Seringkali upacara persandingan yang kini dibuat oleh orang Melayu Islam ini menemui halangan dan kritikan sesetengah orang alim seperti ustaz dan ustazah. Ustazah yang mengajar saya moral di Unisel telah mengatakan persandingan adalah haram secara mentah-mentah. Pada pendapat beliau, persandingan ini sememangnya banyak mempunyai surah yang bercanggah dengannya contohnya bab hiasan inai di jari. Cuma masyarakat Melayu kini mengikut norma masyarakat dan tidak pernah berfikir dan mengkaji tentang ini. Baiklah, walaupun saya ni bukan seorang Melayu apatah lagi muslim, tapi saya mahu mencoret sedikit kata mengenai persandingan dengan bantuan surah dan pendapat orang lain.
Adat atau Agama?
Persandingan itu adalah upacara yang masih keliru lagi pengasasnya. Ada teori yang mengatakan upacara persandingan ini datang dari budaya raja-raja Melayu yang dahulu dengan bukti istilah 'raja sehari'. Ini merupakan pendapat H.M. Sidin dalam kajian Adat Resam Melayu. Rata-rata website yang memplagiat (copy paste) idea ini, padahal sumber sebenar saya tidak dapat jumpai. Teori kedua pula mengatakan bahawa ini datang dari budaya india, atau lebih spesifiknya berasal dari agama Hindu (De Jong, Religions in the Malay Archipelago). Saya ingin menyoal anda yang Melayu ini, jikalau budaya persandingan ini masih diragui samada datang dari budaya atau agama, tidakkah kamu meragui benda yang kamu buat ni? Jika anda sememangnya meragui, halal lagi ke benda yang kamu buat ni?
Kritikan Terhadap Upacara Persandingan
Saya ni sebenarnya tidak pernah bersanding, jadi saya hanya bersumberkan prosedur persandingan melalui orang Melayu yang pernah bersanding sahaja. Saya difahamkan bahawa antara prosedur persandingan adalah pembacaan jampi mantera oleh bomoh (bukan doa, tapi jampi). Komen saya terhadap ini: "Secara logiknya, biasanya majlis akan dimulai dengan bacaan doa, betulkah persandingan ni ada bomoh main baca jampi?"
Selain itu, ada juga prosedur menabur beras kunyit. Mengikut origin prosedur ini, beras kunyit ditabur untuk memuja semangat padi agar menghalau semangat jahat. Wow, sudah obvious ini syirik. Baca surah ini: "Yunus: 107". Kawan saya yang seorang ni pernah berdebat dengan saya tentang ini. Katanya: "Ala, ustaz aku pun ada gak buat macam tu. (Menaikkan kening seolah memberitahu saya "ko tau apa? Ustaz aku pun buat macam ni!")" Saya tidak mendapat jawapan yang clear dari penyataannya, jadi kemudian setelah saya bertanya pendapat orang lain, mereka berkata niat untuk berbuat itu adalah lain. Mereka kini menabur beras dengan tujuan simbolik untuk mencerminkan "adat" mereka (masih tidak terjawab lagi samada persandingan itu adat atau agama). Pendapat saya tentang ini adalah: "Muslim digalakkan untuk mengetahui segala benda yang dibuat mereka, agar tidak tertipu dengan helah-helah orang kafir. Saya rasa pernyataan ini sudah menjelaskan segalanya. Tetapi tolonglah berikan pendapat anda."
Main Dengan Tatu
Satu-satunya benda yang paling saya ingat mengenai persandingan adalah tatu mereka yang disapu ke atas tangan pengantin perempuan. Menurut hadis HR Muslim-Muslim dari Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud, "Tuhan melaknat wanita yang menaruh warna dan mencucuk tangan, menghilangkan kening dan mengikir gigi kerana mengubah kejadianNya". Ini bukan lagi setakat bercerita tentang sembahyang tidak diterima, malah jika para wanita memakai tatu-tatu sebegini akan berdosa sekiranya dilihat orang lain.
Dengar cerita seorang ustazah jika tatu itu berbentuk 'pelik-pelik', maka ia adalah haram. Tetapi jika ia berbentuk organik dan tumbuhan, ia boleh dilakukan. Beliau tidak menyatakan dari mana datangnya sumber itu, jadi saya perlukan penjelasan.
Berhias untuk dipamerkan atau dikenali sebagai tabarruj, disifatkan sebagai pengulangan semula perbuatan Zaman Jahiliah (Al-Ahzab: 33). Jelaskan kalau boleh.
Amalan Boros
Biasanya saya tengok bila 'superstar Melayu' bersanding, bapa saya pun boleh pergi makan free. Saya tahu lah dia kaya. Suara sedap, 'penganut' ramai. Tapi mereka ni sebagai muslim perlu tahu, bahawa 'Islam mencela amalan yang boros' (hasil plagiat) yang boleh dijumpai dalam surah (al-Isra': 26).
Kenduri kahwin ini adalah sunat dan tidak wajib, tetapi walaupun diadakan, hanya sahabat dan saudara terdekat sahaja yang perlu dijemput. Mengikut sabda Nabi Muhammad: " "Adakanlah kenduri kahwin walaupun hanya dengan seekor kambing."
Mas Kahwin Dan Material
Hadiah dan mas kahwin dijadikan sebagai satu kemestian, walaupun kamu bagi mas kahwin sikit pun, kamu tetap kena cakap belakang. Tidak apa, itu persepsi, bukan budaya.
Ayat ni saya suka :"Wanita yang paling berkat ialah wanita yang paling murah hantarannya." (HR Ahmad, al-Hakim dan Baihaqi)
Akhir kata
Saya perlukan pendapat anda kerana bab persandingan sememangnya bukan bidang saya, yang saya boleh bagi hanyalah pendapat. Ini kerana saya tidak banyak menjumpai sumber lain selain dari artikel Tuan Hassan Tuan Lah, "Bersanding dalam Pandangan Islam". Yang blogger lain pula sibuk copy paste artikel itu tanpa pendapat mereka sendiri. Macam mana nak selesai masalah? Diharap kamu sebagai pembaca dapat menyumbangkan saya fakta dan pendapat kamu terhadap topik ini.
Jul 19, 2009
Jul 16, 2009
Freethinker. Jahat Sangat Ke?
Seringkali saya melihat freethinker dicaci dan dimaki oleh orang yang kuat agama. Setahu saya, freethinker ini adalah orang yang menerima semua ajaran agama dan mengkaji agama tanpa prejudis atau kepentingan diri. Bagi orang yang kuat agama pula, freethinker ini adalah orang yang suka menyekutukan Tuhan dari semua agama. Saya ingin bertanya kepada sang kuat agama ini, "mana lagi kamu suka, orang yang menerima semua agama ataupun orang yang menerima agama sendiri sahaja dan tidak menerima agama lain?" Di sini lah terserlahnya prejudis dan kejulingan sang agama ini. Saya ingin menekankan bahawa ajaran Hindu dan Buddha tentang kitaran karma ini bukanlah sekadar cakap kosong sahaja. Kalau kamu tidak menerima pandangan orang lain, mereka pun tidak akan terima pandangan kamu.
Betulkah freethinker ini betul betul jahat? Bagi saya, seorang freethinker ini boleh menyambut Hari Krismas dan pada masa yang sama membuat senaman Yoga. Saya tidak berani menggelar diri saya sebagai seorang freethinker kerana saya ini tidak suka melabel orang 'believer' atau 'non-believer'. Saya juga pernah disakat oleh kawan-kawan saya yang agak kuat agama ini dengan mengatakan bahawa freethinker ini fikirannya tidak betul. Adakah mereka ini bebal atau apa? Saya ini penganut agama Buddha, dan Buddha sering mengajar penganutnya untuk menghormati dan menerima agama orang lain, apa yang pentingnya, setiap agama mengajarkan kebaikan kepada penganutnya. Dengan melawan agama lain, kita juga sedang melawan ajaran agama sendiri iaitu iaitu moral dan kebaikan. Freethinking ini boleh dikatakan sebagai satu ajaran daripada Hindu dan Buddha. Adakah mereka ini sedar yang mereka sedang menghina agama saya?
Saya juga yakin bahawa freethinker ini lebih baik daripada seorang yang degil dan suka memburukkan agama yang bukan dianutinya. Saya sudah bertemu golongan yang suka memburukkan agama orang lain ini, mereka gemar mencari ayat ayat dalam sesebuah kitab dan mentafsirkannya ikut suka sendiri. Ayat yang baik juga boleh ditukarkan menjadikannya buruk mengikut pilih kasih pembacanya. Ada orang pernah mengatakan bahawa freethinker ini merupakan orang yang menghadam semua benda yang dimakannya tanpa mengetahui apakah itu. Maksudnya begini, freethinker ini biasanya telan saja semua sampah yang disalurkan oleh agama yang palsu tanpa mengetahui agama mana satu yang benar dan suci dan murni dan sebagainya. Apa kata saya mengatakan bahawa freethinker ini adalah seorang hakim yang menilai dan menghayati semua kebaikan yang diajarkan oleh semua agama dengan adil dan memerhatikan moraliti penganutnya? Tidakkah ini lebih tepat?
Saya ini seorang manusia yang bukan senang tersinggung, tetapi jika saya ini seorang yang panas baran memang sudah berperang dah saya! Seorang pengkritik blog (saya tidak mahu menyatakan agama apa yang dia anuti) saya pernah berkata bahawa dia perlu buat sesuatu untuk menyedarkan saya tentang kebenaran agama *** agar saya dapat meneruskan 'hidup' saya. Dia meletakkan apostrophe kat ayat 'hidup', apakah maksudnya? Adakah hidup saya ini hidup seekor binatang kerana saya tidak menganuti agama mereka? Dan saya sememangnya benci manusia yang mengatakan bahawa menganuti agama mereka adalah cara hidup yang bermakna manakala agama lain itu sampah. Percaya atau tidak, hidup tanpa rasa ketakutan dan kebencian adalah cara hidup yang PALING baik. Hidup tanpa menyibukkan diri mencari kesalahan agama yang lain adalah jalan hidup yang paling sempurna dan aman damai.
Media ni memang alat yang paling sesuai menyebarkan propaganda, sebab itulah kamu senang percaya yang freethinker ini jahat dan menyesatkan. Tu lah, baca banyak sangat Mastika tanpa mengetahui masalah sebenar yang sedang melanda dunia. Jangan cuba nak berhujah, "ala, dunia dah nak kiamat dah, apa boleh buat!". Itu adalah tindakan yang malas dan alpa. Sedarkah kamu, orang seperti ini lah punca pengakhiran zaman? Pernah ke kamu dengar ada berita tentang seorang freethinker membuat genocide? Genocide ini biasanya dilakukan oleh pemimpin negara yang taksub agama sahaja. Cuba belajar sejarah. Pernah ke kamu dengar tentang seorang pemimpin yang menerima semua ajaran agama ini menghantar askar ke negara lain tanpa alasan yang kukuh? Aduh, sedarlah kawan-kawanku, masalah yang remeh tak perlu diheboh, baik fokus kat masalah yang lebih besar. Freethinking ini walaupun ada bercanggah dengan sesetengah agama, tapi ia tak seteruk kejadian pengganas yang ada di mana mana sahaja negara, janganlah jadi bodoh!
P.S: Agama yang mengajar kebaikan tapi tak diamalkan kebanyakan penganutnya memang saya takkan layan dakwah mereka.
Betulkah freethinker ini betul betul jahat? Bagi saya, seorang freethinker ini boleh menyambut Hari Krismas dan pada masa yang sama membuat senaman Yoga. Saya tidak berani menggelar diri saya sebagai seorang freethinker kerana saya ini tidak suka melabel orang 'believer' atau 'non-believer'. Saya juga pernah disakat oleh kawan-kawan saya yang agak kuat agama ini dengan mengatakan bahawa freethinker ini fikirannya tidak betul. Adakah mereka ini bebal atau apa? Saya ini penganut agama Buddha, dan Buddha sering mengajar penganutnya untuk menghormati dan menerima agama orang lain, apa yang pentingnya, setiap agama mengajarkan kebaikan kepada penganutnya. Dengan melawan agama lain, kita juga sedang melawan ajaran agama sendiri iaitu iaitu moral dan kebaikan. Freethinking ini boleh dikatakan sebagai satu ajaran daripada Hindu dan Buddha. Adakah mereka ini sedar yang mereka sedang menghina agama saya?
Saya juga yakin bahawa freethinker ini lebih baik daripada seorang yang degil dan suka memburukkan agama yang bukan dianutinya. Saya sudah bertemu golongan yang suka memburukkan agama orang lain ini, mereka gemar mencari ayat ayat dalam sesebuah kitab dan mentafsirkannya ikut suka sendiri. Ayat yang baik juga boleh ditukarkan menjadikannya buruk mengikut pilih kasih pembacanya. Ada orang pernah mengatakan bahawa freethinker ini merupakan orang yang menghadam semua benda yang dimakannya tanpa mengetahui apakah itu. Maksudnya begini, freethinker ini biasanya telan saja semua sampah yang disalurkan oleh agama yang palsu tanpa mengetahui agama mana satu yang benar dan suci dan murni dan sebagainya. Apa kata saya mengatakan bahawa freethinker ini adalah seorang hakim yang menilai dan menghayati semua kebaikan yang diajarkan oleh semua agama dengan adil dan memerhatikan moraliti penganutnya? Tidakkah ini lebih tepat?
Saya ini seorang manusia yang bukan senang tersinggung, tetapi jika saya ini seorang yang panas baran memang sudah berperang dah saya! Seorang pengkritik blog (saya tidak mahu menyatakan agama apa yang dia anuti) saya pernah berkata bahawa dia perlu buat sesuatu untuk menyedarkan saya tentang kebenaran agama *** agar saya dapat meneruskan 'hidup' saya. Dia meletakkan apostrophe kat ayat 'hidup', apakah maksudnya? Adakah hidup saya ini hidup seekor binatang kerana saya tidak menganuti agama mereka? Dan saya sememangnya benci manusia yang mengatakan bahawa menganuti agama mereka adalah cara hidup yang bermakna manakala agama lain itu sampah. Percaya atau tidak, hidup tanpa rasa ketakutan dan kebencian adalah cara hidup yang PALING baik. Hidup tanpa menyibukkan diri mencari kesalahan agama yang lain adalah jalan hidup yang paling sempurna dan aman damai.
Media ni memang alat yang paling sesuai menyebarkan propaganda, sebab itulah kamu senang percaya yang freethinker ini jahat dan menyesatkan. Tu lah, baca banyak sangat Mastika tanpa mengetahui masalah sebenar yang sedang melanda dunia. Jangan cuba nak berhujah, "ala, dunia dah nak kiamat dah, apa boleh buat!". Itu adalah tindakan yang malas dan alpa. Sedarkah kamu, orang seperti ini lah punca pengakhiran zaman? Pernah ke kamu dengar ada berita tentang seorang freethinker membuat genocide? Genocide ini biasanya dilakukan oleh pemimpin negara yang taksub agama sahaja. Cuba belajar sejarah. Pernah ke kamu dengar tentang seorang pemimpin yang menerima semua ajaran agama ini menghantar askar ke negara lain tanpa alasan yang kukuh? Aduh, sedarlah kawan-kawanku, masalah yang remeh tak perlu diheboh, baik fokus kat masalah yang lebih besar. Freethinking ini walaupun ada bercanggah dengan sesetengah agama, tapi ia tak seteruk kejadian pengganas yang ada di mana mana sahaja negara, janganlah jadi bodoh!
P.S: Agama yang mengajar kebaikan tapi tak diamalkan kebanyakan penganutnya memang saya takkan layan dakwah mereka.
Jun 8, 2009
Of Race and Religion
We have to admit that this world we are living in have reached modernisation. Unlike in the past, tribal thinking has been fully abolished in most political systems. But how sure are we? How can we secure that our thinking is racially and religiously united? We are still in tribes, living in concrete buildings, giving only to those of our race and religion.
It is quite often when someone of my family asked me where I'm studying, they will ask me how many chinese are there. What do they mean by that? Why do I need Chinese people to study with me in my University? They won't affect my studies at all. Is it so awkward for me to mix with my Malay, Indian, Sabahan and Sarawakian friends there? How different are they to not be friends with me? I'm dissappointed by the fact that my family member will sigh when I say Chinese people is not of majority in my university.
I'm not talking about racism here. I'm only talking about human's tribal thinking to mix with people only with their same faith and race. Ever wondered why extremism of religion is such a big issue in this world? Because of this kind of thinking. On second thought, if those extremists have friends from other races and religion, would they have the heart to kill innocent people that doesn't share the same faith? I'm even labeled as an Indian and Malay once for not eating beef and pork. It is my diet planning, who are others to interfere what I chose to eat and not to eat?
Things could get funnier when me and my friends were divided between Chinese, Malay, Indian and etc during the first week of my orientation week. So I sat with a bunch of Chinese students and knew each other. The only thing that pissed me off is that a Chinese facilitator said to us, "we Chinese are critically outnumbered in this university, because of this, we have to guard our tongues so that we won't insult other races." At first, it was meant to promote racial unity. On second interpretation, the facilatator meant that, "we are outnumbered, so don't pick any fight with other races unless we are the majority." I wished it was a misquote. By the way, what do the authorities mean when they divided the students according to their races?
Honestly, I enjoyed going to holy places of every religion. My mother even said that I'm out of my mind for entering a mosque. So far, I've been to Buddhist temple, Hindu Temple and mosque. I am looking forward to go to church someday. Churches are so outnumbered in my area. Is that so sinful to celebrate something not of our culture? Why is it so wrong if I fast with my friends just to know the feel of Puasa? Why is it so wrong if I proposed an idea to celebrate Christmas with my family? Why is it so wrong for me to keep a copy of translated Bible and Quran in my room?
Life's too short to know only one culture. My effort and goal is to break the barriers of race among us, Malaysians. Isn't it fate if we could live together in a country unlike most other countries? Isn't it advantageous for every race to contribute they share of talents to develop our country? So, why are we still sitting with our own races when we are having lunch in a restaurant? Why don't we sit together? Before I forget, if I should marry a girl not of my own race, so be it. I won't be restricted by tribal thoughts of others.
It is quite often when someone of my family asked me where I'm studying, they will ask me how many chinese are there. What do they mean by that? Why do I need Chinese people to study with me in my University? They won't affect my studies at all. Is it so awkward for me to mix with my Malay, Indian, Sabahan and Sarawakian friends there? How different are they to not be friends with me? I'm dissappointed by the fact that my family member will sigh when I say Chinese people is not of majority in my university.
I'm not talking about racism here. I'm only talking about human's tribal thinking to mix with people only with their same faith and race. Ever wondered why extremism of religion is such a big issue in this world? Because of this kind of thinking. On second thought, if those extremists have friends from other races and religion, would they have the heart to kill innocent people that doesn't share the same faith? I'm even labeled as an Indian and Malay once for not eating beef and pork. It is my diet planning, who are others to interfere what I chose to eat and not to eat?
Things could get funnier when me and my friends were divided between Chinese, Malay, Indian and etc during the first week of my orientation week. So I sat with a bunch of Chinese students and knew each other. The only thing that pissed me off is that a Chinese facilitator said to us, "we Chinese are critically outnumbered in this university, because of this, we have to guard our tongues so that we won't insult other races." At first, it was meant to promote racial unity. On second interpretation, the facilatator meant that, "we are outnumbered, so don't pick any fight with other races unless we are the majority." I wished it was a misquote. By the way, what do the authorities mean when they divided the students according to their races?
Honestly, I enjoyed going to holy places of every religion. My mother even said that I'm out of my mind for entering a mosque. So far, I've been to Buddhist temple, Hindu Temple and mosque. I am looking forward to go to church someday. Churches are so outnumbered in my area. Is that so sinful to celebrate something not of our culture? Why is it so wrong if I fast with my friends just to know the feel of Puasa? Why is it so wrong if I proposed an idea to celebrate Christmas with my family? Why is it so wrong for me to keep a copy of translated Bible and Quran in my room?
Life's too short to know only one culture. My effort and goal is to break the barriers of race among us, Malaysians. Isn't it fate if we could live together in a country unlike most other countries? Isn't it advantageous for every race to contribute they share of talents to develop our country? So, why are we still sitting with our own races when we are having lunch in a restaurant? Why don't we sit together? Before I forget, if I should marry a girl not of my own race, so be it. I won't be restricted by tribal thoughts of others.
Dec 30, 2008
Ways For Muslims To Counter Insults.
It's hard to understand, but muslims often encountered insults and lots of mistreatment. More than people from other religion. It's actually a psychological matter. When people knows that muslims are being over-protective, they tend to provoke them more.
Indeed, this is provocative. Often, in youtube or other blog sites, muslims uses curse word and obscene languages to stop the writer or poster from posting their idea. Of course, this type of person is not limited to only muslims. Even Buddhists would curse. It's human temptation to curse or to boycott.
"whorehouse, there is no difference between Christians, Catholics, or Hindus, all of you worship the creation instead of the Creator."
"joe, asshole, if you say anything about Islam or prophet Muhammad pbuh without posting evidence from the Quran or Sunnah, I will block you, I already deleted one of your comments, next time I block you."
"Fuck off"
"wat are u a hindu ? You still follow the caste system. are u an untouchable ? Call your dad a moron for not teaching you morals. "
Indeed, this is provocative. Often, in youtube or other blog sites, muslims uses curse word and obscene languages to stop the writer or poster from posting their idea. Of course, this type of person is not limited to only muslims. Even Buddhists would curse. It's human temptation to curse or to boycott.
"whorehouse, there is no difference between Christians, Catholics, or Hindus, all of you worship the creation instead of the Creator."
"joe, asshole, if you say anything about Islam or prophet Muhammad pbuh without posting evidence from the Quran or Sunnah, I will block you, I already deleted one of your comments, next time I block you."
"Fuck off"
"wat are u a hindu ? You still follow the caste system. are u an untouchable ? Call your dad a moron for not teaching you morals. "
"Islam and Buddhism", Answering Harun Yahya
I've read about Harun Yahya's book entitled 'Islam and Buddhism'. In this book, I find many incorrect things he mentioned about Buddhism in his way to preach the truth of Islam. I decided to answer his claims about Buddhism Chapter by Chapter. It is best if you own the book too. So that you can refer and make sure I'm not taking anything out of context.
Buddhism: An Idolatrous Religion?
Idolatrous. From the topic that I've read in Harun Yahya's book 'Islam & Buddhism', I have already know that he haven't know about Buddhism yet. Idolatrous. He included Buddha's history in this book, why don't he list out every actions Buddha made? I look upon this as unfair. This is untrue of Buddhism. Buddha lived in an age where hierachical Hindu ruled India. Buddha denied idol worshipping. He was born a Hindu, but he denied the way that people in India worshipped idols. If Buddha denied idol worshipping, why would Harun Yahya say Buddhism is an 'idolatrous' and 'superstitious' religion? By the way, in which basis does he said Buddhism was superstitous? Buddhism is an agnostic religion, which focused more on self and not worship. How superstitious is that?
Those 'idols' Harun shown in his book aren't actually idols. They are not prayed at. Putting hands together and kneeling in front of the statues is simply a form of respect. To clarify this, Buddha once said that he is not a supreme being and does not deserve worship. Right before he died. You may search that up on Yahoo. For further clarification, if we can put flowers and ornaments on the statue of a politician or on the floor when we mourn the death of our loved ones (like in the aftermath of WTC bombing), why not kneeling in front of a statue of person whose opinion brought benefit to the world? Maybe people from other religion say that kneeling in front of something means worshipping, but different cultures mean different things. In India, citizens used to kneel in front of the king. That doesn't mean worship in India. On the other hand, citizens kneel in front of Pharaoh and call him God. This is why religion from that region of area forbids people kneeling in front other beings. Cultural differences could bring forth religion misunderstandings too.
Buddhism's Erroneous Belief?
Harun Yahya had said in his book that Buddha preaches orally and do not write texts. In Buddhism, whether if the text or word passed down on generation, it doesn't matter. Because it is not a word of God. Buddha himself clarified that. So he can't call Buddha a liar. Because Buddha did not claim himself as God or whatsoever.
Later in this chapter, Harun Yahya contradicts himself with an article saying Buddhism is an atheistic religion. Even though it's an atheistic religion, he said, Buddhism believes in life after death without intellect or scientific support. Well, this is funny, I saw a research on a group of psychiatric performing a research on hypnotising a patient to know their previous life. Their result was astounding. I do not dare to say that it was true because it might be the Devil's work.... I don't know.
Harun Yahya said that Karma applies on Buddhists only. I reject that opinion because Karma is not about a human reincarnates as rat. It's simply about 'what you sow is what you reap'. This is a concept. So people can expand this 'Wheel of Karma' as big as they wanted. Just as how people portray their Heaven to be, whether it is symbolic or not. (To clarify, whether 'the flow of honey river' is really in heaven or just a symbolic portrayal of Heaven, which Muslim scholars are still debating about)
An Oppresive, Enslaving Religion?
Harun said in this article that a Buddhist attempt to nullify all human desires is another aspect of its narrow philosophy. Checkmate, you might think? Nope, Castling. Because I believe Islam urges its followers to eliminate nafsu (desires) as a way to get closer to God too. Narrow philosophy? I'd be careful to use that word, especially if it might insult a religion I loved very much. Harun said that Buddha restricted his followers from wondering about how life came into being. However, he has not proven why Buddhists keep themselves from asking questions like where they're from, how the universe and living things came to be. Can he be so sure that Buddha RESTRICTED his follower from wondering? If so, what is he doing under the Bodhi tree if not finding the Cause of All Things? Then why does Buddha said that it is okay for a Buddhist to convert to other religion? There is usually only one Castling is allowed in a Chess game, but in this case, it's already two. He compared Buddhism with Islam, saying that Islam does not suppress its follower's desires or to endure pain and suffering. Inversely, he meant that Buddhism teaches its followers to hunger themselves and make themselves suffer. Is that true? In Buddhism, it is free for its followers to choose to be a monk or a nun. Buddhists can have families, have sex, and child as long as it is not abusive. Being a monk or a nun that begs for food and money have its own morality too. It provokes charity and kindness. It is quite the same as paying Zakat, only it is by choice. Monks and nun used a part of the charity to share with the orphans and open up a cheap vegetarian food outlet (in Malaysia, with RM 2, you get a big bowl of rice and vegetables, I've been there once). And the profit of their sale on vegetarian food will be donated to the Buddhist Temple or orphanage. This is the Buddhist society. And those charities is not limited to only Buddhists, it is applied to every person from every religion. In Malaysia, there are also such society. I've been to their society no less than a month ago.
Buddhists even open up a free clinic to treat everyone who can't afford medical treatments without charging money. And from who do you think those money came from? I've been to the clinic. There are Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists doing their medical checkup over there. Buddhism does not promote suffering as a way of truth, but telling his followers the truth that desires can bring forth suffering. I believe my muslim friends agree with this too. Buddhist monks are jobless, you might say... But Buddhist monks do have a job that is very righteous which is to bring life to other poor beings. This practises has already been portrayed by Buddha himself.
It amused me though, when Harun once again contradicts himself by saying Buddhism is a Pagan religion which worships idol later in the chapter. I'll stay silent on this matter because I believe I have already mentioned it.
Creation of idols in Japan such as Avalokiteshvara, is practised by only a few Chinese and Japanese people. The idol is clearly the portrayal of their culture. Bear in mind that Japanese religion is called Shintoisme, not Buddhism. Personally, I think Harun Yahya himself laid an 'attack' on Buddhism because he watched the comedy series 'Journey To The West'. Its all fiction. Even the directors mentioned that. They are no monkey god or a pig god. Besides, they portrayed Buddha with Chinese cultures. Buddha is from India.
End word.
I would like to apologize to my muslim brothers and sister if I offended you. If you think there is a phrase which offended you, please do tell me so that I could rephrase that sentence. By writing this blog, I am not trying to say which religion is false or right. What I am trying to point out here is the injustice and unjust way Mr. Harun Yahya used to preach Islam. Islam and Buddhism has been both my favourite religion that I most enjoyed studying. Harun Yahya have so much to contradict in this book. There's one muslim scholar named Zakir Naik mentioned about Buddha in his preaching, and I find it most harmony and a true way to bring forth the religion of Islam towards the non-muslims. You should search for Zakir Naik in youtube if you have never heard of him. He is one of my most respectable person after Prophet Muhammad, Buddha, and Jesus Christ. However,Harun Yahya had really done a good job in answering atheists' query on the Theory of Evolution. Kudos. He succeeded in putting many people back in the path of faith.
Buddhism: An Idolatrous Religion?
Idolatrous. From the topic that I've read in Harun Yahya's book 'Islam & Buddhism', I have already know that he haven't know about Buddhism yet. Idolatrous. He included Buddha's history in this book, why don't he list out every actions Buddha made? I look upon this as unfair. This is untrue of Buddhism. Buddha lived in an age where hierachical Hindu ruled India. Buddha denied idol worshipping. He was born a Hindu, but he denied the way that people in India worshipped idols. If Buddha denied idol worshipping, why would Harun Yahya say Buddhism is an 'idolatrous' and 'superstitious' religion? By the way, in which basis does he said Buddhism was superstitous? Buddhism is an agnostic religion, which focused more on self and not worship. How superstitious is that?
Those 'idols' Harun shown in his book aren't actually idols. They are not prayed at. Putting hands together and kneeling in front of the statues is simply a form of respect. To clarify this, Buddha once said that he is not a supreme being and does not deserve worship. Right before he died. You may search that up on Yahoo. For further clarification, if we can put flowers and ornaments on the statue of a politician or on the floor when we mourn the death of our loved ones (like in the aftermath of WTC bombing), why not kneeling in front of a statue of person whose opinion brought benefit to the world? Maybe people from other religion say that kneeling in front of something means worshipping, but different cultures mean different things. In India, citizens used to kneel in front of the king. That doesn't mean worship in India. On the other hand, citizens kneel in front of Pharaoh and call him God. This is why religion from that region of area forbids people kneeling in front other beings. Cultural differences could bring forth religion misunderstandings too.
Buddhism's Erroneous Belief?
Harun Yahya had said in his book that Buddha preaches orally and do not write texts. In Buddhism, whether if the text or word passed down on generation, it doesn't matter. Because it is not a word of God. Buddha himself clarified that. So he can't call Buddha a liar. Because Buddha did not claim himself as God or whatsoever.
Later in this chapter, Harun Yahya contradicts himself with an article saying Buddhism is an atheistic religion. Even though it's an atheistic religion, he said, Buddhism believes in life after death without intellect or scientific support. Well, this is funny, I saw a research on a group of psychiatric performing a research on hypnotising a patient to know their previous life. Their result was astounding. I do not dare to say that it was true because it might be the Devil's work.... I don't know.
Harun Yahya said that Karma applies on Buddhists only. I reject that opinion because Karma is not about a human reincarnates as rat. It's simply about 'what you sow is what you reap'. This is a concept. So people can expand this 'Wheel of Karma' as big as they wanted. Just as how people portray their Heaven to be, whether it is symbolic or not. (To clarify, whether 'the flow of honey river' is really in heaven or just a symbolic portrayal of Heaven, which Muslim scholars are still debating about)
An Oppresive, Enslaving Religion?
Harun said in this article that a Buddhist attempt to nullify all human desires is another aspect of its narrow philosophy. Checkmate, you might think? Nope, Castling. Because I believe Islam urges its followers to eliminate nafsu (desires) as a way to get closer to God too. Narrow philosophy? I'd be careful to use that word, especially if it might insult a religion I loved very much. Harun said that Buddha restricted his followers from wondering about how life came into being. However, he has not proven why Buddhists keep themselves from asking questions like where they're from, how the universe and living things came to be. Can he be so sure that Buddha RESTRICTED his follower from wondering? If so, what is he doing under the Bodhi tree if not finding the Cause of All Things? Then why does Buddha said that it is okay for a Buddhist to convert to other religion? There is usually only one Castling is allowed in a Chess game, but in this case, it's already two. He compared Buddhism with Islam, saying that Islam does not suppress its follower's desires or to endure pain and suffering. Inversely, he meant that Buddhism teaches its followers to hunger themselves and make themselves suffer. Is that true? In Buddhism, it is free for its followers to choose to be a monk or a nun. Buddhists can have families, have sex, and child as long as it is not abusive. Being a monk or a nun that begs for food and money have its own morality too. It provokes charity and kindness. It is quite the same as paying Zakat, only it is by choice. Monks and nun used a part of the charity to share with the orphans and open up a cheap vegetarian food outlet (in Malaysia, with RM 2, you get a big bowl of rice and vegetables, I've been there once). And the profit of their sale on vegetarian food will be donated to the Buddhist Temple or orphanage. This is the Buddhist society. And those charities is not limited to only Buddhists, it is applied to every person from every religion. In Malaysia, there are also such society. I've been to their society no less than a month ago.
Buddhists even open up a free clinic to treat everyone who can't afford medical treatments without charging money. And from who do you think those money came from? I've been to the clinic. There are Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists doing their medical checkup over there. Buddhism does not promote suffering as a way of truth, but telling his followers the truth that desires can bring forth suffering. I believe my muslim friends agree with this too. Buddhist monks are jobless, you might say... But Buddhist monks do have a job that is very righteous which is to bring life to other poor beings. This practises has already been portrayed by Buddha himself.
It amused me though, when Harun once again contradicts himself by saying Buddhism is a Pagan religion which worships idol later in the chapter. I'll stay silent on this matter because I believe I have already mentioned it.
Creation of idols in Japan such as Avalokiteshvara, is practised by only a few Chinese and Japanese people. The idol is clearly the portrayal of their culture. Bear in mind that Japanese religion is called Shintoisme, not Buddhism. Personally, I think Harun Yahya himself laid an 'attack' on Buddhism because he watched the comedy series 'Journey To The West'. Its all fiction. Even the directors mentioned that. They are no monkey god or a pig god. Besides, they portrayed Buddha with Chinese cultures. Buddha is from India.
End word.
I would like to apologize to my muslim brothers and sister if I offended you. If you think there is a phrase which offended you, please do tell me so that I could rephrase that sentence. By writing this blog, I am not trying to say which religion is false or right. What I am trying to point out here is the injustice and unjust way Mr. Harun Yahya used to preach Islam. Islam and Buddhism has been both my favourite religion that I most enjoyed studying. Harun Yahya have so much to contradict in this book. There's one muslim scholar named Zakir Naik mentioned about Buddha in his preaching, and I find it most harmony and a true way to bring forth the religion of Islam towards the non-muslims. You should search for Zakir Naik in youtube if you have never heard of him. He is one of my most respectable person after Prophet Muhammad, Buddha, and Jesus Christ. However,Harun Yahya had really done a good job in answering atheists' query on the Theory of Evolution. Kudos. He succeeded in putting many people back in the path of faith.
Dec 23, 2008
Meaning of Life. (Concluded)
One night when I was alone, I was lying in my bed. I had been thinking of my bed for a long time when I was in my university hostel. At last, I got my hard-earned nap. But then, I started thinking of nonsense things-matters that I have never think of before- and began asking myself questions. Why do I draw breath? What is life? Does our meaningfulness of life determined by religion?
I just couldn't sleep that night, thinking about life. Pretty silly, you might say. But yeah, I started to wonder whether I appreciated my life or not. I have few friends that said that I never appreciated my life (I understand, because they are trying to preach their religion), and so I started to wonder. After I have started my religion studies, I begin to think critically and started to concern about life. In fact, every religion tell its followers to appreciate life. Buddha often teaches his followers that desires can destroy the happiness and joy of life. I agree with this very much, and I admit that I have many worldly things that I wished to possess. Remembering my family's past, it makes me wonder how can they be very happy with their lives when they were struck by poverty. They ate tree bark for lunch and sometimes, if they are lucky enough, have potatoes for dinner. Yet they do not complain. Now, if I gave my aunt potatoes for her birthday, she will cry out of joy. She really provoked my thoughts. Personally, I would only accept birthday presents that costs more than RM 10. But my aunt is content with just a bag of potatoes.
Somehow, I always feel like I am lacking of something. I bet most of you feel the same too. The moment I get certain things, like money, I do not have any contentment inside of me. And I am sure that I am not appreciating my life, or things that are happening around me. Trying something that I have never done before, I gave a beggar RM 1 when I was shopping in Sunway Pyramid. I saw the joy in his eyes, thanking me with a wide smile that is not supposed to be on a beggar's face. RM 1. It was unbelievable. With RM 1, I can buy happiness. But yet, I have thousands of Ringgit Malaysia in my account, why am I not content?
This incident inspired me of a story. This story is about a man who went to his friend's house. His friend cooked something and asked the man to try it. "Hm... It lacked of taste." So his friend put a pinch of salt on the food. The second time the man tried the food, he said, "it is marvellous! With just a pinch of salt, it makes a big difference!" Then his friend said something that changed his life forever, "a pinch of salt makes the food tastes the best, but too much salt can ruin everything." This explains a lot to us. Contentment and moderation. This is also why Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) told his followers to practice Islam in a moderate way. Because too much salt can ruin everything.
I have understood what is life by now. It is now the time to practice what I know. At least I am now content with what I have. At least I am walking the right path of morality. If I am happy and content with my own life, who are they to disagree with me? Why should I let my friends dictate my own basis of life? Why should I fight or disagree with their point of view towards my life? This is my own point of view, whether you agree or disagree, it doesn't make any changes to the world. Live life without prejudice. Live life by contributing to the society. Live life by obeying the rules of religion (regardless of any religion).
I have found my own meaning of life, have you found yours?
"If one day you found yourself waking up, looking forward to face your troubles with an open heart; then you have finally appreciated your life." - My own philosophy.
I just couldn't sleep that night, thinking about life. Pretty silly, you might say. But yeah, I started to wonder whether I appreciated my life or not. I have few friends that said that I never appreciated my life (I understand, because they are trying to preach their religion), and so I started to wonder. After I have started my religion studies, I begin to think critically and started to concern about life. In fact, every religion tell its followers to appreciate life. Buddha often teaches his followers that desires can destroy the happiness and joy of life. I agree with this very much, and I admit that I have many worldly things that I wished to possess. Remembering my family's past, it makes me wonder how can they be very happy with their lives when they were struck by poverty. They ate tree bark for lunch and sometimes, if they are lucky enough, have potatoes for dinner. Yet they do not complain. Now, if I gave my aunt potatoes for her birthday, she will cry out of joy. She really provoked my thoughts. Personally, I would only accept birthday presents that costs more than RM 10. But my aunt is content with just a bag of potatoes.
Somehow, I always feel like I am lacking of something. I bet most of you feel the same too. The moment I get certain things, like money, I do not have any contentment inside of me. And I am sure that I am not appreciating my life, or things that are happening around me. Trying something that I have never done before, I gave a beggar RM 1 when I was shopping in Sunway Pyramid. I saw the joy in his eyes, thanking me with a wide smile that is not supposed to be on a beggar's face. RM 1. It was unbelievable. With RM 1, I can buy happiness. But yet, I have thousands of Ringgit Malaysia in my account, why am I not content?
This incident inspired me of a story. This story is about a man who went to his friend's house. His friend cooked something and asked the man to try it. "Hm... It lacked of taste." So his friend put a pinch of salt on the food. The second time the man tried the food, he said, "it is marvellous! With just a pinch of salt, it makes a big difference!" Then his friend said something that changed his life forever, "a pinch of salt makes the food tastes the best, but too much salt can ruin everything." This explains a lot to us. Contentment and moderation. This is also why Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) told his followers to practice Islam in a moderate way. Because too much salt can ruin everything.
I have understood what is life by now. It is now the time to practice what I know. At least I am now content with what I have. At least I am walking the right path of morality. If I am happy and content with my own life, who are they to disagree with me? Why should I let my friends dictate my own basis of life? Why should I fight or disagree with their point of view towards my life? This is my own point of view, whether you agree or disagree, it doesn't make any changes to the world. Live life without prejudice. Live life by contributing to the society. Live life by obeying the rules of religion (regardless of any religion).
I have found my own meaning of life, have you found yours?
"If one day you found yourself waking up, looking forward to face your troubles with an open heart; then you have finally appreciated your life." - My own philosophy.
Sep 20, 2008
ISLAM - A Religion of Terror?
I couldn't seem to remember which politician branded Islam as a religion that promotes terrorism. I simply couldn't agree with his theories. Does the guy who said this even studied History? It's hard to tell. Because terrorism existed a long, long time before the bombing of WTC. By the defintion of the word ''terrorism'', I figure out the meaning of it which sounded like this, '' acts which are intended to create fear based on one or more ideologies''. Let's highlight the word ''ideologies''. Then let us look through the timeline to see which event of ''ideologies'' comes first.
I stumbled across Communism. Isn't it right to say that Communism was an act based on ideology? Isn't it right to say that Communist intended to bring fear? Then why don't we brand Communism is also a ''religion'' that promotes terrorism? That just doesn't seem fair because of an event brought by a group of radical Muslims, Islam is branded as a religion of terror. Religious wars happened centuries ago and yet we do not announce ' The Global War on Terror'. French Wars in 1562 was waged between French Catholics and Protestant and yet I do not see any word of ''terrorism'' etched in the pages of history.
During the First Crusade, the Crusaders issued a policy of terror against Muslims and Jews. Those who died in the war would receive remissions of their sins. Isn't that another act of ''terrorism''? And the worst part? It happened centuries ago before the bombing of WTC. Like what we could find in almost every religions, there will be religious wars. That seems more like a prejudice than the so-called effort to fight terrorism.
And to the Muslims, I know that most of you wouldn't agree that hostility is the way to solve any problem. Even Prophet Muhammad ceases his followers from pillaging and killing unarmed citizens. So far, in every war events that took place, war fought by the Muslims centuries ago doesn't require them to burn down any villages and kill citizens. It is sad to know that few Jihadist claims that purging all kafirs is an act of martyrdom. How could it be called matyrdom if even Prophet Muhammad himself does not kill unarmed people in every wars he fought?
I stumbled across Communism. Isn't it right to say that Communism was an act based on ideology? Isn't it right to say that Communist intended to bring fear? Then why don't we brand Communism is also a ''religion'' that promotes terrorism? That just doesn't seem fair because of an event brought by a group of radical Muslims, Islam is branded as a religion of terror. Religious wars happened centuries ago and yet we do not announce ' The Global War on Terror'. French Wars in 1562 was waged between French Catholics and Protestant and yet I do not see any word of ''terrorism'' etched in the pages of history.
During the First Crusade, the Crusaders issued a policy of terror against Muslims and Jews. Those who died in the war would receive remissions of their sins. Isn't that another act of ''terrorism''? And the worst part? It happened centuries ago before the bombing of WTC. Like what we could find in almost every religions, there will be religious wars. That seems more like a prejudice than the so-called effort to fight terrorism.
And to the Muslims, I know that most of you wouldn't agree that hostility is the way to solve any problem. Even Prophet Muhammad ceases his followers from pillaging and killing unarmed citizens. So far, in every war events that took place, war fought by the Muslims centuries ago doesn't require them to burn down any villages and kill citizens. It is sad to know that few Jihadist claims that purging all kafirs is an act of martyrdom. How could it be called matyrdom if even Prophet Muhammad himself does not kill unarmed people in every wars he fought?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
_of_Copy_of_Poppet%5B1%5D.jpg)
I believe the Quran did not ask its followers to say things above. If those 'disbelievers' should talk crap of Islam, answer them in an appropriate manner. Don't say things that a terrorist said. Because a true muslim is not a terrorist. Quran is infallible, and you can answer every query they have posted without name-calling and cursing. Personally, the last red sentence pissed me off because the guy even used God's name to curse.
So, to counter insults:
1) Answer without name-calling.
2) Back yourself up with evidences and scriptures.
3) Do not try to find fault in their religion, this leads to prejudism.
4) Boycott is condemned in every religion, especially in Islam, the religion of peace. Don't boycott.
5) One insult could lead to ten more of them coming back at you. Don't insult, explain.
6) Strip away personal judgements when trying to compare religion. This leads to misintrepetation.
The reason I include this one in my blog because I think the morality of most muslims is descending since Islam teaches them morality and peacefulness in almost every page of Quran. You may add more points or suggestion if you want and stay peaceful.