Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

Politics of Religious Identity of the Bajo People

in Wakatobi Islands, South East Sulawesi,
Indonesia

Benny Baskara
Ph.D Candidate of ICRS, UGM Graduate School, Yogyakarta

Irwan Abdullah
Promotor of the Candidate, Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Cultural
Science,
Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta

Djoko Suryo
Co-Promotor of the Candidate, Department of History,
Faculty of Cultural Science,
Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta

43 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

Introduction
The problem of identity is a concern in recent times. Research in this area is
particularly important in that characteristics of an individual, society, or ethnic group
serve as points of identification that differentiate them. Identity includes faith and
religious belief, which in turn fosters differentiation at both individual and societal
levels. This is the case with the Bajo as an ethnic group, who construct their own identity
based on their unique characteristic of being people of the sea. This status creates a
strong level of differentiation with other ethnic groups who live on the land. The Bajo
also have their own system of beliefs that are unique and peculiar, which differ from
systems of belief held by other ethnic groups, which can be considered their religious
identity.
As a sea people, the Bajo have their own indigenous belief system which is
strongly shaped by their natural environment. They believe in the Lord of the sea, which
actually is an incarnation of their great ancestors who hold an extraordinary
supernatural power over the sea. Beside their indigenous belief in the Lord of the sea,
the Bajo also acknowledge that they are Muslims. This acknowledgement actually means
that the Bajo accepted and recognize Islam as an important part of their religious
identity. Therefore, the religious identity of the Bajo is a combination of their indigenous
belief in the Lord of the sea and Islamic belief.
Based on the fact described above, it is strongly assumed that the Bajo, as with
other ethnic groups, always maintain and uphold their religious identity. The way to
maintain and uphold an identity is also known as politics of identity. Politics of identity
plays a particularly significant role in selecting what elements should be retained and
what elements that can be changed in response to challenges and threats in the
dynamics of the construction process of identity itself. This paper, therefore, focuses on
how the Bajo people employ and implement their politics of identity in maintaining their
religious identity. This paper is based on results of research conducted on the Bajo
people who live in Wakatobi Islands, South East Sulawesi.

Politics of Identity: Theoretical Review

If identity includes characteristics and peculiarities of an individual or a society,
then identity politics is an effort to maintain and keep that identity. Identity is closely
related and associated to a sense of belonging and solidarity with social groups,
ideologies, or specific characteristics. Identity politics is therefore the effort to create,
increase, or maintain that sense of belonging and association. Identity politics means the
struggle of individuals or groups to obtain recognition, prestige, and wealth. Further,
identity politics not only means a struggle, but also a communication and exchange
between different modes of belonging, images, and visions of collectivity.1 It prevails
also with religious identity, in which identity politics plays a role to maintain and keep
the faith and commitment of its adherents.
In fact, Sicakkan and Lithman posit their theory on identity politics stated above
based on the comparison and contestation between individualist and collectivist
concepts of identity.2 In brief, individualist theory states that the construction of identity

1
Sicakkan and Lithman, “Politics of Identity, Modes of Belonging, and Citizenship:
an Overview of Conceptual and Theoretical Challenges”, in Sicakkan, H. and Lithman, Y.
(eds.), Changing the Basis of Citizenship in the Modern State. Political Theory and the Politics
of Diversity (United Kingdom: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2005).
2
Sicakkan and Lithman, “Politics of Identity”, 13.

44 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

is determined by individuals, while collectivist theory says that identity is formed and
constructed depend on the community. Identity politics is actually the way to maintain
identity between the contestation of two opposite positions. Other contesting theories
of identity are between essentialist and strategic concepts of identity. The essentialist
concept states that identity is a stable and permanent thing, whereas the strategic
concept states that identity is never be permanent, and is always changing and
developing. Again, identity politics therefore is the way to manage identity between two
contesting concepts.
Stuart Hall emphasizes that his concept of identity is not an essentialist concept,
but rather strategic and positional.3 The concept of identity therefore does not mean a
stable core of the self, permanent from its beginning to end without change. Identity is
never unified, but instead is increasingly fragmented and fractured, constructed through
different discourses, practices, positions, becomes subject to radical historization, and is
constantly in the process of change and transformation. Identity is constituted within,
and not outside, representation. Because he believed that identities are constructed
within, and not outside, discourse, then identities must be understood as created in a
specific historical and institutional context, and within specific discursive formation and
practices.
From this point of view, Hall then stated his opinion that identity is a “meeting
point” or “the point of suture” between discourses and practices on the one side, and
the process to produce subjectivity that constructs us as a subject on the other side.
Identity, therefore, is a point of temporary attachment of the subject’s position which
discursive practices construct it. Identity is the position where the subject “knows”; and
it is a representation, which is always constructed across a division―and from the place
of―the other, and thus can never be adequate. This “suturing” position can be
considered an articulation rather than identification.4 Based on this process, it can be
said also that identity is always in negotiation.
The process of negotiation above, in the view of Althusser, whom Hall cited, is
called the process of “interpellation”, between subject constitution and “ideological
state apparatuses”. The function of ideology in reproducing social relations lies in the
symbolic function of ideology in the constitution of subjects. The factor of ideology lies
outside subjects and determines subjects. Therefore, the constitution of subject
happens between “ideology” and “unconscious”. As Althusser points out: “Individuals
are constituted as subjects through the discursive formation … the individual is
identified as subject to the discursive formation in a structure of misrecognition.
Interpellation names the mechanism of this structure of misrecognition, effectively the
term of the subject in the discursive and the ideological, the point of their
correspondence.”5
The concept of identity formation, interpellation, and negotiation, and the
constitution of the subject, finally culminated in Foucault’s theory about discourse. Hall
emphasized it by quoting Foucault: “The subject is produced as an ‘effect’ through and
within discourse, within specific discursive formations … and discourses construct
subject positions through their rules of formation and ‘modalities of enunciation’”.
Moreover, Foucault also stated his opinion about the human body, which Foucault

3
Stuart Hall, “Who Needs Identity?”, in Hall, S. and du Gay, P. (eds), Questions of Cultural
Identity (London: Sage Publications, 1996).
4
Stuart Hall, “Who Needs Identity?”, 6.
5
Althusser in Stuart Hall, “Who Needs Identity?”, 7.

45 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

argued: “The body is constructed, shaped and reshaped, by the intersection of a series
of disciplinary discursive practices … and its reconstruction in terms of its historical,
genealogical, and discursive formations.” Hall then interpreted Foucault’s idea about the
body, that “the body has served to function as the signifier of the condensation of
subjectivities in the individual. The body has acquired a totemic value in post-
Foucaultian work and served as a transcendental signifier”.6
Furthermore, Hall found that in Foucault’s concept, the identity construction is
done within the discourse of power and disciplinary regulation to resolve the
relationship between the subject, the individual, and the body. The entirely self-policing
conception of the subject emerges from the disciplinary, confessional, and pastoral
modalities of power, in which the subject’s position is constructed by these discourses.
The production of self as an object in the world constituted by the practices of self-
constitution, recognition and reflection, the relation to the rule, attention to normative
regulation, and self-constraint to the rules. Indeed, according to Hall’s interpretation,
Foucault did not commit to the term “identity”, but with the term “the relation of the
self”, and “the constitution and recognition of the self”. However, soon it can be known
that it belongs to the problem of identity.7
Meanwhile, Nikolas Rose clearly applied Foucault’s method of genealogy to
analyze identity construction, which he called “the genealogy of subjectification”.8 The
“genealogy of subjectification” is a “field of investigation that comprises the kinds of
attention that humans have directed toward themselves and others in different places,
spaces, and times”, or, it might be said, “our relation to ourselves”. Dimensions of “the
genealogy of subjectification” are problematizations, technologies, authorities,
teleologies, and strategies. Questions around problematizations are about where, how,
and by whom the aspects of the human are being considered problematic, according to
what systems of judgment and in relation to what concerns. All of these are the most
basic problematizations formulated by human beings, which also shape one’s
subjectification. Technological aspects include creatures of freedom, liberty, personal
powers, and self-realization. Human technologies are “hybrid assemblage of knowledge,
instruments, persons, systems of judgment, buildings and spaces, underpinned in
programmatic level by certain presuppositions about, and objectives for, human
beings”.9 Under this theory, examples of human technologies are schools, prisons, and
asylums.
Authorities’ dimensions are concerned with the capacity or claims to speak
truthfully about humans, their nature and problems, and the characteristics of truth
itself. Authorities are governed by legal codes, the market, protocols of bureaucracy, or
professional ethics, together with all of its apparatuses. Teleologies dimension concerns
with the ideals or exemplars of different practices pursued by human beings to obtain a
‘quality of life’. From teleological perspective, someone can identify the peculiarity of a
single model of an individual as an ethical ideal across different sites and practices.
Strategies include the procedures for regulating the capacities of persons related to the
moral, social, or political objectives and also concerning features of populations, society,

6
Foucault in Stuart Hall, “Who Needs Identity?”, 10-11.
7
Stuart Hall, “Who Needs Identity?”, 11-13
8
Nikolas Rose, “Identity, Genealogy, History”, in Hall, S. and du Gay, P. (eds), Questions of
Cultural Identity (London: Sage Publications, 1996).
9
Nikolas Rose, “Identity, Genealogy, History”, 130-131

46 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

or family. In this sense, the strategic dimension is a “way of negotiating” identities

between the internal and external factors of human beings.10
Furthermore, Rose also explores Foucault’s idea of “the government of the self”,
in which ethics is one element. He quotes Foucault: “Ethical practices were distinguished
from the domain of morality, in that moral systems are, by and large, systems of
injunction and interdiction―you should or should not do―and are most frequently
articulated in relation to some relatively formalized code. Ethics refers to the domain of
practical advice as to how one should concern oneself with oneself, make oneself the
subject of solicitude and attention, conduct oneself in the world of one’s everyday
existence”.11
He then expands his view about subjectificaton by quoting Deleuze’s idea about
“the fold of the soul”. The concept of the fold of the soul means that human beings
do not have an internal essentiality, because what is inside is merely a “folding” of what
is external, like a “folding plate”. Therefore, the mode of subjectification of human
beings is merely a folding of what is outside, or, in other words, what is inside human
beings is determined by, and is a reflection of, what is outside oneself. Memory of
oneself, for example, is organized through external aspects, such as rituals, ethical
procedures, regimes of political bureaucracy, and other dimensional matrices of life.12
Relating to religion, Hubert Seiwert questions the identity of religion instead.13
He addresses two questions, the first is: “what constitutes the identity of a religion?”
based on the notion that religious phenomena― religious beliefs, practices, and
institutions―can be regarded as a religion. While the second question he addresses is:
“what makes the identity of a religious system?” based on the notion that religion
always has a system, and each religious system has its own identity. To answer the first
question, he assumed that religious beliefs and practices, religious feelings and
institutions, and all forms of religious life, are part of something more comprehensive
that exists in history, which is considered “cumulative religious traditions”. Therefore,
the identity of religion can be comprehended through historical identity. Historical
identity is a category by which men interpret history and their own place in history. He
concludes that the identity of religion is such a category of subjective meaning by which
historians can understand and recognize it.
Second, the notion of “religious system” based on two assumptions: firstly, a
system must have unity and closure; secondly, a system must persist in time. Based on
those two assumptions, it can be proposed that religious systems may have a “systemic
identity”. One factor that constitutes the systemic identity of religious system is the
norms. A religious system can be regarded as a system of the norms that are reflected in
its teachings. The validity of a system of norms depends on the recognition of authority,
which is defined by the system itself. The other factor is that the system must be able to
identify itself, or can maintain its boundaries through self-reference, by which the
system can identify what belongs to itself and what does not. The boundaries of

10
Ibid., 132-134.
11
Foucault in Nikolas Rose, “Identity, Genealogy, History”, 135.
12
Ibid., 142.
13
Hubert Seiwert, “What Constitutes the Identity of a Religion?”, in Hayes, V.C. (ed.), Identity
Issues and World Religions (Bedford Park, Australia: Australian Association for the Study of
Religion, 1986).

47 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

religious systems are defined by the recognition of the sources of authority on which the
system is founded.14

Religious Identity of the Bajo People

As stated above, the indigenous belief of the Bajo is a form of belief in the Lord
of the sea. The Bajo acknowledge the great power who controls the sea is an incarnation
of their ancestors, which they call Mbo Ma Dilao. In the Bajo language, the term “Mbo”
itself is used to call the elders. Therefore, Mbo Ma Dilao literally means “our great
ancestors who hold power over the sea”.15 The indigenous belief of the Bajo to their
great ancestors who guard the sea is part of their religious identity that is strongly
shaped by their natural environment. It is clear that the identification of the Bajo as the
sea people directly denotes their identity, as the people who live on the sea.
For the Bajo, their natural environment, the sea, is very influential to the
construction of their religious identity, especially to the construction of their indigenous
belief in the Lord of the sea. In their life, the Bajo face natural phenomena which are all
beyond their power and ability to manage, such as storm, big waves, or big streams.
They acknowledge these powers as the powers of their great ancestors who guard the
sea, or Mbo Ma Dilao. The life of the Bajo also depends on sea products, especially fish
and other sea life, which they perceive as the grace and generosity of the Lord of the sea
to them. Therefore, in their life, the Bajo always want to do everything allowed by the
Lord of the sea to obtain their grace and generosity, and avoid doing everything that is
not allowed or prohibited by the Lord of the sea, to avoid their anger to them. All of
these rules are manifested in the pamalis, as the ethical system in the Bajo traditions,
and serve as the ruling guide for the life of the Bajo.
The deeper comprehension of the indigenous belief of the Bajo that is formed
by their natural environment is the belief that cosmologically, the sea is a center or an
epicenter for the life of the Bajo. The Bajo believe that their life is part of all life in the
sea. The Bajo also believe that the sea is the great legacy that their ancestors left to
them, a place to live and as a source for their livelihood. The Bajo believe that the spirit
of their ancestors guards and maintains the sea for them, which enables them to explore
and employ all the resources in the sea for their livelihood. It is the strength of their
indigenous beliefs that allows the Bajo to continue to survive and persist in living on the
sea and refusing to live or to move to the land. When the Bajo move to the land, it is the
same as violating their indigenous beliefs, and is a form of “betrayal” to their great
ancestors. When the Bajo move to the land, they will surely lose their identity as the sea
people and will become land people instead.
Meanwhile, as Muslims, the expression of Islamic faith of the Bajo also cannot
be separated from their natural environment as the sea people, granting them a special
uniqueness and peculiarity that differs from other Muslims who live on land. The Bajo
expression of Islamic faith began from simple one to become a more complex one,
showing the combination of Islamic belief with their indigenous beliefs. Beginning with
their mosque, which they build beside the sea they maintain a motivation to do sacrifice
in honor of their ancestors, showing the strong indication of their indigenous belief in

14
Hubert Seiwert, “What Constitutes the Identity of a Religion?”, 4.
15
See also: Anwar, Kajian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Bajo, Tinjauan Historis dan Kontemporer
(Kendari: Unhalu 2006); Zacot, Orang Bajo: Suku Pengembara Laut (Jakarta: Gramedia, 2008);
Saifuddin, Menjaga Tradisi, Membangun Identitas: Konstruksi Identitas “Orang Laut” di Pulau
Saponda. (CRCS UGM: MA Thesis, 2009).

48 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

the form of ancestors worship in addition to fulfilling what is required of worship in

Islam. They also combine Islamic prayers and incantations in their traditional rituals, and
Islamic values are also symbolized in the requirements of their traditional rituals.
When celebrating Islamic holy Days, the way the Bajo celebrate is unique and
differs from what takes place on land, because they adapt them to the natural
environment of their settlements built over the sea. For example, in the night before
Idul Fitri and Idul Adha, young Bajo Muslims chant takbir (Allahu Akbar) while riding
their boat around their village. They do it on foot only when the sea is at low tide, when
it is impossible for their boats to float. The most unique Islamic celebration of the Bajo
is Idul Adha, where some Bajo do sacrifice at Idul Adha. They bring a goat or a sheep
from the land, and bring it to their settlement on the sea by boat. The Bajo feel that they
have a strong responsibility to do the sacrifice, because they dedicate the sacrifice to
their forefathers. Indeed, in Islamic teaching, it is allowed to dedicate the sacrifice to
someone, but it is not a substantial one. However, for the Bajo, the sacrifice also means
devotions to their forefathers. This belief seems strongly influenced by their indigenous
belief, which is the legacy of ancestor worship, in the form of devotions to their
ancestors who guard the sea.
Therefore, the religious identity of the Bajo is a combination between Islamic
teaching and their indigenous beliefs. This combination is a form of inseparable
integration in totality, which constructs their religious identity, and is not only a form of
syncretism. When syncretism is simply understood as the acceptance of certain
elements from world religions and adapting and adjusting them according to local
cultural contexts, then it is not a form of the religious identity of the Bajo. According to
Aloysius Pieris,16 and followed by Amaladoss,17 syncretism is only an early stage for the
solid combination of two elements of religions or cultures. The more advance stage of
this combination is symbiosis and synthesis. Syncretism is only the mixing of symbols
and other elements of two religions, and synthesis, as the most advanced stage, creates
a new religion that combines elements of two religions. Meanwhile, symbiosis, a middle
stage, integrates two religions in meaningful way, which means one religion integrates
elements from another religion in harmonious way without losing its basic identity.
Based on this view, the religious identity of the Bajo is a symbiosis between Islamic
belief and their indigenous belief.
The important social figures in the Bajo society related to their religious identity
are sanro and imah kampuh. Sanro is a term used by the Bajo to address a person who
has an extraordinary ability, especially concerning his or her knowledge about
customary rule (adat) of the Bajo, and the ability to heal people from sickness. Sanro
usually also prevails as the adat leader. Imah kampuh is a term used by the Bajo to
address the Islamic leader or Islamic figure in their village, who usually lead Islamic
religious rituals or ceremonies. Imah kampuh also prevails as a leader in the local
mosque (imam masjid).18 Those two figures play crucial role in maintaining the religious
identity of the Bajo, as the central figures in the politics of religious identity of the Bajo.

16
Aloysius Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1988).
17
M. Amaladoss, “From Syncretism to Harmony”, Chakana (Vol. 2, No. 4, 2004), 43-60; and
“Double Religious Identity: Is It Possible, Is It Necessary?”, Vidyajyoti journal of Theological
Reflection (Vol. 73 No. 7, June 2009), 519-532.

18
See also: Anwar, Kajian Pendidikan… and Saifuddin, Menjaga Tradisi…

49 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

The Politics of the Religious Identity of the Bajo People

As a religious ethnic group, the Bajo have also developed their own identity
politics to maintain their religious identity. Based on Seiwert’s view, religious identity
cannot be identified by religious phenomena, such as rituals and worships, but it can be
obtained by looking into religion as a system as a whole. Religion as a system, or system
of religion, contains values and norms that can be identified and also can set borders for
the system itself. Therefore, the religious identity of the Bajo, including their religious
identity politics, cannot be identified from their religious expression, such as their ritual
and worship, but it should be identified from their system of religion, which is
manifested in their adat or customs. The adat of the Bajo contains values, norms, and
teachings, which are derived from religious values and teachings followed by the Bajo,
either from their indigenous beliefs or from Islamic faith. The adat of the Bajo is a form
of institutionalization and systematization of the religious belief of the Bajo, which
means their adat serves as the system of religion of the Bajo.
The obedience of the Bajo to their adat (customary) teachings and rules
becomes one of the strongest bonds for them as a society. Because the Bajo adat or
tradition itself is constructed as a combination from their indigenous beliefs and Islamic
teaching, therefore the obedience to their adat at the same time also means the
obedience to their indigenous belief in Mbo Ma Dilao and to Islamic teachings. As it was
stated before, the faith of the Bajo, both to their indigenous belief and to Islam become
the strongest cohesion for them as a society, and without this commitment, the values
of the Bajo society itself will decline and may endanger their existence as a society.
The Islamic faith of the Bajo gives even wider cohesion and commitment, not
only limited to their community, but also to wider community outside their society as
Muslims. Because of their strong commitment to Islamic faith, Islam itself can be one of
main identifiers for the Bajo, or it can be said that Islam is one of the strongest element
of their identity. Indeed, almost all Bajo, wherever they live, they are Muslim, therefore
it can be said that the Bajo, or the sea people, are identical with Muslims. Because the
Bajo are identical with Muslim, they believe that they will get punished or disaster will
strike them if they abandon their Islamic faith or quit Islam.
The strength of the Bajo to uphold their Islamic faith is described by a Bajo
figure, Pak Udin, with his explanation as follows:
“Whoever the Bajo, whenever he or she quits from Islam, or acknowledge that
he or she is not a Muslim, then his or her skin will be damaged. Until (he or she
is) dead. (It prevails) either (for) man or woman. (I) do not know, it is a curse or
something. Whenever a Bajo converts (to any religion other than Islam), then his
or her skin will be damaged.”

One cannot be sure if the description told by Pak Udin is a description based on real
facts, or it is only a metaphoric illustration to depict the curse or disaster that will strike
to the Bajo when they abandon their Islamic faith. It seems that for the Bajo, if they quit
Islam or abandon the Islamic faith it is like a “betrayal” to their life itself because from
when someone was born until he or she enters adulthood, all of the “initiation”
processes are conducted according to the Bajo adat, or tradition that cannot be
separated from Islamic teaching.

50 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

However, Pak Udin’s explanation above is different from the opinion of another
Bajo figure, Pak Manan, who said that there are some Bajo who are not Muslim. They
are the Bajo who have married with Chinese or with other land people who are not
Muslim, and they followed their couple, including converting to another religion,
because they will live on the land following their spouse. Most of the Bajo who
converted to other religion are women. According to Pak Manan, the case of cross-
marriage between the Bajo and land people mostly happen around Kendari, and there is
no such case happening in Wakatobi; or, probably, there are some cases which have
happenened in Wakatobi, but the cross-marriage couple then moved outside Wakatobi.
Actually, when a Bajo who marries and follows their spouse to live on the land, they
already lost their identity as sea people, and furthermore, when they converted to other
religions, they automatically also lose their Islamic identity.
Whether the curse happens if the Bajo abandons their Islamic belief told by Pak
Udin is true or not, actually this illustration is a symbol that represents the identity
politics of the Bajo concerning their belief and their religious identity in general. When
the Bajo abandon their Islamic belief, it is the same as when he or she is betraying the
Bajo adat as the system of religion that prevails in Bajo society. This means that he or
she breaks and disobeys the customary rule of the Bajo society. The Bajo adat is the
system of religion of the Bajo and also has a role to uphold solidarity and commitment,
and to maintain and strengthen the social bonds in the Bajo as a society. Therefore, the
identity politics of the Bajo religious identity is to maintain solidarity and commitment in
the society by maintaining their adat as their system of religion. When a Bajo breaks or
disobey the Bajo adat seriously, for example by abandoning Islamic belief as in the case
described by Pak Manan, then the Bajo society will no longer accept him or her, and he
or she will lose his or her Bajo identity automatically.
Politics of identity deal with maintaining identity, and the strategy to establish
and to strengthen identity is done by transformation of knowledge, which also means
transformation of hegemonic power and discourse. In the process of establishing and
strengthening the religious identity of the Bajo, their indigenous belief is transformed
from one generation to the next in a form of transforming traditional (adat) teaching
and values, in the practices of adat or traditional norms, rules, and pamalis (taboos),
from one to the next generations. All forms of adat teachings, values, and rules are
transformed by the sanro to the Bajo people when he or she leads traditional rituals.
Starting from symbols, meanings, and purposes of ritual, reasons for performance,
symbolic meanings in the requirements of rituals, to pamalis or taboos that should be
obeyed by the Bajo in their daily life, all of them are the forms of transforming
knowledge in order to strengthen their indigenous belief.
Meanwhile, all forms of Islamic worship, norms, and rules in Islamic teachings
are also a form of transforming Islamic knowledge to strengthen the Islamic faith of the
Bajo.19 Here, the role of imah kampuh is crucial to establish and strengthen the Islamic
faith of the Bajo. It is imah kampuh who has responsibility to lead Islamic worships and
prayers in the Bajo village. Imah kampuh also has responsibility to teach basic Islamic

19
It can be compared with the method of teaching Islam in the Sama Bajau people in South
Philippines studied by Patricia Horvatich, “Ways of Knowing Islam” in American Ethnologist (Vol.
21, No. 4, Nov., 1994), 811-826; and from Kazufumi Islamization of the Sama Dilaut in Sabah,
Malaysia (Leiden: IIAS, 2003) and Pirates, Sea Nomads, or Protector of Islam? A Note on Bajau
Identification in Malaysian Context (Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, 2002)

51 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

knowledge to the Bajo children, such as to teach how to recite the Quran, to teach and
to train how to perform and practice basic Islamic worships, such as five times prayer
(shalat), and introducing moral values and basic rules in Islam.
Transformation of knowledge, which also means transformation of power, is
conducted under strict disciplines, where established rules should be obeyed. If the
rules are broken or violated, there are sanctions and punishments as consequences. This
system also prevails in the strengthening the religious identity of the Bajo in both
aspects, in their indigenous belief and their Islamic faith. In their indigenous belief, if
they break or disobey the pamali, they will get bala or a disaster will happen to them.
For example, if they had an unethical attitude or spoke improper words when they were
sailing in the sea, they will get “punishment” by the guardian of the sea. They might get
bala or a disaster, such as a storm or big waves will strike them, they might get lost
while sailing, or they may not get a good harvest and will come back with empty hands.
Meanwhile, to strengthen their Islamic faith, Islamic norms and rules also should be
obeyed, and if they break or violate the Islamic rule, then they are considered as sinful
and will be punished by Allah. All of them are the forms of strict disciplines to maintain
the religious identity of the Bajo.
Moreover, in the view of Rose, who also used Foucault’s concept, the form of
discipline is a mechanism of “self control”, in which ethics is the most important
element. In the life of the Bajo, it can be said that their system of ethics is constructed
based on two main sources of values, which are values from their indigenous belief and
values from Islam. Values from their indigenous belief take forms in various kinds of
pamali as a system of taboo consist of forbidden things that should not to be done and
other values based on their adat or traditions. Values from Islam also prevail at the
same condition, which contain anything that should and should not to be done in life
according to Islamic teaching. A system of ethics therefore has an important role in the
construction of religious identity of the Bajo.
If compared to Althusser’s view, who said that the construction of identity is a
result of an interpellation between subject and “ideological apparatuses”, then all
elements involved in the transformation of knowledge in the construction of the Bajo
religious identity described above can be considered as “ideological apparatuses”.
Among those “ideological apparatuses”, the most important figures are sanro and imah
kampuh, as the traditional leader and Islamic leader in the Bajo community, who
introduces, teaches, and maintains traditional or adat values and Islamic values for the
Bajo. Besides the key roles played by those two figures, there are secondary roles played
by other figures, such as the role of the elders and other social figures, the role of
ustadz or imah kampuh’ assistants, and the role of the Bajo parents who introduce and
teach traditional or adat values and basic Islamic values to their children. Meanwhile,
the knowledge of the Bajo traditions, or adat teaching and Islamic teaching, is a form of
“ideology” itself, which is introduced and taught to the Bajo to establish and strengthen
their religious identity.
Recall Rose’ view, who applied Foucault’s method and proposed that the
construction of identity is done through a “genealogy of subjectification” process, which
has five dimensions, include formulation of problems, technology, power, teleology, and
strategy. All of those five dimensions will be used to see the construction of the religious
identity of the Bajo. First, the formulation of problems is determined by the natural
environment. In the case of the Bajo, they are sea people, which determines their belief
in the great power of their ancestors who guard the sea, and how they adapt in their life

52 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

based on this belief. Since receiving influences from Islam, they have reformulated their
problems and how their life is in accordance with Islamic teaching.
Second, the dimension of technology. This does not refer to the technology that
is employed by the Bajo, but rather it means all systems of knowledge, tools, and
people, which are integrated as a system and employed to achieve the objectives of the
Bajo. The example described above can illustrate the dimension of technology, where
the role of sanro and imah kampuh who taught traditional values and Islamic teaching to
establish and maintain the religious identity of the Bajo. This illustration is also related
to the third dimension, which is the dimension of power, where the process of
transformation of knowledge also means transformation of power, involving strict
procedures and disciplines, ethics, and ideology done by ideological apparatuses.
Fourth, the dimension of teleology is related to the ideal and makes it the main
objective. For the Bajo as the sea people, to be an excellent sailor who can conquer the
wild of the sea is the ideal and becomes the main objective in their life. Besides this, to
be a devout Muslim (taqwa) to Allah has also become a religious ideal for the Bajo.
Therefore, the dimension of teleology is closely related to the fifth dimension, the
dimension of strategy, which includes efforts and exertions to reach the ideals and
objectives. The strategy to reach the ideals has been formulated and implemented since
the beginning, when a baby is bathed with seawater, as a request and hope that he will
be an excellent sailor in the future. A similar strategy is also applied in the process of
pasunatan or circumcision ritual, as a point that someone is entering adulthood and has
left childhood, meaning that he or she is ready to bear the obligation to perform what is
required and to abandon what is prohibited in Islam, as the basic requirements to be a
devout Muslim.

Conclusion
The religious identity of the Bajo is a strong combination, or a form of symbiosis,
of their indigenous belief in the Lord of the sea and Islamic belief. The politics of
religious identity of the Bajo is a way to maintain and uphold their religious identity. The
politics of religious identity of the Bajo is practiced by maintaining the Bajo adat or
customs, in which religious values, norms, and teachings are derived from their
indigenous belief and Islamic belief. The strategy to apply politics of religious identity of
the Bajo is also done by transformation of knowledge. The sanro or the Bajo adat leader
is the central figure in transforming adat teachings, values, and rules to the Bajo people
in traditional rituals. Meanwhile, the imah kampuh or the Bajo Islamic leader has
responsibilities to lead Islamic worships, and transform Islamic rules and teachings to
strengthen the Islamic faith of the Bajo people.
This is precisely the function of the politics of identity, which is how to manage
and maintain identity, what elements should be defended and retained, and what other
elements can be changed or developed. Based on Aristotelian categories, politics of
identity defend the substantial element of identity and determine what are accidental
elements of identity that can be changed, depending on certain conditions and
circumstances. In the Bajo religious identity, the combination of their indigenous belief
and Islamic belief is the substantial element that cannot be changed. However, their
religious practices as an expression of their religiosity are accidental elements that can
be changed and developed, depending on certain conditions.

53 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

Bibliography

Ahimsa-Putra, H.S. Strukturalisme Levi-Strauss. Yogyakarta: Kepel Press, 2006.

Amaladoss, M. “From Syncretism to Harmony” in Chakana, Vol. 2, No. 4,

2004, 43-60.

____________. 2009. “Double Religious Identity: Is It Possible, Is It

Necessary?” in Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection, Vol. 73
No. 7, June 2009, 519-532.

Anwar. Kajian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Bajo, Tinjauan Historis dan

Kontemporer (unpublished paper), Kendari: Univ. Haluoleo, 2006.

Grossberg, L. “Identity and Cultural Studies: Is That All There Is?”

in Hall, S. and du Gay, P. (eds) Questions of Cultural Identity.
London: Sage Publications, 1996.

Hall, S. “Who Needs Identity?” in Hall, S. and du Gay, P. (eds)

Questions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage Publications, 1996.

Horvatich, P. “Ways of Knowing Islam” in American Ethnologist Vol. 21,

No. 4, Nov. 1994, 811-826.

Kazufumi, N. “Islamization of the Sama Dilaut in Sabah, Malaysia”, IIAS

Newsletter No. 31, July 2003. Leiden: IIAS.

___________ . “Pirates, Sea Nomads, or Protector of Islam? A Note on

Bajau Identification in Malaysian Context”. Paper presented at the 16th
conference of IAHA. Kota Kinabalu, Sabah: 2002,

Pieris, A. An Asian Theology of Liberation, Maryknoll, New York: Orbis

Books, 1988.

Rose, N. “Identity, Genealogy, History”, in Hall, S. and du Gay, P.

(eds) Questions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage Publications, 1996.

Saifudin. Menjaga Tradisi, Membangun Identitas: Konstruksi Identitas

“Orang Laut” di Pulau Saponda. M.A. Thesis (unpublished).
Yogyakarta: CRCS, Universitas Gadjah Mada, 2009.

Seiwert, H. “What Constitutes the Identity of a Religion?” in Hayes,

V.C. (ed.) Identity Issues and World Religions. Bedford Park, Australia:
Australian Association for the Study of Religion, 1986.

54 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)

 Benny Baskara, Irwan Abdullah, Djoko Suryo

Sicakkan, H. and Lithman, Y. “Politics of Identity, Modes of Belonging,

and Citizenship: an Overview of Conceptual and Theoretical Challenges”
in Sicakkan, H. and Lithman, Y. (eds.) Changing the Basis of Citizenship
in the Modern State. Political Theory and the Politics of Diversity. United
Kingdom: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2005.

Zacot, F.R. Orang Bajo, Suku Pengembara Laut. trans. Fida Muljono and
Ida Budi Pranoto. Jakarta: Gramedia-EFEO-FJP, 2008.

55 | En Arche, Vol. 3, No. 1 (2014)