Monday, February 22, 2010

SIS & Sebatan Syariah

1. Baru-baru ini, 3 orang wanita Islam disebat atas kesalahan moral iaitu berzina. Mahkamah menjatuhkan hukuman sebat ke atas mereka dibawah Seksyen 23(2) Akta Kesalahan Jenayah Syariah Wilayah Persekutuan 1997 (Persetubuhan Haram). Hukuman sebat tidak melebihi enam kali adalah satu daripada hukuman yang diperuntukkan di bawah bidang kuasa Mahkamah Syariah, di samping hukuman penjara tidak melebihi tiga tahun dan denda tidak lebih RM5,000.

2. Berita ini telah mendapat reaksi bantahan dan pertikaian oleh NGO seperti Sister in Islam (SIS) yang menyatakan bahawa tindakan merotan ini mencabul hak sama rata dan tiada diskriminasi yang dijamin oleh perlembagaan. Majlis Peguam juga memberikan reaksi yang sama terhadap isu ini. Isu sebat ini timbul rentetan daripada isu sebatan syariah kepada Kartika Sari Dewi kerana didapati bersalah meminum arak. `


3. Satu perkara penting yang semua wajib faham ialah, sebatan syariah berbeza dengan sebatan sivil. Sebatan sivil berbentuk hukuman yang boleh mendatangkan kecedaraan yang serius, manakala sebatan syariah umpama sebatan seorang ayah terhadap anaknya. Tiada kecederaan yang serius dan menakutkan akan berlaku.

Sebatan sivil

4. Executive Director SIS yang baru, Dr Hamidan Marican pernah menyatakan bahawa sebatan syariah kepada Kartika Sari Dewi sebagai 'extreme' dalam wawancaranya bersama Deborah Loh di The Nut Graph. Beliau menyatakan,

"Kartika's case is a problem where certain behavioural codes or requirements are codified and turned into crimes against the state. Islam is a religion of compassion. There are 107 verses in the Quran that talks about compassion and forgiveness, clearly indicating that God views us as mortal beings who are bound to make mistakes. And He's given us space to reflect and reform.

The syariah maximum sentencing provision of 3-5-6 [three years' jail, RM5,000 fine, and six strokes of the cane], is only a guide and should only kick in if you are a repeat offender who is causing harm to others. There is no evidence that Kartika was causing harm to others, so why the extreme punishment?

The situation that has emerged shows that many Muslims seem to confuse the concept of syariah with the content of syariah. The concept refers to syariah being a "path" or a body of law based on the Quran. The content, however, is the outcome of human interpretation. As such, interpretations will differ as we are mortal beings. Hence we see many schools of thought and law in Islam.

My invitation for dialogue and discourse is to examine this very content. Dialogue must involve all stakeholders, not just ulamak and scholars, using the same rigour and intellect used by earlier ulamak. Dialogue must also keep in view the current constitutional provisions, gender perspective, universal human rights, equality at large and the lived realities of today. We must ensure that we leverage the diversity of thought that has been a common thread in Islam."

Penulis tidak pasti, Dr Hamidah sedia maklum atau tidak tentang terdapat perbezaan ketara diantara kaedah sebatan syariah dan sivil. Namun, jika sedia maklum tetapi masih menganggap sebatan syariah sebagai satu hukuman yang 'extreme', maka ini satu keajaiban.

5. Jika dalam sebuah parti politik, terdapat peraturan dan undang-undang yang perlu dipatuhi, maka agama juga begitu. Hukuman terhadap mereka yang melanggar peraturan juga satu hal yang biasa, hatta sistem persekolahan juga terdapat hukuman bagi murid-murid yang melanggar peraturan sekolah. Ya, hukuman sebat.

6. Semak sahaja dalam mana-mana peradaban dunia, peraturan dan hukuman adalah satu perkara normal bagi mengawal manusia. Agama Islam, satu bentuk sistem lengkap kehidupan pastinya juga terdapat peraturan yang perlu dipatuhi. Hukuman dalam Islam adalah satu bab yang kecil sahaja, dan ia hanya melibatkan orang yang bersalah. Jika yang bersalah rela dan redha atas hukuman yang diterima, tetapi kenapa mesti ada 'lebih sudu dari kuah'?

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Monday, February 8, 2010

Isu nama Allah 3

Penjelasan dan huraian oleh YB Zulkifli Nordin:

Antara yang menarik diulas oleh YB Zul adalah gerakan kristianisasi yang cuba berselindung dengan pengedaran template sukan komenwel 1998, sukan F1, dan pemberian makanan ringan kepada kanak-kanak Melayu Islam.



Apa pendapat pembaca? Penggunaan nama Allah lebih membawa manfaat atau mudharat?

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Hukum Niqab


Penjelasan oleh Dr Rajab Abu Maleeh (IslamOnline's Syariah Consultant):

Niqab is permissible in the normal circumstances and recommended in case of fear of temptation. Those who opine that it is obligatory have no solid proof to substantiate their opinion, while those who state that it is a recently introduced bid`ah (innovation in religion) neglect juristic reality and practical fait accompli. Rather, it is neither obligatory nor forbidden; it can be permissible or recommended.


All in all, the woman wearing niqab should not view other women wearing khimar (a head cover that covers the entire head, neck, and the opening of the garment on the chest) as immodest and sinful. How could they be sinful though they are following the opinion of the majority of both early and modern fuqaha! On the other hand, the woman wearing khimar should not view other women wearing niqab as being extremist or committing an innovation in religion. How could the women following the opinion of one of the reliable and trustworthy imams of fiqh be innovative in religious matters!


In light of what is mentioned above, we can say that the ruler is not allowed to enact a general law forbidding wearing niqab, due to the following reasons:


First,
Wearing niqab is obligatory according to the majority of Hanbali fuqaha, and thus we cannot prevent a Muslim man or woman from embracing an opinion adopted by one of the trustworthy imams of fiqh, or one of the legally acknowledged schools of of jurisprudence . Hence, wearing niqab for the one imitates this school of jurisprudence or feels comfortable in following that opinion becomes obligatory on them, and the woman would be considered sinful if she neglects it.


In turn, if a general decree is issued preventing the Muslim woman from wearing niqab, it would be as if we are commanding her to commit disobedience, knowing that no creature should be obeyed in what involves disobedience to the Creator (Glorified and Exalted). In addition, schools of jurisprudence have derived their authority from the unanimous acknowledgment of them on part of the scholars of the Ummah. Hence, it is in no way permissible for any scholar –no matter how versed he may be – to disallow acting upon any of these schools of jurisprudence, especially in what is linked to the relation between a Muslim and his Creator.


Second,
None of the scholars other than the Hanbalis has ever claimed that niqab is bid`ah or a customary wear for that the Muslim woman does not receive a reward. Thus, whoever assumes such an opinion would be disagreeing with the majority of fuqaha of the Ummah and not only the Hanbali fuqaha. In fact, the majority of fuqaha have denied the claim that niqab is an obligation and that the Muslim woman who does not wear it is sinful. This is because it was used during the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and he approved of it: his wives wore it by way of obligation, while other believing women wore it as a devotional act of worship. Because the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not disapprove of it, the least thing that could be said about niqab is that it revolves between permissibility or commendableness.


Third,
It is permissible for the ruler to codify a single school of jurisprudence to be applied among people as regards transactions so as to facilitate ways of litigation for people, and in order that disagreement might not lead to contention. However, it is not permissible for the ruler to do so on individual acts of worship, the performance of which results in no harm for anyone, and which are confined to the individual relation between a Muslim and his Creator.


Fourth,
It would be plausible and acceptable that people adopting this opinion maintain that a woman is obliged to put off niqab in specific places, such as airports and governmental offices where ID cards, passports, driving licenses, and the like must be issued, in order to identify the character of the holders of such cards or papers. In addition, this should take place only before women and not in the presence of men. This is because the ruler is required to ensure the safety of people in such places. However, enacting a general law on this issue is unanimously unacceptable.


Fifth,
Even if wearing niqab was a habitual practice – which is not true – or just permissible, it is not permissible to ban wearing it through a general law because the authority of the ruler as regards restriction of the permissible is not categorical. Rather, he should resort to scholars and specialists before restricting the permissible acts. He is allowed to restrict the permissible only when restricting it is expected to bring about a supreme interest of the country. In this context, Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, said,


The Shari `ah has given the ruler (of authority) the right to restrict some permissible acts for a preponderant interest: at some times or in some case or for some people, and not to restrict it generally, absolutely, or permanently. This is because permanent and absolute restriction is tantamount to prohibition, which is for Allah, the Exalted alone. The Qur'an denounced such an act when
Ahl Al-Kitab (People of the Book) practiced it. Allah says,


(
They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks.)(At-Tawbah 9: 31)


This verse is interpreted by the hadith that reads,


"Indeed, they prohibited the lawful and made lawful the prohibited for them [their people], and thus they followed them."
(At-Tirmidhi)


Sixth,
It would be more proper that such scholars give their focus for preventing women from wearing indecent clothes, because indecency is unanimously prohibited according to scholars from all Sunni, Shiite, Ibadi, and Zahiri sects, and also all wise persons in the Arab and Islamic world, rather according to all heavenly legislations before Islam, such as Judaism and Christianity. Such an attempt would be registered as a good deed in the record of those scholars. But to prohibit and incriminate wearing niqab and overlook indecency, rather nudity and debauchery – which have shamelessly turned into a common attitude – is indeed a real abomination.


Surely, it would be more proper and more honorable that scholars fight this phenomenon of indecency, invite women to observe decency, and prevent
inappropriately dressed women from entering the state institutions in countries that constitution dictates that Islam is its official religion and that Shari`ah is the basic source of its law.


We ask Almighty Allah to protect our Ummah from the evil of temptations whether manifest and hidden, to guide us to the right, and to inspire us and our scholars with truth and right guidance, for He is indeed the Master of all this and He is Able to do it.



Penjelasan oleh Dr MAZA:

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Metaliti Minoriti

Gambar di edit dari: Link

1. Pertama kali penulis mendengar istilah ini diungkapkan oleh YB Dr Puad Zarkashi ketika dalam rancangan Hujah tv9 yang mana sedang membincangkan kesatuan politik Melayu-Islam di Malaysia. Istilah ini kembali segar apabila ia diungkapkan secara tidak langsung oleh seorang panel (lupa namanya) ketika berhujah tentang isu perlembagaan di dalam rancangan Di Luar Lingkungan RTM1.

2. Mentaliti minoriti merujuk kepada sikap dan pemikiran kaum atau kelompok majoriti yang merasakan ia berada didalam keadaan seperti kelompok minoriti. Istilah ini, ketika disebutkan ia merujuk kepada kaum Melayu-Islam di Malaysia. Kaum yang miliki sejumlah angka majoriti, tetapi menjadi minoriti dalam mentaliti.

3. Telah dikisahkan bahawa, orang Melayu-Islam kini bersifat sangat defensif (bertahan) kerana ia telah diserang dari segenap sudut. Hak keistimewaannya dicabar, status ketuanan agama Islam mulai kelihatan goyah, kuasa politik pula sedang retak menanti belah, dan penguasaan ekonomi negara hanya sekadar tempelan semata. Ia kelihatan telah diserang, tetapi ini satu keajaiban.

4. Norma kelompok majoriti di dalam mana-mana negara, kelompok itu bersifat agresif dan menyerang. Manakala kelompok minoriti lebih kepada sifat defensif. Lihat sahaja umat Islam di negara-negara barat, ia kelompok minoriti dan sedang ditindas. Hak-hak mereka dalam beragama sedang dinafikan. Maka umat Islam sedang berjuang bermatian mempertahankan haknya. Hal ini dapat dibuktikan dengan larangan memakai tudung, membina menara masjid, bantahan terhadap pembinaan masjid dan keganasan terhadap umat Islam seperti yang berlaku pada kes pembunuhan Merwa Sherbini di Jerman.

Almarhumah Marwa bersama suami dan anak.

5. Mentaliti minoriti ini berlaku kerana kelemahan Melayu-Islam itu sendiri. Bangsa Melayu tidak mampu berdiri sebagai bangsa dominan yang menguasai keadaan. Jika dulu Melayu-Islam berbangga menguasai pentas politik, kini atas dasar konon ingin menjadi 'liberal' dan 'progresif' ia sedang mula melonggarkan prinsip perjuangan. Benar, dasar liberal dan progresif itu membantu kepada perkembangan negara dan pemikiran, namun ia ada had dan jangan sampai memperjudikan nasib kepentingan umat Islam!

6. Parti politik yang dikuasai Melayu-Islam kini kelihatan begitu ghairah menarik undi bukan Muslim. Seolah-olah Melayu-Muslim itu sudah menjadi undi yang minoriti, atau mungkin undi Melayu-Islam itu rendah nilainya. Mentaliti minoriti bukan hanya menguasai golongan marhaein Melayu, namun terkena tempias juga pada pemain politik.

7. Peringatan ini buat diriku dan buat manusia yang suka diperingatkan.

Link Terpilih

Blog Widget by LinkWithin