Masjid kecil berkubah hijau
hari ini bergoncang-goncang
kerana panas cinta dua insan
melepaskan rindu yang menggenggam kalbu
kemas jari digenggam seperti
tidak akan ada peluang lagi bertemu
alangkah baik dan banyaknya nikmatMu
tiada erti hidup ini tanpa kekasihku
dibawah kubah hijau ini
satukan hati kami lagi
I could not fathom why such a knee-jerk,angry response was given by Malakian (on my link) to my query on some of his links. I was interested in him sharing what he thinks of the perennialists, but he chose to dodge and then downgrade me instead. MashaAllah!
This post is to serve as a nasihah to all traditionalists out there: Explain please, don’t assume and attack. That is called ‘bi dunni adab’.
There are indeed differences between a traditionalist and a pseudotraditionalist.
(this is my IC name)
We Europeans must never forget that we created the Middle East conflict
Justified criticism of Israeli policy needs to be informed by a sense of our own historical responsibility
Timothy Garton Ash
Thursday July 27, 2006
When and where did this war begin? Shortly after 9am local time on Wednesday July 12, when Hizbullah militants seized Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev – Israeli reservists on the last day of their tour of duty – in a cross-border raid into northern Israel? Friday June 9, when Israeli shells killed at least seven Palestinian civilians on a beach in the Gaza strip? January this year, when Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections, in a backhanded triumph for an American policy of supporting democratisation? 1982, when Israel invaded Lebanon? 1979, with the Islamic revolution in Iran? 1948, with the creation of the state of Israel? Or how about Russia in the spring of 1881?Simple questions require such complicated answers. Even if the basic facts are agreed, every term is disputed: militants, soldiers or terrorists? Seized, captured or kidnapped? Every selection of facts implies an interpretation. And in tortured histories like this, every horror will be explained or justified by reference back to some antecedent horror:
From tyranny to tyranny to war
From dynasty to dynasty to hate
From villainy to villainy to death
From policy to policy to grave…
“The song is yours. Arrange it as you will,” writes the poet James Fenton, in his Ballad of the Imam and the Shah.
Yet observing European responses to the current conflict, I want to insist on Europe’s own strong claim to be among the earliest causes. The Russian pogroms of 1881; the French mob chanting “à bas les juifs” as Captain Dreyfus was stripped of his epaulettes at the École Militaire; the festering anti-semitism of Austria around 1900, shaping the young Adolf Hitler; all the way to the Holocaust of European Jewry and the waves of anti-semitism that convulsed parts of Europe in its immediate aftermath. It was that history of increasingly radical European rejection, from the 1880s to the 1940s, that produced the driving force for political Zionism, Jewish emigration to Palestine and eventually the creation of the state of Israel.
“What made me a Zionist was the Dreyfus trial,” said Theodor Herzl, the father of modern Zionism. If Europe decided that each nation should have its own state, would not accept even emancipated Jews as fully members of the French or German nation, and eventually became the scene of the attempted extermination of all Jewry, then the Jews must have their own national home somewhere else. Home – in a definition beloved of Isaiah Berlin – is the place where, if you have to go there, they have to take you in. And never again would Jews go as lambs to the slaughter. As Israelis, they would fight for the life of every single fellow Jew. The 19th-century stereotypes of German Helden and Jewish Händler have been reversed. The Germans, and with them most of today’s bourgeois Europeans, have become the eternal traders; the Jews, in Israel, the eternal warriors.
Of course, this is only one thread in perhaps the world’s most complicated political tapestry; but it’s a very important one. I don’t think any European should speak or write about today’s conflict in the Middle East without displaying some consciousness of our own historical responsibility. I’m afraid that some Europeans today do so speak and write; and I don’t just mean the German rightwing extremists who marched through the town of Verden in Lower Saxony last Saturday, waving Iranian flags and chanting “Israel – international genocide centre”. I also mean thinking people on the left, contributors to discussion threads on Guardian blogs and the like. Even as we criticise the way the Israeli military are killing Lebanese civilians and UN monitors in the name of recovering Ehud Goldwasser (and destroying the military infrastructure of Hizbullah), we must remember that all of this would almost certainly not be happening if some Europeans had not attempted, a few decades back, to remove everyone called Goldwasser from the face of Europe – if not the earth.
Let me be very clear what I mean. It does not follow from this terrible European history that Europeans must display uncritical solidarity with whatever the current government of Israel chooses to do, however violent or ill-advised. On the contrary, the true friend is the one who speaks up when you’re making a mistake. It does not follow that we should sign up to the latest dangerous simplifications about a “third world war” against “an Iran-Syrian-Hizbullah-Hamas terrorist alliance” (according to the US Republican Newt Gingrich) or a “seamless totalitarian movement” of political Islamism (according to the Conservative MP and journalist Michael Gove).
It does not follow that every European who criticises Israel is a covert anti-semite, as some commentators in the United States tend to imply. And it certainly does not follow that we should be any less alert to the suffering of the Arabs, including the Palestinian Arabs who fled or were driven out of their homes at the founding of the state of Israel, and their descendants who grew up in refugee camps. The life of every single Lebanese killed or wounded by Israeli bombing is worth exactly as much as that of every Israeli killed or wounded by Hizbullah rocket attacks.
Does it follow that Europeans have a special obligation to get involved in trying to secure a peace settlement in which the state of Israel can live in secure frontiers next to a viable Palestinian state? I think it does. To be sure, since Europeans have one way or another affected almost every corner of the earth, such an argument from history could in theory take us everywhere – the legacy of European imperialism providing a universal moral excuse for European neo-imperialism. But the story of the Jews driven from their European homelands, and in their turn driving Palestinian Arabs from their homeland, is unique. Even if you don’t accept this argument from historical and moral responsibility, Europe’s vital interests are plainly at stake: oil, nuclear proliferation and the potential reaction among our alienated Muslim minorities, to name but three.
It’s less clear what that involvement should be. One proposal is for European forces to participate in a multinational peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon, but that only makes sense if realistic parameters are established for a clear, feasible and finite mission. Those are not yet in sight. Even a ceasefire is not yet in sight. The Rome summit concluded yesterday afternoon barely papering over a clear difference between the United States and Israel, on the one side, and most of the rest of the world, including the EU and the UN, on the other, about how a ceasefire should be achieved. The truth is that now, more than ever, the diplomatic key lies in the full engagement of the United States, using its unique influence with Israel and negotiating as directly as possible with all partners to the conflict, however unsavoury. Until that happens, Europe alone can do little.
Yet the issue here is not just changing the realities on the ground in the Middle East. How Europeans speak and write about the position of the Jews in the region to which Europeans drove them is also a matter of our own self-definition. We should weigh every word.
Dunia Islam mengambil langkah mengutuk sekeras-kerasnya tindakan schizophrenia Israel. Surat di hantar, demonstrasi diadakan. Forum-forum di laman maya penuh dengan berita dan buah fikiran yang antagonis terhadap Israel.
Tetapi adakah Israel sahaja yang dilanda schizophrenia?
Mungkin amat patut tindakan doktor-doktor kurun dahulu merantai dan mengurung pesakit-pesakit schizophrenia di rumah-rumah sakit jiwa. Sejak perubahan-perubahan polisi dunia perubatan dibuat orang, penyakit ini seperti tidak tertahan-tahan lagi menjadi wabak.
Contoh-contoh schizophrenia umat islam sendiri terlalu banyak untuk disenaraikan. Dalam kes jurnalis Denmark melukis kartun menghina Rasulullah s.a.w. contohnya, habis bangunan-bangunan kedutaan di bakar. Habis bendera negara tersebut di bakar. Boikot produk Denmark dikobar-kobarkan tanpa selektif.
Bagaimanakah kita hendak expect Israeli tidak melakukan tindakan seschizophrenia kita sekiranya kita sendiri menjadi tok guru kepada mereka.
Ataukah kita telah menjadi murid setia mereka? Terhinggap sakit schizophrenia, langsung hilang kawalan perasaan marah?
Pertunjukan hilang kawalan perasaan ini terjadi sekali lagi baru-baru ini di UPM. Sekumpulan pelajar membuka meja khidmat pelajar tanpa kebenaran autoriti. Walaupun wakil pelajar di saat awal bercakap dengan elok meminta meja itu dibubarkan, tetapi kedegilan pelajar-pelajar itu menyebabkan permintaan perwakilan pelajar tersebut tidak diendahkan.
Sekiranya perwakilan pelajar dan pelajar-pelajar lain bersikap lebih rasional, tidak menjerit-jerit, serta melakukan geri laku kurang sopan dan kurang beretika, kelakuan pelajar-pelajar yang tidak mahu mematuhi arahan itulah yang akan dikira sangat tidak beradab.
Sebaliknya, perasaan marah telah menunggangi mereka. Kata orang putih, bila kita marah kena hati-hati supaya jangan sampai kita ‘riding with the Devil.’ Kata orang putih lagi, ‘Two wrongs do not make one right.’
Berlakunya episod memalukan ini di tanah air menyebabkan kita berfikir apakah umat ini sudah jatuh begitu teruk sekali, sehinggakan yang baik tidak dijadikan teladan, dan yang buruk tidak dijadikan sempadan?
Hari ini, esok dan lusa dan seterusnya, adegan schizophrenia apakah lagi yang akan kita pertontonkan kepada dunia?
[Seorang sahabat memulakan satu thread berkenaan pengembaraan baru-baru ini. Berikut adalah muqaddimah beliau terhadap thread tersebut.]
Melancong seharusnya dibuang sahaja dari kamus kita. Kita ada perkataan lain yang lebih enak di dengar dan lebih positif maksudnya – ziyarah, siyar, rehlah, kelana, kembara.
Ulama dan para muarrikh (ahli sejarah) Islam bila bercakap tentang rehlah seringkali merujuk kepada kata-kata hikmah ‘anak panah yang tidak keluar dari busurnya tidak akan mencapai sasarnnya’. [An arrow that is not released will never reach its target.]
Kata-kata ini mengingatkan kita bahawa pengembaraan/rehlah/kembara itu perlu untuk mencapai cita-cita, walaupun manusia seringkali merasa berat untuk keluar dari kotak hidupnya, lebih rela menjadi katak yang berpayung sahaja di bawah tempurung.
Meskipun yang demikian, pengembaraan ini mesti bertujuan, sepertimana anak panah tadi. Bagi ahlullah, tujuan ini tidak lain adalah untuk mencapai perubahan yang positif dalam diri. Disinilah letaknya perbezaan antara rehlah Islamiyyah dan melancong. Melancong adalah term yang mempunyai konotasi negatif dan berkait rapat dengan pengembaraan yang berat dan condong kepada keduniaan dan materiaisma, sedang rehlah/ziyarah dsbnya tidak sekadar mencakup rehlah keduniaan, tetapi juga disertai syahwat mengejar hasil kerohanian.
Dalam melakukan kembara ini, kita diperingatkan juga oleh para hukama dan pujangga terbilang, bahawa ‘air yang tenang sahaja yang akan kekal menjadi jernih’. [A stagnant water will collect dirt; only flowing water will become pure]
Dipandang sepintas lalu, kata-kata ini sekadar mengingatkan kita tentang faedah berrehlah. Tetapi maksud dalam yang lain bagi kata-kata ini adalah dalam melakukan rehlah, jangan risau untuk membuat kesilapan. Seperti air yang mengalir menjadi sungai, i a menjadi jeram, air terjun menerjah dan melompati batu-batu, dan melalui alur-alur tanah, dan merempuh akar-akar kayu sebelum menjumpai jalan terbaik menuju tujuan perdananya: lautan luas membiru.
Di dalam thread ini, insya-Allah kita tidak akan sekadar mahu mengambil tahu dan bercerita tentang pengmbara Islam terkenal seperti Ibn Battuta, Leo Africanus, Ibn Miskawayh, al-Ma’arri, al-Idrisi, dan lain-lain yang sudah menjadi bak bintang bersinar di langit, tetapi juga nama-nama kecil lain yang tidak akan kita biarkan sejarah melupainya.
Mereka ini adalah sebahagian daripada sejarah kita, sebahagian daripada secarik benang di kain sejadah kita. Tuntuti semula warisan kita yang kaya.
Emas yang terbiar tidak digali, kekal menjadi batuan buruk di perut bumi.
On this unpredictable day, and stressing time, the dhikr Zayn al-Anfas/Zaynul-Anfas is good to practice:
(1) One intends drawing nearer to Allah through His remembrance, then sits back as one does in the Testification of Faith of the prayer, facing the qibla, keeping one’s eyes as still as possible or even closed, breathing through the nose. If one cannot face the qibla, then one may do so however one can, facing any direction with the body, but Allah with the heart.
(2) One says Huwa Llah (He is Allah) silently in one’s heart (with something like the same cadence as in the middle of the hadra, if one has heard it) drawing out the first word as one breathes in deeply and slowly (filling the lungs from bottom to top ), and the second word as one breathes out. One should make this as a deep sigh, first filling the bottom of the lungs by lowering the diaphragm and pushing the belly out; then the middle part of the lungs with an expansion of the lower ribs, then breastbone and chest; then the highest point of the lungs up to the collarbone, lifting the chest and upper ribs and slightly drawing in the stomach-all in one smooth, continuous motion, not three-then breathing completely out. This is done three times.
(3) Then one “watches” (yuraqibu) one’s breaths, breathing quietly, regularly, deeply, and without strain; as one breathes in, making oneself totally empty in neediness (faqr) to Allah, and as one breathes out, feeling absolute contentment (rida’ with Allah. This is done ten times. It is best when possible to sit back as one does in the prayer, holding one’s palms about two centimeters above one’s thighs, and beginning with the little finger of the right hand, lowering the fingertip to the thigh as one breathes out, and lifting it off with the other fingers as one breathes in, then lowering the next finger to the thigh with the next breath out, and so on, until one finishes the last breath with the little finger of the left hand.
(4) Then one says Huwa Llah as in (2) a final time, summoning to mind the absolute love of Allah above any other.
(5) This dhikr should be done by all murids at least once a day, on an empty stomach, whether in the morning, midday, or night, though it may be done up to five or times as needed. In situations where sitting or concentration is difficult during the day, one may substitute in (3) above the reciting in one’s heart of verse 80 of Surat al-Shu‘ara’, Wa idha maridtu, fa Huwa yashfin (“And when I am ill, He heals me”), saying the words Wa idha maridtu as one breathes in, and fa Huwa yashfin as one breathes out, seeking the divine shifa’ or healing for the ruh, mind, and body. And Allah alone gives success, and He guides the way.