Hukum Menyambut Hari Valentine

Hukum Menyambut Valentine

Oleh Zaharuddin Abd Rahman

www.zaharuddin.net

Dengan  Nama Allah, Yang Maha Pemurah, lagi Maha Mengasihani;
Segala Pujian dan  Kesyukuran hanya kepada Allah; Selawat dan Salam keatas Muhammad Rasullullah.

Soalan

Assalamualaikum ustaz, Benarkah hukum menyambut hari Valentine adalah haram, bagaimana pula hukum menjual hadiah dan bunga kepada pasangan-pasangan bukan Islam dan sebahagian umat Islam yang meraikannya?

JAWAPAN

Saya telah menyertakan jawapan di ruangan artikel bahasa Inggeris, bagi membantu rakan-rakan yang kurang selesa memahami bahasa Inggeris, disertakan jawapan ringkas saya berkenaan sambutan hari valentine.

Asal-usul Valentine

Tindakan mengaitkan pertengahan bulan Februari dengan cinta dan kesuburan sudah ada sejak dahulukala. Menurut tarikh kalender Athena kuno, periode antara pertengahan Januari dengan pertengahan Februari adalah bulan Gamelion, yang dipersembahkan kepada pernikahan suci Dewa Zeus dan Hera.

Di Roma kuno, 15 Februari adalah hari raya Lupercalia, sebuah perayaan Lupercus, dewa kesuburan, yang dilambangkan setengah telanjang dan berpakaian kulit kambing. Sebagai bagian dari ritual penyucian, para pendeta Lupercus meyembahkan korban kambing kepada sang dewa dan kemudian setelah minum anggur, mereka akan lari-lari di jejalanan kota Roma sembari membawa potongan-potongan kulit domba dan menyentuh siapa pun yang mereka jumpai. Terutama wanita-wanita muda akan maju secara sukarela karena percaya bahwa dengan itu mereka akan dikarunia kesuburan dan bisa melahirkan dengan mudah. (http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hari_Valentine)

Selain itu, sejarahnya juga berkait dengan fakta di bawah:

Saint Valentine is a name which is given to two of the ancient "martyrs" of the Christian Church. It was said that there were two of them, or that there was only one, who died in Rome as the result of the persecution of the Gothic leader Claudius, c. 296 CE. In 350 CE, a church was built in Rome on the site of the place where he died, to perpetuate his memory.

When the Romans embraced Christianity, they continued to celebrate the Feast of Love mentioned above, but they changed it from the pagan concept of "spiritual love" to another concept known as the "martyrs of love", represented by Saint Valentine who had advocated love and peace, for which cause he was martyred, according to their claims. It was also called the Feast of Lovers, and Saint Valentine was considered to be the patron saint of lovers.

One of their false beliefs connected with this festival was that the names of girls who had reached marriageable age would be written on small rolls of paper and placed in a dish on a table. Then the young men who wanted to get married would be called, and each of them would pick a piece of paper. He would put himself at the service of the girl whose name he had drawn for one year, so that they could find out about one another. Then they would get married, or they would repeat the same process again on the day of the festival in the following year.

The Christian clergy reacted against this tradition, which they considered to have a corrupting influence on the morals of young men and women. It was abolished in Italy, where it had been well-known, then it was revived in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when in some western countries there appeared shops which sold small books called "Valentine's books", which contained love poems, from which the one who wanted to send a greeting to his sweetheart could choose. They also contained suggestions for writing love letters.

[Excerpted, with slight modifications, from www.IslamQ&A.com]

Justeru, secara ringkasan saya boleh simpulkan seperti berikut:

1) Kita hanya boleh merayakan perayaan yang diiktiraf oleh Islam iaitu Eidil Fitri dan Eidil Adha. Nabi SAW bersabda:

Ertinya: Sesungguhnya bagi setiap kaum itu perayaan masing-masing, dan ini (Eidil Fitri dan Eidiladha) adalah perayaan kita" (Riwayat Al-Bukhari, 952; Muslim, 1892)

Justeru, sebarang perayaan yang disambut oleh umat Islam mestilah terhad kepada dua perayaan ini sahaja.

Bagaimanapun, jika sesuatu majlis, keraian dan sambutan itu dianjurkan bukan atas asas atau nama agama serta tiada kaitan dengannya bahkan dibuat atas dasar adat semata-mata. Ianya boleh dan harus diraikan dengan syarat sambutannya tidak diserapi apa jua unsur maksiat dan syirik. Sebagai contoh sambutan kemerdekaan Negara, sambutan ulangtahun penubuhan sesebuah syarikat dan sebagainya. Cuma ia bukanlah disambut sebagai hari raya ketiga atau keempat, tetapi hanya sebagai majlis keraian setaraf dengan majlis perkahwinan dan sepertinya sahaja.

Ini bermakna, setiap tujuan dan asal usul perayaan itu perlulah disemak. Maka jika disemak perayaan Valentine ini. Ternyata ia berasal dari cerita dongeng, karut dan syirik berakitan dewa dan sebagainya. Selain dari asalusul, cara dan kaedah implementasnya juga mesti dilihat, jika secara adatnya ia disambut dengan dosa dan maksiat. Ia sekali lagi dilarang di atas dasar tersebut pula.

2) Tidak harus pula meniru orang Kafir dan ahli maksiat dalam meraikan majlis yang dianjurkan. Imam Ibn Taymiah dan Ibn Qayyim telah menyebut bahawa telah Ijma' (sepakat keseluruhan Ulama) melarang penyerupaan dalam meraikan perayaan agama (atas asas agama) selain Islam. [Iqtidha, 1/454; Ahkam Ahli Zimmah, 2/722]

3) Islam tidak mengiktiraf hari kasih sayang. Kasih sayang dalam Islam bersifat universal, tidak dibatasi waktu dan tempat dan tidak dibatasi oleh objek dan motif. Hal ini sesuai dengan hadis:

"Cintailah saudara seislam seperti kamu mencintai dirimu sendiri." [Riwayat Bukhari].

Islam sangat melarang keras untuk saling membenci dan bermusuhan, namun sangat menjunjung tinggi akan arti kasih sayang terhadap umat manusia.

Rasulullah (sallallāhu `alayhi wa sallam) bersabda: "Janganlah kamu saling membenci, berdengki-dengkian, saling berpalingan, dan jadilah kamu sebagai hamba-hamba Allah yang bersaudara. Juga tidak dibolehkan seorang muslim meninggalkan (tidak bertegur sapa) terhadap saudaranya lebih dari tiga hari" [Muslim]

Kasih sayang dalam Islam diwujudkan dalam bentuk yang nyata seperti silaturahmi, menjenguk yang sakit, meringankan beban tetangga yang sedang ditimpa musibah, mendamaikan orang yang berselisih, mengajak kepada kebenaran (amar ma'ruf) dan mencegah dari perbuatan mungkar

4) Sambutan hari Valentine hari ini menjadi semakin terkeji apabila ia menjurus kepada perlakuan maksiat, mengadaikan ‘dara' kepada kekasih yang bernafsu ‘syaitan' dan dengan perlakaun seks bebas yang kononnya bagi membuktikan 'ketulenan' cinta seseorang kepada kekasihnya..

5) Islam juga melarang umatnya dari terlibat, duduk serta bersekongkol dalam majlis yang mempersendakan Islam dan bercanggah dengannya. Ini dari firman Allah yang bermaksud:

"Dan sungguh Allah telah menurunkan kepada kamu di dalam Al Qur'an bahwa apabila kamu mendengar ayat-ayat Allah diingkari dan diperolok-olokkan (oleh orang-orang kafir), maka janganlah kamu duduk beserta mereka, sehingga mereka memasuki pembicaraan yang lain. Karena sesungguhnya (kalau kamu berbuat demikian), tentulah kamu serupa dengan mereka. Sesungguhnya Allah akan mengumpulkan semua orang-orang munafik dan orang-orang kafir di dalam Jahanam" [An-Nisa: 140]

Diriwayatkan dari Umar r.a. bahwa dia pernah mendengar Rasulullah (sallallāhu `alayhi wa sallam)  bersabda:

"Barangsiapa beriman kepada Allah dan hari akhir, maka janganlah duduk pada suatu hidangan yang padanya diedarkan arak." [Riwayat Ahmad]

Maka majlis arak yang haram itu adalah sama hukumnya dengan majlis Valentine yang mana sumber, asal usul dan cara pelaksanaannya yang terdedah kepada pelbagai jenis maksiat. Tidak harus sama sekali untuk menghadiri majlis sempena Valentine di mana-mana jua.

Jadi adakah pergi shopping sempena 'sale' hari Valentine juga salah?

Jawabnya, sekadar membeli belah ia tidak salah, namun TIDAK DIBENARKAN menyertai seseuatu PERHIMPUNAN, SAMBUTAN KHAS kerana Valentine seperti majlis Konsert, Nyanyian dan sepertinya.

6) Hukum memberikan hadiah sempena hari Valentine juga adalah menjadi haram berdasarkan kaedah dari firman Allah: "Janganlah kamu bantu membantu dalam perkara dosa dan permusuhan"

Bagaimanapun hukum menjual bunga sahaja, ia tidak kurang dari kategori jualan yang syubhah, makruh atau haram khas di hari Valentine.

Diriwayatkan, ada seorang laki-laki yang memberi hadiah satu bekas arak kepada Nabi s.a.w, kemudian Nabi memberitahu bahwa arak telah diharamkan Allah. Orang laki-laki itu bertanya:

Lelaki: Bolehkah saya jual?

Nabi: Zat yang mengharamkan meminumnya, mengharamkannya juga menjualnya.

Lelaki: Bagaimana kalau saya hadiahkan raja kepada orang Yahudi?

Nabi: Sesungguhnya Allah yang telah mengharamkan arak, mengharamkan juga untuk dihadiahkan kepada orang Yahudi.

Lelaki: Habis, apa yang harus saya perbuat?

Nabi: Tuang saja di dalam parit air. [Al-Humaidi dalam musnadnya]

Justeru, kita dapat melihat bahawa benda yang haram, maka haram juga dijualnya mahupun dihadiahkan. Dalam hal menjual bunga, ia juga boleh menjadi syubhah di hari Valentine seperti ini, kerana diketahui ianya dibeli khas untuk mearikan Valentine yang haram. Seperti juga hukum menjual anggur kepada tukang buat arak yang telah diketahui. Ia tidak dibenarkan dalam Islam menurut pendapat yang terkuat.

7) Para ulama juga menyatakan LARANGAN untuk saling mengirim ucapan Valentine, cinta dan kasih bersempena hari itu. Perlu dianggapkan hari Valentine itu tidak wujud dan ia adalah sebuah hari biasa sahaja.

[Excerpted from www.zaharuddin.net published 26 Muharram 1428 -14 Feb 2007]

Amat Kejam

Mayat ini ditemui di Permatang Duyung Melaka. Ini adalah terlalu kejam dan perbuatan yang amat jijik. Kerajaan , agen-agensi berwajib, masyarakat umum, ibu bapa perlu membuat tindakan yang tegas bagi membenteras kegiatan ini. Masyarakat Islam perlu bangkit membenteras perbuatan yang jijik ini. Janganlah kita hanya cenderung bermain politik sahaja. Wahai peminmipin dan saudara-saudaraku bangunlah, benteraslah masalah yang jijik ini. Kalu kita tidak mahu jaga bangsa dan agama kita, siapa nak jaga? Kitalah perlu jaga bangsa dan agama kita.

Dr Zambry is valid Perak MB

Dr Zambry is valid Perak MB, Federal Court rules

By M. MAGESWARI, TheStar Online
Tuesday February 9, 2010 MYT 2:22:50 PM

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court ruled on Tuesday that Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abd Kadir is the rightful Perak Mentri Besar.

The decision was read out by Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria, who sat with Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sheriff and Federal Court judges Datuk Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin, Datuk Wira Ghazali Mohd Yusoff and Datuk Abdul Hamid Embong.

The bench ruled that the Court of Appeal was right in reversing the High Court ruling.

The apex court held that if a Mentri Besar refused to resign, his office was deemed to have been vacated.

The bench ruled that the vote of no confidence could be determined by other means than by the Perak Assembly.

It was the final step in the appeal by former Pakatan Rakyat Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin to reclaim the Mentri Besar's post.

However, the losing party in the case can apply to the Federal Court to review its own ruling under Rule 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court to challenge the matter on constitutional points.

A calm looking Nizar told reporters that the decision was “not unexpected” and that he and his team would need to study the written judgment before deciding what to do next.

The conflict over who was the rightful Mentri Besar arose last year after three Pakatan assemblymen quit their parties to become independent state assemblymen, leaving Pakatan and Barisan with 28 assemblymen each in the 59-seat Perak legislative assembly.

The Sultan of Perak then named Dr Zambry the Mentri Besar of Perak.

Nizar took the matter to the High Court which ruled in his favour. Dr Zambry, however, got a stay of judgement and went to the Court of Appeal which overturned the High Court ruling.

Nizar then appealed to the Federal Court.

Dr Zambry, who was not in court, later told reporters that the court's decision would allow Barisan Nasional to continue working for the people.

Meanwhile, Dr Zambry's lawyers came out of the court room waving happily to the crowd. Dr Zambry was not present in the court.

Supporters of both sides erupted into shouting slogans with Dr Zambry supporters chanting 'Hidup BN' while Nizar's supporters shouted 'tipu, Zambry penakut, MB haram.'

Earlier, supporters of both Dr Zambry and Nizar had gathered outside the court as early as 7am with some of them shouting ‘bubar DUN’ and ‘hidup rakyat’.

FRU personnel had a tough time managing the crowd. In the end, Dr Zambry’s supporters were kept to the left while Nizar’s supporters moved to the right of the area leading to the court room.

Chronology of events in the Perak political crisis (Bernama)

March 17 2008: Mohammad Nizar, the state assemblyman for Pasir Panjang, is sworn is as Mentri Besar of Perak.

Feb 1 2009: Perak State Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar announces he has received the resignation letters of Behrang assemblyman Jamaluddin Mat Radzi and Changkat Jering assemblyman Mohd Osman Jailu. Both assemblymen deny they have resigned.

Feb 3 2009: The Election Commission decides that the Behrang and Changkat Jering seats are not vacated and as such, by-elections are not required for the constituencies.

Feb 4 2009: Then Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak announces that the Perak Barisan Nasional has a simple majority to set up the state government after two PKR assemblymen and one DAP assemblyman quit their parties to become independent assemblyman friendly to the Barisan. Perak Barisan and Pakatan Rakyat both have 28 seats each in the state assembly while three assemblymen are independents.

Feb 5 2009: A media statement issued by the office of the Sultan of Perak states that the sultan will not dissolve the state assembly and has asked Mohammad Nizar and the state executive council to resign or their positions will be deemed to have become vacant.

Feb 6 2009: Dr Zambry is appointed the 11th Mentri besar of Perak, replacing Mohammad Nizar. Barisan officially takes over the administration of the Perak government.

Feb 13 2009: Mohammad Nizar initiates legal action, seeking a court declaration that he is still the rightful Mentri besar and an injunction prohibiting Dr Zambry from discharging his duties as the Mentri besar.

March 6 2009: High Court Judge Lau Bee Lan refers to the Federal Court for determination of constitutional issues in the summons filed by Mohammad Nizar challenging the validity of the appointment of Dr Zambry as the Mentri Besar of Perak.

March 23 2009: The Federal Court decides that the Mohammad Nizar vs Dr Zambry case be sent back to the High Court.

April 3 2009: Mohammad Nizar is given the “green light” by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to challenge the validity of the appointment of Dr Zambry as the Perak Mentri besar following a ruling by Justice Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim that the application filed by Mohammad Nizar in February was not frivolous or vexatious and that there was a prima facie case to be argued in court.

May 11 2009: The High Court declares Mohammad Nizar the rightful Mentri Besar of Perak after finding that he had never vacated his post as he had not lost the confidence of the majority of the state assemblymen.

May 12 2009: Dr Zambry remains Mentri besar until the Court of Appeal hears his appeal against the High Court decision declaring Mohammad Nizar as the right Mentri besar following Court of Appeal Judge Datuk Ramly Ali’s decision allowing Dr Zambry’s application to stay the execution of the High Court ruling.

May 22 2009: The decision of the High Court is dismissed by the Court of Appeal which declares Dr Zambry the rightful Mentri besar in accordance with the Constitution.

June 19 2009: Mohammad Nizar files a leave application to the Federal Court to challenge the Court of Appeal decision.

Nov 5 2009: A five-man bench of the Federal Court adjourns its decision to Feb 9, 2010 after hearing submissions.

Feb 9 2010: The five-member panel of the Federal Court rules that Dr Zambry is the rightful Perak Mentri Besar.

Parti Melayu tak bantu kaum sendiri

Dr. Mahathir kecewa parti Melayu tak bantu kaum sendiri

Utusan Online, 31 Januari 2010 / 15 Safar 1431

Oleh MOHD. RAFIE AZIMI
rafie.azimi@utusan.com.my


KUALA LUMPUR 30 Jan. - Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad berkata, tiga parti utama orang Melayu iaitu UMNO, Pas dan Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) terlalu 'asyik' mendapatkan sokongan bukan Melayu sehingga tidak mempedulikan rintihan kaum mereka sendiri.

Bekas Perdana Menteri itu berkata, ketika ini apa jua tuntutan bukan Melayu, sama ada beralas undang-undang, Perlembagaan atau perjanjian lalu, akan dilayan oleh parti-parti berkenaan.

Beliau percaya tindakan itu berpunca daripada keyakinan mereka yang menyedari bahawa orang Melayu tidak mempunyai banyak pilihan ketika pilihan raya dan akan tetap menyokong mereka.

"Tidak perlu saya nyatakan apa yang menyebabkan kita berasa kecewa. Tetapi kita lihat orang yang dulu kata orang Islam jika berkawan dengan bukan Islam akan jadi kafir, sekarang peluk cium orang bukan Islam dan dihalalkan segalanya bagi mereka kerana orang Melayu tetap akan bagi sokongan.

"Ia bukan tindakan yang bijak. Orang Melayu rasa tidak boleh lagi bergantung pada parti-parti politik, sebab itu ditubuhkan pertubuhan bukan kerajaan (NGO) untuk menyuarakan pendapat mereka," katanya.

Beliau berkata demikian ketika berucap di hadapan lebih 2,000 hadirin pada majlis pelancaran Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (Perkasa) Selangor di Dewan Serbaguna Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya (MPAJ), Hulu Kelang di sini hari ini.

Turut hadir, Menteri Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani, Datuk Seri Noh Omar; Presiden Perkasa, Datuk Ibrahim Ali serta beberapa pemimpin NGO Melayu.

Dr. Mahathir menambah, terdapat beberapa NGO Melayu yang menemuinya dan menyatakan kekecewaan mereka terhadap kerajaan dan parti-parti pembangkang.

"Tetapi apa yang mereka boleh buat. Mereka kata, jika terlampau giat suarakan pendirian orang Melayu, mereka akan dituduh rasis dan mungkin juga diambil tindakan oleh pihak berkuasa.

"Akhirnya, mereka datang bertemu bekas Perdana Menteri yang sudah tidak bertaring. Mereka kecewa tetapi tidak dapat suarakan kepada pemimpin Melayu sama ada kerajaan atau parti lawan," ujarnya.

Beliau bagaimanapun mengingatkan orang Melayu agar melakukan protes secara tertib dan tidak melakukan kekacauan sehingga menghancurkan keamanan negara.

"Kalau mereka tidak dengar, kita ada kuasa dalam pilihan raya. Jangan gunakan cara yang boleh merosakkan keamanan.”

"Tetapi saya bimbang, sekiranya keadaan ini berterusan, orang Melayu yang sekian lama memendam kekecewaan akan 'meletup'," katanya.

Kecenderungan Menggodam Melayu

Utusan Online, 28 Januari 2010 / 12 Safar 1431

RUANGAN "Isu-isu Akhbar Cina" di halaman 10 Utusan Malaysia semalam menarik perhatian saya khususnya kerana petikan ucapan dua orang pemimpin Cina dari dua parti yang berbeza.

Petikan pertama berpunca daripada pemimpin veteran DAP, Lim Kit Siang yang dilaporkan sebagai berkata: "Dalam beberapa tahun ini, DAP sangat risau terhadap tohmahan-tohmahan yang dibuat oleh Utusan Malaysia yang mengeluarkan racun dan hasutan."

Daripada satu segi ucapan Lim Kit Siang ini tidak semestinya menghairankan kerana lidahnya memang sentiasa celupar menuduh Utusan Malaysia sebagai "rasis."

Sememangnya kecenderungan yang sangat ketara di kalangan suku sakat Kit Siang sejak akhir-akhir ini ialah menuduh sesiapa sahaja yang memperjuangkan hak dan kepentingan bangsa Melayu sebagai "rasis."

Dan kali ini, tulisan Awang Selamat dalam Mingguan Malaysia, 24 Januari yang lalu dituduhnya sebagai "mengeluarkan racun dan hasutan."

Sehubungan itu saya teringat satu bidalan Melayu dalam bentuk pantun dua kerat: "Kaki dulang paku serpih, mengata orang awak yang lebih."

Tentu kita tidak lupa bahawa beberapa orang pengikut atau rakan Kit Siang dalam DAP telah dilaporkan kepada polis kerana tindakan atau ucapan yang bersifat menghasut atau seditious.

Petikan kedua berpunca daripada kenyataan Ketua Pemuda MCA yang juga menjadi Timbalan Menteri Pelajaran, Dr. Wee Kah Siong yang dilaporkan sebagai berkata: "Kementerian Pelajaran adalah kubu terakhir orang Melayu."

Daripada satu segi, ucapan Kah Siong ini boleh diertikan bahawa "benteng-benteng Melayu yang lain semuanya sudah roboh." Secara tersirat seakan-akan dia mahu supaya semua benteng Melayu "dirobohkan."

Kedua-dua ucapan itu saya anggap sebagai contoh mutakhir tindakan Malay bashing (menggodam dan mengutuk Melayu) yang secara berkias ditafsirkan oleh Awang Selamat sebagai sebahagian daripada satu agenda yang lebih besar (grand design).

Dalam ruangan Bisik-Bisik Mingguan hari Ahad yang lalu, Awang Selamat telah mempersoalkan dakwaan sesetengah pihak kononnya DAP kini telah mulai mendapat sokongan Melayu.

Sebagai reaksi terhadap tulisan Awang Selamat itu, Kit Siang telah mengeluarkan satu kenyataan yang kemudian disiarkan oleh tiga akhbar Cina: China Press, Nanyang Siang Pao dan Sinchew Jit Poh.

Jika diteliti lebih dalam, tulisan Awang Selamat itu yang sebenarnya adalah perkara biasa yang sudah menjadi pengetahuan umum. Tetapi kerana tersiar dalam Utusan Malaysia, ia dibesar-besarkan.

Jika kenyataan Kit Siang dapat dianggap ibarat "kaki dulang paku serpih", maka kenyataan Kah Siong, saya anggap sebagai perbuatan "menggunting dalam lipatan, telunjuk lurus kelingking berkait."

Senator Datuk Dr. Firdaus Abdullah ialah Pakar Rujuk di Akademi Pengajian Melayu, Universiti Malaya

Statements of Muslim Lawyers Association of Malaysia on Allah

On the use of ‘Allah’ by the Herald

Herald Issue – I

The Malays, as one foreigner once summed up, are a people who rest under the coconut tree with the sun shinning brightly and cheerfully upon them whilst the wind blow softly against their faces.

This observation is meant as a compliment to the temperament of the Malay Muslims. As compared to Muslims of other countries, the Muslims of Malaya did not go through a period of great conflict and bloodshed to obtain independence. As a result, you have a Muslim community who is tolerant and receptive to other religion and races.

The constitutional position of Islam and the Malays can be understood by making an analogy to a house owner who welcome visitors into their house and allowed their visitors the right to use the living room, dining room, the bedrooms, the garden, and all other areas, except, the house owner was to say, “Never ask for the right to use my own master bedroom. It is my special privilege.” After a few decades, the house owner has shared everything in his house except for his own master bedroom. He finds that his visitors, having enjoyed unlimited access and use of all the parts in his house are now knocking on the doors of his master bedroom, demanding for the right to use his own master bedroom, his last bastion.

The case of the weekly Herald has jolted the largely Malay Muslim community into the realisation that their last bastion, their master bedroom (i.e. Islam and Malay privileges) is now very much at stake. The positive outcome from the Herald fiasco is the unity of majority of the Muslims coming to the fore to protect and defend a matter held dear to their very essence, their religion, culture and sense of identity.

The Herald had since 1986, illegally used the words “Allah” to refer to God in its publication. Under Control of Undesirable Publications of the Printing Presses And Publications Act introduced in 1984, the Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) (Ministry of Home Affairs) has the power to introduce the Garis Panduan Penerbitan Kementerian Dalam Negeri (“Guideline”) to regulate publications such as the Herald. According to the Guideline, words such as “Allah”, “Kaabah”, “Baitullah” and ‘Solat” are not allowed to be used by religions other than Islam. The KDN then issued a letter dated 19.05.1986 instructing and advising the weekly Herald not to use the words contained in the Guideline. Such words are deemed as sensitive to the Muslim community and may cause disharmony, disunity and confusion among the community especially the Malay Muslim community.

However, instead of adhering to KDN’s instructions and advice to cease publishing the word “Allah”, the weekly Herald repeatedly breached the Guideline by reproducing the publication in the Herald containing the words “Allah”.

The Archbishop of the Titular Roman Catholic Church (“the Church”) himself admitted in his Affidavit that a total of eight letters were sent to the Herald by KDN advising them to cease the use of the word “Allah” in their publication which went unheeded. The word “Allah” is banned for use by non Muslims under the anti propagation laws of states in its schedule of offensive words. Despite a clear statutory provision disallowing the use of Allah by non Muslims, the Herald continued in acts of infringement of the anti propagation laws and blatantly disregarded the Guideline since 1986 until 2007. Since no immediate and decisive action was taken by KDN in response to this transgression of state law and consistent breach of the Guideline, the Church was emboldened enough to file a Judicial Review dated 19.03.2008 for the following declarations:-

1. that the Church is entitled to use the word ‘Allah’ in The Herald, a weekly Catholic publication of the Church;
2. that the Guideline by the Kementerian Dalam Negeri is illegal; and
3. that the use of the word “Allah” is not exclusive for the religion of Islam.

The Herald meanwhile, posted their publication online until it came to the attention of the Majlis Agama Islam Selangor (“MAIS”) and the Muslim Chinese Association of Malaysia (“MACMA”) who were deeply concerned on the effects of the publication on the Muslims in general, especially as they were made to understand by the Church that the publication was to be solely for internal circulation of members of the Church. With its posting online by the Herald however, meant that the general public and those outside of Kuala Lumpur including the world at large would have unlimited access to the Herald. The MACMA feared that the publication would cause confusion among converts due to the terminology used. It may also open the floodgates for other beliefs to challenge the Guidelines and use the word “Allah” in their practise.

As a body entrusted with the protection of the rights and interests of Islam and the largely Malay Muslims, MAIS viewed these developments with alarm and concern. MAIS is empowered under state legislation to dispense their duties as the lawful representative of the Sultan of Selangor including to advise the Sultan of Selangor on any matter impacting the unity and interests of the Muslims. Having presented to the Sultan of Selangor the gravity of the matter, the Sultan of Selangor found the situation to be sufficiently compelling for MAIS’s intervention. With the blessings and unequivocal support of the Sultan of Selangor, MAIS filed applications to be admitted as interveners for both the Summons and Review. Their action was emulated by other Majlis Agama Islam of the States of Wilayah Persekutuan, Terengganu, Johore, Pulau Pinang and Melaka. Throughout the case, solicitors and MAIS officers handling the case attest to the ease by which they were able to advise and brief the Sultan of Selangor and to obtain further directions. The deeds of the Sultan of Selangor shall be crafted in our historical manuscripts as a monarch who has displayed a deep conscience and understanding of his role as protector and custodian of Islam and Malay rights, in the case brought by the Church.

The intervener applications by MAIS, MACMA and Majlis Agama Islam of States were provided for by statutory provisions under the Rules of the High Court.

Unfortunately, the Court did not allow their application even though MAIS argued for their inclusion under the various provisions in the Rules of High Court, including provisions for special entry to oppose the judicial review. The Court did not recognise the statutory duties of MAIS under state legislations as the lawful body to advise and aid the Sultan of Selangor in such matters of judicial review relating to the rights and interests of Islam and the largely Malay Muslims.

The Court made a pronouncement that MAIS have no basis to justify that they have a direct interest in the case, in total disregard to MAIS’s statutory function as adviser and aid to the Sultan of Selangor in matters of Islam and Muslim rights. Thus, MAIS was denied the opportunity to put forth their arguments before the Court by the Judge presiding the case, Datuk Lau Bee Lan. This situation proved fatal to MAIS’s intervener application and was a major factor that led to a decision in favour of the Herald. The Court decision meant that the words “Allah” and consequently, “Allah’s Son” were allowed to be used in the Malay pages of the Herald weekly. The Court decision has also set a precedent that where it deems fit, parties who expressly transgressed and breached laws, may still come to Court challenging the authorities’ right to enforce laws under the guise of “constitutional rights”. This is one of the greatest mockeries to our judicial system.

Consequently, the reaction of the Muslim community to the Court decision dated 31.12.2009 is largely one of disbelief, anger and humiliation; a deep wound that if it were at all to recover, would require a long healing process.

Herald Issue – Part II

The Judge presiding the case of the Herald, Datuk Lau Bee Lan, in her decision disallowing MAIS, MACMA and Majlis Agama of States as interveners, made special mention of the fact that the applicants in this case were unable to provide concrete evidence that the use of the word “Allah” is sensitive to the Muslim community and would cause disharmony, disunity and confusion among the Muslim community. As such, it may be inferred that the Judge was of the opinion that the usage of the word “Allah” by the Herald and the Church would not be of material consequence as far as the Muslim community is concerned.

Events that unfolded during the days immediately succeeding the decision proved otherwise. NGOs, Islamic organisations and various other organisations whether politically connected and apolitical were greatly moved by this outright disregard of the Muslim’s community sensitivities. The government, initially unsure of the correct stand to be taken, followed the stance set by our former premier in this issue, where Tun Mahathir in his statement immediately after the Court decision was handed down stated that “….the word “Allah” is specific for Muslims..” and “…in Peninsular Malaysia we have never heard of Christians using the word Allah when referring to God in the Malay language, why are we using the word now?..”. Tun Mahathir’s sentiment is shared by many Muslim groups in Malaysia who questioned the motives behind the application by the Church to use the word “Allah” in the Herald which may, subsequently lead to the use of the word of “Allah” in a Malay language version of the bible. The other versions of the bible, which is the English, Chinese and Tamil language do not include the word “Allah” in their publications. As such, it seems that the word “Allah” and as such, “Allah’s Son” are meant to be used exclusively for a Malay language version and targeted for the largely Malay Muslim community.

The demonstrations of opposition to the Court decision that took place all over the country culminated in sporadic attacks against Churches in Kuala Lumpur, Selangor, Perak, Malacca and Sarawak, hinting to possible civil unrest if left unabated. A news report dated 11th January 2010 in the Star which states “…Some 1,700 members of the Protestant Church packed the hall for the joint Mandarin and English services from early yesterday…” points blankly to the age old customary usage of English and Mandarin in their Church services, which reinforces the suspicion of the Muslim community towards the intention of the Church in using the word “Allah” in the Malay language pages of the Herald-Weekly and the Malay version of the bible. Members of Churches testify through at least one blog (http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/12096) as follows:- “It is for the use of ‘Allah’ in worship and publication in Bahasa, not in English…Yes, they had use God and will continue use God in English worship/publication but in Bahasa, they want to use ‘Allah’ back”.

In respect to the attacks against the Churches, there have been notable efforts by the government to pacify the Christian community whereby monetary compensation and contribution to repair the Churches were offered. The Muslim community generally do not condone the attacks and belief that these attacks are isolated incidences and committed by extremist individuals. However, similar efforts by the government to pacify the Muslim community are wanting and the Christian community have not come strongly forward to state their disagreement with the application by the Titular Roman Archbishop to use the word “Allah” in Malay language pages of the Herald-Weekly. In order to contain extremist individuals and comfort the wounds of the Muslim community inflicted by the Church’s Court application, a more decisive stand has to be made by the government authorities.

Although the stand by the government authorities in this issue is uncertain and lacking in direction, the King – Yang Dipertuan Agong Al-Wathiqu Billah Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin ibin Almarhum Sultan Madmud Al-Muktafi Billah Shah (“Yang Dipertuan Agung”) came forward to point the direction that the government is supposed to drive in this issue. In the statement issued by the Yang Dipertuan Agung dated 9th January 2010, the Yang DiPertuan Agung reminded all parties to respect Islam as the religion of the Federation and emphatically stated that the use of the word “Allah” shall precisely follow that as understood and complied in the Islamic context. The statement made by the Yang DiPertuan Agung had to a certain extent, provided some semblance of relief from the black abyss that currently envelopes the muslim community.

The statement by the Yang DiPertuan Agung that Islam is the religion of the Federation is of great significance in its meaning and effect. Under the Constitution, Islam holds a special position that is unquestionable. This special position is entrenched in Article 3 of the Federal Constitution that states, “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace in harmony in any part of the Federation.” Therefore, Article 3 establishes the sovereignty of Islam as the religion of the Federation and the rights of other religions to be practised shall not encroach on the rights of Muslims to practise Islam nor cause disharmony to Islam. The description of Islam as a religion above others under the Constitution is aptly described by Judge Mohd Nor Abdullah in a decided case in the year 2000 (Meor Atiqurahman bin Ishak & Ors v Fatimah Sihi & Ors [2000] 1 CLJ 393), where Islam is likened to a majestic tree known as the “Pokok Jati” which is tall, strong and luminous. It stands and walk before others, its presence is in the main arena with its voice heard loud and clear. If its nature is not as such, then it cannot be said to be a religion above others in the Constitution.

The Yang DiPertuan Agung, in taking the office of Yang DiPertuan Agong, is subject to the Oaths he had pledged as stipulated in the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution. In accordance to the Oaths taken under the name of Allah, the Yang DiPertuan Agong has an undisputable sacred duty as custodian and protector of the religion of Islam and Malay rights.

In the case of the Herald, the Yang DiPertuan Agong, having been advised by Constitutional experts, came instantly to the defence of the Islamic religion and being an institution by itself, was the first to pledge support for the Sultan of Selangor in the intervener application. The Majlis Agama of Terengganu, being the state directly under the Yang DiPertuan Agong was initiated as a party through its Majlis Agama Islam to the intervener application. For states that have no Sultan such as Malacca, Pulau Pinang and Wilayah Persekutuan, the Yang DiPertuan Agong took upon himself to instruct the Majlis Agama of these states to join in the intervener application. The Sultan of Johor, meanwhile, came into the intervener application through the advice of their Mufti.

The main thrust of the Yang DiPertuan Agong’s and Majlis Agama States’ concern is the confusion that the misuse of the word “Allah” would cause among the Muslims and non Muslims alike. The concept of Allah as understood, embraced and practised by the Muslim community in Malaysia is totally distinct and separate from the concept as understood by the Church conceptually, culturally and theologically. Whereas, the concept of Allah embraced by the Muslim community in Malaysia as defined in the context of Muslim and Malay tradition is Allah in a MONOTHEIST (TAWHID) sense as opposed to the concept of TRINITY of God as understood by the Church.

In the aftermath of the Church attacks, calls were made for the Muslim community to remain calm and not to disrupt harmony. Some opinions chided the Muslim community for their intolerant behaviour towards the Court Decision and even advised that the issue of the use of the word “Allah” in the Malay language pages of the Herald-Weekly has been unjustly magnified. The nation has forgotten one critical aspect in all of this mayhem; the Muslim community did not start the encroachment of the rights of other religious communities. Instead, the act of the Church in bringing the matter to Court is seen by the Muslim community as a belligerent and provocative act and this fact should be acknowledged by all, as a first step towards healing wounds.

Azril Mohd. Amin
Information Secretariat,
Persatuan Peguam Peguam Muslim Malaysia.
(Muslim Lawyers Association of Malaysia)

Allah Untuk Semua!

Allah Untuk Semua!

Dr Dzulkefli Ahmad

Saya amat insaf isu penggunaan kalimah "Allah" oleh penganut Katolik Kristian di negara ini bakal menimbulkan pelbagai reaksi buruk seandainya penganut Islam dan penganut agama lain khususnya Kristian gagal mengawal emosi dan tidak faham isunya yang sebenar.

Perasan tersebut menghantui penulis, selaku ahli Lujnah Politik PAS Pusat ketika melangkah masuk ke dewan mesyuarat, Pejabat Agung PAS di Jalan Raja Laut pada malam Isnin, 4 Januari 2010. Silap haribulan, dalam PAS pun boleh berlaku kebrentakan.

Bermain di minda penulis adalah kesan impak dan senario, akan akibat keputusan yang bakal diambil. Berlatarbelakangkan demografi negara atau kependudukan dan pengundi yang bersifat 60-40 atau "Mixed", kesan "senjata dua mata" atau "double-edged sword" ini tidak dapat dielakkan. Ada yang suka dan menyokong dan tentunya ada yang akan kecewa dan marah.

Namun, penulis berazam dan mahukan keputusan yang bakal dicapai adalah satu yang dirumuskan dengan segala pertanggungjawabannya. Ya betul perhitungan politik yang bijak dan waras itu penting, tetapi dasar yang berdasarkan hujjah dan sandaran Al-Quran mesti jelas dan teguh dahulu.

Penulis benar-benar menarik nafas lega dengan keputusan. Keputusan lujnah telah pun diumumkan dan tentunya penulis tak boleh menceritakan apa yang yang berlaku di sebalik dewan tertutup itu untuk hampir tiga jam. Berikut adalah penulisan secara ilmiah sebagai perkongsian untuk tatapan umum.

Kerana kekangan ruang, isu ini wajar dilihat penulis dari 2 aspek penting.

i. Perspektif Al-Quran atau Hukum dan
ii. Perspektif Pentadbiran atau Perundangan dan kalau sisi pandang PAS apa yang dikatakan sebagai perkiraan Siasah Syariah atau Siasah dari kacamata Syariah atau tegasnya kesan baikburuk mengikut pandangan Syariah.

Isu ini timbul kerana pengharaman yang dibuat oleh Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) terhadap penerbitan mingguan Herald Katolik yang menggunakan kalimah Allah dalam penerbitannya dalam Bahasa Malaysia. Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur telah membuat keputusan bahawa KDN salah dalam pengharaman itu berdasarkan peruntukan Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Saya cuba huraikan kemudian secara ringkas.

Untuk pengetahuan umum, penganut agama Kristian Katolik di Sabah dan Sarawak telah menggunakan kalimah "Allah" sejak 150 tahun lalu. Kalimah Allah juga digunakan oleh penganut-penganut Sikh Gudwara. Dalam konteks negara timur tengah dan negara umat Islam lain, penggunaan nama "Allah" oleh penganut lain, tidak menimbulkan masalah sejak berzaman.

Persoalan penting yang ummat Islam di negara ini perlu faham ialah, apakah Al-Quran mengizinkan kalimah Allah digunakan oleh penganut selain Ummat Islam? Dan apa pula pendirian ulama-ulama besar terkini atau kontemporari terhadap isu ini, khususnya dalam konteks Islam dalam dunia kini?

Jawapan ini penting dan dapat mengelakkan isu ini dipolitikkan bahkan diekspolitasi sehingga mengeruhkan suasana perhubungan baik antara-agama dan antara-budaya.

Para Ulama kerap merujuk kepada beberapa ayat di dalam Al-Quran yang menyebutkan bahawa Allah SWT sendiri mengiktiraf, bahawa orang-orang muskrik (yang menyembah berhala) pun mengakui bahawa Allah adalah Rabb atau Tuhan yang Mencipta atau Al-Khaliq. Bermakna mereka menerima Tuhan Yang Menjadikan Semesta Alam ini (Tawhid Rububiyah). Islam secara lengkapnya dalam bab Keimanan atau Aqidah Tawhid menerima Allah selaku Pencipta (Rububiyah) dan Pentadbir/Pemberi Hukum (Uluhiyah).

Dalam Al-Quran Allah berfirman: "Dan jika (Muhammad) tanyakan mereka siapa yang menjadikan langit dan bumi?", Tentu mereka akan jawab "Allah". Katakanlah "Segala Puji bagi Allah, tetapi kebanyakan mereka tidak mengetahui" [Surah Luqman,31: 25]

Tegasnya mereka mengiktiraf Allah tetapi hanya dari sifat "Rububiyah"(Pencipta) dan tidak selengkapnya termasuk Allah selaku Yang Mentadbir dan Memberi Hukum (Tauhid Rububiyah).

Saya merujuk kepada pandangan dua tokoh besar ulama terkini, Sheikh Yusuf Qardhawi, penerima anugerah Tokoh Maal Hijrah 1431H dan Sheikh Dr Wahbah Zuhaili Tokoh Maal Hijrah 1429H. Kedua-dua berpandangan bahawa penggunaan nama "Allah" adalah dibolehkan kepada penganut-penganut agama Nabi Allah Ibrahim yakni Islam, Kristian dan Judaism.

Kedua-dua berpandangan bahawa ia adalah baik untuk menjalinkan kesatuan dan perpaduan di peringkat "persaudaraan agama samawiyat", paling tidaknya. Mereka tidak mengambil sikap sempit macam sesetengah orang Islam di negara ini, bahawa Allah hanya untuk orang Islam secara eksklusif dan penganut lain tak boleh guna nama Allah atau macam suruh cari Tuhan lain pulak. Berapa banyak Tuhan yang ada? Bukankah Islam menganjurkan semua ummat manusia mengiktiraf Tuhan itu Esa atau Satu.

Perhatikan ayat di seterusnya ini. Allah sebutkan dalam Al-Quran: "....kami beriman kepada Kitab-kitab yang diturunkan kepada kami dan yang diturunkan kepadamu, Tuhan kami dan Tuhan kamu, satu dan hanya kepadanya kami berserah diri....." [Surah Al-Ankabut, 29:46]

Bukankah lebih baik, mengikut logik akal waras, di samping hujah dari al-Quran dan kata Ulama tadi, supaya kita galakkan mereka juga menerima "Allah", walaupun Tawhid dan Aqidah mereka tak sempurna macam kita. Memanglah, itulah sebabnya mereka Kristian atau Yahudi atau selainnya.

Kalau mereka percaya macam aqidah kita tentang Allah, jadilah mereka orang Islam, bukanlah lagi Kristian dan Yahudi. Namun bolehkah kita paksa Aqidah kita itu kepada mereka? Tentunya tidak. Tidak ada paksaan dalam Islam.

Setelah mengizinkan agama lain menggunakan nama "Allah", maka yang lebih penting adalah supaya tidak menyalahgunakan nama "Allah" itu. Ini perlu diberikan peraturan dan keterangan seperti yang ditegaskan oleh keputusan PAS, supaya jangan ada yang menyalahgunakan perkatan Allah.

Hal ini juga dibangkitkan oleh bekas Mufti Perlis Dr Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin. Ini aspek pengurusannya atau Siyasah Syariahnya, supaya dijaga maslahahnya dan dijauhkan mafsadah atau kemudharatanya. Jelasnya begitu.

Sebenarnya, perkara itulah yang dimaksudkan dengan Perkara 11(4) dan 11(5) dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan supaya di pihak berwajib menjaga pentadbiran kebebasan bergama supaya tidak timbul huru-hara dan ketidakstabilan dan dikekalkan keharmonian. Pada waktu yang sama agama lain tidak boleh berdakwah kepada orang Islam seperti Perkara 11 (4). Ini wajib dijaga dan perlu juga peraturan. Adakan peraturan. Jangan haramkan penggunaan nama Allah, tak selesai masalah.

Sebab itu juga keputusan PAS menekankan supaya jangan ada pihak yang terlalu agresif dan melakukan provakasi sehingga mencetuskan huru-hara dan menjejaskan keharmonian antara agama dan konflik antara kaum-budaya.

Itu saja. Mengapa sampai nak berperang? Mengapa sampai nak berdemonstrasi? Kata 1-Malaysia? Mengapa perlu menimbulkan kesangsian dan syak wasangka sehingga menjejaskan keharmonian antara agama? Siapa yang mempolitikkan isu ini?

Pada saya yang lebih penting dari memperjuangkan isu nama "Allah" itu, ialah memperjuangkan Apa yang Allah perintahkan kepada kita ummat Islam, termasuk menganjurkan kebaikan dan melarang kemungkaran termasuk membenteras rasuah, salah guna kuasa, pembaziran, membasmi kemiskinan, kezaliman dll!

[*Dr.Dzulkefly Ahmad ialah Ahli Jawatankuasa PAS Pusat dan Ahli Parlimen Kuala Selangor; excerpted from Harakah online.]

Bersatu Mempertahankan Kalimah Allah

BERSATU MEMPERTAHANKAN KALIMAH ALLAH

Khutbah Jumaat 15 Januari 2010
Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor.



Sidang Jumaat yang dirahmati Allah

Marilah kita meningkatkan ketaqwaan kita dan menghadapkan seluruh jiwa raga kita kehadrat Allah S.W.T, dengan merenung, berfikir secara mendalam, tentang kebesaran Allah dan segala rahmat kurniaan -Nya.

Mereka yang sering mengingati Allah jiwanya akan tenang, hatinya akan tenteram, sehingga halus budi pekerti dan tutur katanya.

Firman Allah SWT:

“Orang yang beriman menjadi tenang hatinya dengan mengingati Allah, ketahuilah bahawa dengan mengingati Allah hati akan tenang”. [Surah Ar-Ra’d, 43: 28]

Muslimin yang Berbahgia,

Dalam Al-Quran yang mengandungi lebih daripada 600 halaman, kalimah Allah diulang-ulang setiap halaman. Mereka yang membaca seluruh Al-Quran akan menyebut lebih 20 ribu kali. Dalam solat pula, kalimah Allah disebut sebanyak 425 kali bagi 17 rakaat sehari semalam. Begitulah intimnya umat Islam dengan kalimah Allah.

Perkataan Allah menurut Ensiklopedia Islam adalah merujuk kepada sebutan atau nama Tuhan yang tiada Tuhan selain Allah atau Tuhan Yang Maha Esa.

Menurut ensiklopedia Katholik, ianya telah dicatat bahawa “perkataan Allah adalah kalimah dalam bahasa arab, ianya hanya digunakan di kalangan orang Islam bagi nama tuhan mereka”. Umum mengetahui perkataan Allah tidak pernah terdapat dalam bahasa asal perjanjian lama yang dikenali sebagai Taurat dan perjanjian baru yang dikenali sebagai Bible. Ini adalah kerana Kitab Tawrat ditulis dalam bahasa Hebrew, manakala Bible dalam bahasa Greek.

Muslimin yang dirahmati Allah,

Keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur pada hari Khamis, 31 Disember 2009, yang membenarkan akhbar Mingguan Herald-The Catholic Weekly menggunakan kalimah “Allah” amat memeranjatkan bagi semua umat Islam di seluruh negara. Berbagai reaksi telah timbul baik daripada individu, termasuk di kalangan ulama’, ahli politik dan cendekiawan Islam, ataupun jawatankuasa masjid serta persatuan dan pertubuhan Islam.

Penggunaan nama Allah oleh pihak Kristian khususnya dalam penulisan mereka, amat wajar dilarang oleh pihak kerajaan. Di dalam hukum Islam, kerajaan berhak memutuskan hukuman di dalam konteks menghalang mudarat yang dijangkakan.

Dalam konteks Malaysia, penggunaan kalimah Allah bagi penganut agama Kristian amat dibimbangi boleh mencetuskan ketegangan antara agama seterusnya boleh membawa perpecahan yang serius jika gagal dikawal.

Lebih-lebih lagi, apabila mengenangkan kelalaian umat Islam yang ada pada hari ini, telah memberi ruang kepada missionary bukan Islam mengambil kesempatan untuk tujuan-tujuan tertentu.

Di samping itu, kemunculan beberapa kumpulan bukan Islam, yang diyakini akan menyalahgunakan nama Allah dalam tulisan mereka secara berleluasa, sehingga membawa kekeliruan bagi penganut Islam.

Satu lagi fakta yang perlu difikirkan adalah, mengapa gereja-gereja di Eropah seperti Vatican City di Italy TIDAK MENGGUNAKAN kalimah Allah untuk God, malah negara-negara majoriti Kristian juga tidak pernah sibuk ingin menggunakan nama Allah ini. Malah dalam filem-filem bercorak agama terbitan Hollywood, pihak Kristian tidak pernah menggunakan kalimah Allah bila menyeru tuhan mereka. Mereka hanya gunakan God atau Lord sahaja. Itulah yang terpakai di sisi Kristian seluruh dunia sebenarnya.

Umat Islam perlu sedar mengapa kumpulan tersebut memperjuangkan penggunaan kalimah ini di negara-negara majoriti umat Islam seperti Mesir, Indonesia, beberapa negara Arab dan kini di negara kita, Malaysia. Tahukah kita, apa sebabnya berlaku sedemikian?. Kesannya nanti, kita bimbang bahawa semua gereja akan ditukar kepada nama Baitullah (rumah Allah), bible juga akan dinamakan Kitabullah dan lebih keliru lagi apabila setiap agama yang ada di negara ini menggunakan nama tuhan mereka dengan nama Allah. Niat mereka adalah untuk menyamaratakan semua agama di negara ini. Sedangkan Islam itu adalah agama yang diredhai Allah SWT., tiada agama lain yang sebenarnya melainkan Islam. Kerana Islam datangnya daripada Allah sedangkan agama yang lain semuanya rekaan manusia semata-mata. Fikirkanlah!

Sidang Jumaat sekalian,

Larangan penggunaan kalimah Allah oleh bukan Islam bukan perkara baru. Larangan terhadap penggunaan kalimah Allah ini telah diputuskan oleh Jemaah Menteri pada 16 Mei 1986 yang memutuskan empat perkataan khusus iaitu; Allah, solat, Kaabah dan Baitullah tidak dibenarkan penggunaannya oleh bukan Islam. Pada masa ini terdapat sepuluh buah negeri telah memperuntukkan larangan penggunaan kalimah Allah dalam jadual kepada Enakmen Kawalan dan Sekatan Pengembangan Agama Bukan Islam Kepada Orang Islam kecuali Sabah, Sarawak, Pulau Pinang dan Wilayah Persekutuan

Demikian juga, Muzakarah Jawatankuasa Fatwa Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi Hal Ehwal Agama Islam Malaysia Kali Ke – 82 yang bersidang pada 5 - 7 Mei 2008, telah memutuskan bahawa:

1. Lafaz Allah merupakan kalimah suci yang khusus bagi agama dan umat Islam dan ia tidak boleh digunakan atau dimasukkan dengan agama-agama bukan Islam yang lain.

2. Oleh itu, wajib bagi umat Islam menjaganya dengan cara yang terbaik dan sekiranya terdapat unsur-unsur penghinaan atau penyalahgunaan terhadap kalimah tersebut, maka ia perlu disekat mengikut peruntukan undang-undang yang telah termaktub dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Muslimin yang dirahmati Allah,

Jawatankuasa Fatwa Negeri Selangor telah memutuskan bahwa lafaz Allah merupakan kalimah suci yang khusus bagi agama dan umat Islam dan ia tidak boleh digunakan atau dimasukkan dengan agama-agama bukan Islam yang lain.

Oleh itu, wajib bagi umat Islam menjaga dengan cara yang terbaik sekiranya terdapat unsur-unsur penghinaan atau penyalahgunaan terhadap kalimah tersebut, maka ia perlu disekat mengikut peruntukan undang-undang yang telah termaktub dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Majlis Agama Islam Selangor juga telah melaksanakan beberapa tindakan, antaranya pada 13 Mac 2009 yang lalu, mengadakan satu sidang akhbar bagi menyatakan pendirian MAIS berhubung isu ini di mana MAIS berpendirian bahawa penggunaan kalimah Allah hanya eksklusif untuk orang Islam sahaja. Larangan penggunaan kalimah Allah oleh agama selain Islam adalah untuk mengelakkan kekeliruan di kalangan penganut agama Islam terhadap konsep Keesaan Allah SWT.

Selain itu, MAIS turut menulis surat bertarikh 19 Mac 2009 bagi menyatakan pendirian ini kepada Kementerian Dalam Negeri, Kementerian Penerangan Malaysia, Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (JAKIM) dan semua Majlis Agama Islam Negeri-Negeri Seluruh Negara.

Muslimin yang dirahmati Allah,

Marilah kita menghadapi perkara ini dengan penuh bijaksana. Tindakan pertama kita ialah bersatu memperkukuhkan perpaduan. Kita padamkan segala permusuhan dan perbalahan di kalangan kita. Walaupun sebahagian kita berbeza ideologi, namun ianya tidak sampai menggadaikan maruah agama yang maha suci, semata-mata mempertahankan pangkat dan kuasa.

Ingatlah firman Allah S.W.T:

Katakanlah (wahai Muhammad), “Wahai Tuhan yang mempunyai pemerintahan! Engkaulah yang memberi pemerintahan kepada sesiapa yang Engkau kehendaki dan Engkaulah yang mencabut pemerintahan daripada sesiapa yang Engkau kehendaki. Engkaulah juga yang memuliakan sesiapa yang Engkau kehendaki dan Engkaulah yang menghina sesiapa yang Engkau kehendaki. Dalam kekuasaan Engkaulah sahaja adanya segala kebaikan. Sesungguhnya Engkau Maha Berkuasa atas tiap-tiap sesuatu”. [Surah Al-‘Imran, 3: 26]

Adalah diharapkan agar kita bertindak dengan penuh hikmah dan tidak mengambil tindakan yang melulu akibat keputusan mahkamah itu. Sebagai warga negara yang menghormati kedaulatan undang-undang, hendaklah kita bertindak dengan bijaksana di dalam lunas Undang-undang Negara. Pihak yang berkuasa sedang mengambil tindakan yang perlu mengikut proses undang-undang negara kita. Kita berdoa semoga tindakan yang mereka ambil diperkenankan dan diredhai oleh Allah S.W.T:

“Orang Yahudi dan Nasrani tidak sekali-kali akan bersetuju atau suka kepada engkau (wahai Muhammad) sehingga engkau menurut millah (agama) mereka (yang telah terpesong itu). Katakanlah (kepada mereka), “Sesungguhnya petunjuk Allah (agama Islam) itulah petunjuk yang benar”.

Sesungguhnya jika engkau menurut kehendak hawa nafsu mereka sesudah datangnya (wahyu yang memberi) pengetahuan kepada engkau (tentang kebenaran), maka tiadalah engkau akan peroleh daripada Allah (sesuatu pun) yang dapat mengawal dan memberi pertolongan kepada engkau”. [Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:120]


Ya Allah, Engkaulah Tuhan yang Maha berkuasa, kami bersyukur kehadrat-Mu yang telah mengurniakan kami rahmah dan nikmat, sehingga kami dapat meneruskan usaha ke arah memperkukuhkan negara ,umat Islam khususnya negeri Selangor, sebagai negeri yang maju, sejahtera dan berkebajikan.

Justeru kami pohon kehadrat-Mu ya Allah, tetapkanlah iman kami, tingkatkanlah amal kami, kukuhkanlah perpaduan kami, murahkanlah rezeki kami, kayakanlah kami dengan ilmu yang bermanfaat, suburkanlah jiwa kami dengan budi pekerti yang mulia, kembalikanlah generasi muda kami ke jalan yang Engkau redhai, lindungilah kami daripada ujian-Mu yang berat, wabak penyakit, persengketaan, kemiskinan dan lain-lain, supaya dengan demikian, negeri kami akan sentiasa bertambah makmur dan berkat.

Pemahaman Konsep Allah

Oleh NURUL IZZAH SIDEK
Utusan Malaysia, 14 Januari 2010 / 28 Muharam 1431

ADALAH TERLALU AMAT PENTING akan akidah tawhid bagi remaja kerana Al-Quran telah memberikan sempadan yang jelas tentang persoalan akidah dalam suasana pelbagai aliran agama dan kepercayaan.

Dengan Nama Allah nama AllahYang Pemurah lagi Maha Penyayang

1. Katakanlah (wahai Muhammad): "Wahai orang-orang Kafir!
2. Aku tidak menyembah yang kamu sembah;
3. Juga tidak akan kamu menyembah yang aku sembah;
4. Dan aku tidak akan menyembah (Allah) apa yang kamu sembah;
5. Juga kamu tidak pernah menjadi penyembah Tuhan Yang aku sembah;
6. Bagi kamu agama kamu, dan bagiku agamaku (Monoteisme Islam)" .
[Surah Al-Kafirun, 109:1-6].

Al-Quran telah memberi petunjuk bahawa terdapat perbezaan antara akidah tentang agama Islam dan anutan agama lain. Sebagai remaja yang beragama, isu agama adalah isu yang sangat penting dalam kehidupannya kerana ia menunjukkan identiti diri serta kepercayaan terhadap konsep agama dan ketuhanan.

Dalam Islam, akidah tawhid yakni meng-Esakan Allah adalah sangat penting. Oleh itu, secara khususnya Al-Quran menyatakan dengan jelasnya kalimah Allah dalam pengucapan orang beriman. Kalimah-kalimah seperti kalimah syahadah (Tiada Tuhan selain Allah, Nabi Muhammad Pesuruh Allah), Alhamdulillah (Allah Maha Besar), Subhanallah (Maha Suci Allah), dan Allahuakbar (Allah Maha Besar) memberi makna bahawa kalimah Allah adalah asas tawhid dan Tuhan yang Esa.

Kalimah Allah diulang-ulang di setiap halaman di dalam al-Quran lebih 20,000 kali. Di dalam solat pula, kalimah Allah disebut sebanyak 425 kali bagi 17 raka’at solat fardhu sehari semalam, lantas menunjukkan betapa dekatnya kalimah Allah dengan umat Islam.

Timbul persoalan mengapa isu penggunaan kalimah Allah pada agama lain ini ditimbulkan sedangkan sebelum ini pengamal ajaran Kristian itu menyebut 'Tuhan' dengan bahasa mereka masing-masing.

Malah penganut agama di negara majoriti Kristian juga tidak menukar kalimah Tuhan atau God kepada Allah kerana bimbang akan timbulnya kekeliruan pada penganut mereka.

Umat Islam yang terdiri daripada pelbagai bangsa dan bahasa tetap berlafaz dan menulis dengan perkataan Allah dari kitab suci Al-Quran. Perkataan Allah ini tidak diterjemahkan ke bahasa masing-masing, kerana perkataan Allah tidak mampu diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa lain, dengan berpegang kepada makna asalnya dalam bahasa Al-Quran.

Ilmiah dan telus

Justeru, adakah kebebasan beragama dan bersuara memberi ruang untuk manusia menyatakan hak sesuka hati tanpa memikirkan kesan dan implikasinya pada kaum dan agama lain?

Hakikatnya, kebebasan secara saksama seharusnya mempunyai batas sempadan yang tidak menimbulkan masalah sehingga boleh mencetuskan perkara yang boleh merosakkan hubungan sesama manusia.

Perkara ini perlu dijawab secara ilmiah dan telus, kerana umat Islam menyebut dan menulis kalimah Allah mengikut maknanya yang sebenar sehingga menjadi akidah yang menjadi asas kepada amalan mereka.

Orang-orang Yahudi mendakwa mereka adalah 'orang-orang terpilih' (the chosen people). Orang Kristian percaya kepada Tuhan, tetapi juga percaya kepada konsep triniti (3 dalam 1). Mereka percaya tentang kewujudan tiga entiti membentuk satu Tuhan. Di dalam triniti, ada disebut anak Tuhan (Nabi Isa a.s).

Adapun orang Islam melihat Nabi Isa a.s adalah Rasul yang mulia. Rasul bukanlah anak Tuhan, tetapi juga manusia seperti kita yang terpilih untuk menyampaikan ajaran Allah kepada manusia. Maka titik perbezaan ini adalah sangat besar.

Faham Allah yang sebenar adalah dalam maksud tawhid. Maka penggunaan kalimah Allah adalah serasi dalam Islam, yakni dirujuk pada asas yang satu, dan tidak secocok dengan konsep triniti.

Remaja Islam harus memahami asas ini kerana sekiranya kefahaman tentang Allah digunakan sesuka hati, ia akan memberikan implikasi yang kurang jelas bahawa Allah dalam konteks umat Islam dan Allah dalam pemahaman agama lain adalah sama. Jika ini terjadi, maka kedua-dua agama akan disamakan, padahal kedua-duanya adalah berbeza.

Tidak dinafikan bahawa wujudnya nilai-nilai kebaikan dalam semua agama, iaitu nilai interaktif untuk hubungan sesama manusia.

Nilai-nilai seperti amanah, adil, jujur, menepati masa, telus dan tulus diamalkan kerana kepercayaan kepada Tuhan memberi asas komunikasi berlangsung.

Apa yang menjadi masalah apabila ada segelintir penganut yang menyeleweng daripada ajaran-ajaran sebenar, lantas seluruh penganutnya dilabel sebegitu.

Namun begitu, dalam tradisi Islam ada nilai tertinggi (supreme) yang tidak boleh disamakan dengan nilai agama lain. Nilai itu adalah akidah tauhid yang apabila dimanifestasi dalam keyakinan, ia membawa kepada maksud kesatuan Allah, kesatuan ciptaan dan kesatuan rahmah.

Oleh itu, remaja Islam amat beruntung kerana nilai yang tertinggi ini menjadi tunjang, kepercayaan, keyakinan dan nilai tertinggi ini juga memberi pedoman bagi remaja memilih jalan hidup yang baik dan sempurna.

Yang berbeza biarlah berbeza, tetapi nilai-nilai yang baik dan murni harus dimanfaati bersama.

Islam menganjurkan perdamaian dan sentiasa mengamalkan musyawarah dalam menyelesaikan setiap perkara. Sepatutnya rasa perbezaan sudah dimengerti dan difahami oleh orang Islam, apatah lagi tinggal dalam masyarakat berbilang kaum dan agama.

Implikasi di Malaysia

Apabila langkah menggunakan kalimah Allah dalam agama lain dilaksanakan, ia menjadi perkara sensitif dalam hubungan agama. Sungguhpun masih wujud lagi perdebatan mengenai keterbukaan dan keharusan menggunakan kalimah Allah, tetapi dari konteks Malaysia dan kemaslahatannya, ia tidak wajar ditimbulkan.

Ini penting bagi menghindarkan mudarat yang boleh menimpa orang awam Islam serta api pergaduhan yang amat mudah ternyala di celah-celah ruang konflik antara agama.

Dalam negara kita, kedudukan masyarakat Kristian dan agama-agama yang lain adalah dalam lingkungan kehidupan masyarakat umum yang hidup secara bersama, khususnya masyarakat yang hidup di dalamnya umat Islam. Mahu tidak mahu, ia akan menyentuh perasaan umat Islam, kerana perkataan Allah adalah sangat mulia di sisi umat Islam.

Oleh itu, perbincangan secara ilmiah, khusus dan jujur perlu diadakan antara pihak-pihak terlibat terhadap isu ini. Sekiranya ia menjadi isu perundangan, maka dikhuatiri akan timbul tindak balas pihak tertentu, lalu emosi akan lebih berperanan daripada asas ilmu.

Kaedah Islam atau fekah Islam mengambil pendekatan berbeza, iaitu yang berbeza biarlah berbeza kerana memang sifat faham mengenai Tuhan masing-masing adalah berbeza.

Justeru, menimbulkan isu itu adalah tidak harus berlaku kerana selama ini perkataan Tuhan (sama ada Lord atau God) digunakan dalam agama lain. Sekiranya Allah digunakan persoalan akan timbul adakah ia dirujuk kepada Tuhan yang satu atau konsep triniti.

Perlu ditegaskan bahawa penggunaan God adalah konotasi Tuhan secara umum, manakala Allah adalah khusus baik dari segi makna dan sifatnya. Justeru, hakikat Allah adalah bersifat Esa (satu), dan bukannya banyak.

Perkataan Allah anjuran Kristian itu bukan merujuk kepada Tuhan yang satu, saperti asas kepada kitab Injil yang asal diturunkan kepada Nabi Isa a.s serta ajaran samawi yang lain.

Oleh itu, adalah sesuatu yang silap kepada sesiapa yang menyamakan penggunaan kalimah Allah dalam Islam dengan agama lain, apatah lagi ia bakal mengelirukan akidah umat Islam.

Ia bakal mengelirukan umat Islam, terutamanya remaja Islam yang tidak mempunyai asas agama yang kukuh dan hanya bergantung kepada rasional pemikiran untuk menilai.

Generasi muda Islam perlu lebih peka dalam isu ini dan perlu berfikir sedalam-dalamnya mengenai implikasi isu ini.

Generasi muda secara umumnya perlu mengerti walaupun sering disebutkan mengenai kebebasan beragama, kebebasan sewajarnya memberikan peluang dan pilihan yang terbaik. Dan percaya kepada Allah adalah jawapan terbaik dalam persoalan beragama.

Tuntasnya, remaja perlu meningkatkan pemahaman ilmu tauhid dan memahami dengan jelas tentang kewujudan Allah kerana tanpanya asas akidah akan mudah cair dan menganggap bahawa semua agama adalah benar.

Namun demikian, perlu diingatkan bahawa ajaran Islam tidak membenarkan umatnya mencerca dan memaki agama lain tetapi harus menghormati kepercayaan mereka kerana kefahaman mereka terhadap Tuhan mereka dengan faham mengenai Allah yang Esa tidak sama.


Ketidaksamaan ini harus diraikan secara ilmiah, jujur dan berhemah agar hubungan antara agama dapat berlangsung dalam suasana aman dan harmoni.

Kesimpulan

Isu penggunaan kalimah Allah pada agama lain sememangnya pantas mengundang sensitiviti orang Islam kerana intimnya kalimah Allah pada orang Islam.

Kontroversi tentang kalimah Allah tidak boleh dicapai secara mutlak di mahkamah kerana undang-undang hanya mengutamakan maksud undang-undang semata-mata.

Bagi remaja Islam, ini adalah masa untuk menginsafi diri sendiri akan kewajipan dan kefahaman kita tentang konsep Allah yang Esa.

Barangkali kita masih yakin bahawa kita berpegang teguh pada ajaran Islam, tetapi bagaimana dengan generasi akan datang yang makin dihimpit dengan arus globalisasi dan limpahan maklumat dari pelbagai arah.

Pastinya badai ini tidak mampu ditongkah tanpa adanya ilmu dan iman di dada. Oleh itu amat penting remaja memahami asas tawhid supaya tidak tergelincir dari landasan yang benar.

Allah subhanahu wata’ala telah berfirman: “Katakanlah (wahai Muhammad): (Tuhanku) ialah Allah Yang Maha Esa. Allah Yang menjadi tumpuan sekalian makhluk untuk memohon sebarang hajat. Ia tiada beranak, dan Ia pula tidak diperanakkan. Dan tidak ada sesiapapun yang serupa dengan-Nya” [Surah Al-Ikhlas,112: 1-4]

Dr Faruqi's view on the word of Allah

Finding the middle path
Thestar Online, Wednesday January 13, 2010

REFLECTING ON THE LAW
By SHAD SALEEM FARUQI

It is not always right to use our rights. In matters of religion, history, logic and reason must not apply exclusively. Emotions must be regarded.

THE desecration of several places of Christian worship must be condemned as a shameless and mindless atrocity. A democratic society does not resolve disputes through violence.

It is obvious that we have in our midst a lunatic fringe that has no understanding of religion or of the Constitution or of the traditions of tolerance and multi-culturalism that made Malaysia an exemplar for all other plural societies.

In the midst of gloom it is heartening to note that a large number of Muslims, including the Prime Minister, have joined grieving Christians to condemn this outrage.

Church leaders have shown exceptional restraint and have been true to their faith by condemning the sin but forgiving the sinners.

We have to put this national shame behind us and to move on to resolve the “Allah issue” in a spirit of compassion, moderation and accommodation.

Through the looking glass of the Christians, I can clearly see that although the word Allah has obvious reverence for Muslims, no one can deny that Allah is also a term of language.

For centuries, in the whole of Arabia, followers of all semitic religions have used the word Allah to refer to their own God. Arab-speaking Christians use Allah al-ab (God the father), Allah al-ibn (God the son), Allah al-quds (God the Holy Spirit).

Such transcendence of common symbols and vocabulary must be commended, not condemned. In any case the Muslim belief in one and only one God necessitates acceptance that Allah is for everyone and not just for Muslims.

There is also the constitutional dimension of freedom of religion in Article 11(1) and the right to free speech in Article 10(1)(a). These Articles are broad enough to permit any one to invoke whatever language or sentiment he wishes to invoke in order to open his heart and soul to God.

Muslim leaders must also acknowledge their role in this imbrogilo. They banned local translations of the Bible into Malay. This forced Malay-speaking Christians, especially in Sabah and Sarawak, to import Bibles from Indonesia.

Bibles in Bahasa Indonesia use Allah to refer to the Christian God.

The Muslim argument that use of the word Allah by non-Muslims will confuse the Muslim population is demeaning.

It paints the Muslims as an extremely ignorant and gullible lot. It ignores the fact that Islam took deep roots in Malaya hundreds of years ago and became the identifying feature of the Malay persona.

The Islamic faith was not shattered during British rule. Why should it be so easily shaken now after 52 years of Muslim rule, 52 years of Islamic education and a vigorous dakwah movement?

However, looking at the issue through Muslim lenses, many issues tug at my conscience. First, it is not always right to use our rights. Freedom per se has no value. It is what freedom is for. It is the use to which it is put. It is the sense of responsibility and restraint with which it is exercised.

Take the one hundred million Muslims in India for example. Despite their rights in secular India’s Constitution, they refrain from butchering the cow because the cow is regarded as sacred by the majority Hindus.

In the British case of Humphries vs Connors, 1864, a Protestant lady was marching in a predominantly Catholic area with an orange lily in her buttonhole. For historical reasons that evoked painful memories for the Catholics.

A police constable plucked the lily away. In an action against the officer for assault, the court held that the officer was within his duty to prevent breaches of the peace.

Similar considerations apply in Malaysia. The constitutional right to freedom of religion is subjected by Article 11(4) to restrictions on proselytisation. Article 11(5) subordinates religion to public order, public health or morality.

A relevant law on public order is section 298 of the Penal Code which punishes the offence of wounding religious feelings.

These feelings are likely to be wounded if there is a claim that Allah was born in the manger; that Allah was born of Mary; that Allah was crucified on the cross.

The Muslim doctrine is that Allah does not beget and cannot be begotten. He cannot be depicted in any physical form. He cannot be part of the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

To argue that the word Allah is central to the Christian faith and that any restriction on its usage would hinder freedom of conscience of the Christians requires a willing suspension of disbelief.

Other than in the Arab Peninsula and in Sabah and Sarawak, the word Allah has never been part of Christian discourse or sermons. Certainly in west Malaysia the word was not part of Christian vocabulary up to now.

The Herald’s new found love for Arabic words is indeed very touching but one cannot fail to note that the import of Arabic words is rather selective.

Tan Sri Dzulkifli of USM has pointed out that in the Malay translation of the Bible, the word Allah is used to refer to the Lord God but Mary, Abraham, Moses, Joseph, Michael and other revered figures are not given their Arabic names.

One must also remember that Malaysia is not Arab-speaking and Christian sermons in Malay could just as well use words like Tuhan, Dewa, Dewata and Betara without any diminution of freedom of conscience.

The plaintiffs in the Herald case must also take note that there is suspicion, unjustified though it may be, that the use of the word Allah is an indirect attempt to proselytize Muslims contrary to Article 11(4).

The argument that the Church will be using the word Allah only privately is credible but we all know that it does not take much to put a private publication in the public domain.

All in all it can be said that in relation to the Herald case, the general Muslim reaction is too emotional and is based on lack of knowledge.

The Herald, on the other hand, has lots of facts but no tact. Its arguments rely on cold logic, history and rationality but there is total disregard of local context and of religious sensitivities.

It is submitted that in matters of religion, history, logic and reason must not apply exclusively. Emotions must be regarded. Sometimes rights must give way to the need for social harmony. We need to find a middle path.

The case of Sabah and Sarawak Christians who have a long tradition of using the word Allah without any inter-religious problems needs to be sympathetically considered.

In the long range, encouragement must be given to replace Indonesian translations of the Bible with Malaysian renditions. All restrictions on the printing of Bibles in the Malay language must be lifted.

In relation to west Malaysian Christians, there is no need to use the sledgehammer of the Printing Presses Act to impose prior restraints. A Home Ministry advice on the consequences of violating Articles 11(4), 11(5) and section 298 of the Penal Code will be sufficient. If this advice is not followed, prosecutions can be commenced.

The judicial process should be allowed to continue without any intimidation. However neither judicial decisions nor executive proclamations can make this heart-wrenching problem go away.

We need inter-faith dialogue to find comprehensive political and administrative solutions for our tattered fabric of inter-religious relationships. There are many painful issues and piece-meal solutions will not be enough.

Fair and moderate solutions will require leadership and sacrifice. As the Rev Jesse Jackson said “leaders of substance do not follow opinion polls; they mould opinion, not with guns or power of position but with the power of their souls”.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of Law at UiTM and Visiting Professor at USM.

Doctrine of Ahl Al-Sunnah

THE DOCTRINE OF AHL AL-SUNNAH

VERSUS THE "SALAFI" MOVEMENT

بســـم الله الرحمن الرحيــــم
وصلى الله على محمـد وآلـه وصحبه وسلَّم


"And Say: Truth Has Come and Falsehood
Has vanished away. Lo! Falsehood
is ever bound to vanish."
[Al-Isra’, 17:81]

All the Praise belongs to Allah, Who has made the truth prevail over falsehood of innovation and innovators, and raises high the Sunnah of the Prophet, s.a.w, and the people who follow it. The Praise belongs to Allah, Who in every century inspires the emerging of scholarly people to defend the Way of the Prophet, s.a.w, from the distortions of the ignorant -- those who call the majority of Muslims mushrik (idolaters) and mubtadi` (innovators) and kafir (disbelievers), falsely claiming that they alone are saved. Peace and Blessing of Allah be upon the Prophet, his Family, and his Companions who are the exemplars and guardians of the Sunnah.

The reason for this book

This brief but excellent book by the Iraqi scholar Al-Zahawi (1863-1936) is published in English for the first time, by Allah's grace, to give our Muslim brother in the West the necessary historical background on important questions of belief and methodology which are currently under attack from certain quarters of our Community. It is a companion volume to our two books entitled Islamic Doctrine and Beliefs According to Ahl al-Sunnah. [Vol. 1 and 2, pub. As-Sunnah Foundation of America (1996)]

Islam, in our understanding and that of the majority of Muslims, both scholars and non-scholars, is the Islam of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah -- The People of the Way of the Prophet and the Community of Muslims. Chief and foremost among them are the true Salaf of Islam: the Companions, the Successors, and their Successors according to the Prophet's sound hadith in Muslim: "The best century is my century, then the one following it, then the one following that." All the scholars understood by that hadith that the true Salaf were the models of human behavior and correct belief for us Muslims and for all mankind, that to follow them was to follow the Prophet, and that to follow the Prophet was to achieve salvation according to Allah's order: "Whoever obeys the Prophet obeys Allah" [An-Nisaa’, 4:80].

In our time, however, the name Salaf has been usurped by a movement which seeks to impose its own narrow interpretation of Religion towards a re-fashioning of the teachings of Islam. The adherents of this movement call themselves "Salafi." Such an appellation is baseless since the true Salaf knew no such school as the "Salafi" school nor even called them by that name; the only general name they recognized for themselves was that of Muslim. As an eminent scholar has stated, the Salafiyyah is not a recognized school of thought in Islam, rather, it refers to a blessed historical period of our glorious past.

In reality, today's so-called "Salafi" movement, now about thirty years old, is the modern outgrowth of a two-century old heresy spawned by a scholar of the Najad area in the Eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula by the name of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab (1703-1792). This scholar has been refuted by a long line of scholars both in his time and ours. Their names and the titles of some of their excellent refutations are found in the bibliography given at the end of this introduction.

In essence, Salafism and Wahhabism are the same, but the latter is identified by its founder while the former takes the name of the Salaf and makes it its own. Yet both the Salafism and Wahhabism depart from the belief and practice of the Salaf, as the present book abundantly makes clear.

About the book

Al-Zahawi displays a profound mastery of the proofs of Ahl al-Sunnah which he presents in a clear and systematic style. The book is divided into concise sections tracing the origins of the Wahhabi/Salafi movement and the teachings that this movement promotes in isolation of the doctrine of the majority of Muslims. After a brief historical overview of the bloody origins of Wahhabism and the "Salafi" creed, the author turns to investigate the foundations of the Shari`ah which have been targeted by the Wahhabi/Salafi movement for revision, namely:

• The Wahhabi/Salafi tampering of the doctrine of the pious Salaf concerning Allah's essence and attributes, and his freedom from body, size, or direction;
• The rejection of ijma` (scholarly consensus) and qiyas (analogy);
• The rejection of the sources and methodological foundations of ijtihad (deriving qualified judgment) and taqlid (following qualified judgment).

The author then narrows down on the Wahhabi/Salafi practice of takfir, which is their declaring Muslims unbelievers, according to criteria not followed by the pious Salaf but devised by modern-day "Salafis." The author shows that the "Salafis" went out of bounds in condemning the Ummah (Muslim Community) on the question of taqlid, declaring unbelievers all those who practice taqlid, that is, the majority of Muslims. Finally, the author turns to the linchpin of "Salafi" philosophy: leaving the ijma` of the true Salaf in declaring unbelievers all Muslims who use the Prophet Muhammad's intercession, Peace be upon him, as a wasilah or means of blessing.

About the author

Al-Shaikh Jamil Effendi Al-Siqdi Al-Zahawi was the son of the Mufti of Iraq and a descendant of Khalid Ibn Al-Walid. He was educated in the Islamic sciences chiefly by his father and, besides going on to become the greatest Arabic and Persian poet of modern Iraq, was also a literary master in the other two Islamic languages of the time: Turkish and Kurdish.

Al-Zahawi gave early proofs of his scholarly talents. By the age of forty he had served on the board of education in Baghdad, as the director of the state printing office, as editor of the chief state publication, Al-Zawra', and as a member of the Baghdad court of appeal. The second half of his life was devoted to writing, journalism, and teaching. He taught philosophy and Arabic literature in Istanbul and law in Baghdad. A prolific writer, at one point he declined the office of court poet and historian of Iraq offered him by King Faisal. In addition to the above he was scientifically inclined and wrote papers on various scientific topics such as electricity and the power of repulsion, all this despite a chronic disease of the spine which had crippled him from his twenty-fifth year.

At the turn of the century Arabia had witnessed the return of the Wahhabis to power and the open rebellion of their forces against the Caliph of the Islamic community. What was worse, the Wahhabi heresy was knocking at the gates of Baghdad, and the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah spoke out in order to stem its rising tide. In 1905 at the age of 42 and upon the request of his father al-Zahawi published this eloquent indictment of the sect's innovations in doctrine and jurisprudence, refuting its tenets one by one. He named the book, of which the present work forms the major part, Al-Fajr al-sadiq fi al-radd `ala munkiri al-tawassul wa al-khawariq ("The True Dawn: A Refutation of Those Who Deny The Validity of Using Means to Allah and the Miracles of Saints"). The title indicates Zahawi's opinion, reminiscent of that of other scholars who wrote similar refutations, that the Wahhabi position on tawassul represents the essence of their deviation from the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunnah, although it is but one of their many divergences with Sunni Muslims.

Zahawi's brilliant style, his acute sense of balance and moderation, and his luminous logic and concision gave this brief book an undisputed place of honor among modern works of heresiology. May Allah reward him with His generosity, as well as those who collaborated on this timely and all-beneficial translation for the edification of English-speaking Muslims. We warmly recommend this book to all the sincere students and teachers who are interested in the growth and dissemination of sound Islamic belief in the West. As Sayyidina `Umar Al-Khattab said, "This Religion is our flesh and our blood, so watch from whom you take it": in our time it is a duty to inform ourselves as to the soundness of the religious teaching which we are receiving and passing on to our children. For our own sake and theirs, we must discern the sources of such teaching with extreme caution, sifting the sound from the unsound, correcting what is wrong with our hand, our tongue, and our heart.

Muslims of the twenty-first century should beware of the renewed onslaught on their beliefs being conducted today from within our Communities East and West. In the name of Qur'an and Sunnah, but actually supported by certain regimes pursuing specific ideologies, "Salafis" are taking over the mosques built by Ahl al-Sunnah in Europe and North America -- mostly Indian and Pakistani immigrants -- by means of elections and fundings. It is the duty of all Muslims to ascertain that the mosques of Allah continue as centers of sound Islamic practice, not "Salafi" practice. This can only be done if one first apprises oneself of the reality of "Salafi" beliefs which are different from those of the main body of Muslims.

The Prophet, Peace be upon him said: "My Community will split into seventy-three sects. All of them will be in the fire except one group." They asked: "Who are they, O Messenger of Allah?" He said: "Those that follow my way and that of my companions." [A sound (sahih) hadith related by Tirmidzi, Abu Dawud, and al-Darimi] This is a rallying-cry to the Firm Rope of 1,418 years of mainstream Islam and an invitation to reject the absurd claim of the "Salafi" movement that it is they, and not Ahl al-Sunnah, who are the Saved Group. As Zahawi asks -- may Allah have mercy on him: If the saved group is those who came after Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab, then what is the status of all those who came before him, and that of the majority of those who came after him -- that is, Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah?

This warning is not meant as an attack on Islamic unity. On the contrary, our cry of alarm must be understood as a reaffirmation that the Saved Group which the Prophet mentioned in his hadith are the People of the Way of the Prophet and their scholars. Those scholars have spoken in no uncertain terms in condemnation of the innovations of Wahhabis and "Salafis" in our time, as the present book and the bibliography below, al-hamdu lillah, prove beyond doubt.

May Allah give victory to those who stand truly for the way of His Prophet, Blessings and Peace be upon him. O Believers read this book and take heed of its message. We conclude this brief introduction with a selective list of authors and works of Ahl al-Sunna scholars in whose pages the deviations of Wahhabis and Salafis are exposed time after time and conclusively refuted. We look forward to their translations and recommend every one of them.

And all the praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of al-‘alameen.


Shaikh Hisham Muhammad Kabbani
Los Altos, California
1 Muharram 1418
19 May 1996