*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
{ Sila lawat Laman Hizbi-Net - http://www.hizbi.net }
{ Hantarkan mesej anda ke: [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
{ Iklan barangan? Hantarkan ke [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
PAS : KE ARAH PEMERINTAHAN ISLAM YANG ADIL
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Farish A_Noor wrote:
> Dear Abdul Rahman,
> Thank you for your comments which I will respond to below. One word of
> advice though: There is really no need for you to type in BOLD
alphabets to
> make your point. (This seems to be a tendency among Islamist
supporters who-
> like Mahfuz- seem to think that they need to shout to make their point
> heard. A good point will get through, even if it is stated subtly.
Please
> take note)
It's a form of emphasis, not shouting. The upper case I mean.
It's my style.
> Now on to the points you raised:
>
> Yes, I do know Khalid Masud very well in fact. We worked together at
the
> Islamic Institute in Leiden and in fact we are working on a project
right
> now. So there is no need to quote his works for me. But had you read
his
> other writings in full, you would probably realise that Khalid and I
both
> share the same view that the Ulama are basically a conservative
political
> institution that has always been concerned with power- in every sense-
> political, economic, cultural and pedagogic. In fact, it is in the
sphere of
> cultural and pedagogic capital that they are most powerful. Surely you
can
> see that the Ulama wield an inordinate amount of power in Muslim
society,
> and that in most cases this power has been used instrumentally for
clearly
> political (and not religious purposes). Those who doubt this can go to
Iran
> or Pakistan to see the public's contempt for religious leaders who
have
> themselves become corrupt and who have been guilty of the worst
excesses and
> abuses of power in the name of religion.
I did read Khalid's writing in full. And while he argues that ulama is
a
conservativve political tool, he also cannot deny
the strength of the ulama institution in the political system of the
Islamic
State.
As for the public contempt of ulama in Iran , it's easy to point out
that even
Al Khatami is an ULAMA himself.
As for the case of Pakistan, the resistance to ulama is BASELESS because
ulama
has never been in power there.
How can there be contempt against them??.
> Contrary to your interpretation of Khalid Masud's work, he has argued
that
> the Ulama have played a double-edged role in society. While it is true
that
> the Ulama have preserved the corpus of Islamic discourse and learning
over
> the centuries, they are also a conservative and defensive institution
that
> has also been responsible for the stagnation of Muslim thought and
learning
And most of his proof to his claim of Ulama's conservatism is based upon
the
reluctance of ulama
to incorporate Greek and Western philosophy into the "islamic theology".
However, ulama of
ALL NATIONS have rejected the incorporation of western philosophy based
into
Islam.
Among the best reference on this issue is Imam Al Ghazaly in his
monumental book
entitled
"AT TUHAFAT AL FILASAFAH". ( The copy I kno copy is published by
"DARUL TURATH AL ARABIA" ).
In the book, Al Ghazaly points out the weaknesses of western philosophy
in
addressing issues
pertaining to belief in Allah, the traits of Allah , the role of
messengers etc.
And many ulama
has written books NEGATING the role of philosophy including ulama's that
that
criticises
the ulama at his time for not doing IJTIHAD.
In fact Ibnu Taimiyyah in his monumental book " Al Minhaj As Sunnah..."
( the
copy I know
published by Darul Fikr, Beirut) went a step further PROVING that the
increption
of Greek philosophy into "Islamic theology" resulted in the WEAKENING
and
DESTRUCTION of the Muslim ummah as exhibited by the fall of Abbasid
Empire.
The increption of Greek Philosophy into the muslim ummah has also
created
DIVISION
within the muslim ummah resulting in internal bicekring, backwardness,
rejection
of knowledge and even bloodshed according to Ibnu Taimiyyah in the same
book.
Much is the same in terms of accusation of the present ulama. Their
refusal to
incorporate
western beliefs and culture into Islam has rendered them to be deemed as
conservative
and anti progress, the same line taken by secularists in US against the
Church.
It's strange how the act of ulama being steadfast in maintaining the
AUTHENTICITY
of Islam as presented by ALLAH and the Prophet SAW is seen as a step
backwards
and trying to live the past.
When in the past it has been proven time and time again that the
authenticity of
Islam had saved the muslim Ummah and rescued them from the depth of
ignorance
and backwardness. And the acceptance of FOREIGN philosophy and beliefs
only
resulted in the destruction and the failure of muslim ummah and their
government.
The cycle repeats itself and ulama have 1400 yearsa of history to prove
this.
Both you and Khalid failed to show how backwardness occurs due to the
rejection
of
western philosophy by the ulama. What is your YARDSTICK??. What is
your proof linking "ulama conservatism" and backwardness.
For heaven sake the whole muslim world is ruled by secular elite who
relies on
oppression and dictatorial system of power and yet the whole muslim
ummah is
in the gutter at the momendt, including MAlaysia. Check out the how
much equity
muslims
hold in the so call "economically-progressive-Islamic-State" of
Malaysia. The
same islamic
state that relies of Draconian dan Oppresive law and not to mention
abuse of
public
funded institution just to stay in power.
Is this YOUR version of an islamic state??.
What' strange is while at the same time, Khalid Masud acknoledges the
fact that
total domination of ulama is present of the academic institution of the
Spanish
Khalifah,
he still accused them as being conservative.
Yet the same academic institution has produced inttelectuals that has
revolutionised
Europe and brought them out of their Dark Ages??.
Where is the proof of the fall of Muslim Ummah due to ulama??.
Here I see a paradox in both your and Khalid Masud's stand. While at the
same
time
I do not see any HARD PROOF ( much like Bush'es accusation against
Osama) showing the conservatism of ulama contributes to the fall of
Islamic
empires or government.
In fact abundant proof is available to discredit your claim about the
ulama.
I have to disagree because Khalid's Masud's book that I am refering to
talks
about
the attempt of a certain ulama by the name of Asy Syaitibi to bring a
PROGRESSIVE
approach to Islamic LAW while maintaining the AUTHENTICITY of Islam.
This is because Asy Syaitibi approach to the progressiveness is based
upon the
foundation
of Usul Fiqh. And by Usul Fiqh he critisice the stagnation of ulama in
his
time.
As for the issue of conservatism, I think it is also an errornous
claim. Ulama
are known to be
extra careful in their opinion. However, over the course of 1400 years,
MILLIONS of books
have been written discussing various aspects of Islam. So I do not
think that
this is a sign of
conservatism.
We can say that they are humble, extra cautious thus making them slow
but
conservatism is
never an issue. This is my personal experience with the ulama in
Malaysia and
elsewhere.
The issue of stagnation of the ulama in Malaysia lies in the weakness of
our
education system.
This is because our education system is a paralell one. In other words,
the
conventional and
islamic system does not meet at any point.
Therefore, those studying in the Islamic track is systematically
sidelined and
thus making
them out of touch with reality. This is why their view are so backwards
somethimes.
But slowly and gradually they are changing and evolving but thanks to
effort by
certain cynics,
this effort is not being helped or nutured at all.
>
> This is the irony of the Muslim world: The same people who preserved
Islamic
> social sciences and political thought were the ones who destroyed it.
The
> Ulama's special emphasis on fiqh, for instance, is one of the main
reasons
> why a discourse of rights has failed to evolve in our societies. Like
Abdul
> Karim Soroush has pointed out, fiqh is fundamentally a discourse of
> obligations and not a discourse of rights- and that is why even the
> revolutionary thinkers of the Iranian revolution now reject the Ulama
> because they have proven to be the most dogmatic, conservative and
defensive
> elements in Muslim society.
I don't know where Abdul Karim Soroush ( or is it Soros, has Soros
conveerted to
Islam?) got his facts from,
but the truth remains that FIQH has withstood the test of time and for
1400
years the various Islamic
Chalipate has relied on Fiqh for LEGISLATION and INTERPRETATION of
LAWS. And
this track record
basically DISAPROVE everyone that questions the role of Fiqh in ISlam.
Even while the STRONG DEPENDENT on FIQH, Islamic empires has thrived
academically and
economically and this disaprove of any criticism against fiqh in ISlam.
I mean
the system works and it has
withstood the test of time.
In fact, rules derived from Fiqh is of much better quality then the ones
obtained from institutions like the
US Congress where it is inhabited by representatives of LOBBYISTS and
PAC
donaters who serve
and protect the interest of lobbyists, large corporations and bascially
those
who have money in their pockets.
Fiqh is based upon the Quran and Sunnah and this can never be changed
Read this particular book of Khalid MAsud on the biography of Asy
Syaitibi and
you will see the LARGE role of
Fiqh in Islamic empires and govenrmnet.
In fact the REFUSAL to stick to FIQH tradition is when the muslim ummah
starts
to weaken. It has left the whole
ummah without guidance and subject them to total confusion/
>
> As for your claim of an Islamic state existing during the Prophet's
time, I
> refer you to the statements now being issued by Syed Farooq Maudoodi,
son of
> Maulana Abul Alaa Maudoodi, founder of the Jamaat Islami. Farooq was
the one
> who first pointed to the fact that the Islamic state is a flawed and
false
> concept because there never was such a thing.
I had refered to the student of Al Maududi by the name of Zakiyuddin
Syarfi. He
currently resides in
West Haven, Conneticut. He is of the opposite opinion.
Just because he is the brother of Al Maududi does not make him an
authority in
Islam. I mean
Firaun was the godfather of Prophet Musa, does it make firaun an
authority in
Islam. Although,
I am open to his views but his veiw alone is insufficient to prove
anything. I
mean he is not
even an authority in Islamic knowledge.
The concept of Islamic state was first formulated by Rashid Redha in his
article
in "Al Manar".
It is a classical concept of ulama 'moulding' Islam to fit the current
reality
of life. His basis for
the concept is derived from the Quran and Sunnah and you can say that it
is his
IJTIHAD.
Wasn't it you who kept saying that ulamas are STAGNANT and
CONSERVATIVE. Well,
this fact sure is a smack in your face, fella....:)
> Brother, please stop reading the future into the past: The 'State' is
a modern
> concept that did not exist
> in the early period of Islam.
It's hard to accept this claim of yours because of the existance of the
first
written constituion
known by man kind. It is called the DUSTRUL MADINAH and can be read in
so many
books.
And if after the legislation of DUSTRUL MADINAH, madinah cannot be
accepted as
an Islamic
state, then I don't know what madinah is??.
> Not only was there no Islamic state during the prophet's time, there
were no
> states as such. There were no states in
> europe, Asia, africa or anywhere. There were just feudal societies
with no
> political boundaries. The Prophet was a feudal leader and his form of
> government was tribal in nature. That is why there are so many
references
> to 'Qaum' and 'Bani', 'families' and 'tribes' in the Quran and Hadith.
> People like you tend to rewrite history with no respect for the past
and no
> understanding of the difference between modernity and pre-modernity.
That is
> why Islamism, as a political ideology, if full of weak points and
internal
> contradictions.
Oh come on Farish you can do better than this. I mean the second
article in
Dusturul
Madinah clearly state that the various QAUM and KABILAH in Madinah
is one UMMAH or one NATION.
And if there is no state formed by the Prophet, how do you explain
various
treaties
signed by the Prophet including Hudaibiyyah??
How do you explain SAHIFAH BANI SAADAh and many more.
These are the factors that lead western scholars like Dr. V Fitzgerald
in his
book "Muhammedan"
as quoted by Al Qaradhawi in "Fiqh Daulah" ( my copy is published and
translated
by Pustaka
Al Kaustar, Djakarta, 1997):
"Islam is not just A religion but it is also a political system.
Although in
recent decades there appear to be
among the muslims who calls themselves "modernis", that is working
towrds
seperating both instituions, but nevertheless
the islamic "theology" has been built upon the very foundation that both
institution are strongly connected and one
cannot be seperated from the other".
> As for the so-called vices of Mahathir and Ataturk- It was farooq
Maudoodi
> (son of Maudoodi again) who told me in our interview that Ataturk was
a
> great man and that the Muslim world needs 100 more ataturks. What is
more it
> was the leaders of the Ikhwan'ul Muslimin whom I met in Lebanon and
the
> leaders of the Jamaat whom I met in Pakistan who told me that Mahathir
was a
> great Muslim leader and that Malaysia was the best model of
progressive
> Islam at work.
I use to have a roomate from IStanbul who was doing his MAsters degree
in
Ottaman
Empire's history. You can say that he is an authority in the matter.
He clearly state that Attaturk has failed to bring turkey to a level of
respect
and advancement as
the Ottoman empire had once been.
Besides, Attaturk is drunk, womanizing, wife beating, corrupt zionist
agent and
he had olny one
purpose and that is to destroy the Ottoman empire from within. There is
nothing
that Turks have enjoyed
from his policies except they allow nudity in their television
Tell your farooq maudidi to study more and be more careful in what he is
saying. It's
very embarassing to say things that would only expose your own
ignorance.
As for the leaders of Jamaat and Ikhwan, those praises were sung when
Anwar
was still in the CAbinet. IT was due to the PR work done by Anwar and
his
people
by exploting the already estadblshed tie during Anwar's ABIM days.
You got to them now and they've got ntohing but INSULTS for Mahathir.
I met with leaders of Ikhwan and Jamaat Islami too you know. I met them
in
Indiana, DC and amny more cities in USA. I know the reason behind their
so call
praises of Mahathir and the gang.
> So who is right here? You or the leaders of these Islamic parties?
> By the way- none of them had anything nice to say about Anwar who they
> regard as a pro-western lackey of the US and the Jewish lobby in
> washington...
Oh come on. Are you talking about the same Islamic Movement leaders or
are they
someone you thought to be Islamic leaders??.
> So I suggest you take a rest, calm down, pray a bit for guidance and
then
> re-read the works of Maudoodi, al-Banna, Khalid Masud, Abdul Karim
Soroush
> and others before you launch yourself on another one of these little
> 'jihads' to get your point across.
I already have and I've already been exposed.
While at the same time, why don;t you try reading "Original Books" that
discusses the political system of Islam like As Siyash Asy Sya'riah by
Ibnu
Taimiyyah,
Al Ahkam Al Sultaniyyah by Al Mawardi, At Tarikh Al Anbiya Wal Muluk by
At
Tabari
or some easier books like Fiqh Ad Daulah by Al Qaradhawi and many more.
Read also the books I mentioned above like At Tuhafat Al Falasifah by Al
Ghazali
and
Minhajus Sunnah by Ibnu taimiyyah.
p.s. Osama is an ardent follower of Ibnu Taimiyyah an no one man has
managed to
strike
fear in the hearts of America like Osama.
> Thank you and I hope that we will meet again.
> My best regards to yourself and your family,
Same hereWasallam
> Farish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
( Melanggan ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body : SUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Berhenti ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body: UNSUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Segala pendapat yang dikemukakan tidak menggambarkan )
( pandangan rasmi & bukan tanggungjawab HIZBI-Net )
( Bermasalah? Sila hubungi [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pengirim: Abdul Rahman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
