On The Twilight of A Just World
[Personal note: I am pleased that Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Press has just released Kassim Ahmad's Di Ambang Sebuah Dunia Yang Adil (On The Twilight Of A Just World), his fourth collection of essays. I am proud and privileged to have been asked by Kassim to write the Foreword.]
Di Ambang Sebuah Dunia Yang Adil
Selected Essays of Kassim Ahmad
Published by Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Press, 2006
Foreword by M. Bakri Musa
(Part One of Two Parts)
In a country where the official retirement age is 55 years, and where many do indeed stop working on reaching that age, it is heartening to note that Kassim Ahmad is bucking the trend. He is still intellectually productive, as evidenced by this collection of his essays, Di Ambang Sebuah Dunia Yang Adil, his fourth. The title aptly describes the theme of his various commentaries.
Bucking the trend defines Kassim. I first came across his work while in secondary school nearly half a century ago. At the time Kassim had just published his The Characterization in Hikayat Hang Tuah, an academic exercise in partial fulfillment for his honors degree. It was a thesis that would later shake the Malay world out of its cultural comfort zone.
In it he took a decidedly different and necessarily negative view of the hitherto hero, Hang Tuah; instead Kassim extolled the virtues of the presumed renegade, Hang Jebat. In part, Kassim was reflecting the general anti-hero sentiment of the 1950s and 60s; the era of the Beatles, long hair, and rebelliousness. It was also the time of my youth, the phase in one’s life where challenging tradition and accepted wisdom was a given. Thus Kassim’s dismissal of our legendary hero and cultural icon resonated with me.
Kassim did more. By shining the light from and shifting our view to a different angle, the same reality can look very different. To many, that can be unnerving; to others, exhilarating. Regardless of how one reacts, one inevitably begins asking questions. To me that is a healthy intellectual development; to those in power, that is very threatening. This is especially true in a feudal society; and ours is still one steeped in its feudal traditions and strictures.
Stimulating us to ask questions is what Kassim does best; therein lays his major problem. Our culture does not look kindly upon those who would dare see or imagine things differently.
There is an axiom in science that if we cannot find the solution, then we have asked the wrong question. If we listen to the many questions stimulated by Kassim’s writings, chances are some will be the right ones, and we are then that much closer to solving our problems.
I still treasure my frayed and faded translated copy of Kassim’s thesis. A few months ago, with Kassim’s kind permission, I posted his entire thesis in its original format and language on the web (www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com). This will bring his work to within reach of the Internet-savvy younger set. It is my hope that this website will also be a repository of Kassim’s writings.
Characterization was only the beginning. Three decades later, Kassim again shook the Malay world with the release of his Hadith: Satu Penilaian (Hadith: A Re-Examination). Sadly, before I could get my copy, the authorities had banned it!
Fortunately, some sympathetic soul in America saw fit to translate that important book into English, and I was able to obtain my copy.? In it, Kassim challenged the accepted wisdom that places the centrality of hadith over and above the Holy Quran. The book did not endear him to the establishment, both religious and political. Kassim was effectively ostracized and forever tagged as “anti-Hadith,” plus some other more derogatory terms.
I recently profiled Kassim Ahmad for the Sun. I was astounded by the responses from readers who are critical of him yet had not even read his books! Modern myths, like the classical ones about the purported heroism of Hang Tuah, do not die easily.
To me, Kassim’s Hadith, like his earlier Characterization, brings a much-needed fresh perspective. He again challenges accepted wisdom and forces us to think and re-examine our assumptions. To those in authority, that can be very threatening, even dangerous.
It is precisely this quality that we see in Kassim that is becoming rare in our society. We should be nurturing, not discouraging, this trait especially in our young, lest we become a nation of sheep blindly following the shepherd. We are fast becoming what my friend Din Merican calls a society of ahli bodek (sucking up to our superiors).
I am reminded of the teaching techniques of the Sufi Mullah Nasrudin. He delighted in making fun of himself to illustrate a point to his followers. One day his neighbor came to his door to demand the return of the mule the Mullah had borrowed a few weeks earlier. “I don’t have your mule,” lied Nasrudin. Unfortunately at that moment the donkey brayed, and the neighbor exclaimed, “But I can hear the animal in your barn!” Whereupon Nasrudin, looking shock, replied in feigned indignation, “Would you take the word of a mule over the word of a Mullah?”
The moral of this delightful tale is that we should have the courage to not believe even those in authority if what they say does not agree with our experience and common sense. Even a mule may the bearer of truth, and a mullah, lies. This is the recurring thread in Kassim’s essays and commentaries.
Back at my kampong, the villagers have a way of dismissing the hyperboles and grandiose promises of those in power: Tak masuk akal (It does not make sense!). What Kassim is saying is that we should have the courage to tell our leaders when what they preach tak masok akal.
(To be continued next Sunday)
February 14th, 2006 at 7:45 am
Dr Bakri,
I havent read Kassim’s book on Hadith as well but you mentioned:
“In it, Kassim challenged the accepted wisdom that places the centrality of hadith over and above the Holy Quran. ”
The accepted wisdom (which is also based on hadith) is for the hadith to supplement Holy Quran and does not position Hadith over and above Holy Quran, the Book of Allah.
February 15th, 2006 at 7:44 pm
Ricky,
I’m confused. I’m currently learning about Islam and sorry for asking some basic questions. Dont you think that by making them as supplements, the hadiths now equal to the Holy Quran in status? Why your accepted wisdom is based on hadith and not God’s words?
Warm regards
February 15th, 2006 at 8:27 pm
Hi Hantu Gigi Jarang
When the Tsunami swept off the coast of a few countries, none of the Gods came to help - be they the Hindu, Christian, Buddhist or Muslim Gods, or any God for that matter. Everything that concerns us is about us against us. I do not see God coming into this equation.
Kassim Ahmad’s wisdom in saying his piece earned the wrath of man and perhaps, not that of God, whoever that might be. Man is a creature of hypocritical proportions and skewed by tyrannical beliefs but now and then he needs to invoke that “God’s” name to justfy such hypocrisy and tyranny. If man cannot make peace with man, invoking God’s name did not save the Talibans. After all Bush, too, declared he invaded Iraq because God told him to do so. What an irony?
February 15th, 2006 at 10:01 pm
Fair Malaysian,
Why should the God helps when the act is an act of the God, Himself? I mean, when I want to eat that chicken, why should I help that chicken to run away from being slaughtered by me? The imponderable decisions of God cannot be weighed by the scales of reason of man. Devine cannot be measured by the standards of man.
God is God. He is not a “something”. Invoking His name by whoever, does not make Him quickly come to his rescue, unless He pleases.
But I agree that man should make peace with man, with nature and with God in order to be blessed by God.
March 16th, 2006 at 12:26 pm
Marina attempt at raising our ire at UMNO Islamic Family Law by referring to apartheid is misplaced as women’s subservience is more related to bondage.
Sharizat sharing of ideology with PAS fanatic Hadi on UMNO Islamic Family Law raised many interesting points of view which beg the question does women’s right or emancipation comes from men benevolent attitude or does it comes from women’s own struggle for equality?
Since there is only either men or women, the logical answer would be, equality for women can only be achieved through men’s acquiescence. I.e one party can only achieve equality if the other party agrees to it. Why did the Distribution Act 1958 provided equality for men and women. Was it at the time Malaysian women voices were very vocal rather than today? Of course not. The Act was fair for men and women was either because the Malay men were British educated and thus were influenced by the British sense of fair play or Malay men were by nature protective of their daughters and want what is best for them.
I think both of these reasons are applicable. Malay men then provide difficult conditions for polygamy because they do not want their daughters to suffer! They wanted their daughters to be happy and woe betides the men who would cause suffering on his daughter. In general, Malay men are monogamous. No man in their right mind would tell the woman they are courting that hers is one of his first marriage. All Malay men would say that she is the only one until they die!
My point is that UMNO government has been ambushed by the religious PAS leaning officers who put their interpretation of Islam as they thought it ought to be. No Malay men declare they want to be polygamous so why the emphasis by the UMNO liberal Muslims on promoting polygamy. The UMNO Islamic Family Law is an absurd act drawn up by PAS members for UMNO states! It is as if the Government is encouraging polygamy when obviously the majority of Malays don’t want or practice it.
The majority of liberal Malay men want equality for women who are their daughters and wives. The absurd thing is that Dr Abdullah Zin said that it was a perfect law! Perfect for what you might ask. The Family Law he drafted was perfect for propagating polygamy. Perfect for ensuring men’s position in polygamy. Perfect for the ease of divorcing one’s wife.
It is pertinent that the show of support for Islamic Family Law comes from PAS supporters such as JIM the women’s wing and ABIM. PAS itself have come out strongly in favour of the Family Law! What does it tell you about the people who drafted UMNO family law? They are PAS members!!!
The only problem is that UMNO is a nationalistic party and the Malays in
UMNO have a soft spot for women be they daughters, wives or lovers. Thus Islamic Laws proposed by PAS ala arabic paternalism is quite foreign.
Left to the proselytising of the religious ustaz, Malay women would accept the fate that Arabic Islam would imposed on them. It is my proposition that Malay women freedom and relative success is entirely due to Malay men’s sentimental feelings for their daughters and wives. Malay women in PAS accept that their husband has the right to sodomise them. PAS women accept their fate of waiting their turns to have sex with their husbands just like Arabs women are used to in polygamous marriage.
Hell, even Shahrizat has changed her tune on coming back from Mecca pilgrimage. It seems that Malay women’s will to fight for equality can easily be broken by religious admonishments. Sharizat herself chastised the women’s NGOs telling them they don’t understand and are trying to create disrespect for the Syariah laws. A serious charge indeed. Does this means that now Sharizat accept Pas women’s view that her husband has the right to sodomize her as in Hadi’s law in Terengganu or marry 3 more women?
Even Rafidah has started chastising women’s NGOs just like Sharizat telling that those who don’t understand should just let the ulamas do their things!? Does this means Rafidah is going to pinang a younger woman for her husband as a devout muslim woman is supposed to do?
These just prove my stand that Malay women’s success depends on the UMNO men’s themselves. The women don’t mind if the laws allows men to marry many wives because they are married to
generally monogamous.UMNO men
In the previously banned Arqam, the men were actively encouraged to marry more than one. The women are trained to accept it as part of faith and tribulations they must accept. Why would any men object to this seemingly wonderful arrangement?
Who banned Arqam? UMNO men! What drives UMNO men to be kind and fair to women? Their sentimentality and gentle culture. As it is obvious by now Malay men are divided into UMNO and PAS. The malay women just want to let the learned ulama decide. Marina and SIS are new aspects to Malay women equality .equation. When women were given votes early on there were few women pressure group but Malay women are lucky cultural wise the Malay men are gentlemen and romantics.
Thus this explains the difference between Arab women and Malay women despite attempts to impose the
Islamic syariah on the Malays. By the ways there are many Chinese baby girls given to the Malays as Chinese put a premium on boys historically while the Malays on’t mind baby girls.