Penarik Beca
Lepas solat Jumaat semalam, saya terima SMS dari kawan di Shah Alam, "khutbah jumaat ari ni pesta puji raja". Malam tadi pula, masa bersembang dengan kawan-kawan, salah seorang dari depa kata, "rasa nak angkat middle finger dengar khutbah tu". Pagi ni, ada pula mendakwa, "berdosa siapa percaya khutbah Jumaat semalam". Tapi saya yakin, Kavita Kaur tentu bersetuju dengan kandungan khubah Jumaat di kebanyakan tempat di Selangor semalam.
Di Wilayah Persekutuan pun lebih kurang sama isi khutbah Jumaat.
Saya pula sakit hati sangat bila ulama lacurkan perkataan ulil-amri. Saya mohon Allah s.w.t. la'natkan ulama yang buat kelaku jahat macam tu. Mereka sebenarnya bukan ulama, tapi syaitan!
Berikut antara yang saya jumpai ialah dalam tulisan bertajuk "Islam Today" yang bersumberkan kuliah-kuliah Maulana Abul A'la Maududi:
Kingship no doubt brought a host of evils in its wake, but even during that period, the Muslims did much better than other nations in corresponding portions of their history. Indeed the Muslims produced a larger number of good, God fearing kings than did any other community. But, while one must give these virtuous kings all the praise that is due to them, there is little doubt that, on the whole, the natural and necessary consequences of the system of kingship were detrimental to the interests of Islam and the Muslims.
To the limited extent that Islam did spread during the centuries of Muslim rule in India it was due to the efforts of the theologians and the sufis. The rulers not only made no contribution towards the spread of Islam, their behavior and conduct generally tended to thwart the expansion of the creed. By their .tyrannical rule and oppressive policies, by their bullying and high handedness, by the their dissolute living and otherwise immoral conduct, most of the kings and lesser potentates tended to alienate people from Islam rather than make the Faith popular; only a few of them could boast of character and conduct that would induce non-Muslims to join the ranks of Islam. These few exceptions no doubt deserve all praise, but it is obvious that, on the whole, kingship caused grave harm to the cause of Islam.
Another malady that had its origin during the period of kingship, and continued to spread thereafter was the erosion of the Muslim's loyalty to Islam and the Millat and its ultimate replacement by loyalty to the self and the clan or family. Islam had originally abolished all loyalties based upon race, language or nationality, and replaced them with a single, absolute loyalty to God, His Prophet and the Faith. It was on the basis of this supreme loyalty that Islam sought to build the character of the individual. But during the period of kingship this loyalty soon began to weaken, and since it was the foundation of public morality and private character, its weakening naturally resulted in the growth of selfishness and self-promotion. In the absence of ideals and higher loyalties, people are not willing to make any sacrifices and everyone is interested merely in feathering his own nest or promoting the interests of his family or clan. This was what happened in Muslim society during the era of kingship.
Dan juga dari buku bertajuk "Restatement of History of Islam":
When engaged in the practical task of drawing up a new constitution for Pakistan that ‘would be in consonance with the teachings and history of Islam,' (President) Ayub Khan asked his experts to study Islamic history and the constitutions of other Muslim countries. Two things emerged clearly from this study: There was no place for Kingship in Islam, and succession could not be on a hereditary basis. The community as a whole must have the right to choose its leader and the right to remove him. (This means that all Muslim monarchies, whatever their pretensions to religiosity, have been totally unIslamic). On these two fundamentals there is indeed agreement among our political reformers, but on every other aspect of Islamic policy there are differences of substance and of emphasis. (Militant Islam, New York)
The Ikhwan al-Muslimeen (the Muslim Brotherhood) of Egypt, has indicted all military regimes (dictatorships) also as unIslamic.
The Muslim Brotherhood stressed that no government established by force can be accepted, for consultation is mandatory according to Sura 42 verse 35 of the Koran. Hence military regimes produced by coups are unIslamic. (Militant Islam, New York)
It is, therefore, the consensus of the Sunni scholars of Pakistan and the Sunni spokesmen of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, that monarchy and military regimes both are unIslamic.
Dari muka surat 37 buku bertajuk "Islam in South-East Asia"
Tiada ulasan:
Catat Ulasan