DR SIDDIQ FADZIL: MAQASID AL-SHARI`AH: AKTUALISASINYA DI RANAH POLITIK DEMOKRASI

Siddiq Fadzil

Institut Darul Ehsan (IDE)

Mukadimah

Antara perkembangan fenomenal dalam pemikiran Islam masa kini ialah kebangkitan minat dan ghairah mewacanakan isu maqasid al-shari`ah. Memang terkesan wujudnya fenomena al-sahwah al-maqasidiyyah (kebangkitan kesedaran baru tentang peri pentingnya maqasid al-shari`ah). Setelah hampir membeku selama beberapa abad sejak era al-Shatibiy, persoalan al-maqasid disegarkan semula pada pertengahan abad lalu oleh al-Shaykh Muhammad al-Tahir ibn `Ashur dan rakan sezamannya `Allal alFasiy. Sejak itu wacana al-maqasid semakin berkembang dan menyemarak dengan kemunculan para ilmuwan maqasidiyyun kontemporari seperti al-Qaradawiy, alRaysuniy, al-Elwaniy, Abdu ‘Llah bin Bayah, Jamal al-Din `Atiyyah, Salim al-`Awwa, Kamal al-din Imam, Jasir `Awdah, Nur al-din Muhkhtar al-Khadimiy, `Abd al-Rahman al-Kaylaniy dan lain-lain lagi.

Mereka yang menekuni bidang al-maqasid tersebut umumnya didorong oleh keperluan dan cabaran memberikan jawapan, penyelesaian dan alternatif Islam (al-hulul wa albada’il al-Islamiyyah) dalam konteks realiti kehidupan umat masa kini. Dalam proses penetapan hukum, perumusan fatwa atau penggubalan dasar harus dipastikan tercapainya objektif (maqasid) syari`at. Dengan kata lain, mereka perlu melakukan ijtihad yang berorientasi maqasid (al-ijtihad al-maqasidiy), bahkan lebih jauh lagi harus mengamalkan pola fikir maqasidi (al-fikr al-maqasidiy). Demikianlah semangat yang melatari wacana maqasid al-shari`ah masa kini, yang berusaha untuk mengakar pada turath warisan silam, dan sekali gus melakukan anjakan dari tahap teoretikal kepada tahap aplikasi (tatbiqiy-taf`iliy-tawzifiy) di segala ranah kehidupan - politik, ekonomi, sosial dan seterusnya.

Maqasid al-Shari`ah Sebagai Nilai Sejagat

Maqasid al-shari`ah yang secara tradisional terumus dalam al-kulliyyat al-khamsa: hifz al-din (memelihara agama), hifz al-nafs (memelihara nyawa/jiwa), hifz al-`aql (memelihara akal), hifz al-nasl (memelihara keturunan) dan hifz al-mal (memelihara harta) pada hakikatnya adalah nilai-nilai dasar sejagat yang dapat diterima oleh semua agama dan budaya. Nilailah yang sebenarnya menjadi asas kepada hukum. Justeru,  hukum dihadirkan demi memelihara nilai. Sesuatu yang menurut ukuran nilai dianggap baik, maka hukum mewajibkannya; dan demikian sebaliknya, sesuatu yang dianggap buruk menurut ukuran nilai, maka hukum mengharamkannya. Kerana itu orientasi fiqh kita tidak seharusnya hanya memusat pada hukum dengan mengabaikan dimensi nilai yang menjadi asas pijakannya.

Hakikat kesejagatan nilai-nilai maqasidiah sebenarnya telah diungkapkan oleh para ulama maqasidi zaman silam. Al-Shatibiy misalnya, dalam mukadimah ketiga kitab Muwafaqatnya mengatakan,

Kesepakatan terhadap nilai-nilai maqasidiah tersebut sebenarnya tidak terbatas dalam kalangan umat agama-agama tertentu, tetapi meliputi seluruh umat manusia dari segala agama dan budaya. (Al-Fadiliy, Muhammad `Abd al-Qadir, 2014: 20). Justeru, nilai-nilai dasar tersebut pada hakikatnya adalah bersifat fitriy dalam pengertian serasi dengan kesejatian hakikat kemanusiaan. Kerana itu maqasid al-shari`ah tidak hanya relevan dalam konteks penetapan hukum, tetapi sekali gus dapat difungsikan sebagai jambatan penghubung antara pelbagai mazhab, agama dan tamadun. Dalam rangka pencarian asas kerjasama kemanusiaan yang inklusif dan sejagat, nilai-nilai dasar maqasidiah dapat diangkat menjadi landasan dialog antara agama dan tamadun, termasuk dialog dengan Barat.

Memang sangat beralasan apabila Nur al-din Mukhtar al-Khadimiy menyarankan agar budaya maqasidi (al-thaqafah al-maqasidiyyah) dijadikan bingkai kerukunan hidup bersama (al-ta`ayush) dalam kalangan masyarakat plural masa kini. Yang beliau maksudkan dengan budaya maqasidi ialah kesedaran, kefahaman dan penghayatan terhadap objektif dan semangat syari`at termasuk objektif memelihara kedamaian, kesalingan dan kerjasama. Hidup bersama (al-ta`ayush) pula beliau ertikan sebagai pengkongsian dan kerukunan hidup bersama orang lain (al-ishtirak ma`a al-akhar fi alhayat wa al-`aysh). (Al-Khadimiy, Nur al-din Mukhtar, 2013:76-88).

Maslahah Sebagai Paksi Maqasid al-Shari`ah dan al-Siyasah al-Shar`iyyah

Pada asasnya maqasid al-shari`ah berpaksi pada maslahat al-`ibad, iaitu demi kebaikan dan kepentingan manusia secara menyeluruh, memenuhi maksud istilah public interest ketika ini. Memang maslahah adalah kata kunci dalam wacana shari`at dan maqasidnya, sehingga tercipta ungkapan al-shari`atu maslahah wa al-maslahatu shari`ah (syari`at adalah maslahah, dan maslahah adalah syari`at). (Al-Raysuniy, Ahmad, 2014: 22). Dalam politik Islam maslahah `ammah (kepentingan rakyat) menjadi syarat yang mengikat segala dasar dan tindakan penguasa. Demikianlah paksi kekuatan orientasi kemaslahatan dan kerakyatan pemerintahan Islami sebagaimana yang telah dibakukan dalam kaedah:

Kaedah tasarruf al-imam `ala al-ra`iyyati manutun bi al-maslahah (pentadbiran penguasa dalam pelayanannya terhadap rakyat, terikat dengan aktualisasi maslahah) yang diungkapkan oleh al-Imam Badr al-din al-Zarkashiy (w.794H) dengan lafaz tersebut sebenarnya berpangkal dari al-Imam al-Shafi`iy (w. 204H) yang mengungkapkannya dengan lafaz,

Wali (penjaga rakyat) adalah pemegang amanah memelihara kepentingan (maslahah) rakyat, sama seperti amanah penjagaan harta anak yatim yang harus diurus dengan penuh tanggungjawab demi maslahah mereka. Demikianlah kekentalan semangat kerakyatan dan kemaslahatan dalam pemerintahan Islami. Rakyat bagaikan anak yatim yang perlu dijaga, dilindungi dan disayangi; demikian pula dengan harta rakyat yang harus dipersepsikan sebagai harta anak yatim yang hanya boleh dibelanjakan untuk maslahah dan kepentingan mereka. (Al-Raysuniy, Qutb, 2013: 11-15).

Demikianlah kaedah utama dalam politik Islam. Memang ia adalah kaedah, tetapi sebagaimana kaedah-kaedah fiqh lainnya, yang umumnya berpaksikan asas mencapai maslahah dan menghindari mafsadah, semuanya terkait dengan maqasid al-shari`ah. Justeru, al-qawa`id al-fiqhiyyah memang sangat berorientasi maqasidi dalam erti bahawa perumusan kaedah-kaedah tersebut tidak terlepas dari semangat pengaktualisasian maqasid. Isu inilah yang dibahaskan oleh Sa`id al-Shawiy dalam bukunya Maqasidiyyat al-Qawa`id al-Fiqhiyyah berdasarkan kitab Qawa`id al Ahkam fi Islah al-Anam oleh al-`Izz ibn `Abd al-Salam (w.660H). Dalam rumusan kajiannya, al-Shawiy memberikan empat kesimpulan:

Demikianlah hakikatnya, bahawa maqasid al-shari`ah menjiwai kaedah fiqh, dan kaedah fiqh memainkan peranan instrumental dalam merealisasikan maqasid. (alShawiy, Sa`id, 2015:294).

Politik Islam pada prinsipnya adalah politik maslahah, sesuai dengan kata siyasah, kalimah Arab yang memang sejatinya berpaksikan maslahah, salah dan islah,

Kata bima yuslihuha membawa erti pentadbiran hal-ehwal kehidupan rakyat dengan cara yang dapat membawa maslahah dan kebaikan kepada mereka. (al-Sa`udiy, 2010:10). Kedudukan maslahah menjadi lebih jelas lagi dalam al-siyasah al shar`iyyah yang diertikan sebagai sebarang langkah perundangan atau peraturan yang ditetapkan oleh pihak berkuasa untuk merealisasikan objektif syara` (maqasid al-shar`i) dalam realiti kehidupan nyata. Dengan ungkapan lain, untuk mengaktualisasikan masalih dan menghindari mafasid mengikut aturan syara` meskipun tidak ada nass khusus tentang langkah tersebut. Dengan demikian, fiqh dalam bidang al-siyasah al shar`iyyah sebenarnya adalah fiqh maqasidiy dalam pengertian tidak membeku hanya pada hal-hal yang di-nass-kan. Jangkauan fiqh maqasidiy meliputi hal-hal yang tidak ada nass, tetapi masih dalam bingkai maqasid al-shari`ah. Maksudnya dalam hal-hal yang tidak ada nass, rujukan siyasah shar`iyyah adalah al-maqasid. (Al-`Uthmaniy, Sa`d aldin, 2015:84-85).

Kata maslahah dalam wacana maqasid al-shari`ah dan al-siyasat al-shar`iyyah selalu dirangkaikan dengan kata al-`ibad (hamba-hamba Allah) dan al-ra`iyyah (rakyat). Mesej tersirat di balik kata yang umum dan inklusif tersebut ialah bahawa maslahah bukan monopoli kaum Muslimin, tetapi hak bersama manusia keseluruhannya - Muslim dan bukan Muslim. Justeru, Islam adalah agama rahmat sejagat, aktualisasi kasih-sayang Tuhan kepada warga alam keseluruhannya. Dengan demikian, komitmen politik Islam ialah pengaktualisasian maslahah yang inklusif, sesuai dengan misi kemanusiaan yang mencirikan keunggulan umat (khayriyyat al-ummah):

Ayat 110 surah Ali `Imran di atas menyebut misi umat terbaik ini ialah pemerataan manfaat dan maslahah kepada umat manusia keseluruhannya, tanpa diskriminasi bangsa, agama dan budaya. Demikianlah riwayat dari `Ikramah tentang tafsiran ayat tersebut:

Pengiktirafan sebagai umat terbaik berasaskan kriteria kesediaan dan keupayaan melakukan kebaikan kepada umat manusia umumnya, sehingga semua orang dari bangsa apa pun dapat hidup selamat, aman dan damai. Hakikat inilah yang diperjelas lagi oleh Abu al-Sa`ud:

Umat terbaik bererti umat yang ditampilkan untuk menyumbang kebaikan kepada manusia keseluruhannya. Ditampilkan ke tengah masyarakat manusia bererti tampil demi mereka dan demi kepentingan (maslahah) mereka. Maslahah tidak hanya untuk kelompok sendiri, tetapi harus dikongsi bersama golongan lain. Memonopoli maslahah dan manfaat (al-khayr) dan menafikan hak orang lain untuk berkongsi adalah bertentangan dengan misi sejagat umat Islam sebagaimana yang ditegaskan oleh al-Khatib tentang maksud ayat tersebut:

Demikianlah politik maqasidi yang berpaksikan maslahah inklusif selaras dengan misi kemanusiaan sejagat rahmatan li al-`alamin. Ertinya, politik maqasidi bukan politik racist, bukan politik kroni, dan bukan politik sektarian. Dalam politik maqasidi tidak ada dasar atau amalan diskriminatif berasaskan kaum atau agama. Piagam Madinah adalah contoh terbaik politik Islam dalam masyarakat plural yang berasaskan persamaan hak dan tanggungjawab seluruh warganegara, Muslim dan bukan-Muslim. Persamaan hak kewarganegaraan Piagam Madinah itulah yang kemudian melahirkan prinsip persamaan hak dan tanggungjawab Muslim dan bukan-Muslim: mereka berhak mendapat apa yang kita dapat, dan mereka memikul tanggungjawab yang sama kita pikul,

Memang maslahah merupakan paksi politik maqasidi, tetapi yang sering dipermasalahkan adalah isu penetapan maslahah. Sudut pandang yang berbeza-beza selalu mengakibatkan pertikaian. Suatu yang dianggap maslahah oleh satu pihak, dianggap mafsadah oleh pihak lain. Tidak jarang pula penentuan maslahah atau mafsadah didasari motif kepentingan. Akibatnya, “maslahah” yang ditetapkan sebenarnya adalah al-maslahat al-mulghah atau maslahah yang tidak dapat diterima syara`. Untuk menghindari kesewenang-wenangan dalam penentuan maslahah dan mafsadah, isu ini harus dirujukkan kepada dawabit al-maslahah atau parameter maslahah sebagaimana yang diungkapkan oleh para ulama. Dengan demikian maslahah yang ditetapkan benar-benar sah sebagai maslahah shar`iyyah.

Persoalan lain yang terkait dengan isu penetapan maslahah ialah soal siapa yang sebenarnya berwewenang menentukan maslahah `ammah. Sebahagian ulama bidang al-siyasat al-shar`iyyah menyerahkannya kepada pihak berkuasa. Bagi mereka penetapan maslahah `ammah adalah prerogative atau wewenang eksklusif waliyy al-amr. Ia bukan urusran para ulama, fuqaha’, mujtahidin atau ahli bidang apa pun. Demikianlah yang namanya al-siyasat al-shar`iyyah menurut mereka. Bagaimanapun sebahagian ulama kontemporari keberatan terhadap aliran pemikiran sedemikian kerana dianggap menyimpang dari maksud nass dalam surah al-Nisa’ (ayat 59 dan 83) yang menyebut wewenang tersebut di tangan para uli al amr (jamak), bukan waliyy al-amr (tunggal). Bentuk jamak kata uli al-amr seharusnya diberi perhatian sewajarnya. Ia mengindikasikan makna komponen uli al-amr yang merangkumi banyak pihak - penguasa, ulama, ilmuwan pakar dan sebagainya. Pemusatan kuasa (penetapan maslahah `ammah dan mafsadah `ammah) pada seorang Presiden atau Perdana Menteri dikhuatiri akan membuka jalan kepada pemerintahan autokratik.

Kuasa melaksanakan kaedah sadd al-dhara’i` wa fathuha (menutup jalan mafsadah dan membuka jalan maslahah) yang dimandatkan kepada seorang waliyy al-amr mungkin disalahgunakan untuk kepentingan diri. Akan banyak jalan maslahah ammah yang ditutup kerana bertentangan dengan maslahah peribadi atau kelompok penguasa. Lebih berat lagi jika digunakan pula alasan fasad al-zaman (zaman serba bejat) untuk menjustifikasikan kesewenang-wenangan melakukan tindakan-tindakan sadd al-dhara’i` yang pada hakikatnya lebih bermotif melindungi kepentingan diri, parti dan kroni. Akibatnya hak-hak kebebasan rakyat akan semakin terhakis.

Politik Islam adalah politik partisipatif dalam pengertian berlakunya peranserta umat secara aktif dan bererti. Untuk itu amalan shura menjadi teras pemerintahan partisipatif sebagaimana yang diisyaratkan dalam al-Qur’an:

Ayat 38 surah al-Shura tersebut membawa mesej peranserta rakyat dalam proses membuat keputusan tentang hal-hal yang menyangkut kehidupan kolektif mereka. Dalam pemerintahan partisipatif berasaskan musyawarah (dawlah shuriyyah), rakyat adalah pemilik kata putus (sahib al-qarar).

Persoalan Shura dan Demokrasi

Shura adalah prinsip dan nilai yang wajib dijunjung, tetapi mekanisme pengamalannya terserah kepada kebijaksanaan umat sendiri menentukannya menurut kesesuaian realiti zaman, lingkungan dan kemampuan. Dalam kaitan inilah timbulnya isu shura dan demokrasi. Hingga ke saat ini memang ada kalangan yang masih mempermasalahkan isu persamaan dan perbezaan antara shura dan demokrasi. Bagi mereka persoalan ini belum diselesaikan secara tuntas. Tetapi sebahagian besar ilmuwan Muslim kontemporari telah menerima demokrasi sebagai satu-satunya pilihan yang ada ketika ini. Mereka berusaha menyerasikan demokrasi dengan shura berasaskan kefahaman bahawa demokrasi bukan suatu konsep tegar dengan pentakrifan baku yang beku. Demokrasi masih boleh didefinisikan semula, disesuaikan dengan nilai-nilai budaya setempat, dan diberi bentuk lain sebagai salah satu model demokrasi yang Islami. Memang demikianlah kenyataannya, demokrasi seperti yang disebut oleh W.B.Gallie sebagai an essentially contested concept.

Demokrasi sebagai alternatif masa kini disebut oleh Shaykh al-Azhar, Ahmad Muhammad al-Tayyib dalam kenyataan dukungannya terhadap kebangkitan rakyat di negara-negara Arab tahun 2011 yang lalu. Kenyataan itu menyebut bahawa dari sudut pandang keagamaan dan perlembagaan, legitimasi pemerintah tergantung pada kerelaan rakyat yang disuarakan menerusi pilihan raya terbuka, bersih, telus dan demokratik. Ia juga menyebut tentang pembahagian dan pemisahan kuasa legislatif, eksekutif dan kehakiman; juga kuasa rakyat memantau dan meminta pertanggungjawaban pemerintah atas asas bahawa rakyat adalah sumber kekuasaannya, merekalah yang berhak memberikan legitimasi dan mereka jugalah yang berhak melucutkannya apabila perlu:

Dalam menyikapi demokrasi, Al-Qaradawiy lebih menumpu pada idea inti demokrasi (jawhar al-dimuqratiyyah) yang memberikan hak kepada rakyat memilih pemerintah, hak memantau dan meminta pertanggungjawabannya apabila ia melakukan kesalahan, hak memecatnya jika menyeleweng; juga hak menolak pemerintah yang mereka tidak sukai, dan hak menolak sistem (politik, ekonomi, budaya) yang mereka tidak setujui. Selain itu al-Qaradawiy juga melihat mekanisme demokrasi seperti pilihan raya, pungutan suara, pengiktirafan terhadap suara majoriti di samping pengiktirafan hak pembangkangan pihak minoriti, kepelbagaian parti politik, kebebasan media, kebebasan kehakiman dan lain-lainnya. Berdasarkan idea-idea pokok demokrasi dan mekanisme pelaksanaannya, al-Qaradawiy menyimpulkan bahawa demokrasi pada prinsipnya adalah bahagian integral ajaran Islam (min samim al-Islam). (al-Qaradawiy, 1999:132).

Seperti al-Qaradawiy, Ahmad al-Raysuniy juga berpendirian bahawa pada dasarnya tidak ada pertentangan mendasar antara Islam dengan idea-idea pokok demokrasi. Yang banyak dipersoalkan umumnya adalah aspek pelaksanaannya. Yang penting bagi al-Raysuniy bukan nama atau label demokrasi, tetapi kandungannya yang memang dapat diterima, kita tidak harus alergik dengan nama, menolak demokrasi kerana namanya demokrasi, bukan shura. Mengisahkan pengalaman peribadinya tentang isu “isi dan nama” al-Raysuniy mencatat:

Lalu apa masalahnya jika istilahnya demokrasi tetapi isinya shura, sebagaimana alQur’an memakai kata qist dan qistas (istilah romawi) untuk mengekspresikan makna keadilan? (Al-Raysuniy, Ahmad, 2014: 90-91).

Kemungkinan menyerasikan demokrasi dengan shura dibayangkan oleh Dr. Muhammad Salim al-`Awwa apabila beliau mengatakan bahawa shura adalah salah satu daripada nilai-nilai Islam, dan bagi setiap nilai ada seribu satu cara merealisasikannya, termasuk demokrasi. Tetapi beliau menegaskan bahawa demokrasi yang beliau inginkan dan perjuangkan bukan demokrasi yang dilaksanakan di negaranya, demokrasi yang parlimennya dianggotai oleh ahli-ahli yang sebahagiannya dilantik dan sebahagian lagi dipilih menerusi cara yang tidak benar-benar bebas. Dengan berkata demikian, al-`Awwa sebenarnya menginginkan model demokrasi yang lain, demokrasi yang berasaskan kebebasan tulen seperti yang dibayangkannya:

Demokrasi palsu yang penuh dengan kekangan dan pencabulan hak kebebasan rakyat memang tidak mungkin menjadi wahana shura. Kerana itu al-`Awwa tampaknya sangat menekankan prinsip kebebasan (al-hurriyyah). (Al-Furqan, Prosiding Simposium Human Rights in Islam, 1999: 457-458). Hanya dalam iklim kebebasan sahaja, amalan dan budaya shura dapat berkembang subur. Justeru, shura adalah kebebasan berfikir, kebebasan berekspresi dan kebebasan bersikap (bersetuju atau berbeza).

Bertolak dari tafsiran bahawa idea-idea teras demokrasi boleh diletakkan dalam bingkai syari`at, para ilmuwan Muslim mengambil pendirian bahawa negara yang ideal dalam konteks masa kini adalah negara demokratik berbasis syari`at (yang tentunya meliputi al-maqasid yang merupakan objektif tertingginya). Dengan latar sedemikian itulah Abdelwahab El-Affendi menyatakan, “The ideal state for today’s Muslim, or the ideal islamic state at any time, should first and foremost be democratic....A state formed by a Muslim community will by necessity be an Islamic state, one based on the shari`a”. (ElAffendi, Abdelwahab, 1991:89-90). Sementara itu `Abd al-Hamid Abu Sulayman pula mengungkapkan sistem politik (pemerintahan Islam) sebagai sistem demokrasi Islamisyuri (dimuqratiy Islamiy shuriy) yang dibezakanya daripada demokrasi materialistik sekular. (Abu Sulayman, A.Hamid Ahmad, 2012: 38). Yang sangat terasa pada gagasan kenegaraan `Abd al-Hamid ialah demokrasinya yang harus Islamik, dan untuk menjadikannya Islamik, ia harus dapat menjadi wadah, wasilah dan mekanisme shura.

Demokrasi dan Martabat Insan

Idea dasar demokrasi adalah kuasa rakyat yang memungkinkan terbentuknya pemerintahan rakyat untuk rakyat. Demikian jugalah semangat yang mendasari shura sebagai realisasi peranserta rakyat dalam membuat keputusan tentang segala urusan kehidupan, terutama yang menyangkut maslahah `ammah. Memang Islam meletakkan umat atau rakyat pada posisi sentral sebagaimana yang dibahaskan oleh al-Raysuniy dalam bukunya, al-Ummah Hiya al-Asl. Demikianlah hakikatnya, sasaran ayat-ayat al Qur’an (perintah, larangan, pujian, celaan dan lain-lain) umumnya menumpu pada umat, sangat sedikit yang mengarah pada pemerintah. Ertinya, rakyat sebenarnya lebih besar daripada kerajaan. Kerana itu para ulama maqasid menyimpulkan bahawa matlamat utama penurunan syari`at adalah demi masalih al-`ibad, untuk memelihara maslahah umat manusia umumnya, bukan untuk kepentingan para hukkam atau kelompok elit penguasa.

Prinsip rakyat sebagai sumber kekuasaan (al-sha`b masdar al-sultah) dalam pengertian bahawa legitimasi pemerintah tertakluk pada kerelaan dan persetujuan shura rakyat, bahawa rakyat yang berhak mengangkat dan memecat pemerintah, bererti pendaulatan martabat insan. Tanpa pengiktirafan terhadap human dignity atau karamah insaniyyah, prinsip tersebut tidak mungkin terlaksana. Sebaliknya yang akan berlaku ialah pemerintahan autokratik yang menindas dan mencabul hak-hak kemanusiaan rakyat. Dalam sistem demokrasi yang Islami, tonggak utamanya adalah karamah insaniyyah, mengangkat martabat rakyat sebagai insan yang dimuliakan dengan kurnia istimewa al-takrim al-Ilahi.

Demokrasi dan Nilai Kebebasan

Demi martabat keinsanannya, rakyat harus memiliki kebebasan, kerana hakikatnya kebebasan adalah bahagian daripada keinsanan itu sendiri. Demokrasi yang Islami harus memberikan ruang seluas-luasnya kepada rakyat untuk memilih dan dipilih dengan bebas, jujur dan adil, tanpa sebarang paksaan, tekanan dan ugutan. Hak demokratik yang harus dijamin termasuk kebebasan berfikir, kebebasan berekspresi (hurriyat al-ta`bir) dan kebebasan bersikap, meliputi kebebasan media, kebebasan membangkang (haqq al-mu`aradah), kebebasan menubuh dan menyertai parti yang diyakini (haqq al-intima’ al-siyasiy) dan sebagainya. Yang penting kebebasan dalam bidang apa pun harus berperaturan, berakhlak dan beretika.

Kebebasan berfikir bererti juga kebebasan untuk berbeza pendapat, dan seterusnya secara konsekuensial membawa kepada perbezaan parti politik. Perbezaan dan kepelbagaian parti adalah bahagian daripada sistem demokrasi. Kerana itu ia (ta`addudiyyat al-ahzab) harus diterima sebagai suatu yang wajar, sebagaimana wajarnya menerima kepelbagaian mazhab dalam fiqh. Seperti yang dinyatakan oleh al Qaradawiy, mazhab adalah parti dalam fiqh, sementara parti adalah mazhab dalam politik. Memaksa seseorang menyertai parti yang tidak disukainya, adalah sejenis penindasan pemikiran (al-istibdad al-fikriy). Demikian juga penderaan terhadap mereka yang berbeza pendapat adalah sejenis terorisme pemikiran (al-irhab al-fikriy).

Kepelbagaian pada hakikatnya adalah suatu yang positif jika ditangani secara matang dan bijaksana. Al-Qur’an menyebut hikmah perbezaan dan kepelbagaian bangsa saling mengenal (lita`arafu). Tetapi maksud sebenarnya tentu lebih jauh dari sekadar ta`aruf, yang hanya merupakan pembuka jalan ke arah matlamat yang lebih tinggi, iaitu ta`awun (kerjasama) dan ta`ayush (hidup bersama). Dalam kaitan inilah perlunya kefahaman tentang fiqh al-ta`ayush atau fiqh hidup bersama (coexistence) antara pelbagai parti. Mereka boleh bersaing tetapi tetap sedia bekerjasama untuk kebaikan. Persaingan antara parti bukan permusuhan hancur-hancuran, tetapi persaingan menawarkan program maslahah `ammah. Demokrasi Islami yang menerima kepelbagaian parti perlu didasari nilai-nilai makarim al-akhlaq bagi menghindari pelbagai bentuk kecurangan yang selalu merosak citra politik (demokrasi) sehingga menjadi bidang yang dianggap kotor, cemar, penuh tipu daya dan kepura-puraan. Politik demokrasi memang sangat mudah berubah menjadi kancah pertarungan berebut kepentingan diri dan puak, didorong keserakahan nafsu kuasa, harta dan citra.

Nilai Akhlak dan Khayriyyat al-Ummah

Untuk menjadikan Politik (demokrasi) sebagai wahana realisasi maslahah rakyat, ia memerlukan kawalan nilai-nilai akhlak yang pada hakikatnya adalah maqasid al shari`ah yang paling utama. Sebagaimana yang ditegaskan oleh al-Raysuniy, akhlak adalah maqasid kulliyyah bagi syari`at. Demikian pentingnya akhlak sebagai bahagian daripada maqasid al-shari`ah dan bahagian daripada maqasid al-bi`that al Muhammadiyyah sehingga pada suatu ketika al-Raysuniy hampir-hampir mengangkatnya menjadi daruriyyat keenam sebagai tambahan kepada al-daruriyyat al khamsa. Tetapi akhirnya beliau akur dengan kesepakatan ulama silam tentang daruriyyat yang lima setelah memahami bahawa yang mereka maksudkan adalah maslahah keperluan asasi untuk hidup duniawi-ukhrawi, yang tanpanya akan berakibat kehancuran dan kebinasaan. Penetapan lima daruriyyat dalam maqasid al-shari`ah tidak bererti bahawa selain yang lima (agama, jiwa, akal, keturunan dan harta) itu tidak ada lagi maqasid yang lain. Setelah akur dengan al-daruriyyat al-khamsa, alRaysuniy berkata:

Demikianlah, yang disebut maqasid al-shari`ah bukan hanya lima daruriyyat, tetapi masih ada lagi maqasid dan daruriyyat lain seperti akhlak, keadilan, keselamatan, kebebasan dan martabat insan. (al-Raysuniy, Ahmad, 2016:59-60).

Dalam risalahnya al-Qiyam al-Akhlaqiyyat al-Insaniyyah wa Maqasid al-Shari`ah, Nur al din Mukhtar al-Khadimiy menyarankan penekanan dimensi maqasidi dalam nilai-nilai akhlak kemanusiaan, dengan menjadikan al-maqasid sebagai wadah dan rujukan nilai-nilai tersebut. Beliau meninjau persoalan nilai-nilai akhlak dari dua sudut maqasidi: maqasid al-shari` dan maqsid al-mukallaf. Dalam peristilahan maqasidi, maqasid al shari` bermaksud apa yang Tuhan kehendaki apabila Dia mencipta manusia dan memerintahkan mereka melaksanakan ajaran dan hukum-hakam-Nya (muraduhu fi al- Khalq wa al-amr). Yang dikehendaki-Nya adalah mengabdi Ilahi dan mengislah makhluk (`ibadat al-khaliq wa islah al-makhluq). Maqasid al-shari` dalam pengertian tersebut sangat terkait dengan nilai-nilai akhlak kemanusiaan. Dari segi penciptaannya, manusia adalah makhluk yang dimuliakan dengan ketinggian martabat, maruah dan kehormatan diri. Kemuliaan ini harus dipelihara dengan penghayatan nilai-nilai akhlak kemanusiaan. Demikian juga apabila Tuhan memerintahkan manusia melaksanakan suruhan-Nya dan menjauhi larangan-Nya, semua itu adalah akhlak.

Qasd al-mukallaf pula bermaksud niat, tekad dan motif perlakuan manusia (mukallaf) yang harus berasaskan iman (bersih daripada kufur dan syirik); berasaskan kejelasan, keikhlasan dan kemurnian (bersih daripada kepura-puraan, riya’, motif mengejar glamour dan populariti); berasaskan rahmah, kasih-sayang dan kerendahan hati (bersih daripada dendam, kebencian, permusuhan, keangkuhan dan kedengkian); dan berasaskan niat yang tulus menepati segala kehendak agama. (Al-Khadimiy, Nur al-din Mukhtar, 2014: 13-16). Kesimpulannya, politik demokrasi Islami adalah politik berakhlak.

Demokrasi Islami adalah demokrasi yang membebaskan dalam pengertian demokrasi yang mendukung misi liberatif. Umat Islam adalah umat pengemban misi pembebasan. Dalam kaitan ini Taha Jabir El-`Elwaniy menyebut keunggulan (khayriyyat) umat Islam sebagai ummat mukhrajah mukhrijah. Umat mukhrajah adalah umat yang ditampilkan dengan misi berbakti kepada masyarakat manusia (ukhrijat li al-nas). Umat mukhrijah pula adalah umat pembebas manusia dari segala bentuk belenggu musibah yang terliput dalam kata al-zulumat untuk dibawa ke tengah benderang cahaya kebenaran dan keadilan (litukhrija al-nas min al-zulumat ila al-nur). Martabat keunggulan (khayriyyah) yang ditempati oleh umat ini sebenarnya tidak terlepas dari syarat pelaksanaan misi pembebasan. (El-`Elwaniy, Taha Jabir, 2001: 111). Kebebasan (al-hurriyyah) adalah bahagian daripada maqasid al-shari`ah dan bahagian daripada al-daruriyyat yang perlu diberikan penekanan terutama dalam konteks era demokratisasi ketika ini. Bagi Islam, setiap anak manusia dilahirkan merdeka (ahrar), dan kemerdekaan itu menjadi bahagian daripada kemanusiaannya sepanjang hayat. Dengan kemerdekaan keinsanannya ia bebas memilih dan menganut apa yang diyakininya, termasuk agama. Apabila al-Qur’an menetapkan bahawa tidak ada paksaan dalam agama, bererti tidak sah menganut agama kerana dipaksa. Implikasi dasar Qur’ani tersebut ialah merdeka dahulu, lalu memilih agama. Demikianlah maksudnya apabila dikatakan al-hurriyyah qabla al-shari`ah (kebebasan/kemerdekaan sebelum syari`at).

Nilai Keadilan dan Maqasid al-Shari`ah

Demokrasi maqasidi harus mampu menjadi wahana dan mekanisme penegakan prinsip dan nilai keadilan. Justru, keadilan adalah bahagian daripada maqasid al-shari`ah, objektif utama pengutusan rasul-rasul sepanjang zaman,

Ayat 25 surah al-Hadid di atas menjadi sandaran utama maqasidiyyat al-`adl atau posisi keadilan sebagai bahagian daripada maqasid al-shari`ah. Yang dituntut melaksanakan keadilan atau bersikap adil dalam ayat tersebut adalah al-nas, semua orang dalam kedudukan apa pun, termasuk orang awam. Keadilan mesti ditegakkan oleh semua orang, di semua tempat, dalam semua keadaan. Tetapi ada golongan tertentu yang diberikan penekanan khusus iaitu mereka yang memikul tugas memerintah, mengurus dan menghakimi rakyat seperti yang dinyatakan dalam ayat 58 surah al-Nisa’:

Keadilan dapat terlaksana dengan mengimplimentasikan hukum-hukum syara` yang dinass-kan. Tetapi ini tidak bererti bahawa keadilan tidak perlu ditegakkan dalam halhal yang tidak ada nass. Keadilan wajib ditegakkan, ada nass atau tidak ada nass. Justeru, keadilan adalah prinsip, nilai dasar dan komponen penting maqasid al shari`ah yang wajib ditegakkan bila-bila dan di mana-mana.

Pembaharuan Fiqh al-Siyasah

Tidak siapa pun dapat menafikan kenyataan bahawa nilai-nilai al-maqasid (kebebasan, keadilan, akhlak dan karamah insaniyyah) sering kali dicabul dan diinjak-injak, tidak hanya sepanjang sejarah pemerintahan autokratik, tetapi juga dalam era pemerintahan yang mendakwa dirinya demokratik. Kenyataan ini membawa kita kepada persoalan bagaimana menyikapi dan menangani isu al-istibdad al-siyasiy atau penindasan dan kezaliman para penguasa sebagaimana yang berlaku di pelbagai negara umat Islam hari ini. Persoalan hari ini tentunya tidak dapat dijawab dengan fiqh zaman lampau yang sudah kehilangan justifikasi kesejarahannya. Khazanah fiqh politik yang dihasilkan pada abad kelima hingga kelapan (hijriah) jelas tidak dapat menyelesaikan masalah masa kini (abad kelima belas) yang sudah jauh berbeza. Perbezaannya tidak hanya dari segi rentang waktu yang berabad-abad, tetapi juga perubahan realiti politik semasa. Memang sangat beralasan apabila al-Raysuniy mengatakan bahawa tinjauan semula yang berterusan, dan ijtihad baru dalam bidang fiqh politik bukan sahaja wajar, bahkan wajib. Menurut beliau, warisan fiqh politik yang perlu ditinjau semula bukan hanya yang salah, tetapi juga yang betul dan sesuai untuk zamannya, namun tidak lagi dapat diaplikasikan dalam realiti hari ini. (Al Raysuniy, Ahmad: 2014:13).

Turath fiqh politik kita memang banyak membicarakan isu kezaliman penguasa dan cara menyikapinya, sama ada terus patuh atau melawan. Ketika berhadapan dengan penguasa zalim, umat umumnya hanya mempunyai dua pilihan: sabar atau pedang, yang diungkapkan dalam fiqh tradisi sebagai madhhab al-sabr dan madhhab al-sayf. Yang jelas, antara dua pilihan tersebut, mazhab sabarlah yang dominan kerana dukungan majoriti ulama atas pertimbangan maslahiy, menghindari mudarat yang lebih besar iaitu fitnah (kacau-bilau, pertumpahan darah dan perpecahan ummah). Dalam konteks suasana zaman tersebut keamanan dan kestabilan politik lebih diutamakan berbanding keadilan.

Apa pun justifikasi yang diberikan oleh ulama pendukung mazhab sabar berasaskan realiti zaman mereka, ketika ini telah muncul generasi ulama kontemporari yang melihat persoalan al-istibdad (penindasan/kezaliman) berasaskan realiti hari ini. Didahului oleh `Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibiy (Taba’i` al-Istibdad wa Masari` al-Isti`bad), diikuti oleh Muhammad al-Ghazaliy (Al-Islam wa al-Istibdad al-Siyasiy), diteruskan oleh al-Qaradawiy (Thaurat al-Sha`b), dilanjutkan oleh al-Raysuniy (Fiqh al-Thawrah) dan lain-lain lagi. Antara isu penting yang ditinjau semula oleh ramai ulama masa kini ialah pengertian hakikat fitnah yang dijadikan asas pendirian mazhab sabar. Setelah menyaksikan akibat dominasi mazhab sabar sehingga leluasanya kezaliman, dan lumpuhnya amar makruf nahi munkar, al-Raysuni mendefinisikan semula hakikat fitnah:

Bertolak dari premis bahawa mencegah kezaliman dan kemungkaran adalah perintah agama, al-Raysuniy mempersoalkan, adakah melaksanakan perintah (agama) itu fitnah? Dengan tegas beliau mengatakan bahawa menuntut hak yang sah bukan fitnah, menolak kemungkaran yang sudah nyata berlaku bukan fitnah, dan melawan kezaliman yang jelas bukan fitnah. Yang sebenarnya fitnah ialah keleluasaan menzalimi orang, melakukan kemungkaran, merampas hak-hak orang lain, dan mendiamkan diri terhadap segalanya itu, membiarkannya merebak menjadi bertambah dahsyat, sehingga rakyat kehilangan segala-gala termasuk agama dan dunianya. Apabila kezaliman dan kerosakan merajalela, sehingga sabar dan nasihat sudah tidak berguna lagi, maka ketika itu, kata al-Raysuniy,

Jika ada tuntutan memecat penguasa zalim dan degil seperti, maka ia bukan fitnah, sebaliknya ia adalah suatu usaha menghapuskan fitnah hingga ke akar umbinya. Memetik dari Taha Jabir al-Elwaniy, beliau mengatakan bahawa penindasan (al istibdad) itu sendirilah yang sebenarnya merupakan punca terbesar fitnah dalam segala bentuknya. (Al-Raysuniy, 2014: 39).

Sebenarnya yang dianggap membawa fitnah dalam fiqh tradisi adalah khuruj, kata yang mengandungi makna pemberontakan bersenjata (musallah), bukan protes aman seperti yang banyak dilakukan di mana-mana ketika ini. Melawan dengan kekerasan (bersenjata) mungkin bukan pilihan terbaik dalam keadaan rakyat sudah tidak memiliki kekuatan senjata (shawkah), tetapi tidak boleh dihukum secara mutlak “haram”, sebagaimana tidak boleh dihukum secara mutlak “harus”. Hakikatnya, haram atau harus tergantung pada pertimbangan antara maslahah dan mafsadah yang dihasilkan atau yang diakibatkannya. Pemikiran sedemikian itulah juga yang termuat dalam kenyataan al-Azhar ketika berlaku gerakan kebangkitan rakyat Arab beberapa tahun lalu,

Hukum wajib sabar terhadap pemerintah zalim juga bukan suatu yang mutlak. Tindakan pemecatannya diharuskan jika ada kemampuan melakukannya tanpa membahayakan keselamatan rakyat dan masyarakat (kenyataan Shaykh al-Azhar, 30 Oktober 2011). Tindakan apa pun, termasuk pemecatan pemimpin negara yang zalim atau fasiq, selamanya bersyarat. Selain prinsip pertimbangan (al-muwazanah) antara masalih dan mafasid, harus dipertimbangkan juga dari segi maqasid al-shari`ah (memelihara nyawa, harta-benda, maruah kemanusiaan dan lain-lainnya), di samping pertimbangan tentang kesan dan implikasi tindakan tersebut (al-nazar fi ma’alat al-nazar fi ma’alat alaf`al).

Ternyata pilihan rakyat era sekarang tidak lagi terbatas pada “sabar atau pedang”, tetapi sudah ada pilihan ketiga yang lebih baik. Yang mengumandang ketika ini bukan lagi kata al-sabr atau al-sayf, tetapi al-silmiyyah, kata baru yang membawa erti protes aman, tidak bersenjata. Memang kenyataannya ketika ini ruang untuk pelbagai bentuk gerakan protes aman itu terbuka lebih luas dengan terciptanya pelbagai saluran komunikasi, teknologi maklumat, media sosial, alam maya terbuka dan sebagainya. Protes terhadap kezaliman tidak hanya disuarakan secara individu, tetapi lebih banyak disuarakan secara kolektif oleh pelbagai pertubuhan, parti politik dan badan-badan NGO dari pelbagai latar budaya, agama, ikhtisas dan sebagainya. Semuanya ini tidak ada pada zaman lahirnya mazhab sabar dan mazhab pedang. Implikasi protes aman zaman sekarang juga tidak sama dengan implikasi protes zaman silam yang selalu berhujung dengan tindak balas semerta - pancung, dera atau penjara. Sekarang sudah wujud pelbagai mekanisme mempertahankan diri dari tindakan sewenang-wenang, sudah ada badan-badan antarabangsa yang memantau, dan sudah ada kepekaan masyarakat dunia terhadap pelanggaran hak asasi manusia dan lain-lainnya.

Demokrasi Islami selamanya memerlukan peranserta rakyat secara aktif dan bertanggungjawab, termasuk komitmen pemantauan, pengawalan, teguran dan koreksi (muraqabah dan muhasabah) terhadap dasar dan tindakan para penguasa, sesuai dengan kewajipan amar ma’ruf nahi munkar. Dalam kaitan inilah perlunya persepsi yang benar terhadap protes rakyat dalam bentuk demonstrasi aman (al muzahat al-silmiyyah). Ia bukan tindakan kaum bughah (penderhaka) yang “dihalalkan” darahnya. Mengenai isu ini Walid al-Rawabidah merumuskan:

Demikianlah erti dan fungsi demonstrasi dari sudut pandang demokrasi Islami. Ia adalah sejenis hisbah politik, suatu bentuk odit kawalan pertanggungjawaban ketua pemerintah, pernyataan keberatan rakyat terhadap dasar pemerintah dan orang-orang kepercayaannya. Demonstrasi yang shar`iy tentunya tidak terlepas dari syarat dan batasan syari`at (dawabit al-shari`ah), termasuk syarat silmiyyah (tidak bersenjata), motif penentangan terhadap kezaliman dan kemungkaran hakiki, tidak melakukan sebarang tindakan yang merosak harta awam, dan bersih dari sebarang perlakuan yang bertentangan dengan nilai-nilai moral kesantunan. (Al-Rawabidah, Walid, 2015: 381).

Khatimah

Sistem politik Islam selamanya bersifat dinamik dan luwes, sesuai dengan zaman yang berubah dan lingkungan yang berbeza. Yang tetap dan tidak berubah adalah prinsip dan nilai-nilai dasarnya. Bertolak dari premis tersebut, politik Islam dapat menerima unsur-unsur yang positif walau dari mana pun datangnya. Yang penting, ia harus disesuaikan dengan syari`at - prinsip, nilai dan maqasid-nya. Seperkara yang perlu dicatat bahawa maqasid al-shari`ah harus selamanya terpadu dengan fiqh dan usulnya. Kesepaduan ini perlu dipertahankan agar maqasid al-shari`ah tidak dieksploitasi untuk menjustifikasikan maqasid dan masalih yang terpisah dari nass, dengan menjadikan akal semata-mata sebagai penentunya. Sebahagian intelektual sekularis yang ikut mewacanakan maqasid al-shari`ah terkesan cuba mempromosikan maqasid yang terpisah dari Usul al-Fiqh, atau maqasid yang ditawarkan sebagai alternatif kepada Usul al-Fiqh. Pemikiran seperti itu dapat dikesan dalam tulisan Muhammad Arkoun dan mereka yang sealiran dengannya. (Imam, Muhammad Kamal al-din, 2011:10-11). Ramai kalangan cendekiawan Muslim masa kini yang merasakan bahawa politik adalah bidang yang sangat memerlukan pendekatan metodologi maqasidi, malah ada yang menyarankan pembinaan ilmu maqasid siyasi yang khusus, berbeza daripada `ilm al maqasid al-`ammah. Saranan ilmu khusus maqasid politik ini didasarkan kepada hujah bahawa fiqh tradisi dalam bidang politik terkesan kurang mendapat sentuhan maqasid; yang lebih terasa adalah penyerlahan realiti politik zaman penguasa yang memerintah dengan kekuatan tentera. (Al-Shatiwiy, Muhammad, 2014: 97-98). Kesimpulannya, maqasid al-shari`ah harus menjadi bingkai rujukan politik Islam masa kini.

Rujukan

Abu Sulayman, `Abd al-Hamid Ahmad. 2012. Ishkaliyyat al-Istibdad wa al-Fasad fi al- Tarikh al-Islamiy. Herndon: International Institute of Islamic Thought.

Al-Elwaniy, Taha Jabir. 2001. Maqasid al-Shari`ah. Beirut: Dar al-Hadi.

Al-Fadiliy, Muhammad `Abd al-Qadir (ed.). 2014. Al-Muwafaqat fi Usul al-Shari`ah li Abi Ishaq al-Shatibiy. Beirut: Al-Maktabah al-`Asriyyah.

Al-Khadimiy, Nur al-din Mukhtar. 2013. Abhath fi Maqasid al-Shari`ah. Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Ma`arif.

 ----------------- 2014. Al-Qiyam al-Akhlaqiyyat al-Insaniyyah wa Maqasid al-Shari`ah. Kaherah: Dar al-Salam.

Al-Qaradawiy, Yusuf. 1999. Min Fiqh al-Dawlah fi al-Islam. Kaherah: Dar al-Shuruq.

Al-Raysuniy, Ahmad. 2014, Fiqh al-Thawrah - Muraja`at fi al-Fiqh al-Siyasiy al-Islamiy. Kaherah: Dar al-Kalimah.

----------------- 2014. Al-Ummah Hiwa al-Asl. Kaherah: Dar al-Kalimah.

----------------- 2014. Al-Ijtihad: Al-Nass, Al-Waqi`, Al-Maslahah. Kaherah: Dar alKalimah.

---------------- 2016. Dirasat fi al-Akhlaq. Kaherah: Dar al-Kalimah.

Al-Raysuniy, Qutb. 2013. Qa`idat Tasarruf al-Imam `Ala al-Ra`iyyat Manutun bi al- Maslahah. Kaherah: Dar al-Kalimah.

Al-Rawabidah, Walid. 2015. Al-Mustajiddat fi Mas’uliyyat Ra’is al-Dawlah. Herndon: International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT).

Al-Sa`udiy, `Abd al-Wadud Mustafa 2010. Al-Bayan al-Shafiy fi al-Fiqh al-Islamiy - Al- Siyasah al-Shar`iyyah. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Al-Shatiwiy, Muhammad. 2014, Manhajiyyat Maqasid al-Shari`ah Bayna As’ilat al-Madiy wa As’ilat al-Waqi`, dlm. Al-`awwa, Muhammad Salim (ed.), Taf`il Maqasid al-Shari`ah fi al-Majal al-Siyasiy. London: Al-Furqan.

Al-Shawiy, Sa`id. 2015. Maqasidiyyat al-Qawa`id al-Fiqhiyyah min Khilal Kitab Qawa`id al-Ahkam fi Islah al-Anam li al-`Izz ibn Abd al-Salam. Kaherah: Dar al- Kalimah.

Al-`Uthmaniy, Sa`d al-din. 2015. Fi Fiqh al-Din wa al-Siyasah. Beirut: Markaz Sina`at al- Fikr li al-Dirasat wa al-Abhath.

El-Affendi, Abdelwahab. 1991. Who Needs an Islamic State? London: Grey Seal.

Imam, Muhammad Kamal. 2011. Al-Maslahah fi al-Mustalah al-Maqasidiy: Ru’yat Wazifiyyah. London: Al-Furqan.

IDE/KDH: 28052016.

(Dato' Dr Siddiq Fadzil adalah Pengerusi Institut Darul Ehsan dan mantan Presiden Wadah Pencerdasan Umat Malaysia)

ANWAR IBRAHIM: LOVE AND FORGIVENESS: READINGS ON THE ASIAN RENAISSANCE 2

Anwar Ibrahim’s rise and  involvement as a prominent politician in the Malaysian government came to an abrupt halt in 1998 when he was sacked from his posts by the then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. After he organised the biggest reform protest in the nation’s history, his home was raided, he was put into jail without bail, cuffed, blindfolded and was even beaten up by the Inspector General of Police.

It was during that period when he suffered that police assault that he was once mistaken for dead. His famous photograph with a black eye became the symbol of his predicament worldwide and the beating has left him with a permanent back injury that requires wearing a fortified brace all the time.

Despite his serious injury and harsh treatment, he is forgiving. He doesn’t expect an apology from the powers that be and has no plans to sue the government. “Can you sue Hitler?” he asks.  He was a close aide and was said to be the protégé of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammed, he took on corruption within the first family leading to his arrest and conviction the first time. He has been described as a prisoner of conscience by Amnesty International twice for the previous and his recent imprisonment, and has received widespread support from the world over after he was jailed.

Anwar was put on trial and convicted for the crimes of corruption in 1999 related to dubious sexual offences, subsequently he was imprisoned for the sexual misconduct only to be repealed later upon a lengthy appeal. It was the most shameful and ridiculous bout of absurdity in the courts as shown by the lugging about and frequent display of a stained mattress appearing as “material evidence”. The official media and main news outlets were having a field day shaming and slandering him. In 2008 the whole shenanigan was replayed.

The first trials were conducted during a major political fallout, amidst incessant disputes between Mahathir and Anwar Ibrahim over financial and economic measures that were to be implemented within the country during an economic crisis and viral accusations of cronyism at the top. 6 years later, Dr. Mahathir’s successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, released Anwar much to Mahathir’s chagrin, and Anwar went on to become the leading opposition figure until his second imprisonment for similarly questionably charges. Mahathir never forgave Abdullah Badawi for giving such latitude in allowing Anwar’s freedom.

Those who met him would realise that it was his strong sense of humour and courage of conviction that he was never in the wrong that helped him survive six years in solitary confinement the first time.

When speaking of his time in prison then, Anwar spoke of the hardship and the pain of losing his loved ones and the deaths of those closest to him while he was incarcerated. In order to endure that difficult time, he depended heavily on the Quran, the Islamic religious text, prayers and meditation. He filled up the time with reading and immersing himself with books. He was engrossed in great classical literature, not just versions of Islam but also of the Bible and Confucian texts. He read and read Shakespeare.  He spoke specifically about King Lear, saying that, “… King Lear is in prison with Cordelia. He comes out wiser and more detached. So when I came out, I’ve forgiven all of the past, let us move forward.”

Much of his political views and thoughts are similarly centred around the same role of religious teachings of peace, spirituality and forgiveness. “I’m a practicing Muslim,” he said, “and I think compassion is part of the religious teaching.” For Anwar Ibrahim, that compassion means putting an emphasis on equality for all in Malaysia, not just for the Muslims of the country but people of other confession and beliefs. According to him, “More than half a century after independence, we don’t want poor Malays to be marginalized or Chinese to feel discriminated and Indians ignored.” He says his stance on such issues does not make him pro-secularization, but rather makes him “pro-justice and freedom.”

Anwar spoke concerning Mahathir’s incessant attacks even in his twilight years having shown no remorse or regret, “When I was released I said that I would forgive but not forget [the injustices heaped upon me and my family]. It was sometime thereafter that Dr Mahathir resumed his baseless accusations against my character in a manner that was undermining my rights as a Malaysian citizen. I am within my rights as a human being to defend my reputation in the public eye and will rely on Malaysian Courts to grant justice where justice is due. But this is not a case about clearing my name - it is a question of preserving my name against these ongoing vicious attacks in a manner consistent with the protections afforded me by Malaysian law.”

Speaking of his relationship with Mahathir and on perhaps things could have been done differently, Anwar said, “Others have asked me how I see Mahathir now, and I spent the first 20 minutes talking about the nice time I had with him. They said, “No, please be serious.” I said, “I am!” That’s a wonderful thing to have. Of course I get angry, I counter his arguments, rebut very strongly, in some ways despise his hypocrisy, the gross injustice, but I wouldn’t deny the positive contributions he made. But the destruction of the institutions of government, that’s unforgivable. Personally, I’m okay, I moved on, but the judiciary, media, the police force, parliament, were all relegated to becoming inconsequential.”

(On whether things could be different) “Oh, I thought about that a lot. You have to remember, I was in prison, so what do you do? Meditate, read and think. And sing, I sing quite a bit too. You do, you reflect, but then it was mutual, he was kind to me and I was exceedingly kind and loyal to him. It was a very difficult period but I don’t think I had much option towards the end. In fact, I’ve always said to my more critical friends that I have absolved myself. After all, we were part of the government. Some of the decisions were bitter, but we needed to draw the line.

Things like bailouts, things like the corruption reports against ministers, already on your table, and for you to say “not to do anything”… you have to bring it up! But people say you could have compromised, some friends did say that. But then you would have transgressed the boundary. If or when you do take over, how do you then rationalise with the public what you’ve done? If it’s done by the prime minister, well there’s not much I can do. But if it is condoned by you, you have a problem. So, do I regret it? No. Was it difficult? Yes. Do I think I had other options? No, except to resign early, or to die a fighter.”

Asked about the book he wrote, “Asian Renaissance”, Anwar replied, “That book became quite contentious because people close to Mahathir thought we were clearly parting ways. Secondly, the central idea of economics empowerment is critical, but not everything, that’s why I talked about renaissance, cultural empowerment, I talked about freedom, and justice. And I think there was a flaw in the thinking at that time of these economic gurus: prescriptions by the World Bank, the IMF about the East Asian economic miracle, and so forth. They didn’t talk about disparity, the marginalised, the poor, whether the judiciary is independent or not, or if the media’s free. To them ‘the miracle’ was in terms of a limited notion of economics and power. I hold very dearly the thesis I presented in that book. That’s why I used the term ‘renaissance’.

But it’s a challenge. Once you are transformed into a relatively vibrant democracy, then you actually allow for space. And that latitude is essential for the mushrooming of ideas. That, to me, is very critical when you talk in terms of economics or cultural empowerment.

That is happening more successfully in Indonesia and the Philippines because they are more democratic. Although I wouldn’t want to deny the fact that Indonesia, too, is facing a major problem due to endemic corruption and marginalisation. If the issue of governance is not resolved, people have this suspicion, then whatever policies, however rational or good, will always be suspect. Is it to enrich your cronies or is it really something really essential to the masses?  Trust is important.”

On his greatest political achievement to date, Anwar says, “There is still a long way to go. So we shall see. People say that success means you assume office. It’s not true. Success is when you’re able to deliver.

It’s not when you attain the position. That’s I think the wisdom of having been there and being downtrodden. And I think that keeps your sanity and humility. I think that’s important. People think being prime minister is the end, but I don’t think so.

I think you should be evaluated and judged. And when you’re able to honour your commitments after you assume office, and remain true to your ideas, that, to me, is a far greater challenge than articulating this ideal in the absence of authority or power. When you’re there, you deal with the realpolitik, with the power play, with the big forces, with the tycoons. If they give you a 10 million dollar ring, what do you do?”

When asked how he would deal with such tycoons and sustain his idealism, Anwar explained, “I’m a man of faith; I’m a practicing Muslim. At the same time, I grew up well thanks to my parents. I’m grateful for my parents, they were quite idealistic, my late mum and my father. My mother is not English-educated but she’s an avid reader. She virtually read all novels in Malay or in Bahasa Indonesia in those days, the entire collection of Balai Pustaka books. And my dad, we always had these small compendiums of books, from Gandhi to Lao Tzu to Confucius, and it’s interesting. For a Muslim family in a village, with a small library at home, we have that. So you familiarise yourself. I go to Quran class, and following the Nabi (prophet), as an intellectual, you don’t view religion purely from a dogmatic sense but you engage.

Roger Garaudy was a great philosopher, who started off being a Christian in France, then later on became a Muslim. It’s very interesting what he said, unlike a new convert. He said, “I’m blessed, I grew up a Christian, and that’s where I learnt compassion and tolerance. Then I became a Communist, and I had strong empathy and love for the poor and downtrodden. Then I became a Muslim and then I became more universal.” So just because he is a Muslim, the past is no longer relevant? No, the past is what is him.

Exactly what Amartya Sen had said. In his book “Identity and Violence”, he said, “I’m an Indian, I memorised Sanskrit at the age of nine and I think it was a great thing, I’m a Hindu and I think we have a great civilisation, but because I’m in India, I think that Muslim moguls have done wonderfully well. But later I became a professor in Cambridge, in Harvard. I think it’s a great institution and I love being here in America and despite the fact that I grew up in Santiniketan, I am a great admirer of Shakespeare. So who am I?” And that is beautiful. I use that a lot. And when you read it and understand it and you see these people talking about Malay supremacy, oh my god, they know nothing.”

On why he was charged with such a peculiarly reprehensible allegation, he said, “They cannot taint me with corruption or any other criminal misconduct so finally sodomy was chosen - because this would enrage the rural conservative Muslim constituency. Moreover it is easier, there is no proof required to convict me, it is a matter of accepting the complainant’s view.”

He brought the matter up (criminal slander, Qadhaf) to be tried under Islamic Law explaining, “I did that because they use Islam and they say you should swear by the Quran which to me is an insult. I am a practising Muslim and it is an insult to Quran to consider crimes to be resolved only by swearing on the holy book. You rape a girl and you swear by the Quran and you are free? What does this mean? Is this what Islam teaches us? I consulted all religious authorities and they said no (to swearing oaths), they said the only option is to refer the matter to the religious court. That’s why I decided to go there but they wouldn’t dare bring it up.”

The sodomy charge used to harass him apparently seemed to foreigners to be used commonly in Malaysia to which Anwar expressly remarked, “No, I am an exception. It’s a phobia created against me, a sort of xenophobia. You look at the media on prime time TV-- I am a threat to security, I am anti Malay, they say I went to India and attacked Malaysia. Once I asked the Minister of Information, “Can you give me one week's leave?” He didn’t understand, he asked me, “Where do you want to go?” He kept on asking – I finally said, “Shut up on Anwar in your TV network.” The media is UMNO controlled, there is no freedom. The foreign media has been kind to me. Amnesty and Human Rights Watch played a major role in raising the issue.”

The most corrupt will be supporting legislation against corruption. We must measure change from actual reform and actual implementation of the reform, not pronouncements. If I am a rich man, I can pay 22 million US dollars to appoint an international PR consultant appointed by Sani Abacha and others- so naturally they must give him (the Malaysian Prime Minister) good advice- but should you be presumptuous and accept their version? No. You should assess by the performance what have they done. Is corruption rooted out? Is there a free media? Is there an independent judiciary?

 I was once arrested, and put in a lock up on a cement floor for one night and then released, for no reason- other than abuse --they could have asked me to go to the police station for questioning. But the good thing is I have the humility now - that means your passion for justice becomes strong- if I can be treated that way- I am a known person, the world talks about me. What about the poor guys?”

Forgiveness is a vital part of Anwar Ibrahim’s life, and it has consistently played a prominent role in his dealing with others who have mistreated him. An example given was of an issue that arose in 2008 when the Foreign Minister of the time called Anwar an American agent. Such an accusation is taken extremely seriously, and Anwar Ibrahim was thus compelled to take the case to court, but six years later, when both men appeared in court, the ex Foreign Minister who had accused him of being an American spy said that it had been long since this issue had occurred, and urged that it was time to drop the case and move on. Ibrahim agreed, but placed the condition that if he dropped the case, then the former Foreign Minister had to retract his statements and publicly apologize. The former Foreign Minister refused, saying that he would not do so in public but would do so privately in the chambers so that it would appear in court documents. Much to the shock of his family and friends, Anwar Ibrahim agreed, dropped the case and accepted his accuser's apology. His family and friends, he said, were furious and confused, but, “… then they understood. They said that the Quran is very clear, and that it’s superior to forgive.” Thus, both religion and forgiveness have played a vital role in Anwar’s decision making.

Moving forward, Anwar Ibrahim believes that justice must be consistent, and that love, compassion and forgiveness is what we should focus on. “If you show love, compassion, and forgiveness for those around you on earth,” said Anwar, “then those in the heavens will shower love and blessings on you.” (Borislava Manojlovic 2015, The Love & Forgiveness Project. School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University)

Concerning his family and friends, Anwar said, “My wife has been supportive all along. She became politically active only after I was detained but my daughter is in politics. The government prompted people to ask my wife --"Why are you still with your husband? Why don’t you demand a divorce?" Can it happen anywhere else in the world? That is the state of gutter politics in Malaysia - insulting human dignity and they call it moderate Islam. I was badly assaulted and in pain but otherwise its okay. I survived reading, meditating, being patient, and the conviction that ultimately you will be victorious. The role my family, my wife Azizah and the children too played was remarkable. People prayed for me- it was amazing the support I had.”

AHMAD AZAM: NAVIGATING THE TIMES: ISLAM AND GLOBAL PEACE

AHMAD AZAM: ISLAM AND GLOBAL PEACE: IDEALS AND REALITIES, THE MODELS OF AL ANDALUS AND AL UTHMANIYYAH

HISTORY

In a glance, there are three historical dates which are significant in its impact on the plight of the Muslim world. May 19, 1916 concluding the Sykes Picot Agreement by the British and the French with Russian collusion leading to the break up of the Uthmaniyah caliphate and the sprouting up of small nationalist states. The Balfour Declaration on November 2, 1917 expressing British support and endorsement for a Jewish homeland in Palestine,  bringing about the era of belligerent Zionist domination and Israeli aggression, never ending war and suffering to the Arab world. March 3, 1924 the Uthmaniyah caliphate was formerly abolished signalling the rise of secularism and Western hegemony over the Muslim world.

In brief, with the fall of the khilafah, Zionist hegemony ruled with its ambitions and the supremacy of West was left unchallenged by any Muslim world power. Muslim nations were conquered, subjugated and colonised. It was always unhindered Western imperialism aided by Zionist aggression that threatened time and again world peace.

CURRENTLY

That was history and it holds many lessons. Then what is the state that we are in at present?

There are well over 1.7 billion Muslims, equal to 23.4 % of the world population. There are 25 million Muslims in Western countries. However, the narrative and discussion about Islam and Muslims are founded on baseless assumptions and outright prejudice.

The prejudices got even worst after September 11, 2001 when a small number of Muslims, based on media reports, attacked the World Trade Centre which resulted in inventing and bringing “Islamic Terrorism” to the fore.

WAR ON TERROR

In what many now see as a pretext of fighting terrorism, the “War on Terror” was unilaterally declared by the United States of America unleashing their killing machines upon sovereign countries beginning with the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan (7 October 2001), Iraq (20 March 2003) dan the capitulation of Libya (19 March 2011). With the support of NATO war was declared and these Muslim countries were attacked and defeated. Saddam Hussein was executed in front of his own people. Muammar Gaddafi was murdered under controversial circumstances.

Strangely, the “War on Terror” has produced and has targeted many shadowy and previously unknown so called Islamic Jihadist groups operating and disguising under various crafty names. There was al Qaeda then led by the infamous Usama bin Laden. There was Taliban in Afghanistan. Later there were the Shabab, Boko Haram, Abu Sayyaf and various assortments of names. The most devious was ISIL or was it ISIS – Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, which then became simply IS or the Islamic State. Due to Muslim protests at the derogatory usage of the term “Islamic State” which was causing confusion, Barack Obama and John Kerry preferred to use the Arabic equivalent of  Daesh which is still Dawlah Islamiyyah fi ‘l Iraq was sh Sham.

People who have been seriously involved and actively engaging Islamists all over the world are quite surprised and perplexed at the sprouting of such militant extremists and cold blooded terrorists. These dark developments are surely aimed at killing the psychology of true Islamists and suppressing the genuine spirit of jihad. The sinister image and disheartening portrayal of the Shahadah, La ila ha illal Lah Muhammad ur Rasulullah by terrorists affects the hearts and minds of Muslims and Non Muslims. The evil distortion in displaying the Seal of the Prophet on black flags amidst perpetrating acts of terror has a deep psychological effect and leaves a bad scar on the thoughts of many especially the young.

Hard and Soft Power

Many political analysts, scholars and observers see the “War on Terror” as an undeclared “War on Islam”. Islam is seen under attack from all fronts by the use of hard and soft power strategies. Hard power is by the usage of war and physical aggression to beat basically Muslims into submission. While soft power is by the usage of stealth, psychology and mind control through aggressive and massive propaganda and intense diplomacy.

Joseph Nye from Harvard University in his book, Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics quoted Robert Gates, then US Defense Secretary, in describing the context of using soft power for world diplomacy as saying, “a dramatic increase in spending on civilian instruments of national security – diplomacy. Strategic communications, foreign assistance, civic action, and economic reconstruction and development.”

Soft power targets the minds and psychology of the young. To win over the hearts and minds of young Arabs, satellite TV is very effective. Carnes Lord in “Public Diplomacy and Soft Power” wrote “Satellite TV is actively promoting American soft power in the Arab world in ways that the United States had been incapable of doing. The launch of the Arabic language al Hurra channel in early 2004 to provide news in more ways beneficial to the US marked an important turning point in US public policy development.”

Islamophobia

The greatest impact of the War on Terror is definitely on the image of Islam. Islam is depicted by fear and menace.  Islam is often portrayed as misogynistic – discriminating women, regarding women as lesser humans subservient to men and the appalling rites of genital mutilation are repeatedly flaunted. Islam is accused of being contemptible of other religions and other beliefs, advocating barbaric and inhumane sharia laws. Islam is condemned as encouraging violence and terrorism in the name of Jihad. Myths have became virtual realities in the world of Islamophobes.

In contrast, the West is portrayed as highly civilised, modern, governed by the rule of law, enjoying equality, freedom and justice. The West is thrust upon as the model that the Muslim world must emulate. Ironically the world conveniently forgets and ignores the millions of refugees suffering and lingering helplessly all over the world as the direct result of the War on Terror. These are innocent people seeking shelter, respect and a decent living. The West responses by coldly shutting down its borders and putting up razor wire fences.

Endless numbers of people are being killed by indiscriminate bombs and remote controlled mindless drones. The loss of life, destruction and mayhem are squarely blamed on the Jihadist, the Mujahidin and Islam. While the West is the gallant saviour of mankind and the protector of humanity.

If we were to care and look objectively at the history of the world when Muslims ruled before the advent and era of Western colonialism, we shall be amazed to know that this religion of Islam had been instrumental in providing peace and stability, flourishing a vibrant and dynamic civilization for centuries. It was the great Andalusian Civilization or experience (in Muslim Spain) that gave birth to the Era of Enlightenment of Europe in the 17^th century.

La Convivencia (Mutual Co-Existence) in Al Andalusia (711 – 1492)

For centuries when Medieval Spain was ruled by the Moors (Muslims), the believers of Judaism, Christianity and Islam lived together in peace and harmony. La Convivencia refers to this co existence and inclusivity. For over 400 years, knowledge and spirituality thrived in the Spanish towns of Toledo, Cordoba and Granada as students and teachers of all disciplines helped one another to learn, translate and comprehend ancient teachings.

Arguably, political factors were most influential in facilitating the Convivencia process. There were two key political figures present in the upper echelons of Islamic rule in Al Andalus of the 10^th century which impacted upon the birth of such amicable coexistence. Abd al Rahman III (912-961) conducted his policy of reconciliation of Berbers, Arabs, Jews and Christians of the Ibero-Hispanic population. He also worked directly with the Mozarabs, generally referred to as Christians who lived under Muslim rule. Jews and Christians were free to practice their religion without fear of harassment or persecution. Abd al Rahman III rotated posts within the government and even placed former Jewish and Christian slaves in positions of power.

Hasdai ibn Shapmut was the Jewish Vizier of Abd al Rahman III. He and Abd al Rahman III had a common goal of shifting their Jewish and Muslim communities respectively from their Eastern centre and advancing intellectual and religious independence. Consequently, this led them to create an educational structure that encouraged the importance of Greek philosophy, particularly the works of Aristotle which was translated into many languages. This political manoeuvring had social manifestations – the Jews shared the same Romance and Arab vernacular as the Christians and Muslims. This further inaugurated the social unification among the three faith communities of the peninsular. (Sarah Mac Thomas, The Convivencia in Islamic Spain)

Akbar S Ahmed wrote, “We need to put Muslim Spain in the perspective of medieval Europe. At the time London and Paris were small towns. There was no notable art or literature or libraries or debate anywhere in Europe. Here, in contrast, was a sophisticated and powerful civilization with clear notions of harmony involving race and religion. Ideas of debate, love of poetry, cleanliness and baths were pervasive. Plato and Aristotle were discussed here.

The intermingling of race and religion in Muslim Spain produced a rich and dynamic culture. Intermarriage between Jews, Christians and Muslims produced many Muslim rulers with fair hair and blue eyes, according to literature. There were alliances between Muslim and Christian rulers and a great deal of give and take on all levels.” (Akbar S Ahmed, Islam Today, A Short Introduction to the Muslim World)

The Fall of Al Andalus, Muslims and Jews sought refuge in the Uthmaniyyah Caliphate (Ottoman Empire)

The glory of Islamic Spain ended on 2 January 1492, when the last Muslim ruler of Granada, Sultan Muhammad XII or better known in Spain as Boabdilla surrendered to Queen Isabella I of Castille and Ferdinand II of Aragon. The spirit of Reconquista drove and overwhelmed Ferdinand and Isabella. A decree of forced conversion to Catholicism was enforced upon Muslims and Jews giving them the dreadful choice of conversion or expulsion from Spain. Thus the spirit of La Convivencia which brought glory to Spain for 800 years came to an end. Spain became totally Catholic.

Muslims and Jews who refused to convert chose to migrate, interestingly to another Muslim Empire, the Uthmaniyyah Caliphate centred in modern day Turkey.  Its ruler Sultan Bayezid II (1481-1512) upon hearing of the ultimatum given to Muslims and Jews in Spain, had sent out imperial edicts or Fermans in Ottoman language throughout his empire to welcome the refugees. In his proclamation, the Sultan addressed the Jews that it was God’s command to care of the descendants of Prophets Abraham and Jacob, to see that they had food to eat and to take them under his protection. They were invited to Istanbul and to live in peace in the “shade of the fig tree” where they were free to engage in trade and to own property. Around 250,000 Jews resettled in Ottoman lands, most heading for Istanbul and Salonika. Today, present day Turkey has welcomed 3 million Syrian refugees in the words of its president as “guests”.

Al Andalus and Uthmaniyah Models of Global Peace: Spiritual Commitment to Quranic Injunctions

This was one of the most important virtues of the great founding leaders of al Andalus and Uthmaniyyah. Al Qur’an provided them guiding ideas, inspiration and motivation for good governance, universal justice, peace, toleration and harmony. Global peace and harmony could only be achieved when the virtues of the Quran are followed in letter and in spirit. Once these virtues were ignored for whatever reason, then a state of anarchy, enmity and chaos will creep into the empire that will end in its downfall and capitulation.

Briefly browsing the Qur’an, we shall find:-

Surah al Fatiha reminds all that Allah is the One and only Lord of Mankind and it is Allah that we worship, seek help and guidance in life’s journey.

Al Isra: 70 tells us that all mankind are from Prophet Adam and humans are ordained by God with honour and dignity.

Al Hujurat: 13 informs us that mankind were created in plurality and diversity so as to know one another and that the most honoured are the most pious and righteous in the sight of Allah.

An Anbiya’: 106-107 brings the message of the Messenger of Allah as the mercy for mankind.

Al Baqarah: 85 reminds us to follow the Qur’an entirely and comprehensively.

The Ulama’ of al Andalus

An important factor promoting universal justice and global peace is the role played by Muslim rulers and their close relationship with the ulama’. The Sultans especially during the formative years loved to cultivate the culture of learning encouraging the ulama’, scholars and intellectuals from all over to come and reside in their palaces, residences or madrasahs in the vicinity of their palaces. The Sultans valued their relationships with the ulama’ in seeking spiritual guidance while the ulama’ advocated Qur’anic teachings without fear or favour.

It is important to note the ‘alim during the al Andalus period was a philosopher, scientist, sharia scholar and a Sufi master. The ulama’ mastered a multidisciplinary field of knowledge. Al Andalus was famous for producing many highly respected ulama’ such as Ibn Rushd, Ibn Arabi, Ibn Bajjah and Ibn Tufail.

The Spiritual Foundation of The Uthmaniyyah Empire

The foundation of the Ottoman Empire was rooted in spirituality. It was the norm for all Sultans to be a man of God, strictly obeying Quranic injunctions. All Sultans have spiritual advisors and these are masters of Sufi orders who only fear Allah. The early years of the Ottoman Empire were blessed by God fearing Sultans who respected, learned and adhered to the advice of their spiritual advisors. The founder of the Empire, Osman Ghazi (1299-1326) was blessed with Shaykh Edebali who interpreted the famous dream of Osman Ghazi.

One night, when Osman was a guest in Edebali’s dergah, he had a dream. As the sun rose, he went to Edebali and told him, “My Shaykh, I saw you in my dream. A moon appeared in your breast. It rose, rose and then descended into my breast. From my navel there sprang a tree. It grew and branched out so much, that the shadow of its branches covered the whole world. What does my dream mean?”

After a brief silence, Edebali interpreted: “Congratulations Osman! God Almighty bestowed sovereignty upon you and your generation. My daughter will be your wife, and the whole world will be under the protection of your children.”

Osman's dream seems to heavily reflect the creation of the Ottoman Empire. Osman's dream was an important piece of literature for Ottoman scholars.

Osman Ghazi’s descendants followed the same path with Sultan Murad II who had Haci Bayram Veli as advisor, and Sultan Mehmet II – al Fatih, the conqueror of Constantinople had Ak Semsettin Hoca guiding him spiritually.

The Spiritual Character of Ottoman Sultans and their soldiers won Christian hearts

The success and fast expansion of the Ottoman Empire onto Christian Europe was not through the sword as always mentioned. Instead it was through the shining example of devotion and strict observance to the teachings of the Quran. People were willingly submitting to Ottoman rule and some accepted Islam because of the good Islamic behaviour of the Ottoman Sultan and his soldiers.

Thomas W Arnold in The Spread of Islam in the World – A History of Peaceful Preaching (1896) wrote, “ Even in the dirt of alcoran you shall find jewels of Christian virtues; and indeed if Christians will but diligently read and observe the Laws and Histories of the Mahometans (followers of Muhammad), they may blush to see how zealous they are in the works of devotion, piety and charity, how devout, cleanly, and reverend in their Mosques, how obedient to their Priest (Imam), that even the great Turk (Sultan) himself will attempt nothing without consulting his Mufti; how careful are they to observe their hours of prayer five times a day wherever they are, or however employed? How constant do they observe their fasting from morning till night a whole month together; how loving and charitable the Muslemans (Muslims) are to each other, and how careful of strangers may be seen by their Hospitals, both for the Poor and for Travellers; if we observe their Justice, Temperance, and other moral Virtues, we may truly blush at our own coldness, both in devotion and charity, at our injustice, intemperance, and oppression; doubtless these Men (Muslims) will rise up in judgement against us; surely their devotion, piety and works of mercy are main causes of the growth of Mahometism (Islam).”

CONCLUSION

In order to understand and comprehend the events around the world today, one needs to look back to fathom the historical background with objectivity and a balanced perspective.  This is a challenge to us all. The ups and downs of any civilization largely depends on virtues of good governance, justice, peace and harmony irrespective of race and religion. The glory of Islamic history was always characterized by the spiritual commitment of Muslims to the teachings of the Quran while its downfall was related to failure in adhering to Quranic injunctions. History shall always repeat itself.

The problem of the Muslim world today is the lack of quality in its leaders and its ulama’. Our society would be more informed and well guided if leaders were just and able with the wholehearted support of competent and qualified ulama’. Ulama’ who are without fear or favour, who are capable of upholding and expounding Islam as the highest standard – al Islam ya’lu wa la yu’la álaih.

(Edited and enhanced from a presentation by Ahmad Azam Abd Rahman for the International Seminar on Islam and Global Peace)

Ahmad Azam Abd Rahman is President of the Movement for an Informed Society (WADAH), Deputy Secretary General (Asia Pacific) Union of NGOs in the Islamic World UNIW and was former President of ABIM