Ross on the bigotry of teachers of religion in Islamic schools, ideological jilbabs, and Dewi Persik.
The Jakarta Post recently gave front page attention to a survey (by an Islamic college, Pusat Pengkajian Islam dan Masyarakat (PPIM)) of Muslim “religious teachers” which indicates that a large percentage of them are benighted savages.
This in itself may come as no surprise but what is particularly disturbing is the fact that a clear majority of these ignoramuses are affiliated to the so-called “moderate, main-stream” Muslim bodies, the NU (44.9% ) and Muhammadiyah (23.8%).
While their enthusiasm for cutting off thieves’ hands is a matter of taste, their notion that stoning ought to be applicable to people convicted of “other crimes” is abominable. (One hopes they will go easy on parking violations and smokers!)
I’m no softy pinko and I’m all for tough penalties, but we know how primitive Aceh is, beatings administered by cowards in masks to guys who play cards for small change or teeny-boppers who get caught canoodling – are we really looking at a situation whereby thousands, millions, maybe, of young Muslims all over Indonesia are indoctrinated into this kind of garbage by semi-educated goat-beards?
Over 21% of the nutters think anybody smart enough to convert out of Islam should be murdered. An incredible 85.6% abuse their positions to tell kids not to go to ‘Western’ festivals – i.e. if a young Muslim lad wants to go to his Christian pal’s Christmas party, he’s affronting his own religion. Sounds to me that there is a degree of insecurity in these pesantren senior common rooms – do they think the joyful festivities might seem more appealing than sonorous ululations?
Again, much the same percentage says it is impermissible even to learn about other religions! How asinine (and in this case hopefully self-defeating – if you tell a teen he’s not allowed to know about something, he’s likely to get into it PDQ).
These morons, 73.1% of those surveyed, object to having churches or other faiths’ houses of worship in their neighbourhoods. Insecurity again! Bet they’d be the first to whine if Brits or Aussies object to a cacophany of mosques being erected in Sydney or Birmingham.
Yet 75% urge students to urge their contemporaries to convert to Islam. How they’d manage to demolish tenets of other faiths if they may not first make themselves aware of their target’s current beliefs is a fascinating point which may be too complex for neanderthal imams to take on board.
When I worked in the West, I had numerous Muslim colleagues, exemplary in their prayers and other religious obligations but happy to join in the office Xmas knees-up. Thus I had a very open mind towards Islam when I came here. I find it harder and harder to maintain this, despite the many normal,sensible Muslims I meet and with whom I agree on a great many issues. Moderate Muslims abound, but they are not calling the shots.
The bad guys evidently have the whip-hand in education and politically, well, recall my post about the mayor of Tangerang, a man of mediaeval mentality, who nevertheless got the entire spectrum of “moderate” and even “nationalist” parties to back his bid for re-election. Now we read of the PDI-P and the PKS playing footsie, despite the candour with which the latter’s leading lights admit their long-term goal of suffocating Indonesia under a giant ideological jilbab.
It’s just too grim to contemplate, especially for those who never want to leave these islands.
Okay, that’s today’s rail – but just as a playful idea, how about we give the sharia gang something to keep them busy.
The PKS has supplied a number for the public (and that surely includes expats) to nominate women whose activities are an inspiration to Indonesia. It was in 24/11 Jakarta Post – 0856 7007 699 – and I’m strongly tempted to sms the name of a truly inspirational Indonesian female, the delightful Dewi Perssik! I doubt if they’ll go by the democratic method of total smses received, but it would be great if she got more than anybody else. On the other hand, guess the PKS wouldn’t let on!
I actually thought nutters and goatbeards were hilarious epithets. Great article.
Muslims religionist perform the largest pagan ritual in the world in mecca and yet they proclaim to be against any form of idol worship.They just cannot see good from bad anymore.
God has sealed their hearts and although they have eyes, they are blind.
More bule whining about people who refuse to follow their way of life. If anything, this only shows that the silent majority of Indonesians are not the into liberalism or pluralism (the JIL kind of liberalism and pluralism) so bule or bule wannabees can now quit claiming to speak for the silent majority and accept that most people here do not agree with their western ideology.
What an irony that most anti conservatives are against these teacher “indoctrinating their student” with conservative values while advocating to indoctrinate them with liberal “values”.
It seems that indoctrination is OK only when it suit their agenda.
When the alternative is a culture that call a movie showing a 40 years old man’s nut as a comedy (comedy, not xxx movie), what is happening in Aceh seems a lot more civilized.
Don’t be a hypocrite: as many of you used to say: “if you don’t like what they say, close your ears”. the MUI is just exercising their freedom of speech.
An incredible 85.6% abuse their positions to tell kids not to go to ‘Western’ festivals – i.e. if a young Muslim lad wants to go to his Christian pal’s Christmas party, he’s affronting his own religion.
These are the true muslims who take their Holy book seriously:
Qur’an 005.051
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.
SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
They don’t want other people that is not like them.
Starting to sound that everyone has to be them in order to be accepted. Different house of worship is outright rejected. Tolerance doesn’t exist. If you decided to change, 1/5 muslim pop will kill you.
Sounds like another ideology that indonesia knows. But supposedly hate. Maybe they just change the name a bit?
It does make me laugh tho.
“don’t underestimate stupidity in great numbers” indeed…….
The opener by Ross is wonderfully stated and narrated.
But it is all about the modern times of Islam. True value is in the origins of it, and not in what it is now.
There is no physical connection to either of the two first “Koran” manuscripts, and Mr. Mohammed. There is too long in years and generations gap and the oldest manuscript. It is estimated about 150-200 years after the death of Mr. Mohammed. A lot can happen in that span of time. Also what could happen, that Mohammed could be not the real name of the person in questions, or that due to the time span, a legend formed of Mr. “X”.
Similar case was in the case of El-Bab, but he wanted to introduce more softer and peaceful version of Islam, and was shot dead by Islamic Turks at the end of 1800(?) Because of it. Not long after his martyr death, new legend started to pop up one after another, among the Islamic people about El-Bab who objected to the brutality of Islam. But this is another sotry.
But what amazes me, is the ignorance of the Islam scholars who are not of Arabic descent. How many of them actually did study the history of the near east regions from which Arabs are coming from? How about history of other kingdoms which culture and history are much more interesting and more historically based than few beduin and nomadic arabic tribes.
Bowing toward Arabia, was compulsory from all who fell to the Arab sward in the conquered territories. It was written in the laws for the conquered countries and kingdoms to bow toward the Arabia’s capital where current highest camel drivers were farting in the camel’s saddle.
Bowing toward Arabia didn’t have any religious beginnings, and it was a tribute to the victorious Arabian king who conquered that nation or kingdom. It was forma tribute, and not a religious thing to do.
Because Arabs conquered so many countries in so many different parts of the world, it became necessity to write some rules and law for the conquered nations. If one will look at the different writings from the Arab conquer eras, it maybe more easy to find the basis for Koran in these regulatory civil writings, from which Koran is derived.
I am not sure that the Koran was intended to be a religious book, and not just stay a rules by which Arabs intended to control conquered nations. I see as each person bows toward the “Mecca” that actually that person is paying homage and tribute to the King Fahd, and not any Mr. Allah, at the present – modern times.
When Fahd will pass away, the live Islam people will bow to the new Arab king, and not any “Allah” god. Even a novice religious scholar would not have a problem to find Arabic “Allah” attributes in the ancient Arab beduin and nomadic gods of a fertility and crescent moon. Just take a look at the top of the roof of any mask, and you will see the fertility god crescent moon symbol.
I think that this is something to think about, regardless how hard Islam follower one truly is.
Again, great article Ross, and we are looking for more open mind people regardless of their political or religious leanings to share their views. It is not who is right or wrong. It is about the freedom of each individual to have right to express his/her view without the fear to be punished for it.
Alf Janszoon is obviously as ignorant of the real meaning of this verse as the so called Muslims who use it as an excuse for not taking Christians and Jews as friends.
The literal translation of the Arabic verse doesn’t use the word “friends” as a translation of the Arabic word “Awliya” It is a plural and its singular is “wali”. The correct translation of the word “”wali”” is not “friend” but it is someone who is very close and intimate. It is also used to mean “guardian, protector, patron, lord and master”.
The verse itself was revealed after the Battle of Uhud, when a predominantly Jewish tribe which The Prophet had negotiated a safety and security treaty had treacherously betrayed the Muslims in Madina. the verse is directed at the members of that tribe, this is the reason that it says THE Jews and THE Christians, not just Jews and Christians.
For those of you willing to learn and not let others hatred guide you:
Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for your faith, nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them. For Allah loves those who are just. Allah only forbids you with regard to those who fight you for your faith, and drive you out of your homes and support others in driving you out, from turning to them for protection. Those who seek their protection they are indeed wrong- doers. Al-Mumtahinah 60: 8-9
True islam is the only religion which encourages all who believe in God to strive against each other only in good deeds, and clearly states that all who beleive in God, have nothing to fear from Him.
We have also sent down unto thee the book of the Koran with truth, confirming that scripture which was revealed before it; and preserving the same safe from corruption. Judge therefore between them according to that which God hath revealed; and follow not their desires, by swerving from the truth which hath come unto thee. Unto every of you have we given a law, and an open path; and if God had pleased, he had surely made you one people; but he hath thought fit to give you different laws, that he might try you in that which he hath given you respectively. Therefore strive to excel each other in good works: Unto God shall ye all return, and then will he declare unto you that concerning which ye have disagreed. 5:48
Surely those who believe, and those who are Jewish, and the Nazarenes, and the Sabiens; any who believes in God and the Last Day, and does good work, they will have their reward with their Lord, with no fear over them, nor will they grieve. 2:62
“Those who believe, and those who are Jewish, and the Sabiens, and the Nazarenes; whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good works, then they will have nothing to fear nor will they grieve.” ; 5:69
Alf, I don’t know if you are simply ignorant or a hate monger but I hope that True Muslims will take heed of the following verse:
O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah as witnesses to fair dealings and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just, that is next to piety. Fear Allah, indeed Allah is well-acquainted with all that you do. Al-Ma’dah 5 :8
Peace
Assalamualaikum Mas Khafi,
Welcome back. Was worried for you. Thought you were bobbled up by some islamists.
M.Khafi,
Welcome back, long time no see. Hope all’s well. Missed your wise words.
Salam.
Wa’alaikum salam wr wb,
Work has been most pressing, so I haven’t been able to devote much time recently to Indonesia Matters! In fact I have moved country. I was home in Jakarta for a short while but have been invited to work again in Europe for a few years.
It would appear that I haven’t really missed much, still the same old mixture of sense and stupidity, ignorance and enlightenment, humour and horror!
Still it was good to get back and read a few comments, had to leave my own of course, can’t stand missinformation!
Salaams to you all if you believe in God and Peace to those who don’t.
Mohammed Khafi
Alf, I don’t know if you are simply ignorant or a hate monger but I hope that True Muslims will take heed of the following verse:
Why do you accuse Alf Janszoon of ignorance and hate mongering? All he does is quote what is revealed in the Koran and translated by reputed scholars.
What is the use of the Koran as a guidebook for all mankind if it can only be correctly interpreted by linguists and historians who might have an agenda of their own?
ET,
If Alf Janszoon was simply ignorant of the facts of the background of the quoted verse, then he should not be quoting the verse There are more than enough so called Islamic Scholars who are capable of that and using it negatively to paint Islam in a bad light.
If on the other hand we was aware of the backround of the verse then he is simply a hate mongerer, randomly quoting Quranic verses out of context, again to paint Islam in a bad light. Of course there is always a third possibility, that he is a combination of both, an ignorant hate mongerer!
Regarding your second point as to the usefullness of Al Quran as a guidebook to all mankind, If you approach the reading of Al Quran with a clean and good heart, you will find much to bring you joy in your journey through life, but remember that Al Quran is as it was revealed to the Mediaeval Arabs, it is not a modern day guide to life. The translations are nearly all coloured by Sunnah and Hadith traditions and are in many cases a poor reflection of the purity of the original classical Arabic verses. That is not to say that there are no good translations, but unfortunately the bad ones are in the majority, again if you have a good heart it is possible to find the correct interpretation.
You know as well as I, that anybody can go to the Torah and Injeel and randomly pull verses from them to try and show both the Jewish and Christian faiths in a bad light, the same can be said for their histories both ancient and modern, come to that it can also be said of the Muslims. I refuse to do that because it would make me a hate monger. I prefer to try and do what I can to show that all religions can live together in harmony. Part of that process is exposing ignorance or hatemongering to others, I don’t really like those who destroy bridges between faiths, when those bridges are so fragile.
Peace
ET,
Let us look at some other comments of Alf Janszoon on other sites and try and make a decision as to his character.
From Islam Watch
“Islam is also built on murder, highway robbery, theft, slavery. I came to this conclusion after reading the English translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sira by Alfred Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad. How can a sane person convert to islam after reading Ibn Ishaq’s book?”
From Corporate Media Watch
“What does defaming means? Do I defame islam when I cite quran, sira and the sahih hadiths, arguing that islam is a bloody awful and murderous religion?”
A Hate Monger? I will let you decide!
From Darwiniana “Experimental Philosophy”
“The question is: do philosophers need to be scientists (specialists) beside being philosophers? Can philosophers follow the example of Aristotle one of the first empirical scientists cum philosophers? Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was philosopher and paleoanthropologist. Philosophers don’t need to be empirical scientists although it would help. They can use (with the appropriate amount of gratitude) the work of the scientists. For example: Ortega y Gasset used to speculate about the difference between man and monkeys he observed in the Retirio. Nowadays philosophers can use the results of comparative cognitivists, neurologists etc. If Ortega had lived today he would have studied “From Monkey Brain To Human Brain : A Fyssen Foundation Symposium” for example. The task of the philosopher is confronting reality in the form of scientific results, not in producing empty abstractions.”
Ignorant? Again, I will let you decide!
From Darwiniana “Self-evident moral truth”
“Morality and ethics belong to the realm of intra-human relations and based on the principle of reciprocity. No need to drag metaphysics in this realm. I intend to brush up my Arnold Gehlen on this subject: Moral und Hypermoral.”
Intelligent? Well….. After talking about the principle of reciprosity, and not realising that his hatefull invective will result in an equal and opposite reaction, I will let you decide!
What seems strange to me is that somebody who appears intelligent enough to comment on philosophical questions, then has to rely on the corrupt and fabricated Sunnah and Hadith, or abstract quotes from Al Quran to try and make his point.
Whilst this sort of behaviour is somewhat understandable from the masses who practice Mainstrean Islam it is completely unnacceptable from somebody who considers himself in some way superior to them, whilst accepting the lies and fabrications that they themselves believe.
Peace
@ Lanang
Why do you comment in this thread when the topic was physical abuse of Indonesian workers in countries like Saudi Arabia? What has physical abuse and its causes to do with religious difference and pluralism? Are these maids raped and abused because of their religion which in most cases is the same as that of their rapists and abusers?
Btw, have you ever been to Saudi Arabia and seen with your own eyes what is going on there?. If not, then lower your tone or better shut up.
Mohammed Khafi
Morality and ethics belong to the realm of intra-human relations and based on the principle of reciprocity. No need to drag metaphysics in this realm.
That’s an interesting point of view that needs to be further elaborated. If this is the case then religion, for all its metaphysical connotations, should refrain itself from mixing with ethics and morality and I don’t think the ulamas will agree with this.
ET,
You would have to ask Alf Jonszoon, it was his comment? Being a simple engineer, I am far from qualified to debate questions of Philosophy.
There are many things the Ulama disagree with, even Allah! We are clearly told to use our intelligence and intellect by coming to our own conclusions about Al Quran and its message, but the Ulama and Clerics still keep trying as they have done for centuries to forcefeed fabrications and downright lies into the minds of the Ummah.
Despite clear verses in Al Quran which warn against clerics, many Mainstream Muslims are afraid to stand up against them. Allah in Al Quran even goes so far as to warn against believing what our fathers tell us because they may be in error.
Peace
Ross…
Good to see you still have a “thing” for Dewi Persik 😀
On the pinko, nutters, and goat beard front, it just would not be you if you opted for other terms of endearment!
As to being a liberal…well, the only time you will see “Ross” and “liberal” in the same sentence is this one, and that is to say I have never thought you to be a liberal 😉
People like you feast on others’ sufferance.
Do I? I thought I only made an angry and indignant comment on the mentality of a certain ethnic where a culture of permissiveness on the abuse of subordinates is prevalent.
Morality and ethics belong to the realm of intra-human relations and based on the principle of reciprocity. No need to drag metaphysics in this realm.
The principle of reciprocity is more complicated than that, in fact the reciprocity is only taking place in the invisible world, not the everyday level of cause and effect which is visible to the human eye or rational mind or experience..You cannot have religion without metaphysics, as religion is the revelation of metaphysical or celestial forces into the human sphere. Without that you reduce religion, theology and thus humans to a singular moral dimension, which is what leads not only to fundamentalism, but also religious apologetics which are just as bad. You do not have to be a metaphysician or know metaphysics, to be partaking of metaphysical. Of course the intellectual understanding of metaphysics (which is impossible without humaneness) is what leads to real objectivity and understanding of society, religion, the universe and god and the point from which we can make decisions which are outside the usual levels of reactionary causation.
Funny Says :
They don’t want other people that is not like them.
Same could be said of Ross….Freedom is only relative and based on certain assumptions about what human beings are and what freedom is .Fundamentalist have their own idea of freedom too.
What is the use of the Koran as a guidebook for all mankind if it can only be correctly interpreted by linguists and historians who might have an agenda of their own?
Correctly interpreted? There is no such thing, as one correct interpretation, that is not the idea of the Quran at all. What you see in the Quran is what is within you. You can only interpret according to you own hikmah and knowledge and the layperson need not necessarily need to be fluent in Arabic, as the Quran speaks in the language of the soul, and is thus dependent on psycho spiritual state /intention of the reader. Whilst a knowledge of classic Arabic is useful for scholars and theologians, it obviously has not necessarily lead to a beneficial understanding. The most appealing translations/interpretations of Quranic verses come from those who are both theologians and Mystics ie:Adul Qadir Jilani, Rumi etc…
Koran as a guidebook for all mankind
The Quran is inexhaustible in its scope; it is a guide as you said not a manifesto. Like any Wisdom text,it is not linear, logical and instantly accessible, it is a mystery that has to be unlocked, a puzzle. The Quran is the map of the human soul itself, and thus caters to all its layers of darkness and light. There is an element of compulsion in the Quran, but it is balanced out by a vagueness that allows sufficient breadth for human interpretation. I think it would be unfair to expect anything other than that from the creator or from a guide book?
If you approach the reading of Al Quran with a clean and good heart, you will find much to bring you joy in your journey through life/ but remember that Al Quran is as it was revealed to the Mediaeval Arabs, it is not a modern day guide to life.
Asslamualiakum Mas Kafi, can you see the big contradiction in the same sentence? If Allah is eternal and the Quran are his words as he revealed them, it has by necessity also have to have a dimension to it that is transcendental and timeless. Mas Kafi I have read some of your other posts, and you seem to indulge in a kind of Quranic apologetics, trying to make it fit into the modern world and the values it holds to be true.
You are forced into that stance, by denying or not acknowledging metaphysics because only on that level is the unity and relationship between things revealed not on the purely literalist level. The Quran is not addressing one level of reality, one level of cause and effect, one type of human being, it is addressing the multiplicity of the universe, but then tying it up in an act of cunning into a unity.You can find unity on a rational level, but that unity is only relative (and thus no unity at all is it really?) and its validity is only true in a historic time and place. That is perhaps why you have reached the second part of your conclusion.
Al Quran is as it was revealed to the Mediaeval Arabs, it is not a modern day guide to life.
Whilst you try to find cohesion in the literal dimension, this itself is not one dimensional either, the Semitic field of words in the Quran as you mentioned are very wide in their range and open up lots of universes by themselves. People wrote whole books on one simple Ayat! In fact only with an understanding of metaphysics, can we unlock the language of the sacred..in fact if we do no acknowledge the sacredness of language in the quran we can never know what the treasures hiding within are.
Lanang
You’re not even a bule, ET.
Of course not. I’m an ET.
Copyright Indonesia Matters 2006-2023
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact
You might want to cut back on epithets like “pinko”, “goat-beards”, “nutters”, and so forth. Your writing would be better for it, imho.