Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Merdeka: The end of the fairy-tale
- A depressed Merdeka — Are you celebrating Merdeka?
- Time for DAP to be a good partner
- Hudud: A PAS objective, not an agreed Pakatan agenda
- Hudud law: Truth or illusion?
- The bankruptcy of the Islamic vs secular state debate
- UMNO, PAS and the hudud debate
- Hopping means betrayal
- Hudud not just a religious issue
- Do ghosts and spirits exist?
| Merdeka: The end of the fairy-tale Posted: 30 Aug 2012 02:16 PM PDT Najib has made a lot of mistakes and has reneged on many promises. His Merdeka slogan, 'Janji DiTepati' is an affront to the rakyat. Mariam Mokhtar, FMT The nation is 55 years old today. To read some newspapers you'd think that it was Barisan Nasional, and not the people, which achieved independence from Britain. To learn that the Merdeka Day celebrations at the Bukit Jalil Stadium is "by invitation only", is appalling. Who decreed that the rakyat had to be members of the "select" BN club to celebrate Merdeka? If Merdeka is exclusively BN, then the slogan "1Malaysia" is rendered meaningless. As with many things in Umno, the taxpayers are made to pay for the prizes and the ceremony, but they are denied the opportunity to win any of the prizes or even attend the event. If the Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and his Information, Communications and Culture Minister, Rais Yatim, cannot even organise a Merdeka event that is inclusive of all Malaysians, then they are not fit to run the country after the 13th general election. You'd be forgiven for thinking that it was not Merdeka we were celebrating but Hari BN. Rais' foray into composing the Merdeka song makes you wonder: which is he worse at – songwriting or being a Cabinet minister? The biggest disappointment is Najib. He is weighted by personal and political baggage. Even if he listened and learnt (from his and others' mistakes), he cannot be rescued politically. He was not elected into office and is now vilified by the man who put him there, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Najib has made a lot of mistakes and has reneged on many promises. His Merdeka slogan, "Janji Di Tepati" is an affront to the rakyat. He is insecure and is desperate to win the affection of the rakyat. His reputation locally and abroad is tarnished. At the beginning of the week, it was reported that The Guardian had sacked its journalist, Joshua Trevino, for conflict of interest and for bringing the media industry into disrepute. Trevino had belonged to FBC Media, a public relations company, which had been paid by Najib to bathe Malaysia in a good light, to whitewash the misdeeds of its government, and to criticise Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim. Using taxpayers' money, Najib paid overseas PR companies such as Apco, FBC and CNBC millions of ringgit to promote him and his administration. Why does Najib need to spruce up his image? Why waste taxpayers' money when he only needs to act responsibly at home? If he is not sure of his duties, they are to lead, to listen and to learn. Najib holds on to the illusion of power, but the real power is in the hands of a man, who is sitting in The Mines Resort, just outside Kuala Lumpur. Najib thought he could win the hearts of the overseas Malaysians with the promise of enfranchisement, but his promises have remained an illusion. The Home Ministry, the police and Pemandu CEO Idris Jala, all gave us the illusion that crime was falling, but the truth is people are being raped, mugged, killed, abducted and robbed, on a daily basis. The illusion that Najib presents to overseas leaders is that he is a champion of the "moderates", but Malaysians beg to differ. At home, race and religion are used to divide the nation. Thus, the illusion of racial and religious harmony is just that. An illusion. Periodically, Malays are scared into thinking that Muslims are covertly being converted to Christianity, en masse. The controversial raid on the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) sparked off the formation of Himpunan Sejuta Melayu to defend Islam. Himpunan reported that it had the support of four million Muslims and 200 NGOs. Last October, a mere 5,000 people turned up for the rally, at the 100,000-capacity Shah Alam stadium. Another illusion was broken. Last May, the government held a "Million Youths Rally 2012" in Putrajaya, an event which some alleged was the government's attempt to try and rival the success of the Bersih 3.0 rally. The illusion of mass support by the youth was crushed with allegations of money and free food for those who attended. To make matters worse, several people were injured when a drag race car tore into the crowds. The illusion that the government looks after its youth was shattered when the Youth and Sports Minister Ahmad Shabery Cheek asked that the event not be politicised. Both he and the organisers refused to be held responsible for the lack of safety at the event. The 11th National Cooperative Day Expo 2012 held in mid-July at the National Stadium was another flop. Many seats were unoccupied. Old-age pensioners who had been bused in to fill the seats started to disperse as Najib started to speak. Bored schoolchildren blew their vuvuzelas and were reprimanded by Najib for drowning him out. The illusion that the prime minister draws crowds wherever he goes is false. It is also alleged that several government servants were transferred because of the dismal attendance.
|
| A depressed Merdeka — Are you celebrating Merdeka? Posted: 29 Aug 2012 02:50 PM PDT
Malaysians at this moment can't be bothered about politics. They're concerned about GE, but right at the top of their heads is how to make a living in Malaysia. If corporate professionals turn to multi-level marketing as a side-income, and journalists to tuition and freelance writing to make up for their pay, what about the average Malaysian? This year's Ramadan revealed the rising cost of food. A pitiful currypuff is now 50 sen, when it used to be RM1 for three currypuffs. And it seems that it is the same everywhere, from Bangsar to Keramat. Maggi Mee, a staple for Malaysians, has gone up, and a cup of very sweet Milo at a small mamak-like café at Giant Kota Damansara now cost RM4. Could this be why crime is rampant? Dina Zaman, The Malaysian Insider Seeing a headline shouting "Putrajaya offers cash rewards to N-Day event participation" does not encourage patriotism. It does not help that this year, just like the past few years, the atmosphere is muted. Very few Malaysians are in the mood to celebrate Malaysia's 55th year of Independence, and that is a truly sorry state for the country to be. There are many factors related to this. A declining economy, rising costs of living, gutter politics, crime, and there is also a general air of hopelessness among Malaysians when asked if they were looking forward to August 31, 2012. If one is to believe the noise on social media, and in forums, it would seem that Malaysians hate their country. There seems to be nothing positive about the country, and every effort the government puts, is met with ridicule. What does the average Malaysian think about this year's Merdeka celebrations? CS Tan of Terengganu finds that this year theme is a joke. "I 'created' a few phases to my Merdeka celebration. From primary to secondary school Merdeka was about how we managed to be independent, govern our country on our own terms, instead of being under British rule, and of course the colourful floats we saw on television. Tertiary – it's about holidays. Young working life – it's about holidays plus those outrageous uniforms from TNB and Telekom and other Malaysian companies we had to wear. Middle age phase – Merdeka is about able to think of myself after years of believing that the government can't do wrong. This year – it's about Merdeka from crime in Malaysia. Not optimistic huh?" The 1Malaysia Merdeka logo provoked such outcry and ridicule, one can only feel sorry for the government. "I'm sure that our Government had the best of intentions when they commissioned the design …" a rather diplomatic professional who did not want to be named said. Oso-San Anna disagrees. A Communications professional, she has worked in advertising agencies and in-house communications departments. She understands design and branding – she lives and breathes them. "Firstly, for something as important as Merdeka, the Government should leave it to the pros. I mean real pros (and not some crony's son) who has a solid understanding of the use of symbol and colour and collective expression of national pride." "Secondly, branding is powerful when built and layered over time with consistency and commitment." "Thirdly, where are the brand values? Both from the standpoint of the creator and the people it's meant for? Is there buy-in from the Rakyat? I feel all 3 are missing in the 1Malaysia logo that was designed. We are 55 years old as a Nation. Sure it's national pride but the meaning of real patriotism is already lost since it's seldom practiced in soul & spirit," she said. Angelia Ong, who works in animation is saddened by recent celebrations. The idea of Merdeka has somehow lost its spirit, she says. "It used to be more alive and less about polishing the achievements of a particular political coalition. It used to come across as more inclusive and meaningful. The phrase "1Malaysia" has taken over so much, my youngest had one time thought our country was called 1Malaysia, rather than Malaysia. From a branding point of view, I guess they have succeeded in ensuring that it's everywhere and anywhere, to the point of oversaturation." From a Malaysian's point of view (on what she thought of the logo), "it was just a major facepalm moment." On Facebook, one lone friend is spotted asking on his status update, "Where can I get a Malaysian flag? I want to hang it from my balcony." Very few of his friends responded to the query. No Money, No Merdeka Honey Malaysians at this moment can't be bothered about politics. They're concerned about GE, but right at the top of their heads is how to make a living in Malaysia. If corporate professionals turn to multi-level marketing as a side-income, and journalists to tuition and freelance writing to make up for their pay, what about the average Malaysian? This year's Ramadan revealed the rising cost of food. A pitiful currypuff is now 50 sen, when it used to be RM1 for three currypuffs. And it seems that it is the same everywhere, from Bangsar to Keramat. Maggi Mee, a staple for Malaysians, has gone up, and a cup of very sweet Milo at a small mamak-like café at Giant Kota Damansara now cost RM4. Could this be why crime is rampant? Tania Leong, who runs a new age shop, is not confident of our economy. "Everyone I know who owns a business, has reported a decrease in revenue. Even my customers share a same complaint of their businesses, be it property, legal (clients unable to pay), travel agency, health spas, dvd shops, children's play facilities, restaurants etc. Sungai Wang Plaza in the city has always been golden hot property (probably one of the top 5 most expensive per sq.ft.), and even that is suffering." "What I have observed is that this country is lacking qualified personnel in many areas of work from a sale assistant to corporate positions, a low standard of education system, many government workers are slow, inefficient and clueless, there is no minimum wage, corruption appears to be the norm in our judicial, police & government departments, religion has been made into law, sex education in schools are non-existent or minimal and so we have children bearing children. Crime rates seemed to have soared the last couple of years." "If leaving the country was an option for me, I would leave in a heartbeat." Hani B works in retail and has first-hand experiences with customer spending. Her customers range from the wealthy Middle Easterners to young college students, and understands their buying habits. "I used to be confident that our economy can weather most adversities, now I get totally scared when reading that our national debt amounted to 257 billion in 2011 … yikes!! When I google about our economy, the results go on and on about how much it's growing bla bla bla but retail wise, I just don't see it and my salary certainly doesn't reflect it." Like Tania, she notes that skilled workers are lacking. "I read that our country is among the top 20 nations to be labelled as losers of capital flight ... that is RM893 billion(!) siphoned out between 1970 and 2010, so why should we stay back and help with the improvement of wealth to the 1 per cent? Then again, what do I know, I'm just a shopgirl." At the many open houses around the capital, the Malaysians asked, professed to forgetting that Merdeka was around the corner. This year is bad, they said, and their open houses reflect that. Open houses are celebrated on a smaller scale now.
|
| Time for DAP to be a good partner Posted: 29 Aug 2012 02:42 PM PDT The Chinese-based party should not rock the Pakatan boat right now by harping on non-issues and should instead work towards winning the polls. CT Ali, FMT The 13th general election is there for Pakatan Rakyat to lose. And lose it they will if DAP does not get its act together. I never thought I would say that. All this time I have watched DAP grow from strength to strength. Consolidating its considerable presence in Sabah and Sarawak while making inroads into the Peninsula in places where even Umno thinks Pakatan would not dare venture into or could hope to field a candidate against the Barisan Nasional and have a chance to win. All this while, the DAP has made concerted efforts to take in Malays to boost its claims to be a party for all Malaysians. Its commitment on taking over the government in concert with PAS and PKR seems to be the order of the day. And yet as the 13th general election nears, we see the real DAP is starting to unravel… to fray at its edges. The memory of the controversial exit of its vice-chairman, Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim, has returned to haunt the party because now, through Tunku Aziz, we are privy to what has been said of Anwar Ibrahim by DAP's first-tiered leadership. And what they say of Anwar is not flattering to DAP and to Anwar himself. Now, is DAP making use of Tunku Aziz to rein in Anwar after his acquittal of Sodomy II? Or is Tunku Aziz making use of DAP to continue his public spat with Anwar over his insistence that the April 28 Bersih rally should not have proceeded at Dataran Merdeka? You tell me. Either way, it bodes ill for the Pakatan coalition. Hudud a non-issue The DAP also insists on mischievously harping on hudud – a non-issue as both BN and Pakatan are on record as having said that they will not and cannot implement. So why talk about something that is not going to be implemented? Another non-issue is party hopping. It is a non-issue because anybody with an ounce of grey matter in his or her brain is against this. But anybody with an ounce of grey matter also knows, understands and accepts that no matter what anybody says, any politician worth his salt will have to accept that in a democracy, elections are won in a number of ways – and party hopping is one of them. Tell us, Karpal Singh and Lim Kit Siang, was there not a time when this Anwar was once your sworn enemy? Wasn't he your favourite target and whipping boy in Parliament? And now you are comrades in arms. And do you not have within DAP ranks former Umno politicians? What do you call that? A change of heart, a marriage of convenience? Or has the time come even for sworn enemies to look again at each other's convictions and see if there is room to work together towards a common goal? So please DAP, while it is a decent thing to do to be against frogs that go hopping from one party to another, the adherence to such sentiment might be a bit harder to do. We are at war with BN. Almost anything that could assist us to win that war must be considered. When victory is in hand, these "questionable tactics" can be looked again with clear heads. Until then shut up.
|
| Hudud: A PAS objective, not an agreed Pakatan agenda Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:35 AM PDT
Mat Sabu was telling the truth when he denied he said PAS would amendment the constitution to implement hudud. The word 'hudud' was planted into the conversation by the reporter, who was smart enough to put the questions in such a way that Mat Sabu could hardly answer in the negative. Kim Quek Like any reader of The Sin Chew Daily, I was stunned by its front page headline on Aug 28, which reads: "PAS will implement Hudud when it rules". My split-second reaction was: "Gosh, this is serious!". Flashing instantly across the mind is the image of an Islamic state, mixed with the consternation that PAS might have suddenly changed course over the Islamic state issue and the devastating electoral repercussion that can be expected to ensue from the Chinese community following such a shocking turn of event. Anxious to know more, I read through the entire two pages covering the event without pause, and was relieved that, as I expected, PAS has indeed held on to its policy of putting the pursuit of an Islamic state and implementation of Hudud as a long term objective – certainly not the current priority. I am happy that the alliance of PAS-PKR-DAP remains intact and on-course in its relentless march to Putrajaya. Meanwhile Sin Chew's headline on Aug 28 has kicked up a mini-storm in the Internet.
PAS Deputy President Mat Sabu immediately denied that he said PAS would amend the federal constitution to implement Hudud should it come to power. "I did not say (we'll bring) hudud (to Parliament)," he told Malaysiakini. He added that good governance and social justice must be practised in Malaysia before implementing the Islamic penal code. However, Sin Chew on the other hand also defended its headline report by giving the following sequence of events through its website on Aug 28 (Tuesday): Stage 1: On Sunday, Aug 26: Sin Chew asked Mat Sabu to comment on PAS President Hadi Awang's statement on Saturday (Aug 25) that PAS would implement Hudud through the democratic process. Mat Sabu answered: "Democracy is to govern through the ballot box, and change to any policy must be done through Parliament, and two-thirds support (in Parliament) is needed to amend the constitution." Stage 2: On Monday, Aug 27: Based on the above Mat Sabu answer, Sin Chew's evening edition said in its headline story: "Mat Sabu says PAS has decided to propose constitutional amendment to implement hudud should the Islamic party capture Putrajaya" Upon learning from an English daily that Mat Sabu had denied saying so, Sin Chew called Mat Sabu to clarify further. Mat Sabu reiterated that if any party wanted to amend "any Act", it would need to go through Parliament, and that he didn't mention hudud. He also stated that the party had not discussed whether to table a motion to amend the constitution. However, Sin Chew reporter pressed further and asked: "The 'any Act', does it include hudud?". Mat Sabu answered: "Yes." The reporter further asked: : "Can I say PAS 'memang berhasrat' (intend) to amend the constitution to implement any Act, including hudud, but at the moment has not discussed the matter of tabling a motion in Parliament?". Mat Sabu answered: "Can." Stage 3: (Tuesday, Aug 28) Sin Chew splashed the headline "PAS will implement hudud when it rules", saying in its first line: "PAS Deputy President Mat Sabu says PAS intends to seek constitutional amendment in Parliament in order to implement hudud, when it rules in the central government".
From the above sequence of events, we can see that Mat Sabu was telling the truth when he denied he said PAS would amendment the constitution to implement hudud. The word 'hudud' was planted into the conversation by the reporter, who was smart enough to put the questions in such a way that Mat Sabu could hardly answer in the negative. In fact, Mat Sabu was only making a general remark when he answered that a constitutional amendment needs to have two thirds support in parliament. He was certainly not specifically referring to hudud, so it is not fair to coin the words in such a way as to portray Mat Sabu as driving the point that PAS will seek parliamentary approval for implementing hudud upon taking over the federal government. It is apparent that Mat Sabu didn't want to give a direct answer. The reasons are simple. In the first place, a parliamentary motion from PAS needs to go through the process of building consensus within Pakatan Rakyat, more so when it is a constitutional amendment as momentous as the introduction of hudud and the conversion of the status quo into an Islamic state. There is no such consensus now or in the foreseeable future. Secondly, social conditions are not ripe for implementation of hudud as exemplified by the lack of social justice and good governance in our country, as pointed out by Mat Sabu and other Islamic scholars. Thirdly, it is suicidal for PAS to hammer home the hudud agenda at this sensitive election time when it says it is still in the process of building greater understanding among non-supporters of hudud,who in all likelihood, predominate the electorate. So, with all these hurdles standing in the way, does it make sense for PAS to trumpet the message that upon reaching Putrajaya, it will implement hudud – as if this is currently its urgent priority?
Perhaps what causes the furor most is not so much the details in Sin Chew's report as the grossly misleading and sensational title of "PAS WILL IMPLEMENT HUDUD WHEN IT RULES". It distinctly gives the impression that hudud is on the cards, the moment PAS steps into Putrajaya. So, who among the non-Muslims wouldn't be alarmed and shocked by such a headline and the leading sentences of the story, when they have all along been assured that PAS will only move through consensus within Pakatan Rakyat and that the latter's prime political objective is to improve the people's welfare by replacing the corrupt and obsolete Barisan Nasional? Considering that many readers do not read through all the relevant details or possess the analytical mind to sort out the wheat from the chaff, many must have already been misled and alienated by this sensational report. (In all fairness to Sin Chew, despite the misleading headlines and the leading story on Aug 28, its entire coverage of the subject, particularly its exhaustive coverage spreading over five pages in the following day, Aug 29, do contain sufficient truthful information for the more discerning reader to form the correct conclusion). Now that the damage has been done, it falls upon Pakatan Rakyat and democracy activists to dispel the misperception and spread the truth that hudud remains a PAS objective, but not an agreed Pakatan Rakyat agenda when it comes to power. And hence, a vote for PAS is not a vote for Hudud, but a vote for good governance. |
| Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:55 PM PDT
Our reporter called him again after the evening edition of Sin Chew Daily hit the street, and wanted to reconfirm with him the content of his speech. Mat Sabu offered to change the tone from "decided" to "had the intention" (berhasrat) which our reporter agreed. As a result, some minor changes appeared on the morning edition of the newspaper: "PAS has the intention of seeking constitutional amendment in the Parliament in order to implement the hudud law once the Pakatan takes the helm of the federal administration." Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily In an open society, everything is laid out under the sun for public scrutiny. I personally have nothing against what PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu has said. On the contrary, I used to have very high regards for his candidness, and his relatively open and pragmatic attitude towards things. Such a perception has been reflected in many of my past commentaries on PAS. This time, we have to really thank Mat Sabu for accepting an interview from Sin Chew Daily, during which our reporter requested him to expound the remarks made by party president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang on Harakah that the party had the intention of implementing the hudud law through democratic process. Mat Sabu explained, "PAS has decided that it will seek constitutional amendment in the Parliament to implement the hudud law once the Pakatan takes the helm of the federal administration." Our reporter called him again after the evening edition of Sin Chew Daily hit the street, and wanted to reconfirm with him the content of his speech. Mat Sabu offered to change the tone from "decided" to "had the intention" (berhasrat) which our reporter agreed. As a result, some minor changes appeared on the morning edition of the newspaper: "PAS has the intention of seeking constitutional amendment in the Parliament in order to implement the hudud law once the Pakatan takes the helm of the federal administration." In the meantime, we also interviewed PAS information chief Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man to get him to clarify on the party's stand on this issue. His response was consistent with that of Mat Sabu and the same was published on the day's edition of Sin Chew Daily. We have later acquired the official statement of PAS president Hadi Awang on August 13, as well as his August 25 statement published on the party's mouthpiece Harakah on the implementation of the hudud law. We later clarified with PAS secretary-general Mustafa Ali on the same issue. Unfortunately, after the report went into print, Mat Sabu denied the following day what he had said, and claimed that Sin Chew Daily had distorted his speech. We tried contact him with the hope of seeking further clarification from him but have so far not been able to get him. It appears that politicians' customary ways of doing things have been repeated on Mat Sabu. Although this is nothing new in politics, I am still somewhat disappointed. I thought Mat Sabu was a responsible man who would loyally adhere to his principles. To support our case that we have not misquoted or distorted anyone's speech, we published the statement Hadi Awang has made on today's Sin Chew Daily, along with an exclusive interview with Mustafa Ali for public scrutiny. We have to make it very clear that our reports on the hudud law have not been tailored in such a way to baffle PAS or Pakatan but to deliver accurate and essential information to the reading public. As a public medium, we are in no position to conceal any piece of important information from public knowledge, especially something that involves public interests, and incidents that may transform our society in one way or another. It is imperative that PAS' stand on the implementation of hudud law be exposed under the sun so that members of the public could comprehend, evaluate and make their options. The worst thing we could do is to selectively hide the truth, glorifying the most beautiful parts and covering up the rest of it. The most despicable and deceitful way of doing things is to tell one side of the story to the Muslim community, and the other side to the non-Muslims. PAS used to enjoy a respectable repute and should therefore treasure its own credibility. If the party insists that the hudud law is correct and appropriate, it should then publicly proclaim its political agendas in the same tone, be it to the Muslim or non-Muslim society, and go on to promote and lobby for them among the Chinese voters. That said, the party must make its agendas unreservedly open to all Malaysians. This is the most fundamental way of doing things justly. Meanwhile, PAS' allies in the opposition pact must never attempt to create a glamorous illusion among the Chinese community with their own interests and ballots as prime considerations. While political parties have every right to pursue their goals and objectives, they have to be accountable to the rakyat in so doing. Whether the hudud law is eventually good or detrimental to our nation, once it is put into implementation, it will stay in effect for generations, even as electoral ballots and political parties do not last forever. Malaysians are entitled to the whole truth to make sensible judgements and choices that will shape their common future.
|
| The bankruptcy of the Islamic vs secular state debate Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:35 PM PDT
Those who ignore ― whether deliberately or otherwise ― the civilizational, historical, intellectual and spiritual dimensions of Islam risks projecting their own prejudices and fantasies onto their understanding of Islam wherever they employ the words "Islam" or "Islamic" in their utterances or writings, thus betraying their superficial grasp of the religion which they (falsely) claim to represent. Imran Mustafa and Wan Mohd Aimran Wan Mohd Kamil, The Malaysian Insider We read with interest the article by Dr Farouk Musa entitled "Arguing for a secular state" published on August 22 in The Malaysian Insider. The idea of the Islamic state, as mentioned by Farouk, is indeed a modern creation. It did not appear, or even conceivable, prior to the total fall and destruction of the Caliphate, as Muslims have always understood polity and politics to be intimately linked to some form of authority which upholds systems that are congruent with principles in Islam. This is of no surprise, as there had never been any point in Muslim history in which there was a total loss of sovereignty in almost all Muslim lands, and of which Muslims can do nought but watch as their precious way of life, their entire being, were unrecognizably altered to fit a system whose history and philosophy they did not share. In fact, according to Shaykh Seraj Hendriks, a Mufti in South Africa, the adjective "Islamic" was never truly used for organisations or entities prior to the fall of the Caliphate, including "Islamic Renaissance", whatever that might mean. Indeed, the use of the adjective came first in Muslim majority countries, rather than non-Muslim countries, indicating the severity of the trauma that the Ummah suffered at that time. A tangential but crucial point that needs to be made on the meaning and scope of the word 'Islamic' is that it should be not understood simply as a prefix, the addition of which automatically transforms the subject-matter into agreement with the requirements of the religion of Islam. This is especially true if one reduces and restricts the meaning of the word 'Islam' and 'Islamic' to an external show of piety without a conscious and knowing submission, or to a private choice without an outward and social manifestation of religious belief, or to an intellectual form of religious understanding severed from its spiritual and intuitive wellsprings, instead of conceiving the word 'Islam' or 'Islamic' as standing for a religion founded upon Divine Revelation, transmitted by Holy Prophets and Messengers (upon them be peace!) and nurtured by learned scholars and men and women of spiritual discernment and of pure and upright character. Those who ignore ― whether deliberately or otherwise ― the civilizational, historical, intellectual and spiritual dimensions of Islam risks projecting their own prejudices and fantasies onto their understanding of Islam wherever they employ the words "Islam" or "Islamic" in their utterances or writings, thus betraying their superficial grasp of the religion which they (falsely) claim to represent. Indeed, inserting the word "Islam" or "Islamic" into the name of one's movement or organization does not necessarily mean that words and deeds of the movement or organization will be in harmony with the teachings and practices of Islam nor does it guarantee that everything it stood for faithfully represents the religious and intellectual traditions of Islam, especially if those in movement or organization of such kinds are themselves confused about the fundamental elements of the worldview of Islam and completely unmoored from the living tradition of Islam as constituted by its scholars and saints, in addition to men and women of spiritual discernment. In evaluating the validity and soundness of the proposals made by such movements or organizations pertaining to the direction and future of the Ummah, one doth well to remember that even the devil can quote Scripture. A sensitivity towards history The study of history is only as useful as it contributes to a true and correct perspective of the present, upon which a proper and clear path to the future may be charted. This alone should be sufficient in justifying the need for a sensitive awareness of the historical context and a critical assessment of historicity whenever one wishes to discuss ideas and theories, peoples and nations. The attitude that readily marginalizes the historical perspective and analysis on the assumption that everything that has happened are of no value to our predicaments today and which pretentiously declares the obligation to respect and care for our intellectual inheritance amounts to a form of 'medievalism' which is regressive and archaic, is predicated on a shallow concept of what being medieval represents and entails. There is, in fact, nothing wrong with being 'medieval' ― some of the best buildings in the world are medieval buildings, as are some of the best poetry. One only needs to point to the great Gothic churches of Europe; to Chaucer and Rumi as obvious examples. In fact, the Mu'tazilites, whom Farouk is fond of mentioning, were also 'medieval' rather than classical, being influenced primarily by Plotinus, a neo-Platonist, due to a misattribution in the title of the book, "The Philosophy of Aristotle". The same is also true of Muslim thought and matters of fiqh (jurisprudence). One cannot, for example, take a text such as al-Mawardi's al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah out of context and assume universality ― this is in fact an inversion of fiqh, which literally translates to understanding. One also cannot, by virtue of the same reasoning, throw away such works due to some misappropriation of some quarters in society. What is required, obviously, is a proper understanding of the historical context and a critical examination of the text. There can be errors in reasoning, and we shall deal with this in due course, but it is the principle still stands, nonetheless. Therefore, when discussing the so-called "Islamic state" and the way it was understood by past Muslims, one needs to look at how medieval Muslim polities operated, and whether or not such contexts and elements that existed then still exist in the same form today. Then, a critical evaluation and interrogation of the current, accepted system need also be made in order to best fit the purposes of the din, which is ultimately, submission to the Almighty. Now, traditional Muslim polities are known to be relatively decentralised. In fact, the appropriation of the hudud laws in traditional Muslim societies have been mainly local, even though the Qadis might be appointed by the government. The fact that Qadis are normally local means that they would normally understand the local context, and therefore are able to exercise discretion in the way the Law is exercised. There is, after all, a distinction made within Islamic Law between hudud and ta'zir, and it was also related by Shaykh Hamza Yusuf that the dishing of punishment, whether hudud or ta'zir, very much depended upon the understanding of the local qadi of both the Law, which requires an understanding of the Principles of Jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as well as the local context. Therefore, the objection that, "The formulation, adoption and implementation of legislation are always matters of human judgment and reasoning. Therefore their intended implementation is subject to human error and fallibility and can always be challenged and questioned", has always been understood within the Muslim intellectual tradition, and jurists traditionally have been acutely aware of their own fallibility as human beings; hence all treatises on fiqh always ends with the phrase "Allahu a'lam" or "God Knows Best". Indeed, to a certain extent, this is no different than today's justice system, whereby cases of miscarriages of injustice is not unknown to have occurred. If it argued that the mere fact that somebody is a human being automatically renders his judgement and conclusion on matters of religion suspect in terms of its validity and truth, then is not the questioner himself open to similar charges of human fallibility? After all, if the mere fact that a scholar is also a human being impairs him from giving valid and correct solutions to a particular religious problem, how can it be guaranteed that those who are challenging the scholar will be immune from the same failings, especially if the intellectual and spiritual qualities of the challenger is nowhere near compared to the scholar against whom he rails upon? Therefore, in brazenly imputing the fallibility of the learned of the past due to the self-evident fact that there are merely human beings, the challenger leaves himself open to the same charge of fallibility by others, which then calls into question the validity of his challenge in the first place since he too is a mere human being. Now, in the specific case of hudud, the intrinsic flexibility and robustness of the system which takes into account the diversities and weaknesses of human reasoning was radically altered with the permeation of Western ideas of nation states into the minds of the Muslims at the turn of the 20th century, which among other things, calls for a singular and uniform codified law within the political boundaries of the state. The reduction of legal principles to strict and clear rules in a legal code disrupts and impairs the ability of the jurists to exert his or her own opinion to the fullest, disempowering them by shifting the judicial-legislative powers to a centralized state bureaucracy. An example of this occurred when the Ottomans, as part of programmatic response to external Western threats, initiated a series of internal reform in the early 19th century, the most significant being an attempt to codify the Syariah, which involves compiling large amounts of authoritative Hanafi legal rulings and codifying it into a single body of work. As Noah Feldman explained in his book, "The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State": "This Westernizing process, foreign to the Islamic legal tradition, sought to transform Syariah from a body of doctrines and principles to be discovered by the human efforts of the scholars into a set of rules that could be looked up in a book." What transpired was that the jurist were, to a very large extent, forced to make their own rulings based on previous ones (simple precedents), thereby removing their traditional flexibility in applying principles of justice and significantly diminishing their role as the source of legal authority. This, coupled with the breakdown of the Millet system ― which divided the population of the vast Ottoman Empire into several quasi-autonomous groupings according to their religious affiliations, with each groupings enjoying comparative legislative, judicial, fiscal and religious freedom, thus granting security, stability and self-confidence to the members of each grouping, securing the preservation of religious and cultural identity across successive generations within the same religious community ― due to the rise of nationalism, were among the factors which contributed to the failure of the multiracial, multiethnic, and multireligious Ottoman system. As the 19th century progressed into the 20th century and the idea of nation states with their fixed borders and single codified law became the norm, the conception of what a "state" is and of "Islamic law" crystallised around these accepted models of "nation states" and now should be and, indeed are, critically evaluated so as to test its validity in light of the intellectual and religious traditions of Islam and more importantly, to determine the extent to which it can be made to serve the needs of Muslims living in the modern world.
|
| UMNO, PAS and the hudud debate Posted: 27 Aug 2012 05:44 PM PDT
UMNO keeps attacking PAS through state-controlled media in the hope that it would turn PAS and DAP against each other. Many too are waiting for PAS to fall apart before elections. At the same time, UMNO has not shown courage to respond to MCA's repeated rejection of Hudud. It is more interested to keep deceiving Malay voters, ensuring they remain in the dark. Tuan Guru Abdul Hadi Awang, Harakah Hudud form one of several of Islamic penal codes, along with qisas and ta'zir. It is divine prerogative, as codified in the Qu'ran and mutawatir hadiths (whose chain of narrations is solid making them authoritative), detailing specific offences covered in Hudud, the punishments they entail and the grounds of punishment.
|
| Posted: 27 Aug 2012 05:21 PM PDT
We are curious about the stand of Pakatan Rakyat leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is the leader behind the scene that caused the fall of the PBS state government in 1994 and planned the September 16 takeover attempt in 2008, over the proposed anti party-hopping Bill. Lim Sue Goan, Sin Chew Daily The Penang state government is planning to table an anti party-hopping Bill at the November sitting of the State Legislative Assembly. It has triggered the questions of whether preventing the people's elected representatives from changing parties is a violation of the freedom of association conferred by the Federal Constitution, and why Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng made such a proposal at this time? It is not something new to have elected government being collapsed by party-hopping lawmakers. In the 1994 Sabah state election, Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) managed to stay in power after winning 25 of the total 48 state assembly seats. However, its members were induced and roped, and the state government fell two months later. It is a forever pain in the heart of its founding president Datuk Joseph Pairin Kitingan. On January 25, 2009, Umno Bota state assembly member Datuk Nasarudin Hashim hopped to the PKR, causing the Pakatan Rakyat to have 32 seats in the Perak state assembly, five seats more than the BN's 27 seats. The BN and Umno rapidly launched a counterattack by pulling back Nasarudin to Umno, and roping in DAP Jelapang state assembly member Datuk Hee Yit Foong, PKR Behrang state assembly member Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi and Changkat Jering state assemblyman Mohd Osman Jailu. They quit the Pakatan Rakyat and supported the BN, allowing the BN to regain the Perak state regime. Different people in different situations have different feelings for the proposed anti party-hopping Bill. Pairin believes that when a people's representative contests under the banner of a political party, he or she has "sealed" a social contract with the people. If he or she changes party after being elected, it means a betrayal to the commitment. However, other BN leaders do not agree with the anti party-hopping Bill and MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek even challenged the DAP to amend its party constitution to prohibit party-hopping lawmakers from joining the party. We are curious about the stand of Pakatan Rakyat leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is the leader behind the scene that caused the fall of the PBS state government in 1994 and planned the September 16 takeover attempt in 2008, over the proposed anti party-hopping Bill. If there is no law to prevent lawmakers from violating the commitments, the elected government might eventually fall, causing the election to lose its significance. The Penang state government proposed the anti party-hopping Bill with the hope to gain public support and prompt the federal government to amend the Federal Constitution. The general view is, the BN and the Pakatan Rakyat are equal in strength and if the numbers of seats they gain in the next general election are close, the elected government would be unstable, if there is no law prohibiting lawmakers from changing parties. Can the BN be sure that betrayal will not happen within the ruling coalition? Therefore, there must be an anti party-hopping law to clarify that the seat of a lawmaker who quits his or her party will be vacant, even if he or she does not join the rival party. The people's right to vote should be prioritised over lawmaker's right of association. Moreover, the act of quitting and joining rival parties is related to the lawmaker's integrity and should not be simplified as democracy and freedom. However, even if the anti party-hopping Bill is passed in the Penang state assembly, it would still be ruled invalid once it is brought to court. In 1993, the PBS had foreseen a potential threat for the state government and thus, an anti party-hopping Bill was passed by in the Sabah state assembly. However, the Bill was challenged in court and eventually ruled invalid due to the violation of the Federal Constitution. Similar to the restoration of local elections, lawmakers can still change parties as they like if the federal government refuses to cooperate. Such kind of democracy and freedom of association are not worth mentioning.
|
| Hudud not just a religious issue Posted: 27 Aug 2012 01:19 PM PDT
Muslims must recognise that people of other religions have the right to their own beliefs. They must also recognise that a person's belief does not hinder him from associating and or cooperating with – what is now a commonly used term – "kafirs" if the purpose is beneficial to all. Awang Abdillah According to the Quran, there is no compulsion in the freedom of faith. The hudud issue is one of those opportunistic topics that snakes its way into the mainstream every time conniving politicians hit a wall. As a Muslim, let me share a simple truth enshrined in the Quran. The Surah AlKafirun affirms that for a Muslim "his religion is his" and for a non-Muslim "his religion is his", which basically means "to you your religion and to me mine". It is crystal clear that there is no compulsion in this freedom of faith. As such, persons with different beliefs can still work together Beliefs are a set of values about the spiritual or physical things that a person has faith in such as truth, strength, guidance and benefits. Hence everyone has his own beliefs, be it factual, real or mythical. Muslims must recognise that people of other religions have the right to their own beliefs. They must also recognise that a person's belief does not hinder him from associating and or cooperating with – what is now a commonly used term – "kafirs" if the purpose is beneficial to all. Which brings me to the politics of the day. Prophet lived with a Christian If the DAP does not accept the hudud Islamic law, so be it. The question of prohibiting Muslims from supporting DAP does not arise at all. As a political party, DAP has its own struggle – in the pursuit of its own principles and objectives. And being a non-Muslim party, its beliefs will in many ways run contrary to that of a Muslim. Nevertheless in the political cause, the party can still work together with Muslim parties for the benefit of the nation. As far as cooperation – for justice, good governance and nation building – is concerned, there is no reason why different political parties cannot work together. The Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) lived with his uncle Abu Talib who was not a Muslim and assisted the latter in the trade business. The first Hijrah of the Muslims was to Habsyah (now modern Ethiopia), which was a Christian country at that time, to seek protection from persecutions from the Meccans. Let me enlighten you with this insight: on the issue of the implementation of hudud law, even many Umno stalwarts are not in favour of it. What is happening now is that certain PAS hardliners are believed to be using the issue for their own political ends. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2012/08/28/hudud-not-just-a-religious-issue/
|
| Posted: 26 Aug 2012 02:40 PM PDT Is there any truth in the Chinese folklore that during the Zhong Yuan festival the gates of hell are opened allowing all wandering and suffering spirits to enter the earthy realm? Stanley Koh, FMT Do ghosts or earth-bound spirits exist? If so, why do they exist? Is there any truth to the belief that after death, humans are reincarnated into the spirit world? Is their existence a part of the human spiritual evolutionary process in the cycle of life and death? The curious mind can go on generating a list of perplexing questions on the mysterious and puzzling existence of invisible beings that continue to influence and shape religious-cultural practices since the dawn of human civilization. Perhaps, the answers are within our human psyche and not externally out there. Millions of people with diverse cultural and religious backgrounds across the globe have some sort of personal life and death experience which shapes their views and beliefs on the existence of invisible beings and the spirit world. A student on spiritualism will swear that suicides and other victims of sudden death (that is, accidents and murders), including executed criminals, having been cut off in the full flush of physical life, are likely to be earth-bound in the hope of satisfying their deeply rooted desires or thirst for life. Some scholars of occultism also claim that passionate sorrow and desires of friends on earth tend to draw departed spirits down to the earth-sphere again, thus, often causing acute suffering to the deceased as well as interfering with the normal course of their evolution. Furthermore, the uninitiated ordinary folk are unable to distinguish the major difference between an astral body and an earth-bound reincarnated spirit (that is, ghost) during paranormal encounters. Perhaps, there are clues to this perplexing question. This is provided by author and student of theosophical studies, Lieut Colonel Arthur E Powell, in his publication titled, "The Astral Body." Some define the "astral body" as a duplicate of the physical body, though this may not necessarily be true as it is composed of "subtle" or ethereal substances which are much less grosser than physical matter. An astral body leaves the physical body upon death of a person and often, encounters with an astral body apparition with swirling colours are mistaken for ghosts. "Astral matter exists in seven grades or orders of fineness, corresponding to the seven grades of physical matter which is solid, liquid, gaseous, etheric, super etheric, sub-atomic and atomic. "Being much finer, the astral body's matter interpenetrates physical matter. Every physical atom therefore floats in a sea of astral matter which surrounds it and fills every interstice in the physical matter. "Thus a being living in the astral world might be occupying the same space as a human being living in the physical world. Each entirely unconscious of the other and in no way impeding the freedom of movement of the other," according to the theosophical interpretation. 'Many kinds of heavens and hells' In short, the astral body of man is a vehicle and every living man possesses and is capable of using an astral body. Most humans are able to use their five physical faculties of sense, taste, touch, hearing and sight but lack the knowledge in developing their astral senses which can reap the special powers of clairvoyance and astral travelling. Hence to the uninitiated they lack the ability to distinguish the difference when they see an "astral body" and often mistake it for a "ghost" which is completely another different entity, another form of spiritual reincarnation. In actuality, an astral shell of a deceased person is not immortal unlike the life span of a "ghost". An auric astral shell will eventually disintegrate and dissolve into its original elements just as the physical body decomposes into different earthy elements upon death – corresponding to the five elements, namely earth, fire, water, air and metal as stipulated in the Taoist text on metaphysics. Are there more interpretations on "ghosts" in other religions? According to Buddhist scriptures and texts, there are different types of ghosts while in Taoist metaphysical studies, the principle of "ying" and "yang" gives a clearer picture of human life after death. "Hence, the many kinds of heavens, hells and purgatorial existences believed by followers of innumerable religions, all fall naturally into place and become intelligible as we understand the nature of the astral body and of the astral worlds," wrote Powell in his famous publication depicting in detail the characteristics and nature of the human astral body. In a nutshell, there is a growing realisation and awareness of Man's true spiritual nature and the complexities in the human evolutionary process after life on earth, with interludes in other and subtler worlds. With the dawn of the 21st century, there is little doubt the human species is steadily evolving and becoming more and more aware of their spiritual knowledge and needs. "Physical science, with its ions and electrons, is on the threshold of the astral world, while the researches of Einstein and others are rapidly making acceptable the conception of the fourth dimension, which so long has been familiar to… students particularly of the astral and spiritual worlds. "In the realm of psychology, modern analytical methods are giving a promising future of being able to reveal this true nature of human spiritual journey… the lower fraction of man's psychic mechanism, confirming incidentally some of the statements and teachings put forward by ancient Eastern books and by Theosophists and occultists of today." Modern sciences and the enormous vogue of spiritualism, physical science and the realm of psychology are beginning to unfold the true psyche of the human species being not just a physical body endowed with merely physical senses. Modern clinical sciences are beginning to understand the existence of other "bodies" encasing the human physical forms – the etheric astral and casual bodies including all the other complex interplaying different levels of human consciousness. It is therefore fascinating when prominent psychiatrist Dr Brian Weiss through his scientific clinical studies on his patients opened an unexpected door into the astonishing realm of past-life regression. His professional findings proved that life after death is not mere superstition or a myth of ancient wisdom. Whatever profound yet simple truth on human evolutionary existence unveiled by Brian is nothing new. But the fascinating fact is, the truth of his clinical findings has finally pointed scientifically to the evidence of reincarnation. Reincarnation can take place in many invisible dimensions of existence as some religions have described and narrated in their scriptures. The existence of "etheric beings", ghosts or aggrieved spirits cannot be proven by chemistry. Spirits of the ghostly types or spiritual beings do exist in different levels at varying higher to lower hierarchies in the cycle of rebirths. It is sheer ignorance or arrogance even to ponder that human beings are the only spiritual, visible and living creatures on Earth. In his publication, "Messages from the Masters," Brian wrote, "Humans always think of themselves as the only beings. This is not true. There are many worlds and many dimensions… many, many more souls…." Brian is convinced of life after death despite his initial scepticism of "unscientific" fields in parapsychology and he confessed he knew nothing about the concept of past lives or reincarnation, nor did he initially desire to during the early years of his profession. His scepticism changed 20 years ago when one of his patients inexplicably began recalling what seemed to be her past-life memories. Since then Brian regressed more than 2,000 patients to perinatal, in-utero or past life memories. Do these evidential documented cases shed any light about the cycle of life and death involving the passage of time – past, present and future? Do they provide a scientific logical explanation on the existence of other beings, namely, ghosts, spirits, souls, angels, demons, vampires, elves, bogeymen, unicorns, phoenixes, energies of karma, chi, holy-spirit and guardian angels, to mention some examples of supernatural beings amid our human existence? Anything unknown is generally fascinating, even to the sceptics.
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
