Merry Christman Everyone !

Sedar lah Wahai Rakyat !!!

Pemimpin-pemimpin politik memang tidak berhenti mendabik dada menyuarakan melalui media dan ucapan betapa sumbangan dan tenaga mereka lah yang telah meningkatkan kesejahteraan rakyat.

Bahawa usaha mereka bersama dengan penasihat2 agama mereka lah yang telah menyelamatkan akidah rakyat. Tanpa mereka, kamu semua akan sesat seolah-olah kamu sendiri tidak ada akal, nawaitu mahupun kemahuan sendiri untuk beriman kepada Pencipta semesta alam.

Benarkah kehidupan kamu telah bertambah baik kerana usaha pemimpin politik? Atau sepatutnya kah kehidupan kamu dan anak2 kamu seharusnya lebih baik jika mereka telah menjalankan tanggungjawap yang mereka sendiri rela dengan amanah dan lebih cekap?

Jika benarlah kehidupan kamu bertambah baik diatas usaha pemimpin2 politik, apakah itu kerana pengorbanan mereka ? Pengorbanan apakah namanya bila kehidupan kamu bertambah baik daripada miskin kepada tidak miskin dan kehidupan mereka dan anak2 mereka bertambah baik daripada miskin kepada jutawan dan billionare ? Apakah anak2 kamu tidak berhak kepada kemewahan yang dikecapi oleh pemimpin politik serta peluang2 yang dinikmati oleh anak2 mereka? 

Kamu menilai anak2 kamu begitu rendah sekali???

Mungkin kamu sudah bergembira dengan teriakan mereka untuk memperjuangkan “bangsa, agama dan Negara” walaupun diri mereka dan keluarga mereka yang di perjuangkan walhal kamu dan anak2 kamu dapat cebisan2?!

Buta atau rela nya kamu? Kamu langsung tidak sedar bahawa dikalangan mereka kamu dipandang sebagai hina, sebagai rakyat biasa atau alat untuk mereka hidup berkuasa dan kaya raya? Kalau kamu benar2 rasa diri kamu disayangi cuba lah kamu pergi ke rumah mereka seperti mana kamu akan ziarah rumah sanak saudara kamu !

Adakah mereka menjalankan tugas mereka sebagai pemimpin politik yang dipilih oleh rakyat dengan merendah diri? Atau adakah mereka mahu diri mereka diperlakukan sebagai Raja moden yang tangannya harus dicium, kehadiran mereka wajib di raikan dengan merendah dirikan diri rakyat yang hadir bersama?

Adakah kamu rasa diri pemimpin politik sebagai yang berkhidmat kepada kamu, wahai Rakyat, atau  diri kamu yang terpaksa mengampu mereka kerana mereka berkelakuan sebagai Raja yang berkuasa?

Adakah kamu merasakan bahawa pemimpin politik itu gembira ikhlas diatas kehadiran kamu atau kamu yang merasa bangga kerana kehadiran pemimpin politik itu? Supaya dapat bergambar dengan mereka seolah2 itu sahaja sudah pun mengurangkan cabaran hidup kamu untuk menyara keluarga keluarga kamu?

Pernah kamu fikir, mengapa kita masih di tahap dimana kita masih berada selepas berdekad tahun kita merdeka?

Tidak kah kamu sedar atau tidak mahu sedar bahaw kebebasan kamu untuk hidup sebagai seorang dewasa dan rakyat yang bermaruah semakin dikikis dengan penggunaan sentimen agama?

Mungkin kah kamu rela atau sudah biasa diperhambakan sehingga penghinaan terhadap  kamu sebagai seorang dewasa pun kamu tidak nampak? Kalau perlu dicakapkan lagi baru kamu nak faham bermakna jiwa hamba sudah sangat menebal dalam diri kamu.

Maka, jadilah hamba wahai rakyat dan keluarga kamu dengan di beri makan oleh pemimpin2 politik dan kuncu2 agama mereka!

 

Salam.

Munafiqs and Firauns Oppressing Other Muslims is the real threat?

(Image thanks to http://www.presentermedia.com/index.php?target=closeup&maincat=clipart&id=10112)

My deep and sincere concern is this – will munafiqs in our midst try all possible ways to deny my ubudiyah (service/worship) and compel me to stray away from the path of Islam as taught by Allah? Will they deny me the right to sincerely serve my Creator?

 I am not worried about non-Muslims trying to proselytise me, or trying to “insult Islam” or "placing" Islam under a “threat”. These are things that I can handle myself easily. 

Also, for me it is impossible, under current circumstances where Muslims are the majority and have political control for any non-Muslim to place Islam under “threat”.  I also believe in the promise of Allah that it is He who will guide whom He pleases and that it He who will safeguard the teachings of the Quran.

I actually welcome non-Muslims to try to proselytise me as it would give me an opportunity to share the wisdom of the Quran and to invite them to Allah who is the Creator of everything and everyone. I will be happy to be engaged in a discussion to seek out the Way of the Creator.

As a Muslim, I will also be equally happy to peacefully disagree with the non-Muslim and welcome him back for another discussion if he so desires.  Otherwise, being consistent with what the Quran teaches, I will let Allah decide our differences on judgement day. In the meantime, I am completely prepared to share Allah’s mercy with him as Allah so graciously bestows His mercy on me.

It is the munafiqs (hypocrites) and the extremists that worry me. For one to be a munafiq in this situation, he has to smell, sound, and look like me and even pretend to “care” for me except that he wants me to think and believe EXACTLY as he does. In effect, he wants me now to accept him as my god or as another god alongside Allah or an intermediary for me to "reach" Allah.

If I do not accept his views and his teachings, he is prepared to ostracise me, humiliate me, oppress me if he has the power and make life completely miserable for me. He will even go to the extent of declaring that I am not a Muslim and hence try to deny me my right of faith simply because I do not think and believe EXACTLY like him.

He will behave like the Firaun (Pharoah) of the Quran who will cut off the legs and hands of his subjects on opposite sides if they were to follow Moses without his permission.

The real threat to the practice of Islam has always been from within - by those who want to compel by force their understanding of Islam on other Muslims. Extremist behaviours.

It is the munafiq and the Firaun who is a threat to the peaceful practice of Islam. 

Correct me if I am wrong in my views.

Peace !

Bagaimanakah nanti Di Perhimpunan Agung UMNO? Fahamkah UMNO apa cabarannya?

Harus Memahami Persepsi2

Sudah lama kita dengar bahawa sudah lama Perhimpunan Agung Umno (PAU) tidak lagi di hiraukan oleh rakyat Malaysia, termasuk orang-orang UMNO sendiri – kecuali orang UMNO yang berkepentingan peribadi. Ada yang berkata ini berlaku kerana dibandingkan dengan zaman Tun Dr Mahathir (TDM), hari ini, pengumuman penting2 sudah pun di maklumkan sebelum PAU dan juga oleh beberapa Menteri2 dan bukan PM sahaja.

Kalau dahulu pengumuman2 penting Negara di buat di PAU, sejak zaman Tun Abdullah (Pak Lah), sudah terdapat perpisahan lebih jelas diantara kerajaan dan parti politik iaitu UMNO.  Maka, pengumuman dibuat juga oleh para Menteri diluar PAU. Samada benar atau tidak, ini adalah satu persepsi yang kuat di pegang oleh ramai orang. Pada saya, setiap PAU masih diperhatikan rakyat bagi mengetahui halatuju UMNO dan polisi UMNO sebagai parti tunggak BN.

Scenario Politik kini tidak sama dengan zaman TDM

Pandangan lain juga mengatakan bahawa UMNO masih tidak dapat “adjust” atau sesuaikan diri dengan iklim dan suasana politik yang amat berbeza berbanding dengan zaman TDM.  UMNO sudah seolah-olah biasa dengan retorika “perjuangan kaum Melayu” dan “agama” terutamanya yang di juruskan untuk menunjukkan bahawa UMNO lebih Islam daripada PAS. Ini sebabnya mungkin beberapa pemimpin yang cuba memainkan “isu Melayu” pada zaman Pak Lah sudah bertukar skrip ucapan mereka kearah yang berlainan sekali.

TDM tidak berhadapan dengan begitu banyak pemuda-pemudi Melayu yang tidak berminat dengan retorik perkauman.  Masa beliau media sosial tidak begitu berkembang maka rakyat terpaksa bergantung sebahagian besar kepada media rasmi yang kebanyakkan dikuasai oleh kerajaan. Pemikiran, pola politik dunia, tahap ekonomi dan pendidikan juga amat berbeza. Maka kaedah2, perbincangan dan pemikiran politik zaman TDM memang tidak boleh di aplikasi pada zaman ini. Pergerakkan civil society di zaman Tun juga tidak sehebat kini.

Disamping itu, sejak 1998, ramai Melayu sudah mula berani mempersoalkan polisi kerajaan dan mengkritik pemimpin Melayu secara terbuka. Semakin ramai pemuda Melayu (dan juga ayah2 mereka yang di pengaruhi pemuda pemudi ini) sudah mula mendesak sikap keterbukaan atau transparensi dalam banyak hal. Golongan ini yang semakin meningkat gagal dipujuk untuk menutup mata kepada sebarang “irregularity” atas alasan ianya adalah untuk membantu Melayu.

Maka pemimpin atas UMNO yang mewarisi pemimpin-pemimpin zaman TDM “meraba-raba” mencari kaedah dan pendekatan yang sesuai dengan zaman ini.

Retorika Perkauman serta Melayu yang mana?

Namun dalam UMNO, tarikan untuk menengahkan bicara dalam bahasa perkauman masih menjadi tarikan yang kuat - walaupun isu yang sama boleh diketengahkan dengan lebih efisien dalam bahasa bukan perkauman. Mungkin ini lah antara sebabnya polisi 1Malaysia yang di bawa oleh Dato Seri Najib menjadi sesuatu yang ditentang kerana ia seolah-olah mencabar politik dan retorika perkauman yang beberapa pemimpin UMNO sudah biasa.

Ia menjadi satu kehairanan kenapa masih ada dinasor tua atau dinasor muda yang telah dilatih masih tidak faham bahawa isu “kemelayuan” yang di balut dalam retorika perkauman akan gagal kerana satu sebab yang utama – iaitu Melayu sudah ada dimana2 dan bukan sahaja di pangkuan UMNO. Sememangnya landasan politik dan civil society dipimpin dan disokong oleh Melayu dalam Negara ink.

Dalam UMNO, kebanyakkannya Melayu. DI PAS, semuanya Melayu. DI PKR, DAP dan lain-lain parti politik sudah ada banyak Melayu. Di dalam NGO2 yang bukan pro UMNO, pemimpin yang ke hadapan biasanya Melayu. Orang yang memperjuangkan “Asalkan Bukan UMNO”  adalah Melayu. Di pihak civil society atau gerakkan sibil, banyak yang Melayu. Pendekata, pemimpin2 Melayu daripada pelbagai parti politik, NGO dan individu yang berdebat, berlawan hujah dan mengutarakan pandangan yang berlawanan adalah Melayu.

Musuh ketat politik UMNO adalah PAS dan sejak kebelakangan adalah PKR yang juga dipimpin oleh Melayu. Ketiga-tiga parti ini berlumba pengaruhi undi Melayu. Jelas sekali UMNO sekali lagi terjerat dalam bicara politiknya – jika UMNO mahu memperjuangkan Melayu, maka secara logiknya ia juga memperjuangkan kebajikan ahli-ahli Melayu PAS, PKR, dan DAP yang jelas menolaknya!

PAS secara terbuka bukan sahaja menolak UMNO tetapi pernah mengisytiharkan UMNO sebagai parti sesat , parti asobiyah, serta jahil agama. PAS pernah beberapa kali mengatakan bahawa ia lebih rela berkerjasama dengan DAP yang UMNO capkan sebagai parti chauvinis Cina.

UMNO menghadapi kepayahan untuk menghadapi PAS yang juga keahliannya terdiri daripada Melayu. Ini adalah kerana UMNO tidak tahu atau tidak berani menghadapi alat politik mujarab yang digunakan oleh PAS iaitu agama. UMNO masih tidak dapat membezakan diantara Islam dan agama, diantara politik dan Islam.  Maka, ia selalu masuk kedalam perangkap PAS (dibincang lebih mendalam dibawah).

PKR pula dilihat sebagai parti yang tidak berasaskan perkauman serta parti yang memperjuangkan isu-isu Negara seperti korupsi, transparensi, dan lain-lain. Persepsi politik juga adalah bahawa PKR lah yang telah membawa masuk “kewujudan” masyarakat peribumi didalam perbicangan politik di semenanjung Malaysia. Sebelum 1998, jelas bahawa hampir kesemua ucapan politik hanya merujuk kepada “Melayu, Cina dan India” dan jarang atau tiada kita dengar “Iban, Kadazan, Murut” dan sebagai nya. UMNO lah yang sepatutnya memulakannya dahulu kerana UMNO lah dahulunya mengiktiraf mereka ini sebagai ahli UMNO.  Saya percaya perkara ini juga tidak difikirkan oleh “pemikir-pemikir” politik UMNO yang sudah ada one track mind over the years.

Dalam konteks perbincangan diatas, maka jelas monopoli UMNO terhadap minda Melayu semakin dicabar - samada dari segi politik mahupun dari segi agama.

Saya kira common sense akan menginsafkan UMNO bahawa dalam suasana sedemikian, retorika berasaskan kaum Melayu sahaja yang dibalut dalam bahasa perkauman tidak akan berjaya dalam jangka panjang. Maka mengapa masih ada dinasor-dinasor yang masih mahu berhujah sedemikian sehingga 1Malaysia Najib dilihat sudah tersasar daripada membina satu gagasan yang berpotensi?

Saya antara yang terdahulu yang menyokong polisi 1Malaysia PM Najib yang saya kira dapat dijadikan satu wawasan bagi Rakyat Malaysia. Sememangnya amat radikal wawasan ini dicetuskan oleh Presiden UMNO. Ianya dapat dijadikan dan diusahakan sebagai polisi rasmi kerajaan dengan segala kesungguhan. Kalau inilah scenarionya, maka tidak akan menjadi sesuatu yang janggal bagi Najib sebagai Presiden UMNO untuk memperjuangkan yang hak bagi Melayu yang memerlukan. Malangnya, 1Malaysia dilihat sebagai terpaksa mengambil “backseat” dan label itu telah mutate menjadi sesuatu yang lain.

Kesimpulan nya ialah: dalam suasana dimana Melayu akan berhadapan dengan Melayu dalam membicarakan suatu isu daripada fahaman dan pandangan yang berbeza, Melayu manakah yang UMNO dikatakan mewakili? Ini lah persoalan yang semakin timbul dan yang masih belum di jawab oleh UMNO.

Retorika “Islam” dalam politik UMNO?

Dalam aspek memperjuangkan Islam melalui politik, UMNO juga dilihat  tidak begitu berkesan dari segi kacamata politik. Didalam minda Melayu, persepsinya ialah PAS adalah pejuang Islam. Bukan kah namanya itu sendiri “Parti SeIslam Malaysia”? UMNO tidak ada Islam atau Muslim pada namanya. Nama UMNO berasaskan kepada kaum iaitu “Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu”. Maka, UMNO dilihat sebagai parti perkauman dan PAS sebagai parti agama. Perkara ini pun sering diceramahkan oleh pemimpin2 parti PAS iaitu Melayu PAS mengatakan Melayu UMNO amalkan “asobiyah” atau perkauman ! Bukan kaum lain yang cakap. Ini pun satu cabaran yang saya percaya UMNO tidak tahu bagaimana hendak hadapi.

Selanjutnya, Melayu berpendidikan hari ini sedar bahawa undang2 syariah diluluskan di Dewan Undangan Negeri dimana sekian lama ianya di monopoli oleh pemimpin2 UMNO. Baik atau buruknya undang2 yang digubal dan diluluskan sebagai "syariah" akan memberi kesan kepada kewibawaan, kebolehan dan kebertanggungjawaban adun2 UMNO.  Rakyat Muslim akan menilai. Saya percaya adun2 UMNO tidak bersedia untuk menghadapi pelbagai cabaran baru yang saya lihat akan timbul dimasa hadapan didalam hal ini. Ini adalah kerana sehingga kini pun selain daripada menyanyikan lagi konservatif yang dipinjam daripada penasihat agama mereka, pemimpin UMNO tidak fokus langsung akan hal ini.

Didalam isu berkaitan dengan “Islam”, UMNO sudah tidak dilihat sebagai satu parti politik yang memberikan fahaman atau bentuk Islam yang berbeza dengan fahaman PAS. Sejak bersaranya TDM, tidak ada perbincangan segar mengenai Islam dalam arena politik. Dalam konteks ini, masa zaman TDM, kita dapat juga kelainan fahaman dan hujah berkaitan dengan Islam oleh TDM – lain daripada PAS sehingga ada kalanya PAS diletakkan dalam keadaan defensif.

Sejak zaman Pak Lah pula, saya lihat UMNO diletakkan dalam keadaan defensif apabila PAS timbulkan isu2 agama walaupun isu2 yang amat remeh.  Sejak itu, strategi UMNO berkaitan dengan Islam, tanpa disedari oleh UMNO lebih menguntungkan PAS.  Bukan itu sahaja, UMNO seolah-olah buta atau tidak sedar bahawa permainan politik agama ini akan merosakkan perpaduan Melayu dan menggugat keselamatan Negara dijangka panjang. Di samping itu, UMNO juga tidak sedar bahawa ia akan terima “backlash” daripada penggundi nanti.

Mengapa perkara ini boleh berlaku? Pandangan peribadi saya ialah berbanding dengan TDM yang berani dan merendah diri mahu membaca dan memahami Al-Quran dan memikirkan mengenai hal2 agama, pemimpin sesudahnya sudah tidak lagi berbuat demikian. Saya mengatakan perkara ini kerana dalam kesibukan TDM sebagai PM, beliau sanggup meluangkan masa untuk berbincang mengenai isi kandungan Al-Quran. TDM juga amat rajin dalam membaca dan mengkaji buku2 yang diberikan kepada beliau dan kemudian berbincang pula mengenainya! Pengalaman peribadi saya ialah TDM mempunyai minda intellectual yang kuat dan kerendahan diri untuk mengkaji dan belajar walaupun ketika itu beliau adalah seorang PM.

 Pemimpin UMNO hari ini bergantung sepenuhnya kepada penasihat2 agama tanpa sedar bahawa penasihat2 ini keluar daripada Universiti yang sama dengan penasihat2 agama PAS! Dalam situasi seperti ini, sudah tentu PAS lah yang akan untung dari segi politik. Akhrnya, penasihat2 agama menjadi boss kepada pemimpin politik dalam hal agama !

Maka, dalam hal2 agama, pemimpin politik UMNO kini bergantung seratus peratus kepada fahaman dan tafsiran apa itu Islam daripada penasihat2 mereka tanpa berfikir secara mendalam atau mengambil kira fahaman dan tafsiran yang berlainan. Pemimpin UMNO kurang faham bahawa tafsiran penasihat mereka sendiri lebih kurang sama dengan PAS. Saya harian mengapa pemimpin-pemimpin politik ini tidak sedar bahawa mereka diperalatkan oleh beberapa penasihat2 agama mereka untuk agenda peribadi? Walaupun nasihat pemimpin agama ini kadangkala boleh merosakkan Negara atau memberi gambaran negatif kepada Islam, pemimpin politik membenarkannya kerana mereka sendiri jahil dan takut.

Satu perkara yang sering terlepas pandang oleh pemimpin UMNO ialah ini: - perbuatan, ucapan dan polisi ajensi-ajensi agama akan dianggap sebagai direstui oleh pucuk pimpinan UMNO. Jika tidak pun, apabila pucuk pimpinan UMNO berdiam diri, ianya dianggap direstui oleh mereka. Walaupun faktanya ialah ianya dibawah Negeri, namun Rakyat tahu siapa yang menguasai pentadbiran iaitu kerajaan. Oleh sebab pemimpin politik UMNO terlepas pandang, maka tidak ada sebarang pemantaun atau strategi digubal untuk menilai kesan politiknya.

Banyak isu2 agama atau isu2 yang diagamakan yang tercetus kebelakagan ini memberi kesan kepada UMNO sebagai parti utama dalam kerajaan BN. Ini adalah perkara2 yang akan diingati oleh pengundi menjelang pilihanraya. Kegagalan kerajaan membendung fahaman dan tindakan eksremis sehingga ada anak muda yang memasuki dalam ISIS juga menimbulkan tanda tanya berkaitan dengan kurikulum agama disekolah2 dan siaran agama dalam media yang rakyat anggap sebagai dibawah kawalan kerajaan.

Perkara yang anih ialah ini – UMNO sejak selepas TDM dilihat telah menjadi PAS zaman dulu dengan fahaman konservatif agamanya ! Sebaliknya dalam beberapa ketika, PAS pula dilihat sebagai semakin kembali kepada AL-Quran dan sunnah sahih. Ini adalah persepsi yang perlu dihadapi dan fahami.

Maka berlaku lah kecelaruan dikalangan Melayu dari aspek apa itu “Islam” yang semakin lama dimonopoli oleh fahaman satu kelompok dengan izin pemimpin politik yang dilihat sebagai jahil agama.  Dalam aspek ini, UMNO dilihat sebagai gagal selepas TDM. Dari segi politik pula, pengaruh PAS semakin meluas walaupun ada pelbagai spinning di laman maya yang semakin hari semakin tidak dipercayai oleh pembaca.

Semua ini akan mengurangkan kerelevanan UMNO dijangka panjang dan akan menjauhkan UMNO daripada orang Melayu dijangka pendek dari segi undi JIKA UMNO masih lagi berada dalam “comfort zone” dan kotak pemikiran kini. Adakah UMNO berani menghadapi isu-isu agama secara berilmiah dan terbuka? Saya kira tidak setakat ini.

Yang paling dikhuatiri ialah jika Melayu hanya di sogokkan dengan bicara “kemelayuan” dan fahaman “agama” sempit sahaja dalam hidup mereka, seluruh dunia akan maju dan kita akan tinggal dalam dunia syok sendiri kita yang lambat laun akan di telan oleh masa menurut Sunnah Allah.

“Tetapi jika kamu berpaling, aku telah menyampaikan kepada kamu apa yang aku diutus dengannya kepada kamu, dan Pemeliharaku akan mengantikan kamu dengan satu kaum yang selain daripada kamu, dan kamu pula tidak akan memudaratkan-Nya sedikit pun. Pemeliharaku Penjaga atas segala sesuatu." (Quran 11:57)

Salam.

Pendekatan Berhemah dan Saintifik Menghadapi Isu Transeksual - Mufti Perlis Dato Murshid Dr Juanda Jaya

It is a complimentary boost to the image of Islam to note the compassionate and knowledge based approach taken by the Mufti of Perlis in the issue of transgenders.

I believe such an approach will bridge the widening gap between the clerics and the people..

Peace !

Bar Council must be neutral and seen to be neutral

[ Photo thanks to The Mole ]

2005/2006 Bar Council Election 

The upcoming Bar Council Election for the 2005/2006 term is expected to be a heated affair with 23 senior and junior candidates vying for 12 council seats.

The numbers are lower than recent elections but this year’s election is widely anticipated by many groups in the legal fraternity following several controversial issues concerning the Malaysian Bar.

Almost 16,000 members of the Bar are eligible to cast their votes and are expected to start receiving their ballot papers by post from tomorrow. 

The ballots must be returned to the council’s secretariat by Dec 1 and the results are expected to be announced on Dec 2.

Among the election contenders are Datuk Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos, Datuk Sulaiman Abdullah and Syahredzan Johan.

Jahaberdeen, who has been practicing for more than 20 years, said he wants to contribute more effectively to the Bar and to do more for fresh lawyers.

“I am looking forward to assisting new lawyers to set up their practices and find solutions for their problems because this is what the Bar should do.

“It should be focused in matters concerning members and focus on protecting them and their services,” he told The Mole.

You can read more by clicking The Mole

Peace !

Justice is serious business

The reason why I have never considered becoming a Judge is because I consider it as a very heavy responsibility and that I have to be answerable direct to Allah.

I can understand that judges are human and hence prone to errors and human failings.

But a serious defect in judicial attitude is not a human failing - it is a refusal to improve oneself. Worse, if one has such a bad temperament that it affects the due administration of justice and yet the person persists in continuing to earn the salary as a judge, then it is a reflection that he/she has no honour.

A judge's position is not just another job to earn a salary.

It is not just a career for self glory.

It is a position akin almost to divine qualities where people come to seek justice and fairness.

IF judges are bad tempered, impatient, lazy or not clever, those who come before the court will suffer in their lives.

Justice must also be dispensed with compassion and the sentence must befit the crime.

Justice cannot be dispensed like producing mineral bottles from a factory. Number of files closed cannot be a KPI. Of course, justice delayed is also justice denied and hence each case must turn on its own circumstances.

We must remember that we and our families become victims or recipients of the system we ourselves create. do not ever enter into the delusion that you will be with that power forever. It will leave you and you will one day be helpless. Trust the law of nature.

It will be painful to spent the retiring years regretting the injustice that one may have caused.

Peace !

17 year old forced into sex in the name of religion?

What if this was your daughter?

This can never be what Allah teaches.

Peace !

Book Review15; "The Seven Military Classics of Ancient China"

I bought this book way back in 1998 and have read it three times since.

I happened to read it again last week and I realise how very relevant it still is today. It is an interesting book but you have to read and think about what you read to enjoy it.

Ralph D. Sawyer presents us with an Eastern tradition of strategic thought that emphasizes outwitting one's opponent through speed, stealth, flexibility and a minimum of force - an approach very different from that stressed in the West, where the advantages of brute strength have overshadowed more subtle methods.

The book discusses T'ai Kung's Six Secret Teachings, the methods of the Ssu-ma, the famous Sun-tzu's Art of War, Wu-tzu, Wei Liao-tzu and the three stragetgies of Huang Shih-kung,

I would recommend this book to anyone in planning and strategic thinking positions, to psychology students, political science students or if you simply want fun reading.

Peace !

About Shia

Khalid sacked from PKR - and so???

Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim apparently has been sacked from PKR - so he is now party less.

A MB does not have to be a party member  but he must be a state assemblyman, which Khalid is. And he must have the majority support of the members of the assembly.
If chooses to remain as MB, what happens now?

He is MB until there is a vote of no confidence in him by the state assembly, whereupon, the Sultan will be asked to appoint a new MB who has the "support and confidence of the Assembly". The Sultan must be so satisfied too.

What if PAS and UMNO supports Khalid while PKR and DAP oppose him - a very dicey situation where it may be difficult to be satisfied either way.

In the interest of certainty and considering the political situation and in the best interest of Selangorians, the Sultan may very well dissolve the Assembly paving the way for fresh elections.

Let's see how this plays out.

Whatever it is, PKR has lost its credibility to govern when it could not even handle a simple leadership issue within its own party.

Peace !

Be Brave !!!

Peace !

MH 17: WHO STANDS TO GAIN?

By Dr Chandra Muzaffar

The Russian military has released military monitoring data which challenge allegations circulating in the media pertaining to the MH 17 crash in the Donetsk Region of Eastern Ukraine on July 17 2014. Questions have been raised about Kiev military jets tracking MH 17, Ukrainian air traffic controllers and the deployment of Buk missile systems. Kiev should also release military data on the circumstances leading to the crash. So should the Pentagon which reportedly has relevant intelligence and satellite data.

Since military data is hardcore information, Kiev and Washington should be persuaded to be transparent and accountable. The UN Secretary-General can play a role in this since there is a specialized agency within the UN, the ICAO, dedicated to international civil aviation. Military data from Moscow, Kiev and Washington should be scrutinized by the independent international panel that is supposed to probe the MH 17 catastrophe.

Such data carries much more weight than videos purportedly revealing the role of the pro-Russian rebels and the Russian government in the crash. One such video showing a Buk system being moved from Ukraine to Russia is a fabrication. The billboard in the background establishes that it was shot in a town --- Krasnoarmeisk --- that has been under the control of the Ukrainian military since May 11. Similarly, a You Tube video showing a Russian General and Ukrainian rebels discussing their role in mistakenly downing a civilian aircraft was, from various tell-tale signs, produced before the event.

The public should be wary of fabricated “evidence” of this sort, after what we have witnessed in the last so many years. Have we forgotten the monstrous lies and massive distortions that accompanied the reckless allegation that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) which led eventually to the invasion of that country in 2003 and the death of more than a million people? Iraq continues to bleed to this day. What about the Gulf of Tonkin episode of 1964 which again was a fabrication that paved the way for wanton US aggression against Vietnam that resulted in the death of more than 3 million Vietnamese? The “babies in incubators” incident in Kuwait in 1990 was yet another manufactured lie that aroused the anger of the people and served to justify the US assault on Iraq.  Just last year we saw how an attempt was  made by some parties to pin the blame for a sarin gas attack in Ghouta, Syria upon the Assad government when subsequent investigations have revealed that it was the work of some militant rebel group.

From Tonkin to Ghouta there is a discernible pattern when it comes to the fabrication of evidence to justify some nefarious agenda or other. As soon as the event occurs before any proper investigation has begun, blame is apportioned upon the targeted party. This is done wilfully to divert attention from the real culprit whose act of evil remains concealed and camouflaged. The colluding media then begins to spin the “correct” version with the help of its reporters and columnists who concoct “fact” out of fiction. Any other explanation or interpretation of the event is discredited and dismissed derisively to ensure that the “credibility” of the dominant narrative remains intact. As the narrative unfolds, the target often embodied in a certain personality is demonized to such a degree that he arouses the ire of the public and becomes an object of venom.

The pattern described here is typical of what is known as a “false flag” operation in which blame for some dastardly deed is consciously transferred to one’s adversary. It has happened right through history and many contemporary nation-states --- and not just the United States --- are guilty of flying false flags.

To protect ourselves from being deceived by such operations, the general public should always ask: who stands to gain from a particular episode? Cui Bono is in fact an important principle in the investigation of a crime. In the case of the MH 17 carnage, the pro-Russian rebels do not benefit in any way from downing a civilian airliner. Their goal is independence from the Kiev government which is why they are fighting Kiev through sometimes violent means including shooting down its military planes.  Massacring 298 passengers in a flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur does not serve their cause. Moscow which backs the rebels to an extent also gains nothing from involving itself in such a diabolical carnage.  

10 days after the carnage, it is now clear who is trying to reap benefits from that terrible tragedy in the skies. The demonization of the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, orchestrated from various Western capitals, including Kiev, after Crimea voted to join the Russian Federation, thus thwarting one of the primary strategic goals of NATO’s eastward expansion, has now reached its pinnacle. After MH 17, it has become a lot easier to convince people--- even without an iota of evidence --- that Putin is a “mass murderer”.  The tarnishing of Putin’s image is crucial for those in the West who want to curb Russia’s political re-assertion so that the US and its allies can perpetuate their global dominance without hindrance.     

MH 17 has helped the elite in Washington in yet another sense. It has strengthened its push for tougher sanctions against Russia which began after the Crimea vote. Given their extensive economic ties with Russia, many European countries such as Germany, France, Netherlands and Italy have been somewhat lukewarm about widening and deepening sanctions. But will that change now? Will an outraged European public, incensed by the MH 17 massacre, demand that their governments punish Moscow?

It is obvious that those who seek to punish Russia and the pro-Russian rebels, namely, the elite in Washington and Kiev, are poised to gain the most from the MH 17 episode. Does it imply that they would have had a role in the episode itself? Only a truly independent and impartial international inquiry would be able to provide the answer.

In this regard, we must admit that while elites in Kiev and Washington may stand to gain from MH 17, those who actually pulled the trigger may be some other group or individual with links to the powerful in the two capitals. It is quite conceivable that a certain well-heeled individual equipped with the appropriate military apparatus and with access to air-control authorities in the region may have executed the act of evil itself.

Because of who he is, and where his loyalties lie, that individual may have also decided to target Malaysia. Was he giving vent to his anger over our principled stand on the question of justice for the Palestinians? Was he also attempting to divert public attention from Israel’s ground offensive against Gaza which time-wise coincided with the downing of the Malaysian airliner?

As we explore MH 17 from this angle, would we be able to connect the dots between MH 17 and MH 370, between July 17 and March 8, 2014?

We should not rest till the whole truth is known and the evil behind these two colossal catastrophes punished severely.

We owe this to every soul who perished on those fateful flights.

(This article is dedicated to the cherished memory of all those on MH 17 --- especially the 80 children who were on board).

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is the President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST).

Malaysia.

26 July 2014.  

Salam Eid Mubarak !

Salam Hari Raya and Salam Holidays to all my blog readers.







Peace !

We can be each others Friends - We Are Malaysians !

Prayers is one thing BUT The Government must act to protect the Safety of Malaysians and its Property !

1. MH17 is another tragic disaster to befall Malaysia and the passengers on board.

2. We are of course sad with the loss of lives for their loved ones and our condolences.

3. It is still unclear who shot the plane.

4. If it is the separatists, then Russia too may be held as an accomplice. If it is the separatists, then the theory that it was mistaken for President Putin's plane does not hold water as they are on the same side.

4. ON the other hand, if it is the Ukrainian Government, then it has a lot of explanation to do and the Malaysian Government must hold it accountable.

5. I hope the Malaysian Government is more firm and vocal is declaring to the world that it will do all it can to protect Malaysian lives, the lives of those under its care and Malaysian property.

May the souls rest in peace !

They Don't really Care About US !!!

If you really think about it, the powerful and influential do not really care about us.

Peace !

Biadap itu Biadap tanpa mengira kaum atau agama.

1. Allah swt tidak mengkhususkan kebaikan bagi satu kaum dan kejahatan bagi kaum yang lain. Ada orang baik dan jahat dalam semua kaum.

2. Kesalahan, kebiadapan dan dosa tetap kesalahan, kebiadapan dan dosaa tanpa mengira kaum atau agama. Yang baik tetap baik dan yang jahat tetap jahat.

3. Jangan kerana seorang manusia daripada kaum tertentu itu bersikap jahat atau biadap, maka kita hukum keseluruhan kaum itu sebagai jahat atau biadap.

4. Allah swt lah yang mencipta kita pelbagai bahasa, kaum, warna, budaya dan sebagainya. Kepelbagaian ciptaan ini mencerminkan, diantara lain, kebesaran dan rahmah Allah kepada kita.


5. Kita dicipta pelbagai kaum, bahasa dan budaya bukan untuk bermusuhan atau untuk mendiskriminasi manusia lain berdasarkan kaum atau budaya. Kita disuruh saling berkenalan dan sentiasa berlaku adil dan mengejar untuk melakukan perbuatan baik.

" Hai manusia, sesungguhnya Kami menciptakan kamu dari seorang laki laki dan seorang perempuan dan menjadikan kamu berbangsa-bangsa dan bersuku-suku supaya kamu saling kenal mengenal. Sesungguhnya orang yang paling mulia di antara kamu di sisi Allah ialah orang yang paling bertakwa di antara kamu. Sesungguhnya Allah Maha Mengetahui lagi Maha Mengenal". (Quran 49:13)

6. Yang biadap atau jahat bukan kaum Melayu, kaum Cina, kaum Rusia, kaum Eropah, kaum Venezuala, kaum India, kaum Jerman, kaum Uzbekistan, kaum Arab dan sebagainya. Yang biadap dan jahat ialah individu yang biadap dan jahat.

7. Oleh yang demikian, jauhilah daripada bisikan Iblis dan syaitan untuk memporak perandakan masyarakat dengan menjadikan perbuatan orang jahat dan biadap sebagai satu isu perkauman.

 "Orang-orang yang beriman, dan tidak mencampuradukkan iman mereka dengan kezaliman; bagi merekalah keamanan, dan merekalah orang-orang yang mendapat petunjuk yang benar" (Quran: 6:82)

Salam.

Islam -- Up for Grabs?

By:
Ooi Kee Beng Become a fan

Author, Deputy Director of ISEAS

( Article taken from TheWorldPost)

SINGAPORE -- The world is wrestling with a variety of events, all classed under the name of Islam. A storm of social media criticism against the shocking kidnapping by the militant Boko Haram of more than 200 schoolgirls in Chibok, Nigeria, eventually prompted countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Israel and Canada to offer military and intelligence aid to Nigeria. At the same time, a spontaneous and celebrity-led boycott of top hotels in Hollywood owned by the Sultan of Brunei, though not expected to be effective, is underway after the little Southeast Asian kingdom initiated a staggered implementation of hudud punishments, which would eventually include stoning adulterers to death.

While the two events are not connected, both help fuel a perception of a deep polarization between ways regarded as "Islamic" and those that are not.

Two related dynamics are involved, which if left undiscussed may inflame international relations for decades to come. The first has to do with the excessive use of "Islam" in denoting as many aspects of daily life as possible. With Islam being a holistic religion, modern leaders of Muslim-majority societies tend to encourage the description of as many aspects as possible of modern life under a restrictive Islamic paradigm. Regrettably, this tendency mirrors and sustains the simultaneous propensity of non-Muslims to regard Muslim societies as being steered by a rigid religious ideology.

"Historically, resistance to excessive Islamization in Muslim-majority countries was often headed by the military."

Second, the sense of besiegement felt in Muslim societies since the fall of the Ottoman Empire has discouraged public criticism among Muslims of any aspect of culture their society has already labeled Islamic. This is avoided especially in contexts involving non-Muslims. Again, matters are exacerbated by a growing propensity of non-Muslims to vex unfavorably on Islamic culture.

Typically, the international assistance being given to Nigeria in the search for the schoolgirls does not include Muslim countries. This is a pity and is symptomatic of the treacherous Islam-versus-the-rest paradigm the world has created and of the two dynamics mentioned above

Historically, effective resistance to excessive Islamization in Muslim-majority countries has often been headed by the military, as champions of secularism. This has been obvious in the modern history of the Middle East.

Where monarchies have reigned, Islam's role has been harder to predict. And so in Brunei, a stable country living off oil wells, the sudden implementation of hudud has left many baffled. The government has suppressed social media response against the sudden imposition of hudud. Whether the whole exercise is simply the whim of an autocrat or long-term strategic politics is too early to determine.

In nations where Muslims comprise a small majority of the population, the role of Islam has been more undecided. In Malaysia, where about 60 percent are Muslims, the trend has been towards a homogenizing of Islam and a strengthening of the religious bureaucracy. The incessant drawing of an effective line to separate Muslims from non-Muslims has over the last 40 years also precipitated the painful erasure of healthy distinctions among the Muslims themselves.

"In nations where Muslims comprise a small majority of the population, the role of Islam has been more undecided."

This is an unfortunate historical change. A common understanding about the spread of Islam in Southeast Asia since the 14th century is that it was largely peaceful and commerce-driven. In a wish to attract the Arab and other Muslim merchants who then dominated oceanic traffic, port rulers became Muslims.

Given the hierarchic and caste-based nature of the many ancient Indic kingdoms that dotted the archipelago, Islam came as a liberating ideology for the lower classes. This democratization of religious consciousness did not go very far, and traditional authoritarian structures of power did in fact prevail. The nine sultans in Malaysia and the Brunei Sultanate are a case in point.

Culturally, however, a sense of Islamic cosmopolitanism, inclusiveness and liberation was enhanced over time. Such had been the peaceful historical nature of Islam in Southeast Asia.

However, recent trends spanning the world have come to change this perception.

In Southeast Asia, an Islamic revival has been going on since the 1970s. As colonies, the Malay sultanates, along with Brunei, were governed through a clever formula where the British stayed out of matters of religion and culture. This allowed the populace at large to imagine that they in essence actually stayed uncolonized.

An uneasy co-habitation between civil law and Muslim law thus came to form the fabric of post-colonial society in Malaysia and Brunei. The fact that the majority of the archipelagic peoples were Muslims while migrants into the region were followers of other faiths made the political equation a very difficult one.

In recent times, in line with global fashion, increasing numbers of individuals and groups have opportunistically come to use "Islam" as an easy route to infamy -- and power.

The kidnapping of the school girls in Nigeria is but the latest extreme event involving a claim to know "Islam." The 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon, major bombings in European cities, the bombings in Indonesia, the attack on the Boston Marathon, and America's war on terror have all made "Islam" a modern newsmaker that is second to none.

"It is worrying to Muslims that Islam -- perhaps because of its decentralized procedures -- is being so easily hijacked."

A majority of non-Muslims in Southeast Asia may have come to see Islam as a growing threat to their civil and religious liberties, but it is just as worrying to Muslims that Islam -- perhaps because of its decentralized and devolved procedure of doctrinal proclamations -- is being so evidently and easily hijacked.

In Malaysia, the government has banned certain Arabic words central to Islamic discourses from use by non-Muslims, including the word "Allah." The common excuse is that their use by non-Muslims in non-Muslim contexts might confuse common Muslims. The latest inane proclamation is that historical immigration into the region had been engineered over centuries for the sole purpose of robbing Malays of their birth rights.

In truth, much of the confusion is generated within Muslim communities through the strong inclination to couch and simplify all social tensions, psychological pressures and political conflicts as opposing religious positions. And since this is done by any power-seeker, ranging from hooligans such as Nigeria's Boko Haram, unscrupulous opportunists within Malaysia's Malay-based political parties, purportedly devout scholars or aging aristocrats, it has become difficult to tell what seriously rests on religious fundaments and what does not.

In a situation where political leadership is weak, as in Nigeria and much of the Islamic world, this crucial distinction is ignored, encouraging further misuse of the Islamic label as a shortcut to political relevance. Religious pronouncements, true or false, have become an easy path to power and consequence. "Islam" as a self-glorifying and self-justifying marker is up for grabs.

All major religions promulgate rules, but they also teach tolerance and compassion. For some sad reason, the social turbulence of modern times has in public discourse and behavior allowed the doctrinal and punitive aspects of historical Islam to overshadow the religion's compassionate teachings and practices. Resetting the balance will not be easy, and is furthermore a task that is best done from within Muslim communities, in Southeast Asia and elsewhere.

The writer is the deputy director of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore. His articles can be read at wikibeng.com.

This also appears on YaleGlobal

Rights: Copyright © 2014 The Whitney and Betty MacMillan Center for International and Area Studies at Yale

The Illusion and deception of Power

Contrary to popular belief, power and glory are not ‘difficult’ to achieve though it is thought to be achieved by only a select few in society. In a sense, everyone who is born gradually attains power of sorts as he grows until he reaches a pinnacle of power whereupon; his power declines and then ends with death. A simple example will be the comparison between a baby and a teenager. The teenager yields much power compared to a baby. 

This natural aspect of power has often been forgotten by many because of the distraction of “artificial” power”. By artificial power, I mean that power which is enhanced by the use of illusions and deceptive methods. Example, teenager A of equal natural capacity with teenager B is of equal power naturally. However, when the image of teenager B is artificially propped up by various means, teenager B creates the illusion that he is more powerful than teenager A. Examples of artificially propping tools are like certain clothing, a fictitious storyline, etc. 


You can continue reading by clicking here

Iqra in the Month of Ramadan

1. One of the significance of the Ramadan month is that Muslims believe that the Quran was first revealed during this month.

2, The first verse revealed was said to be the following:

"Read [O Muhammad!] in the name of your Lord who created. (96.1) He created man from a clot. (96.2) Read, and your Lord is the Most Honorable (96.3) who taught with the pen, (96.4) taught man what he did not know. (96.5)"

3. Hence, the month of Ramadan is also a month of learning and relearning. In line with the first verse of the Quran, Muslims can use this month to revisit the contents of the Quran, to reach out to its messages. To read in the name of the Lord who teaches humans what they know not.

3. There are many pearls of wisdom in the Quran and guidance for mankind in many areas of our life, particularly how to be a human being useful to His creations and to ourselves.

4. Reading sincerely leads to self reflection.

5. Self reflection, hopefully leads us nearer to Allah in our actions and we become useful human beings on earth so that those who do have the benefit of the Quran can see its mercy through our actions of kindness and industry.

6. Reading the Quran will make us aware that there are many approaches of peace that Allah has taught us when we are faced with potentially hostile situations.

7. Reading the Quran also teaches us to preempt potentially aggressive or hostile situations in our dealings with other fellow human beings.

8. Islam after all means peace and it is this peace that we wish to share.

9. Hopefully, this Ramadan is the month where the Muslims will spread the message of peace to all in the world.


Peace !

Salam Ramadan

1. The Ramadan month is here again. This is the time where the Muslims undergo disciplinary training of abstinence from food, drinks, lust and management of emotions for the love of Allah.

2. The month is also filled with nightly ritual prayer of terawih, a special prayer which is much longer than the normal five times per day prayers.

3. Correctly practiced, the Ramadan month is capable of being a month that transforms the caterpillar into a butterfly, change of bad habits into good ones. It can cause the Hijrah or migration of a person from a lower state into a higher state, a poor character into an examplary one.

4. Whether Ramadan serves the purpose of transforming a person into a better human being or it only serves as a mere religious ritual depends on many factors, primarily how the individual Muslim sees it.

5. On the one hand, Ramadan also witnesses many hypocritical, commercial and purely selfish behaviour.  The business entities, especially the food industry seems to ironically have a boost in sales! Corporate and political personalities also use this period to network for commercial and political purposes.

6. The most basic and fundamental teachings of Islam comes from the Quran.  If the Muslim takes the trouble to allocate a mere one hour a day in the month of Ramadan to study the Quran, he may emerge more knowledgeable about true Islam as contained in the Quran at the end of the Ramadan month.

7. With the knowledge gained from the Quran,he may then use it as a criterion to evaluate his life, the life in the society he lives in, the values and the events that he has witnessed in his society - and decide whether it reflects the mercy, blessings, and teachings that benefit human kind as contained in the Quran.

8. It will be sad and futile if the Ramadan month is turned into pure ritualistic exercise for the sake of a tradition or religion without the spirit. Then there will be no migration or Hijrah of the person's character and perspectives.

9. Salam Ramadan to all and may you each be blessed with what you sow.

Peace !

What in the world is “liberal Islam” ???

Image thanks to here

This is one of the “latest” terms being bandied about in our society – some use it in a positive way and some use it in a negative way.  In most cases, most people use this term so carelessly in any way that they please which serves to demonstrate the mental confusion.

Any discussion of “Liberal Islam” is always liked to the criticism of “liberalism” by the critics. This is yet another term that has many meanings and being used by many in different ways. At the end of the day, the discussion descends into how the term is being used rather than the substance of the argument.

Liberalism is not necessarily a “bad thing”. The Latin word “liber” itself means “free” and what is wrong with the “soul” being free? Surely we do not support the opposite of being free which is being enslaved? 

The online Encyclopaedia Britannica defines Liberalism as follows:

“liberalism, political doctrine that takes protecting and enhancing the freedom of the individual to be the central problem of politics. Liberals typically believe that government is necessary to protect individuals from being harmed by others; but they also recognize that government itself can pose a threat to liberty. As the revolutionary American pamphleteer Thomas Paine expressed it in “Common Sense” (1776), government is at best “a necessary evil.” Laws, judges, and police are needed to secure the individual’s life and liberty, but their coercive power may also be turned against him. The problem, then, is to devise a system that gives government the power necessary to protect individual liberty but also prevents those who govern from abusing that power”.  

Looking at the definition above, one can agree that Liberalism is not “bad” after all. It is true that one of the major roles of governments is to protect individuals from being harmed by others. However, governments themselves may exert harm on its citizens through abuse of power. Another philosophy central to Liberalism is the upholding of the human dignity and this is characterised by the notion that human beings are inherently good and hence they should generally have the freedom to decide for themselves on various aspects of their lives. There is of course a balance of “freedom” that is sought to be achieved and not as the critics suggest that Liberalism seeks absolute freedom for the individual.

On another note, the word “liberal” itself has both positive and negative connotations. Generally, in the first world and progressive countries, it is seen as a positive trait while in the third world and so-called “Islamic countries” it is seen in a negative light. One wonders why this is so – is it because of the differences in educational levels and economic levels or due cultural and religious factors?

In third world and “so called Islamic” countries, the word “Liberal” appears to mean “doing as you wish, being free without basis or deviating from a set of established fundamental understandings or behaviours”.

What has all the discussion above has to do with “liberal Islam”? Once again, even this term seems to have different meanings to different people.

In Malaysia, the term “Liberal Islam” has a very negative meaning among the mainstream conservative Muslims. They see “Liberal Islam” as a “deviationist” movement away from “true” and “accepted” understanding of what Islam is. Such general accusations without going into the substance of what the proponents of so called “Muslim Liberalists” are arguing does not augur well for the maturity of the Muslim population.

I want to digress a bit and take up a different argument. For the sake of argument let’s say we use the word “liberal” to mean the “act of departing from the original principles or the fundamental of something” and apply this to how Islam is being understood. Based on this understanding, we may have the following scenarios:

1)      No one can deny that the first and fundamental source of Islam is the Quran.  This was the revelation to the Prophet Muhammad who himself would have been guided by it and not his own personal whims and fancies. In this scenario, would not any references to his so-called acts and utterances (collectively called the “hadiths and/or sunnah of the Prophet”) to shape the understanding of Islam be considered a “liberal act” especially if the “Islam” that emerges is different as contained in the Quran?

For the sake of argument, it would appear that the Muslim who sticks only to the Quran to get his understanding of Islam is a “fundamentalist” but the one who seeks extra sources is a “liberal”. However, in today’s mainstream Muslim community, a Muslim who primarily wants to be guided by the Quran alone is labelled as “anti-hadith”, “anti-prophet” and even a deviant in law. The fact that the world of hadith is replete with debate seems irrelevant to the ostracisation of the “Quran alone” group either by societal pressure of by State laws.

In other words, the Muslim who wants to stick only to the Quran either has to be “closet Quranist” or he is compelled by law and society to adjust his behaviour and belief to that of the mainstream belief. Otherwise, he has to be prepared to suffer for his beliefs – imposition by coercion and possible oppression.

2)      It is generally accepted that the main source of Islam is both the Quran and the Hadith/Sunnah of the Prophet. However, even this scenario also seems to pose problems because many also insist that while the hadith explains the Quran, the clergy is the expert group that explains both the Quran and the Hadith. Hence, they come up with a third category called the “consensus of the ulema” or “ijmak” ulema. The consensus of the ulema is actually the juristic reasoning and exposition of many things today that represents and shapes what Islam is. In this type of thinking, it becomes almost mandatory of the ordinary Muslims to accept unquestionably the “collective views” of the clergy as part of their faith.

Again for the sake of argument, if we take the position that Quran and Sunnah are the two fundamental sources of what Islam is, then would not the mandatory acceptance of clergy views be an act of being “liberal”?

3)      If one studies Islamic jurisprudence or usul al fiqh as it is called in Arabic, one will find that there are many other “sources” which the clergy or jurists rely on to arrive at an understanding of “what Islam is”. This is the juridical process of exegesis and reasoning which in reality shapes mainstream Islam. Would this be argued as being "liberal"?

From the above discussion, it should be clear that it is pointless to hurl and be influenced by labels such as “anti-hadith”, “liberalists” and so on without understanding the substance of the argument or philosophy. It is even worse when one has the subservient attitude of accepting what the clergy, however learned and sincere they are, as the absolute truth without cross referencing with the Quran itself or without examining the thought processes of the clergy or the ulema.

The end question is – does the society itself allow the Muslim to seek out the answer for himself or is he expected to be a blind follower since it has all been decided by “some learned folks”?

Peace.

NOTE: This article is not an indication that the author supports “liberal Islam” or “anti hadith”. No one is expected to agree with the views of the author and this article is intended to raise questions rather than to formulate conclusions. You make your own conclusions based on the level of passion you have for the truth and facts.