Resolutions of Conflicts among Radical Beliefs through the Wisdom of Cultural Values

: This study seeks to identify a form of cultural reconciliation applied by the community to the radical belief clash between Dayak Indramayu mysticism and the Muslim community in Indramayu Regency, West Java, Indonesia. This study employed a strategy for resolving cultural conflicts by collecting data via observation and in-depth interviews with both parties. This investigation yielded multiple findings. First, the fight between Dayak Indramayu and Muslims in the Indramayu Regency is a religious dispute. The crisis began when the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) labelled Dayak Indramayu group as heretical. Following the labelling, Dayak Indramayu responded by criticizing Islamic religious leaders who engage in numerous unethical behaviours. Second, although this dispute affected religious leaders on both sides, it had no effect on the religious followers at the grassroots level. Thirdly, religious conflicts involving religious leaders and beliefs can naturally lessen due to the community-owned and religious leader-guided cultural framework. The author identifies this as a cultural resolution to religious problems. This study contributes to two aspects. First, as a model for resolving interfaith problems that can be replicated abroad through the application of cultural values' wisdom. Second, this idea of resolution contributes to the corpus of religious studies on the management of religious conflicts founded in radical views.


Introduction
Current research on the discourse of religious conflict resolution in Indonesia focuses on multiple contexts. Some of them concentrated on religious education (Kusuma, 2018;Moedjiono, 2005), religious tolerance (Wibisono, 2021), and the function of religious leaders (Najib, 2005). Conflict resolution using processes of cultural systems has not been generally practiced (Ode, 2015;Prasojo & Pabbajah, 2020). Whereas religious conflicts typically include the community and involve disagreements in religious views and attitudes.
Society is not an abstract concept separate from culture (Narwaya, 2013). Culture and society are inseparable, complementary aspects of a single whole (Asyrafunnisa & Abeng, 2019). Therefore, it is necessary to consider cultural components that they have so far adhered to and put into practice in their everyday lives to understand the conflicts that arise in society, especially religious disputes.
Dayak Indramayu is a contentious form of mysticism among the people since the genuine deity is the universe, and the universe is the one that has provided all of the human necessities for life. However, it is different belief from Muslims in general, who hold the belief that God is the one should be believed and the one who creates the universe as has been conveyed by the prophets through revelation they received. The conflict resulted in such discrimination to the group. Discrimination against the Dayak group is rooted in the Dayaks' unique religious beliefs that set them apart from the rest of society (Nasution, 2013). They received insult and scorn from the society. Finally, the Supervision of Religions and Beliefs (Pakem) of Indramayu Regency has issued a heretical fatwa, the most severe form of public condemnation. Pakem officially decided that the Dayaks should split since they were causing problems for the locals (Ma'mun, 2013).
The decision of the Pakem team against Dayak Indramayu indicates that religious divisions in Indonesia are not yet reconciled with the Constitution. Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution (UUD 1945) guarantees religious freedom in its full as a fundamental human right that must be maintained and defended. The judgement against the Dayak Indramayu exemplifies the widespread prejudice against the world's numerous religious sects.
This research aims to compare the conflict resolution strategies employed by each group. Therefore, beneficial ideas for reconciling religious tensions in society can be gained from this article. This study examines how Dayak Indramayu and Islamic religious leaders in Indramayu utilize cultural conflict resolution to develop a contemporary relationship model.

Method
The goal of this study is to investigate how the Dayak Indramayu and MUI came to a resolution of their disagreement by drawing on their respective cultural beliefs. Since the violence first broke out in 2007, researchers have been collecting data up until the present day. This was done because, during that span of time, there were multiple stages, beginning with the process of initially issuing issues, moving on to the open conflict phase, having the government intervene by issuing heretical fatwas and dissolving the group decisions in 2012. And finally, the conflict resolution phase and maintaining the results of the decisions until the conflict subsided.
This research employs a descriptive analytic methodology. This study employed a qualitative research approach that empirically examines objects, thinks inductively and deductively, explains the entire phenomenon, and draws conclusions from general to specific. In terms of scientific domains, it employs an inter-disciplinary approach that encompasses the sociology of religion and cultural science. A qualitative approach is viewed as a research method that can generate descriptive data in the form of written or spoken words from individuals and observable behaviour (Kahmad, 2000). This research employs both a case study and a life-behaviour method in an effort to concentrate more on the research object.
Observation, interviews, and documentation were used to collect data utilizing triangulation approaches. This research falls under the category of field research. Observations were made by visiting to the village of Krimun, located in the subdistrict of Kandanghaur, Indramayu regency, and observing every conflict-related occurrence there. Through conversations with the leaders and members of Dayak Indramayu, the data from the observations were confirmed. Multiple interviews were conducted until the data was saturated and no longer changed. While documentation procedures were carried out by collecting books that serve as guides for Dayak Indramayu in performing rituals of worship and interacting with humans and nature, books are also utilized to preserve Dayak Indramayu.

Results and Discussion
Dayak Indramayu is a community that has different beliefs from society in general. They do not believe in God as adherents of other religions believe (Afifah & Soedarsono, 2021;Umam, 2016). Dayak Indramayu believes that the real God is nature. They assume that human life is completely created from nature, and will return to nature. The nature they mean is everything that makes humans dependent on it.
Nature is regarded as the greatest force in life. Nothing is more powerful than the forces of nature. Thus, Dayak Indramayu community seeks to get closer to nature and explore all knowledge and beliefs through a direct learning process from nature and human life. So that this flow can be called a flow of belief that seeks the authenticity of life.
Takmad 1 is traditionally credited with founding the first Dayak Indramayu martial arts school. This martial arts school (silat) underwent a series of name changes before settling on Dayak as its central tenet. Where, their belief is completely based on the grace of nature, and nothing outside of that.
Nature, according to Dayak, gives life to all living things, including humans, animals, and plants. Through nature, mankind takes advantage of nature's gifts to sustain life. They view the existence of sun as the source of life for all living things, providing them with the energy and strength to grow. Water is a component of nature, the source of life. Without water, living organisms, including people, cannot survive. The elements that nature provides for all living things, especially humankind, are sun, water, soil, and air.
Dayak Indramayu repays nature's generosity by establishing complete obedience to nature through the living principle of sejarah alam ngaji rasa (Umam, 2016). This community embraces the gifts of nature by adhering to the concept of nature's grace. Additionally, their religious practices attempt to respect nature. This belief distinguishes them from other religious devotees in Indramayu Regency.

The Conflict of Dayak Indramayu
Accepting religious ideas that differ from those of a religion group is difficult (Ahimsa-Putra, 2012). In addition, it alludes to the existence of God. An individual or religious group will feel endangered or, at the very least, angered by these opposing perspectives. Eventually, these glaring disparities give birth to discriminatory behavior between the dominant and the weak (Hatu, 2010). This kind of practice happened to Dayak Indramayu community in 2007.
The dispute between Dayak Indramayu and religious groups as well as the government institutions became visible due to differences in beliefs without mutual understanding. This was signed by the creation of various statements published by both parties evaluating the other party. Conflicts related to the existence of Dayak Indramayu and problematic religious beliefs are mapped and listed in the following table 1. Bakorpakem/ Attorney Issuance of Fatwa that the group is perverted The confrontations between Dayak Indramayu and various government entities in Indramayu District are summarized in Table 1. The nature of the aforementioned conflicts varies according to the areas of activity and topics each organization focuses on. The rivalry between Dayaks Indramayu and the Indonesian Ulema Council of Indramayu Regency is centred on Dayaks Indramayu ' religious beliefs, which are deemed to diverge from Islamic principles. By recognizing that humans were formed by nature and will return to nature, this position rejects the presence and might of Allah SWT, who Muslims firmly hold to be the creator and controller of all life.
In Indramayu, the dispute between Dayak Indramayu and MUI is a type of conflict with a very high level of escalation. Due to the fact that this inter-institutional conflict was the genesis of subsequent confrontations between Dayak Indramayu and other government institutions. The MUI's opposition to the existence of Dayak Indramayu gave rise to an extreme stance, namely the proclamation of a heretical fatwa against the Dayak's activities (Jumhari, 2015).
Dayak Indramayu responded to the statement released by MUI Indramayu by questioning the existence of religion in society. According to Dayak Indramayu, religion, as represented by clergy (ulama), frequently demonstrates attitudes that are opposed to their human values and fundamental ethical principles. Such as the incidents committed by Islamic elites in some of their religious institutions by misusing the financial and religious authority over the congregation, as well as by engaging in filthy, like lustful behavior.
Frequently, Dayak Indramayu consider that the Islamic religious elite cannot offer a example or model for their followers. They illustrate the mentality of a religious elite who requests that individuals pay zakat and alms, yet the religious elite can only communicate and cannot set an example. In reality, there are religious elites who misuse zakat and congregational contributions. For Dayak Indramayu, the approach to religion is unsophisticated because the leaders do not provide a religious role model. Religion is only a mask for the desires of a small privileged group. Similarly, Dayak Indramayu also brought the issue of sexual harassment performed by the religious elite on their adherents. They believe that the religion of the main religious group cannot serve as a guide for its people since its elites frequently engage in unethical behavior.
Cases of abuse and immoral behaviour disclosed by Dayak Indramayu toward the religious elite demonstrate that Dayak Indramayu present themselves as a community that rejects these attitudes. Because they believe that religion should help individuals become better. Utilizing the influence of the religious elite solely to satisfy personal desires is an inappropriate approach. Criticism of religion by Dayak Indramayu, based on the unfavorable attitudes displayed by the religious elite, is an expression of their radical view of their own beliefs and an attempt to fight other different organizations.
In addition to the MUI, Dayak Indramayu frequently engage in contest with government organizations. Both village government departments and other government departments. These disputes are either open or resolved. Dayak Indramayu and the village authorities disagree about their identity. There are certain government regulations that this group does not adhere to. They declined to put the religion column on their Identity Cards (KTP) because their religion was not among the six recognized by the government. This prompted the government to take action by censure and summoning its leader, Mr. Takmad. However, this was progressively permitted by the village authority since, according to them, only one member of the Dayak Indramayu tribe, Mr. Takmad, refused to sign a KTP.
Against Islamic religious leaders, Dayak Indramayu frequently questions the role of religion in guarding their followers. And they conclude that seeing religion is only selling its leaders, as mentioned above. The tendency to be critical of the government and religious institutions has made Dayak Indramayu involved in conflict with these two institutions. This conflict led to the issuance of a dissolution fatwa for this group. As a consequence, the Dayak Community must interact with the government through the Institute for Supervision of Community Beliefs (Pakem), a government organization created to fight sects that are regarded deviant or heretical for reasons of unsettling people's beliefs and indicators of belonging to deviant sects.
Members  (1) and (2), Law no. 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights article 22 paragraph (1) and (2), as well as Law no. 12 of 2005 concerning Ratification of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Komnas HAM is of the opinion that the government has no right to restrict citizens from embracing religions and beliefs (Japar, Syarifa, & Fadhilah, 2020). Restrictions can only be made if they are deemed to disturb public order and security, those restrictions must also be carried out or regulated by existing laws.
A number of non-governmental organizations and humanitarian workers have also been involved in the Indramayu Dayak's fight for full citizenship rights. On a number of occasions, Dayak Indramayu was invited to national and international gatherings centered on religious ideas. There have been numerous scientific studies on Dayak Indramayu culture from a variety of perspectives.
According to this organization, local religious leaders have come around to the idea that their teachings are authentic, but they are afraid to make this information public out of concern for their reputations. Some of the individuals I attempted to question, however, came to the conclusion that not all local religious authorities confirmed this teaching; some considered them as heretical, while others viewed them as kebatinan, depending on the perspective and paradigm of each figure.
According to the justification presented previously, the findings of this study demonstrate that religious radicalism might have multiple interpretations. Let's begin with "inner radicalism", which refers to a person's unwavering allegiance to a religious teaching due to a profound belief in the theory's veracity. Almost certainly, all adherents of a certain religion possess something. Because without a strong religious foundation, faith would never amount to anything. Sociologically speaking, this viewpoint will grow more established if those outside the group challenge it.
Second, radicalism from the outside (external radicalism) is the typical response of a group whose members hold a strong conviction but also view the ideas of other groups as errors that must be corrected. When radicalism within one group collides with the ideas of another group that is considered as separate, violent confrontations are inevitable.
The conflict that occurred between Dayak Indramayu community and outsiders with opposing perspectives proved that the group possessed radical beliefs. This ideology will serve as the impetus for resistance movements when confronted with other different groups. Despite the fact that latent tensions are not always apparent, they are reasonably simple to recognize. And at some time, it will manifest as physical resistance, in the form of attacks or rejections of the rules established by the side viewed as the opponent.
The confrontation between Dayak Indramayu and the MUI, the Police, and the Attorney General's Office is obvious and can be defined as follows: 1.
Initially, a religious movement emerged in a society apart from the dominant group. This action is communal and performed entirely for the group.

2.
There are claims that the presence and activity of the new organization disturbs certain parties.

3.
It is feared that the group will influence more persons because it is regarded to substantially impact society. 4.
Concerned groups utilize government authorities to undertake research on these aberrant groups.

5.
The majority of studies employ merely the reporter's perspective, without attempting to analyze and understand the reported perspective. 6.
The results of the study imply that the reported group will receive the negative stigma and participate in deception. Their paradigm excludes human rights concerns in religious belief. 7.
The government responded to the situation by assigning a negative status to the reported group. Until a decision is made to dismantle the considered deviant group. 8.
The reported group attempted radical resistance in order to counterattack the opposing party (the reporter and those who assisted). Figure 1 illustrates the concept of a radical behavior anchored in internal beliefs and manifested in actions of resistance in response to pressure from a threatening adversary. Thus, radicalism is not formed in a vacuum; rather, it is the consequence of two factors combining to produce an act of resistance aimed at negating the opponent on both the discursive and physical levels. The adversary (opponent) may appear on its own and constitute a threat, or it may be an invention (imagination) created by a group in an effort to strengthen bonds (solidarity) between groups.

Conflicts Resolution among Radical Beliefs through the Wisdom of Cultural Values
The fact that the conflict between Dayak Indramayu and the MUI, the Village Government, the Police, and Pakem is public demonstrates that it is an open conflict. According to various national web media reports, this is shown by the ease with which individuals may access information and news about the conflict in the mass media (NU Online, 2007;Suryanto, 2007).
The abundance of reporting about the confrontation indicates that the topics being fought over are fundamental. According to Lewis Coser, a struggle between two parties over fundamental problems or ideals will threaten the social stability (Poloma, 2013). The belief in the divine's nature is the essence of religion. If the issue of divinity is litigated, the defendant will respond. In this manner, the MUI organization responded to Dayak Indramayu, which resulted in a heretical fatwa and its destruction.
On the other hand, the tremendous intensity of the confrontation between Dayak Indramayu and their adversaries demonstrates that each faction thinks and acts in an extreme manner. This is demonstrated by the attempts made by both sides to refute the views of their respective opponents. The initial attempt to dismiss the perspectives of groups deemed distinct was made. On numerous times, Dayak Indramayu attempts to disparage Muslims, which is offensive. Moreover, this criticism is conducted by challenging the presence of God, which is a fundamental belief for Muslims.
On the other hand, the Muslim community represented by the MUI carried out an "attack" back on Dayak Indramayu by examining their existence based on the MUI's assessment standards which resulted in heretical decisions or fatwas for the beliefs and activities of Dayak Indramayu. Unquestionably, the MUI based its arguments on a number of Qur'anic propositions. One of the arguments used is the Al-Qur'an (QS.) An-Nisa verse 136 which means, "Whoever disbelieves in Allah, His angels, His books, and the day after, then verily that person has gone astray." In addition, MUI Indramayu also based their claim on QS. An-Nisa verses 80, 59, 105, and 150-151, as well as several traditions of the Prophet In this context, the efforts made by MUI Indramayu have rooted efforts because they use the main references of Muslims, namely the Qur'an and Hadith.
Seeing the various efforts made by each group in responding to the other group in an intense manner and basing their judgment on the opposing party on views originating from fundamental references (religious propositions) demonstrates a radical attitude, as both sides attempt to defend their beliefs while attacking the beliefs of the other side.
The term radical has a fundamental meaning or gets to the fundamentals of something. In the meantime, radicalism is described as "thinking or movement that desires social and political transformation or renewal in a severe or extreme manner" (Yunus, 2017). Thus, we can temporarily conclude that both groups, particularly the Losarang Dayak and the MUI of Indramayu, employed extreme measures in response to other parties (opponents). Then, are they both members of the extreme group?
As noted previously, Sartono Kartodidjo developed the term radicalism to characterize the (peasant) protest movement that defied all existing laws and orders while employing religious symbols. Radical signifies a total rejection of all current conditions (Effendi, 1998). Dayak Indramayu and MUI Indramayu's only action was to criticize one party against another. This objection is incapable of serving as a persuasive legal argument due to its nature. In contrast, neither party's actions have reached the mass movement attempting to transform the current order.
Horace M. Kallen's also proposed an idea of radicalism. According to him, at least three broad characteristics characterize radicalism (Kallen, 1996). First, radicalism is a response to ongoing conditions. Responses typically consist of evaluation, rejection, or even resistance. The rejected concerns may take the form of assumptions, conceptions, institutions, or ideals that are deemed responsible for the continuation of the rejected conditions. Second, radicalism does not end with rejection; it continues to aspire to replace the current system with a new one. This characteristic indicates that radicalism has its own ideology or worldview. Extremists are exerting significant effort to replace the current order with this order. Therefore, according to the meaning of the term radical, a radical attitude requires a desire to fundamentally modify the circumstances.
The third characteristic of radicals is their unwavering belief in the reality of the program or ideology they support. This perspective is accompanied by a denial of the realities of the system being replaced. In the name of ideal values such as 'populist' or 'humanity,' social movements frequently mix beliefs about the adequacy of plans or philosophies with tactics of achieving their goals. However, the intensity of this belief may lead radicals to adopt emotional attitudes.
The activities of Dayak Indramayu, MUI Indramayu, and other government officials only meet two of Kallen's principles, particularly the first concept, which requires a response to each party's presence. According to Dayak Indramayu, the existence of religious individuals has not established the religion's fundamental principles. Dayak Indramayu would have a tough time believing in an immaterial god, hence there are also criticisms of concepts regarding the concept of divinity. MUI Indramayu has done comprehensive studies in reaction to the presence of Dayak Indramayu, both internally within MUI and in collaboration with other government institutions that are part of the Monitoring Team for Community Beliefs (Pakem).
Neither group's motions provide credence to Kallen's second proposition, which would seek to alter the status quo. Due to the fact that they can only make formal, discursive decisions and carry them out orally. This commodity is not amenable to efforts to alter each party's social hierarchy, which is a major drawback.
Meanwhile, it has been shown that Kallen's third statement holds true for both groups: that there is a very powerful perspective that opposes the opposing position. Dayak Indramayu considers their guiding concept in life to be the last, undeniable truth. Many of their actions prove this to be the case. while condemning and denying the truths held by competing groups. When unchecked, this criticism leads to the essential beliefs of its opponents, such as the idea of divinity, the principle of immortality of the genesis of life, and a number of ethical values in life.
On the other hand, the MUI provides a comprehensive perspective of its beliefs. Based on the primary arguments that become religious references, the MUI is extremely committed to defending its core values. However, at the same time, they will be forced to confront those who initiate the campaign of latent views entrenched inside their own. A religious mass group issued a fatwa in an attempt to deprive the opposing party in the conflict with Dayak Indramayu the ultimate weapon. In addition, it is common knowledge that religious fatwas issued by religious organizations in a democratic nation like Indonesia cannot serve as a legal basis. It is merely an appeal without the ability to compel.
Viewed from the perspective of Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby, Dayak Indramayu and MUI Indramayu's methods can be categorized as a fundamentalist movement. As expressed by Marty and Appleby regarding fundamentalism's criterion (Martin & Appleby, 1993).
Fundamentalism is characterized by a fighting mentality. Among them is fighting back against groups that threaten their existence or identity, putting their lives at risk. They fight to sustain ideals that pertain to all aspects of life, including the family and other social institutions.
Fundamentalists contend with a framework of values or identities derived from both historical legacies and contemporary constructions. Deviant religious groupings or social structures are therefore also a target of their opposition. Lastly, fundamentalists are distinguished by their engagement in conflict in the name of God or other ideas. The fundamentalist movement's intellectual framework has its own logic. Fundamentalists have a high propensity to reject historical and hermeneutical approaches to interpreting the Bible. In addition to being exclusive, this movement clearly distinguishes its group from other groups. This movement gave rise to what is now known as identity politics.
According to Appleby's perspective, Dayak Indramayu movement is ultimately viewed as the movement that gave rise to identity politics. Similar to Coser, a group's identity will develop as it struggles against the presence of other groups. The author now recognizes that Dayak Indramayu can gain benefits in their religious conflict with the MUI and other government agencies.
What's left of the war? This question should be asked to determine the size of the influence of these social processes. Almost every individual in social relationships relies on others to meet his needs. Protracted conflict will only result in the accumulation of several losses. Social relations between individuals deteriorate, and parties in conflict eventually reach a saturation threshold of conflict.
Similarly, Dayak Indramayu and MUI Indramayu, who represented Muslims, engaged in the conflict. The disagreement peaked between 2007 and 2012 and reached a turning point. As previously indicated, when this research was conducted, a significant number of respondents expressed a more tolerant perspective of other competing groups.
As pointed out by the following Dayak Indramayu WR adherents: The essence of all religions is excellent, as they teach noble virtues taught by the chosen people of God. Although it will be challenging to perform as instructed by the chosen human. As with the Prophet Muhammad in Islam, the splendor of the Prophet Muhammad cannot be followed by humans so long as his followers continue to pursue religious teachings solely from the sacred scriptures of religion, without relying on their own strength to "pray the taste" (WR, Dayak Indramayu follower, Personal Communication, August 26, 2019).
This implication suggests two things. First, Dayak Indramayu continue to stick to their own living principles. This is what the author refers to as inner radicalism, a belief that arises from within based on the community's teachings. A determination that has been imprinted for a very long time and possibly will continue to endure for a very long time. Second, the remark demonstrates admiration for other groups. Particularly religious groups that have opposed them in a dispute of beliefs.
Other evidence indicates that the religious conflict between Dayak Indramayu and Muslims has subsided. This is demonstrated by the mutual understanding between the parties. The author acquired this information from the nearby religious community. According to RR, food vendors in the vicinity of Dayak Indramayu hermitage complex. He stated that his relationship with Dayak Indramayu community was similar to his interaction with regular people. Attendance is guaranteed when each party hosts a celebration and invites the other. So, contrary to what the media has portrayed in previous years, there is no conflict and everything is operating regularly. Regarding deeds, both rewards and punishments are carried by its own individual ( Based on the viewpoints of some of the aforementioned informants, we may conclude that the conflict that once existed between Dayak Indramayu and Muslims is no longer observable in contemporary culture. Each party respects the other's group views and beliefs, so that disagreements are not an issue. The conflict resolution proposed by both parties reveals an observable reality. Both sides have fulfilled a number of conditions for a conflict resolution. Syafuan Rozi outlines four steps in conflict resolution (Rozi et al., 2006, p. 382), they are: 1.
Conflict de-escalation stage.
The peace building stage. Dayak Indramayu conflict is unique, and it will not be possible to resolve it using all of the methods outlined above. Stages one and two occur in situations where a high risk of physical harm is present. In Dayak Indramayu setting, the third and fourth stages occur when each party makes the efforts to avoid underlying conflict.
In the third and fourth stages, problem-solving approach and peace-building, it can be summed up as each party's desire to try to open up to and appreciate the diverse viewpoints of the other party without attempting to judge them as the guilty party. This has been accomplished by both parties; both Dayak Indramayu and Muslims in Indramayu have acknowledged the existence of the other. In addition, the willingness of each party to create a conducive environment is crucial in conflict resolution. At the stage of peace building, the desired peace activities are refined. Specifically, cultural and structural efforts. In this situation, it takes considerable time to achieve permanent peace. It is essential to anticipate the willingness of parties with authority to act objectively and impartially in dispute resolution (Abdul, 2014).

Conclusion
The year 2012 marked the height of the religious conflict between Dayak Indramayu and MUI and Muslims in Indramayu. This conflict reveals a specific pattern of extremism. Each side resorted to extreme tactics in response to the actions of the other. Nevertheless, based on the theories offered, it does not represent social radicalism, as shown by efforts to change the order of other parties viewed as opponents. But limited to discourse in the form of an assessment of how the party viewed the opponent. Only the conviction of a life viewpoint retained in the heart is radicalism (inner radicalism). As said, Dayak Indramayu presented a view regarding the behavior of the religious elite that was judged inconsistent with the essential ideals of the faith.
Meanwhile, the MUI of Indramayu analyzed Dayak Indramayu's behavior and stimuli in great detail. Based on the results of their study, the MUI of Indramayu deemed Dayak Indramayu heretical. This fatwa persuaded the Indramayu Regency's Religion and Belief Monitoring Team (Pakem) to abolish this community. Similar to fatwas and Attorney General's Office judgements, which are vulnerable to multiple interpretations in their application, these decisions remain nonbinding public discourse. Due to the fact that Dayak Indramayu continues to exist and engage in typical activities to this day.
Since 2012, the conflict has began to decline as a result of many parties taking concrete steps to reduce the dispute, which they believe has had no beneficial impact on human relations. The conflict between Dayak Indramayu and the MUI of Indramayu subsided due to their attempts to comprehend and value one another's perspectives. On the other hand, these initiatives are also supported by the common cultural values of each religious elite on both sides, including both Dayak Indramayu and the Muslims, as represented by local religious leaders.
This research has identified patterns of extreme behavior in religious disputes on the north coast from an academic approach. In addition to having disclosed ideas and concrete measures for resolving religious conflicts between groups of the Beliefs and those of the majority religion. For future research, it is proposed to delve deeper into Dayak Indramayu's involvement in practical politics, which has the potential to serve as a wedge between the government and the Dayaks, so that the once-obvious tensions are no longer visible and tend to coexist.