I never understand the Ummah preoccupation with hudud especially in Malaysia. Here is an article written by Dr Chandra Muzafar in the Star today which is very lucid and clear to those who understand the issue but to those who is unwilling to understand would point out that Chandra is a convert (does that makes a different?, i wonder) and not school in the Islamic traditional school but learn Islam through the Secular way, oh blimey, excuse and excuse. I do find Dr Chandra a bit pedantic and at times a bit of a bully but i do respect his thoughts and as a fellow muslim is that what we should ask from us in Islam?
Here is the article in question

Hudud in its true perspective

COMMENT By CHANDRA MUZAFFAR

It is not one’s observance of hudud’s modes of punishment that defines one’s piety. It is one’s commitment to justice demonstrated through actual deeds that is the ultimate measure of one’s goodness.

HUDUD is not central to Islam. True, the modes of punishment for murder, robbery, theft, adultery and apostasy spelt out in hudud enactment are part of Islamic law.

But it is not one’s observance of these modes of punishment that defines one’s piety. It is one’s commitment to justice demonstrated through actual deeds that is the ultimate measure of one’s goodness.

The preoccupation with hudud and with punitive law in general, as the single most important attribute of Islamic governance was developed partly as a reaction to Western colonial rule. It has continued in this era of Western global hegemony.

It is an attempt to re-assert what is perceived as Muslim authority at a time when the forces challenging the community’s power are overwhelming. In a sense, this emphasis upon hudud as punishment is at variance with the Quranic meaning of the term which alludes to the limits or the restraints that one is advised to adhere to in one’s behaviour.

Hudud fixation has also diverted the attention of the Muslim ummah from those fundamental values and principles that had endowed strength and dynamism to Islamic civilisation in its heyday. Apart from justice, the passion for knowledge was the driving force behind Islam’s much acclaimed role as leader of scientific and social thought between the eighth and 14th centuries. How to enhance the pursuit of knowledge within the ummah rather than the implementation of hudud should be our primary concern today.

Those who are obsessed with hudud have also failed to examine the actual performance of states that have implemented hudud in recent decades. From Sudan and Saudi Arabia to Afghanistan and Iran, what has been the balance sheet like from the perspective of the very values and principles that the Quran cherishes - distributive justice, accountability on the part of the ruler, freedom and dignity of the human being? Are these hudud states worthy of emulation?

Hudud advocates sometimes argue that whatever the shortcomings of these states, some of them have managed to curb hudud-related crimes among the people such as stealing and illicit sex. Even if we accept the veracity of their claim, one wonders whether these vices have also been eliminated at the level of the elites? Has hudud led to a decline in elite corruption - which is another name for elite theft - or has it tamed sexual licentiousness among the rich and famous in these countries? Or is it only the weak and the vulnerable who live in fear of hudud punishments?

These are important questions that should be raised because one of the major political actors in the country is undoubtedly hudud oriented and is determined to occupy Putrajaya. This is why as soon as it came to power in Kelantan in 1990, PAS sought to introduce hudud. It did the same thing in Terengganu in 1999, after its victory in the 10th general election, even though the common manifesto PAS shared with its other Barisan Alternatif partners made no mention of hudud or an Islamic State.

No one should be under the illusion that PAS has abandoned its hudud goal. Its espousal of a “Welfare State” instead of a hudud committed Islamic State is a crafty political tactic geared towards winning non-Muslim votes. A number of other hudud fixated political parties in other countries have also adopted various tactics and manoeuvres with the aim of garnering popular support. Indeed, obtaining power by whatever means is often the mission of hudud parties which makes them no different from parties that do not speak on behalf of religion.

The lust for power is also the reason why the de facto leader of the Pakatan Rakyat, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, has given his backing to PAS’s hudud stand. His stance should not surprise anyone. The chameleon he is, Anwar has over the last 40 years, incarnated and reincarnated himself as Malay nationalist, Islamic champion, state-centric leader, West oriented liberal - and hudud advocate.

Contrast PAS and Anwar with the men who have been at the helm of our nation since Merdeka. No Malaysian Prime Minister was - or is - hudud inclined. This is a fact of tremendous significance that all Malaysians should appreciate.

And yet, each of our six Prime Ministers in the past and the present have pursued policies which in one way or another are related to Islamic values and principles. The first Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, for instance, was deeply committed to unity among the different communities, in consonance with Islam’s recognition of the oneness of the human family.

The second Prime Minister, Tun Abdul Razak, sought to reduce poverty, improve educational opportunities for the people and enhance the nation’s independence and sovereignty - goals which reflected the essence of the Islamic faith.

The third Prime Minister, Tun Hussein Onn, a man of integrity, was determined to eradicate corruption, a noble mission from an Islamic perspective. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, our fourth Prime Minister, not only made the middle-class multi-ethnic and thus reinforced social stability but also raised Malaysia’s profile in the eyes of the Muslim world and the Global South. His successor, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, expanded space and scope for freedom of expression which in itself is an Islamic virtue. The present Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, is attempting a major economic and political transformation while strengthening national integration through 1Malaysia. The overall aim is the well-being of the people. No goal is more laudable in Islamic governance.

Of course, our past prime ministers had their flaws and their failings. Najib is also very much aware of his shortcomings. But Najib, like his predecessors, is not fixated on an idea which has not - and will not - enhance the dignity of the human being.

■ Dr Chandra Muzaffar is a political scientist who has written extensively on religion and Malaysian society.

This letter was written to the New Straits Time in respond to an article about Negaraku. It was not publish. I reprint it in full here.

Dear Sir

I read todays article about Negaraku. I know Mansor Abdul Aziz, whose mom is YM Raja Toh Puan Teh Zaitun. He always regard my father as a brother or as a relative to her. It just so happen my Great Grand Ma was the consort of YM Raja Mansur. I hope my take on Negaraku and the Perak Anthem is publish

Name Wan Zaharizan Bin Wan Zan
IC 621003-05-5093
Mobile 019 2514781

I am a Nobody. I am not a product of the NEP and not a crony of anyone. I found it hard to reconcile myself as a Malaysian for I have seen how history has been skewered to fit one’s own hand. I am proud of my heritage, my race and definitely I am proud to be Malaysian. The story of our National Anthem has always reward me with a smile. It shows to me how subtle the malay mind works. How without ruffling any feathers the message was implied and understood. These hidden message is what make my race great. The Wonderful simplicity of the effect is made known. Yes you have read the story of our National Anthem it is much more. But first let us correct the misconception that it was compose by a French guy Pierre- Jean de Béranger. How do you compose a song which was already there. Like Rasa Sayang Eh or Surinam nam nam it was a folk song. Composer would just rearrange it to give it a new lease of life but never compose it! It is a song which belongs to the sailors who hum it, to the African fisherman who sang it but not to the French or the Americans who came out later with Mula Moon or the Indonesians who came out with Terang Bulan.

That must be crystal clear. Why the song is so important to understand the subtleness of the Malay? Because it shows how a dutiful son of the rightful Sultan make sure to those in power that the rightful ruler was still alive! Yes YM Raja Mansur then was just the aide de camp, unlike his younger sibling YM Raja Chulan whom the Brits preferred. He was not made the Raja the Hilir his younger brother did! His son YM Raja Kamarulzaman did manage to be the Raja the hilir but not him.

Yes when the Sultan was ask by the bandmaster the State Anthem of Perak it was his Aide de Camp who came to his aide. To me there were many other Malay folk song but why did he choose this Seychelles’ song? Because with a quickness of wit he made the Sultan and the Brits acknowledge the wrong they did to his father. They all stand to attention paying homage to the rightful Sultan that was illegally disposed of. So everytime a Perakian stand to attention he must remember what happen to the rightful Sultan. And that to me best illustrate the mind of the Malays.

I am telling you because it was Wahi Anuar’s mother in law who introduce him to politics. Yes his mother in law was YM Raja Mansur’s wife. She is noted for her beauty and very independent woman. It was her daughter whom she force to enter English school, mention briefly in Mustafa Hussain’s book. She was the first Malay nurse and the malay girl to study in an English school at treacher Taiping. But we are nobody. I am sad that many Malaysians do not know history and if do skewered it too much it does not reflect the truth. Mat Indera’s case is noted here. To me he is not a hero ,he to me is a tragic person whom through blinded hatred cannot see the errors of his ways. My Grandfather was a Communist leader and I say it here and now he is a communist. Some will hate me but I say it without malice.

Most people forgot that the Communist Party of Malaya was a legal party in Malaya until 1948. It is when they became militant hell bent in not respecting the law that it was ban. But then that is how communist work. To destroy the rule of law. To disobey and instruct people to distrust and create mistrust of the instrument of law and order. To create mischief and cast dispersion to the leaders of the day. To agitate the masses and provoke them by creating myth and stories. These are all Communist strategies and since Karl Marx was a Jew you can find similarities in how Zionist Israel works. Then that is why when I look at Tien Chuah charging at the police or hear Hishammuddin speeches I am not surprise because both were school in Socialism. To me what Mat Sabu did and what Anwar is doing is subversive. They to me are Communist as what my Grandfather was label by the British and many left wingers were. To compare Bersih to Arab Spring uprising is laughable. In Arabs and many despotic countries there is no way to change the government through the ballot box but here in Malaysia there is a chance. No country is perfect no ism is perfect too but here in my country that I love it tries to be one. The leaders has work hard and has listen and if the population feels it is not enough then go and vote them out as nearly happen in 2008. So why do we need always to question motives? , why cant we be thankful and grateful ?

Think hard and vote for the right leaders. For me I prefer those that deliver than those that keep questioning but do nothing!

New Post from Malaysian Insider

History’s never black and white

September 15, 2011

SEPT 15 — First and foremost, I hate the term “freedom fighters.” In the English language, it’s a necessity to point out, as the late comedian George Carlin once did: if fire fighters fight fire, and crime fighters fight crime, what do freedom fighters fight?!

I find his observations valid especially when air stewards and stewardesses insist on me getting “on” the plane instead of “in” it.

Subsequently, while people (myself included) continue to claim that Tunku Abdul Rahman was a brilliant leader, let’s not forget that no leader is infallible. And no, I’m not talking about his drinking, gambling or joget habits.

I’m talking about the fact that he once supported the Malayan Union, which Umno itself protested against. Looking through Malaysian history, you can find all sorts of discrepancies in our leaders or would-be leaders.

So I will admit that perhaps Malaysiakini has a point; in truth, if there was a referendum on who would run Malaya after its formation, Tunku may not have been the people’s first choice.

So we have a PAS leader calling a communist Malay Malaysian leader of the CPM 10th Regiment a freedom fighter. Now, while Mat Sabu is going around preaching this, I want to ask him a few things.

First and foremost, what took him so long?! Shamsiah Fakeh is dead, Rashid Maidin is also dead, Mat Indera is also dead. Is it now PAS’s policy to praise dead communists in order to get votes from the living?

If PAS were to go out and truly praise the communists, why not talk about Abdullah CD, former chairman of the CPM, who is still alive in exile? Why not fight to bring both him and Chin Peng home?

For me personally, the timing and angles taken by PAS for all this is very suspect. PAS needs to decide whether or not it wants to truly delve into the Bukit Kepong incident and support the actions of the communists under Mat Indera at the time.

This would include, of course, the murder of both the wife and son of Marine Constable Abu Bakar Daud, and the wife and daughter of Constable Abu Mohd Ali. Does PAS support the murder of non-combatants, or does it consider this acceptable collateral damage?

While PAS is so adamant about supporting one dead communist leader in an assault on a Johor police station, why not voice its support for other leaders of the communist party? Let’s talk a bit about Shamsiah Fakeh, who died in 2008, shall we?

Shamsiah was the leader of Angkatan Wanita Sedar (AWAS) who faced a lot of trials and tribulations throughout her life. She was abandoned by her first husband while pregnant. She literally gave birth to a child while in the forests of Malaya, and had her newborn child murdered by her own comrades.

She is perhaps the only Malaysian Malay woman who can truly be labelled a nationalist feminist icon. She died in 2008. PAS didn’t even acknowledge her by attending her funeral. Tony Pua from the DAP and Syed Husin Ali from PKR were there. And yet, now suddenly PAS wants to fight for the former communist Malay Malaysians?

What does Islam say about hypocrisy again?

Personally, I view the communist insurgency as what it is; a period of attrition which saw all sides, left and right political wings, conduct acts that were both despicable and revolting.

But then again, I read Chin Peng’s book, Shamsiah Fakeh’s memoir as well as Abdullah CD’s, thanks very much to my father’s insistence of wanting both sides of history to be seen on his ever glorious bookshelf which I raid every now and then.

However, this came later in life. These actions were never mentioned in our history books, or all those reference books published by Pelangi, Longman or Sasbadi.

Mat Indera was not a “freedom fighter”, if you refer to my first paragraph. He was a left-wing nationalist who believed that independence could come from armed struggle if the masses were to join the revolt. The masses didn’t.

And thus, since history was written by a blemished, non-independent pro-propaganda government body, the communists and other left-wingers did not get any credit until Fahmi Reza did his indie documentaries, “10 Tahun Sebelum Merdeka” and “Revolusi ‘48”.

It just goes to show that Churchill had a point when stating that history is written by the victors.

listen

I have to write after so long of not writing, I am compel to write. It is about Mat Indera. If you Google him you will out his full name is Ahmad Bin Indera. He was born in 1920 which make him younger than my Grandfather who at that time was heading the 10th Malay Regiment in place of Abdullah C.D. who was found guilty for having lovers tryst with one of the Chinese woman. Wahi Anuar then was his Commander.

Both were active in PKMM and both went into the jungle around 1948 somewhere in Temerloh. as I have said before there were the Malay leftist which many was rounded up and their party ban by the British. The fact was those who might not have the ability intellectually would found themselves fighting the British alongside the PKM. These Malays sometimes were knowledgeable in Islam, Nevertheless many found Marxism ideas to be compatible with social justice that Islam advocate. They do not hold the idea of religion as an opium of the people as stated by Marx but the idea of all man were servant to states and the state is the protector of man appeals to them. Some like Musa Ahmad and my Grandfather were school with the idea of Marxism at a school in Ampang. Please take note too that Tan Sri Asiah Ghani was an attendee and did very well in that school. She left later due to the opposition by her parents.

So does that make them Communist? No I don't think so, they were as my Grandfather says Sosio Nationalist,the term make famous by Sukarno. They just the same goal to drive out the British they might share some similar ideologies but definitely they fought for the total independence of the country not to be a satellite of Peking! If you read Shamshiah Fakeh memoir you will read her disillusionment with the party. She was jail during the 1966 Cultural Revolution, Chin Peng do not offer any help. She suffer all because she holds divergent views with CCP under Mao. There she learn the son she had with Wahi Anuar whom she has to gave away to PKM agent were later murdered by them!!

Yes there were many tragedies, and many like Shamshiah and Wahi who has good family background i.e. very Islamic would still be branded as a communist. So to me Mat Indera being a Hafiz do not surprise me. His hatred towards the British were real just like the hatred of many against Barisan which make people blind of the truth. Somebody remark that Mat Indera was kebal and this does not gel with his so call Islamic background. I am not sure if he is kebal, many said the same about my grandfather but I just saw an old man. There is one legend of a kebal warrior in the 10th Malay regiment, his name is Wan Ali. He was shot and die in a river in Jerantut early one morning. He went back to visit his house and wife and he still got kill so where is the kebal?

As for leading the Bukit Kepong raid he might be guilty of that but as my Grandfather say it was a tragedy. In Chin Peng words the loss of PKM in the so call war against the British was due to them not getting the support of the Malays. It got the support only from Chinese whose studied in Chinese Stream School! The Bintang tiga massacre in 1945 after the war when they rule Malaya before the British came back caused mayhem everywhere. The Bintang Tiga was bloodthirsty, many were kill. They went on a rampage took vengeance on those people whom they thought betray them. Malays whom were said to be the lackey of the Japanese were brutally murdered after a kangaroo court found them guilty.
Racial war erupted everywhere, so who could forget Sungai Manik incident or those that happen in Parit and Bota?

The killing was a tragedy to PKM. The massacre of Bukit Kepong police personnel seal them forever in the Malay minds as a brutal and Chinese chauvinese rebellion. It might be lead by Mat Indera, the soldiers were Chinese. 200 PKM members who were lead by a Malay did not heed their own Commander. They brutally murdered the police personnel and wives and children of some of them. I it said that Mat Indera try to help the police personnel and victims but were powerless. Some would be burn. These brutality seal the PKM fate. Who open the fire first does not matter but to kill 20 people for a mere police station shows the unreasonableness of PKM. So tell me how can he be a hero, to me he is a tragic person who cannot control his charge and he has to pay for it by receiving the death penalty and was hanged in 1952 in Taiping.