The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion
The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion |
| Posted: 30 Dec 2013 04:21 PM PST
This is my last piece for the year and it's best that, for a change, I refrain from penning anything remotely political. It's hard to touch on any subject without bringing some public elements to the issue, which then transforms the subject into a political one. But I will try. I was thrilled to discover only last week that Indonesian movie producers and directors are producing excellent films that I thought only Hollywood and Bollywood were capable of. I watched two Indonesian blockbusters, Soekarno and Tenggelamnya Kapal van der Wijck. Both films were expensive productions that took more than four years to produce, and both boasted well-known stars in their casts (though certainly not of the same scale as The Wolf of Wall Street produced by our Prime Minister's stepson). These were the first Indonesian movies I watched and I must say I was impressed and had a thoroughly enjoyable experience. Soekarno was about the great man himself and covered his youth up until his proudest moment: reading his country's Proclamation of Independence on August 17, 1945. There were two poignant and memorable moments in the film. One was when he had to tell his wife Inggit (played by the exquisitely beautiful Maudy Koesnaedi) that he had fallen in love with a young schoolgirl but wanted to remain married to her. The response from Inggit was classic. She told him she loved him and had given everything she possibly could give, both to the man and to the revolution, but she could never accept sharing him with another woman. There was only so much she was willing to sacrifice for him. The other memorable scene was of his inspirational speech to a gathering of Indonesian nationalists and freedom fighters. These warriors of independence, made up of members from different groups, had assembled to deliberate on the principles and values that were to constitute the foundation of the new country called Indonesia. Here Soekarno, using his charisma and powerful oratorical skills, was able to bring peace among the warring groups of religious organisations and multi-ethnic communities across Nusantara, including communists and democratic nationalists, to achieve consensus. They all accepted and embraced his solution to be bound by the principles of Pancasila. To this day, Indonesia holds steadfast to this pact and it has become the national point of reference to its nation-building process. Indonesians are generally of one mind when it comes to the importance of these principles. Even when they differ and deal with conflict, they never veer from the goals of Pancasila. They take pride in their diverse cultures and religious differences, and always seek to bring unity by accepting the diversity of the people. They accept the principles of live and let live! When will we have a Soekarno? I believe our early leaders were of the same mould and had the same ideals for our country. But times have changed us. Today in our country, it's no longer about accepting our differences but about emphasising them. We have rejected the values of diversity (except when it comes to our food) and we take pride in our idea of superiority, whether it involves religion or ethnicity. It's time we prayed for a new leader who shares the vision and spirit of compromise that was common during the formative years of our independence. We desperately need a leader who can persuade the warring factions in this country to accept the national traits of cultural and religious diversity, which we are clearly made of. Happy New Year. – December 31, 2013. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider. | |
| Posted: 30 Dec 2013 04:17 PM PST
My recent message of peace during Christmas caught some attention. Some responded with applause, and some were sceptical of my sincerity. One article by blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin attempted to further scrutinise my message, whether it represented a true innovation of sorts in pushing the limit in the fight against tyranny and extremism. He went on to deliberate the impact of my message, whether my call to fight extremism and tyranny would also mean opposing the idea of forcing someone to follow organised religion, never mind what religion that may be. For Raja Petra, being forced into following organised religion is a form of extremism and tyranny. There was nothing substantial about his thought on this, but merely resting his case on the semantics. He used the word 'reasonable' in explaining its antonym, putting forth his argument about 'unreasonable behaviour' which defies logic, and concludes that forcing ideas on others is an "act of oppression, which is tyranny, and hence extreme". Raja Petra has his way of deliberating a thought and he does not leave any topic untouched, including religion or faith. In penning his thought, the seasoned writer defies any issue with expertise. After all he has many followers who would crave for new ideas and thoughts from him. I must admire him for his courage and innovative thinking, and he rightly chose the phrase "pushing the envelope" in his recent article in response to my Christmas message. Pushing the envelope has nothing to do with putting your letter in it and pushing it, but the phrase has to do with innovation and creativity beyond the normal practice and understanding. Raja Petra was debating something else from my message, asking whether we could go beyond to accept the fact that being forced to follow organised religion is a form of extremism and tyranny. The repercussion of my message can be viewed in many ways. They include the intent, education and action. As a person who holds dear to the faith, I am taught to synchronise the three in harmony, because otherwise, there would be inconsistency, which means cheating or even betrayal. A believer honours his word but before this can happen, one must understand the bigger structure of one's own faith and how it relates to the 'other', reflecting the message of peace. I cannot start to push the envelope if I do not understand my own faith and how it relates to the other faiths, under the necessity of a peaceful co-existence. I do not presume an organised religion justifies oppression and compulsion. There is a difference between religion and faith. While religion is a set of beliefs or any formal or institutionalised expression of such beliefs, faith is a strong unshakeable belief in something, especially without proof or evidence. So the term 'organised religion' refers to a structured set of beliefs from what you know or you see, that can be learned, experienced and expressed logically. Faith is beyond all that, as it is about the inner inward looking of yourself, relating to what you believe, and defending it in whatever way you can to preserve it. Faith is beyond logic but because you hold it dear, you have full trust in it that it will not betray you, including forcing others in an organised manner in the name of religion. Islam has beautifully laid down the principles, between holding dear to your faith and relating it to others. This is where a Muslim needs to understand the value of having a faith rather than just a set of beliefs known as religion. Faith tells you to own a belief with love and passion, how can you own something with love if you are forced to accept it? Before you can reach the level of true faith, knowledge will have to guide you on the do's and the dont's, but after all is done, true faith takes you from there, elevating you from being a legalistic believer to a deeper meaning of the faithful, and then relating to others with compassion and benevolence. That is why Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, accepted the fact that despite the truth he held, he accepted diversity of faith around him and after his death, the Muslims continued to live side by side with others, although Islam was at its climax of authority and power. Legalistic interpretation has its roots in Islamic history and remains intact until today. No one denies the legalistic role because without a clear guideline, faith will be dormant and dysfunctional. Islamic jurisprudence is founded on two categories, one that is fundamental with regards to basic theology (usuli) and the other being functional in terms of action ('amali). Theological debate has been deep rooted in the intellectual realm while the action part has evolved with the ever changing environment. Nevertheless, traditional books in relation with others, legalistically speaking, are based on the premise of peace and war and the nation those days were divided into two terms of relation: the enemy through wars, and friends through peace treaties. To defend the security of followers of other faiths in the Islamic territories, they were divided between non-Muslims at war (who has strategic ties with the enemy of the state) and those under protection (who accepted the political authority of the Islamic power). The first are called harbi, and the latter, dhimmi. Each has its legalistic implication, but when there is no such condition after the rise of nation-states where citizenship became the binding factor of one's affiliation to the state, rights and constitution should define conflicts in interfaith relations. It's not just a matter of deliverance; it is about educating the public, especially with the fragile interfaith relations in this country. Beside the public, political parties need to reform in order to understand the new realities, at the same time holding to their principles. As far as my message of peace is concerned, I hope this writing gives a clearer picture of my intent, my effort to create awareness (education) and to practise what I preach for a better Malaysia and a better world. Thank you, Raja Petra, for deliberating the issue and for pushing the envelope. – December 31, 2013. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from The Malaysian Insider : All To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan