a majority of women in Indonesia when she says that if her husband wants to marry another woman, she would let him, provided he takes responsibility for the future of her children and provided he gives her a proper divorce. It is understood that a proper divorce allows women to move on with their lives and pursue a brighter future with somebody who is more deserving of their love, without having to fear for the immediate future of themselves and their children. What is not understood, however, is why Zi Tjahjono does not seem to want for Teh Nini what she wants for herself. Does she really think that Teh Nini is more fortunate than Hillary Clinton because, unlike Bill Clinton who cheated on her repeatedly and lied about publicly, the “courageous” Aa Gym announced that he is going to marry another woman?

The Conclusion
The analysis using those five sets of resources above enables the voices of different positions in different groups to emerge clearly, explicitly in subtle ways, from the patterns of meaning in which they are encoded. The findings of this study show that language use is functional and its function is to make meanings. These meanings are influenced by the social and cultural context in which they are exchanged. The process of using language is the process of making meanings by choosing. Meanings are not located in texts itself. Meanings are produced in the interaction between text and audience. Meaning production is a dynamic act in which both elements contribute equally. When the text and the audience are members of tightly knit culture, the interaction is smooth and effortless. In other cases, the meanings are produced with a much greater sense of strain as the discourse on polygamy in The Jakarta Post in the end of 2006 has attested.
The discourse on polygamy in The Jakarta Post in the end of 2006 is a good example of hegemony at work. But the hegemony has to work hard because so much of the points of view that react the dominant ideology contradicts it. Ideology here is a term used to describe the social production of meanings. The ideological work to win the consent of women to patriarchal interpretation of polygamy is not just an ideological practice but an ideological struggle, and that signs of resistances it has to overcome can never be wiped out. The consent of the subordinate to the dominant system is never fully won; always elements of resistance remain.
The arguments of those who are in favor of polygamy clarify how ideology works to produce meanings through signs. The central point is, in the words of those who are in favor to polygamy, “It is written in the Koran that men are allowed to marry more than one wife”. This point is ideological: the statement is meaningful only in so far as its maker and audience are members of the same patriarchal interpretation on polygamy. This point is a dominant ideology among Muslims in Indonesia. In so far as Muslim women accept this interpretation, they are actively promoting an ideology that against their interests: they are participating in hegemony. Hegemony involves the constant winning and rewinning the consent of the majority to the system that subordinates them. By organizing herself as the addressee ‘hailed’ by this point, the reader is practicing patriarchal ideology; and accepting the common-sense of the representations of herself and her future, she is helping to win the consent of herself and others like her to a system that only men can benefit from in the long run.
The dominant ideology constantly meets resistance that it has overcome in order to win people’s consent to the social order that it is promoting. These resistances may be overcome, but they are never eliminated. So any hegemony victory, any consent that it wins, is necessarily unstable; it can never be taken for granted. In spite of the fact that Islam envisions women enjoying an equal position to men in family, in reality, the position of Indonesian women are generally weak so that many wives opt to allow their husband to take another wife rather than being divorced. This includes the case demonstrated by Teh Nini, the first wife of Aa Gym. However, the women’s rejection of Aa Gym’s sermons quite recently shows that Indonesian women are not going to easily submit to the patriarchal interpretation of the holy sayings. At the social level, Indonesian women are highly empowered.
One of the key hegemonic strategies is the construction of ‘common-sense’ assumption. If the ideas of the ruling class can be accepted as common (i.e. not class-based) sense, then their ideological object is achieved and their ideological work is disguised. This study reveals at least eighteen ‘common-sense’ assumptions. These ‘common-sense’ assumptions are implicit in the conventions according to which people interact linguistically, and of which people are generally not consciously aware.
These common sense assumptions include (1) Polygamy breaks no rules. It’s permitted by Islam; (2) Polygamy is important. It’s solution to a problem; (3) Polygamy stabilizes the social economy; (4) It is OK for a husband to marry another woman as far as his responsibility for the future of his children has been assured; (5) Women tend to be monogamous – or “mono”, while men are “stereo”, that is polygamous; (6) Statistics show that there are more women than men in this country, and even in the world; (7) Polygamy is better than infidelity; (8) Polygamy protects the interests of women; (9) A wife who allows his husband to take a second wife can hope for a place in heaven; (10) Polygamy prevents adultery; (11) Polygamy implies that it is OK for a man not to be faithful as long as he gets certificate, pays for the upkeep of all “his” women and children, and as long as he can satisfy all “his” women’s sexual needs; (12) A woman’s primary duty is to serve men and take care of the kids and the home; (13)Men and women were not created equal; (14) Muhammad not only approved of the practice but also engaged in it (polygamy); (15) Not even men are created equally. Some men for physical or clinical reasons, need more than one women to satisfy their needs; (16) The sad truth is that the public seems more tolerant of chronic womanizers than those who legally take up more than one wife; (17) It is written in the Koran that men are allowed to marry more than one wife; (18) Sharia, as designed 1,500 years ago on the Arab continent, holds the promise of divine perfection.

The Implications
This study, first, implies the use of literacy-based approach in language education. This approach represents a style of teaching educators ought to consider if they wish to prepare learners for full participation in societies that increasingly demand multilingual, multicultural, and multitextual competence. A literacy-based approach, by focusing not only on language but also on the effects and communicative consequences that particular texts can have for different audiences, can clear a path to new levels of understanding of language, culture, and communication.
Second, it is an invitation to help increase consciousness of our society of how language contributes to the domination of some people by others, because consciousness is the first step towards emancipation. Resistance and change are not only possible but continuously happening. But the effectiveness of resistance and the realization of change depend on people developing critical consciousness of domination and its modalities, rather than just experiencing them. Women’s rejection of Aa Gym sermon recently clearly shows that Indonesian women are not going to easily submit to the patriarchal interpretation of the holy sayings. Today, people in general would like to see monogamous families as an idea suiting the aspirations and principles of Islam. God wants us to enjoy life, as long as we worship Him, are in control of ourselves and live with dignity and compassion. It must be noted that a family must be built on the basis of harmony and physical and mental happiness. We need to find other, more dignified mechanism to protect women that do not require them to sleep with their “benefactors”.
Third, audiences are an important influence on media content. It content should be accessible to people who have a lay interest in how media work, how language works, and particularly how the two interact. I hope it will also be of interest to journalists and others in the news media to learn something about the nature of the linguistic work they do. The language of news media is prominent and pervasive in society, and it is worth understanding how language works, how it affects our perceptions of others and ourselves, how it is produced, how it is shaped by values. Journalist and others in news media are, therefore, expected to select opinions and news reporting which educate the readers apart from marketable materials.
Finally, for further researchers it is expected to conduct studies on sensitive issues such as generation, gender, class, incapacity, ethnicity and so on by considering those three aspects mentioned above.