Posted in Evangelis

Hukum karma Anwar / DAP lagi Islamik

Dokumentari terbitan Norhayati Kaprawi yang berjudul ‘Aku Siapa‘ menunjukkan isteri-isteri tokoh PAS Burhanuddin al-Helmy dan Asri Muda serta Khatijah Sidek bekas ketua Kaum Ibu tidak memakai tudung.

Isteri-isteri perdana menteri Malaysia yang sekarang dan yang dahulu pun tidak memakai tudung.

Tun Rahah Noah wanita moden tahun 1960-an

Gambar keluarga Najib Razak (dibulatkan atas) menunjukkan ibunya, isteri Tun Abdul Razak,berpakaian lawa macam wanita-wanita filem P. Ramlee.

Daripada 14 orang Raja Permaisuri Agong sejak negara Merdeka, 12 orang daripada mereka tidak memakai tudung.

Yang bertudung hanyalah Cik Puan Siti Aishah Abdul Rahman (Selangor, Raja Permaisuri Agong 1999-2001) dan Sultanah Nur Zahirah (Terengganu, Raja Permaisuri Agong 2006-2011).

Mazlan Othman bersama Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu (UN)

Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz, Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz, Tan Sri Zarinah Anwar dan Datuk Mazlan Othman (Tokoh Melayu Terbilang 2011), contohnya, tidak memakai tudung.

Terpulanglah kepada kaum Muslimat untuk menafsir tuntutan agama berhubung perkara ini.

Di kalangan bukan Islam, wakil-wakil DAP evangelis pula yang beriya-iya memakai tudung. Tarbiah PAS dan imam mahdi PKR nampaknya berjaya melenturkan parti ‘sosialis’ itu.

Saya telah menghadiri tayangan dokumentari Norhayati – iaitu seorang penggiat NGO bersama Sisters in Islam – pada April lalu di mana beliau membincangkan topik pemakaian tudung.

The Star tahun 1971, Hlm 6

Filemnya menunjukkan gambar-gambar penuntut perempuan Melayu pada tahun 1960-an yang tidak bertudung.

Norhayati memberitahu hadirin bahawa pelajar perempuan Universiti Malaya yang mula-mula sekali memakai tudung ialah kumpulan yang ditaja Yayasan Anwar Ibrahim.

Anwar memang layak bergelar Bapa PengIslaman Malaysia.

Liputan BBC dua hari lepas (Jumaat) mencatat:

“But many Malaysians, particularly non-Muslims, see it quite differently, pointing to Mr Anwar’s political roots in radical Islam.

“He made his name as a student leader, defacing English language signs at the University of Malaya and founding Malaysia’s Islamic youth movement, ABIM.

“Many local Chinese people, who make up the largest ethnic group after the Muslim Malays, doubt that Mr Anwar has left his radical Islamic roots far behind.”

BBC memetik orang Cina Malaysia sebagai berkata Anwar masih lagi berpaut kepada fahaman Islam radikalnya.

Nyata orang Cina yang ditemubual BBC itu bukannya Hasnah Yeop, Khalifah Umar Lim atau penyokong-penyokong tegar DAP seperti Jackson Ng.

Orang Cina Kristian DAP sebenarnya yang paling hebat mengutuk Chua Soi Lek. Orang Cina Kristian DAPlah yang paling kuat menyokong hudud.

Hannah Yeoh

Tidak harus dinafikan Anwar yang bertanggungjawab atas pengIslaman jabatan-jabatan kerajaan dan ruang awam di negara ini (jika dilihat peranan yang dimainkan orang-perseorangan).

Ketiga-tiga keratan akhbar di halaman ini diambil dari The Star cetakan September 9, 1971.

Gambar-gambar mukasurat 3, 6 dan 9 yang dipaparkan suratkhabar itu membayangkan sikap terbuka pengarang Star terhadap cara wanita berpakaian. Masyarakat sekitar awal tahun 1970-an tidak begitu memandang serong hal aurat berbanding masyarakat Malaysia hari ini.

The Star tahun 1971, Page 3 girl

Pada zaman Tunku, seseorang politikus tidak akan dihadapkan ke mahkamah untuk dibuka aibnya bersabit kesalahan akhlak.

Namun oleh kerana diri Anwar yang begitu Islamik sekali, maka dia terpaksa menunjukkan teladan sebagai seorang Muslim contoh.

Perdana menteri kita yang pertama Tunku Abdul Rahman tidaklah menggambarkan dirinya alim (misalan macam alim-alim Anwar) pada luaran. Akan tetapi tanggapan umum terhadap Tunku lebih elok daripada tanggapan umum terhadap Sang Anugerah Tuhan.

Anda mungkin juga meminati:

Orang Sabah boleh jadi perdana menteri kelak

Apa ketetapan Majlis Syura atas PAS 2.0?

Masukkan saja hudud dalam Buku Jingga

The Star tahun 1971, Hlm 9

Author:

I have no Faceook or Twitter.

11 thoughts on “Hukum karma Anwar / DAP lagi Islamik

  1. There’s nowhere in the Quran that states that the hair is aurat. The yesteryear Muslims got it right. In fact punishment of stoning to death is also not found in the Quran. But both were found in the Bible. Muslims nowadays are a confused lot. Hannah Yeoh also got it right.

  2. Cukup menarik huraian di atas. Terima kasih kerana prihatin terhadap isu pemakaian tudung. Malangnya, huraian yang mendasari huraian tersebut dari premis yang kurang tepat. Pemakaian tudung bukanlah rutin dan ikut-ikutan, tetapi arahan yang jelas di dalam kitab suci Al Quran. Kalau ada yang ikut-ikutan, terpulang. Tetapi jika sekiranya memakai tudung bererti mereka telah mematuhi ajaran Islam. Niatnya, terpulanglah kepada mereka. Tetapi akhirnya untuk Tuhan sekalian alam. Hidup kita untuk Tuhan kerana Tuhan yang menjadikan kita. Oleh itu kita patuhi apa yang diarahkan oleh Tuhan. Mengapa kita persoalkan suruhan Tuhan? Adakah kita lebih pandai daripada Tuhan? Tuhan kata, kita dilarang membunuh manusia , jadi kita patuhilah arahan tersebut. Konsep pematuhan amat penting di dalam kehidupan. Cuma mungkin tahap pematuhan yang berbeza-beza ikut kefahaman dan kedalaman ilmu kita terhadap sesuatu perkara. Banyak fakta yang mempengaruhi diri manusia terhadap pematuhan tersebut. Saya sekadar itu dulu sebagai permulaan. Terima kasih.

    1. Bila bercakap pasal tudung, kita nak sangat tunjuk dalil dlm quran. bila bercakap pasal niat, terpulang la pada mereka. sepatutnya, niat lah yg mereka perlu ikut quran dan kemudian baru lah datang tudungnya. kalau niat betul, tudung tak jadi soalan.

  3. So what? It’s a democratic country. Those people wearing tudungs also have their rights to express themselves in a manner they deemed it right. Who are you people to force your view on other people. There is always 2 sides to a coin. No matter what the other side did, you cannot do the same to justify the higher moral ground you are taking.

    So please la STFU to those people who always think that those not wearing tudung are always better than their counterpart morally and externally and vice versa.
    ____________________________________________________________________________

    Up to the individual lah. My Malay friends wear tudung from their own choice & conviction. — Helen

    1. On the reverse prejudice that you cite, it might interest you to read Salbiah Ahmad’s take (excerpt below from M.Bakri Musa’s foreword to her book):

      QUOTE BEGINS:

      “Unlike feminist Muslims of the Sisters-in-Islam variety, Salbiah is very comfortable in her tudung and not at all perturbed that others might mistake her to be of the fundamentalist stripe. She wears it because she is comfortable with it, plain and simple, period. She is fully aware that the tudung now represents much more: as a subtle statement of protest for an oppressed minority (as in Thailand), a reflection of group identity and solidarity (as in Europe), a consequence of peer pressure (Malaysia), or merely as a fashion style. It could also be simply a functional item, a convenient cover for ‘a bad hair day.’ Salbiah could not care less. To each his own, that is what freedom means.

      “Salbiah’s observations on the reactions (rather, over reactions) of the authorities in Singapore and Turkey to Muslim women donning the tudong are both entertaining and insightful. As she astutely observes, such overreactions reflect more the oppressive tendencies and authoritarian streaks of those governments and their leaders and less on the piety of those ladies.

      “I find Salbiah’s personal anecdotes just as revealing and instructive as her critical analyses. In one of her essays, she recalled being a member of the Sisters-in-Islam meeting the Ford Foundation officials in Kuala Lumpur for possible funding. Her fellow “Sisters” insisted that she discarded her tudong lest those Americans would think that the organization was made up of fundamentalist Muslims! This irony is just too delicious not to note. Here we have these modern liberal and “emancipated” feminist Muslims, many related to or part of the country’s establishment (Prime Minister Abdullah’s daughter is an active member of Sisters-in-Islam), successfully overcoming the local social pressure to wear the tudong, only to succumb to perceived Western expectations!”

      QUOTE ENDS

      The link is here and the bold emphasis above is mine.

      I do not make any judgment one way or the other about women who choose to wear as I’m not a Muslim. As I said in my original posting, it’s up to the Muslim woman herself to interpret.

      However, I feel that it’s pertinent to point out the past practise among Malays in the local community before Anwar and his Abim came on the scene, especially the juxtaposition against his personal role and influence.

      His wife even wears gloves when shaking hands with the public, and when Chua Soi Lek made a remark about the PAS Tenang by-election candidate Cikgu Mala wearing gloves, he was attacked relentlessly by the Chinese DAPpers.

      This article alludes to the DAP Chinese Christian evangelists hijacking your religion and introducing even more rigid religious posturing to score political points.

      One example is their defence of Hannah/Nie Ching wearing tudung saying that it’s not alien to medieval Christian practice.

      That’s menegakkan benang basah because the Christians in Malaysia don’t ordinarily wear headscarf. So easy to put to the test: Just stand outside a big church on Sunday morning and see how many of the Christian women cover their hair like Hannah in the photo.

      The lengths that the Yeopies will go (like invoking veil-wearing Christians of the Middle Ages) just to defend the acts of the DAP evangelist politicians.

  4. If Hannah consistently wore the tudung,there’s no reason for anyone to begrudge her. But if she wore it only in the presence of Muslims with a view to garner electoral votes, then it’s base.

  5. malangnya helen saya sama sekali tidak bersetuju dengan tulisan kali ini. Memamparkan sifat hipokrit DAP di hadapan masyarakat melayu adalah difahami, tetapi menidakkan kebenaran bagi muslim yang bertudung atas dasar mematuhi perintah tuhan dan rasul adalah amat dikesali.

  6. I agree with you that both women who wear it and women who don’t should not be made to feel bad by any parties. Incidentally, don’t you think it is telling that so many Malaysian Muslims seem to feel that the Islamic laws re hijab are explicit and there are no two ways about it and that anyone who suggests a different interpretation is unislamic. Yet, at the same time, when it comes to Islamic laws on polygamy (ie,cannot begin with an adultery, must get permission from first wife, must treat all wives equally in ALL aspects) many Malaysian Muslims willingly accept the various ways people have found loop holes to allow multiple marriages even when they are done in ways against what is advised in Islam.

  7. TQ for your pictures. It helps me to see and create good issue for my research. I am going to look into this history of printing more and will try to find more images like this as well.

    I am a researcher on Hijab and post colonial issues. I am also a lecturer teaching the History of the Western Costume. Here, I must say that in the Al-Qur’an there are many verses that specifically mentioned about head-cover and “hijab” on women, from An-Nur and Al-Ahzab. There is also a methodological aspect of inductive and deductive analogy for this as well, especially in the verse Al-Baqarah. There are four basic aspects of Hijab and the head-cover “surroundings” mentioned in An-Nur, 1st; gaze, 2nd; gendered space, 3rd; the extension of modesty and 4th; tabaruj (extensive decorative mode that lead to boastful or pompous being). Throughout my readings and discussions with my research colleagues, veil or “gendered space had also existed during the knowledge of Taurah and Injil (later changed into Bible). All of them were from the Abrahamic revelation, revealed by stages according to the physicality of the prophetic period.

    The Muslim Malays that you have seen in the History of colonial, pre and post colonial images were the result of Islamic contamination done by the colonials. These had happened before during post revelation of the Moses and Jesus. So it is not surprising to find the same into this era of post Mohamaddian. So bear that in mind whenever that you are trying to think of Islamism issues. Not all Muslims are good Muslims. They are facing obstacles, some are trying to change and some are just pretending, but the worst that you should avoid is when you find Muslims who would go against the Al-Qur’an revelation. Those who as you see would not do the task of being one but try to explain and rationalise their thinking of not doing the task. The Qur’an does not work as temporal text. So when you find a Muslim talking about temporal modernity that would constantly change the meaning of the Quranic text depending on the changing situation, that would only be of his/her point of view, and definitely not from the AlQur’an itself. If you find a Muslim that is so disturbed by the the religion that she/he is born with, try find someone else who actually choose to convert to it. If you find difficulties understanding my words, try pick-up the An-Nur verse and read the whole verse over and over again. If you are honest, I am definitely sure you’ll find what you looking for.

    Being a Muslim and donning the hijab is not as bad as you think. People think that the hijabbed women were the oppressed. If ever that those people made samples of how many Hijabbed women are in science and creative technology including computer technology, you’ll be surprised. I could give you one sample for you to look at. Try take computer science subjects in universities across the world, you’ll be surprised that many Hijabbed women in this area than the non-hijabbed. Now that’s only a small knowledge. You could do more on other areas as well.
    __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    TQ. I’ll read the An-Nur verse you recommend. — Helen

Comments are closed.