Category: Agama

Muslims Honouring Your Mother On Mother’s Day; Better Than Not Doing On Every Other Day

Sambut Hari Ibu?

Katanya dalam Islam boleh sambut hari2 dan bila2, tak perlu nak ikut2 orang kafir?

Ada awak sambut hari ibu utk ibu awak hari2 atau seminggu sekali atau sebulan sekali, ada?

Memuliakan ibu bukan hanya ajaran orang ‘Orang Kafir’ sebaliknya ia merupakan ajaran Islam.

Kalau hari2 tak buat, seminggu sekalipun tak buat, sebulan sekalipun tak buat, kenapa pula setahun sekali jadi haram?

Tidak semua perkara yg diamalkan oleh adat orang bukan Islam itu Haram.

Adat tidak kira adat apa bangsa sekalipun selama mana tidak bertentangan dengan ajaran Islam maka hukumnya adalah
Harus.

Melainkan adat tersebut ada kaitan dengan aqidah agama atau kepercayaan agama lain maka barulah jatuh hukum Haram.

Source: Abdul Rahman Mohamed

May 15, 2017
Myanmar Arrests Buddhist Monks Accused Of Targeting Muslims

Myanmar police have arrested two hardline Buddhist nationalists and are seeking several more after they clashed with Muslims in the country’s commercial capital Yangon, underscoring the authorities’ growing concern over rising religious tensions.

The arrests came after nationalists led by the Patriotic Monks Union (PMU) raided flats on Tuesday in a Yangon district with a large Muslim population, igniting scuffles that were only broken up when police fired shots into the air.

Two weeks ago, the same people had forced the closure of two Muslim schools.

“We have arrested two people since yesterday evening, and are still looking for the rest of them,” said Police Major Khin Maung Oo, in charge the police station in Yangon’s Mingalar Taung Nyunt district, where this week’s clashes took place.

The 13-month-old administration of Aung San Suu Kyi had made tentative moves against nationalist hardliners, but the arrests mark a significant step-up in the government’s efforts, highlighting official concerns over a potential outbreak of violence in the country’s main city, which has a substantial Muslim population.

Tensions between majority Buddhists and Myanmar’s Muslim minority have simmered since scores were killed and tens of thousands displaced in intercommunal clashes accompanying the onset of the country’s democratic transition in 2012 and 2013.

Mutual distrust has deepened since October, when attacks by Rohingya Muslim insurgents in northwestern Rakhine state provoked a massive military counter-offensive, causing about 75,000 Rohingya to flee across the border to Bangladesh.

Brigadier-General Mya Win, the commander of Yangon’s regional police security command, said extra security forces had been deployed and the police were on high alert to prevent communal violence.

“We are patrolling around Muslim areas and have taken security measures around places of worship,” he told Reuters news agency.

Leaders of the PMU said they were acting independently of the Ma Ba Tha, a larger hardline Buddhist and anti-Muslim organisation that counts among its leaders the firebrand monk Wirathu, who once called himself “Myanmar’s Bin Laden.”

Ma Ba Tha holds its nationwide congress in Yangon – a city of more than five million that has been a focus of foreign investment since a former military government ceded power in 2012 – in two weeks and is expecting about 10,000 monks to attend.

Targeting Muslims

In both incidents, PMU monks and lay sympathisers targeted Muslim areas after attending a trial of fellow nationalists facing charges of inciting violence during a protest in front of the United States embassy in Yangon last year.

“We didn’t want any confrontation with the nationalists so we allowed them to shut down our schools,” said Tin Shwe, the chairman of the Muslim schools, referring to an incident on April 28.

Tin Shwe, and a lawmaker from the ruling National League for Democracy, said the nationalists came to the schools with local administrators and policemen.

On Tuesday the group – again accompanied by local authorities and police – searched a building in a different part of Yangon shortly before midnight, claiming some Rohingya Muslims were staying there illegally.

Local residents confronted the nationalists, gathered in front of the building, prompting police officers to fire warning shots to break up the crowd.

A Yangon court issued the arrest warrant against seven people, including two monks, charging them with inciting communal violence, which carries a penalty of up to two years in prison.

At a news conference on Tuesday, organised shortly before the arrest warrants were issued, the nationalists vowed to keep fighting Muslim influence in the country, citing government reluctance to “protect race and religion” in Myanmar.

“We are protecting our people because government authorities are reluctant to do that. Even though many people hate us, we are not creating problems,” U Thuseikta, a monk and a senior official of the PMU, told reporters.

Tin Shwe, the Muslim community leader, said: “We want to get equal treatment and be protected by the government – we voted for them with our hands.”

Source: www.aljazeera.com

May 13, 2017
Alami Musa: Religion’s Place In Parliament, Politics And Policy
The crossing of swords in Parliament last month between Minister Masagos Zulkifli and opposition MP Faisal Manap on a religious issue (wearing of tudung by nurses and uniformed officers) provides an opportunity to reflect on the appropriateness of bringing religion into parliamentary debates.

“Mr Masagos pointed to his (Mr Faisal’s) practice of subtly and frequently bringing issues that are sensitive to the community, knowing (they are) not easy to resolve and cleverly turning them into state-versus-religion issues… He (Mr Faisal) disagreed he was sowing discord and said that as an elected MP, he had the right to voice the concerns of his community in Parliament.” (The Straits Times, April 5).

The question to deal with is whether issues of religion can be raised in Parliament, which is the apex political institution that defends the secular nature of the Singapore state.

The above question seems easy to answer but it is not so. This is due to the complexities of Singaporean society that is religious in character. Eighty-three per cent of the populace have religious affiliations and the remaining 17 per cent have moral sensibilities, although they do not profess any religion. Religion is central in the lives of a majority of Singaporeans; it is intertwined with many aspects of life and cannot be ignored even within the secular setting.

One response is to address the above question from the perspective of politics and policy. In his National Day Rally speech of 2015, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong spoke of the 2Ps of politics and policy and reiterated that the Government must get them right to secure people’s trust and confidence.

One important way to ensure that Singapore gets its politics right is to ensure that there is strictly no mixing of politics with religion. Raising issues of religion in Parliament for the sake of winning political support or gaining political mileage is politicising religion and this is against secularism.

Nevertheless, secularism is more than the simple separation of politics from religion or the neutrality of state towards religion. Secularism is essential because it is only with a secular state ideology that tolerance of differences in beliefs and persuasions can exist. Furthermore, a state that does not show any favour to a religion or belief can better arbitrate among the many contending interests, wants and needs of various groups in a religiously diverse society.

The nature of politics is that it is likely to be contentious. Its mix with religion will make politics even more contentious. Politics is the exercise of power, and the pursuit of religious demands or goals through politics in Parliament will give rise to a clash of interests and conflict among diverse religious groups. This can lead to disharmony and disunity.

REGULATING RELIGIOUS PRACTICE

However, it is recognised that religion is important to Singaporeans. In a religiously diverse country experiencing rising religiosity, the Government cannot be indifferent to religions. It has to assume stewardship over religion with regard to the social and political implications of rising religiosity. The Government does this through the lever of policy to ensure that the religious practices of any community do not contravene public order, public hygiene, national security, public safety and good governance requirements. Examples include the practice of ritual slaughter, playing of musical instruments during a street procession and the soliciting of public donations for religious purposes. The state must regulate these and many other aspects of religious life to the extent that they affect the general well- being of Singaporean society. As the state is involved in these matters, issues of religion will find their way into Parliament, either as policy pronouncements by the Government or as points of debate among parliamentarians.

The state’s commitment is to secure the overall well-being of society through maintenance of public order, social stability, defence against external threats, enforcement of contracts and long-term economic prosperity. The Government has to be fully in charge to deliver all these “public-interest goods”. This means that all institutions and groups – temporal and spiritual – need to accept the reality that they have to be subordinated to the state. Nevertheless, the Constitution upholds the freedom of practice of religion and beliefs.

Singapore’s secularism is unique in many ways. While it curtails the encroachment of religion into politics, as institutionalised within the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act, the state accommodates the need for religion to assume a public presence to a certain extent. As many aspects of religious life have implications for society, the Government needs to be in charge through the instrument of policy to ensure the well-being of all citizens, regardless of faith or persuasion.

The main argument for religious communities to leave to the Government of the day judgment calls on specific requests is that only the Government is in a position to decide which of these would not cause a pushback or adverse reactions from other religious communities. This is a delicate matter as each community has its own expectations that its requests be fulfilled.

The state has been judicious in maintaining an “equidistant” position in relation to all religious groups and not showing favouritism to any particular group. In this regard, the state adopts a number of approaches, including that of accommodating all religious groups. For example, the state accommodates the request for space for places of worship for many groups by allocating parcels of land for religious purposes. Another approach is equal recognition of needs. This is illustrated in the equal recognition of religious celebrations and the declaration of public holidays for them. At the same time, as the third approach, the state had also in the past turned down requests but it did so with fairness, as illustrated in the refusal to allow religious groups to broadcast religious programmes over national television.

Hence, the Government adopts an even-handed approach to all religious groups and it will decide how and when requests of various religious communities can be acceded to. In this way, the Government maintains its neutrality towards religion to secure the trust and seek the buy-in of all stakeholders. There is no benefit for religious communities to pressure the Government directly or indirectly, through proxy in or outside Parliament. To do so is to politicise these religious requests and it may result in an impasse. The ultimate loser will be the religious community concerned.
- The writer is Head of Studies in the Interreligious Relations in Plural Societies Programme, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University .
Source: www.straitstimes.com
May 13, 2017
An Open Invitation For Non-Muslims To Fast For A Day

Ramadhan is coming in about two weeks. I hope my Muslim brothers and sisters can introduce Ramadhan, and its significance in Islam (and why Muslims are markedly nicer in this month, if only in this month!) to our friends from other (or no) faiths.

In fact, I suggest we encourage the people we know to try out fasting for a day. If nothing else, just to get the multiracial experience.

For my friends, those who wish to try fasting for a day (or more), please inform me and you have an open invitation to my place for the breaking of fast on that day(s).

Source: Walid J.Abdullah

May 12, 2017
Kumpulan 25 Melayu Terkemuka – Pendapat Dr Zakir Naik Tiada Tempat Dalam Dunia Sekarang

KUALA LUMPUR: Komen-komen negatif pendakwah yang penuh kontroversi, Dr Zakir Naik, terhadap agama lain boleh mencetuskan bahaya ke atas negara berbilang kaum dan sekular seperti Malaysia.

Demikian menurut kumpulan bekas penjawat awam Melayu di Malaysia, dipanggil Kumpulan 25 Melayu Terkemuka (G25).

Menerusi kenyataan media yang dikeluarkan minggu ini, G25 menambah pihaknya bimbang tentang sikap tolak ansur pihak berkuasa Malaysia terhadap sikap Dr Zakir Naik serta mempersoalkan status penduduk tetap yang diberikan kepadanya. Berikut ini kenyataan G25:

G25 bimbang dengan sikap tolak ansur pihak berkuasa Malaysia terhadap komen-komen ekstrim yang dibuat oleh Dr Zakir Naik menerusi dakwahnya.

Kami percaya dengan hak kebebasan bersuara namun apabila ia dibenarkan bagi orang-orang tertentu sementara pihak yang berlainan pendapat pula tidak diberikan kebebasan bersuara, itu bukanlah bentuk kebebasan bersuara untuk masyarakat kita yang berbilang budaya.

Meskipun kami menghormati hak demokratik Dr Zakir Naik untuk menyuarakan pandangan beliau tentang Islam dan membandingkannya dengan agama lain dengan menukil beberapa kitab agama untuk memberikan gambaran pendapat beliau, Dr Zakir Naik seringkali mencetuskan kemarahan di kalangan masyarakat Muslim dan bukan Muslim disebabkan kebiasaannya memperolok-olokkan doktrin dan amalan agama lain.

Beliau juga dikait rapat dengan pandangan ekstrim dan sikap tidak bertolak ansur terhadap hak kebebasan beragama. Oleh sebab itu beliau dilarang berdakwah di Britain, Kanada, Singapura, India dan Pakistan.

Dr Zakir Naik gemar berbahas namun hanya dengan orang-orang beliau dan yayasan privetnya luluskan.

Terdapat juga dakwaan yang menyatakan beliau tidak akan berbahas dengan para cendekiawan dari agama lain. Beliau mengelak perdebatan serius dengan para cendekiawan yang termuka di peringkat antarabangsa dengan meletakkan syaratnya sendiri.

Dengan meletakkan syarat berbahas hanya dalam sekitaran yang menjadi pilihan beliau, Dr Zakir Naik jelas menunjukkan sikap pendakwah yang mahu diberikan sorakan gemuruh oleh hadirin supaya dapat menutup mulut lawannya.

Kami juga bimbang komen-komen negatif Dr Zakir Naik terhadap agama lain akan membuat para ulama kita di Malaysia semakin berani mencontohi sikap tidak bertolak ansur beliau.

Respons yang kami pantau dari kumpulan-kumpulan perbicangan menunjukkan golongan bukan Muslim berasa cemas dengan trend baru di mana para cendekiawan agama seolah-olah kebal dan boleh menyuarakan pendapat sesuka hati tanpa menimbangkan perasaan mereka yang dari agama lain.

Sikap Dr Zakir Naik terhadap agama tiada tempat dalam dunia sekarang dan boleh mencetuskan bahaya sosial yang serius di negara yang berbilang kaum dan sekular seperti Malaysia.

Ia juga membimbangkan apabila kami mendapat tahu Dr Zakir Naik dapat memperolehi status sebagai Penduduk Tetap dari Kementerian Ehwal Dalam Negeri tanpa diketahui oleh orang ramai sama ada beliau sudah memenuhi kriteria dan kelayakan ketat seperti yang dikenakan ke atas pemohon lain.

Tentunya ratusan ribu kanak-kanak di Malaysia yang tidak mempunyai kerakyatan perlu mengetahuinya.

Selain itu, jika pengecualian diberikan ke atas Dr Zakir Naik, maka penjelasannya perlu didedahkan.

Akhirnya, pihak berkuasa Malaysia tidak sepatutnya dilihat sebagai memperjuangkan hak seseorang individu yang mempunyai reputasi sedemikian dan kami menggesa mereka supaya mengambil langkah berjaga-jaga.

Sekiranya Malaysia digesa untuk bekerjasama dalam menangani pelampau agama yang berbahaya, kami menggalak supaya kerajaan melakukannya.

Source: http://berita.mediacorp.sg

May 12, 2017