I am taking a great risk by sharing this view, in a sense. But I must stress that it is my personal view based on my own reflections, research and reading and I do not expect nor need anyone to accept this view. However, I do welcome criticisms or comments so that I may learn.
I reject “religions”. By religion, I mean generally a set of belief complete with its rituals, dogmas, and symbols.
Firstly, I find that they are based largely on superstitions and conjectures that have been transmitted from generation to generation. Each generation accepts what it has inherited unthinkingly. It is difficult to validate or prove superstitions or beliefs that are founded on conjectures – hence the insistence of “belief or faith” as opposed to reason. “This is my belief” is often the concluding remark of religious people who are unable to reason out the contents of their belief.
I find that religions are man-made. Due to the fact that religion is man-made, the later inheritors of the religion usually have to refer to the experts of the religion ie those who are well versed with it. It is usually impossible to discern the teachings of a particular religion with Reality because it often departs from Reality. For example, if I was to tell you that the sun-God mithra will be furious if you do not worship it, how can you validate this claim with Reality? Thus, you need the expert or clergy of the sun-god Mithra religion to explain, what “worship”, “furious” and even who this mithra back to you. If you belong to this Mithra religion, obviously, you will be at a loss to practice it without the help of their clergy. Common sense, intelligence and knowledge of facts/Reality will be insufficient to make you a religious Mithra worshipper. You need the clergy, the ‘knowledgeable people of the mithra religion”.
On the other hand, if I was to tell you that the plant will die if you do not constantly water it, you will be able to validate this yourself with reality. You do not need the botanist to explain this to you, though he will be able to explain it clearly by referring to further realistic experiments. All you need is common sense, intelligence and knowledge of botany. You can get all this from Reality. Whether you believe or disbelieve is irrelevant to the plant – it will die if you do not water it. This is Reality. This is Ad-deen.
Secondly, Religions also appear to be cultural in nature but seem to derive its authority and “higher status” from a claim of “divine source”. It is this claim of divine source that seems to blur the fact that it is actually cultural practices. Religious culture, if I may call it, is again at variance with the demands of Reality. For instance, if you are a Mithra worshipper, you may be required to chant certain prayers to him/her/it if say you have a new born baby as way of expressing gratitude. Logic and common sense will not be able to understand how this chanting will in any way affect the well being of the baby. Like wise it may defeat reasoning to figure out how this act of chanting equals expression of gratitude to the god.
On the other hand, making the best possible efforts for the well being of the baby would appear to be the common sensical approach inline with the Reality of the baby’s needs. This is Ad-deen or the “way of life which is consistent with the general laws of nature”. For example, feeding the baby with the proper baby food will have an impact on the baby while chanting “holy words” will not. If mere words can have an effect on the laws of nature, than it will seem that all we got to do to avoid floods is to chant the rain or the water away. Obviously that will not work. The way to avoid floods is to take realistic steps to avoid them in line with nature. Taking positive actions in line with Reality is Ad-deen. Chanting is religious.
Thirdly, religions are much occupied with symbols and rituals. Form to them is important rather than substance. To a Mithra worshipper, for example, it may be important that he constantly bows to the sun in the middle of the afternoon. He may be taught that the best form of worship is when the sun is high in the sky such that there is no shadow. So, to attain this “best form of worship”, he spends his entire life trying to achieve this.. He will also spend his life talking about it, the “virtues” of so doing, the “inner peace attained” and will also try to persuade his family, especially the children to follow suit. The fact that his quest to attain this worship does not positively contribute to the betterment of the world or those around him is irrelevant. To him, it is a religious duty that must be performed.
On the other hand, in life one must forever seek to control his own base desires, emotions and ability to think. If you allow negative traits, for example like greed, to control you, you may harm yourself and others. Thinking skills are very important in life to survive. You must cultivate the habit of gaining knowledge and evaluating what you see and hear so that you can grasp Reality. A proper understanding of Reality will allow you to live as effectively as possible. For example, it is from our understanding of physics and mathematics that we are able to improve the way we live. Understanding Realistic knowledge has a real effect on life. This is Ad-Deen. To me religious knowledge actually sedates one’s understanding of reality, sort of creating a “dream world”. When you do or think about things that are contrary to nature, then you are being zalim or “unjust” to yourself.
Fourthly, since Ad-Deen is grounded in Reality, there can be no real disputes. For example, no one will dispute that one need food and water to live. There is unity in Ad-Deen. Only a fool will say, for example, that you do not need transport to move from one place to another. On the other hand, religions, since they are man-made and founded on conjectures, invariably leads to disputes and disunity. Even the clerics will dispute among themselves. This is possibly the reason why you find that sectarianism is common among religions. Since common sense has no place, it is usual that emotional stances among the diverse sects results not only in disunity but enmity between them. This is due to the need to “uphold” religious beliefs.
Would you be angry if anyone disagrees with you that water is essential for living? Of course you wouldn’t because it is a fact grounded in Reality or Ad-Deen. On the other hand, a Mithra worshipper may get angry and call you a disbeliever if you tell him that standing constantly under the sun may cause skin cancer. IN the face of pure faith, reason does not have a role. Your act of reasoning with a religious person will be taken to mean that you are challenging his belief. To him, you are trying to burst his fragile bubble that he has carefully and painstakingly build around him.
PEACE !
Part Two: Ad-Deen Approach of the Quran.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
IS YOUR BELIEF A PERSONALITY DISORDER?
It easy to say that you believe in God or a Supreme Being. It is more difficult to actually try to understand what you mean when you say that. What does it mean when you say that you believe in a Supreme Being? If you care to analyse yourself (honestly and objectively) you will find that we often go through life saying things to ourselves that we do not fully understand. These things we do not understand, we repeat to others and they in turn repeat to others.
Through this process, what was never understood becomes a "reality" held by many. Since it is held by many, it then becomes accepted as the "reality" or the "truth". It then becomes even more difficult to analyse the belief or thought objectively because subjective factors tend to block critical thinking. Example, the person who told you about "believing" is someone you love or your parents or your friends or someone you or society regard as "knowledgeable" or "good person". All these subjective factors may be formidable obstacles in the search for "truth" unless you are focused only on letting your research unfold itself - whatever the results.
The sentence 'I believe in God". Is it simply a sentence? Is it simply a "feeling"? Is it simply something that you feel "right to say" and uncomfortable if you do not say it? Do you know what it entails when you say that?
Let us say you strongly believe that drinking more than 2 pints of water will make you dizzy. Most probably, you may abstain from drinking that amount. But what does believe in God make you abstain from? And how did you come to believe that drinking that amount of water will make you dizzy? Was it a personal experience? Did you validate the experience though research, inquiry and thinking?
What if you believed that you are fat when actually you are thin and thus you abstain from food until you become bulimic? Doctors say this is a personality disorder. Such beliefs can cause damage to self and to others. Unvalidated beliefs may be dangerous.
What about your belief in a Supreme being? Does that cause personality disorder in you such that you lose all sense of rationality, and common sense? To answer this question, if you want to, you have to examine your belief - what is it founded on, what does it do to you, why you believe, how does that belief manifest in reality and so on.
Just sharing. What do you think?
PEACE .
Through this process, what was never understood becomes a "reality" held by many. Since it is held by many, it then becomes accepted as the "reality" or the "truth". It then becomes even more difficult to analyse the belief or thought objectively because subjective factors tend to block critical thinking. Example, the person who told you about "believing" is someone you love or your parents or your friends or someone you or society regard as "knowledgeable" or "good person". All these subjective factors may be formidable obstacles in the search for "truth" unless you are focused only on letting your research unfold itself - whatever the results.
The sentence 'I believe in God". Is it simply a sentence? Is it simply a "feeling"? Is it simply something that you feel "right to say" and uncomfortable if you do not say it? Do you know what it entails when you say that?
Let us say you strongly believe that drinking more than 2 pints of water will make you dizzy. Most probably, you may abstain from drinking that amount. But what does believe in God make you abstain from? And how did you come to believe that drinking that amount of water will make you dizzy? Was it a personal experience? Did you validate the experience though research, inquiry and thinking?
What if you believed that you are fat when actually you are thin and thus you abstain from food until you become bulimic? Doctors say this is a personality disorder. Such beliefs can cause damage to self and to others. Unvalidated beliefs may be dangerous.
What about your belief in a Supreme being? Does that cause personality disorder in you such that you lose all sense of rationality, and common sense? To answer this question, if you want to, you have to examine your belief - what is it founded on, what does it do to you, why you believe, how does that belief manifest in reality and so on.
Just sharing. What do you think?
PEACE .
Sunday, May 3, 2009
How did you become a Muslim?
I was completely shocked when a Muslim responded to me saying: “so what if I do not read the Quran? I am already doing all the essentials of Islam. So I really cannot understand why you are going on and on about me reading the Quran?”
[I also cannot understand why he, being a Muslim, was upset when all I did was to share with him the idea that the Quran should be read to understand its content]
ME: “But if you did not read the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: “You think that reading the Quran means you are a good Muslim?”
ME: “But if you did not read the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: “You didn’t answer my question!”
ME: “ Of course not necessarily. But if you did not read the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: “Well I like to think that I am an okay Muslim. I do all the essentials, I do not hurt others.
ME: “But if you did not read the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: “You do not understand at all. Just because you know the Quran, you think you are clever. What about those who do not know about the Quran?”
ME: “but YOU know about the Quran. You have read it without understanding when you were young. So, if you did not make an effort to understand the teachings of the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: (looking annoyed): “Don’t be stupid lah. Of course they taught us in the mengaji and agama classes. Cant you see I am doing the same thing as every other Muslims. Tak kan tak nampak? Why? Is there anything sesat that I am doing ka?”
ME: “That’s not the point. My point is and I sincerely want to understand … why do you not want to read the Quran to understand it”
HIM: “ Bila sampai seru, of course lah I will”.
ME: “Well, at least let me share some verses with you.”
HIM: “ Tak payah lah. We can just discuss generally without referring to the Quran. You ni, discus agama pun sikit sikit nak rujuk Quran. It is very distracting tau?”
ME: “How is it possible to discuss Islam without referring to the Quran bro? be reasonable”
HIM: “You are the one being unreasonable. Kan I told you, we discuss generally okay?”
ME: “Meaning what?”
HIM: “ Don’t pretend to be stupid lah. You are a lawyer. You know what I mean”.
ME (being sincerely baffled): “ No, I really do not know what ‘discussing generally means apart from the fact that it is clear we are not supposed to refer to the Quran”.
HIM: “ Bro. You are a very nice guy and I like you. I tengok bila discuss religion, you ni serious sangat”.
ME: “But bro, isn’t discussing truth and Allah’s verses a serious matter?.
HIM: “There you go again. All I was saying was that kita kena tingkatkan pengetahuan agama among the youth. You yang lari topic saying we must read the Quran lah, we must understand it lah. Of course. Siapa tak tau?”
ME: “Bro, sorry lah…you are 45 years old and you nak tunggu seru baru nak baca. How in the world are you going to motivate the young to understand Islam? What is this tunggu seru anyway?”
HIM: “You ni tak baik lah buat buat bodoh. Don’t lah play lawyer with me. Tak kan seru pun you tak tau?
ME: “ya lah bro, if we want to motivate the young, we must know the first basis of Islam that is the Quran. That’s what I have been meaning all through our chat tonight”.
HIM: “You are being difficult. Use common sense lah brother. Don’t we have the experts huh? Tak kan kita tak ada ustad, ulamak dan orang pengetahuan. Mereka lah yang perlu buat semua tu”.
ME: “If they are going to do it, why are you telling me this?”
HIM: “Sharing lah. Since you are so interested in Islam. I also feel much more should be done. Tengok lah pemuda pemudi Melayu, teruk sangat nilai dia orang. Simple as that”.
ME: “Your concern for them is good. But why do you forget about yourself?”.
HIM: “Mana ada I forget myself pula?”
ME: “Well, you are stopping me from referring to the Quran in our chat. And you say you want to tunggu seru, whatever that means. Anyway, how do you know what the experts are going to do is in line with the Quran if you do not understand it?”
HIM: “ Bro, malas lah nak discuss this topic with you. Tukar topic lah”.
Then he discussed current politics and after about 15 minutes of patience, I excused myself and went home.
SALAM.
P.S. Brother, if you do read this posting, know that I still love you as my friend.
[I also cannot understand why he, being a Muslim, was upset when all I did was to share with him the idea that the Quran should be read to understand its content]
ME: “But if you did not read the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: “You think that reading the Quran means you are a good Muslim?”
ME: “But if you did not read the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: “You didn’t answer my question!”
ME: “ Of course not necessarily. But if you did not read the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: “Well I like to think that I am an okay Muslim. I do all the essentials, I do not hurt others.
ME: “But if you did not read the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: “You do not understand at all. Just because you know the Quran, you think you are clever. What about those who do not know about the Quran?”
ME: “but YOU know about the Quran. You have read it without understanding when you were young. So, if you did not make an effort to understand the teachings of the Quran, how did you become a Muslim?”
HIM: (looking annoyed): “Don’t be stupid lah. Of course they taught us in the mengaji and agama classes. Cant you see I am doing the same thing as every other Muslims. Tak kan tak nampak? Why? Is there anything sesat that I am doing ka?”
ME: “That’s not the point. My point is and I sincerely want to understand … why do you not want to read the Quran to understand it”
HIM: “ Bila sampai seru, of course lah I will”.
ME: “Well, at least let me share some verses with you.”
HIM: “ Tak payah lah. We can just discuss generally without referring to the Quran. You ni, discus agama pun sikit sikit nak rujuk Quran. It is very distracting tau?”
ME: “How is it possible to discuss Islam without referring to the Quran bro? be reasonable”
HIM: “You are the one being unreasonable. Kan I told you, we discuss generally okay?”
ME: “Meaning what?”
HIM: “ Don’t pretend to be stupid lah. You are a lawyer. You know what I mean”.
ME (being sincerely baffled): “ No, I really do not know what ‘discussing generally means apart from the fact that it is clear we are not supposed to refer to the Quran”.
HIM: “ Bro. You are a very nice guy and I like you. I tengok bila discuss religion, you ni serious sangat”.
ME: “But bro, isn’t discussing truth and Allah’s verses a serious matter?.
HIM: “There you go again. All I was saying was that kita kena tingkatkan pengetahuan agama among the youth. You yang lari topic saying we must read the Quran lah, we must understand it lah. Of course. Siapa tak tau?”
ME: “Bro, sorry lah…you are 45 years old and you nak tunggu seru baru nak baca. How in the world are you going to motivate the young to understand Islam? What is this tunggu seru anyway?”
HIM: “You ni tak baik lah buat buat bodoh. Don’t lah play lawyer with me. Tak kan seru pun you tak tau?
ME: “ya lah bro, if we want to motivate the young, we must know the first basis of Islam that is the Quran. That’s what I have been meaning all through our chat tonight”.
HIM: “You are being difficult. Use common sense lah brother. Don’t we have the experts huh? Tak kan kita tak ada ustad, ulamak dan orang pengetahuan. Mereka lah yang perlu buat semua tu”.
ME: “If they are going to do it, why are you telling me this?”
HIM: “Sharing lah. Since you are so interested in Islam. I also feel much more should be done. Tengok lah pemuda pemudi Melayu, teruk sangat nilai dia orang. Simple as that”.
ME: “Your concern for them is good. But why do you forget about yourself?”.
HIM: “Mana ada I forget myself pula?”
ME: “Well, you are stopping me from referring to the Quran in our chat. And you say you want to tunggu seru, whatever that means. Anyway, how do you know what the experts are going to do is in line with the Quran if you do not understand it?”
HIM: “ Bro, malas lah nak discuss this topic with you. Tukar topic lah”.
Then he discussed current politics and after about 15 minutes of patience, I excused myself and went home.
SALAM.
P.S. Brother, if you do read this posting, know that I still love you as my friend.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
RESTORING INTER- RELIGIOUS HARMONY
Media Statement
The proposals made by the Malaysian Cabinet pertaining to conversion, the religion of a child one of whose parents has converted to another religion, and the responsibilities that a convert will have to fulfil in relation to his or her spouse and children, should be welcomed by all Malaysians.
These proposals will help to improve inter-religious ties in the country. In the last few years a number of episodes related to conversion and the responsibilities of a convert towards his non-Muslim spouse and family have had a negative impact upon our multi-religious fabric. By allowing these controversies to drag on and on, without providing any solutions, the authorities had indirectly aggravated inter-religious antagonisms.
Equally important, the Cabinet proposals project the essence of Islam with its strong commitment to justice and fair play. It is wrong of a person who converts to Islam to abdicate his responsibility to his non-Muslim spouse and children. Neither should he coax or coerce his young children to become Muslims. It is only right that they remain in the religion of their parents at the time of the parents’ marriage until they attain maturity at which point they can decide for themselves on the religion they want to embrace.
It is hoped that these sane and sensible proposals will be supported by the State Muftis and other religious authorities. Given the right advice by their Muftis, the Rulers as Heads of Islam in their respective states will undoubtedly endorse these proposals which are fundamental for enhancing inter-religious ties. Political party leaders should also rise above partisan politics and power play and eschew narrow interpretations of Islamic law. They should appreciate the larger significance of these proposals for the dignity of Islam and the honour of the Muslim community in Malaysia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar.
President,
International Movement for a Just World (JUST).
Petaling Jaya.
Malaysia.
24 April 2009.
The proposals made by the Malaysian Cabinet pertaining to conversion, the religion of a child one of whose parents has converted to another religion, and the responsibilities that a convert will have to fulfil in relation to his or her spouse and children, should be welcomed by all Malaysians.
These proposals will help to improve inter-religious ties in the country. In the last few years a number of episodes related to conversion and the responsibilities of a convert towards his non-Muslim spouse and family have had a negative impact upon our multi-religious fabric. By allowing these controversies to drag on and on, without providing any solutions, the authorities had indirectly aggravated inter-religious antagonisms.
Equally important, the Cabinet proposals project the essence of Islam with its strong commitment to justice and fair play. It is wrong of a person who converts to Islam to abdicate his responsibility to his non-Muslim spouse and children. Neither should he coax or coerce his young children to become Muslims. It is only right that they remain in the religion of their parents at the time of the parents’ marriage until they attain maturity at which point they can decide for themselves on the religion they want to embrace.
It is hoped that these sane and sensible proposals will be supported by the State Muftis and other religious authorities. Given the right advice by their Muftis, the Rulers as Heads of Islam in their respective states will undoubtedly endorse these proposals which are fundamental for enhancing inter-religious ties. Political party leaders should also rise above partisan politics and power play and eschew narrow interpretations of Islamic law. They should appreciate the larger significance of these proposals for the dignity of Islam and the honour of the Muslim community in Malaysia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar.
President,
International Movement for a Just World (JUST).
Petaling Jaya.
Malaysia.
24 April 2009.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Adakah anda seorang "penilai" atau "peminat?" - Respon kepada KomentaR
Seorang pembaca blog ini telah memberi komen berikut yang mana saya dapati mengandungi beberapa perkara penting yang perlu dihurai:
Salam ustaz,
terima kasih atas jawapan tuan.dan terima kasih atas niat tuan tentang penghuraian lain di masa depan. saya sedar diri ini kurang tercabar untuk jadi penilai. saya masih struggle di tangga bawah maslow's theory of needs. macam mana saya nak jadi penilai bila saya sibuk bekerja untuk memberi makan keluarga. saya buat aktiviti kehidupan untuk hidup saya. Apa yang saya dapat jadi penilai? kalau menurut penerangan tuan tangga moral penilai jauh lebih tinggi dari peminat. Tapi apa kepentingan moral bila perut lapar? Adakah saya perlu takut kalau saya lupa, tuhan yg saya tak nampak akan marah dan seksa saya. sedangkan saya lupa kerana nak hidup? Tuhan ini juga bagi saya hidup. Kesedaran saya belum sampai tahap penilai masih di tahap ahli perut.Maaf kerana bangkitkan soal ini.
ps. menunggu article baru tentang ahli perut.
Respon saya:
Pertama sekali, saya bukan ustad tetapi masih ditahap seorang pelajar. Saya sentiasa berasa amat aneh apabila seseorang itu digelar sebagi “pakar Islam” walhal Allah telah berfirman bahawa kalau lautan itu digunakan sebagai dakwat untuk “ilmu” Allah, lautan itu maih tidak mencukupi (Quran: 18: 109). Kalau seorang itu digelar sebagi pakar agama, saya mungkin tidak terasa aneh sebab memang agama itu ciptaan manusia dan sememangnya manusia yang mencipta agama itu adalah pakarnya. Islam adalah “addeen” dan bukan nya agama.
Maslov’s theory of needs memang menarik dan dari satu sudut boleh diterimapakai bagi memahami tingkahlaku manusia. Namun, pada saya ia adalah satu theory yang tidak benar walau pun betul. Ada perbezaan yang besar diantara apa yang “betul” dan apa yang “benar”. Tetapi bukan lah tujuan respon ini untuk mengkaji theory Maslov disini.
Sebenarnya, keperluan untuk hidup adalah perkara yang perlu diberi perhatian oleh seorang mukmin kerana kita diberi kehidupan oleh Maha Suci. Seorang penilai tahu bahawa maha Suci telah menetapkan kesemua ini sebagai satu “natural law” atau semula jadi serta sifat kehidupan sejak ciptaan. Ia redha dengan sifat itu dan tidak menjadikan nya sebagai satu alasan atau masalah untuk “mengasingkan diri” dari Maha Suci. Kita tidak perlu Maslov untuk terangkankan perkara ini.
“Sesungguhnya, Kami akan menguji kamu dengan sesuatu daripada ketakutan, dan kelaparan, dan kekurangan harta, dan jiwa, dan buah-buahan; dan berilah berita gembira kepada orang-orang yang sabar” (Quran 2:155)
Orang-orang yang, apabila mereka ditimpa penderitaan, berkata, "Sesungguhnya kami kepunyaan Allah, dan kepada-Nya kami kembali." (Quran 2:156).
Manakala Maslov mengajar bahawa manusia itu hanya akan mula berfikir mengenai perkara-perkara yang dianggap sebagai “ideals” setelah keperluan asas nya dipenuhi, Allah mengajar bahawa hambatan untuk memenuhi keperluan asas itu satu ujian dari Nya untuk “mendekatkan diri” pada Nya. Seroang mukmin, kerana ia seorang penilai, sudah mula berfikir apabila ia membenarkan diri nya berfikir berpandukan Al-Furqan. Ia tidak tunggu sehingga “keperluan asas” nya dipenuhi kerana ia tidak tahu bila ia terpaksa kembali kepada Maha Suci untuk dipertanggungjawap.
Tindakan si Ali (penilai) yang sibuk bekerja untuk menyara kehidupan keluarga nya mungkin boleh di nilai sebagai “mengunakan harta nya ke jalan Allah”. Sebaliknya, tindakan si Ahmad (peminat) untuk menyara kehidupan keluarga nya mungkin boleh di nilai sebagai bukan ke arah jalan Allah. Dua-duanya sibuk berkerja tetapi kesan nya amat berbeza. Apa beza nya?
Perbezaan nya terlalu banyak untuk dihuraikan disini. Secara ringkas beberapa perkara boleh di fikirkan bersama. Seroang penilai tidak akan makan harta secara palsu (Quran 2.188, Quran 4.29), tidak akan menindas atau timbang kurang untuk menyara keluarganya (Quran 11:85 ). Pendekata, seorang mukmin kerana ia sentiasa menilai dengan akal dan fikiran yang dianugerahkan oleh Maha Suci, ia tidak akan menjadi ahli perut. Ia tahu bahawa hanya syaitan yang menjanjikan kemiskinan ( Quran 2:268). Ia yakin bahawa Maha Suci memberi keampunan dan pemberian.
Sebaliknya, seorang peminat hidup akan yakin dengan ketakutan kemiskinan yang di bisik oleh syaitan dan sanggup melakukan kesumbangan untuk menyara keluarga nya serta diri nya. Ia sanggup, sebagai contoh menindas pengguna dengan menaikkan harga barangan dengan begitu tinggi sekali melalui kaedah komisyen dan sebagainya. Hanya semata-mata untuk mempunyai tabungan dan keselesaan hidup untuk diri nya! Namun, Maha Suci berpesan bahawa bagi peminat hidup, harta serta anak-anak mereka tidak berguna bagi mereka (Quran 3.10).
Satu lagi perkara yang perlu saya sebut ialah: menjadi “penilai” bukan lah satu tahap “tinggi” atau "rendah" yang susah hendak dicapai. Jika ia nya mustahil untuk di capai, mustahil ada puluhan ayat dalam Al-Furqan yang mendesak dan mengajak manusia untuk menilai dan berfikir. Malangnya, kita yang telah menurunkan martabat manusia dengan mengatakan bahawa “payah untuk berfikir” atau “bukan semua orang boleh berfikir”. Perkara yang lazim telah di jadikan oleh syaitan sebagai satu perkara yang luar biasa. Memang peranan syaitan untuk songsangkan nilai-nilai. Maka ramai mengambil jalan keluar yang dianggap “senang” tetapi sebenarnya menzalimi diri sendiri.
Saya akhiri respon ini dengan firman Maha Suci yang bermaksud:
“Pergilah, dengan ringan dan berat! Berjuanglah di jalan Allah dengan harta kamu dan jiwa kamu. Itulah yang lebih baik bagi kamu jika kamu mengetahui”. (Quran 9:41).
Sekian. Sekadar berkongsi.
SALAM.
NOTA: Sila rujuk kepada teks Al-Quran yang asal untuk pastikan terjemahan diatas.
Salam ustaz,
terima kasih atas jawapan tuan.dan terima kasih atas niat tuan tentang penghuraian lain di masa depan. saya sedar diri ini kurang tercabar untuk jadi penilai. saya masih struggle di tangga bawah maslow's theory of needs. macam mana saya nak jadi penilai bila saya sibuk bekerja untuk memberi makan keluarga. saya buat aktiviti kehidupan untuk hidup saya. Apa yang saya dapat jadi penilai? kalau menurut penerangan tuan tangga moral penilai jauh lebih tinggi dari peminat. Tapi apa kepentingan moral bila perut lapar? Adakah saya perlu takut kalau saya lupa, tuhan yg saya tak nampak akan marah dan seksa saya. sedangkan saya lupa kerana nak hidup? Tuhan ini juga bagi saya hidup. Kesedaran saya belum sampai tahap penilai masih di tahap ahli perut.Maaf kerana bangkitkan soal ini.
ps. menunggu article baru tentang ahli perut.
Respon saya:
Pertama sekali, saya bukan ustad tetapi masih ditahap seorang pelajar. Saya sentiasa berasa amat aneh apabila seseorang itu digelar sebagi “pakar Islam” walhal Allah telah berfirman bahawa kalau lautan itu digunakan sebagai dakwat untuk “ilmu” Allah, lautan itu maih tidak mencukupi (Quran: 18: 109). Kalau seorang itu digelar sebagi pakar agama, saya mungkin tidak terasa aneh sebab memang agama itu ciptaan manusia dan sememangnya manusia yang mencipta agama itu adalah pakarnya. Islam adalah “addeen” dan bukan nya agama.
Maslov’s theory of needs memang menarik dan dari satu sudut boleh diterimapakai bagi memahami tingkahlaku manusia. Namun, pada saya ia adalah satu theory yang tidak benar walau pun betul. Ada perbezaan yang besar diantara apa yang “betul” dan apa yang “benar”. Tetapi bukan lah tujuan respon ini untuk mengkaji theory Maslov disini.
Sebenarnya, keperluan untuk hidup adalah perkara yang perlu diberi perhatian oleh seorang mukmin kerana kita diberi kehidupan oleh Maha Suci. Seorang penilai tahu bahawa maha Suci telah menetapkan kesemua ini sebagai satu “natural law” atau semula jadi serta sifat kehidupan sejak ciptaan. Ia redha dengan sifat itu dan tidak menjadikan nya sebagai satu alasan atau masalah untuk “mengasingkan diri” dari Maha Suci. Kita tidak perlu Maslov untuk terangkankan perkara ini.
“Sesungguhnya, Kami akan menguji kamu dengan sesuatu daripada ketakutan, dan kelaparan, dan kekurangan harta, dan jiwa, dan buah-buahan; dan berilah berita gembira kepada orang-orang yang sabar” (Quran 2:155)
Orang-orang yang, apabila mereka ditimpa penderitaan, berkata, "Sesungguhnya kami kepunyaan Allah, dan kepada-Nya kami kembali." (Quran 2:156).
Manakala Maslov mengajar bahawa manusia itu hanya akan mula berfikir mengenai perkara-perkara yang dianggap sebagai “ideals” setelah keperluan asas nya dipenuhi, Allah mengajar bahawa hambatan untuk memenuhi keperluan asas itu satu ujian dari Nya untuk “mendekatkan diri” pada Nya. Seroang mukmin, kerana ia seorang penilai, sudah mula berfikir apabila ia membenarkan diri nya berfikir berpandukan Al-Furqan. Ia tidak tunggu sehingga “keperluan asas” nya dipenuhi kerana ia tidak tahu bila ia terpaksa kembali kepada Maha Suci untuk dipertanggungjawap.
Tindakan si Ali (penilai) yang sibuk bekerja untuk menyara kehidupan keluarga nya mungkin boleh di nilai sebagai “mengunakan harta nya ke jalan Allah”. Sebaliknya, tindakan si Ahmad (peminat) untuk menyara kehidupan keluarga nya mungkin boleh di nilai sebagai bukan ke arah jalan Allah. Dua-duanya sibuk berkerja tetapi kesan nya amat berbeza. Apa beza nya?
Perbezaan nya terlalu banyak untuk dihuraikan disini. Secara ringkas beberapa perkara boleh di fikirkan bersama. Seroang penilai tidak akan makan harta secara palsu (Quran 2.188, Quran 4.29), tidak akan menindas atau timbang kurang untuk menyara keluarganya (Quran 11:85 ). Pendekata, seorang mukmin kerana ia sentiasa menilai dengan akal dan fikiran yang dianugerahkan oleh Maha Suci, ia tidak akan menjadi ahli perut. Ia tahu bahawa hanya syaitan yang menjanjikan kemiskinan ( Quran 2:268). Ia yakin bahawa Maha Suci memberi keampunan dan pemberian.
Sebaliknya, seorang peminat hidup akan yakin dengan ketakutan kemiskinan yang di bisik oleh syaitan dan sanggup melakukan kesumbangan untuk menyara keluarga nya serta diri nya. Ia sanggup, sebagai contoh menindas pengguna dengan menaikkan harga barangan dengan begitu tinggi sekali melalui kaedah komisyen dan sebagainya. Hanya semata-mata untuk mempunyai tabungan dan keselesaan hidup untuk diri nya! Namun, Maha Suci berpesan bahawa bagi peminat hidup, harta serta anak-anak mereka tidak berguna bagi mereka (Quran 3.10).
Satu lagi perkara yang perlu saya sebut ialah: menjadi “penilai” bukan lah satu tahap “tinggi” atau "rendah" yang susah hendak dicapai. Jika ia nya mustahil untuk di capai, mustahil ada puluhan ayat dalam Al-Furqan yang mendesak dan mengajak manusia untuk menilai dan berfikir. Malangnya, kita yang telah menurunkan martabat manusia dengan mengatakan bahawa “payah untuk berfikir” atau “bukan semua orang boleh berfikir”. Perkara yang lazim telah di jadikan oleh syaitan sebagai satu perkara yang luar biasa. Memang peranan syaitan untuk songsangkan nilai-nilai. Maka ramai mengambil jalan keluar yang dianggap “senang” tetapi sebenarnya menzalimi diri sendiri.
Saya akhiri respon ini dengan firman Maha Suci yang bermaksud:
“Pergilah, dengan ringan dan berat! Berjuanglah di jalan Allah dengan harta kamu dan jiwa kamu. Itulah yang lebih baik bagi kamu jika kamu mengetahui”. (Quran 9:41).
Sekian. Sekadar berkongsi.
SALAM.
NOTA: Sila rujuk kepada teks Al-Quran yang asal untuk pastikan terjemahan diatas.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Adakah anda seorang “penilai” atau “peminat”?
Walaupun pun masing-masing yang hidup itu diberi kehidupan oleh Maha Suci, setiap orang membuat keputusan yang berbeza mengenai bagaimana mereka hendak kendalikan kehidupan itu.
Ada yang mengambil berat kehidupan mereka, ada yang mengambil ringan dan ada pula yang membiarkan kehidupan mereka berlalu begitu sahaja.
Apa sahaja keputusan yang dibuat, masing-masing menerima akibat tertentu ekoran keputusan yang di buat.
Bagaimana dengan orang mukmin atau orang yang percaya? Sudah tentu orang mukmin mempunyai perspektif yang berbeza mengenai kehidupannya. Pertama sekali, seorang mukmin percaya dan sedar bahawa kehidupan nya adalah untuk Maha Suci. Kesedaran dan kepercayaan ini akan menjadikan beliau seorang penilai dalam kehidupan dan bukannya seorang peminat.
Seorang penilai akan menilai segala sesuatu yang di hadapinya atau dialami olehnya bagi menentukan bahawa kehidupannya diatur supaya “ia nya adalah untuk Maha Suci”.
Seorang peminat pula leka dengan kehidupan dan minat kepada tipuan dunia dan kesenangan sementara yang dikecapi oleh pancainderanya. Ia tidak akan menilai segala sesuatu yang didengar, lihat atau dirasa oleh nya. Ia akan terima segala yang dialami atau diingini oleh nya sebagai kebenaran tanpa sebarang penilaian.
Seorang mukmin adalah serorang penilai yang konsisten dimana ia akan menilai tindak-tanduk, pemikiran serta segala sesuatu berpandukan Al-Furqan.
Sekiranya orang mukmin itu tidak merujuk kepada Al-Furqan untuk menilai sesuatu, dari mana pula ia dapat pengukur nya? Kalau kayu ukur nya bukan Al-Furqan, sumber mana kah yang di percayai oleh nya? Apa kah setaraf Al-Furqan yang terus daripada Maha Suci dengan pandangan mana-mana manusia?
Adakah dikatakan orang itu beriman kepada Al-Furqan walhal ia tidak mahu atau tidak pernah merujuk kepada Al-Furqan dengan mata, hati dan akal nya sendiri?
Seorang peminat mudah meminati pelbagai perkara dalam kehidupan – kekayaan, kepandaiaan, benda, orang-orang terkemuka dalam pelbagai bidang, dan sebagainya. Ia menceburi dalam kehidupan dengan seluruh jiwa nya tanpa menilai.
Seorang mukmin menilai peranan pelbagai perkara dalam kehidupan nya. Ia menilai segala yang dilihat, dengar, dan dirasa kerana ia ,beriman bahawa segala ini akan diperanggungjawapkan kelak oleh Maha Suci. Ia mengunakan akal sejajar dengan apa yang di ajar oleh Al-Furqan.
Seorang peminat mudah taklid dan taksub kepada seseorang atau sesuatu.
Seorang penilai tidak pernah taklid dan taksub pada sesiapa atau sesuatu. Ia hanya beriman kepada Maha Suci dan berpandukan Al-Furqan.
Hanya sekadar berfikir - peminat atau penilai dalam hidup.?
Salam.
Ada yang mengambil berat kehidupan mereka, ada yang mengambil ringan dan ada pula yang membiarkan kehidupan mereka berlalu begitu sahaja.
Apa sahaja keputusan yang dibuat, masing-masing menerima akibat tertentu ekoran keputusan yang di buat.
Bagaimana dengan orang mukmin atau orang yang percaya? Sudah tentu orang mukmin mempunyai perspektif yang berbeza mengenai kehidupannya. Pertama sekali, seorang mukmin percaya dan sedar bahawa kehidupan nya adalah untuk Maha Suci. Kesedaran dan kepercayaan ini akan menjadikan beliau seorang penilai dalam kehidupan dan bukannya seorang peminat.
Seorang penilai akan menilai segala sesuatu yang di hadapinya atau dialami olehnya bagi menentukan bahawa kehidupannya diatur supaya “ia nya adalah untuk Maha Suci”.
Seorang peminat pula leka dengan kehidupan dan minat kepada tipuan dunia dan kesenangan sementara yang dikecapi oleh pancainderanya. Ia tidak akan menilai segala sesuatu yang didengar, lihat atau dirasa oleh nya. Ia akan terima segala yang dialami atau diingini oleh nya sebagai kebenaran tanpa sebarang penilaian.
Seorang mukmin adalah serorang penilai yang konsisten dimana ia akan menilai tindak-tanduk, pemikiran serta segala sesuatu berpandukan Al-Furqan.
Sekiranya orang mukmin itu tidak merujuk kepada Al-Furqan untuk menilai sesuatu, dari mana pula ia dapat pengukur nya? Kalau kayu ukur nya bukan Al-Furqan, sumber mana kah yang di percayai oleh nya? Apa kah setaraf Al-Furqan yang terus daripada Maha Suci dengan pandangan mana-mana manusia?
Adakah dikatakan orang itu beriman kepada Al-Furqan walhal ia tidak mahu atau tidak pernah merujuk kepada Al-Furqan dengan mata, hati dan akal nya sendiri?
Seorang peminat mudah meminati pelbagai perkara dalam kehidupan – kekayaan, kepandaiaan, benda, orang-orang terkemuka dalam pelbagai bidang, dan sebagainya. Ia menceburi dalam kehidupan dengan seluruh jiwa nya tanpa menilai.
Seorang mukmin menilai peranan pelbagai perkara dalam kehidupan nya. Ia menilai segala yang dilihat, dengar, dan dirasa kerana ia ,beriman bahawa segala ini akan diperanggungjawapkan kelak oleh Maha Suci. Ia mengunakan akal sejajar dengan apa yang di ajar oleh Al-Furqan.
Seorang peminat mudah taklid dan taksub kepada seseorang atau sesuatu.
Seorang penilai tidak pernah taklid dan taksub pada sesiapa atau sesuatu. Ia hanya beriman kepada Maha Suci dan berpandukan Al-Furqan.
Hanya sekadar berfikir - peminat atau penilai dalam hidup.?
Salam.
Monday, April 20, 2009
THE WELL
This story was told to me when I was in my early twenties by a Buddhist monk I met in Kajang.
One upon a time there was Kingdom which was ruled by a King. This King took advice from a council of elders on matters. There was one well in the Kingdom which supplied drinking water to all his subjects, including the palace.
One day, he had a terrible nightmare. A witch appeared in his dream and cursed: " From the time of the full moon, all those who drink from the well will become insane".
The next morning, the King related to his advisers his dream. They advised the King to stock up as much water as possible from the well for the needs of the palace before the full moon which was only two days away. So the next two days, as much water as possible from the well was kept in the palace.
As the full moon passed, many subjects became increasingly mad as a result of drinking water from the well. As more and more subjects drank from the well, finally, all his subjects became mad. The only sane ones were the King and all those in his palace.
One day, the King's spy approached the King and informed him that some of his subjects are planning an uprising against the palace. The King was puzzled as he has always been a just King and inquired the reason for the upcoming rebellion. The spy informed him thus:
"O King, the people are saying that you and the palace officials are mad and behave in very odd ways."
The King looked at his advisers and sought their view. The Chief adviser approached the King and said:
"O King! since all the subjects have gone mad from drinking from the well, we seem different to them. The only way to retain their loyalty is for us to drink from the well too."
The King then ordered that everyone, including himself drink from the well. And his Kingdom was saved.
PEACE !
One upon a time there was Kingdom which was ruled by a King. This King took advice from a council of elders on matters. There was one well in the Kingdom which supplied drinking water to all his subjects, including the palace.
One day, he had a terrible nightmare. A witch appeared in his dream and cursed: " From the time of the full moon, all those who drink from the well will become insane".
The next morning, the King related to his advisers his dream. They advised the King to stock up as much water as possible from the well for the needs of the palace before the full moon which was only two days away. So the next two days, as much water as possible from the well was kept in the palace.
As the full moon passed, many subjects became increasingly mad as a result of drinking water from the well. As more and more subjects drank from the well, finally, all his subjects became mad. The only sane ones were the King and all those in his palace.
One day, the King's spy approached the King and informed him that some of his subjects are planning an uprising against the palace. The King was puzzled as he has always been a just King and inquired the reason for the upcoming rebellion. The spy informed him thus:
"O King, the people are saying that you and the palace officials are mad and behave in very odd ways."
The King looked at his advisers and sought their view. The Chief adviser approached the King and said:
"O King! since all the subjects have gone mad from drinking from the well, we seem different to them. The only way to retain their loyalty is for us to drink from the well too."
The King then ordered that everyone, including himself drink from the well. And his Kingdom was saved.
PEACE !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
