Perginya Sekuntum Bunga Bangsa

Saya tidak pernah bertemu dengan Shamsiah Fakeh dan tidak pernah mendengar apa-apa ucapan daripadanya. Kisah sejarahnya hanya terpampang untuk dibaca oleh generasi anak merdeka apabila Dewan Masyarakat menyoroti kehidupan Shamsiah Fakeh di Tanah Besar China. Melalui wartawan Fatini Yaakob itu, barulah diketahui Shamsiah Fakeh ini masih hidup, malah hidup dalam buangan. Sejarah perjuangan beliau telah digelapkan dan label yang diletakkan kepadanya adalah 'pengganas' atau dalam bahasa Inggeris 'terrorist'. Ketika itu saya terfikir mengapa Shamsiah Fakeh, yang namanya sahaja telah menunjukkan pegangan Islamnya boleh memilih Parti Komunis Malaya (PKM) untuk melangsungkan perjuangan?

Malah persoalan seperti itu telah wujud di benak fikiran saya ketika di bangku sekolah rendah, apabila melihat bekas Pengerusi PKM, Musa Ahmad ditemuramah dengan begitu panjang oleh RTM secara psycho-war selepas menyerah diri. Sebelum itu digambarkan bahawa PKM ini adalah pengganas Cina, tetapi saya dikejutkan apabila Pengerusinya adalah Melayu. Musa Ahmad pula dikatakan turut mempunyai latar belakang pendidikan Islam. Bagi anak merdeka seperti saya, golongan ini dianggap sebagai musuh utama masyarakat. Tiada gambaran yang positif bagi golongan ini, malah mereka yang seperti Pak Sako dan Ahmad Boestamam turut terpalit dengan gambaran tersebut.

Rumah saya dan rumah kelahiran Ahmad Boestamam tidaklah jauh. Ketika saya di bangku sekolah rendah, saya berbasikal ke kawasan perkelahan Sungai Bil berhampiran rumah kelahiran Ahmad Boestamam. Demikian juga dengan keluarga Dr Burhanuddin al-Helmy, mereka duduk bercampur-gaul dengan keluarga sebelah emak saya di Slim River. Lebih dari itu, adik Dr Burhanuddin, Pak Baharin pernah menziarahi saya di tempat kerja untuk mempelawa saya menjadi calon DUN Negeri Slim River semasa Pilihanraya Umum 1995. Sebagaimana juga Shamsiah Fakeh, nama kedua-dua tokoh besar itu tidaklah harum hatta di kalangan masyarakat tempatan.

Hanya kini kisah perjuangan mereka baru tersingkap. Ketika Chin Peng melancarkan buku memoirnya 'My Side of History', saya segera menelaahnya. Kemudian diikuti beberapa buku oleh bekas tokoh-tokoh PKM ini, seperti Ibrahim Chik dan Shamsiah Fakeh. Buku-buku memoir ini telah memaparkan sisi sebenar sejarah perjuangan mereka dan bagaimana mereka boleh memilih PKM untuk menentang penjajah British. Turut dipaparkan penderitaan mereka mengharungi perjuangan, sehingga kadang-kala pembaca yang menghayati memoir ini boleh menitiskan air mata. Malang sekali sejarah perjuangan mereka telah digelapkan kerana 'history is written by the victor'.

Semalam seorang lagi tokoh perjuang kemerdekaan tanah air telah pergi meninggalkan kita. Beliau pergi bersama memori perjuangannya yang telah digelapkan. Kalaulah Shamsiah Fakeh menuruti jejak sahabatnya Aishah Ghani, beliau mungkin bergelar Tun atau Tan Sri hari ini. Namun beliau memilih jalan perjuangan yang penuh tribulasi dan menentang golongan anti-establishment, sehingga sejarah sebenar perjuangannya tidak ditulis. Nasib baik beliau sempat menulis memoirnya untuk menjadi tatapan generasi anak merdeka. Dengan memoir itu, maka generasi anak merdeka tetap bersedih dengan pemergiannya seumpama gugur sekuntum bunga bangsa. Al-Fatihah untuknya.

Masyarakat Madani VS Civil Society

Sebagaimana biasa dalam lapangan ilmiah, sukar untuk memberi satu makna yang tuntas terhadap sesuatu konsep supaya dapat disepakati oleh semua pihak. Hakikat ini seharusnya diterima kerana sesuatu konsep itu kadang-kadang cuba disejagatkan meskipun dilahir dalam satu budaya yang setempat malah dalam banyak keadaan melalui jaluran zaman yang begitu panjang. Demikianlah juga konsep masyarakat madani, sukar untuk diberi makna yang dapat diterima oleh semua pihak. Oleh sebab itu, pendekatan yang agak selamat ialah dengan melihat makna yang dikemukakan oleh tokoh terawal memperkatakan atau mungkin menggunakan istilah masyarakat madani tersebut.

Menurut Osman Bakar, tokoh ilmuan terawal mengemukakan konsep dengan menggunakan istilah masyarakat madani ialah al-Farabi (870-950). Beliau dikatakan pernah menulis sebuah buku bertajuk Kitab Fi al-Ijtima’at al-Madaniyyah (Discourse on the Civil Society). Manakala tokoh ilmuan lain yang turut mengemukakan konsep masyarakat madani ialah Ibn Miskawayh (936-1030) yang juga sangat dikenali dalam bidang akhlak. Kedua-dua tokoh ini mentakrifkan masyarakat madani sebagai masyarakat bertamadun atau masyarakat berperadaban. Dalam risalah Islam, pembinaan masyarakat berperadaban merupakan tanggungjawab sosial terpenting yang telah dilaksanakan sendiri oleh Rasulullah SAW semasa membuka negara Madinah.

Sesebuah masyarakat berperadaban merujuk kepada masyarakat yang mempunyai keluhuran budi yang tinggi dan murni disamping memperolehi pencapaian hidup yang selesa dan maju. Masyarakat berperadaban tidak semestinya merujuk kepada masyarakat yang mempunyai kemajuan material yang melimpah-ruah tetapi runtuh erti kehidupan yang sebenar. Kemuncak kepada sesebuah masyarakat madani ialah memperolehi kebahagiaan (al-sa’adah) atau ‘eudai-monia’ istilah yang digunakan oleh Plato (427-347 SM). Antara ciri-ciri masyarakat berperadaban ialah:

a. Masyarakat hidup dalam satu wilayah secara menetap bersama seperti dalam sebuah kota atau bandar dengan memperolehi segala keperluan asas yang berupaya meningkatkan kualiti kehidupan.

b. Kewujudan struktur politik dan sosial yang kukuh dan teratur dengan wujudnya satu kontrak sosial yang memenuhi kehendak umum (general will) sehingga menghasilkan sistem pendidikan, perekonomian dan lain-lain untuk masyarakat keseluruhan.

c. Penerapan kehidupan yang luhur dengan adanya sistem nilai atau moral serta perundangan yang saksama demi keadilan untuk seluruh rakyat. Berdasarkan kepada tamadun-tamadun silam sistem nilai dan perundangan ini dibina atas pegangan agama dan kepercayaan.

d. Penggunaan satu bahasa atau beberapa bahasa serumpun dengan sistem tulisan yang tersendiri bagi melebarkan interaksi sesama manusia dan menyatupadukan seluruh masyarakat.

e. Penyuburan budaya ilmu yang diterajui sendiri oleh golongan pemerintah sehingga melahirkan pencapaian yang tinggi dalam pelbagai lapangan termasuklah teknologi.

Satu persoalan yang selalu juga diperbahaskan, adakah konsep masyarakat madani boleh disamakan dengan konsep civil society seperti yang difahami oleh masyarakat moden. Konsep masyarakat madani boleh disamakan dengan konsep civil society sekiranya dilihat dari segi nilai-nilai sejagat yang dapat dikongsi bersama. Sekiranya dilihat dari segi sistem keseluruhan bagaimana pembinaan masyarakat madani dalam Islam berbanding pembinaan civil society dalam masyarakat Barat moden, maka akan dilihat jurang perbezaan yang begitu ketara. Bagaimanapun tiada satu konsep yang paling hampir kepada golongan bukan Islam untuk memahami konsep masyarakat madani melainkan konsep civil society.

Patriotisme Menurut Perspektif Islam dan Barat (Siri 2)

Patriotisme Buta (Blind Patriotism)

Bekas pemimpin Perancis, Charles De Gaulle pernah menyatakan bahawa “patriotisme ialah mengutamakan kecintaan kepada negara lebih dahulu manakala nasionalisme mengutamakan kebencian kepada negara lain lebih dahulu”. Pandangan ini agak menarik kerana cuba menggambarkan wujudnya suatu semangat yang semacam patriotisme tetapi sebenarnya ‘patriotisme buta’. Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa cintakan kepada negara adalah sesuatu yang positif tetapi sekiranya kita mendahulukan semangat bermusuh dengan orang lain maka ia merupakan sesuatu yang negatif. Sikap negatif yang seperti inilah yang selalu disebut ‘Patriotisme Buta’. Sepanjang sejarah Eropah kejadian konflik yang berpanjangan mempunyai hubungkait dengan kepimpinan yang selalu meniupkan semangat patriotisme buta.

Sekiranya kita menyorot kepada sejarah bangsa Eropah yang diakui sendiri oleh sejarawan mereka, sikap suka mendominasikan orang lain (jingoism) telah menjadi darah-daging mereka. Sikap inilah yang telah mencetuskan Perang Salib ke atas masyarakat Islam, penjajahan seluruh manusia yang bukan berkulit putih dan lain-lain. Bagaimanapun untuk membenarkan tindakan mereka, pemimpin-pemimpin bangsa Eropah meniupkan semangat memusuhi bangsa lain dan menganggap ini adalah sebagai patriotisme. Sebenarnya ini bukanlah hakikat patriotisme iaitu dengan menindas bangsa lain, mengenepikan keadilan, melakukan kezaliman sesama manusia, menolak kebenaran dan mengikis naluri kemanusiaan. Semangat dan sikap seperti ini adalah disebut patriotisme buta.

Patriotisme yang celik atau ‘celik sivik’ sebenarnya seperti apa yang dibangkitkan oleh Plato, ahli falsafah kenegaraan Yunani yang agung iaitu menegakkan keadilan dan menghapuskan kezaliman sesama manusia. Perkara inilah yang menjadi intipati karya Plato yang terkenal dalam persoalan kenegaraan bertajuk ‘Republic’ iaitu buah tangannya yang ditulis kerana kecewa dengan hukuman mati yang dijatuhkan kepada gurunya Socrates. Menyedari hakikat tersebut, patriotisme yang sebenar adalah untuk mewujudkan keharmonian sesama manusia, melakukan keadilan dan menegah kezaliman. Semangat mencintai negara dan bangsa yang ditiupkan adalah untuk mengimbangi kecenderungan negatif yang mungkin terdapat pada negara dan bangsa lain bukannya untuk memulakan permusuhan.

Selain daripada itu, Patriotisme yang sebenar juga bukan bermaksud seseorang itu merelakan negara atau bangsanya mencabul dan menzalimi orang lain sebagaimana pernah disebut oleh warga Amerika dalam akhbar The Chronicle; “Sekiranya dengan tidak menyokong perang ke atas Iraq, membunuh orang awam dan memusnahkan harta mereka dianggap tidak patriotik, maka saya rela dikatakan sedemikian”. Secara kesimpulannya, boleh disebut bahawa patriotisme sebenar adalah bersifat positif dengan mengutamakan kebenaran, keadilan, kesaksamaan dan kemanusiaan, manakala patriotisme buta pula ialah bersifat negatif dengan mendahulukan kebatilan, kezaliman, diskriminasi dan penindasan.


Patriotisme dan Islam

Dalam konteks Islam patriotisme sebenarnya merujuk kepada semangat Jihad di jalan Allah. Bagaimanapun jihad bukanlah merujuk kepada satu kepentingan yang sempit tetapi meninggikan kalimah Allah yang kepentingannya lebih sejagat. Jihad dalam konteks ini adalah untuk menegakkan peradaban manusia seluruhnya yang diredhai Allah. Perjuangan yang seumpama ini memerlukan semangat kental yang ditanam dalam diri setiap anggota masyarakat. Selain daripada itu, setiap anggota masyarakat dipupuk untuk mendahulukan kepentingan masyarakat berbanding kepentingan diri sebagai manifestasi daripada semangat pengorbanan (tadhiyah) yang tinggi. Kesemua usaha yang dilakukan dalam membangunkan peradaban manusia seharusnya berterusan yang mungkin melibatkan silih berganti antara generasi.

Perkataan jihad berasal daripada perkataan 'jahada' dalam bahasa Arab yang bermaksud melakukan sesuatu dengan bersungguh-sungguh. Dari segi pengertiannya yang sebenar di sisi Islam ialah usaha yang bersungguh-sungguh sehingga mengorbankan kepentingan peribadi demi untuk meninggikan kalimah Allah berlandaskan ketentuan syara'. Menurut al-Razi, jihad ialah penggembelingan tenaga oleh umat Islam bagi membantu menegakkan Islam, kestabilan kehidupan dan keutuhan masyarakat. Selain daripada kelima-lima Rukun Islam, jihad merupakan satu kefarduan yang sangat dituntut kerana melalui jihadlah umat Islam akan dipandang mulia dan terhormat. Sekiranya dilihat dari perspektif yang lebih luas, jihad merupakan asas kepada tertegaknya kehidupan berperadaban menurut Islam. Peradaban Islam sebenarnya merujuk kepada sesebuah masyarakat yang berjaya memasakkan mabadi' (prinsip) Islam dalam kehidupan serta melaksanakan manhaj (sistem) Islam sebagai cara hidup mereka.

Masyarakat yang seperti inilah yang telah dibina oleh Nabi Muhammad saw selepas baginda berhijrah ke Madinah. Kesemuanya ini memerlukan penggembelingan tenaga yang bersungguh-sungguh yang dinamakannya sebagai 'jihad'. Lebih daripada itu, jihad juga boleh dilihat sebagai daya ketahanan yang memastikan kelangsungan peradaban Islam. Masyarakat yang menghayati konsep jihad akan sentiasa memastikan faktor-faktor yang boleh memusnahkan peradaban seperti yang dikemukakan sebelum ini, tidak dibiarkan berleluasa di samping terus berusaha untuk memajukan kehidupan menurut ketentuan Islam. Setiap anggota masyarakat Islam akan saling pesan-memesan untuk keharmonian bersama. Segala aspek ini terangkum dalam konsep Jihad sekiranya dilihat dari perspektif Islam yang luas dan lengkap.

Para ilmuan Islam telah menghuraikan konsep Jihad seumpama ini dalam buku-buku mereka berteraskan kepada sumber al-Quran dan al-Sunnah. Salah seorang daripada mereka ialah Ibn Qayyim al-Jauziah yang telah membahagi Jihad kepada empat kategori:

a. Jihad melawan hawa nafsu, iaitu merujuk kepada usaha yang bersungguh-sungguh untuk membaiki peribadi dengan memupuk nilai-nilai terpuji seperti jujur, rajin berusaha, mencintai ilmu dan berani, serta menghindarkan nilai-nilai terkeji seperti khianat, malas, melakukan perkara lagho dan bacul.

b. Jihad melawan syaitan, iaitu merujuk kepada usaha yang bersungguh-sungguh untuk menghapuskan hasutan syaitan yang mendorong manusia melakukan perkara-perkara yang melampaui batas Allah (taghut).

c. Jihad melawan golongan munafik, iaitu merujuk kepada usaha yang bersungguh untuk menentang golongan ‘musuh dalam selimut’. Termasuk juga dalam kategori ini ialah usaha yang bersungguh-sungguh untuk menegakkan kebenaran dan menenggelamkan kebatilan, menyuruh kepada makruf dan mencegah kemungkaran serta menuntut keadilan dan mengenepikan kezaliman.

d. Jihad melawan tentera-tentera musuh, iaitu merujuk kepada jihad memikul senjata bagi menghadapi tentera-tentera musuh yang mengancam kestabilan yang secara langsung boleh memusnahkan sesebuah peradaban.

Keempat-empat kategori ini pada hakikatnya akan berlaku di sepanjang zaman meskipun dalam wajah dan bentuk yang berlainan. Menyedari hakikat tersebut, masyarakat yang berperadaban seharusnya dari masa ke semasa menanamkan semangat perjuangan dalam setiap peribadi supaya peradaban yang dibina akan sentiasa diperkukuh dan dipertahankan. Bagi mencapai perkara tersebut segala persediaan dalam bentuk keilmuan, perekonomian, pemuafakatan dan persenjataan seharusnya disempurnakan.

Konsep jihad yang diutarakan ini seharusnya dilihat dari kacamata yang positif, iaitu bertujuan untuk mewujudkan perdamaian dan keseimbangan bukannya perbalahan dan melampau. Melalui semangat perjuangan, pemujaan kepada nafsu, perkara-perkara yang melampaui batas agama, kekejaman atau penindasan, pencabulan hak dan serangan musuh dapat dipatahkan atau dilenyapkan. Sekiranya tiada penghayatan konsep perjuangan kesemua perkara negatif tersebut akan bermaharajalela kerana tiada lagi kuasa pengimbang seterusnya terhapuslah keharmonian dan kesaksamaan dalam kehidupan sejagat.

Patriotisme Menurut Perspektif Islam dan Barat (Siri 1)

Konsep Patriotisme

Secara umumnya bolehlah dikatakan bahawa asal-usul patriotisme adalah daripada budaya turun-temurun masyarakat Barat kerana perkataan patriotisme itu sendiri berasal daripada bahasa Yunani ‘Patria’ yang bermaksud tanahair (fatherland or homeland). Secara lebih lengkap maksud patriotisme ialah cintakan kepada tanahair dengan kesanggupan untuk menumpahkan hati-budi kepadanya. Disebabkan perkataan ini berasal daripada bahasa Yunani dan kemudian digunakan oleh bahasa Inggeris maka secara khusus perkataan ini mempunyai hubungkait dengan sejarah perkembangan budaya masyarakat Eropah daripada zaman Yunani sehingga zaman Barat Moden. Bagaimanapun ini tidaklah menafikan kewujudan nilai yang sama dalam masyarakat Timur dan masyarakat Islam.

Selalu disebut bahawa konsep patriotisme dalam masyarakat Eropah dan Barat telah berubah mengikut perkembangan zaman terutama menjelang kurun ke-18. Sekiranya pada zaman Yunani, patriotisme ini merujuk kepada ‘an attachment to the physical features of land’ (rasa kebersamaan dengan tanahair), konsepnya telah berubah selepas itu. Pada Zaman Pertengahan, iaitu sewaktu masyarakat Eropah didominasikan oleh pengaruh golongan eklesiastik (golongan gereja), konsep patriotisme merujuk kepada kecintaan terhadap agama Kristian yang menjadi pegangan Tamadun Rom. Selepas Zaman Renaisans (zaman kebangkitan Eropah), ketika Tamadun mula berpecah kepada kewujudan negara-negara bangsa, maka patriotisme merujuk kepada kecintaan kepada bangsa yang dikaitkan dengan nasionalisme. Pada zaman ini juga bermulanya era kolonialisme yang dilebarkan atas semangat patriotisme golongan penjajah.

Pada kurun ke-18, ketika kelahiran pelbagai ideologi seperti demokrasi, sosialisme dan komunisme yang menjadi anutan negara-negara tersebut, konsep patriotisme telah dikaitkan dengan pegangan yang kuat kepada ideologi tersebut sehingga rasa kebersamaan itu telah menggabungkan beberapa negara dalam sesebuah blok ideologi (seperti blok kapitalis dan blok komunis). Pada zaman ini, dalam suasana globalisasi yang begitu kuat selalu dipersoalkan adakah masih wujud rasa patriotisme dan nasionalisme? Yang jelasnya syarikat-syarikat transnasional atau multinasional selalu dipertikaikan semangat patriotisme dan nasionalisme yang ada pada mereka oleh golongan patriotis dan nasionalis. Dengan demikian, agak sukar memberi satu konsep yang tepat kerana konsep patriotisme seharusnya dilihat dari perspektif sejarah perkembangan tradisi, budaya dan politik manusia.

Hubungan Patriotisme dengan Ideologi Negara.

Bagaimanapun yang sangat jelas konsep patriotisme itu selalunya berkaitan rapat dengan ideologi yang menjadi teras kepada sesebuah negara, malah boleh dikatakan inilah yang menjadi ciri utama dalam perkembangan patriotisme di Barat. Ideologi sesebuah negara itu kemudiannya dipupuk dalam masyarakat dengan pelbagai cara sama ada melalui simbol, slogan, kempen dan lain-lain. Dalam konteks ini sudah pasti mereka yang menjadi penafsir yang utama kepada patriotisme ialah pemimpin utama sesebuah negara. Dalam sesebuah negara despotisme atau diktator, tafsiran mereka ini kemudiannya dipaksakan kepada masyarakat untuk diterima tanpa soal. Situasi yang seperti ini berlaku semasa kebangkitan negara-negara komunis sehingga rakyat dipaksa berkorban atas nama patriotisme.

Disebabkan konsep patriotisme tidak mempunyai suatu pengertian yang mutlak atau tuntas, maka ia seringkali tafsiran pemimpin tentang patriotisme dianggap sebagai tafsiran yang patut diterima. Pemimpin selalu melihat merekalah orang pertama yang mempertahankan ideologi negara maka merekalah yang saharusnya menentukan kehendak sebenar patriotisme. Bagi golongan pemimpin, patriotisme itu adalah mentaati kepimpinan yang secara tidak langsung merupakan ketaatan kepada ideologi negara. Mereka yang tidak bersetuju dengan pemimpin seringkali dianggap sebagai golongan yang tidak patriotik dan pengkhianat. Konsep patriotisme seperti ini telah menular kepada negara-negara yang dikatakan demokrasi dan liberal. Dalam perang yang dilancarkan oleh Amerika ke atas Iraq, George W. Bush telah menggunakan pendekatan yang sama dengan menganggap mereka yang menentang perang tersebut sebagai tidak patriotik.

Two in One: Dual Platform on Religious Dialogue

(I was at London from June 30 to July 3 to accompany Tuan Guru Haji Abdul Hadi Awang and Pas delegation attending a conference as well as having meetings with some prominent Muslim scholars. Here is a report from Muslim News about the conference.)

By Dr Saeed Shehabi (Muslim News)

It was a cultural Binali, or in the words of one participants “the awakening of conscience”. The conference that took place over two days in London (July 1 & 2) was not merely a gathering of pro-Islamic unity enthusiasts, nor was it an event to exchange superficial good wishes and sweet words while brushing aside “serious” differences amongst adherents of various schools of thought and jurisprudence within the realm of Islam.

Those who took part in the convention had deep convictions that it would be foolish to continue on the path of disunity, fragmentation and mistrust. It may have been a small gathering compared with the lavish conferences often draped in officialdom and lavishly conducted, but the spirit that surrounded the discussions and debates was far superior to many other similar congregations.

The Islamic Unity Forum (IUF) which convened the conference at the Quality Hotel, next to the grand stadium at Wembley, Middlesex, had been formed by activists from various Muslim countries over the past twelve months, with the declared aim of creating “meaningful dialogue, cooperation and practical integration”.

The idea arose after the decline in the bond between the adherents of the various schools of thought in the Muslim world, and particularly the Shi’a and Sunni Muslims. The events in Iraq had been derailed to target the peaceful coexistence and mutual recognition amongst them and strong voices, with grassroots following, were thus needed to contain the religious, cultural and ethical mayhem.

The conference was attended by religious scholars from Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Malaysia, Lebanon, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and some European countries. According to the organisers, many other scholars were not able to attend mainly due to difficulties in obtaining visas, or prior engagements with other activities. Over the span of two days, more than fifty scholars and intellectuals were engaged in relentless discourse on various issues relating to Muslims and the obstacles to unified attitudes and stands.

Ayatullah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah from Lebanon, in a special message to the conference, called for the revision of Islamic history with the aim of removing such obstacles. While Munir Shafiq, the renowned Palestinian thinker and the Chairman of the Nationalist-Islamic Congress, called for the revival of the spirit promoted by contemporary thinkers such as Jamal Al Din Al Afghani and Muhammad Abdo.

Director of the Islamic Centre of England, and Special Representative of Ayatullah Sayyid Ali Khamenei, Shaykh Ali Mo’ezzi, outlined the efforts of the late Imam al Khumayni in urging Muslims to unite in the face of the political and cultural onslaught of Westernisation, colonisation and cultural invasion.

On the other hand, Chairman of the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS), Sheikh Abdul Hadi Awang, presented fresh ideas on searching for commonalities amongst Muslims and re-iterated the famous saying of Shaykh Muhammad Rashid Ridha (19th Century Islamic thinker and a pioneer of modern Islamic political thinking): “Let us cooperate in matters of agreement, and let us excuse each other in matters of contention.”

Dr Mohammad Al Baltagi, a Member of the Egyptian Parliament representing the Muslim Brotherhood block, emphasised the need for wisdom, seriousness and a truthful approach in matters of extreme importance such as the relations between Muslims. Dr Abdul Majeed Al Manasra, a Member of the Algerian Parliament, called for a Pan-Islamic code of conduct that prohibits the exchange of accusations of blasphemy when opinions differ.

To complement the intellectual debate, the participants were invited to attend receptions by several mosques and Islamic centres. For four consecutive evenings, leaders of these bodies added to the calls for unity. At the inaugural reception at Abrar Centre on Edgware Road, Dr Kemal Helbawi and I (co-Directors of IUF) outlined the mission of the Forum and presented a press release to the media about the project.

We were joined by Sheikh Abdul Hadi Awang, Munir Shafiq and Ayatullah Muhammad Baqir Al Nasseri from Iraq. At the Islamic Centre of England, London, the message was clear from Ayatullah Mo’ezzi, who repeated his earlier call for rational approaches to the concept of unity, dialogue and cooperation among Muslims.

The Khatib and Imam of the East London Mosque, Maulana Abdul Qayyum, presented the pivotal role of mosques, citing the example of the East London Mosque in forging solid relations among Muslims. He was joined by Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), Dr Mohammad Abdul Bari, to present a similar picture of the practical benefits of collective action by Muslims. He cited the cooperation within the MCB between Muslims (Sunni, Shi’a and others) as a practical manifestation of unity.

Ayatullah Sayyid Fadhel Al Milani welcomed the guests to Al Khoei Foundation’s reception and informed them of its efforts in promoting unity and discourse among Muslims, starting with the Amman conference in 1998.

To complement the Unity Conference, the IUF organised a one-day conference on July 3 to discuss Muslim-Christian relations. During the three sessions of the day, speakers presented new dimensions to the debate. Revd Canon Peter Challen and Dr Rodney Shakespeare called for Muslim Christian joint efforts to challenge the worldwide interest-based banking system which, they said, was responsible for the ongoing global financial crisis.

The Islamic concept of Riba (interest) on loans lies at the heart of financial illnesses of the world. Father Toma Dawood representing the Assyrian Christian community in Iraq, delivered a moving speech about the brotherly relations in Iraq between the two communities and called for stopping the preachers of hate in all communities.

Sayyid Kamel Al Hashimi, a religious intellectual from Bahrain, called for a “culture of communication” among the adherents and followers of the faith. Revd Frank Gelli presented the debate on spirit or soul and whether it is terminally attached to the body or a separate entity, as one example of the mystical dimensions of cooperation between Muslims and Christians.

The two conferences were, in reality, more than platforms for the exchange of good ideas; they were launching pads for what the organisers had always promoted: “the creation of meaningful dialogue among the adherents of faiths.”

Who Needs an Explanation of Islamic State (1)

Recently Abd Waheb al-Effendi’s book entitled ‘Who Needs an Islamic State’ has been publicized especially in Malaysia by a group who claim themselves as Malaysia Think Tank. Actually al-Effendi’s ‘Who Needs an Islamic State’ was first published in 1991, before Anis Ahmad had commented it in 1993. Then after almost 18 years later al-Effendi review his first edition book by updating his ideas as well as responding to Anis Ahmad comment. Whatever the purpose of the publicity, the book inevitably would spark a debate between those who uphold al-Effendi thesis and those who are not, or at least would make al-Effendi thesis green.

Perhaps, as a philosopher I do to agree with al-Effendi philosophical ideas about Islamic Politics especially whenever he calls the Muslim society to share political wisdoms with others non-Muslims. It is common for a philosopher like al-Effendi to limit himself by merely asking some great questions related to Islamic Politics and ignoring the details of the system. Even in Islamic tradition, this approach had been initiated by al-Farabi when he shared his political wisdoms with Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics in his political books like al-Siyasah al-Madaniyah and Fusul al-Madany.

Then in the modern age, al-Farabi approach was followed by Ali Abd al-Raziq when he wroted his Islam wa Usul al-Hukm. Al-Raziq who was once a disciple of Muhammad Abduh wrote his book to respond Rashid Redha (also Muhammad Abduh’s disciple) effort in reviving Khilafah after the demolition of Ottoman Empire. Redha pioneered a movement to restore Khilafah by expressing his stands in al-Manar and calling Muslim scholars across the Muslim World to attend a conference discussing the feasibility of reviving Khilafah. Indeed Al-Raziq was a philosopher although his first education in al-Azhar was Shariah.

Therefore al-Effendi thesis is not a new one as his philosophical approach to understand Islamic Politics has been applied previously by Muslim philosophers. Perhaps John Hosper’s book about philosophical analysis provides a very good answer for those who intend to understand al-Effendi approach towards Islamic Politics. Hosper in his book distinguished philosophical questions from non-philosophical questions, hence this discipline is called philosophy. Al-Effendi in this sense repeats the philosophical approach by answering philosophical questions of Islamic Politics and apparently refuses to answer non-philosophical questions.

ALlah Memenangkan PAS Melalui Orang Kafir

(Dipetik daripada cetusan rasa seorang bekas pimpinan mahasiswa)

Semasa artikel ini ditulis Pas telahpun berjaya menawan Kedah dan mengekalkan Kelantan di samping bersama-sama PKR membentuk kerajaan di Perak dan Selangor. Seperti yang telah dimaklumi kemenangan ini banyak dibantu oleh perubahan sikap politik kaum India dan Cina, sehingga kedua-dua kaum ini tanpa rasa takut membantu jentera pilihanraya Pas termasuk menyumbangkan kewangan. Semasa saya mengikuti perkembangan kempen pilihanraya di Kedah, sepanjang perjalanan ke sana dapat dilihat lori dan kereta mengibarkan bendera pembangkang lebih hebat daripada senario politik tahun 1999. Kemudian sewaktu pulang ke Perak, dapat dilihat kereta bersusun-susun seperti orang kota balik berhari raya di kampung masing-masing. Bagai dapat dirasakan gerombolan orang kota ini membawa balik undi-undi untuk parti pembangkang.

Namun faktor yang paling ketara memenangkan PAS dan PKR ialah sokongan daripada kaum India dan Cina. Sekonyong-konyong saya teringatkan Firman Allah swt dalam surah al-Taubah: Dan sekiranya kamu tidak mahu keluar (berjihad dan berkorban) menegakkan agama Allah maka akan ditimpakan azab dan Allah menggantikan dengan kaum yang lain.... Ayat tersebut benar-benar memberi pengajaran dan keinsafan kepada kita yang selalu mendakwa memperjuangkan Islam dan keadilan. Tetapi cuba kita nilai diri kita, benarkan kita tergolong dari kalangan para pejuang itu. Kita sebenarnya bukan pejuang, kerana kita tidak berani mengambil risiko. Para pendukung gerakan mahasiswa Islam sama ada di luar negara atau di Malaysia sebenarnya hanya menjadi pemerhati kepada perjuangan yang dilakukan oleh ahli-ahli PAS yang gigih serta golongan bukan Islam seperti kaum India dan Cina yang lebih sanggup menanggung tribulasi dalam menegakkan Islam dan keadilan.

Cuma golongan bukan Islam ini tiada Akidah, kalau tidak merekalah yang lebih layak digelar mujahidin. Para mahasiswa Islam lebih memilih jalan selesa, tidak berani dan penakut dalam bersuara menyatakan pendirian. Manakala masyarakat India khususnya pemuda mereka, sanggup menanggung risiko berjuang atas nama keadilan untuk kepentingan kaum mereka. Manakala masyarakat Cina juga berani mengkritik secara terbuka sama ada melalui forum-forum di media cetak mereka juga di majlis-majlis umum. Dengan perjuangan dan keberanian mereka inilah Allah swt memberi kemenangan kepada PAS dan PKR. Semoga kita dalam gerakan mahasiswa Islam ini mengambil iktibar dan selepas ini tidak lagi ragu-ragu bahawa Allah swt akan menyempurnakan janjinya kepada mereka yang berjuang atas jalannya dan Allah swt yang memberi rezeki bukannya manusia.

Wajah Baru Politik Malaysia

Pilihanraya Umum (PRU) ke-12 baru-baru ini benar-benar telah mengejutkan banyak pihak sama ada golongan ahli politik ataupun pemerhati politik. Secara sensasinya PRU tersebut memperlihatkan kejatuhan beberapa buah negeri kepada PAS, PKR dan DAP di samping BN tidak lagi memperolehi majoriti dua pertiga di peringkat pusat. Namun jika diteliti, secara hakikinya senario dan landskap politik di Malaysia sedang berubah kepada wajah yang baru. Perubahan itu boleh dilihat berdasarkan pemerhatian berikut:

a. Corak politik perkauman yang diwarisi oleh Malaysia daripada dasar pecah dan perintah penjajah British telah beralih kepada politik ideologi. Sepanjang 50 tahun selepas merdeka Perikatan atau Barisan Nasional banyak mendapat manfaat daripada corak politik perkauman ini. Dengan adanya sentimen perkauman yang kuat, maka parti yang berjaya menemukan (toleransi) tuntutan perkauman ini akan terus releven. Sebaliknya dalam PRU ke-12 rakyat mulai dilihat untuk tidak terikat kepada sentimen politik perkauman, sehingga ada kaum mengundi parti yang sebelum ini tidak mungkin diundi oleh mereka.

b. Tanggapan yang menyatakan bahawa BN atau UMNO tidak mungkin dikalahkan khususnya di negeri-negeri Pantai Barat telah tinggal bahan sejarah. PRU ke-12 telah membuktikan bahawa kemungkinan untuk mana-mana parti memperolehi mandat rakyat tetap wujud. Malah sekiranya pintu demokrasi dibuka dengan saksama seperti hak liputan media yang adil, kemungkinan untuk berlakunya perubahan yang lebih menyeluruh adalah tinggi. Fenomena ini sebenarnya bertepatan dengan firman Allah swt dalam surah Ali Imran, bahawa Allah lah yang berkuasa memberi dan mencabut pemerintahan daripada sesiapa yang dikehendaki.

c. Golongan pertengahan rakyat Malaysia khususnya yang berada di bandar-bandar telah mula menjadi faktor penentu yang aktif dalam politik Malaysia. Sebelum ini faktor penentu yang aktif ialah golongan bawahan rakyat yang begitu mudah digula-gulakan dengan pembangunan. Bagaimanapun perkembangan sosial dan ekonomi negara telah melebarkan kewujudan golongan pertengahan sehingga menjadi seumpama 'struktur bawang'. Masyarakat yang berstruktur bawang ini merupakan satu lonjakan baru untuk mencapai tahap minda politik kelas pertama bagi negara membangun seperti Malaysia.

d. Pihak Istana kembali memainkan peranan yang penting dalam sistem pemisahan kuasa di Malaysia. Peruntukan perlembagaan negara dan negeri dalam perlantikan Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Besar merupakan salah satu kaedah melaksanakan sistem pemisahan kuasa tersebut. Sebagaimana kes perlantikan MB di Perlis dan Terengganu, pihak Istana telah bertindak mengikut budibicara yang diperuntukkan oleh perlembagaan. Peristiwa ini menunjukkan bahawa Raja-raja Melayu kembali berperanan dalam politik negara bagi mengimbangi kuasa uniliteral BN.

Ibarat Ikan Pulang Ke Lubuk

Saya tidaklah begitu mengenali Asyraf Wajdi Dusuki, tetapi sempat untuk bersua muka bersamanya ketika saya membimbing gerakan mahasiswa semasa era reformasi tahun 1998. Beliau pada ketika itu memimpin PKPIM yang lebih rapat kepada pembimbing mereka seperti Saudara Yusri Mohamad yang merupakan Presiden Abim hari ini. Manakala saya lebih rapat dengan GAMIS yang merupakan satu wadah yang pernah saya hidupkan semula setelah dipelopori kewujudannya oleh Ustaz Yusof Abdullah, Saudara Abdul Rahman Embong dan lain-lain. Sekali-sekala ketika diwujudkan forum-forum tertutup tentang pendirian mahasiswa terhadap kebangkitan rakyat semasa era reformasi ini, saya sempat mengenali perwatakan dan pendirian beliau.

Pada ketika itu beliau sememangnya cenderung bersama arus perdana kebangkitan rakyat khususnya dalam konteks pembelaan terhadap kezaliman yang ditimpakan ke atas Anwar Ibrahim. Sememangnya daripada raut wajahnya beliau seperti menghadapi dilema untuk mengambil pendirian seperti itu, ketika mana bapanya sendiri adalah Setiausaha Politik kepada Dr. Mahathir. Saya rasa bukan saya seorang tetapi rakan-rakan beliau dalam PKPIM dan GAMIS sendiri seperti ragu-ragu terhadap pendirian sebenar beliau. Situasi ini sehingga menyebabkan beliau satu ketika menyebut "saya ni boleh dipercayai ke, sebab bapa saya Setiausaha Politik Dr Mahathir". Kelihatan beliau cuba untuk menyembunyikan konflik kejiwaan kalaupun bukan konflik kepentingan yang sedang dihadapinya.

Pada ketika itu saya cuba meramal sejauh manakah langkah 'menongkah arus' terhadap pendirian politik bapanya boleh bertahan. Untuk melihat beliau terus berdiri seperti rakan-rakannya di pihak politik anti-establisment, saya merasakan kemungkinannya adalah tipis. Paling jauh beliau boleh menjadi seorang ahli akademik yang kritis setelah mendapat didikan daripada wadah ABIM semasa berkecimpung dengan PKPIM. Tetapi hari ini setelah diumumkan calon-calon BN di negeri Kelantan, nama beliau terselit untuk berhadapan dengan Kamaruddin Jaafar yang juga merupakan bekas Setiausaha Agung ABIM yang memilih wadah PAS. Maka terserlahlah natijah konflik kejiwaan yang beliau hadapi sehingga akhirnya beliau kembali juga kepada pendirian politik bapanya. Bak kata pepatah "Ibarat Ikan Pulang ke Lubuk".

Tribute to the Late Mufti Ishak Baharom

Whenever I was informed that Dato Ishak Baharom passed away on 30th of January, immediately my memory flew to the most controversial issue in 1997, 'Mufti Selangor Sacked Down'. Since that time he was no longer a Mufti of Selangor State Government, but he still considered as a Mufti of people by Malaysian muslims. Every where he go, he would be asked about 'hukm' and his opinion was more trusted. His lecture attracted so many audiences even though he was banned from giving lecture at Government mosques. Until the last day of his life, he had been invited to give lecture at certain places in Kedah and Johor. His journey in this world almost repeat the history of Sultan al-Ulama Izz al-Din Abd al-Salam, a prominent Shafie's jurist in the Seventh Century of Hijrah.

Dato Ishak Baharom was born in 1928 in Kanchong Darat Selangor. His family was known very committed to Islamic teachings, thus Dato Ishak was sent to study Islamic knowledge at Madrasah al-Misriyah Penang. Not many know that at Madrasah al-Misriyah he was very closed to Haji Ahmad Fuad, a prominent scholar and among the founders of PAS. Then he furthered his study to Darul Uloum India, a very known higher Institution especially in Hadith. When returned to Malaysia, Dato Ishak started accomplishing his ummah obligation by becoming a teacher in some schools. He was appointed as Mufti by Sultan of Selangor in 1985 until he was sacked down in 1997. He was known by his pious personality but persistent in upholding Islamic stand. May Allah bless him and place him under His Mercy. Al-Fatihah

Socialist Jews Join Demontration Againts Zionism

Last Sunday 27 January, I made a way joining demonstration to support Palestinian related to racent issue in Gaza. The demonstration was organized by a group who call themselves as Palestinian Society of Wales. Though I arrived at the demonstration square whenever the demonstration almost over, I managed myself to meet the organiser as well as some representatives of NGOs. Amongts them, I discussed with a representative of Socialist Workers Party who I believe a non-muslim. He told me that, in his opinion the roots of Palestinian crisis is not because of religious sentiment but the domination of Capitalist Jews.

Actually the Capitalist Jews were the founder of Zionism, upholding the ideology of Jewish Empire. Most of the World crisis from Middle East to African and the rest part of the world, there are a 'hidden hand' ensuring the interest of Zionist towards Jewish Empire. It is true to look Jewishs by categorizing them into certains groups, because not all of them support the idea of Jewish Empire. A couple months ago, while visiting New York to attend UN General Assembly, the Iranian President also met a group of fundamentalist Jews who declared their oppositional stand againts Israel.

Indeed in the holy Al-Quran, when Allah mentioned about Jews, sometimes he use the term of Ahl al-Kitab, in the other verse he use al-Yahud and the Sons of Jacob. Clearly Allah himself tought us to categorize them, so that we have to deal with them by diverse form of relationships. In certain verses Allah has warned us to be aware of them, but in the other verses Allah offer us to make relationships with them until we are permitted to marry their women. Therefore, it is important to identify which group of Jewish who Allah means in verse 120 Surah al-Baqarah: "Never will the Jews be pleased with you and nor Christians until you follow their way.."

Gelatine Babi dan Hukum Najis Berubah


Saya ingin merujuk kepada isu yang ditimbulkan oleh petikan daripada artikel dalam al-ahkam.net tentang gelatine babi seperti di bawah:

“Satu kaedah dalam menentukan halal haram makanan ialah dilihat pada pertukaran rupa dan benda, seperti arak yang kemudiannya bertukar rupanya menjadi cuka. Menurut mazhab Syafie pertukaran rupa tidak mengubahkan hukum najis sesuatu benda, kecuali arak yang berubah menjadi cuka. Cuka ini bersih, sekalipun asalnya arak yang najis.

Imam Malik berpendapat, benda-benda najis yang bertukar kepada suatu rupa yang lain adalah suci, seperti najis babi yang dibakar kemudian bertukar menjadi debu hukumnya suci, sekalipun pertukaran itu dengan sendiri atau setelah diusahakan. Atas dasar ini, ramai berpendapat, gelatin itu suci dan boleh digunakan, sekalipun ditakdirkan asalnya babi atau bangkai yang tidak disembelih, kerana najis itu telah bertukar rupanya kepada rupa yang lain. Kedudukannya samalah dengan tulang bangkai yang dibakar menjadi debu. Tulang bangkai adalah bangkai, tetapi debu tulang setelah dibakar tidak lagi membawa hukum asalnya.

Saya lebih cenderung kepada pendapat ini, kerana hukum halal haram ditentukan mengikut namanya. Apabila tiada nama, maka tiada lagi hukum asalnya, tahi adalah tahi dan hukumnya adalah najis, tetapi apabila tahi menjadi tanah, maka hukumnya adalah tanah.” (sumber al-ahkam)


Pendapat saya:

Hukum mengenai najis yang berubah dalam istilah Fiqh disebut ‘Istihalah’ yang merujuk kepada sesuatu najis yang berubah a`in (zat) kepada bentuk yang lain melalui proses pembakaran dan seumpamanya. Sepertimana yang dimaklumi mazhab Syafi`e menyatakan sesuatu najis yang berlaku istihalah tidak akan merubah hukumnya kecuali arak yang berubah menjadi cuka disebabkan ada nas yang mengisyaratkan sedemikian, malah arak itu sendiri asalnya daripada perahan buah-buahan yang suci. Manakala menurut mazhab Maliki pula sebaliknya, najis yang berubah a`innya, maka berubahlah hukum tentangnya seperti najis yang dibakar maka debu-debu najis tersebut menjadi suci ataupun najis yang telah bertukar menjadi tanah maka tanah tersebut menjadi suci. Berdasarkan pandangan mazhab Maliki tersebut maka gelatine babi bagi sesetengah pendapat menjadi halal kerana telah berlaku istihalah padanya.

Pada pandangan saya pendapat ini tidak benar disebabkan alasan-alasan berikut:

a. Setakat yang saya rujuk kepada pandangan mazhab Maliki (sekiranya ada pandangan lain dialu-alukan) istihalah ini berkaitan dengan persoalan najis yang berubah menjadi suci selepas berubah a`innya bukannya berkaitan dengan perubahan makanan daripada haram kepada halal. Tidak semua perkara yang suci halal di makan, malah di dalam mazhab Maliki sendiri melihat babi itu suci tetapi haram di makan. Demikian juga dengan arak sebahagian ulama menyatakan bahawa ia suci tetapi hukum meminumnya tetap haram. Dalam kes gelatine babi ini, pengharamannya disabitkan dengan jelas melalui nas yang qati’e samaada tsubut dan dalalahnya. Dan berdasarkan hadith Rasulullah saw yang masyhur: “Yang halal itu jelas dan haram itu jelas…” pada pandangan saya menunjukkan tidak berlaku perubahan hukum tentang halal dan haram kepada sesuatu yang berubah a`innya.

b. Menurut satu Qai`dah Fiqhiyah, “tidak berkumpul halal dan haram kecuali haram mengalahkan yang halal”, maka dalam berlakunya istihalah a’in babi ini kemungkinan ia berlaku tidak seluruhnya, kecuali proses semulajadi atau proses yang memungkinkan ia berubah sepenuhnya seperti pembakaran. Oleh sebab itu, menurut Syafi`e arak yang berubah menjadi cuka hendaklah berubah secara semulajadi kerana perubahan secara semulajadi itu memungkinkan berlaku perubahan seluruhnya. Walaupun terdapat khilaf ulama tentang sumber hadith yang menjadi dasar kaedah ini, tetapi sekiranya hadith ini disandarkan kepada hadith: “ Yang halal itu jelas dan haram itu jelas…. Dan barang siapa yang menjatuhkan dirinya kepada syubhat maka jatuhlah ia kepada yang haram, bagaikan pengembala yang mengembala di sekitar daerah larangan, yang hampir-hampir ia mengembala di dalamnya", maka dapat dilihat bahawa kaedah di atas terpakai dalam Fiqh.

c. Menurut sebahagian ulama mutakhir seperti Muhammad al-Hawari dan Abd Naseer Abu Basal bahawa a`in babi ini tidak mungkin berubah walaupun melalui proses istihalah. Oleh kerana itu, sesiapa yang masih hendak berpegang kepada hukum halalnya gelatine babi ini tidak boleh tidak perlu memastikan syarat perubahan a`in itu secara yakin. Sekiranya tidak maka Kaedah Usul yang menyatakan, “Keyakinan Tidak dihilangkan dengan Keraguan” menunjukkan bahawa hukumnya haramnya tidak berubah disebabkan ragu-ragu bahawa berlakunya perubahan a`in tersebut. Perkembangan bidang Sains telah memungkinkan manusia untuk mengenalpasti kewujudan DNA yang menjadi unsur asas sel-sel kehidupan, seterusnya mengenalpasti sesuatu haiwan daripada yang lain. Daging seseekor haiwan terdiri daripada sel-sel yang struktur asasnya mengandungi DNA. Oleh kerana itu, selagi mana boleh dikenali DNA itu daripada babi maka daging yang haram itu tetap wujud, maka hukumnya tidak boleh berubah sekiranya hendak disandarkan kepada pandangan mazhab Maliki tersebut.

d. Setakat pengetahuan sains saya khusus bidang kimia organik, proses menghasilkan gelatine babi ini adalah berasal daripada kalogen babi (fibre protine) yang diekstrakkan kemudiannya melalui proses hydrolysis. Proses hydrolysis ini bukan seperti pembakaran yang melibatkan pengoksidaan sehingga merubah a`in asal daging babi tersebut. Oleh sebab itu, melalui proses itu a`in babi itu tidak berubah kecuali ditambah molekul air yang merubah bentuk pepejalnya kepada gel pada suhu rendah dan cecair pada suhu tinggi. Gelatine babi itu tiada bezanya dengan kalogen asal, maka tidak berlaku perubahan a’in melainkan bentuknya (form) yang berubah. Jadi disebabkan tiada perubahan a`innya, walaupun kita hendak menerima pandangan pandangan mazhab Maliki tersebut, pandangan tersebut tidak terpakai dalam kes gelatine babi ini.

Wallahua`lam

Empat Noktah Tentang HINDRAF

Noktah 1.

Tidak keterlaluan jika dikatakan bahawa rakyat Malaysia adalah mangsa kepada penyonsangan sejarah sehingga impaknya semakin dirasai oleh mereka pada hari ini. Sebenarnya sejarah kita dibina oleh negara, bukannya sejarah yang membina negara kita. Dalam Falsafah Sejarah, salah satu persoalan besar yang mengundang perbahasan panjang lebar ialah sama ada ‘sejarah membentuk negara atau negara membentuk sejarah’. Secara normalnya sejarah yang membentuk negara kerana akar-umbi sosial dan budaya sesebuah masyarakat itulah yang sepatutnya dijadikan sebagai asas kepada pembentukan negara. Meminjam pandangan Baharuddin Ahmad, pakar Falsafah Sejarah di ISTAC, sejarah berasal dari bahasa Arab ‘syajarah’ yang bermakna pokok (pokok-pangkal) bukan seperti bahasa Inggeris ‘History’ bermakna pengkesahan (his + strory). Konotasi dari perkataan ini menerangkan bahawa sejarah menerangkan tentang akar-umbi dan pokok-pangkal sesuatu perkara.

Sepertimana yang selalu disebut, sejarah dipelajari untuk kita mengambil iktibar daripadanya. Sebenarnya lebih daripada itu, sejarah dipelajari supaya akar-umbi dan pokok-pangkal sesuatu itulah sepatutnya dijadikan asas untuk kita membina kehidupan di masa akan datang. Sejarahlah yang telah membentuk Kepulauan Melayu didiami oleh etnik Melayu seterusnya menjadi wilayah yang didiami oleh penganut Islam antara yang paling besar di dunia. Kedua-dua faktor Melayu dan Islam inilah yang telah mencorakkan pula sosial dan budaya masyarakat rantau ini selama berkurun-kurun sehingga menjadi sesuatu yang telah sebati. Kaum Cina dan India telah datang ke rantau ini lebih awal daripada migrasi yang dirancang oleh British, tetapi kesemua mereka berasimilasi dengan sosial dan budaya masyarakat rantau ini sehingga sukar dibezakan mereka dengan masyarakat tempatan. Lihat sahaja masyarakat Baba dan Nyonya yang merupakan hasil asimilasi migrasi dari China dengan sosial dan budaya tempatan.

Kedatangan Migrasi daripada China dan India pada kurun ke-20 seperti yang ditaja oleh British tidak mempedulikan akar-umbi dan pokok pangkal masyarakat di Kepulauan Melayu ini. Kaum Cina dan India dipisahkan daripada diasimilasikan dengan sosial dan budaya tempatan, malah British sedaya mungkin cuba menghakis akar-umbi dan pokok-pangkal tersebut. Situasi ini berterusan sehingga British berura-ura memberi kemerdekaan kepada Malaya. Pembentukan negara Malaya pada ketika itu berasaskan kepada sosial dan budaya yang ditaja oleh British seperti politik perkauman dan budaya carcamerba. Sejarah (akar-umbi dan pokok-pangkal) rantau ini tidak menjadi asas terpenting kepada pembinaan negara. Dengan perkataan lain, masyarakat kita sebenarnya dibina menyosang sejarah.

Kedua-dua kaum Cina dan India semenjak zaman British sama ada dirancang atau tidak dirancang, dihalang daripada berasimilasi dengan faktor Melayu dan Islam yang menjadi akar-umbi dan pokok-pangkal masyarakat rantau ini. Halangan itu berterusan sehingga selepas kemerdekaan seperti tiada kemahuan untuk merubahnya. Merubahnya mungkin tidak menguntungkan pada sesetengah pihak. Berbeza dengan masyarakat Cina dan India di beberapa buah Negeri seperti Kelantan dan Terengganu, mereka lebih terdorong berasimilasi dengan faktor Melayu dan Islam. Masalah perkauman tidak begitu kronik bagi kolompok-kelompok yang tidak terhalang seperti itu. Menyedari perkara tersebut, tuntutan HINDRAF ini adalah sebahagian daripada impak wujudnya halangan asimilasi tersebut disebabkan kemahuan yang kurang untuk menjadikan ‘akar-umbi dan pokok-pangkal’ sejarah sebagai asas membina negara.

Noktah 2

Lazimnya di Malaysia, apabila timbul sahaja isu-isu berbau perkauman maka akan terdengarlah semula gagasan tentang ‘kontrak sosial’ (social contract). Skrip yang sama akan diulang-ulangkan seumpama, “semua pihak perlu menghormati kontrak sosial semasa negara memperolehi kemerdekaan daripada British”. Malang sekali ramai yang tidak memahami tentang apakah sebenarnya yang dimaksudkan kontrak sosial atau mungkin mereka akan berhujah seperti yang selalu diucapkan, “kita mempunyai kontrak sosial cara kita”. Sekiranya inilah skrip dan hujah yang digunakan, lebih baiklah kita menggunakan perkataan lain seperti ‘perjanjian bersama’ atau sebagainya. Kontrak Sosial seperti yang wujud dalam falsafah kenegaraan yang dikemukakan oleh tokoh-tokoh Barat seumpama John Locke dan Jacques Rousseau memberi makna yang perlu diperhalusi supaya konsep itu sesuai untuk digunapakai dalam konteks Malaysia.

Kontrak sosial seperti yang dikemukakan oleh mereka memberi penekanan kepada kepentingan bersama sebagai dasar kepada pembinaan sesebuah negara bangsa. Secara semulajadi setiap manusia mempunyai kebebasan untuk melakukan apa sahaja sehingga dilihat sebagai hak perseorangan. Tetapi apabila mereka mahu hidup dalam sebuah masyarakat atau bangsa bernegara, maka hak perseorangan itu disempadani dengan had batasan sehingga tidak mencerobohi hak orang lain dengan meletakkan kepentingan bersama sebagai terasnya. Semangat daripada kontrak sosial ini ialah mendaulatkan hak-hak perseorangan selama mana tidak mencerobohi hak orang lain dan mengutamakan kepentingan bersama bila wujud pertembungan hak. Di sinilah timbul persoalan iaitu sejauh mana kontrak sosial yang menjadi teras pembinaan negara Malaysia semasa kemerdekaan dahulu memenuhi konsep tesebut.

Dalam kontrak sosial tersebut, dimanakah letaknya hak-hak orang Islam untuk beramal dengan keseluruhan ajaran Islam dalam negara ini, betapa pula faktor Islam menjadi faktor terpenting mencorakkan kondisi masyarakat seperti itu. Pelaksanaan Islam dalam negara Malaysia tidak menyeluruh, sedangkan hak untuk melaksanakannya tidak mencerobohi hak-hak kaum yang lain. Sebagai contoh hak untuk melaksanakan hukum-hukum Islam seperti hukum Hudud, Qisas dan Taazir, merupakan hak yang tidak mencerobohi hak-hak kaum lain sebagaimana yang digubal oleh Kerajaan Kelantan dan Terengganu sebelum ini. Namun demikian, hak-hak untuk melaksanakannya tidak dijamin oleh kontrak sosial yang termaktub semasa mencapai kemerdekaan. Sebaliknya hak-hak yang telah diberikan seperti polisi kawalan moral pula telah dicabar oleh beberapa NGOs sebelum ini.

Demikian juga berapa banyak hak-hak orang Islam dicerobohi oleh kepentingan-kepentingan sebelah pihak seperti pembinaan pusat perjudian, pusat-pusat hiburan dan lain-lain. Tidakkah perlaksanaan semua ini mencerobohi hak-hak orang Islam disebabkan ajaran Islam melarang kegiatan-kegiatan seumpama ini. Malangnya kontrak sosial yang dimeterai semasa kemerdekaan ini tidak mengambil kira perkara-perkara teras seperti ini. Maka kontrak sosial tersebut sebenarnya lebih banyak merugikan orang-orang Islam sedangkan seperti yang disebut dalam noktah pertama sebelum ini, faktor Melayu dan Islam seharusnya menjadi asas kepada pembinaan negara bukannya diketepikan. Kandungan kontrak sosial tersebut lebih kepada kepentingan bersama untuk ‘mengisi perut’ atau bahasa akademiknya religious-free. Agama yang sepatutnya menjadi teras kehidupan manusia terpenting diremehkan, dengan pengertian lain kontrak sosial tersebut berwajahkan sekular. Sekiranya tuntutan HINDRAF itu disifatkan sebagai hak untuk memprotes setelah kontrak sosial itu menjurus kepada penindasan sebagaimana pandangan Locke, maka sudah sampai masanya kontrak sosial yang dimeterai itu disemak semula.

Noktah 3

Selepas Negara Malaysia merdeka, sememangnya pembangunan banyak bermatlamatkan kepada aspek material. Jarang sekali pembangunan ditumpukan kepada matlamat sosial dengan menjadikan material sebagai wasilahnya. Ada satu ketika iaitu pada zaman Tun Razak, pembangunan ditumpukan kepada matlamat sosial melalui pelaksanaan Dasar Ekonomi Baru. Dalam DEB ini, matlamat pembangunan lebih ditumpukan pembasmian kemiskinan dan penyusunan semula masyarakat. Matlamat seperti ini tidaklah begitu popular seperti Wawasan 2020, Selangor Maju 2005, Kedah Gemilang 2010 dan lain-lain. Namun demikian, DEB ini merupakan satu pembangunan sebenar untuk manusia kerana mengambil kira faktor-faktor kemanusiaan sebagai matlamatnya.

Malangnya DEB ini telah disalahgunakan sebagai pembangunan untuk Bumiputera atau secara khususnya untuk UMNOputera. Sedangkan dalam matlamat DEB secara jelas menunjukkan matlamatnya merentasi kaum. Kemudian semasa zaman Dr Mahathir, matlamat sosial ini dijadikan matlamat kelas kedua, manakala matlamat material yang bertopengkan DEB dijadikan matlamat kelas pertama. Meskipun Dr Mahathir melakukan inisiatif tertentu khususnya untuk memenuhi strategi DEB bagi menempatkan kaum Melayu dalam sektor-sektor berdaya maju seperti industri otomobil, tumpuan kepada DEB itu telah berubah daripada sosial kepada material. Apabila tumpuan diberikan kepada material maka situasi sosial masyarakat tidak begitu dipentingkan apatah lagi kepada kaum minoriti.

Selepas zaman Tun Razak khususnya tiada tempat yang utama kepada matlamat sosial. Malah dalam bidang pendidikan matlamat sosial secara rasmi telah dipinggirkan dengan tumpuan 60% aliran Sains dan 40% Sains Sosial. Masyarakat yang membangun dengan pembangunan material tetapi pembangunan sosialnya tempang akan menghadapi masalah. Masalah yang dihadapi oleh kaum India di Malaysia ini adalah penyakit yang disebabkan oleh gejala ketempangan ini. Dari segi perangkaan, kaum India lebih terkehadapan berbanding kaum Melayu, namun apakah gambaran material itu menggambarkan situasi sosial yang sebenarnya. Oleh sebab itu, Hindraf telah memberi signal penting kepada keperluan melakukan 'reengineering' sosial dalam masyarakat Malaysia.

Noktah 4

Bersambung....

Kebebasan Akademik Yang Hilang

Sememangnya umum mengetahui bahawa demokrasi di Malaysia semakin pincang. Bagi ahli-ahli akademik yang jujur dan luhur boleh melihat sendiri perjalanan demokrasi di Malaysia mutakhir ini bermula daripada kebebasan media sehingga kepada amalan pilihanraya, sedang menuju kepada autokrasi. Bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir sendiri mengakui secara terbuka tentang hakikat ini, lalu beliau menggambarkan Malaysia seumpama sebuah Negara Polis. Di peringkat antarabangsa negara Malaysia telah dikategorikan sebagai Negara Demokrasi Pincang berdasarkan Indeks Demokrasi yang dikeluarkan oleh majalah The Economist’s. Daripada 167 buah negara, Malaysia berada ditangga 81 lebih rendah daripada India (35), Mongolia (56) dan Bangladesh (75). Malah Nepal yang bangsanya disebut sebagai ‘Gurkha’ lebih baik pencapaiannya dalam konteks amalan demokrasi.

Menyedari hakikat tersebut, hasrat untuk mengembalikan amalan demokrasi yang adil merupakan kehendak seluruh rakyat Malaysia tidak kira parti pemerintah (sebagaimana yang disuarakan oleh penyokong-penyokong bekas Perdana Menteri), parti pembangkang, NGOs dan mereka yang tidak berpihak (non-partisan). Pilihan yang lain ialah kita terus mengekalkan status-quo amalan demokrasi kita sehingga akhirnya negara kita akan terjerumus dalam konflik yang kronik sebagaimana yang berlaku di negara-negara yang mengamalkan despotisme. Tepat sekali pandangan yang dikemukakan oleh Robert D. Crane bekas Penasihat Presiden Amerika Syarikat Richard Nixon: Extremisme bukan lahir disebabkan hasrat untuk berkuasa tetapi lahir dari rasa takut disebabkan cengkaman sehingga mendorong kepada pemikiran totalitarian yang membawa kepada terrorisme. Oleh sebab itu perjuangan untuk mengembalikan amalan demokrasi yang adil merupakan satu usaha yang patriotik oleh rakyat yang cintakan negara.

Perhimpunan aman yang dianjurkan oleh Bersih pada 10 November 2007 yang lalu merupakan satu usaha ke arah mengembalikan amalan demokrasi yang adil. Sepatutnya semua pihak yang mempunyai semangat patriotik akan turut bersama mendukung hasrat tersebut termasuklah dari kalangan parti pemerintah. Namun demikian, berbagai usaha telah dilakukan untuk menggagalkan tuntutan tersebut termasuklah amaran daripada pihak pentadbiran di universiti-universiti awam, mengugut ahli-ahli akademik dan mahasiswa supaya tidak hadir “walaupun sebagai pemerhati”. Larangan itu dikeluarkan di saat The Times Higher Educations Supplement menyenaraikan 200 universiti terbaik dunia, yang menyaksikan tiada sebuahpun universiti di Malaysia yang tersenarai.

Siapapun tidak boleh menjangkakan apakah impak perhimpunan aman yang dianjurkan oleh Bersih ini. Mungkinkah perhimpunan aman tersebut akan membawa natijah yang positif sehingga mengembalikan amalan demokrasi yang adil? Tidak mustahil sekiranya dengan ramainya rakyat yang berhimpun menyebabkan amalan pilihanraya di Malaysia akan berubah sebagai contoh beralih kepada sistem Proportional Representative. Sekiranya perubahan-perubahan ini berlaku sehingga membawa perubahan besar kepada amalan demokrasi negara atau setidak-tidaknya melahirkan rakyat yang berjiwa merdeka, maka perhimpunan aman ini akan dikenang sepanjang zaman sebagai ‘turning point’nya. Jika telahan ini berlaku maka berebut-rebutlah ahli-ahli akademik pada masa mendatang membuat kajian tentang perhimpunan aman ini dari pelbagai sudut. Tidak mustahil cecair kimia yang digunakan oleh Meriam Pancutan air pihak Polis turut menjadi bahan kajian.

Tidakkah dunia akademik kerugian besar apabila larangan seumpama ini dikeluarkan. Kajian yang dilakukan oleh ahli-ahli akademik selepas peritiwa ini berlaku sudah pasti kurang wibawanya berbanding dengan ahli-ahli akademik yang berada sendiri ditempat kejadian, melakukan pemerhatian secara langsung terhadap peristiwa ini. Oleh kerana itu, larangan kepada ahli-ahli akademik berada di tempat kejadian walaupun sebagai pemerhati merupakan langkah seribu tapak ke belakang menyekat kebebasan dunia akademik. Sekiranya larangan itu menyebut dilarang menyertai perhimpunan maka dapatlah dilihat rasionalnya, tetapi “sehingga menjadi pemerhati”pun tidak dibenarkan, apa lagi yang tinggal pada kebebasan dunia akademik. Lupakanlah hasrat menjadi universiti bertaraf dunia kalau minda ahli akademiknya dikongkong sebegitu rupa.

An Impressive Speech by Ahmadinejad at University of Columbia (Part 2)

MODERATOR: Mr. President, your statements here today and in the past have provoked many questions which I would like to pose to you on behalf of the students and faculty who have submitted them to me. Let me begin with the question to which you just alluded.

The first question is: Do you or your government seek the destruction of the state of Israel as a Jewish state?

AHMADINEJAD: We love all nations. We are friends with the Jewish people. There are many Jews in Iran, leaving peacefully, with security. You must understand that in our constitution and our laws and in the parliamentary elections for every 150,000 people, we get one representative in the parliament. For the Jewish community, for one- fifth of this number, they still get one independent representative in the parliament.

So our proposal to the Palestinian plight is a humanitarian and democratic proposal. What we say is that to solve this 60-year problem, we must allow the Palestinian people to decide about its future for itself. This is compatible with the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations and the fundamental principles enshrined in it. We must allow Jewish Palestinians, Muslim Palestinians and Christian Palestinians to determine their own fate themselves through a free referendum.

Whatever they choose as a nation, everybody should accept and respect. Nobody should interfere in the affairs of the Palestinian nation. Nobody should sow the seeds of discord. Nobody should spend tens of billions of dollars equipping and arming one group there.

We say allow the Palestinian nation to decide its own future, to have the right to self-determination for itself. This is what we are saying as the Iranian nation.

MODERATOR: Mr. President, I think many members of our audience would like to hear a clearer answer to that question. The question is:
Do you or your government seek the destruction of the state of Israel as a Jewish state? And I think you could answer that question with a single word, either yes or no.

AHMADINEJAD: You asked the question, and then you want the answer the way you want to hear it. Well, this isn't really a free flow of information. I'm just telling you what my position is. I'm asking you: Is the Palestinian issue not an international issue of prominence or not? Please tell me, yes or no? There's the plight of a people.

MODERATOR: The answer to your question is yes.

AHMADINEJAD: Well, thank you for your cooperation . We recognize there's a problem there that's been going on for 60 years. Everybody provides a solution. And our solution is a free referendum. Let this referendum happen, and then you'll see what the results are.

Let the people of Palestine freely choose what they want for their future. And then what you want in your mind to happen there will happen and will be realized.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) second question, which was posed by President Bollinger earlier and comes from a number of other students:
Why is your government providing aid to terrorists? Will you stop doing so and permit international monitoring to certify that you have stopped?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, I want to pose a question here to you. If someone comes and explodes bombs around you, threatens your president, members of the administration, kills the members of the Senate or Congress, how would you treat them? Would you reward them, or would you name them a terrorist group? Well, it's clear. You would call them a terrorist.

My dear friends, the Iranian nation is a victim of terrorism. For --26 years ago, where I worked, close to where I worked, in a terrorist operation, the elected president of the Iranian nation and the elected prime minister of Iran lost their lives in a bomb explosion. They turned into ashes.

A month later, in another terrorist operation, 72 members of our parliament and highest-ranking officials, including four ministers and eight deputy ministers' bodies were shattered into pieces as a result of terrorist attacks. Within six months, over 4,000 Iranians lost their lives, assassinated by terrorist groups. All this carried out by the hand of one single terrorist group. Regretfully, that same terrorist group now, today, in your country, is being -- operating under the support of the U.S. administration, working freely, distributing declarations freely, and their camps in Iraq are supported by the U.S. government.

They're secured by the U.S. government. Our nation has been harmed by terrorist activities. We were the first nation that objected to terrorism and the first to uphold the need to fight terrorism. We need to address the root causes of terrorism and eradicate those root causes. We live in the Middle East.

For us, it's quite clear which powers, sort of, incite terrorists, support them, fund them. We know that. Our nation, the Iranian nation, through history has always extended a hand of friendship to other nations. We're a cultured nation. We don't need to resort to terrorism. We've been victims of terrorism, ourselves. And it's regrettable that people who argue they're fighting terrorism, instead of supporting the Iranian people and nation, instead of fighting the terrorists that are attacking them, they're supporting the terrorists and then turn the fingers to us. This is most regrettable.

QUESTION: Mr. President, a further set of questions challenged your view of the Holocaust. Since the evidence that this occurred in Europe in the 1940s, as a result of the actions of the German Nazi government, since that -- those facts -- are well documented, why are you calling for additional research? There seems to be no purpose in doing so, other than to question whether the Holocaust actually occurred as a historical fact. Can you explain why you believe more research is needed into the facts of what are what are
incontrovertible?

AHMADINEJAD: Thank you very much for your question. I am an academic, and you are as well. Can you argue that researching a phenomenon is finished, forever done? Can we close the books for good on a historical event?

There are different perspectives that come to light after every research is done. Why should we stop research at all? Why should we stop the progress of science and knowledge?

You shouldn't ask me why I'm asking questions. You should ask yourselves why you think that that's questionable? Why do you want to stop the progress of science and research?

Do you ever take what's known as absolute in physics? We had principles in mathematics that were granted to be absolute in mathematics for over 800 years. But new science has gotten rid of those absolutisms, come forward other different logics of looking at mathematics and sort of turned the way we look at it as a science altogether after 800 years.

So, we must allow researchers, scholars, they investigate into everything, every phenomenon -- God, universe, human beings, history and civilization. Why should we stop that?

I am not saying that it didn't happen at all. This is not that judgment that I am passing here. I said, in my second question, granted this happened, what does it have to do with the Palestinian people? This is a serious question. There are two dimensions. In the first question...

QUESTION: Let me just -- let me pursue this a bit further. It is difficult to have a scientific discussion if there isn't at least some basis, some empirical basis, some agreement about what the facts are.

So calling for research into the facts when the facts are
so well established represents for many a challenging of the facts themselves and a denial that something terrible occurred in Europe in those years.

Let me move on to ...

AHMADINEJAD: Allow me. After all, you are free to interpret what you want from what I say. But what I am saying I'm saying with full clarity.

In the first question I'm trying to actually uphold the rights of European scholars. In the field of science and research I'm asking, there is nothing known as absolute. There is nothing sufficiently done Not in physics for certain. There has been more research on physics than it has on the Holocaust, but we still continue to do research on physics. There is nothing wrong with doing it.

This is what man wants. They want to approach a topic from different points of view. Scientists want to do that. Especially an issue that has become the foundation of so many other political developments that have unfolded in the Middle East in the past 60 years.

Why do we stop it altogether? You have to have a justified reason for it. The fact that it was researched sufficiently in the past is not a sufficient justification in my mind.

QUESTION: Mr. President, another student asks -- Iranian women are now denied basic human rights and your government has imposed draconian punishments, including execution on Iranian citizens who are homosexuals. Why are you doing those things?

AHMADINEJAD: Freedoms in Iran are genuine, true freedoms. Iranian people are free. Women in Iran enjoy the highest levels of freedom. We have two vice presidents that are female, at the highest levels of specialty, specialized fields. In our parliament and our government and our universities, they're present. In our biotechnological fields, our technological fields, there are hundreds of women scientists that are active -- in the political realm as well. It's not -- it's wrong for some governments, when they disagree with another government, to, sort of, try to spread lies that distort the full truth.

Our nation is free. It has the highest level of participation in elections, in Iran. Eighty percent, ninety percent of the people turn out for votes during the elections, half of which, over half of which are women. So how can we say that women are not free? Is that the entire truth?

But as for the executions, I'd like to raise two questions. If someone comes and establishes a network for illicit drug trafficking that affects the youth in Iran, Turkey, Europe, the United States, by introducing these illicit drugs and destroys them, would you ever reward them?

People who cause the deterioration of the lives of hundreds of millions of youth around the world, including in Iran, can we have any sympathy to them? Don't you have capital punishment in the United States? You do, too.

In Iran, too, there's capital punishment for illicit drug traffickers, for people who violated the rights of people. If somebody takes up a gun, goes into a house, kills a group of people there, and then tries to take ransom, how would you confront them in Iran -- or in the United States? Would you reward them? Can a physician allow microbes, symbolically speaking, to spread across a nation? We have laws. People who violate the public rights of the people by using guns, killing people, creating insecurity, sells drugs, distribute drugs at a high level are sentenced to execution in Iran.

And some of these punishments, very few, are carried in the public eye , before the public eye. It's a law, based on democratic principles. You use injections and microbes to kill these people, and they' re executed or they're hung. But the end result is killing.

QUESTION: Mr. President, the question isn't about criminal and drug smugglers. The question was about sexual preference and women.

AHMADINEJAD: In Iran, we don't have homosexuals, like in your country. We don't have that in our country. In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have it.

But, as for women, maybe you think that being a woman is a crime. It's not a crime to be a woman. Women are the best creatures created by God. They represent the kindness, the beauty that God instills in them. Women are respected in Iran. In Iran, every family who is given a girl, they are 10 times happier than having a son. Women are respected more than men are.

They are exempt from many responsibilities. Many of the legal responsibilities rest on the shoulders of men in our society because of the respect, culturally given, to women, to the future mothers. In Iranian culture, men and sons and girls constantly kiss the hands of their mothers as a sign of respect, respect for women. And we are proud of this culture.

QUESTION: Mr. President, I have two questions which I'll put together. One is, what did you hope to accomplish by speaking at Columbia today? And the second is, what would you have said if you were permitted to visit the site of the September 11th tragedy?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, here, I'm your guest. I've been invited by Columbia, an official invitation given for me to come here. But I do want to say something here.

In Iran, when you invite a guest, you respect them. This is our tradition, required by our culture. And I know that American people have that culture, as well. Last year, I wanted to go to the site of the September 11th tragedy to show respect to the victims of the tragedy, to show my sympathy with their families.

But our plans got overextended. We were involved in negotiations and meetings until midnight. And they said it would be very difficult to go visit the site at that late hour of the night. So, I told my friends then that they need to plan this for the following year so that I can go and visit the site and to show my respects.

Regretfully, some groups had very strong reactions, very bad reactions. It's bad for someone to prevent someone to show sympathy to the families of the victims of the September 11 event -- tragic event.

This is a respect from my side. Somebody told me this is an insult. I said, "What are you saying? This is my way of showing my respect. Why would you think that?" Thinking like that, how do you expect to manage the world and world affairs?

Don't you think that a lot of problems in the world come from the way you look at issues because of this kind of way of thinking, because of this sort of pessimistic approach toward a lot of people, because of a certain level of selfishness, self-absorption that needs to be put aside so that we can show respect to everyone, to allow an environment for friendship to grow, to allow all nations to talk with one another and move toward peace?
What was the second question?

I wanted to speak with the press. The September 11th tragic event was a huge event. It led to a lot of many other events afterwards. After 9 /11 Afghanistan was occupied, and then Iraq was occupied. And for six years in our region there is insecurity, terror and fear. If the root causes of 9/11 are examined properly -- why it was happened, what caused it, what were the conditions that led to it, who truly was involved, who was really involved -- and put it all together to understand how to prevent the crisis in Iraq, fix the problem in Afghanistan and Iraq combined.

QUESTION: Mr. President, a number of questions have asked about your nuclear program. Why is your government seeking to acquire enriched uranium suitable for nuclear weapons? Will you stop doing so?

AHMADINEJAD : Our nuclear program, first and foremost, operates within the framework of law. And, second, under the inspections of the IAEA. And, thirdly, they are completely peaceful.

The technology we have is for enrichment below the level of 5 percent level. And any level below 5 percent is solely for providing fuel to power plants. Repeated reports by the IAEA explicitly say that there is no indication that Iran has deviated from the peaceful path of its nuclear program.

We are all well aware that Iran's nuclear issue is a political issue. It's not a legal issue. The international atomic energy agency has verified that our activities are for peaceful purposes. But there are two or three powers that think that they have the right to monopolize all science and knowledge. And they expect the Iranian people, the Iranian nation, to turn to others to get fuel, to get science, to get knowledge that's indigenous to itself, to humble itself. And then they would, of course, refrain from giving it to us, too. So we're quite clear what we need.

If you have created the fifth generation of atomic bombs and are testing them already, what position are you in to question the peaceful purposes of other people who want nuclear power? We do not believe in nuclear weapons, period. It goes against the whole grain of humanity. So let me just joke -- try to tell a joke here. I think the politicians who are after atomic bombs or are testing them, making them, politically, they are backward, retarded.

QUESTION: Mr. President, a final question. I know your time is short and that you need to move on. Is Iran prepared to open broad discussions with the government of the United States? What would Iran hope to achieve in such discussions? How do you see, in the future, a resolution of the points of conflict between the government of the United States and the government of Iran ?

AHMADINEJAD: From the start, we announced that we are ready to negotiate with all countries. Since 28 years ago, when our revolution succeeded and we established, we took freedom and democracy that was held at by a pro-Western dictatorship. We announced our readiness that besides two countries, we are ready to have friendly relations and talks with all countries of the world.

One of those two was the apartheid regime of South Africa, which has been eliminated. And the second was the Zionist regime. For everybody else around the world, we announced that we want to have friendly, brotherly ties. The Iranian nation is a cultured nation. It is a civilized nation. It seeks -- it wants talks and negotiations.
It's for it.

We believe that in negotiations and talks, everything can be resolved very easily. We don't need threats. We don't need to point bombs or guns. We don't need to get into conflicts if we talk. We have a clear logic about that.

We question the way the world is being run and managed today. We believe that it will not lead to viable peace and security for the world, the way it's run today. We have solutions based on humane values and for relations among states. With the U.S. government, too, we will negotiate -- we don't have any issues about that -- under fair, just circumstances with mutual respect on both sides.

You saw that in order to help the security of Iraq, we had three rounds of talks with the United States, and last year, before coming to New York, I announced that I am ready in the United Nations to engage in a debate with Mr. Bush, the president of the United States, about critical international issues.

So that shows that we want to talk. Having a debate before the all the audience, so the truth is revealed, so that misunderstandings and misperceptions are removed, so that we can find a clear path for brotherly and friendly relations.

I think that if the U.S. administration, if the U.S. government puts aside some of its old behaviors, it can actually be a good friend for the Iranian people, for the Iranian nation.

For 28 years, they've consistently threatened us, insulted us, prevented our scientific development, every day, under one pretext or another. You all know Saddam, the dictator, was supported by the government of the United States and some European countries in attacking Iran. And he carried out an eight-year war, a criminal war. Over 200,000 Iranians lost their lives. Over 600,000 Iranians were hurt as a result of the war.

He used chemical weapons. Thousands of Iranians were victims of chemical weapons that he used against us.

Today, Mr. Nobaveh, who is a reporter, an official reporter, international reporter, who was covering U.N. reports in the U.N. for many years, he is one of the victims of the chemical weapons used by Iraq against us.

And since then, we've been under different propaganda, sort of embargoes, economic sanctions, political sanctions. Why? Because we got rid of a dictator? Because we wanted the freedom and democracy that we got for ourselves? That, we can't understand.

We think that if the U.S. government recognizes the rights of the Iranian people, respects all nations and extends a hand of friendship with all Iranians, they, too, will see that Iranians will be one of its best friends.

Would you allow me to thank the audience a moment? Well, there are many things that I would have liked to cover, but I don't want to take your time any further. I was asked: Would I allow the faculty at Columbia and students here to come to Iran? From this platform, I invite Columbia faculty members and students to come and visit Iran, to speak with our university students. You're officially invited.

University faculty and students that the university decides, or the student associations choose and select are welcome to come. You're welcome to visit any university that you choose inside Iran. We'll provide you with the list of the universities. There are over 400 universities in our country. And you can choose whichever you want to go and visit. We'll give you the platform. We'll respect you 100 percent. We will have our students sit there and listen to you, speak with you, hear what you have to say.

Right now in our universities on a daily basis there are hundreds of meetings like this. They hear, they talk, they ask questions. They welcome it. In the end I'd like to thank Columbia University. I had heard that many politicians in the United States are trained in Columbia University. And there are many people here who believe in the freedom of speech, in clear, frank conversations.

I do like to extend my gratitude to the managers here in the United States -- at Columbia University, I apologize -- the people who so well organized this meeting today.

I'd like to extend my deepest gratitude to the faculty members and the students here. I ask Almighty God to assist all of us to move hand in hand to establish peace and future filled with friendship and justice and brotherhood.
Best of luck to all of you.

MODERATOR: I'm sorry that President Ahmadinejad's schedule makes it necessary for him to leave before he's been able to answer many of the questions that we have, or even answer some of the ones that we posed to him.

But I think we can all be pleased that his appearance here demonstrates Columbia's deep commitment to free expression and debate.
I want to thank you all for coming to participate.

An Impressive Speech by Ahmadinejad at University of Columbia (Part 1)

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad expounded on important international and regional issues in a speech given to academics at the prestigious University of Columbia in New York on Monday. The following is the full text of President's speech:

In the name of God, the compassionate, the merciful...

The president recites verses from the holy Koran in Arabic.

"Oh, God, hasten the arrival of Imam al-Mahdi and grant him good health and victory and make us his followers and those to attest to his rightfulness."

Distinguished Dean, dear professors and students, ladies and gentlemen, at the outset I would like to extend my greetings to all of you. I am grateful to the almighty God for providing me with the opportunity to be in an academic environment, those seeking truth and striving for the promotion of science and knowledge.

At the outset I want to complain a bit from the person who read this political statement against me. In Iran tradition requires that when we demand a person to invite to be a speaker we actually respect our students and the professors by allowing them to make their own judgment and we don't think it's necessary before this speech is even given to come in with a series of claims and to attempt in a so-called manner to provide vaccination of some sort to our students and our faculty.

I think the text read by the dear gentleman here, more than addressing me, was an insult to information and the knowledge of the audience here. In a university environment we must allow people to speak their mind, to allow everyone to talk so that the truth is eventually revealed by all. Certainly he took more than all the time I was allocated to speak, and that's fine with me. We'll just leave that to add up with the claims of respect for freedom and the freedom of speech that's given to us in this country. Many parts of his speech, there were many insults and claims that were incorrect, regretfully. Of course, I think that he was affected by the press, the media, and the political, sort of, mainstream line that you read here that goes against the very grain of the need for peace and stability in the world around us.

Nonetheless, I should not begin by being affected by this unfriendly treatment. I will tell you what I have to say, and then the questions he can raise and I'll be happy to provide answers. But as for one of the issues that he did raise, I most certainly would need to elaborate further so that we, for ourselves, can see how things fundamentally work. It was my decision in this valuable forum and meeting to speak with you about the importance of knowledge, of information, of education. Academics and religious scholars are shining torches who shed light in order to remove darkness. And the ambiguities around us in guiding humanity out of ignorance and perplexity.

The key to the understanding of the realities around us rests in the hands of the researchers, those who seek to discover areas that are hidden, the unknown sciences, the windows of realities that they can open is done only through efforts of the scholars and the learned people in this world. With every effort there is a window that is opened, and one reality is discovered. Whenever the high stature of science and wisdom is preserved and the dignity of scholars and researchers are respected, humans have taken great strides toward their material and spiritual promotion.

In contrast, whenever learned people and knowledge have been neglected, humans have become stranded in the darkness of ignorance and negligence. If it were not for human instinct, which tends toward continual discovery of truth, humans would have always remained stranded in ignorance and no way would not have discovered how to improve the life that we are given. The nature of man is, in fact, a gift granted by the Almighty to all. The Almighty led mankind into this world and granted him wisdom and knowledge as his prime gift enabling him to know his God.

In the story of Adam, a conversation occurs between the Almighty and his angels. The angels call human beings an ambitious and merciless creature and protested against his creation. But the Almighty responded, "I have knowledge of what you are ignorant of," Then the Almighty told Adam the truth. And on the order of the Almighty, Adam revealed it to the angels. The angels could not understand the truth as revealed by the human being. The Almighty said to them, " Did not I say that I am aware of what is hidden in heaven and in the universe?" In this way the angels prostrated themselves before Adam.

In the mission of all divine prophets, the first sermons were of the words of God, and those words -- piety, faith and wisdom -- have been spread to all mankind. Regarding the holy prophet Moses, may peace be upon him, God says, "And he was taught wisdom, the divine book, the Old Testament and the New Testament. He is the prophet appointed for the sake of the children of Israel, and I rightfully brought a sign from the Almighty, holy Koran,"

The first words, which were revealed to the holy prophet of Islam, call the prophet to read, "Read, read in the name of your God, who supersedes everything," the Almighty, quote again, "who taught the human being with the pen," "The Almighty taught human beings what they were ignorant of,"

You see, in the first verses revealed to the holy prophet of Islam, words of reading, teaching and the pen are mentioned. These verses in fact introduced the Almighty as the teacher of human beings, the teacher who taught humans what they were ignorant of.

In another part of the Koran, on the mission of the holy prophet of Islam, it is mentioned that the Almighty appointed someone from amongst the common people as their prophet in order to, "read for them the divine verses," and "and purify them from ideological and ethical contamination" and "to teach them the divine book and wisdom."

My dear friends, all the words and messages of the divine prophets from Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, to David and Solomon and Moses, to Jesus and Mohammad delivered humans from ignorance, negligence, superstitions, unethical behavior, and corrupted ways of thinking, with respect to knowledge, on the path to knowledge, light and rightful ethics.

In our culture, the word science has been defined as illumination. In fact, the science means brightness and the real science is a science which rescues the human being from ignorance, to his own benefit. In one of the widely accepted definitions of science, it is stated that it is the light which sheds to the hearts of those who have been selected by the almighty. Therefore, according to this definition, science is a divine gift and the heart is where it resides. If we accept that science means illumination, then its scope supersedes the experimental sciences and it includes every hidden and disclosed reality.

One of the main harms inflicted against science is to limit it to experimental and physical sciences. This harm occurs even though it extends far beyond this scope. Realities of the world are not limited to physical realities and the materials, just a shadow of supreme reality. And physical creation is just one of the stories of the creation of the world. Human being is just an example of the creation that is a combination of a material and the spirit. And another important point is the relationship of science and purity of spirit, life, behavior and ethics of the human being. In the teachings of the divine prophets, one reality shall always be attached to science; the reality of purity of spirit and good behavior. Knowledge and wisdom is pure and clear reality. It is -- science is a light. It is a discovery of reality. And only a pure scholar and researcher, free from wrong ideologies, superstitions , selfishness and material trappings can discover -- discover the reality.

My dear friends and scholars, distinguished participants, science and wisdom can also be misused, a misuse caused by selfishness, corruption, material desires and material interests, as well as individual and group interests. Material desires place humans against the realities of the world. Corrupted and dependent human beings resist acceptance of reality. And even if they do accept it, they do not obey it. There are many scholars who are aware of the realities but do not accept them. Their selfishness does not allow them to accept those realities. Do those who, in the course of human history, wage wars, not understand the reality that lives, properties, dignity, territories, and the rights of all human beings should be respected, or did they understand it but neither have faith in nor abide by it?

My dear friends, as long as the human heart is not free from hatred, envy, and selfishness, it does not abide by the truth, by the illumination of science and science itself. Science is the light, and scientists must be pure and pious. If humanity achieves the highest level of physical and spiritual knowledge but its scholars and scientists are not pure, then this knowledge cannot serve the interests of humanity, and several events can ensue.

First, the wrongdoers reveal only a part of the reality, which is to their own benefit, and conceal the rest. As we have witnessed with respect to the scholars of the divine religions in the past, too, unfortunately, today, we see that certain researchers and scientists are still hiding the truth from the people.

Second, science, scientists, and scholars are misused for personal, group, or party interests. So, in today's world, bullying powers are misusing many scholars and scientists in different fields with the purpose of stripping nations of their wealth.

And they use all opportunities only for their own benefit. For example, they deceive people by using scientific methods and tools. They, in fact, wish to justify their own wrongdoings, though. By creating nonexistent enemies, for example, and an insecure atmosphere, they try to control all in the name of combating insecurity and terrorism. They even violate individual and social freedoms in their own nations under that pretext. They do not respect the privacy of their own people. They tap telephone calls and try to control their people.

They create an insecure psychological atmosphere in order to justify their warmongering acts in different parts of the world. As another example, by using precise scientific methods and planning, they begin their onslaught on the domestic cultures of nations, the cultures which are the result of thousands of years of interaction, creativity and artistic activities. They try to eliminate these cultures in order to separate the people from their identity and cut their bonds with their own history and values. They prepare the ground for stripping people from their spiritual and material wealth by instilling in them feelings of intimidation, desire for imitation and (inaudible) submission to oppressive powers and disability.

Making nuclear, chemical and biological bombs and weapons of mass destruction is yet another result of the misuse of science and research by the big powers. Without cooperation of certain scientists and scholars, we would not have witnessed production of different nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Are these weapons to protect global security? What can a perpetual nuclear umbrella threat achieve for the sake of humanity? If nuclear war wages between nuclear powers, what human catastrophe will take place? Today we can see the nuclear effects in even new generations of Nagasaki and Hiroshima residents, which might be witnessed in even the next generations to come.

Presently, the effects of the depleted uranium used in weapons since the beginning of the war in Iraq can be examined and investigated accordingly. These catastrophes take place only when scientists and scholars are misused by oppressors. Another point of sorrow: Some big powers create a monopoly over science and prevent other nations in achieving scientific development as well. This, too, is one of the surprises of our time. Some big powers do not want to see the progress of other societies and nations. They turn to thousands of reasons, make allegations, place economic sanctions to prevent other nations from developing and advancing, all resulting from their distance from human values and the teachings of the divine prophets. Regretfully, they have not been trained to serve mankind.

Dear academics, dear faculty and scholars, students, I believe that the biggest God-given gift to man is science and knowledge. Man's search for knowledge and the truth through science is what it guarantees to do in getting close to God. But science has to combine with the purity of the spirit and of the purity of man's spirit so that scholars can unveil the truth and then use that truth for advancing humanity's cause. These scholars would be not only people who would guide humanity, but also guide humanity towards a better future. And it is necessary that big powers should not allow mankind to engage in monopolistic activities and to prevent other nations from achieving that science. Science is a divine gift by God to everyone, and therefore, it must remain pure.

God is aware of all reality. All researchers and scholars are loved by God. So I hope there will be a day where these scholars and scientists will rule the world and God himself will arrive with Moses and Christ and Mohammed to rule the world and to take us toward justice. I'd like to thank you now but refer to two points made in the introduction given about me, and then I will be open for any questions.

Last year -- I would say two years ago -- I raised two questions. You know that my main job is a university instructor. Right now, as president of Iran, I still continue teaching graduate and Ph.D.-level courses on a weekly basis. My students are working with me in scientific fields. I believe that I am an academic, myself. So I speak with you from an academic point of view, and I raised two questions. But, instead of a response, I got a wave of insults and allegations against me. And regretfully, they came mostly from groups who claimed most to believe in the freedom of speech and the freedom of information.

You know quite well that Palestine is an old wound, as old as 60 years. For 60 years, these people are displaced. For 60 years, these people are being killed. For 60 years, on a daily basis, there's conflict and terror. For 60 years, innocent women and children are destroyed and killed by helicopters and airplanes that break the house over their heads. For 60 years, children and kindergartens, in schools, in high schools, are in prison being tortured. For 60 years, security in the Middle East has been endangered. For 60 years, the slogan of expansionism from the Nile to the Euphrates is being chanted by certain groups in that part of the world.

And as an academic, I asked two questions; the same two questions that I will ask here again. And you judge, for yourselves, whether the response to these questions should be the insults, the allegations, and all the words and the negative propaganda or should we really try and face these two questions and respond to them? Like you, like any academic, I, too, will keep -- not yet become silent until I get the answer. So I'm awaiting logical answers instead of insults.

My first question was if -- given that the Holocaust is a present reality of our time, a history that occurred, why is there not sufficient research that can approach the topic from different perspectives? Our friend referred to 1930 as the point of departure for this development. However, I believe the Holocaust from what we've read happened during World War II, after 1930, in the 1940s. So, you know, we have to really be able to trace the event.

My question was simple: There are researchers who want to approach the topic from a different perspective. Why are they put into prison? Right now, there are a number of European academics who have been sent to prison because they attempted to write about the Holocaust or research it from a different perspective, questioning certain aspects of it.

My question is: Why isn't it open to all forms of research? I have been told that there's been enough research on the topic. And I ask, well, when it comes to topics such as freedom, topics such as democracy, concepts and norms such as God, religion, physics even, or chemistry, there's been a lot of research, but we still continue more research on those topics. We encourage it.

But, then, why don't we encourage more research on a historical event that has become the root, the cause of many heavy catastrophes in the region in this time and age? Why shouldn't there be more research about the root causes? That was my first question.

And my second question, well, given this historical event, if it is a reality, we need to still question whether the Palestinian people should be paying for it or not. After all, it happened in Europe. The Palestinian people had no role to play in it. So why is it that the Palestinian people are paying the price of an event they had nothing to do with? The Palestinian people didn't commit any crime. They had no role to play in World War II. They were living with the Jewish communities and the Christian communities in peace at the time. They didn't have any problems.

And today, too, Jews, Christians and Muslims live in brotherhood all over the world in many parts of the world. They don't have any serious problems. But why is it that the Palestinians should pay a price, innocent Palestinians, for 5 million people to remain displaced or refugees abroad for 60 years. Is this not a crime? Is asking about these crimes a crime by itself? Why should an academic myself face insults when asking questions like this? Is this what you call freedom and upholding the freedom of thought?

And as for the second topic, Iran's nuclear issue, I know there is time limits, but I need time. I mean, a lot of time was taken from me. We are a country, we are a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency. For over 33 years we are a member state of the agency. The bylaw of the agency explicitly states that all member states have the right to the peaceful nuclear fuel technology. This is an explicit statement made in the bylaw, and the bylaw says that there is no pretext or excuse, even the inspections carried by the IAEA itself that can prevent member states' right to have that right.

Of course, the IAEA is responsible to carry out inspections. We are one of the countries that's carried out the most amount of level of cooperation with the IAEA. They have had hours and weeks and days of inspections in our country, and over and over again the agency's reports indicate that Iran's activities are peaceful, that they have not detected a deviation, and that Iran -- they have received positive cooperation from Iran. But regretfully, two or three monopolistic powers, selfish powers want to force their word on the Iranian people and deny them their right. They tell us you don't let them -- they won't let them inspect. Why not? Of course we do. How come is it, anyway, that you have that right and we can't have it? We want to have the right to peaceful nuclear energy. They tell us, don't make it yourself, we'll give it to you.

Well, in the past, I tell you, we had contracts with the U.S. government, with the British government, the French government, the German government, and the Canadian government on nuclear development for peaceful purposes. But unilaterally, each and every one of them canceled their contracts with us, as a result of which the Iranian people had to pay a heavy cost in billions of dollars.

Why do we need the fuel from you? You've not even given us spare aircraft parts that we need for civilian aircraft for 28 years under the name of embargo and sanctions because we're against, for example, human rights or freedom? Under that pretext, you deny us that technology? We want to have the right to self-determination toward our future. We want to be independent. Don't interfere in us.

If you don't give us spare parts for civilian aircraft, what is the expectation that you'd give us fuel for nuclear development for peaceful purposes? For 30 years, we've faced these problems for over $5 billion to the Germans and then to the Russians, but we haven't gotten anything. And the words have not been completed. It is our right. We want our right. And we don't want anything beyond the law, nothing less than international law. We are a peaceful, loving nation. We love all nations. At the end of President Ahmadinejad's speech, he responded to questions posed by some students.