The following are some newspaper articles which I find very interesting. Just couldn't help myself uploading them onto this blog.
Why I Support Maryam Lee’s Non-Fasting Protest
By Farouk A.Peru
Published: July 1, 2016 07:35 AM GMT+8
See more at: http://m.themalaymailonline.com/opinion/farouk-a.-peru/article/why-i-support-maryam-lees-non-fasting-protest#sthash.JN0d4q7Z.dpuf
JULY 1 ― It has been a more dismal week than usual for Malaysian Islam. There was an exhibition in Kedah where Muslims were invited to kiss the holy footprint of Prophet Muhammad. Unusually and commendably, the Islamic Department of Kedah actually warned against it although strangely, they did not dispatch any enforcers to stop this obviously unIslamic practice. Perhaps the enforcers were busy monitoring Muslims who were sneakily not fasting. Or perhaps they are too afraid of losing Muslim support?
Before I explain why I support Maryam Lee’s protest, I would just like to say that I have a deep admiration for Muslim women who unflinchingly stand against Islamofascism. Amina Wadud Muhsin, the famous female Imamah, withstood many death threats and harassment; she never wavered from her stand. Our very own Sisters in Islam has been facing up to the Islamic Patriarchal Elite for more than three decades. And now we have a new generation of Muslim feminists, one of whom is Maryam Lee.
The first thing we should note is that Maryam Lee did not break Islamic law. In Traditional Islam, women are actually forbidden (i.e. it is haram for them) to pray and fast during menstruation. According to Maryam, it is also not a crime for a Muslim woman to eat and drink during Ramadan either. What does exist, however, is an unspoken rule. This is the intangible policy which manifested as a moral obstruction to Maryam’s act.
So what really happened? According to Maryam, she was making a conscious act of protest. During her “time of the month”, she went to a restaurant in and ordered some food. The manager, who was rude to her from the start, served her lunch but literally tossed the plate of food on her table. He then asked if she was Malay (a strong indicator of racial-religious signals here, take note) and then proceeded to berate her. Her non-Muslim friend was told to shut up and not get involved. His excuse was, he could get raided by the authorities for serving a Muslim during Ramadan!
As if that was not enough, a total stranger came up to Maryam and proceeded to berate her as well. His excuse was, her act would tarnish the image of Islam in front of the general public! How exactly is not easily deduced by logic. Would they be tempted less by a Muslim woman who ate and drank than if a non-Muslim did so? Also, would the image of Islam be actually improved if we can show how magnanimous we are?
Surprisingly, much of the social media response to this report was to focus on Maryam’s so-called “provocation.” Apparently, Maryam should not have provoked the Muslims by eating while they were fasting. We should first ask the question, did she loudly shout the shahada (Muslim profession of faith) before eating? Of course not! Her only “tell” was that she was wearing the headscarf. The headscarf is not the sole domain of the conservative Muslims.
Secondly, is she entitled to consume during Ramadan? God himself entitles her to do so although God’s self-proclaimed agents do not. Not once but twice in the Quran when fasting is mentioned (Chapter 2, Verses 183-185), for those who are indisposed, flexibility is afforded to them. Not just for the indisposed but for those who are travelling as well.
Even Islamic Tradition, which is usually at odds with the Quran, supports the notion that if one is hard pressed, one may break his fast. This can happen with diabetics or with those with low blood pressure who need water to prevent them from fainting. So it is actually OK with God Himself. Who is it not OK with?
The unsurprising answer is the Malaysian Islamofascist authorities. They have taken it upon themselves to be a nuisance by raiding restaurants and catching out Muslims who are not fasting. What if the person was a diabetic who needed a quick blood sugar spike? What if she was a woman who simply could not fast? Does she have to bring her menstrual pad to prove her case? This is the ridiculous level of thinking which we will be forced to take if we followed the logic of these authorities.
And then, of course ISMA had to show its own repressive policies. ISMA has never been sympathetic to women. Abdullah Zaik, after all, feels that women’s roles should be in the home. Having them in public spaces may arouse men and cause disharmony, he probably thinks.
In ISMA’s article against Maryam Lee, a slew of scholars were invoked to say that Muslim women who cannot fast should not consume in public because it may tempt Muslims. Not a single Quranic verse nor even a directly relevant hadith was quoted.
This shows the utter paucity of evidence from the Islamofascists. It is best they take leave during Ramadan and never leave their homes in case they get tempted. MAS workers who are prone to sleeping on the job, take note. You now have a “valid” excuse.
For the past three decades or so, Malay Muslims have been told by their Islamic priests how special they are and how the rest of the country needs to acquiesce and allow them to do as they please. Coupled with the influence of a corrupt government who gave them a sense of entitlement, the Malay Muslim is now acting with the maturity of a spoilt and petulant child.
Maryam Lee’s protest was indeed provocative but it is the first step towards waking them up. The counter-privileging against the conservative Malay-Muslims will hopefully show them that while we must respect their right to fast, they must equally respect our prerogative not to, if we choose to take it.
* This is the personal opinion of the columnist.
SORRY HARUSSANI, ISLAM IS NOT ABOUT EXCLUSIVITY
By AZRUL MOHD KHALIB
Published: March 5, 2016 07:32 AM GMT+8
- See more at: http://m.themalaymailonline.com/opinion/azrul-mohd-khalib/article/sorry-harussani-islam-is-not-about-exclusivity#sthash.XyJ3aEWX.dpuf
MARCH 5 — Warning: If this column starts to sound like you have read it before and you think that you are having a déjà vu moment, you are probably right. It sometimes feels like a broken record dealing with and responding to our recalcitrant and wayward religious authorities.
We have just been told that it is a crime to publish, and to read the Quran in non-Arabic languages without accompanying Arabic text.
Stop the press! All printing of the Quran in Chinese, Spanish, Afrikaans, Russian, Chechen, Indonesian and English around the world must cease! After all, if it is supposedly a wrong practise here, it must be wrong elsewhere too. After all, Islam is a global religion.
The recent warning from Harussani Zakaria, chairman of the Home Ministry’s Al-Quran Printing, Control and Licensing Board, is representative of what’s gone wrong with the practise and teaching of Islam in this country.
While Muslims in other countries are busy making their religion increasingly accessible, friendly and inclusive to those not of the Islamic faith, our religious authorities are moving in the exact opposite direction.
Far from sounding enlightened, progressive and welcoming, individuals such as Harussani are making Islam in Malaysia sound and appear to others as arrogant, irrational, suspicious and disdainful of other religions.
Maybe Harussani is more knowledgeable than I am in this matter, but I am almost certain that this kind of paternalistic approach is neither in accordance with the teachings of Prophet Muhammad nor adhering to the principles of Islam. But what do I know? I don’t write or understand Arabic so Harussani can perhaps provide some enlightenment.
I am tired of our religious authorities treating Islam like it is some exclusive club and they alone determine who gets to join and the conduct of those who are members. Historically, we have seen this behaviour before where the clergy of an institutionalised religion attempts to impose a monopoly on faith and its teachings under the guise of “only the learned and knowledgeable” (i.e themselves) can communicate with God and not be led astray.
The reality has less to do with God but more to do with the very earthly pursuit of power and control over others. Over the years, the ever-expanding sphere of influence of Islamic institutions in Malaysia have gone increasingly unchecked and it can be argued that through their actions, have repeatedly violated Constitutional limitations and even expressed disdain for those limits. Yet, very few have dared to challenge them and even fewer have stood to defend those who have done so. Just ask Rosli Dahlan.
I have travelled to many places in the world where Islam has taken root and flourished. Based on my own understanding, Islam is not and has never been about exclusivity and superiority of faith.
It is arguably a violation of Islamic teachings to insist on exclusivity as touted by Harussani as it prevents others from acquiring knowledge, learning and understanding Muslims and Islam.
The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself, through his own documented practises and teachings, practised inclusivity, humility, and believed in the importance of knowledge and most importantly, sharing it with others.
Exclusivity results in misunderstanding, ignorance, conflict, bigotry and irrational fear. It breeds contempt for others and arrogance.
One of the most common complaints and gripes by the Islamic authorities and clergy in this country is that they are frequently misunderstood and that others must seek understand and learn about Islam Fair argument, until you make important texts like the Quran inaccessible. Read the notice from the Kementerian Dalam Negeri again and you will realise that what it is actually saying is that reading the Quran is off limits to non-Muslims (need to take Islamic ritual ablutions to touch and read the Quran) and to those not proficient in the Arabic language.
Speaking of reading, I have struggled to explain to those who are non-Muslims how it is possible for a person to be able to read the Arabic in the Quran yet not understand a single word of it.
Because that is how the Quran is often taught (can a person be taught when the language of the lesson itself is not understood?) here in this country.
Harussani’s statement itself affirms that you can read without understanding and it is okay. I really don’t understand that and never have. Wouldn’t it be meaningless without understanding the words of what you are reading? Maybe it’s just me but that is my individual cross to bear.
Oh, final question for the mandarins of the Kementerian Dalam Negeri: is it also a crime to download digital versions of the Quran such as eBooks or apps in other languages? Are we allowed to think for ourselves or do we need to ask for your permission?
Those who demand for exclusivity and impose such restrictions and monopolies of knowledge convey a lack of depth in their awareness and understanding of how Islam is practised elsewhere around the globe and of its co-existence with other world religions.
Get a grip.
* This is the personal opinion of the columnist.
THE RISE OF RELIGIOUS BUFFOONERY IN MALAYSIA
By: Farouk A. Peru
Published: February 12, 2016 07:14 AM GMT+8-
See more at: http://m.themalaymailonline.com/opinion/farouk-a.-peru/article/the-rise-of-religious-buffoonery-in-malaysia#sthash.KNmOFUAa.dpuf
FEBRUARY 12 ― When any industry gets inundated with players, the quality of its products can be very questionable. It was true with the PC industry when IBM PC opened its doors to compatibles thus giving way to some very sub-par products.
It was also true in the movie industry when stellar movies inevitably inspired copycats. The Blair Witch Project and Sixth Sense were pioneers in this regard and inspired a number of inferior films.
This is also unfortunately true with the industry of religion. While there are some very inspiring speakers who can motivate the layperson to become a better human being, there are also those who tap into the religious market by providing sheer entertainment. They, perhaps unknowingly, act like buffoons in order to boost their popularity.
What makes a religious buffoon? While some may point to the speakers’ demeanour and style, I have to disagree.
Humour can actually make difficult subjects much easier to digest, in my experience. I have a vast collection of “Idiots Guides” and “For Dummies” books which attest to that fact!
No, rather buffoonery comes from the puerility of the subject matter and worse, the superficial manner in which it is handled.
Like any economic endeavour, the religious industry needs to keep coming up with fresh products to keep the target market interested else it becomes stale or irrelevant.
The inspiration for this piece came earlier this week in my Facebook feed which I use to observe the religious social media. I chanced upon a lecture by this ustaz (religious teacher) who claimed that the voices of women is considered “aurat” in Islam.
“Aurat” is an imported word from Arabic which means “modest or private area” in everyday lingo. The ustaz who seemed to be talking to an exclusively male audience, claimed that if a male were to engage in a telephone conversation with a woman ― however innocent the conversation may be ― that man would be sexually aroused.
He then asked a member of the audience if this was true and the answer came in the negative. Instead of accepting that different people have different levels of acceptable stimuli, the ustaz then accused that gentleman of having a low sex drive!
The next person the ustaz questioned hurriedly replied to the affirmative that indeed women’s voices can be seductive. The ustaz then added that not only are women’s voices arousing, they can actually cause a man to emit pre-ejaculate!
One wonders how this ustaz survives in daily life. When he goes to a restaurant and a waitress inquires about his order, would he then be in a state of arousal?
But it does not end there. The ustaz manages to surreptitiously add in some misogynistic elements to the seemingly receptive audience.
At that point, he adds that that is the reason we cannot have female leaders and khateebas (women who give sermons) unless the congregation is all female. The measure of a society’s backwardness is apparently when women take the helm of leadership, he asserts.
This is from the same individual who criticises women for shaping their eyebrows, claiming that it is physical modification! Comparing eyebrow shaping with plastic surgery must be the very definition of puerile and superficial.
The phenomenon of the religious buffoon is, in reality, an indictment on the society which produces it. Without the religious consumer, these people would need to find real jobs, perhaps in the entertainment industry given their talents to amuse listeners.
The only difference is the entertainment industry actually provides some benefit in that it gives us a means to relieve stress and to enjoy ourselves.
These religious buffoons, however, can actually cause damage with their sinister remarks. With the aforementioned ustaz for example, male members of his audience may actually force their beliefs on female members of their respective families.
This is when simple entertainment translates into social detriment. Malay-Muslims need to stay away from such folks.
*This is the personal opinion of the columnist.
buffoon (n): a clown, a jester, a fool, a ridiculous person.
buffoonery (n): a ridiculous behaviour which can be amusing.
