Assalamualikum Tip
Maybe we are splitting hairs over nothing because I agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph. I implied the same thing when I wrote what I wrote in our email group yesterday about our need to focus on our children's Islamic foundation so that they become Islamic Architects, lawyers, engineers etc. I've got a sneaky feeling that we are disagreeing to agree.
It's true that I read about "Plastic Words". I read it, understood it, agreed with it and thought it was worthwhile to share with my friends. I didn't just transmit it just because it was printed in a book. And, I discovered the phrase in a book by William Chittick titled "Science of the kCosmos, Science of the Soul", subtitled "The Pertinence of Islamic Cosmology in the Modern World". He has written/translated dozens of books on Sufism and Islamic Thought so he is every bit as Islamic as Syed Qutb. However, you might find him objectionable because he is a Traditionalist or Perrennialist rather then a member of Ahlis Sunnah Wal Jamaah. I didn't reveal him as the source because I didn't want people to dismiss the notion simply because it didn't come from the right source. He doesn't even have the right name!
My misgivings are proven right, at least where you are concerned. You have not addressed the message in the posting at all, choosing instead to criticise its lack of Islamic references. I could have peppered the posting with Arabic/Islamic terms like shir'k, takhtir, ihjtihad, tahqiq and taqlid, words that Chittick used liberally in his book. But I write as a lay Muslim. I don't have sufficient knowledge to use those terms comfortably. Besides, it would make me appear pretentious.
Coming to the message in my posting, it's probably unclear to some people because I did a bad precis job, trying to compress some ten pages into one. You were probably reminded of Syed Qutb because he too said Democracy is unIslamic arguing that it is not the same as the Islamic concept of Shura which means "to consult". Further, (he purportedly argued) the relevant ayat came down when the Prophet was still in Makkah so it couldn't have been in the context of forming a government.
My own layman argument against Democracy is that, while it means Government by the people for the people, it is hardly ever the case. If you consider the "one man one vote" connotation of the word, that's not what you have in a party-based parliamentary democracy like ours. Besides, is voting the best way to determine the truth?
But the most important message in the posting is this - when Ustaz Hadi proclaimed "Islam is consistent with Democracy", wasn't he saying Islam is subordinate to Democracy? Isn't that Shir'k? Wallahwaalam. Besides it could have been only what the newspapers say Hadi said.
You see, Tip, these days, nobody argues against words like Democracy, even Ulamas.
These words, Chittick argues, are "Gods of Modernity"! You can take heed of this warning or you can just dismiss it because it didn't come from the right sources.
Another portent false god is the word "science". If you want to understand its tyrannical nature, lookup "scientism" and "enlightenment" on Wikipedia.
Coming back to Qutb, Wikipedia says he was posthumously cited for heresy by University al-Azhar because of his views on using force and violence to bring about an Islamic State. Paradoxically, he was also said to be against having any form of government at all, arguing that no man should be submissive to the state and Divine Law is sufficient to govern social interactions (which is way up my alley). The point I am making here is that even if you refer to Islamic Sources, you have to, at the end of the day, use your own brain to assess what is truthful, what is not.
The real difference between us, I think, is your dogmatic adherence to the Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah creed that Islamic Knowledge is to be derived only from
Quran > Hadith > Ulamas
But, as Chittick points out, the Ulamas who are qualified to issue guidance based on the Quran and Sunnah are all dead. The doors of Ijtihad are closed - Taqlid! No room to think! Imam Shafie's book, written centuries ago is all you have.
I admit, I exaggerate, to drive home my point.
To contrast, I learn from all sources, from conversations, books, films and songs (even that came from a song Rosdi and Razak would recognize). Whatever I learn, I bring it back to my "Islamic Mold", based on the meagre Islamic knowledge I have. If it fits, I accept. Otherwise, reject. To put it another way, I try to maximise my Islamic'ness subject to constraints such as knowledge and context. If anything compromises the two sets of five rukuns, I reject. But of course, I am no Wali and sometimes I forget.
Of course you are like me to some extent. Otherwise you would have gone to China, not Egypt or Yemen.
Salams
Friday, May 27, 2011
Monday, May 23, 2011
Interlude
Interlude
One great thing about squash is that you can play it alone. You can hit parallel drives, crosses, boasts, drops, lobs and overheads, practically the full array of shots you need in a match, all on your own. I used to do that a lot in Kolej, to break the monotony of playing tennis, when hockey was not in season. Besides, it beats making small talk and horseplay that others indulge in.
It's sad that even in this virtual squash court, I am still alone. I know that some people pop into the gallery from time to time but hardly anybody gives a shout to announce their presence. I guess I am not free of the sense of vanity we are all inflicted with. I crave for some reaction to what I write, even negative ones, because that's better than being ignored. It shouldn't matter really. I am writing mainly for myself. In putting down my thoughts and beliefs here, I am re-affirming and clarifying them in my own mind. If somebody else finds them useful, great. Otherwise, it's ok.
I don't know. Maybe Jackson Browne can express how I am feeling better:
"Now I am sitting here wondering what to say
Afraid that all these words might scare you away
No one talks about their feelings anyway
Unless they dress them in dreams and laughter
I guess it's just too painful otherwise"
Good night folks!
One great thing about squash is that you can play it alone. You can hit parallel drives, crosses, boasts, drops, lobs and overheads, practically the full array of shots you need in a match, all on your own. I used to do that a lot in Kolej, to break the monotony of playing tennis, when hockey was not in season. Besides, it beats making small talk and horseplay that others indulge in.
It's sad that even in this virtual squash court, I am still alone. I know that some people pop into the gallery from time to time but hardly anybody gives a shout to announce their presence. I guess I am not free of the sense of vanity we are all inflicted with. I crave for some reaction to what I write, even negative ones, because that's better than being ignored. It shouldn't matter really. I am writing mainly for myself. In putting down my thoughts and beliefs here, I am re-affirming and clarifying them in my own mind. If somebody else finds them useful, great. Otherwise, it's ok.
I don't know. Maybe Jackson Browne can express how I am feeling better:
"Now I am sitting here wondering what to say
Afraid that all these words might scare you away
No one talks about their feelings anyway
Unless they dress them in dreams and laughter
I guess it's just too painful otherwise"
Good night folks!
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Plastic Words
Plastic Words
There is a book called Plastic Words by Uwe Poerksen, a German linguist. In it, he argues that, the world today is characterised with certain plastic words which he also describes as tyrannical because they have been so destructive to society. These words have no precise meaning but they do have an aura of goodness and beneficence about them. They also appear to be scientific, so they carry an aura of authority.
Examples of these words include democracy, freedom, equality, development, progress and science. People who brandish these words gain power and prestige and consider themselves winners like Manchester United supporters. Those who don't would be ignored and marginalised and cringe in shame like Arsenal supporters. How often have we heard it being said, "We need to do such-and-such for the sake of democracy", or "In these days of science and technology it's a shame that we still............."? These words are bandied about as if they are deities. Isn't Libya attacked for the sake of democracy? And, Iraq and Afghanistan before that?
It's due to this phenomenon that Perkasa appears to be so out-of-whack and we are ashamed to be associated with it even though they are fighting for our rights. But it is most sad to see PAS leaders proclaim proudly, "Islam is consistent with democracy," and "Membangun Bersama PAS" being made a PAS slogan.
Recently, during a dinner with an American political scientist, I asked her jokingly, "Who is this god, democracy, that you all seem to worship?" She replied, "I know! It's so embarrassing to be an American these days. We invade countries in the name of democracy but it doesn't even work in our own country!"
Many of us are unreflective. We prefer to keep things simple. "Tak mau pening," so to speak. We pray five times a day, fast during Ramadhan, pay our zakat and imagine we are alright. But are we really alright?
When we go along with the rest of the world, in allowing our lives to be orientated by these words, aren't we compromising our Aqidah?
Food for thought for those who think.
There is a book called Plastic Words by Uwe Poerksen, a German linguist. In it, he argues that, the world today is characterised with certain plastic words which he also describes as tyrannical because they have been so destructive to society. These words have no precise meaning but they do have an aura of goodness and beneficence about them. They also appear to be scientific, so they carry an aura of authority.
Examples of these words include democracy, freedom, equality, development, progress and science. People who brandish these words gain power and prestige and consider themselves winners like Manchester United supporters. Those who don't would be ignored and marginalised and cringe in shame like Arsenal supporters. How often have we heard it being said, "We need to do such-and-such for the sake of democracy", or "In these days of science and technology it's a shame that we still............."? These words are bandied about as if they are deities. Isn't Libya attacked for the sake of democracy? And, Iraq and Afghanistan before that?
It's due to this phenomenon that Perkasa appears to be so out-of-whack and we are ashamed to be associated with it even though they are fighting for our rights. But it is most sad to see PAS leaders proclaim proudly, "Islam is consistent with democracy," and "Membangun Bersama PAS" being made a PAS slogan.
Recently, during a dinner with an American political scientist, I asked her jokingly, "Who is this god, democracy, that you all seem to worship?" She replied, "I know! It's so embarrassing to be an American these days. We invade countries in the name of democracy but it doesn't even work in our own country!"
Many of us are unreflective. We prefer to keep things simple. "Tak mau pening," so to speak. We pray five times a day, fast during Ramadhan, pay our zakat and imagine we are alright. But are we really alright?
When we go along with the rest of the world, in allowing our lives to be orientated by these words, aren't we compromising our Aqidah?
Food for thought for those who think.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
1Islam - Final Episode
May peace be on you, Tip
It appears that the entire batch of ‘73 has abandoned this virtual squash court, leaving the two of us to beat each other up to submission. Actually, Razak said he posted a comment. That seems to have gone missing in cyber-limbo. Ah, never mind. I am sure many of them are in the gallery, having fun at our expense. Let’s continue the jousting:
It all depends on what you mean by “implement Islam”, Tip. The Sufis would say, “Everything, good or bad, is already Islam”. End of story.
But we are not discussing at that level. I am guessing you mean “implementation of an Islamic State that will include Islamic Law, Hudud etc”. (I said etc. because like many people, I still don’t get a full idea of what PAS means by an Islamic State.) Can’t you see that this is also another possible approach towards “peace, harmony, justice, equality etc”, all those good values that we universally uphold including Lim Guat Eng, Karpal Singh, Anwar Ibrahim and Najib Tun Razak? (At least outwardly, in any case). Even PAS doesn’t openly shout “Islamic State” nowadays, less it gets an “Over my dead body” response from Karpal Singh. And, within PAS, as you shared with us, the difference between the “Ulamas” and “Erdogans” is a question of approach, whether to cooperate with Pakatan or not. Towards what? Towards capturing Putrajaya so that you can implement all those nice things stated earlier. But does it have to include “Islamic Law”? If Karpal Singh drops dead, his son will rise in opposition and someone else after him. Besides, even if all the liquor in the country is poured down the drain, all brothels are closed and all forms of gambling (even on the golf course) are banned, would that make people more pious?
Further, where is this Islamic Law you are talking about? Is it still being drafted? Who is drafting it? How do we know that he has sufficient authority? You said before that some people are extracting “codifiable laws” from the Quran and Hadith that presumably will be the basis of this Islamic Law you have in mind. Wouldn’t this extraction process also involve translation and interpretation by humans and is susceptible to “errors”? Islamic Law means God’s Law. Do we want to attribute errors to God? Doesn’t it mean anything to you that most of the Islamic/Hudud laws that the layman is familiar with has a qualifier at the end? For example, cut the hand of a thief but not if he steals because he is hungry. Or, marry upto four but only if you can treat them all fairly. To me, this means God and the Prophet are telling us to use our heads to some extent.
For want of a better example, let’s consider the “law” on 4 witnesses. If we take this literally, no rapist will ever be prosecuted. Who will commit rape in front of 4 truthful witnesses unless they are all in collusion? No forensics can be used, not even finger prints! That being the case, wouldn’t it be understandable that an unmarried mother would just kill her baby? I can elaborate but I think you get the gist. (I could hardly believe it that Pak Ya argued that we cannot use DNA because DNA cannot be called as witnesses in the final judgment. Better not say anything more about it because what I am inclined to say is not very nice. Ahh, he’s not reading this anyway. He said so.)
I once read a book by the Iranian Nobel Prize winner, Shirin Abadi. She related that the Mullahs there extracted some holy statement from somewhere saying women who die as virgins will go to heaven. So, if a woman is sentenced to death for whatever reason, they rape her first before killing her to make sure she doesn’t go to heaven. I know this is a bit sensationalistic, to pander to Islamophobics who are her targeted audience. I am just relating it as an example how “literally taken Islamic Law” can be manipulated to perpetrate an injustice.
(REMINDER – I AM NOT AN UMNO SUPPORTER)
You asked – is the country already Islamic? Not in the sense that it has implemented Islamic law like you are suggesting. But if you look at it from the point of view of whether it is peaceful, harmonious, etc. we are doing relatively ok. Go look at the conditions in our neighboring countries in ASEAN, or even in “Islamic countries” such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and even Iran. We are a lot better off, if you can take it from me. Didn’t you notice the hoards of middle eastern looking people who prayed alongside us at USM? We are fast becoming a country of choice for people from the middle east to migrate to. In my neighborhood, there is one Indian Muslim family from UK who decided to move here after a single visit. There is also an American convert who decided to retire here. It’s so easy to be a practicing Muslim here, they say.
And look at ourselves. Many of us have transcended the line of poverty in just our generation. Many of us, me included, could not imagine living the lives we are living. I vividly remember talking to Ilham in section 14, PJ, before we left for UK. We just wanted 4 figure salaries and to be able to afford scrambler bikes! There is so much to be grateful for. Alhamdulillah!
You said:
The issues you listed suffer the same fate. How do you expect people who do not rule according to Islam to come out with Islamic response to such issues? Their thinking will always be influenced by unIslamic political, commercial and personal considerations.
Let’s face it. What we have in the country today is still very much the legacy of Mahathir. He once famously proclaimed Malaysia to be already an Islamic State arguing (roughly), “I am a Muslim, I try to govern Islamically. Therefore, the country is Islamic”. I can imagine him having regular imaginary conversations with the Prophet. For example, “Ya Rasulallah, some trouble makers are stirring racial sentiments in the country. What do I do?”. And the Prophet might respond (in this imaginary conversation), “Hey, you have the ISA. Just round the all up”. So we have Ops Lallang. In a nutshell, Mahathir’s problem statement can be stated as:
“Maximimize Islamicness subject to constraints:
Prevailing legal/constitutional/electoral framework
economic backwardness and mentality of the malays
Growing kurang-ajar’ness of the pendatang
etc.
There will always be constraints and the constraints change from time to time. We do not have a clean slate upon which the Islamic blueprint can be implanted.
I am not saying everything mahathir did was right but I do believe he was the best prime minister we could have had. It was as good as it can get. I know you hate him because of what he did to Anwar but imagine him asking the Prophet, “Ya Rasulallah, my IGP has reported that my designated successor is a homosexual. What do I do?” We have gone over this before. I urge you to read his memoirs. He could be lying of course but consider the plausibility of his explanation of what happened.
I am also not saying I like the present government. But we get the leadership we deserve. It’s corrupt because we (generally, not you and I) are corrupt. We take handouts from politicians without asking where they get the goodies from; we seek recompense in the form of jobs and contracts in return for our support; we put them on a pedestal and tolerate their excesses; we allow them to live beyond their official means, hardly ever asking questions; we take on contracts with kickback arrangements to them; and so on, and so on. That’s why I say if you want to change the government, you need to work on yourself first, then your family, your friends and so on. It doesn’t necessarily have to be political.
About the leadership’s thinking being influenced by “political, commercial and personal considerations”, isn’t PAS susceptible to the same stuff? Isn’t PAS’s cooperation with Pakatan and its downplaying of the Islamic State objective a political compromise to capture Putrajaya? It’s politics. Wikipedia once defined Politics as “.....about who gets what, when”. I guess they took it down because it’s too cynical. The Electoral System itself: how Islamic is it? Isn’t it susceptible to manipulation, bribery, grandstanding and everything unIslamic? Why is PAS submitting itself to something that can be said to satanic? (Overstatement, perhaps, but you get the point, I hope).
Everything that I wrote above is rendered meaningless if you are talking at the level of simple folk from my kampong: “kito oghe isle, kito keno sokong PAH (PAS) la. Kalu dok kito kape (kafir) la”. I really hope that’s not where you are coming from.
Regarding piety, of course it’s not confined to ritual matters, Tip. I am reminded of an Ayat Doc Halim sent us a few weeks ago. I can’t find it but I think it was this one:
[2:177] It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces Towards east or West, but it is righteousness- to believe in Allah and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer; for those who ask; and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer, and practice regular charity; to fulfil the contracts which ye have made;and to be firm and patient, in pain (or suffering) and adversity, and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth, the Allah.fearing.
It says here we should fulfill the contracts we have made; elsewhere, I can recall it says we should be fair in our dealings, be kind and considerate and generally, what some people call the Golden Rule: Do unto others what you want done unto you. But I can’t recall any Quranic statement or hadith that obligates us to implement Islamic Law as I understand you mean it. Perhaps I am missing something.
I stand corrected if I implied that the teachings of the 4 Mazhabs of Sunni Muslims are confined to ritual and familial matters. What I wrote was that they appear to differ or focus on ritual and familial matters. The book “Crisis in the Muslim Mind”, among other things, asserted that due to reasons of methodology and the tension between scholars and political leaders historically, social sciences such as what we are talking about is lacking in depth of thought (my words). Anyway, I’ll look out for the book you recommended.
I do not confine myself to “intellectual” knowledge, Tip, although I must admit, I am more inclined that way. For society to progress, there has to be division of labor. Let the likes of Fuad be the Imam. As for me, I am good at other stuff. Where “transmitted” knowledge is concerned, I do know enough to get by. Give me some credit that I know how to pray, Tip.
If you hold onto what you wrote:
All the great Imams presented their interpretations and understanding of the Quran and hadith. They encouraged their students to think and make their own assessments on what they presented. They frowned upon those who follow them blindly. None of them claim theirs to be the only right way and all the others are wrong. Imam Shafie himself taught for a number of years in Syria. Later he moved on to Cairo and taught there until his death. There are a number of differences in his teachings between the two places based on new knowledge and experiences that he gathered after he moved to Cairo.
we got no issues at all! ANTICLIMAX! I have been under the impression that you believe all of us have to support PAS and if we don’t, we are wrong. Damn! We have been wasting our time. Let’s take a bow to the gallery anyway. Hand-in-hand.... If they are still there....
Wassalam
It appears that the entire batch of ‘73 has abandoned this virtual squash court, leaving the two of us to beat each other up to submission. Actually, Razak said he posted a comment. That seems to have gone missing in cyber-limbo. Ah, never mind. I am sure many of them are in the gallery, having fun at our expense. Let’s continue the jousting:
It all depends on what you mean by “implement Islam”, Tip. The Sufis would say, “Everything, good or bad, is already Islam”. End of story.
But we are not discussing at that level. I am guessing you mean “implementation of an Islamic State that will include Islamic Law, Hudud etc”. (I said etc. because like many people, I still don’t get a full idea of what PAS means by an Islamic State.) Can’t you see that this is also another possible approach towards “peace, harmony, justice, equality etc”, all those good values that we universally uphold including Lim Guat Eng, Karpal Singh, Anwar Ibrahim and Najib Tun Razak? (At least outwardly, in any case). Even PAS doesn’t openly shout “Islamic State” nowadays, less it gets an “Over my dead body” response from Karpal Singh. And, within PAS, as you shared with us, the difference between the “Ulamas” and “Erdogans” is a question of approach, whether to cooperate with Pakatan or not. Towards what? Towards capturing Putrajaya so that you can implement all those nice things stated earlier. But does it have to include “Islamic Law”? If Karpal Singh drops dead, his son will rise in opposition and someone else after him. Besides, even if all the liquor in the country is poured down the drain, all brothels are closed and all forms of gambling (even on the golf course) are banned, would that make people more pious?
Further, where is this Islamic Law you are talking about? Is it still being drafted? Who is drafting it? How do we know that he has sufficient authority? You said before that some people are extracting “codifiable laws” from the Quran and Hadith that presumably will be the basis of this Islamic Law you have in mind. Wouldn’t this extraction process also involve translation and interpretation by humans and is susceptible to “errors”? Islamic Law means God’s Law. Do we want to attribute errors to God? Doesn’t it mean anything to you that most of the Islamic/Hudud laws that the layman is familiar with has a qualifier at the end? For example, cut the hand of a thief but not if he steals because he is hungry. Or, marry upto four but only if you can treat them all fairly. To me, this means God and the Prophet are telling us to use our heads to some extent.
For want of a better example, let’s consider the “law” on 4 witnesses. If we take this literally, no rapist will ever be prosecuted. Who will commit rape in front of 4 truthful witnesses unless they are all in collusion? No forensics can be used, not even finger prints! That being the case, wouldn’t it be understandable that an unmarried mother would just kill her baby? I can elaborate but I think you get the gist. (I could hardly believe it that Pak Ya argued that we cannot use DNA because DNA cannot be called as witnesses in the final judgment. Better not say anything more about it because what I am inclined to say is not very nice. Ahh, he’s not reading this anyway. He said so.)
I once read a book by the Iranian Nobel Prize winner, Shirin Abadi. She related that the Mullahs there extracted some holy statement from somewhere saying women who die as virgins will go to heaven. So, if a woman is sentenced to death for whatever reason, they rape her first before killing her to make sure she doesn’t go to heaven. I know this is a bit sensationalistic, to pander to Islamophobics who are her targeted audience. I am just relating it as an example how “literally taken Islamic Law” can be manipulated to perpetrate an injustice.
(REMINDER – I AM NOT AN UMNO SUPPORTER)
You asked – is the country already Islamic? Not in the sense that it has implemented Islamic law like you are suggesting. But if you look at it from the point of view of whether it is peaceful, harmonious, etc. we are doing relatively ok. Go look at the conditions in our neighboring countries in ASEAN, or even in “Islamic countries” such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and even Iran. We are a lot better off, if you can take it from me. Didn’t you notice the hoards of middle eastern looking people who prayed alongside us at USM? We are fast becoming a country of choice for people from the middle east to migrate to. In my neighborhood, there is one Indian Muslim family from UK who decided to move here after a single visit. There is also an American convert who decided to retire here. It’s so easy to be a practicing Muslim here, they say.
And look at ourselves. Many of us have transcended the line of poverty in just our generation. Many of us, me included, could not imagine living the lives we are living. I vividly remember talking to Ilham in section 14, PJ, before we left for UK. We just wanted 4 figure salaries and to be able to afford scrambler bikes! There is so much to be grateful for. Alhamdulillah!
You said:
The issues you listed suffer the same fate. How do you expect people who do not rule according to Islam to come out with Islamic response to such issues? Their thinking will always be influenced by unIslamic political, commercial and personal considerations.
Let’s face it. What we have in the country today is still very much the legacy of Mahathir. He once famously proclaimed Malaysia to be already an Islamic State arguing (roughly), “I am a Muslim, I try to govern Islamically. Therefore, the country is Islamic”. I can imagine him having regular imaginary conversations with the Prophet. For example, “Ya Rasulallah, some trouble makers are stirring racial sentiments in the country. What do I do?”. And the Prophet might respond (in this imaginary conversation), “Hey, you have the ISA. Just round the all up”. So we have Ops Lallang. In a nutshell, Mahathir’s problem statement can be stated as:
“Maximimize Islamicness subject to constraints:
Prevailing legal/constitutional/electoral framework
economic backwardness and mentality of the malays
Growing kurang-ajar’ness of the pendatang
etc.
There will always be constraints and the constraints change from time to time. We do not have a clean slate upon which the Islamic blueprint can be implanted.
I am not saying everything mahathir did was right but I do believe he was the best prime minister we could have had. It was as good as it can get. I know you hate him because of what he did to Anwar but imagine him asking the Prophet, “Ya Rasulallah, my IGP has reported that my designated successor is a homosexual. What do I do?” We have gone over this before. I urge you to read his memoirs. He could be lying of course but consider the plausibility of his explanation of what happened.
I am also not saying I like the present government. But we get the leadership we deserve. It’s corrupt because we (generally, not you and I) are corrupt. We take handouts from politicians without asking where they get the goodies from; we seek recompense in the form of jobs and contracts in return for our support; we put them on a pedestal and tolerate their excesses; we allow them to live beyond their official means, hardly ever asking questions; we take on contracts with kickback arrangements to them; and so on, and so on. That’s why I say if you want to change the government, you need to work on yourself first, then your family, your friends and so on. It doesn’t necessarily have to be political.
About the leadership’s thinking being influenced by “political, commercial and personal considerations”, isn’t PAS susceptible to the same stuff? Isn’t PAS’s cooperation with Pakatan and its downplaying of the Islamic State objective a political compromise to capture Putrajaya? It’s politics. Wikipedia once defined Politics as “.....about who gets what, when”. I guess they took it down because it’s too cynical. The Electoral System itself: how Islamic is it? Isn’t it susceptible to manipulation, bribery, grandstanding and everything unIslamic? Why is PAS submitting itself to something that can be said to satanic? (Overstatement, perhaps, but you get the point, I hope).
Everything that I wrote above is rendered meaningless if you are talking at the level of simple folk from my kampong: “kito oghe isle, kito keno sokong PAH (PAS) la. Kalu dok kito kape (kafir) la”. I really hope that’s not where you are coming from.
Regarding piety, of course it’s not confined to ritual matters, Tip. I am reminded of an Ayat Doc Halim sent us a few weeks ago. I can’t find it but I think it was this one:
[2:177] It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces Towards east or West, but it is righteousness- to believe in Allah and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer; for those who ask; and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer, and practice regular charity; to fulfil the contracts which ye have made;and to be firm and patient, in pain (or suffering) and adversity, and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth, the Allah.fearing.
It says here we should fulfill the contracts we have made; elsewhere, I can recall it says we should be fair in our dealings, be kind and considerate and generally, what some people call the Golden Rule: Do unto others what you want done unto you. But I can’t recall any Quranic statement or hadith that obligates us to implement Islamic Law as I understand you mean it. Perhaps I am missing something.
I stand corrected if I implied that the teachings of the 4 Mazhabs of Sunni Muslims are confined to ritual and familial matters. What I wrote was that they appear to differ or focus on ritual and familial matters. The book “Crisis in the Muslim Mind”, among other things, asserted that due to reasons of methodology and the tension between scholars and political leaders historically, social sciences such as what we are talking about is lacking in depth of thought (my words). Anyway, I’ll look out for the book you recommended.
I do not confine myself to “intellectual” knowledge, Tip, although I must admit, I am more inclined that way. For society to progress, there has to be division of labor. Let the likes of Fuad be the Imam. As for me, I am good at other stuff. Where “transmitted” knowledge is concerned, I do know enough to get by. Give me some credit that I know how to pray, Tip.
If you hold onto what you wrote:
All the great Imams presented their interpretations and understanding of the Quran and hadith. They encouraged their students to think and make their own assessments on what they presented. They frowned upon those who follow them blindly. None of them claim theirs to be the only right way and all the others are wrong. Imam Shafie himself taught for a number of years in Syria. Later he moved on to Cairo and taught there until his death. There are a number of differences in his teachings between the two places based on new knowledge and experiences that he gathered after he moved to Cairo.
we got no issues at all! ANTICLIMAX! I have been under the impression that you believe all of us have to support PAS and if we don’t, we are wrong. Damn! We have been wasting our time. Let’s take a bow to the gallery anyway. Hand-in-hand.... If they are still there....
Wassalam
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Response to ALI
Waalaikumussalam, Tip.
I am posting this response to your last comment as anther blog because of its length:
The difference between PAS and UMNO can also be attributed to approach. I am sure, if you ask UMNO people, they would say they are for welfare/charity, justice and elimination of corruption too. It's a question of approach that they choose not to fly the Islamic flag.
Just as there are bad people in UMNO, there are bad people in PAS too. It's just that it seems "more ugly" when PAS people do bad things. Imagine someone having a beer in public while wearing a kopiah and jubah! OTOH it's perfectly possible for a pious Muslim to be an UMNO supporter because he prefers not to wear his Muslim'ness on his sleeves, preferring to let his actions and behaviour reflect his piety.
The issues I listed, other then poco-poco are not trivial. They are to do with what should be the Islamic response to issues brought about by our multi-racial and multi-religous context, not to mention our unique history. If we cannot arrive at a consensus, we cannot have 1Islam. It's highly unlikely that there is a clearly transmitted example from the Prophet prescribing solutions to these issues. That's why, the Ulamas too have to do some "independent thinking". The question is, should we leave the thinking just to the Ulamas? Even to choose which Ulama to follow, we have to do some thinking.
The 4 Mazhabs, I believe, differ or focus mainly on matters of ritual which has got nothing to do with what we are discussing here. We are discussing societal matters here. Ritual matters necessarily have be transmitted from those who know to those who don't because otherwise, how would we know how to pray.
Transmitted knowledge has to be differentiated from Intellectual or perceived knowledge. For example, you cannot say 2 + 2 = 4 because your teacher says so. In the same way, it's not good enough to say God is One because your parents or ustaz tell you so. You have to contemplate this on your own, even though one's vision and understanding of God might differ from another.
In the Quran, God commanded us to think in numerous verses. But think about what? How does one think Islamically? Employing my brain, I think we should think with the end in mind. So years ago, I asked SIR what is the purpose of life as a Muslim. His answer was " The purpose of life is to return". However, all of us are going to return to His presence anyway. So, the issue is not about to return per se but about how we get there. And I think we want to get there in a manner that meets His approval rather than His wrath, guided by the Quran and Sunnah, employing our brains to its individual capacity.
When I set up my FB account, I described my political views as "What would the Prophet do?". Recently, I came across a book that coincided with my thinking, a page of which my daughter dilligently retyped which I reproduce below.
Incidentally, my father was an Ustaz. He and Dato' Asri, the late PAS stalwart were classmates in religous school. Unlike Asri, my father joined UMNO and was a much sought after speaker during elections because of his religous credentials. Presumably, they debated the issue of PAS vs UMNO literally to their deaths and neither could "turn" the other. They remained good friends though.
Salams
Pudin
Book Extract
____________
"Here is one of the keys for understanding the Muslims' connection to the Prophet. Muhammad does not merely drop the Quran on the front door of humanity. He lives the Quran, he embodies the Quran, as his wife said, his nature is the Quran. Muslims do not connect to Muhammad simply to learn disembodied hadith statements; they look to him to embody the very meaning of the connection to God. This is why for Muslims the key spiritual and intellectual guide to answering every legal and ethical dilemma has always been to ask: what would Muhammad do?
Yet, Muhammad himself prophesied that his community would not find the answer to every new challenge spelled out in the pages of the Qur'an or his sayings. Part of Muhammad's mission was to provide his community with the tools they would need to encounter every fresh challenge in situations for China to Africa, Malaysia to America. The well-commemorated episode that identifies this account is Muhammad's interaction with his companion Mu'adh ibn Jabal, who was being sent to lead another province as its new governor. In their last conversation, Muhammad asked Mu'adh how he would deal with the new challenges that would surely come his way. Mu'adh answered that he would first look into the Qur'an for guidance. Muhammad asked his companion what would he do if he did not find the answer there. Mu'adh pondered further, then stated that he would look at the example of the Prophet himself - he would wonder what Muhammad would do. The Prophet pressed on a bit further, asking one last time what Mu'adh would do if asking this question revealed no specific instruction. Reflecting one last time, Mu'adh offered that then he would exert his own independent reasoning to come up with a fresh solution to the new dilemma. Finally satisfied, Muhammad sent his companion forth to lead his community."
Page 299-300, Memories of Muhammad
Omid Safi, Ph. D.
I am posting this response to your last comment as anther blog because of its length:
The difference between PAS and UMNO can also be attributed to approach. I am sure, if you ask UMNO people, they would say they are for welfare/charity, justice and elimination of corruption too. It's a question of approach that they choose not to fly the Islamic flag.
Just as there are bad people in UMNO, there are bad people in PAS too. It's just that it seems "more ugly" when PAS people do bad things. Imagine someone having a beer in public while wearing a kopiah and jubah! OTOH it's perfectly possible for a pious Muslim to be an UMNO supporter because he prefers not to wear his Muslim'ness on his sleeves, preferring to let his actions and behaviour reflect his piety.
The issues I listed, other then poco-poco are not trivial. They are to do with what should be the Islamic response to issues brought about by our multi-racial and multi-religous context, not to mention our unique history. If we cannot arrive at a consensus, we cannot have 1Islam. It's highly unlikely that there is a clearly transmitted example from the Prophet prescribing solutions to these issues. That's why, the Ulamas too have to do some "independent thinking". The question is, should we leave the thinking just to the Ulamas? Even to choose which Ulama to follow, we have to do some thinking.
The 4 Mazhabs, I believe, differ or focus mainly on matters of ritual which has got nothing to do with what we are discussing here. We are discussing societal matters here. Ritual matters necessarily have be transmitted from those who know to those who don't because otherwise, how would we know how to pray.
Transmitted knowledge has to be differentiated from Intellectual or perceived knowledge. For example, you cannot say 2 + 2 = 4 because your teacher says so. In the same way, it's not good enough to say God is One because your parents or ustaz tell you so. You have to contemplate this on your own, even though one's vision and understanding of God might differ from another.
In the Quran, God commanded us to think in numerous verses. But think about what? How does one think Islamically? Employing my brain, I think we should think with the end in mind. So years ago, I asked SIR what is the purpose of life as a Muslim. His answer was " The purpose of life is to return". However, all of us are going to return to His presence anyway. So, the issue is not about to return per se but about how we get there. And I think we want to get there in a manner that meets His approval rather than His wrath, guided by the Quran and Sunnah, employing our brains to its individual capacity.
When I set up my FB account, I described my political views as "What would the Prophet do?". Recently, I came across a book that coincided with my thinking, a page of which my daughter dilligently retyped which I reproduce below.
Incidentally, my father was an Ustaz. He and Dato' Asri, the late PAS stalwart were classmates in religous school. Unlike Asri, my father joined UMNO and was a much sought after speaker during elections because of his religous credentials. Presumably, they debated the issue of PAS vs UMNO literally to their deaths and neither could "turn" the other. They remained good friends though.
Salams
Pudin
Book Extract
____________
"Here is one of the keys for understanding the Muslims' connection to the Prophet. Muhammad does not merely drop the Quran on the front door of humanity. He lives the Quran, he embodies the Quran, as his wife said, his nature is the Quran. Muslims do not connect to Muhammad simply to learn disembodied hadith statements; they look to him to embody the very meaning of the connection to God. This is why for Muslims the key spiritual and intellectual guide to answering every legal and ethical dilemma has always been to ask: what would Muhammad do?
Yet, Muhammad himself prophesied that his community would not find the answer to every new challenge spelled out in the pages of the Qur'an or his sayings. Part of Muhammad's mission was to provide his community with the tools they would need to encounter every fresh challenge in situations for China to Africa, Malaysia to America. The well-commemorated episode that identifies this account is Muhammad's interaction with his companion Mu'adh ibn Jabal, who was being sent to lead another province as its new governor. In their last conversation, Muhammad asked Mu'adh how he would deal with the new challenges that would surely come his way. Mu'adh answered that he would first look into the Qur'an for guidance. Muhammad asked his companion what would he do if he did not find the answer there. Mu'adh pondered further, then stated that he would look at the example of the Prophet himself - he would wonder what Muhammad would do. The Prophet pressed on a bit further, asking one last time what Mu'adh would do if asking this question revealed no specific instruction. Reflecting one last time, Mu'adh offered that then he would exert his own independent reasoning to come up with a fresh solution to the new dilemma. Finally satisfied, Muhammad sent his companion forth to lead his community."
Page 299-300, Memories of Muhammad
Omid Safi, Ph. D.
Islamic Banking
Assalamualikum
A few months ago, my sister, who is also my accountant, came to me asking, "Can we move all our bank accounts to an Islamic Bank?". I responded, "Why? Islamic Banks, in substance, are the same as conventional banks". I relented because she pleaded, "Humour me. They say it's Islamic and the authorities (Ulamas) don't say otherwise. As a Muslim, I feel obliged to choose the Islamic alternative since it's available".
I know many of us would take the same stand as my sister. As for me, I just can't shut my brain. I can state categorically that all Islamic Banking products, in substance, mimic Conventional Banking. For instance, for housing loans, they say that they do it on a buying and selling basis i.e. the bank buys the house from the developer and sells it to the purchaser/borrower at a profit. The profit amount is being computed in exactly the same manner as you would compute interest on a term loan in conventional banking. The buying and selling is of course, pseudo, because it doesn't attract stamp duty or taxes. In a nutshell, in prevailing Islamic Banking practices, they change the term, "interest", to "profit", and they give the product an Arabic name and they call it Islamic. To me it's a blatant lie!
I am citing this as an example of the inadequacies of Ulamas to "guide us on all matters". As argued in the book "Crisis in the Muslim Mind", the role of the Ulama has been reduced to matters of Fiqh and familial matters. Not enough emphasis has been placed on coming out with genuine Islamic knowledge in the areas of social sciences and muamalat.
And, dare I say, our minds have been atrophied due to disuse?
A few months ago, my sister, who is also my accountant, came to me asking, "Can we move all our bank accounts to an Islamic Bank?". I responded, "Why? Islamic Banks, in substance, are the same as conventional banks". I relented because she pleaded, "Humour me. They say it's Islamic and the authorities (Ulamas) don't say otherwise. As a Muslim, I feel obliged to choose the Islamic alternative since it's available".
I know many of us would take the same stand as my sister. As for me, I just can't shut my brain. I can state categorically that all Islamic Banking products, in substance, mimic Conventional Banking. For instance, for housing loans, they say that they do it on a buying and selling basis i.e. the bank buys the house from the developer and sells it to the purchaser/borrower at a profit. The profit amount is being computed in exactly the same manner as you would compute interest on a term loan in conventional banking. The buying and selling is of course, pseudo, because it doesn't attract stamp duty or taxes. In a nutshell, in prevailing Islamic Banking practices, they change the term, "interest", to "profit", and they give the product an Arabic name and they call it Islamic. To me it's a blatant lie!
I am citing this as an example of the inadequacies of Ulamas to "guide us on all matters". As argued in the book "Crisis in the Muslim Mind", the role of the Ulama has been reduced to matters of Fiqh and familial matters. Not enough emphasis has been placed on coming out with genuine Islamic knowledge in the areas of social sciences and muamalat.
And, dare I say, our minds have been atrophied due to disuse?
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
The Real Reason Why NATO Attacked Libya?
Assalamualaikum
Kita side-track sikit.....
Kalau Doc Hatta dok baca ni, bila nak jumpa Husam?
Kab
Kita side-track sikit.....
Kalau Doc Hatta dok baca ni, bila nak jumpa Husam?
Kab
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Kita sambung lagi.......
Assalamualaikum Dear Brothers
When Ilham GM threw the term "Muallaf" at me recently, I must admit, it hurt. Why? Because truth hurts. The level of my knowledge on the religion is not much higher than a Muallaf. I wish I can recite the doa like Razak, lead a tahlil or terawih prayer like Fuad or deliver a tazkirah like Wak Tumiran. "Hang ni, basic kurang!", says Mau. I am relating this because in conversations with a few of you lately, I keep getting warned that I should be careful what I write because I might influence people the wrong way. So I am categorically stating here that I am not here to teach anybody. Rather, I want you guys to teach me. Tell me when I am encroaching dangerous grounds. You see, I read a lot. Some of the books I have read would not meet the approval of many of you. Zahari's initial reaction to the link to the book "Crisis in the Muslim Mind" is a case in point. Also, some time ago, I gave Mau a copy of a book by Gai Eaton to read. He gave it back to me after reading 2 pages. "Takut!", he said. But why? "I don't have sufficient knowledge to answer you", he keeps telling me until now.
I do realise I have an unconventional attitude towards religion, to say the least. That's probably because I am the laziest person I know. Before I set out to do anything, I have to know why or what for. Once, early in my career, in the Accountant General's Dept., my boss asked me to write a program to force the insertion of a certain code on payment vouchers so that some reporting could be done. I told him if he wants to do that, he needed to get the Treasury Instructions modified first which required an act of parliament. That put paid to the idea, and I saved some effort. Sorakkkk!
I think it's fair to say that Latif Ishak and I have been the main protoganists in our tumultous debate on 1Islam and related issues. If I may summarize, the main difference in our respective positions is that, while he is more comfortable relying on literal statements (Codified Islamic Law?) from people of authority (Ulama) to guide him on all matters, I tend to give myself more room for independent thinking. (Am I right, Tip?). Perhaps, this should be the topic we should discuss next in this forum.
Feedback please.
Kab
When Ilham GM threw the term "Muallaf" at me recently, I must admit, it hurt. Why? Because truth hurts. The level of my knowledge on the religion is not much higher than a Muallaf. I wish I can recite the doa like Razak, lead a tahlil or terawih prayer like Fuad or deliver a tazkirah like Wak Tumiran. "Hang ni, basic kurang!", says Mau. I am relating this because in conversations with a few of you lately, I keep getting warned that I should be careful what I write because I might influence people the wrong way. So I am categorically stating here that I am not here to teach anybody. Rather, I want you guys to teach me. Tell me when I am encroaching dangerous grounds. You see, I read a lot. Some of the books I have read would not meet the approval of many of you. Zahari's initial reaction to the link to the book "Crisis in the Muslim Mind" is a case in point. Also, some time ago, I gave Mau a copy of a book by Gai Eaton to read. He gave it back to me after reading 2 pages. "Takut!", he said. But why? "I don't have sufficient knowledge to answer you", he keeps telling me until now.
I do realise I have an unconventional attitude towards religion, to say the least. That's probably because I am the laziest person I know. Before I set out to do anything, I have to know why or what for. Once, early in my career, in the Accountant General's Dept., my boss asked me to write a program to force the insertion of a certain code on payment vouchers so that some reporting could be done. I told him if he wants to do that, he needed to get the Treasury Instructions modified first which required an act of parliament. That put paid to the idea, and I saved some effort. Sorakkkk!
I think it's fair to say that Latif Ishak and I have been the main protoganists in our tumultous debate on 1Islam and related issues. If I may summarize, the main difference in our respective positions is that, while he is more comfortable relying on literal statements (Codified Islamic Law?) from people of authority (Ulama) to guide him on all matters, I tend to give myself more room for independent thinking. (Am I right, Tip?). Perhaps, this should be the topic we should discuss next in this forum.
Feedback please.
Kab
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Welcome
Assalamualaikum Spiders
Welcome to our new virtual squash court. Here, insha'allah, we will continue the kind of discussions we have had recently eversince Zahari's watershed post on our email group. To begin with, I'd like to address Zahari's last post.
Dear Prof Zaharij
We started discussing this topic (1Islam) after Latip suggested it as an alternative to your suggestion that you might join the 1Bumi/1Melayu movement(?). After his second posting, it became clear that Latip's idea of 1Islam is for us all to support PAS which created a very thick line dividing us with violent and vehement support on both sides. A few people like Rashid Dimin and Doc Halim threw in sobering postings to try to cool down the situation. Others, like Prof Jamaluddin and Razak suggested that we bring in an outside authority to teach us "True Islam". (Sorry if I translate/interprete you wrong, guys). Amidst it all, Pak Ya posted an extract from a book titled Ethics of Disagreement in Islam, which he dilligently typed, but unfortunately largely fell on deaf ears (or should I say blind eyes?). On my part, I tried to argue agaist Latip's position rationally suggesting instead an apolitical/intellectual approach grounded on the Quran and examples of the Prophet s.a.w., towards solving our quagmire. To further support my position, I posted a link to a book titled "Crisis in the Muslim Mind", which you immediately reject because you consider it "Wahabbi" and/or "too complex".
I guess that brings us up to speed, unless anybody else wants to add anything.
Zahari, you say it's Wahhabi, I say it's not but even if it is, does it matter? Ideas and opinions should not be rejected simply because of labels. What's wrong with Wahhabism? Don't they also believe in the One God and the Prophet s.a.w.? Don't they also uphold the Quran and Sunnah? Maybe somebody else can help me here. I don't know much about so-called Wahhabism and why we should fear it. When we go to Makkah, we pray behind a Wahhabi Imam, don't we?
Pening? I am guessing that what you mean is that you prefer to keep things simple: pray, perform haj, fast in ramadhan and pay zakat. Actually, I envy your position because, I read/heard somewhere that the Prophet s.a.w. once said, "Most people of paradise are simple-minded." However, the simple-mindedness that leads to paradise also demands simple-mindedness in the affairs of the world. The fact that you brought up the 1Bumi/1Melayu issue to our attention does not suggest this. You are concerned and do think about the future our children and the Ummah in this country. Besides, we often claim we have the best brains among 54/55/56 year olds in this country. Don't we have a duty to use them?
The book Crisis in the Muslim Mind actually addresses problems with the Ummah, the very problem we have clearly demonstrated in our exchanges on this subject. Humour me. Just read the Foreword that I am copying below and tell me what you think.
P.S. to everyone - these exchanges are not meant to pit one's ego against another or show who is cleverer than who. We are trying to pursue the truth. In order for a discourse like this to be productive, we need to learn to address the messages, not the messenger.
Peace to all.
Kab
CRISIS IN THE MUSLIM MIND
FOREWORD
There is general agreement that the Ummah is passing through an extremely difficult stage, one of disintegration and schism, loss of identity, failure of institutions, and inability to extract itself from its present state of bewilderment.
There is also general agreement that change is needed. In particular, the Ummah became acutely aware of its problems following its early encounters with Western civilization in Egypt and Turkey. In the two centuries that have passed since then, the Ummah has suffered through periods of dictatorship and submission to foreign experiments with its political and administrative systems, its culture and business, ethical and social makeup, and science and art. None of this, however, has yielded the kinds of results that the Ummah wanted or hoped for. Instead, the Ummah found itself caught up in a vicious circle.
What this means is that the leadership of the Ummah has been unable to determine the proper approach for bringing about the change needed to lead it toward its true objectives, After pondering the matter at length, looking at it from different perspectives, and considering objectively the attempts of the Ummah in the past to extract itself, we are convinced that the process of change must begin in the thought of the Ummah. This is because thought naturally precedes deeds, whether they prove to be correct or faulty.
Only sound thinking will result in sound reconstruction, and only sound thinking will deliver the Ummah from the crisis which threatens to strangle the life from it.
___________________________________________________________________________
Serious and mature Muslim intellectuals and leaders must commit themselves to the one path that is truly open to them, regardless of how difficult it might at first appear to be. They must make certain that the solution they seek originates in their religion, their homeland, and their history, and that they use it to steadfastly confront the challenges of the present. if this is not done, the bitter failures suffered by the Islamic world over the past several centuries will pale in comparison with the new problems that it will have to face.
Of course, Muslim leaders and intellectuals, with all their different leanings and preferences, as well as the entire Muslim Ummah can continue to dream of salvation, progress, honor, or power. However, if they do not change their present ways, means, and methods of thinking, in the end they can only expect that their lot will be a harvest even more bitter than those they have experienced in the past. The Ummah's intellectual and social leadership must search for an authentic Islamic alternative solution, strive to discern its elements from deep within the thought, culture, practices and institutions of the Ummah, and then relate it to the actual circumstances of its people.
Welcome to our new virtual squash court. Here, insha'allah, we will continue the kind of discussions we have had recently eversince Zahari's watershed post on our email group. To begin with, I'd like to address Zahari's last post.
Dear Prof Zaharij
We started discussing this topic (1Islam) after Latip suggested it as an alternative to your suggestion that you might join the 1Bumi/1Melayu movement(?). After his second posting, it became clear that Latip's idea of 1Islam is for us all to support PAS which created a very thick line dividing us with violent and vehement support on both sides. A few people like Rashid Dimin and Doc Halim threw in sobering postings to try to cool down the situation. Others, like Prof Jamaluddin and Razak suggested that we bring in an outside authority to teach us "True Islam". (Sorry if I translate/interprete you wrong, guys). Amidst it all, Pak Ya posted an extract from a book titled Ethics of Disagreement in Islam, which he dilligently typed, but unfortunately largely fell on deaf ears (or should I say blind eyes?). On my part, I tried to argue agaist Latip's position rationally suggesting instead an apolitical/intellectual approach grounded on the Quran and examples of the Prophet s.a.w., towards solving our quagmire. To further support my position, I posted a link to a book titled "Crisis in the Muslim Mind", which you immediately reject because you consider it "Wahabbi" and/or "too complex".
I guess that brings us up to speed, unless anybody else wants to add anything.
Zahari, you say it's Wahhabi, I say it's not but even if it is, does it matter? Ideas and opinions should not be rejected simply because of labels. What's wrong with Wahhabism? Don't they also believe in the One God and the Prophet s.a.w.? Don't they also uphold the Quran and Sunnah? Maybe somebody else can help me here. I don't know much about so-called Wahhabism and why we should fear it. When we go to Makkah, we pray behind a Wahhabi Imam, don't we?
Pening? I am guessing that what you mean is that you prefer to keep things simple: pray, perform haj, fast in ramadhan and pay zakat. Actually, I envy your position because, I read/heard somewhere that the Prophet s.a.w. once said, "Most people of paradise are simple-minded." However, the simple-mindedness that leads to paradise also demands simple-mindedness in the affairs of the world. The fact that you brought up the 1Bumi/1Melayu issue to our attention does not suggest this. You are concerned and do think about the future our children and the Ummah in this country. Besides, we often claim we have the best brains among 54/55/56 year olds in this country. Don't we have a duty to use them?
The book Crisis in the Muslim Mind actually addresses problems with the Ummah, the very problem we have clearly demonstrated in our exchanges on this subject. Humour me. Just read the Foreword that I am copying below and tell me what you think.
P.S. to everyone - these exchanges are not meant to pit one's ego against another or show who is cleverer than who. We are trying to pursue the truth. In order for a discourse like this to be productive, we need to learn to address the messages, not the messenger.
Peace to all.
Kab
CRISIS IN THE MUSLIM MIND
FOREWORD
There is general agreement that the Ummah is passing through an extremely difficult stage, one of disintegration and schism, loss of identity, failure of institutions, and inability to extract itself from its present state of bewilderment.
There is also general agreement that change is needed. In particular, the Ummah became acutely aware of its problems following its early encounters with Western civilization in Egypt and Turkey. In the two centuries that have passed since then, the Ummah has suffered through periods of dictatorship and submission to foreign experiments with its political and administrative systems, its culture and business, ethical and social makeup, and science and art. None of this, however, has yielded the kinds of results that the Ummah wanted or hoped for. Instead, the Ummah found itself caught up in a vicious circle.
What this means is that the leadership of the Ummah has been unable to determine the proper approach for bringing about the change needed to lead it toward its true objectives, After pondering the matter at length, looking at it from different perspectives, and considering objectively the attempts of the Ummah in the past to extract itself, we are convinced that the process of change must begin in the thought of the Ummah. This is because thought naturally precedes deeds, whether they prove to be correct or faulty.
Only sound thinking will result in sound reconstruction, and only sound thinking will deliver the Ummah from the crisis which threatens to strangle the life from it.
___________________________________________________________________________
Serious and mature Muslim intellectuals and leaders must commit themselves to the one path that is truly open to them, regardless of how difficult it might at first appear to be. They must make certain that the solution they seek originates in their religion, their homeland, and their history, and that they use it to steadfastly confront the challenges of the present. if this is not done, the bitter failures suffered by the Islamic world over the past several centuries will pale in comparison with the new problems that it will have to face.
Of course, Muslim leaders and intellectuals, with all their different leanings and preferences, as well as the entire Muslim Ummah can continue to dream of salvation, progress, honor, or power. However, if they do not change their present ways, means, and methods of thinking, in the end they can only expect that their lot will be a harvest even more bitter than those they have experienced in the past. The Ummah's intellectual and social leadership must search for an authentic Islamic alternative solution, strive to discern its elements from deep within the thought, culture, practices and institutions of the Ummah, and then relate it to the actual circumstances of its people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)