WWW.PRIBUMI.WIN – I was quite surprised and deeply disturbed by Nusron’s attitude at ILC TVOne last night. Both the attitude of his mind and the attitude of spoken language and body (body language) shows a very low. The inability of a person to convey a thought in a beautiful way, even if true, indicates something is wrong. Especially when the thought or understanding is indeed, in addition to ignorant, arrogant, also indeed “blunder”.
I do not agree with the liberal mindset much. Because liberalism is different from logic in thought. Logic is healthy and necessary. But liberals may mean that they are unwilling to be bound by religious boundaries, even those that are approved as fundamental borders.
I am very logical. Even assume that religion and faith even have a strong logic base. But it does not mean the boundaries or in the language of religion “huduud” must be trampled on behalf of logic. Because any human thought selogis, undoubtedly have limitations, even tends to be a mistake trap. Therefore, ultimately, logic should still be used at the boundaries fixed by the determination of the heavens (revelation).
Yusron is not just liberal. But the character that expresses his liberalism is built on a character that is not morally. Rant words, facial expressions, wide-eyed, and obviously uncontrollable emotions all show who Yusron is.
I honestly do not really know Yusron. And I also do not really want to waste energy, time and thought to talk about it. Because it really is not very qualified to discuss. But in the event ILC there are some things that are very intriguing, even disturbing the intellect, even the sensitivity of my faith.
First, the statement that the right to understand the Qur’an is only Allah and His Apostle. This statement is very paradoxical with the religious position of Nusron who selau said that the religious texts must be with logic. Even those who determine truth are human logic, as in the basic position of liberalism.
Secondly, the above statement is in fact contrary to the basic purpose of the Qur’an to be understood by man: “inna anzalnaahu Qur’aanan Arabiyan la’allakum ta’qiluun”. The point is that the Qur’an is revealed to be understood. And if only Allah and His Messenger understood the meaning of the Qur’an, why was it revealed to man? Especially if indeed the Qur’an is intended as a guide (hudan linnas). Can humans make it a live manual if they do not understand it?
Third, his statement about Ahok’s statement that Ahok alone understands. Nusron implies that everyone should close the ears and eyes of the attitude and words of Ahok. There are two possibilities in this case.
Probably because of blindness and deafness Nusron wants all men blind and deaf. So no longer need or pretend not to know what is said by Ahok.
It is also possible that Nusron has placed Ahok in the position of God whose word is absolute and only he understands.
Fourth, Nusron’s appearance with emotional facial expressions, uncontrollable words, seems to be one character with the person he wants to win. Appearing in a discussion setting, let alone broadcasting directly across the country through national television, is highly inappropriate with uncontrolled emotions. Usually such attitudes as well as a measure of the depth of knowledge and psychological maturity of a person.
Fifth, perhaps the most disturbing is as a NU cadre (hopefully true) Nusron’s attitude is the antithesis of the NU character, whose tradition respects the ulama. When Nusron shouted at the clerics, directly or not, then in the street language his name was “insolent”.
Therefore all parties must find a way for Nusron is no longer repeat. The difference of opinion is okay. I support differences of opinion, including in the interpretation of religious texts. But it should be done on the boundaries of syar’i, and more importantly built on the basis of “khuluqi”.
Wallahu al-Muwaffiq ilaa aqwamit thoriq (NU-style cover).
New York, October 12, 2016. [AW]