Open Letter to Zainah Anwar from a self anointed Islamic Malay Scholar


April 9, 2016

Khalif Muammar

COMMENT: Hey Islamic Scholar.  Wake up. Your open letter to Zainah Anwar tells me more about you than your attack on her ideas and views about the state of Islamic discourse in our country, and in particular, your angst against Sisters in Islam. I too do not accept “the verdict issued by the religious authorities which deemed every NGO that brings the ideas of liberalism and pluralism to be deviant”.

First of all, you seem to promote the prevalent view that only ulamas have the sole right to speak on Islam and the rest of us must accept their  views, interpretations and injunctions without subjecting them to the test of reason and logic.

What is man without his capacity to use his intellect? I wonder. Without this endowment, man cannot be a vicegerant of God ( Read this: http://www.esscr.org/g203_2.htm). Furthermore, we know that Ulamas like Harussani Zakaria and Ridzuan Tee Abdullah and others like them  are aligned to Najib’s UMNO and PAS. They use Islam to their own purposes. To be politically can be rewarding in Malaysia. To me, a mixture of politics and Islam is hazardous to mental well being of Malaysian muslims.

Second, you should know that most people, Muslims and Non-Muslims, reject dogma in whatever shape or form. In the world of globalisation, we require people who can think critically, be innovative and operate creatively.

By the way, to some scholars of his generation, Imam Al-Ghazali was a deviant. What is new? It comes with the territory,  as we say. Now, people like you and others regard people like Zainah and her friends and associates in Sisters in Islam as deviants because they advocate the idea of re-education of Muslims, especially the Malays, so that they can see Islam with a new set of lenses, one that is more in touch with reality. Obviously, deviants are those who disagree with you and your type.

Finally and most crucially, you lost me completely with the following statement:

 “As a feminist, surely you are promoting the idea of equality between men and women. This struggle of feminism is only relevant in the West as a reaction against oppression and injustice towards women. Islam never discriminated women; it indeed promotes justice for all. The feminist endeavor to fight for gender equality will not bring any good. In reality it will actually cause the collapse of the family institution and social disintegration.

Justice should not be equated with equality. Women are indeed a weaker party that needs protection. Often, due to ignorance and moral decay, men fail to uphold their responsibilities to protect women. However, giving women the same rights as men will not solve the problem; instead it will cause more problems to arise. This is because God created the nature (fitrah) of men and women differently. That is why men have different responsibilities than women in a household.

If both were to compete to become the leader of the family, men would no longer be responsible to sustain the family – in Islam this task is the reason why they are given twice of that given to women in inheritance, and if women do not want to manage the household, there will be no tranquility in family life. Instead the family institution will be corrupted due to the lack of cooperation and complementary roles from both sides.”

This is utter  gubberish.  Man and women are born equal. In marriage, they are equal partners. Today women are better educated their indolent male counterparts. Statistics show that women are doing better than the men academically. In business and the professions, they are on par with, if not better than, their male counterparts. You are out of date. This sentence is outrageous: “Justice should not be equated with equality.” Well, without equality there is no justice.–Din Merican

Open Letter to Zainah Anwar from a self anointed Islamic Scholar

YOUR article in The Star, dated 3rd April 2016 caught my attention. In the article, you accused the scholars and religious institutions in this country to have deplored the use of intellect, and more so when you said that the scholars in Malaysia are ignorant about Islam, hence your suggestion for an overhaul of the understanding of Muslims in this nation to suit the spirit of modernity.

From your writing, it was obvious that you could not accept the verdict issued by the religious authorities which deemed every NGO that brings the ideas of liberalism and pluralism to be deviant.

You were very eager to tell the scholars in Malaysia how they should understand Islam. You were so confident that your understanding of Islam is better because you have received the “enlightenment” from the liberal figures who emphasise on their version of Maqasid Shari’ah and the freedom of ijtihad for everyone.

In this world, as mentioned by Imam al Ghazali, there are 4 types of people, (1) The knowledgeable, (2) The forgetful, (3) The ignorant and (4) The obstinate (those who do not know that they do not know). Do not become of those from the third and fourth categories; not realizing that they do not know, yet what’s worst, is to arrogantly assume to know and to refuse to be told. People like these will only corrupt many others, again and again.

There is nothing that pleases us more than to see you learn Islam diligently from the true scholars instead of from “pseudo-scholars”, those who get their degrees in Islamic studies by learning from the works of Orientalists. Eventually they themselves become confused and caused confusion to others, by not being able to differentiate between Shari’ah and Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence); between things that are immutable (thawabit) and things that are changeable (mutaghayyirat); the definitive evidence (qat’i) and those that are not definitive (zanni). Despite this deficiency, these people dare to differ with the great scholars of the past by declaring that they are scholars and we are scholars as well (hum rijal wa nahnu rijal).

A true understanding of Islam could not be obtained by attending two or three-day seminars and workshops. The religion of God is not something that can be picked on the side way, in market, on Google and YouTube, but one has to learn with extreme diligence. A student of the religious sciences has to first spend many years to learn the sciences of the tools such as, Arabic Nahw, Sarf and logic, before going further to learn the higher and more complex sciences of Islam. Some has to spend 40 years to master an in depth understanding of Islam.

Do not for once believe that the scholars of Ahl Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah  renounce the use of intellect. On the contrary, the scholars have emphasized the importance of learning the science of logic immensely, but without exalting the human reason beyond and above its limits. The assumption that Sunni scholars reject the use of intellect is a baseless allegation by some Western writers who are deliberately preaching hatred against Islam and hope to see the Muslims alienating each other.

If you really want to champion the use of the intellect, you should first begin by critically analyzing the liberal doctrines that are illogical. Arguments on religious pluralism, liberalisation of ijtihad, gender equality have no basis for rational arguments and no authority of knowledge. Equally, the opinions that legitimise homosexuality and pornography do not garner support from rational and logical arguments, let alone corroborated by evidences from the Qur’an and Sunnah.

Religious pluralism is illogical because two opposing propositions cannot both be regarded as true? Monotheism and polytheism cannot be referring to the same reality. The message of Tawhid which was the main teaching of the Prophets could not possibly be regarded as equally valid as the message for associating God with others.

It is evident that the liberals do not champion the intellect, and so, Muslims who oppose the liberal agenda are not irrational. The fact is that the liberals are anti-knowledge and have no respect for the authority of knowledge. A truly rational man who possesses a sound reason would not undermine the authority of knowledge.

Islam does not stop Muslims from using intellect. What is not allowed is to regard it as the sole measure of truth as the liberals always do. Likewise Islam does not denounce the idea of freedom, but the act of deifying and absolutizing freedom is that which is rejected because it will deviate men from the true path of Allah S.W.T.  Nevertheless, the liberals often accuse Islam and the Muslims of renouncing the use of intellect and the idea of freedom.

As a feminist, surely you are promoting the idea of equality between men and women. This struggle of feminism is only relevant in the West as a reaction against oppression and injustice towards women. Islam never discriminated women; it indeed promotes justice for all. The feminist endeavor to fight for gender equality will not bring any good. In reality it will actually cause the collapse of the family institution and social disintegration.

Justice should not be equated with equality. Women are indeed a weaker party that needs protection. Often, due to ignorance and moral decay, men fail to uphold their responsibilities to protect women. However, giving women the same rights as men will not solve the problem; instead it will cause more problems to arise. This is because God created the nature (fitrah) of men and women differently. That is why men have different responsibilities than women in a household. If both were to compete to become the leader of the family, men would no longer be responsible to sustain the family – in Islam this task is the reason why they are given twice of that given to women in inheritance, and if women do not want to manage the household, there will be no tranquility in family life. Instead the family institution will be corrupted due to the lack of cooperation and complementary roles from both sides.

If you were to ask why SIS needs to be banned, know that one of the main tasks in an Islamic nation is to defend the sanctity of religion. If someone or a group of people seeks to confuse and deviate other believers about Islam, and after being corrected and rectified by the scholars they are still stubbornly clinging to their ideologies, then in that case the state has the right to ban or stop their activities for the sake of safeguarding the belief and identity of all other Muslims. SIS and a few other NGOs clearly promote Western feminism, liberalism and religious pluralism and this is not a matter of difference in opinion. The difference between you, and other liberal figures that support you, and the scholars that issue a fatwa of deviance is not just a matter of difference in opinion. But it is a difference in the fundamentals of religion, a matter in which there should not be a difference.

  A piece of advice from me: If you truly are a Muslim, you should accept the Shari’ah. It is the basic tenet in Islam. Don’t just accept what conforms with your secular dan liberal thoughts. Respect the authority of scholars, because they issue a fatwa and ijtihad based on the methodology of Islamic Jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh), which have been developed for over a thousand years. The methodology that these scholars are using is established and firmly rooted, to the extent that it will not be shaken by any other methodologies that are being developed by the liberals. The liberal methodologies that are supposed to be based on Maqasid Shari’ah, are actually a result of the confused understandings of Islam, and are under the influence of some Orientalists writers who are ignorant about the true understanding of Islam. Therefore, do not change a firmly rooted one with the one that is crumbling, and do not be easily influenced by the slogans about reformation of Islamic law which have been brought forward by individuals who are proud to bear the title “Martin Luther of Islam”.

There is no doubt that the Western media will praise your actions to go against the Islamic authorities. However, it would be a great injustice if you do not have the same courage to fight the oppressions and genocide that Muslims are facing in some countries. Surely the fate of many Muslim women need to be defended! Why don’t you help them sincerely where help is direly needed without confusing them with the concept of gender equality and other liberal ideas.

Assoc. Prof Dr Khalif Muammar A. Haris
Coordinator of Academic Affairs
Centre for Advanced Studies on Islam, Science and Civilisation (CASIS) UTM

(Translated by Rehan Khalina)

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Surat terbuka kepada Zainah Anwar

13 thoughts on “Open Letter to Zainah Anwar from a self anointed Islamic Malay Scholar

  1. I have one question for the professor: Who determines you are a Muslim and I am not. You go by the rukun Islam but I go more than that. I live my life guided by the Quran with the sincere hope that Allah considers me a Muslim and not a hypocrite. He is the Best Judge not by some who claim themselves ulamaks.

  2. LOL

    And this is an Assoc. Prof?

    His quote of the millennium, “Justice should not be equated with equality”

    That’s like saying rape should not be equated with violence against women?

    BTW, since at this moment Communist China is militarily stronger than Malaysia, it is not “unjust” if the former decided not to treat the latter as “equals” and violate Malaysia’s territorial sovereignty? We should be glad this Assoc. Prof is not the Foreign minister. But then we never know because Najib may just appoint him as such in order to showcase Malaysia’s Islamic / Shariah credentials?

    Quote:- “A piece of advice from me: If you truly are a Muslim, you should accept the Shari’ah”

    OK, I would like to ask him a simple question. If in the event a female member of his family was raped, would he prefer the accused rapist be tried in the Shariah court or the civil courts?

    As a “true” Muslim, I assume he would chose the Shariah court where the victim needs to produce 4 male upstanding witnesses of the crime before a conviction could be obtained, and if not, the victim would be charged and convicted for false accusation?

    And I suppose DNA, (or even good old fashioned fingerprint), evidence would not be admissible in the Shariah court since it is the product of the liberal, pluralistic, anti-Shariah West?

    I propose that this “Open Letter”, (itself, BTW, a Western liberal, pluralistic concept since it is not mentioned either in the Quran or Hadith), be read by all Muslim parents with school-going children, especially those with “weak, less-than-equal” daughters.

  3. Part of a right-wing backlash against the achievements (educational, occupational, financial) of Muslim women in Malaysia?

  4. Injustice and inequality would be much reduced if religious (and Islamic) scholars, read and understand how evolution science works and explains itself with evidence and rational observation in drawing respectable conclusions in existence. everything humanity does and has acted – being born equal and free.

  5. (Translated by Rehan Khalina)
    I wonder why are we reading a translated copy, furthermore one written in Malay.
    Not worth the effort to comment.
    To comment on his work intelligently would be an insult to the people of Malaysia.

    I do not see an ioata of intelligence in his “surat terbuka”. Khalif Nuamar would just have to face his own God. Perhaps, he should spend another 40years sharpening his understanding of fiqh before writing his surat terbuka.

  6. My religion is what will work and what will not. That religion says Malay Muslim need secularity and liberalism. Look at Hadi’s PAS – after decades of political Islam, ultimately fails those they fight for – democracy ultimately saved Malay Muslim, not their ideas.

    Like it or not the West figured out what Muslims refuse to admit for thousands of years. Just because the West has not figured out Islam and Muslim, does not mean Islam and Muslims have the answer.

  7. Hahaha,

    Wayne schooled this “Muslim intellectual” .

    “Islam never discriminated women; it indeed promotes justice for all.”

    Only a Muslim scholar could make such a claim.

  8. Any dogma that sticks to medieval texts and practices and resists adapting to modern needs and advances in knowledge will be subject to thrashing by the enlightened. This is what SIS doing to people like the good professor Dr Khalif Muammar and his ilk in the Ulama fora. It is people like this professor who do not realise that they do not know all that needs to be known and yet arrogantly assume to know everything about Islam at the their finger tips. Take this claim of his: “Religious pluralism is illogical because two opposing propositions cannot both be regarded as true? Monotheism and polytheism cannot be referring to the same reality”. One can argue that polytheism is an amalgam of multi monotheisms as reflected in the existence of religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism ,Islam, and others. They reflect the same reality of God and hence to be regarded as true by the faithful.

  9. This country is full of nut cases pretending to be muslim muftis, clerics, ulamas, ustazs and of course islamic assoc. professors.

  10. “In this world, as mentioned by Imam al Ghazali, there are 4 types of people, (1) The knowledgeable, (2) The forgetful, (3) The ignorant and (4) The obstinate (those who do not know that they do not know). Do not become of those from the third and fourth categories; not realizing that they do not know, yet what’s worst, is to arrogantly assume to know and to refuse to be told. People like these will only corrupt many others, again and again.”

    (Excerpt from Assoc. Prof Dr Khalif Muammar A. Haris’s open letter to Zainah Anwar)

    What if the professor himself belongs to the third or fourth category, i.e. people who do not know that they do not know, who assume to know and refuse to be told, and who will corrupt many others, again and again?

  11. Ah! if that lunatic from the charenton asylum was here what would he say to this mad mullah? Read Dialogue between a priest and a dying man. This indiviual as a typical UMNO BARU product shows no shame in flaunting his ignorance.

  12. “Likewise Islam does not denounce the idea of freedom, but the act of deifying and absolutizing freedom is that which is rejected because…” Khalif Muammar.

    Well, self-proclaimed Islamic scholar, if Islam does not denounce the idea of freedom but the act of deifying freedom, then tell us what does freedom represent to you? In your closed mind, do you mean freedom is not having the liberty to think and act the way you feel is right? Or the way kopiah-donning-goatee ulamas like you perceived?

  13. why r u writing here? just ask for a debate with the so called intellectual, educated etc..so called men la? ask mariam mokhtar; dato frida or zairinah anwar and debate with them. I also would like to see that debate…!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s