An Urgent Call for Inter-Madhhab Discourse

“For every ‘why’, there’s a ‘why not’,

for every ‘if’, there’s a ‘but’,

for every ‘and’, because there’s an ‘and’.”

~ Dr. Yasir Qadhi

Picture courtesy of http://startempathy.org/

An Urgent Call for Inter-Madhhab Discourse

Imagine while you are joyously enjoying your Udang Goreng (fried Shrimp) with rice for lunch, suddenly a friend of yours, a Muslim but non-Shafiie came to you and says “How can you eat this? How can you digest seawater cockroaches?”

“Cockroaches?! Can’t you be more rude?” pounding in your heart.

How would you have reacted? Would you throw up? Would you punch him in the face? Would you post an angry status?

That was what happened to me, several years ago, the result of spending a lunch with my Afghani friend.

Luckily I managed to keep my sanity and didn’t commit any of the immature reactions aforementioned.

I was a bit startled at first but kept my cool. I could have yelled at him “Can’t you see I’m eating here?” but I did not.

I asked with a soft tone “What madhhab are you following?”

He replied “Hanafi.”

“Thought so” in my mind.

Thanks to the little knowledge I had on inter-madhhab discourse stemmed from my first semester subject “Transaction in Islamic Law” that led to the discussions that Hanafis don’t eat water creatures, I withheld my anger.

Now, I would like to ask, what if the plot was changed; I started punching him or posted an angry status?

It is only “khilaf”

I am completely aware that, my background education as a bachelor’s degree holder in English Linguistics and Literature does not qualify me to advocate a scholarly opinion.

That is why, this piece of writing is an opinion of me, as a non-Islamic studies major, observing the polemics among Muslim clerics and the general public on the issue of “khilaf”.

Like many laymen Muslim Malaysians, the earliest that I’ve been exposed on inter- madhhab discourse was at university level which was a little bit late.

Let’s assume that all tertiary educated Malaysians have been exposed to a glimpse of inter- madhhab discourse, which is doubtful of course.

So the percentage of tertiary educated labour workers as of 2012 is only 24% of the whole population of labour workers. This percentage is the minority.

I can confidently say, the majority of Malaysians are in the dark of any inter-madhhab discourse. They follow what their “ustaz says” back in school.

Looking at the recent outburst of Malaysian Muslims being overly sensitive on the “I want to touch a dog” program, I perceive this an urgent call for inter-madhhab discourse that should be fostered in starting from high school.

I agree with Dr. Zaharuddin’s account on the way the program was conducted as it is perceived by the public as somewhat provocative, enjoining people to “touch a dog gleefully.”

But Syed Azmi Alhabshi’s effort to apologize to the public is honourable. What is despicable is the threats made to him, raiding his personal space. That is, utterly uncivilized and unacceptable.

The Shafiie-centered education has led Malaysian Muslims to lose tolerance, to lose their balance in making the right judgements. Malaysians Muslims do not even know that what they’ve been taught in schools is from the Shafiie school of taught. This is a loss.

Lack of inter-madhhab discourse has made Malaysian Muslims to be overly emotional making them the “licence” to hurt others not sharing the same school of Islamic thought.

Is this what the Imam Shafie himself wanted?

To accept something as a “khilaf” these days is perceived as a “sin” giving birth to “If you do not follow my madhhab, then I shall kill you” attitude.

Clerics should help in educating  

It is depressing to see, with the stress accumulated from inflation, rise cost of living and political crisis, some iconic clerics who should be the doing their work in educating the public, instead, they poured oil to fire.

For example, the statement given by Ustaz Azhar Idrus’s assistant, Zulkifli Wahab regarding the alleged despicable video by an irresponsible party, and I quote:

“Justeru, pihak tertentu sengaja merancang usaha kotor ini untuk menjatuhkan ulama dan memesongkan akidah umat Islam di negara ini.

“Ia termasuklah program ‘I Want To Touch A Dog’ di ibu kota baru-baru ini.

“Mereka akan buat apa saja untuk merosakkan umat Islam.”

I clearly do not believe UAI is the protagonist in the video.

I really respect UAI because of his aid in helping the public on basic understandings of Islam from his widely received lectures. But I do not agree with his assistant in saying the program “I want to touch a dog” as an effort to bring down clerics.

I want to ask you Ustaz Azhar Idrus, not to be rude, but to clarify, how could you let your assistant to give a statement on your Facebook profile, which is antithetical to the real issue?

I fail to see any relations whatsoever with the video and the program. Not at all.

You should, follow the examples of other Muslims clerics such as Dr. Zaharuddin or Hilal Asyraf in tackling the discourse of “dog” as a khilaf.

How long will we prolong the enmity over “khilaf”?

It is stressful to read the hateful comments of Facebook surrounding the “dog” issue, depressing to listen to sermons lambasting with hateful statements to the organizers of the program.

I wish for a world where everyone is civilized and open to differences of opinion with necessary boundaries and limitations.

But it looks like, that world is just an utopia.

The post An Urgent Call for Inter-Madhhab Discourse appeared first on Langit Ilahi.