IKIM - Disconnecting People ??

Gambar hiasan saja. Tolong simpan sejuk (keep cool).

Today's Star carried the IKIM column : Ridiculing others in not a good idea.   

I wish to advise The Star that not everything IKIM says is good for the country. 

I would be careful about any group which insists that it is not possible to use intelligence to resolve all issues ('kita tidak boleh menggunakan akal dalam semua perkara').  I read IKIM's latest column in The Star today with some trepidation. 

Here is their column. I have placed my comments in blue in between :

Ridiculing others in not a good idea.

The secular West has to wake up and admit that their narrative of being human is not the only narrative in existence, let alone the ultimate one.  TODAY, Muslims are always ridiculed for anything to do with their belief and their way of life.

(My comments : I beg to differ. The west makes fun of whatever is ridiculous.  If you act ridiculously, it will be ridiculous if people dont make fun of you. 

The question is by whose measure of ridiculousness and is it applied evenly to everyone? The West seems to ridicule and criticise anything and anyone including themselves, including their own religons and belief systems. That is why they are so strong - they can withstand criticsm. If they cannot overcome the ridicule, they change their ways.) 

The unbelievers know that the Muslims believe in the Prophet, honour him and follow the details of his words and actions.  So, we all basically know what ridiculing the Prophet entails, and what the possible outcome could be.  But we also know what disbelief means and what it entails.  It means rejection, and may include ridiculing of what is being rejected.


(My comments : "Unbelievers"?? Why so rude?  You just said "do not ridicule people."  Why call the non-Muslims 'unbelievers'? Using this type of logic, then can the Christians call the Muslims 'pagans'?  Because according to their beliefs, not only Muslims but almost all other religions are pagan. So we call the christians 'unbelievers', they call us 'pagans' and etc etc. Cantiklah macam tu. Is that the best example that IKIM can show? Calling your neighbours 'unbelievers'? How about just non-Muslims? 

What does the Quran say?

Surah 16:125  "You shall invite to the path of your Lord with wisdom and kind enlightenment, and debate with them in the best possible manner. Your Lord knows best who has strayed from His path, and He knows best who are the guided ones." 


So cakaplah elok-elok sikit. 

The Quran has made it very clear that it is one of the features of the unbelievers, and the early history of Islam abounds with narrations about insults and ridicule the Prophet and his companions had to face.


My comments : The prophet of Islam would not have killed or attacked  anyone just for throwing an insult at him. The Quran says so: 

Surah 3:111  "They can never harm you, beyond insulting you. If they fight you, they will turn around and flee. They can never win."

An insult cannot do physical harm. It is just an insult. Just ignore it. Unless you are immature and childish. Or uncivilised.


It is normal or rational for a person not to believe in what is ridiculous to believe in, and ridiculous for him not to believe in what is reasonable.  Ridiculous basically means irrational, and our rejection of what is ridiculous comes from a natural rejection of what is irrational. 
My comments :  Err very well put. This is exactly what the West says as well. Normal and rational people should not believe in ridiculous things. Yes we should reject that which is irrational. 

For example when someone insists 'kita tidak boleh menggunakan akal dalam semua perkara' that is a totally irrational statement.   

In other words 'sometimes we must be irrational'.    This is already an irrational statement. Now if people ridicule you for believing such statements, are they being rational or irrational?  
  
So, if we find someone ridiculing a particular view out of ignorance and arrogance, not because the opinion is truly ridiculous, then we must say that he is actually ridiculous and irrational.  It is obvious here that being ridiculous is tantamount to being irrational.
Since rationality defines humanity, being ridiculous ultimately means being inhuman or non-human.
 
My comments : Ok but how does that justify killing someone just because he does not accept the other fellow's "my imaginary pet unicorn is better than your imaginary pet unicorn" theory? 

Coming back to IKIM, if IKIM says 'sometimes we must be irrational" do you seriously expect rational people to NOT ridicule you?  


Now it should be clear why ridiculing a person or a community is a grave matter, and why it could lead to enmity and disaster.

My comments : This is not a rational statement by IKIM because this does not apply universally to all human beings. 

This statement has to be qualified.  Normal human beings do not kill people over mere insults. Only immature, childish, abnormal and uncivilised human beings will act violently when ridiculed or insulted. 

I think every religion has sufferd insult - at one time or another. Please check out You Tube if you dont believe me.  You can insult the christians in the West all you want (if you want). So far we do not see any christian from the West killing anyone in retaliation for an insult to christianity.  Neither would this apply to the Buddhists. How come? Can IKIM explain this?    

Yet in some communities, which boast of being the champion of freedom and human rights, ridiculing what others take as sacred is part of what they define as freedom and their right.  In other words, as far as they are concerned, it is part of being human. And they don’t realise, or they simply ignore, the fact that their idea of humanity is not universally acknowledged by all.  

My comments :  They have a long history of challenging, ridiculing, making fun and rejecting what they deem as irrational. They have criticised and ridiculed their own religions, their own political systems, their own monarchies and their own societies. That has been their nature.  We did not stop them when they criticised themselves. In fact we have benefited  when the West became self critical and created huge space for free speech. The  West progressed and became prosperous because of free speech. And we "sheltered" under their progress.  Tumpang sekaki.

Now let us return to the question of belief and rationality.  Islam is a religion of knowledge. It does not encourage blind following, but insists that every Muslim seeks adequate knowledge to support his faith.

My comments : Err.. I think this applies very well to the Quran & the Islam that is in the Quran. I dont think it applies to "sectarian religion". The Quran is a book that addresses common sense. (To all you detractors out there, you are reading translations - which can be bad or corrupted.  You must cross reference the arabic Quran. There is no "man in the cave hearing voices" and other such stuff in the Quran. That is dementia.  So I really cannot answer such questions. If it is in the Quran, we can discuss. But what a "corrupted translation" says is not in the Quran. So cannot discuss.) 

But how does IKIM justify (to the West especially) the statement that sectarian Islam is a religion of knowledge? 

1. Criticism is not allowed. It is a crime punishable by prison and fines. 
2. Questioning opinions is not allowed. It is a crime punishable by prison and fines. 
3. Leaving the sectarian religion is not allowed. It is a crime punishable by death. 

You call this knowledge?  The West will say that IKIM is joking, not serious. 

So what will IKIM do? Blow yourselves up??   

You can read the rest of IKIM's comments yourselves. Reading IKIM's views, the future looks bleak.  To conclude here is Omar Khayyam.