If one were a graduate of an Islamic university, would a career as a Malaysian mufti, JAKIM official, or MUI ulama be a good option? During my interview with the Perak mufti, Harussani Zakaria, he remarked, “People say the state instructs me what to do. I have served for 28 years and never once did the Perak chief minister tell me what to do […] I don't follow his instructions. Islamic laws are clear!” Likewise, Amirsyah Tambunan, MUI vice-secretary, said, “People think Suharto is so powerful that he can influence everybody. However, MUI has always been independent!” These dilemmas facing official ulama have been the heart of this book.

Existing writings by Islamic studies scholars have been generally sceptical about the power of official ulama to influence states and politicians who are in power. The common perception is that ulama cannot fulfil the tasks Islam has entrusted to them as legatees of the Prophet once they co-operate with the ruling elites. In other words, once ulama serve within state-sponsored institutions, they lose the autonomy to make credible and objective religious judgements. Saeed's account, which opened this study, argues for the decline in authority of the official ulama in the modern world. Non-official ulama interviewed during my fieldwork also felt that participation in state-sponsored institutions compromises ulama's authority.

Nevertheless, the findings of this book suggest that co-operating with the state does not necessarily detract from the official ulama's authority or power. The preceding chapters demonstrate how Indonesian and Malaysian ulama responded to and capitalised on state co-optation. Instead of being passive actors receiving orders from the states that co-opted them, ulama have devised strategies to capture parts of the state based on the objectives they had set for themselves.

Recent scholarship on Middle Eastern ulama which has also questioned the perception that official ulama are passive or biddable. Meir Hatina (2009b), Levy (1983), Marsot (1973) and Al-Atawneh (2009) underscore official ulama's ability to resist state co-optation and determine their own agenda. This book builds on these scholars’ observations and, at the same time, applies political science theories such as corporatism and state-in-society to conceptualise its empirical findings.