Bacaan asing
petikan dari laman Ustaz Hazrizal:
THE AGE OF MUSLIM IGNORANCE
Pada saya, apa yang telah membelenggu Eropah di era itu, hal yang sama jugalah sedang membelenggu pemikiran umat Islam hari ini. Saya bimbang dengan pemikiran simplistik umat Islam di Malaysia hari ini. Jika Tok Wan di kampung, tentulah saya tidak bimbang. Tetapi yang menjadi kerisauan saya adalah tokoh-tokoh masyarakat, ahli politik dan Ulama sendiri.
Di era penghormatan orang ramai terhadap Ulama semakin terhakis, ramai Ulama yang dengan sendiri menambah sebab untuk mereka tidak dihormati.
Suatu ketika, kita beranggapan bahawa semua yang menentang Islam adalah Orientalis. Semua Orientalis adalah musuh Islam. Walaupun mungkin kita bahagikan Orientalis kepada Orientalis klasik, moden, dan pasca moden, namun kita beranggapan bahawa semua kelompok ini bekerja untuk menjayakan agenda penjajahan dan merancang untuk membinasakan Islam. Lantas kita gagal bersikap adil, dan seterusnya terhijab dari mengambil manfaat menerusi kajian Orientalis yang bermaksud baik seperti Arnold Toynbee.
Kita juga marah dengan Orientalis kerana menyalah tafsirkan Islam, bagaimana pula dengan jenayah kita menyalah tafsirkan Eropah? Apakah kita sudah menghasilkan terjemahan Islam terhadap Western Civilization? Orientalis gigih bekerja, dan kita hanya gigih menangkis, semata-mata.
Saya terkejut apabila mendapati ada di kalangan rakan saya yang belajar di Eropah tetapi menumpukan pembacaan tentang Orientalis kepada hasil karya orang Islam terhadap subjek tersebut. Tentunya pembacaan sedemikian rupa akan diwarnai oleh bahasa sacarstic, prejudis dan sinis yang merugikan. Sedangkan saya dan rakan-rakan di Malaysia, kami bertungkus lumus membaca tentang Orientalis berasaskan karya Orientalis sendiri, agar kami tidak bias, dan boleh membuat kesimpulan yang adil tentang mereka.
Kami menempuh kesukaran untuk mendapatkan bahan bacaan tentang Orientalis, dan jika ada terjual di Kinokuniya atau Borders, harganya menyeksa diri. Sedangkan mereka yang berada di Eropah tidak mengambil peluang daripada keberadaan mereka di sana, untuk mendalami isu ini dari sumbernya yang asli.
kalau berani, ia dibaca dengan ini: Ancaman Pembiusan Agama, tulisan Fathi Aris Omar.
[TAMBAHAN (10/5/2007): Kedua-dua artikel ini mengupas isu yang sama, iaitu perlunya berlaku adil terhadap kawan dan lawan, di dalam konteks penerimaan ilmu. Ia, pada hemat saya, sesuatu yang perlu diamalkan oleh setiap muslim.]
Ada baiknya jika diskusi di hujung artikel ini dibaca juga.
Mohon dijaga adab di dalam berpendapat.
10 comments:
Salaam, brother.
If you had attended the MSA forum tonight, you would have found that unlike some minds, the Australian-Muslim public's concerns surround a wider spectre, with worries no less real than the ones you seem to be fixated upon.
At the same time, I am glad that you have found alternative views on the methodology. One's opinion, after all, is the cumulative formation of many others.
However, I still maintain that the 'international student' approach is broader than the Malaysian approach. There is a greater focus on Mercy rather than Scorn, when it comes to earning the Pleasure of God. Admittedly, that is an attribute that has put many Malaysian Muslims off attending halaqahs and lectures.
I have listened to views of people who have undergone the 'usrah methodolgy' - heard the jaded perspectives, the wary outlooks, the cynicism. Fathi Aris Omar's is one of the harshest yet, but I take it that it is mostly directed towards the Malaysian usrah. InsyaAllah, hopefully, us international students use our noggle more often than not.
One thing cannot be denied: That the activism endorsed in attending/being part of such organizations during the prime of their youth is what still feeds them with the drive, the input and the know-how to continue fighting back, to this very day.
Moral of the story: Doing something is better than doing nothing.
The end.
umm, this is actually not a 'get usrah' post. Despite me putting a link to Fathi Aris Omar's site.
In fact, I'm declaring a moratorium on the discussion of usrahs (and halaqahs and quranic circles)here on this blog. Any comment (by any of the 10-15 people aware of the existence of this blog) henceforth that deals with them shall not be posted. This is because too much ink and saliva has been wasted on something that is in essence ancillary to Islam. I would suggest both proponents and opponents of the methodology have some tea together sometime
That being said, I've read and reread both articles (saifulislam's and FAO's) to check whether there was any explicit condemnation of Usrahs, and from my readings I've found none. The purpose I posted both links (and might I add an emphasis on Ustaz Hazrizal's post) is because I felt they dealt, on the surface, with the same issue, namely, the lack of critical reflection among the religious set.
In fact, if you were to visit the learned ustaz's site and read his post entitled 'anti-slogan' he himself mentions FAO's article and states his agreement with it, on this matter, IMHO.
Whether this is a prevalent condition or not among latter-day muslims, both religiously educated or otherwise, is not for me to say; but I am certain that it is not the position of a group just because they espouse a form of (islamic) ideology. It is a symptom of something, someone once told me, but Islam is not the underlying cause.
Regarding the forum, (which I attended but had to leave early for other commitments), if what is meant by 'the Australian-Muslim public's concerns surround a wider spectre' is a profound epistemology of Islam, then we humble Malaysians have to raise our hands in deference. We usually leave such matters to our philosophers.
Please allow me to explain my reactionary stance to En. Fathi's article. I believe that my response was based on the entire blog itself, and not strictly the article given. In which case, I admit to having succumbed to prejudice.
I hold nothing against the topic you have brought forward. You are right, there is a fixation for bias in the Muslim world, and true enough, the underlying cause is not Islam itself.
But if I might make a suggestion, I would recommend that you include some form of commentary when using other sources. Given the depth of your personal analysis, simple-minded folk (or maybe just me) tend to miss the point by far.
"A child looks at a mountain and sees a mountain; a man looks at a mountain and sees many things; a wise man looks at a mountain and sees a mountain."
And I would never profess to be wise - only perhaps of owning a 'prickly disposition'.
That having been said, do accept my apology for commenting on something completely different altogether. From one blogger to another, I do understand that there is nothing quite so irritating, and your patience in explaining it is to be lauded.
alah bro, biasalah tu. takdehalnya.
Dear friends,
Frankly speaking, it surprised me when Ustaz Hasrizal agreed with my piece "Ancaman Pembiusan Agama".
It was first written for my column (Malaysiakini.com, Dec. 2004) and got republished some months later here, UmmahOnline.com (old website).
Many readers were not happy with me. Unfortunately they did not argue well.
[ii]
My recent piece "Di Bawah Mendung Usrah" is a draft (for a book's chapter).
It may not be well-written, and it was also provocative in nature.
http://patahbalek.blogspot.com/
Assalamualaikum sir
Thank you for gracing my humble blog (we're very close to 20 readers now!). Very thought-provoking articles you have there on yours. To say that many readers were unhappy with you is an outright understatement, IMHO.
Perhaps the articles were a bit too harsh. Though it being drafts,I'm sure the coming revisions will make it more objective and balanced, and not repel those who should read it most at the mere mention of it.
That being said, the points you raised are not without merit (see I didn't say it) and I look forward to reading future discussions on the matter at your site.
i am sorry lutfi..this time it is just too much...i have limits on debating or arguing...
Are you sure. Try reading the discussions here.
I share Ustaz's opinions in this regard, and I'm not just saying that to save my skin. It was, in fact, the reason I wrote this post in the first place.
I've also included a note in the post, to avoid any further confusion.
Hm.
To focus on the part where Ustaz Hasrizal comments on the need to stop repeating 'slogans' without taking reality into consideration, I have found I few passages I thought relevant to share:
‘The Prophet’s life is an invitation to spirituality that avoids no question and teaches us – in the course of events, trials, hardships, and our quest – that the true answer of existential questions are more often those given by the heart than by the intelligence. Deeply, simply: he who cannot love cannot understand.’
‘The whole Abrahamic experience unveils the essential dimension of faith in the One. Abraham, who is already very old and has only recently been blessed with a child, must undergo the trial of separation and abandonment, which will take Hagar and their child, Ishmael, very close to death. His faith is trust in God: he hears God’s command – as does Hagar – and he answers it despite his suffering, never ceasing to invoke God and rely on Him. Hagar questioned Abraham about the reasons for such behaviour; finding it was God’s command, she willingly submitted to it. She asked, then trusted, then accepted, and by doing so she traced the steps of the profound “active acceptance” of God’s will: to question with one’s mind, to understand with one’s intelligence, and to submit with one’s heart.’
-- From Tariq Ramadan’s ‘The Messenger: The Meanings of the Life of Muhammad’
I think that sometimes, these 'slogans' or 'catchphrase hadeeths' we tend to pass around hold different meanings for each of us. And for certain parts, it is not so much something for the aqal, as it is something for the heart.
Dear friends,
With reference to Syazwina's comment, the last sentence "And for certain parts, it is not so much something for the aqal, as it is something for the heart" is -- to my understanding -- is problematic.
And she must have "felt" it without really thinking, reading or analysing about it.
Can you explain what these two words (aqal and heart) mean?
As far as I know, no classical ulama has ever reached any conclusion about these two words.
Two other words (nafs or self; and ruh) are also inconclusive.
To me, some Muslims believe in words "God" or "Islam", they don't believe in God.
Words are mere conveyor or vehicle for meanings. It is partly stable and/or unstable.
Muslims (I don't know how many of them) don't understand the ambiguous tension between essentialist understanding of the World (and Self) and socially- consctructionist understanding of it.
So, to me, what we normally say sometimes meaningless, though it sounds "meaningful".
Post a Comment