On 25 October 2004, the Malaysian government made a historic decision by releasing Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad, the former leader of Darul Arqam, the Islamic movement which had been controversially banned nationwide through a ruling issued by the National Fatwa Council on 5 August 1994. He was freed from restrictions imposed upon him since being arrested under the Internal Security Act on 2 September 1994. 1 The release ended what had arguably been one of the longest, if not the longest, detention orders applied in Malaysia on leaders of independent movements and organisations who had mounted a challenge to the state. Speculation about the release had spread for two months, 2 especially since the momentous decision by the Federal Court to quash the conviction on former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy, thereby granting him freedom after six years in prison. Despite the governments insistence that the judiciary had come to its decision independently, the Malaysian public widely saw the liberal hand of the executive influencing the court. 3 Since assuming power in late October 2003, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has made an effort to establish good governance and a people-friendly image as hallmarks of his administration (Khoo Boo Teik 2004: 810). Despite the official purpose of detaining, under the Home Ministers authority, anybody who has acted or is about to act or is likely to act in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia (ALIRAN 1988: 24), the Internal Security Act has often served as a convenient tool for ruling politicians to stifle opposition, whether coming from within or beyond ruling party circles. A detainee under the Act can be held without trial for a preliminary period of sixty days pending investigation, followed by a two-year period of confirmed Review of Indonesian and Malaysian Affairs, vol. 39, no. 1 (2005), pp. 87128. detention, renewable indefinitely on a two-yearly basis, subject to recommendations from the Special Branch and an appointed Advisory Board (Lent 1984: 4434). Upon release, detainees may have a further restriction order imposed upon them, effectively confining their movements to a designated locality and circumscribing their public role (Barraclough 1985: 808). In Ustaz Ashaaris case, his movement was confined to the Gombak district in Selangor from the end of October 1994 until February 2002, when he was forcibly transported to Labuan, off the coast of Sabah, where he remained until October 2004. Throughout the period, he had to report to the nearest police station once a week and was not allowed to be outside his residence at night. The identity of his visitors and the subject of conversations he had with them were closely monitored. Having established Darul Arqam, a seemingly innocent religious study group in the lower middle class Dato Keramat suburb in Kuala Lumpur in 1968, Ustaz Ashaari rapidly developed the movement by means of intense self-purification and soul-searching activities. Early recruits were generally young, first generation rural- urban migrants who formed the upcoming Malay middle class. Such urban spiritualism laid the foundation for a powerful sense of solidarity and commitment among adherents, who were prepared to sacrifice material comfort in order to create model Islamic villages which sprouted around the country after the founding of Darul Arqams pioneering Sungai Penchala settlement in the outskirts of Kuala Lumpur in 1973. The settlements became bases where courses on the essentials of Islam were organised, missionary activities were planned, economic enterprises were set up, schools were built, medical facilities were offered and publications were produced. In the 1980s, Darul Arqam expanded internationally, as shown by Ustaz Ashaaris decision in 1988 to travel abroad more or less continuously. By the early 1990s, Darul Arqam had burgeoned into a self-styled business empire with an extensive global network whose influence penetrated mainstream socio-political circles. The clampdown on Darul Arqam in 1994 involved persistent vilification in the mainstream media, raids into Darul Arqam communal villages by the security forces, wanton confiscation of property, job and scholarship suspension, state-incited 88 Ahmad Fauzi social boycott, a ban on overseas travel, detentions of Darul Arqam leaders under the Internal Security Act and mass arrests of followers for minor criminal offences such as failing to register marriages and distributing illegal publications. The wholesale proscription of Darul Arqam, by necessitating the closure of its economic activities and institutions, led to its 8,000 strong workforce almost instantly becoming unemployed. The former Darul Arqam members had to undergo special classes of the state Islamic Centre (Pusat Islam), later renamed the Islamic Advancement Department of Malaysia (JAKIM: Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia). 4 Having had their livelihood disrupted if not destroyed, Darul Arqams former followers paid a heavy price for its dissolution. These Malay-Muslims, despite the anti-establishment tag put on them, had in fact contributed to Malay economic development, thus realising a major target of the New Economic Policy (Nagata 1984: 107, 113; 1997: 138). But in the true manner of neo-feudal Malay patronage politics, these achievements were not acknowledged by the state because they took place outside the network of state institutions and parties dominated by ruling elites. Independent Malays were considered dangerous because their power base and loyalty would be necessarily independent of official corridors of political, economic and social influence (cf. Nidzam Sulaiman 2002). The demise of Darul Arqam abruptly stopped a bold attempt to create Malay-Muslims who could develop independently from the state, though the states crackdown on Darul Arqam was undertaken in the name of guarding the sanctity of Islam. Throughout the Darul Arqam versus the state saga, the government consistently stressed that the stern measures against Darul Arqam were based on religious rather than political grounds (Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid 2000: 36). As we proceed to examine this claim in the following sections, it will become clear to readers that the governments strategy of demonising Darul Arqam relied significantly upon a compliant mainstream media, whose freedom had experienced considerable erosion throughout Dr. Mahathir Mohamads tempestuous Premiership (19812003). Steady restructuring of media ownership since the 1970s meant that by the late 1980s, major The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 89 Malaysian newspapers and television stations had been either directly controlled by the government or indirectly via share acquisitions by investment subsidiaries of the ruling elites. To make matters worse, Dr. Mahathirs era had been notoriously marked by unabashed expression of and hold on to antipathetic views on press freedom (Lent 1984: 451-2, Means 1991: 13741). From the moment of the authorities declaration in 1986 of Darul Arqam being suspected of practising deviant teachings, the media played a crucial role in building a negative public image of Darul Arqam through a vicious onslaught of libellous and biased coverage, the intensity of which fluctuated but occasionally reached high points in 1986, 1988, 1991 and ultimately 1994. The transformation of the relationship between Darul Arqam and the Malaysian state Darul Arqam had earned the deviant tag in the mid-1970s, when its attempt to revive elementary Islamic practices, as manifested in its manners of eating, dressing and communicating, was widely viewed as antithetical to the modern values advocated by the socio-political establishment. Allegedly displaying anti-progressive attitudes, Darul Arqam pioneers fostered in many minds the image of religious fanatics aspiring to recreate the age of the camel within their retreats (Muhammad Syukri Salleh 1995: 2289). The earliest newspaper article on Darul Arqam accused it of basically inventing a new religion which demanded total abandonment of worldly comfort (Utusan Melayu 26 May 1976). Public misinterpretation of Darul Arqams endeavour was predictable in view of the widespread ignorance of Islam beyond the paradigm set by the dominant post-Independence liberal-capitalist thinking and refurbished by post-1969 leaders of national reconstruction. Despite contemptuous responses to Darul Arqam growing in society and the pro-establishment media, the political authorities took hardly any notice (Muhammad Syukri Salleh 1992: 1027). A handful of recluses who seemingly shunned worldly pursuits and were in turn shunned by society was hardly an irritation to the state. Probably convinced that Darul Arqams influence would remain marginal, the political elites were content to maintain minimal 90 Ahmad Fauzi The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 91 surveillance of Darul Arqam at a time when the political potential of Islamic resurgence was beginning to cause apprehension in official circles. The officially-sanctioned Islamic Centre did react to public pressure by dispatching an investigation team to Darul Arqams main settlement in Sungai Penchala, but despite reservations about Darul Arqams alien world-view and lifestyle, this team came out with largely positive findings (Mingguan Islam 21 Oct. 1988). As Darul Arqams socio-economic and dakwah (missionary) activities began to create a significant impression among the Malay- Muslims, especially the urban youth who flocked in large numbers to self-contained Darul Arqam villages to join their Islamic activities, Darul Arqams exclusive anti-development image was tacitly accepted as inaccurate. This change of perception was reflected in the official cooperation extended to Darul Arqams economic projects, and the reception of influential government figures at Darul Arqam functions (Nagata 1984: 112, Hussin Mutalib 1990: 89). The cordial visit to Darul Arqams principal headquarters by the Federal Territory mufti, Syeikh Mohsin Salleh, in 1978 did much to dispel the notion that the Islamic practices enjoined by Darul Arqam differed substantially from those of the Muslim masses (Al Islam June 1978). A minor outcry against Darul Arqam surfaced in 1979 amidst the expulsion of six leading members for allegedly questioning Ustaz Ashaari Muhammads unorthodox teachings, but this issue was quickly resolved by an amicable discussion between Darul Arqam leaders and Islamic Centre officials, and the consequent agreement of Ustaz Ashaari to clarify his mystical beliefs in the following December issue of the Al-Arqam newspaper (Kedah Religious Affairs Department 1994: 34, Meuleman 1996: 52). The first official recognition of Darul Arqam by the political establishment came in the same year when Ustaz Ashaari was summoned to the office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, to explain the nature of Darul Arqams activities. Having apparently been convinced that Darul Arqams struggle did not forsake the world and was therefore not antithetical to the aims of the New Economic Policy, Dr Mahathir was reported to have expressed admiration for the ambitions of Darul Arqam (Ashaari Muhammad 1993b: xxii). 5 Paradoxically, it was during Dr Mahathirs term as prime minister that the relationship between Darul Arqam and the Malaysian state deteriorated to the point at which reconciliation became impossible. In 1986, in the wake of the resignation of and revelations by the erstwhile Deputy Sheikh Al-Arqam, Ustaz Mokhtar Yaakub, the government began to unearth allegedly deviant (sesat) practices of Darul Arqam. Propaganda against Darul Arqams peculiar lifestyle was superseded by allegations of theological deviationism, which came officially from the Islamic Affairs Division of the Prime Ministers Department (BAHEIS: Bahagian Hal Ehwal Islam Jabatan Perdana Menteri) and were sanctioned by its political masters. 6 There were relentless media attacks on supposedly Darul Arqam doctrines. 7 At the centre of the dispute were the theological status of the Aurad Muhammadiah 8 and certain practices associated with it, and Darul Arqams position with respect to the Imam al-Mahdi. 9 Darul Arqams response to the allegations came not in the form of replies through the government-controlled media or outbursts of unruly behaviour, but rather through the intensification of dakwah, social services and explanations to the public. Theologically, Ustaz Ashaari defended his teachings in his book Aurad Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam (Aurad Muhammadiah: The Conviction of Darul Arqam) (1986), to which the Islamic Centre replied with an anonymously written discourse, Penjelasan Terhadap Buku Aurad Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam (An Explanation of the book Aurad Muhammadiah: The Conviction of Darul Arqam) (1986). The intellectual exchange of arguments between the authorities and Darul Arqam, however, was short-lived. In 1988, unambiguous declarations of Darul Arqams deviationism were made by the Islamic Centre (Utusan Malaysia 22 Sept., 12 Oct. 1988; Berita Harian 14 Oct. 1988), and followed by state religious councils. 10 The book Aurad Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam was banned, and the publishing permits of seven Darul Arqams newspapers and magazines were revoked by the Home Affairs Ministry for fear they would lead the public astray by disseminating the Aurad Muhammadiah. 11 Denied of nearly all means of communication with the public, Ustaz Ashaari questioned the banning and the unilateral 92 Ahmad Fauzi The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 93 declarations of Darul Arqams deviationism and replied to the book Penjelasan with another book, Berhati-Hati Membuat Tuduhan (Be Careful in Making Allegations) (1989). Nevertheless, response from the authorities came in the form of intensified allegations and repressive regulations. Throughout the 1990s, the Malaysian public witnessed a systematic campaign against Darul Arqam launched through the mass media and the distribution of pamphlets, Friday sermons and public lectures in mosques, offices, universities and places of public interest (cf. Abdul Khaliq 1993: 816, Haswan 1993: 1223). With the intervention of senior Malaysian political figures, allegations against Darul Arqam mixed theological and non-theological, primarily security, issues. Following a firm declaration by the Chief Director of the Islamic Centre banning all Darul Arqam activities and products in government departments, agencies and ministries a ban which would also in due course cover statutory bodies, local authorities, political organisations and the private sector (Utusan Malaysia 12 Sept. 1991) 12 the Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir, stated that the activities of the Sheikh Al-Arqam would be investigated to ascertain whether or not they were dangerous and threatened national security (Berita Minggu 15 Sept. 1991). Pronouncing that the decision to ban Darul Arqam was made by Islamic experts, Dr Mahathir unconditionally declared that Darul Arqam had deviated from Islam (Utusan Malaysia 14 Sept. 1991, Berita Harian 14 Sept. 1991). A similar allegation was later reiterated by his deputy, Ghafar Baba (Utusan Malaysia 28 Sept. 1991). These were followed by the commitment given by the Deputy Home Affairs Minister, Megat Junid Megat Ayub, that Darul Arqam leaders would be arrested under the Internal Security Act if their actions were found to create tension and jeopardise national harmony (Utusan Malaysia 27 Sept. 1991). On the sluggishness of the government to enforce the ban, Deputy Minister at the Prime Ministers Department, Dr. Abdul Hamid Othman, replied that aggressive action against Darul Arqam would turn its supporters towards militancy (Berita Harian 12 Oct. 1991, New Straits Times 18 Oct. 1992). Allegations surfaced of Ustaz Ashaaris extravagant lifestyle abroad and of Darul Arqam illegally operating its own radio station (Berita Harian 7 Dec. 1991, Utusan Malaysia 6 Oct. 1991). Permits for newly published Darul Arqam magazines were revoked without any justification being given. 13 In 1993, following Dr. Abdul Hamids accusation that Darul Arqam was manipulating Islam to highlight the image of its leader as a political hero (Berita Harian 24 Feb. 1993), the Chief Director of the Islamic Centre claimed that militancy had crept into Darul Arqam, which allegedly harboured designs to overthrow the government by revolutionary means (Berita Harian 4 May, 6 May 1993). After the Prime Minister stressed yet again that Darul Arqam activities would be clamped down on (Utusan Malaysia 8 May 1993), a prominent United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) 14 senator urged the government to confiscate Ustaz Ashaaris passport. He claimed that Darul Arqam was more dangerous than the communists, that Ustaz Ashaari had ambitions to become Prime Minister, that Darul Arqam members believed their leader was the Imam al-Mahdi, and that the Darul Arqam lifestyle so promoted promiscuity that syphilis was rife among its members (Berita Harian 26 May 1993). 15 While state religious officials and politicians in charge of Islamic affairs tried to justify government actions from a theological point of view, other politicians and bureaucrats from the ruling elite, in their occasional outbursts, failed to portray the Darul Arqam versus government controversy as a strictly non-political affair. For example, the clampdown of 1994 was triggered by the Islamic Centres charge that Darul Arqam had formed a 313-men suicide army based in Bangkok in a plan to take over power in Malaysia through militant means (Utusan Malaysia 13 June 1994, 14 June 1994). The Information Minister, Mohamed Rahmat, simultaneously accused Darul Arqam of harbouring extreme political ambitions (Utusan Malaysia 14 June 1994). Immediately following the fatwa (legal ruling) banning Darul Arqam, Deputy Minister at the Prime Ministers Department, Dr Abdul Hamid Othman insisted that Darul Arqams concept of Imam al-Mahdi was a political concept which had been associated with a religious struggle (Utusan Malaysia 6 Aug. 1994). Following the Internal Security Act arrests, the Malaysian Police Chief claimed to have extracted information from Ustaz Ashaari, under interrogation, proving that 94 Ahmad Fauzi The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 95 Darul Arqam had plans to capture political power through magic and violence (The Nation 17 Sept. 1994). Clearly, as Darul Arqam expanded in size and influence, the state had, on its own volition, transformed the nature of its relationship with Darul Arqam from one of provisional toleration to one of overt hostility. While concerns about Darul Arqams lifestyle and religious beliefs and practices had ostensibly determined the governments actions until the late 1980s, statements by ruling elites in the 1990s suggested that antagonism between both parties had assumed political proportions, despite official disclaimers to the contrary. But insofar as it needed a religious justification to act against Darul Arqam, which was not legally registered, the government had to continue using Islam to conceal more directly political motives. Since the Darul Arqam episode had always been presented by the government as a purely religious affair devoid of political motives, 16 it is pertinent to examine the contending arguments from just such a perspective. Theological dimensions in the Darul Arqam versus the Malaysian state crisis In its 5 August 1994 ruling outlawing Darul Arqam, the National Fatwa Council listed nine facets of Darul Arqams teachings considered to have deviated from Islam. 17 These, however, and other charges of theological deviationism against Darul Arqam may be classified under three broad headings; the theological validity of the Aurad Muhammadiah, the nature of Darul Arqams belief in the Imam al-Mahdi and fanaticism of Darul Arqam members towards their leader. The first two issues had consistently been the sources of contention between the official religious authorities and Darul Arqam, as revealed in public statements by representatives of the Islamic Affairs Division of the Prime Ministers Department (BAHEIS) and the booklets and documents it published on the matter (Berita Harian 10 June 1993, 16 July 1994; BAHEIS 1986, 1993, n.d.). The issue of Darul Arqams alleged fanaticism, although existent from the early stages of the controversy, became conspicuous only in the 1990s, after the unprecedented interest shown by hitherto indifferent politicians who tried to justify their arguments in religious terms, hence practically forcing the official ulama to follow suit. Theological validity of the Aurad Muhammadiah Dispute concerning the status of the Aurad Muhammadiah, as applied by Darul Arqam, concerned both the tariqahs foundational basis and elements of its practice. First and foremost, the official religious authorities contested Darul Arqams belief that the Aurad Muhammadiah was taught directly by the deceased Prophet Muhammad to Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimi during a yaqazah 18 in Makkah, as related in the biography of the tariqahs founder written by his eldest grandson, Mohd. Taha Suhaimi (1990: 267) and cited approvingly by Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 345). The authorities refuted the possibility of such a yaqazah, which arguably implied that the shariah, as contained in the Quran and Sunnah, was incomplete. 19 Acknowledging yaqazah apparently degraded both the Quran and the missionary character of the Prophet Muhammad (Berita Harian 10 June 1993), whose death in 632 was an accomplished fact. Communication with the dead was said to be totally impossible, for it went against both Divine Revelation and immutable laws of nature, such that Darul Arqams claim that the founder of the Aurad Muhammadiah received it directly from the Prophet Muhammad was judged to be fabrication and nonsense (BAHEIS 1993: 15, 19; n.d.: 30). Moreover, it was argued that no mention of yaqazah could be found in the stories of the Prophet Muhammads companions, who were presumably more in need of his direct guidance to confront chronic problems besetting Muslims of their time (BAHEIS 1993: 11). Referring to a fatwa by the Makkan-based Rabitah Al-Alam Al-Islami, a highly respected Islamic legal body, BAHEIS declared that claims of the dead maintain[ing] physical communication with the living, although the latter are allegedly endowed with supernatural abilities, are absolutely false (1986: 7980). Although Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 6871) corroborated his claim with Quranic and Prophetic evidence allowing for the Prophet Muhammads posthumous encounters with succeeding generations among his ummah, 20 the authorities argued that 96 Ahmad Fauzi his interpretations of the relevant texts had strayed from the consensus of scholars of tafsir and hadith (BAHEIS 1986: 216, 6579; 1993: 20-1, n.d.: 12). Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 703) also quoted anecdotes from classical sufi texts and personal admissions of prominent sufi scholars proving that yaqazah with the Prophet Muhammad had taken place, but the authenticity of his references was severely questioned. For example, BAHEIS (1986: 26) rejected Ustaz Ashaaris use of episodes from the mediaeval book Sharh al-sudur as incapable of scientific authentication, and implied that such writings were influenced by the Hindu doctrine of the reincarnation of the soul. This disregarded the fact that Sharh al-sudur was compiled by Jalal al-din al-Suyuti (d. 1505), the renowned Egyptian jurist universally recognised as a great Islamic mujaddid (reformer) (cf. Atiqul Haque 1990: 11315), and who, according to Mohd. Taha Suhaimi (1990: 28) and Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 71, 1989: 109), admitted to have met and spoken with the deceased Prophet Muhammad seventy-five times. The religious authorities manifestly held that the authoritative reputation of a scholar was not enough to validate his findings and compilations. Of Darul Arqams ritual practices declared to have deviated from true Islamic teachings, two towered in importance above others. Firstly, there was the allegedly longer shahadah contained in the Aurad Muhammadiah, whereby the practitioner was expected to acknowledge, after the normal attestation of faith to Allah and the Prophet Muhammad, the Righteous Caliphates of Abu Bakr (d. 635), Umar (d. 644), Uthman (d. 656) and Ali (d. 661), and of the future Muhammad al-Mahdi. The whole addition was deemed to be publicly misleading, besides the claim that including Al-Mahdi as one of the bearers of the Righteous Caliphate was a bidah (innovation) which lacked evidence from the Quran, hadith or practices of the ulama (BAHEIS 1986: 468, 1993: 223, n.d.: 245). Secondly, there was Darul Arqams practice of tawassul 21 as contained in the tahlil 22 of Aurad Muhammadiah. The authorities vehemently repudiated the ability of godly people to mediate in the affairs of God and His creatures, and implied that resorting to tawassul denied His omnipotence and verged upon polytheism (BAHEIS 1986: 4952). The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 97 Defending his teachings, Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 89-90, 1989: 11012) pointed out that, grammatically, the apparently additional portion of the shahadah ascribed to its Aurad Muhammadiah version was in reality a separate recitation; the phrases shared no connection, apart from being in juxtaposition with one another. The relevant question then became whether mentioning the names of the Prophet Muhammads companions and of Al-Mahdi, following the conventional recitation of the shahadah, was permissible. Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 904, 144-51; 1989: 11216, 118, 22731) laboriously extracted evidence from the hadith and rulings by classical and contemporary ulama permitting both the successive recitation and tawassul. As, however, similar accusations figured in subsequent fatwa on Darul Arqams deviationism, the authorities had clearly chosen to ignore the sources cited by Ustaz Ashaari. At this juncture, it should be discernible that theological disagreement between Darul Arqam and the religious authorities stemmed primarily from discrepancies in the sources used to buttress each others arguments. While Ustaz Ashaari espoused the orthodox Sunni theology as systematised by Abul Hassan al-Ashari (d. 936) and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (d. 944) and found in classical works of mediaeval ulama who unanimously endorsed sufism, 23 the authorities relied on the works of modern scholars belonging to the version of reformist Islam whose intellectual origins could be traced to the teachings of Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1263) and Muhammad ibn Abd al- Wahhab (d. 1787), both of whom sought to purge sufism of its allegedly heretical excesses. Among scholars who could be included in this latter category, and whose arguments were utilised to emasculate and disprove Quranic interpretations and hadiths brought forth by Ustaz Ashaari, were Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905), former Grand Mufti of Egypt; Mahmud Syaltut, former rector of Al-Azhar University; and Nasiruddeen al-Albani, a well-known Syrian-based muhaddith (BAHEIS 1986). Contemporary orthodox Sunnis have conventionally used the epithet Wahhabi to describe the followers of this theological school which unanimously rejects the Asharite and Maturidite systems of beliefs, 24 and have gone to great lengths to refute these doctrines (cf. Sirajuddin Abbas 1991: chapters XXI, 98 Ahmad Fauzi XXIII; Ibn Muhammad 1994: 78121, 1426). Embracing a traditionalist system of beliefs which tolerated controversial spiritual practices such as yaqazah, veneration of awliya and tawassul, Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad identified the authorities theological doctrines as resembling Wahhabi thought, which was in conflict with Sunni thought and repudiated spiritual and sufi matters (1989: 110). He suggested: I am not sure how far the Islamic Centre accepts my suggestion that its views are closer to those of the Wahhabis than of Sunnis. If that were true, what harm is there in explaining to the public, that the conflict between me and the Islamic Centre is actually a continuation of the traditional conflict between Wahhabis and Sunnis, and not one between true Islamic teachings and teachings said to be deviant or deviationist (1989: 44). The question of discordant sources apart, one may argue, by a detailed examination of both sides discourses, that dispute between the religious authorities and Darul Arqam might have been alleviated had the former refrained from accusing the latter of subscribing to views and practices it strenuously disavowed. For example, the authorities accused Darul Arqam of adding phrases to the shahadah, hence distorting a cardinal tenet of Islam, although this had been categorically denied by Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 8990). Further, the authorities accused Darul Arqam of honouring the founder of the Aurad Muhammadiah as an anointed caliph, with the same status as the four Righteous Caliphs, yet Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad had made it plain clear that the Muhammad al-Mahdi mentioned after the Aurad Muhammadiahs shahadah was not necessarily Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimi, but rather the awaited al-Mahdi (1986: 945). Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad also painstakingly explained that by yaqazah, he did not mean a conscious meeting with the original body form of the Prophet Muhammad, which would indeed constitute a denial of the completeness of the shariah, but rather with his soul (roh), from whom the acceptance of any command had been declared as commendable by al-Suyuti, among others (1986: 713). While such mistakes may have originally been the result of an unfortunate misreading of Ustaz Ashaaris Aurad The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 99 Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam (1986), the fact that the same allegations were reiterated in 1993 (Berita Harian 10 June 1993, BAHEIS 1993: 2), despite Ustaz Ashaaris disavowal of such claims in Berhati-Hati Membuat Tuduhan (1989: 77-8, 108, 11012) which went unanswered, showed that the authorities had resorted to a deliberate distortion of facts smacking of theological sophistry. If Darul Arqam were guilty of adopting beliefs and practices as portrayed by the authorities, their arguments in defence of their teachings would have been less credible. But the authorities had to misrepresent facts to convince the masses, who were perennially exposed to only one side of the polemic, that Darul Arqam had indeed deviated from the straight path. Darul Arqam was left defenceless in the psychological warfare against the state as its publications were successively proscribed, so that the public was made to digest not Darul Arqams actual opinions and convictions, but what the authorities wanted them to believe about Darul Arqam. Unlike previous official campaigns against heterodox beliefs, 25 no Darul Arqam member was charged in the shariah court for embracing or propagating deviationist teachings, a fact which lends doubt to the authorities claim that Darul Arqams teachings lacked proper Islamic foundations. Belief in Imam al-Mahdi The fundamental point of dispute on this matter related to Darul Arqams conditional belief that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al- Suhaimi was still alive and was being kept in a miraculous state by God to prepare for his reappearance as Imam al-Mahdi, the messiah whose advent was ordained by several hadiths. 26 Based on the prevailing chaos in the contemporary world and the prediction made by Jalal al-din al-Suyuti that Al-Mahdi would appear around 1407 Hijrah, Darul Arqam believed that Al-Mahdi was the anointed saviour of the fifteenth Islamic century, and the last in the list of celebrated mujaddids mentioned in the hadith, as related by Abu Dawud: Allah will raise, at the head of each century, such people for this Ummah as will revive its Religion for it (Ashaari Muhammad 1987a: 6, 4854; 1988: 257). This was not surprising since the coming of Al-Mahdi as a ruler 100 Ahmad Fauzi who would bring justice and prosperity to the world had always been a favourable topic of discussion and speculation among sufis, who regarded the messiah as the final and greatest wali (saint) (Muhammad Labib Ahmad 1980: 2931, 42). But Ustaz Ashaaris postulation that the founder of the Aurad Muhammadiah was the most plausible candidate for the Mahdi-ship was based on purely arbitrary suggestions made by his grandson Mohd. Taha Suhaimi (1990: 67, New Sunday Times 13 July 1986), and upon circumstantial evidence such as an ancestral lineage reaching to the Prophet Muhammad through his daughter Fatimah, and physical features and a name which accorded with the description of Al-Mahdi in hadiths, as testified by his contemporaries still alive (Ashaari Muhammad 1986: 178, 1989: 489). One of them, known only as Kiyai Mahmud, was said to have heard in person Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimis prediction that the revival of the Aurad Muhammadiah, after a brief decline following his occultation, would occur under the leadership of a man named Ashaari Muhammad (1989: 84). The religious authorities claim that the aforesaid beliefs constituted theological deviationism was contested by Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 16578), who expressed the view that the whole issue of Al-Mahdi was not a matter of theological belief, such that even a disavowal of Al-Mahdi would not negate ones aqidah (Islamic belief). When the whole matter was not even a tenet of the Islamic faith, unlike beliefs in God, His Messengers, Angels, His Books, the Day of Judgement and qada and qadar (fate and predestination), how could determining someone as Al-Mahdi constitute a deviation from aqidah? Ustaz Ashaari supplied evidence showing that there were prominent Sunni ulama who claimed to have met Al-Mahdi and agreed with the Shiite view that Al-Mahdi had been born and was alive, without risking being labelled as heterodox (Ashaari Muhammad 1986: 1704). 27 Paradoxically, part of the evidence came from a BAHEIS- published book, Aliran Syiah (The Shiite Sect), by Wan Alias Abdullah of the officially sanctioned Islamic Research Centre (Ashaari Muhammad 1986: 173). Ustaz Ashaaris view that the question of determining the person of Al-Mahdi fell within issues allowing differences of opinion (khilafiah) based upon independent reasoning The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 101 (ijtihad), and was beyond matters affecting ones aqidah, was purportedly supported by several contemporary scholars whom Ustaz Ashaari listed (1986: 175). To Ustaz Ashaari, all matters concerning Al- Mahdi were subsidiary branches rather than the core of the Islamic creed, such that even holding a mistaken opinion on any aspect of them did not make one accountable to God in the Hereafter (1986: 185, 1989: 79). The authorities patently disagreed with the analysis above, stating that there exists no avenue for us to deny that the question of Imam Mahdi concerns the aqidah and determining the Imam Mahdi is surely a false and misguided bidah (BAHEIS 1986: 64). But apart from a fatwa by Mahmud Syaltut, whose unorthodox views had been rejected by the majority of the Sunni ulama, BAHEIS failed to provide any documentary evidence to support its stance (1986: 615). Moreover, as Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1989: 467) pointed out, BAHEIS arguments were replete with contradictions and confusing statements. For instance, prior to its damning conclusions above, it had agreed that to Sunnis, matters concerning Imam Mahdi are only khilafiah (BAHEIS 1986: 63), thus implying that ijtihad was permissible in such cases. But it also added that determining something on a matter which is non-obligatory (khilafiah) surely becomes a bidah (BAHEIS 1986: 63). Any student of fiqh could not help being confounded by such a statement, for bidah, by definition, referred to any belief or action which was in contradistinction to the Sunnah (al Alwani 1993: 137), and the very fact that permissible differences of opinion occurred among scholars on any issue indicated that no clear guidance on it existed in the Quran and Sunnah, thus necessitating the interpretative process of istinbat (inference). BAHEIS had also erroneously claimed that the Prophets companions and the scholars following them had made ijtihad on matters whose bases were clear in the Quran and Sunnah (having nas qati) (1986: 64). For, as had been asserted by Dr Taha Jabir al Alwani, interpretation of a revealed text was only admissible in matters on which there [was] no clear guidance in the Quran and the Sunnah and which require[d] the use of rigorous reasoning (ijtihad), but in matters pertaining to belief there [was] no room for ijtihad ... (al Alwani 1993: 102 Ahmad Fauzi 25). The whole purpose of BAHEIS arguments seemed to be establishing that Ustaz Ashaari had committed a bidah by tentatively determining the person of Al-Mahdi, but its failure to substantiate them with any evidence from the revealed texts or consensus of previous ulama clearly violated the conditions permitting legitimate differences of opinion among scholars. These are, as outlined by al Alwani: Firstly, each disputant must have evidence or proof (dalil) to authenticate his argument. Failure to provide such evidence would invalidate an argument. Secondly, the adoption of a divergent opinion should not lead to anything preposterous or false. If the opinion is manifestly false from the beginning, it should be abandoned straight away (al Alwani 1993: 81). In a desperate effort to convince the public that Darul Arqams opinions on Al-Mahdi were blasphemous and deviant, the religious authorities again blatantly resorted to factual distortion. For instance, as reported in Berita Harian (10 June 1993), to BAHEIS, Ashaaris claim that Sheikh Muhammad Suhaimi Abdullah did not die [was] impossible since even the most honourable Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) died. This gave the impression that Darul Arqam believed that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimi would never die, which obviously contradicted the Quran (XXI: 35): Every soul shall have a taste of death. In its official fatwa of 5 August 1994, the National Fatwa Council used the word resurrected to describe Darul Arqams belief in the coming of Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al- Suhaimi as Imam al-Mahdi, hence implying that it was a case of one rising from the dead (The Star 6 Aug. 1994). But as Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1989: 117) and Mohd. Taha Suhaimi (1994: 100) stressed, in response to bewildering allegations of Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimis immortality, they had said that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimi had not died, not that he would not die. BAHEIS insistence that the real name of the founder of the Aurad Muhammadiah was Muhammad Suhaimi Abdullah instead of Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimi, as appeared in his biography by Mohd. Taha Suhaimi (1990), was another subtle attempt to deny his The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 103 claims to the Mahdi-ship, for hadiths had stated that al-Mahdi would bear the same name as the Prophet Muhammad. 28 Clarification by Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1989: 78) was apparently not accepted by BAHEIS (n.d.: 19), who claimed to have derived Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimis real name from his original Javanese-language biography authored by his son and Mohd. Taha Suhaimis father, Sheikh Muhammad Fadhlullah Suhaimi. 29 But Mohd. Taha Suhaimi (1994: 901), by presenting evidence from books which his grandfather himself wrote and printed, verified that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimis real name did indeed resemble that of the Prophet Muhammad. Mohd. Taha Suhaimi also explained that his father, having gone to study in Egypt at a young age and settled in Java for a significant duration thereafter, was never in close companionship with his grandfather, such that intimate details of Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimis traits and life were missing from the biography he wrote (1994: 72, 95). Perhaps most significantly, BAHEIS (n.d.: 22) accused Darul Arqam of deciding for certain the person of Al-Mahdi, whereas Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 184; 1989: 478) had emphasised that his belief in Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimi as Al-Mahdi was zanni (uncertain) instead of qati (certain) since it had not yet happened. This was appropriate for such a belief derived from ijtihad. Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 1824) said his attitude was one of tawaqquf, that is not wholly rejecting, yet not necessarily accepting, circumstantial evidence and oral testimonies supporting the view that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimi was Al-Mahdi. Since the conviction could turn out to be wrong (Ashaari Muhammad 1989: 48), the so-called determination of the person of Al-Mahdi was nothing more than a prediction (Ashaari Muhammad 1988: xi). Furthermore, since the belief was the result of a personal ijtihad by Ustaz Ashaari, it was unfair of the authorities to implicate all Darul Arqam members and practitioners of the Aurad Muhammadiah with it. Ustaz Ashaari himself insisted that he never forced Darul Arqam members to subscribe to this personal view of his as derived from the view of Mohd. Taha Suhaimi, and that it bore no connection with the Aurad Muhammadiah as a tariqah (Ashaari Muhammad 1986: 95, 186). 104 Ahmad Fauzi Fanaticism of Darul Arqam members Charges of fanaticism against Darul Arqam most probably carried political motives from the beginning, but they were carefully shrouded by religious language and terminology so as to make politicians statements incriminating Darul Arqam appear theologically justified. In his 1995 Eid al-Fitr 30 address broadcast nationwide, Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad denounced fanatical teachings which encouraged the blind following of leaders, and gave the example of Darul Arqam as an originally innocent movement which eventually cultivated fanaticism through attempts to create a personality cult around its leader who was allegedly glorified as Imam al-Mahdi. Fanaticism was thus singled out as the reason why the government disbanded Darul Arqam and rehabilitated its leaders and followers according to true Islamic teachings (Utusan Malaysia 3 Mar. 1995). As a matter of fact, instead of the conventional allegations of Darul Arqams heresy as outlined in the previous two sub-sections, it was the issue of fanaticism which pre-occupied the authorities in its conflict against Darul Arqam in the period immediately preceding National Fatwa Council NFCs decisive fatwa on 5 August 1994. It was the case of an old issue, Darul Arqams deviationism, being presented by official and unofficial state organs in a new fashion, centring upon the dominating personality of Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad. Immediately before the allegation of Darul Arqams operating a suicide army in Thailand surfaced, Deputy Home Affairs Minister, Megat Junid Megat Ayub, had already declared that stern action would be taken against a religious group which was so obedient to its leadership that it repudiated the validity of the national leadership and administration (Berita Minggu 12 June 1994). We might have expected revelations of a Darul Arqam suicide army to have come from the Home Affairs or Foreign Ministry, but ironically, the unsubstantiated allegation was advanced by the Chief Director of the Islamic Centre, Zainal Abidin Abdul Kadir. He further claimed that the armed squad would fight against anyone who refused to accept its leader as Imam al-Mahdi, as chosen by the Prophet Muhammad and destined to rule the world (Utusan Malaysia 13 June 1994). The Prime Minster then rebuked Darul Arqam as an organisation whose strength was based on The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 105 fanaticism and the power of personality, whose leader harboured ambitions to rule the country and was regarded like a prophet and Imam al-Mahdi by his followers (Utusan Malaysia 18 June 1994). Deputy Minister at the Prime Ministers Department, Dr Abdul Hamid Othman, accused Darul Arqam members of having been brainwashed into blindly executing any command coming from Ustaz Ashaari, who himself was accused of self-exaltation, through concepts such as abuya (father of the community), his alleged origins from the tribe of Tamim, khawariq al-adah (defiance of natural laws) and his position as the main vizier of Imam al-Mahdi, to a position attainable only by Gods Messenger (Utusan Malaysia 21 June 1994). He revealed the governments intention to broadcast a video-recording showing Ustaz Ashaari claiming himself as Al-Mahdi and the operations of Darul Arqams suicide army (Utusan Malaysia 24 June 1994). 31 By later alleging that the concept of Imam al-Mahdi as brought forth by Ustaz Ashaari was political in nature not to mould ones faith but to inculcate fanaticism in ones leader Dr Abdul Hamid had unwittingly divulged the governments fears of Darul Arqam and Mahdism as a political threat (Utusan Malaysia 27 June 1994). Despite denials by the Thai government and police as to a Darul Arqam- operated suicide army in Bangkok, 32 Dr Abdul Hamid, in a parliamentary statement, maintained that the formation of such an army took place as a material and personal sacrifice to protect Ustaz Ashaari (Utusan Malaysia 5 July 1994). The formation of the army was even mentioned as part of Darul Arqams deviant teachings by Abdullah Fahim, chief research officer at the Islamic Centre (Berita Harian 16 July 1994). The Police Chief, Rahim Mohd. Noor, condemned Darul Arqams allegedly excessive glorification of its leader as potentially threatening public order, and raised fears that the tragic aftermath of cult movements, like those of David Koresh in Texas in 1993 and Jim Jones in French Guyana in 1978, might occur in Malaysia (Utusan Malaysia 12 July 1994). Darul Arqams schools were censured by both Dr Abdul Hamid Othman and Zainal Abidin Abdul Kadir for allegedly neglecting the modern sciences and emphasising instead the creation of a cult figure out of Ustaz Ashaari (Sunday Star 31 July 1994, Berita Harian 1 Aug. 1994). 106 Ahmad Fauzi Evidently, as the promulgation of the fatwa of 5 August 1994 neared, the leading theme behind Darul Arqams alleged deviationism shifted from issues concerning the Aurad Muhammadiah and Imam al-Mahdi to those related to the authoritarian nature of the leadership in Darul Arqam. Hero worship charges concurrently shifted attention from the mysterious figure of Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al- Suhaimi to that of Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad who was in a position to respond to provocations, albeit from abroad, and who could be acted against as a Malaysian citizen. To give a religious colouring to the newly created atmosphere and thus maintain the semblance of a Darul Arqam versus the state crisis that was wholly apolitical, the authorities persistently imposed upon Ustaz Ashaari the image of a militant cult leader who was idolised to an extent exceeding the reverence accorded to the Prophet Muhammad, who exclusively claimed for himself the mantle of prophethood and Mahdi-ship, and who manipulated countless innocent followers towards accomplishing his selfish aims. 33 Unequivocal denials by the accused and interested parties, such as the Thailand government with regard to the suicide army allegation, were brushed aside. 34 Yet, a week before the promulgation of the fatwa proscribing Darul Arqam, Abdullah Fahim, chief research officer at the Islamic Centre, sensationally confessed to Reuter reporters that the suicide army charge against Darul Arqam was actually a propaganda exercise to get people ready for a comprehensive fatwa banning Darul Arqam (Daily Express Sabah 30 July 1994). Significantly, this admission appeared only in an obscure regional newspaper which the masses of Malay-Muslims in Peninsular Malaysia could not have obtained. In the fatwa of 5 August 1994, two main allegations of theological deviationism were levelled against Ustaz Ashaari in his personal capacity. Firstly, that he claimed to have consciously met and had a dialogue with the Prophet Muhammad. This accusation originally surfaced after the alleged discovery of a tape-recording of the said dialogue, in which the Prophet was said to have acknowledged Darul Arqam as a bona fide Islamic group (Berita Harian 16 July 1994). The recording was played to representatives of the media, before being heard on television on 29 July 1994 and printed in Utusan The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 107 Malaysia on 6 August 1994. Whereas the Prime Minister and his deputy respectively questioned the respect accorded to Ustaz Ashaari by the so-called Prophet Muhammad who addressed him as Sir, and the substandard language used throughout the dialogue (New Straits Times 2 Aug. 1994, Berita Harian 21 Aug. 1994), Dr Abdul Hamid Othman disputed the whole basis of the alleged encounter as a logical impossibility which strayed from Islam (Berita Minggu 17 July 1994). This pitted both sides in an irreconcilable position, with regard to theological arguments permitting and denying the possibility of yaqazah with the Prophet Muhammad. Even if we allow that yaqazah could not take place, it was instructive that the allegation of the tape- recording being really concocted by Darul Arqam was never scientifically verified in court. This raised the possibility that it was a pre-meditated fabrication by the government. 35 Secondly, that Ustaz Ashaari was claimed to have been endowed with the divine power of creation as summarised by the term kun fayakun (be and shall be). 36 Believers in such claims would have involved themselves in shirk (polytheism) an unpardonable sin in Islam. The source of the allegation came from an article written by Khadijah Aam, Ustaz Ashaaris wife and head of Darul Arqams Qismu Muslimah, entitled Ayatullah in an internal Darul Arqam publication, Siri Terkini Era Kasih Sayang (Latest on the Era of Love and Care) (1994). In the article, she praised Ustaz Ashaari as an ayatullah, that is a sign of the greatness of God through whom His blessings were showered on to mankind. The controversial phrase appeared to be, If Allah is endowed with the attribute of kun fayakun, we can observe the representation of this attribute of His in His people. Khadijahs use of the nomenclature ayatullah must have caused shudders among the authorities for its resemblance with the title of Shiite imams, and was regarded in official quarters as another explicit recognition of Ustaz Ashaari as the promised messiah. 37 However, the crux of the dispute lay in the disparate writing and interpretative processes utilised. While the authorities relied on a literal understanding of Khadijahs text, Khadijahs work evidently bore hallmarks of a sufi discourse competently written in modern Malay prose. Since the article was meant for an internal Darul Arqam 108 Ahmad Fauzi readership, it should not have been interpreted out of context, that is beyond the confines of sufi literary traditions. A thorough examination of classical sufi texts would reveal that discourses smacking of semi-pantheistic doctrines and advocating a seemingly fanatical adoration of a sufi master are not uncommon, written and comprehended in a state of zauk. 38 For example, the controversial Andalusian sufi, Ibn Arabi (d. 1240), poetically wrote: So if one say I am God, then hearken to him, for it is God (whose name be exalted) saying I am God, not he. But thou hast not attained to that to which he has attained; for if thou hadst attained to that which he has attained, thou wouldest understand what he says, and say what he says, and see what he sees. 39 (Ibn Arabi 1976: 21). The hypocrisy of the governments stance with regard to Darul Arqams deviationism, could be gauged by the continual selling of sufi-inclined religious books whose doctrines were akin to Darul Arqams beliefs and practices alleged to be deviant. One may wonder, if the government was consistent in its theological position and its concern to protect the faith of its people, why did they not declare all such materials which indirectly approved Darul Arqams controversial religious stance as illegal, and prosecute their authors or translators who were Malaysian citizens? During his several visits to Malaysia after 1988, the year in which Ustaz Ashaaris Aurad Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam was banned, the present author managed to purchase such books from open shelves in public bookshops. Any reader would be startled to discover that the books candidly accepted the theological validity of, among others, yaqazah with the late Prophet Muhammad and determination of Al-Mahdi. For example, in Husain Hasan Tomais Masalah Berjumpa Rasulullah Ketika Jaga Selepas Wafatnya (The Question of Consciously Meeting the Messenger of Allah After His Death) (1989), translated with explanatory notes by a Malay scholar, Ustaz Anuar Abdul Rahman, the author presented a concrete defence of the North African-based Tijaniyyah sufi order, whose founder, Sheikh Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Tijani (d. 1815) also claimed to have received the practice of his tariqah directly from the Prophet Muhammad. In Tazkiratul-Auliya: 62 Orang Wali Allah (Reminders of Saints: Sixty-two The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 109 Saints of Allah) (1990), translated into Malay by Abdul Majid Haji Khatib, Fariduddin Attar narrated the anecdote of a medieval wali, Abu al-Hasan al-Khirqani, who claimed to teach hadith just as he was directly taught by the Prophet Muhammad, telling his student: The Prophet is always with me when I teach you. When a false hadith is recited, his facial expression changes in disapproval. From there, I know whether a reputed hadith is true or untrue. (Attar 1990: 125). In the document Mengenal Al-Tarekat Al-Ahmadiah (Introducing the Ahmadiyyah sufi order) (1993), written jointly by Mohd. Murtadza Sheikh Haji Ahmad, the mufti of Negeri Sembilan, and Professor Mahmud Saedon Awang Othman of the International Islamic University, the authors more than once explicitly referred to the conscious meetings of Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris (d. 1837) and of his disciple Syeikh Ibrahim al-Rasyidi with the Prophet Muhammad in connection with the origins of the Ahmadiyyah sufi order. 40 While the yaqazah of Sheikh Ahmad Idris, a teacher of Sheikh Ahmad al-Tijani, has also been mentioned by other researchers (Tomai 1989: 1003, Wan Mohd. Shaghir Abdullah 2000: 1245), the fact that both the aforesaid authors were members of the National Fatwa Council which declared Darul Arqam as heterodox, would astonish any reader. Furthermore, the book was published by the Negeri Sembilan Islamic Affairs Department and contained a preface by the states UMNO Chief Minister. On the issue of Al-Mahdi, a writer not known to have any connection with Darul Arqam, boldly stated, in close resemblance with Ustaz Ashaaris views, that: Meanwhile, the author has discovered a book entitled Manakib asy- Syeikh as-Saiyid Muhammad bin Abdullah as-Suhaimi, founder of the Suhaimi 41 sufi order famous in the Malay world. In the book, it is mentioned that Syeikh Suhaimi, said to have died or disappeared in 1929, will reappear and assume an important position as decided by the Council of Saints. He will be easily recognisable through several distinctive physical features, such as a mole on his right cheek. Besides that, the Manakib also proves that Syeikh Suhaimi is a descendant of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) it could therefore be concluded that Syeikh Suhaimi will reappear as the awaited Imam Mahdi. 110 Ahmad Fauzi However, before disappearing, he reminded his disciples to sustain and implement the laws of Allah. (Muhammad Labib Ahmad 1980: 44, emphasis added). On the whole, theological allegations against Darul Arqam were never properly investigated or proven, but were judged to be true based on a malicious campaign of trial by media. As far as the media coverage of the Darul Arqam versus the state controversy from a religious perspective was concerned, a balanced view, that is one which gave exposure to perspectives from schools of Islamic thought not subscribed to by the authorities, was perennially elusive. Even if there were remarks representing views congruent with those of the accused, they were relegated to obscure sections of a publication, given minute portions of a page, or even outright distorted, such that the balance of the argument would eventually be in the authorities favour. 42 It was this biased environment which may explain Darul Arqams reluctance to speak out through the media. At the end of the day, the Malaysian state succeeded in pushing its sinister portrayal of Darul Arqam down the throats of the Malay-Muslim population, with the exception of an informed minority whose overt or covert dependence on state patronage and resources cowed them into silence and unwilling submission to the establishment. Concluding remarks In Malaysia, the present authors attempt to rethink theological controversies surrounding the banning of Darul Arqam would most probably be frowned upon by mainstream Malay-Muslims. Refusal to acknowledge religious pluralism in Malaysia developed out of a peculiar Islamic administrative structure which overrules diversity between Islamic traditions and organisations and from an obsessive desire of Malay ruling elites to ward off any signs of Malay-Muslim disunity in the context of maintaining a delicate political balance between Muslims and non-Muslims (Meuleman 1996: 56). As such, constitutional freedom of religion applies only with respect to Islam vis--vis other religions, but not among different interpretations of Islam. The Malaysian government, as represented by its religious bureaucracy, considers its version of religious orthodoxy to be The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 111 universally applicable to the Malay-Muslim population, although legitimate evidence indicates that alternative positions, as adopted for instance by Darul Arqam, have been tolerated within the framework of acceptable differences of opinion in the Islamic intellectual tradition. In fact, it could be argued that before the onset of Wahhabi reformism in Arabia and its global dissemination, made possible by Saudi Arabias patronage of the pilgrimage and massive Middle Eastern oil wealth, it was traditionalist doctrines familiar to the world of sufism, as upheld by Darul Arqam, that were dominant among the ummah and certainly in the Malay world (Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid 2001b; 2001c). Although Malaysia and Indonesia share a similar Islamic heritage, in Indonesia, a higher degree of tolerance of unofficial Islamic viewpoints prevails. In Darul Arqams case, despite a public statement by the Ulama Council of Indonesia (Majlis Ulama Indonesia) on 13 August 1994 proclaiming Darul Arqams deviationism for reasons not dissimilar to the ones in the Malaysian fatwa and proposing a national ban on Darul Arqam (Media Dakwah September 1994, Kompas 14 Aug. 1994), the Indonesian fatwa was not universally endorsed by the ulama, intellectuals and the government of Indonesia. The Indonesian Council, and for that matter, the Malaysian government, was dealt a severe blow when the Nahdatul Ulama, Indonesias largest Islamic organisation with sixty-million members, issued an opposite fatwa which exonerated Darul Arqam from charges of deviationism and exhorted the government not to ban Darul Arqam on the basis of aqidah (Pengurus Besar NU 1994, Kompas 13 Aug. 1994, Dunia Islam October 1994). Eventually, as proclaimed by the Attorney-General on 5 October 1994, Darul Arqam was spared from a national ban since it had hitherto posed no threat to Indonesias security and stability (Straits Times Singapore 6 Oct. 1994, Utusan Malaysia 6 Oct. 1994). Within the Indonesian scholarly community, discussions putting forth different sides of arguments pertaining to the Darul Arqam affair flourished. 43 Although the Indonesian Islamic authorities had also been penetrated by Wahhabi elements, they failed to impose their viewpoints by letter of the law. Respectable sections of society were too familiar with the traditionalist-modernist dimension of 112 Ahmad Fauzi doctrinal conflict to be coaxed by any interested party into excommunicating either school. As Meuleman noted, in Indonesia, representatives of the traditionalist style of Islam ... considered the Darul Arqam doctrine as acceptable within the Islamic tradition, and although at first glance, Indonesia looked less democratic than Malaysia, its handling of the Darul Arqam affair indicated that Indonesia offered more religious tolerance and dynamism and more open discussions between various religious figures and organisations or scholars than Malaysia (1996: 602). In Malaysia, by contrast, the highly limited scope of academic discussion was confirmed by the impression Meuleman obtained in an interview with a Malaysian scholar, that one should be careful not to discuss certain issues or express certain opinions before the wrong forum (1996: 56). In the ten years of state-imposed solitary confinement, neither Ustaz Ashaari nor any former Darul Arqam member was formally accused in a syariah court for professing or disseminating heterodox teachings. Yet, during this period, there were those who were formally charged for subscribing to similarly unorthodox beliefs. 44 The difference appears to be that while other individuals possessed no systematically organised mass following, Ustaz Ashaari did. Despite the ten-year blanket imposed on him, he has since 1997 regrouped some of his former followers in a bustling business entity formally registered as Rufaqa Corporation (Muhammad Syukri Salleh 2003: 1428). 45 Ustaz Ashaaris release shows that Rufaqa has reached a modus vivendi with Abdullah Ahmad Badawis administration, that Rufaqa focuses purely on economic activities, without indulging its members in theological controversy. The states strong-arm tactics in defeating the challenge posed by Darul Arqam was indicative of the growth of authoritarianism that had been a major trait of the Mahathir era (Case 1993: 198ff.; Khoo Boo Teik 1995: chapter 7; Crouch 1996: 240). In spite of theological haziness surrounding the states case against Darul Arqam, Islam in Malaysia had been sufficiently centralised, bureaucratised and managed in such a way that those who dared to stray from an officially defined orthodoxy risked social ostracism as a price for their heresy, which, unfortunately, might have been politically rather than theologically The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 113 motivated (Nagata 2004: 111). In April 2003, the Home Ministry banned the present authors Malaysia Daulah Pemuda Bani Tamim: Rahsia Keagungan Ummah (The Malaysian State of the Youth of Bani Tamim: Secrets of the Glorious Ummah) a study of the messianic ideology centred around the youth of Bani Tamim. Altogether, under the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 (Amended 1987), thirty- five books were gazetted as detrimental to the public peace (New Straits Times 9 April 2003). Malaysia Daulah Pemuda Bani Tamim was wholly theoretical in orientation, without juxtaposing any particular figure or group as the candidate most fitting the credentials of the youth of Bani Tamim. It does not contain arguments supporting Darul Arqams theological position which made it unacceptable to the religious establishment. The book does, however, mention that Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad, utterly convinced that Malaysia was the provenance of the youth of Bani Tamim, has been the one who most recently strove to realise the hadiths related to this concept (Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid 1999a: 1535). Deviation from religious orthodoxy becomes sensitive to the Malaysian state whenever it is deemed to constitute a challenge to the hegemony of religio-political elites. It is not religious heterodoxy as a false doctrine in itself which bothers the Malaysian authorities, but rather, whether or not the elites are affected by it. Appendix: Summary of the fatwa banning Darul Arqam and its legal implications (Sources: The Star, 6 August 1994; The Sun, 6 August 1994) On 5 August 1994, the National Fatwa Council, under the chairmanship of the Royal Mufti Ahmad Tajuddin Abdul Rahman, issued a fatwa banning Ashaari Muhammads Darul Arqam movement, after a unanimous agreement by members that Darul Arqam was deviant. Ten aspects of Darul Arqams teachings were considered by the Council to have deviated from Islam: 1. The belief that Sheikh Muhammad As-Suhaimi, the founder of Aurad Muhammadiah (the philosophy of Al Arqam), would be resurrected as Imam Mahdi, a messiah. 114 Ahmad Fauzi 2. The belief that Sheikh Muhammad As-Suhaimi had a conscious meeting with Prophet Muhammad in the Kaabah and received the Aurad Muhammadiah from him. 3. Adding false information to a prayer by saying that Sheikh Muhammad As-Suhaimi was Imam Mahdi and giving him equal status to the four Righteous Caliphs: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali. 4. Wrongly defining the meaning of Verse Three of Surah An-Nisa (Chapter IV: Women) in the Quran by claiming that the origin of marriage began with two wives and then the third and fourth. This conflicted with the accepted translation and opposed the consensus of recognised scholars on marriage. 5. The claim by Al Arqam leader Ashaari Muhammad that he had a conscious meeting with Prophet Muhammad and his followers and had a dialogue with the Prophet. 6. Al Arqam followers were so entranced by their leader that they idolised Ashaari and believed he could perform miracles, was a saint and protector. 7. Ashaari also claimed that the Prophet acknowledged the bona fides of Al Arqam teachings. 8. It was claimed that Ashaari was given the power of Kun-Fayakun (be and shall be) possessed by Allah. The claim could give rise to shirk (polytheism), by comparing Allah with His creations. 9. Al Arqam failed to observe state Islamic laws and enactments and other written laws regarding Islamic affairs, did not comply with decisions of recognised scholars of the Sunni sect and ignored advice and rulings of state ulama and mufti. 10. Ashaari claimed he was a descendant of Bani Tamim Arab when in fact he was of the Bawean Malay descent. The fatwa imposed a ban on Darul Arqams practices, materials and activities. Specifically, it prohibited members of the public from: 1. Adopting Darul Arqams ideology, philosophy and practice which go against Islamic teachings and practice. 2a. Using Darul Arqams publicity materials such as photographs, posters, graphs, circulars, film slides and newspaper advertisements. 2b. Possessing Darul Arqams books, magazines, pamphlets, films, audio tapes, laser discs, phonography, compact discs and all forms of recordings. The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 115 2c. Displaying any symbol, diagram or sign that could identify the group with any movable or immovable property. 3. Becoming a member or leader, holding ceramah (religious talks), conducting classes or becoming involved in economic, social, art, cultural or other activities for the purpose of upholding and expanding the movement. As a consequence of the fatwa, the following actions, applying full weight of the law, were to be taken against Darul Arqam: 1. Under the Education Act, all Darul Arqam schools are to close because they are not registered with the Education Ministry or any religious authority. Students are to be put in special classes in government schools. 2. Under the Companies Act, Registrar of Companies regulations prohibit the use of words connected with Islam, like the names of friends of the Prophet, for a company name or logo, without the approval of the Islamic Centre. Al Arqam is the name of a friend of a Prophet. It did not seek approval and this by itself will render the symbol invalid. 3. The Societies Act specifies that the symbol of any society must be approved by the registrar. The use of Ashaaris photograph on badges worn by Darul Arqam followers is disallowed. The Act prohibits the collection of money. 4. The Printing Presses and Publications Act imposes a ban on the movements publications. 5. District councils are to remove any symbol associated with the movement. 6. The National Film Development Corporation is to prohibit any film production by the movement. 7. Under the Internal Security Act, it is up to the police to use their discretion to enforce the ban. 8. The Public Services Department will act against civil servants who are members of Darul Arqam. 9. Darul Arqams assets may be frozen if it can be established these assets are not registered under the name of movement but under the names of individual members. 116 Ahmad Fauzi Dr Ahmad Fauzi is a Senior Lecturer in Politics in the School of Distance Education, Universiti Sains Malaysia in Penang. His email address is: afauzi@usm.my Notes 1. Ex-leader of Al Arqam can now move freely, New , 27.10.04; Former leader of Islamic sect freed,Straits Times(Singapore), 28.10.04. 2. Pengikut yakin Ashaari akan dibebaskan, Kosmo!, 08.09.04; Abu Ya Ashaari bebas!, Buletin Demokrasi, 28.09.04; Jakim serah kepada KDN tempoh tahanan terhad Asaari, Utusan Malaysia, 12.10.04. 3. Was there a deal?,Straits Times (Singapore), 04.09.04; Time for Healing: In a stunning decision, Malaysias highest court allows Anwar Ibrahim to go free. Can he be a political force again?, Time, 13.09.04. 4. For background information on the Darul Arqam versus the state conflict, see also Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid (1999b: 5-18, 2001a). 5. Subky Latiff, Arqam Yang Pernah Disanjung oleh Dr. M, Harakah, 28.10.91. 6. See the preface to the book Penjelasan Terhadap Buku Aurad Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam by Dr. Mohd. Yusof Nor, then Deputy Minister at the Prime Ministers Department, 06.11.86. 7. Yayasan Arqam Berpecah Belah, Utusan Malaysia, 18.06.86; Kewajipan Memerangi Kesesatan, Utusan Malaysia, editorial, 28.06.86; Haji Mokhtar Dedah Kepercayaan Pengikut al-Arqam: Buku Tarikat Disimpan sebagai Pasport Tentera Imam Mahdi, Utusan Malaysia, 12.07.86; Al-Arqam Adakan Tentera Berpedang Sambut Kebangkitan Imam Mahadi, Utusan Malaysia, 16.10.86. 8. Aurad Muhammadiah refers to the tariqah (sufi order) practised by Darul Arqam members. Technically, Aurad Muhammadiah consisted of the recitation, individually after each daily prayer and preferably in congregation on Thursday nights, of seven verses in the correct order, preceded by reading the first chapter of the Quran. These verses, four and three of which were to be read ten and fifty times respectively, were together a collection of Quranic verses, the kalimah shahadah (attestation of faith to God and the Prophet Muhammad as His Messenger) and a salutation of peace upon the Prophet Muhammad (salawat) (cf. Ashaari Muhammad 1986: chapter 5). 9. Imam al-Mahdi is the Islamic version of the messiah who will appear towards the end of the world to restore Islamic political supremacy and universal justice, heralding the ensuing advent of Jesus Christ. The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 117 10. As religious matters are under jurisdiction of the states according to the Federal Constitution, consent of states religious authorities, headed by muftis, was needed for any legal action to be taken against Darul Arqam. For examples of state religious councils pronouncements on Darul Arqams deviationism, see Kedah Religious Affairs Department (1994) and Ashaari Muhammad (1989: 74-7, 98-100). For Ustaz Ashaaris replies, see pp. 77-93, 100-19. 11. The newspapers and magazines affected by this ban were Al Arqam (jawi script), Al Arqam (romanised script), Al Arqam (English), Mingguan Islam, Al Munir, Al Mukminah a womens magazine, and Al Ain a childrens magazine. 12. For the formal letter of ban, written by Zainal Abidin Abdul Kadir, Chief Director of the Islamic Centre, on behalf of the federal Chief Secretary, see Utusan Malaysia, 11.10.91. 13. In October 1991, four magazines viz. Al Qiadah, An Nasihah, Anak Soleh and Generasi were banned. In November 1992, the permit of the magazine Amal was revoked after only two issues, and in March 1993, the magazine Ratu, a week after the publication of its premier issue, encountered a similar fate; see Darul Arqam (1993: 191). From then onwards, Darul Arqam publications purely served the internal market, that is, for members only. 14. The chief Malay component of the ruling National Front (BN: Barisan Nasional) coalition. 15. For the complete statement of Senator Nazri Abdul Aziz in Parliament, see Ashaari Muhammad (1993b: 11011). 16. Anwar on banning of Al Arqam, Malaysian Digest, August/September 1994; Abdullah: No reason to give members asylum, New Straits Times, 05.09.94; A butterfly upon a wheel, The Economist, 10.09.94. 17. The official pronouncement of the fatwa made headline news of all national daily newspapers on 6 August 1994. See the appendix at the end of this article. 18. Meeting, in a state of consciousness and zauk (spiritual intoxication), between two human beings, one or both of whom may have been deceased and therefore present in spiritual and not physical form. Sufis regard yaqazah with the late Prophet Muhammad as a karamah accorded to the awliya (saints); see Tomai (1989). 19. The position of the Islamic Centre on yaqazah was clarified by Dr Abdul Hamid Othman, Deputy Minister at the Prime Ministers Department, as follows: Muslims believe that the Prophet can only be met in dreams and not directly. If the Prophet can be encountered in such a [direct] circumstance, then whatever explanations that occur in the Quran are not 118 Ahmad Fauzi correct (Berita Minggu 17.07.94). The respective Quranic verse and hadith to support this view are: This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed my favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion (Quran V: 3), and I leave behind the Quran and my Sunnah and as long as you hold on to both of them you will not be lost (related by Hakim) (BAHEIS 1986: 27, n.d.: 12). 20. For example, the verse And say not of those who are slain in the way of Allah: They are dead. Nay, they are living, though ye perceive (it) not (Quran II: 154) and the hadith The prophets live in their graves and they pray (related by Baihaqi) (Ashaari Muhammad 1986: 68). 21. The practice of invoking intermediaries, usually the saints, when making doa (supplication) to God. The issue of whether tawassul is permissible or not in Islam has long been a source of contention between Islamic traditionalists, who allow it, and Islamic modernists, who forbid it. See Sirajuddin Abbas (1991: 284-301, 316-26) and Deliar Noer (1975: 56-7). 22. Tahlil refers to religious chantings which testify that Allah is the One and Only God. The tahlil of Aurad Muhammadiah refers to specific chantings recited in congregation by practitioners of the Aurad Muhammadiah on Thursday and Sunday nights (Ashaari Muhammad 1986: 11927). 23. For an exposition and defence of doctrines of the orthodox Sunni theology, see Sirajuddin Abbas (1991: chapters II, III, XXVIII) and Ibn Muhammad (1994: 12241, 1479). 24. The term Wahhabi was derived from the name of the reformer of Najd (in present-day Saudi Arabia), Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1787). It has been suggested that this epithet is a misnomer, for its implied sanctification of ibn Abd al-Wahhab was contrary to his opposition against veneration of humans, and that the so-called Wahhabis preferred to be known as muwahhidun (unitarians). (Mortimer 1982: 64, Sirajuddin Abbas 1991: 309). 25. For an account of such heterodox groups and the measures taken to combat them, see Jamil (1988: chapter 4) and Mustaffa Suhaimi (2000: 142- 55). 26. For hadiths on the coming and characteristics of Imam al-Mahdi, see Ibn Kathir (1991: chapter 6) and As-Siddiq (1985). 27. Twelver Shiites (Shiah Ithna Ashariah), the dominant Shiite sect in Iran and most of the world, believe that Imam al-Mahdi is their twelfth Imam, Muhammad Hassan al-Askari, who allegedly disappeared into a tunnel in Sammara, Iraq, in 260 Hijrah at five years of age. Sunni scholars claim that this belief is based on fabricated evidence; see Sirajuddin Abbas (1991: 127- 8) and Ibn Kathir (1991: 20). Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad personally refuted The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 119 Shiite doctrines, including the one on Al-Mahdi, in Bahaya Syiah (Dangers of Shiism) (1987b), but unlike the authorities attitude towards Darul Arqam, he stopped short labelling Shiites as deviants or infidels (p. 134). 28. An example is the hadith narrated by Abd Allah ibn Masud, reported by Abu Dawud and mentioned by Ibn Kathir (1991: 21) in connection with al- Mahdi, where the Prophet Muhammad said: If there were only one day left for the world, that day would be lengthened until a man from among my descendants or from among the people of my household, was sent; his name will be the same as my name, and his fathers name will be the same as my fathers name. He will fill the earth with justice and fairness, just as it will have been filled with injustice and oppression. The world will not end until a man of my household, whose name is the same as mine, holds sway. 29. Unlike his father, who was well-known in his lifetime among the Aurad Muhammadiah circle and other sufi groups mainly for his supernatural abilities, Sheikh Muhammad Fadhlullah Suhaimi (d. 1963) excelled as a conventional religious scholar prominent for his founding of the Islamic College in Klang and vociferous defence of orthodox Sunni theology against the onslaught of Wahhabism, leading to his famed debate against the Indonesian modernist scholar , A. Hassan Bandong, in Penang in 1953. He is mentioned twice by Safie Ibrahim (1981: 1718), in connection with his article in Utusan Melayu (27.07.51) advocating the unification of religious administrations of Malay states, and his chairing a conference of ulama which was instrumental in leading to the formation of PAS. William Roff, in his study of Malay-Indonesian students in Cairo in the 1920s, refers to Ata Allah Suhaimi, chairman of the organising committee of commemorative celebrations to honour founders of the Seruan Azhar journal, as a younger brother of the well-known alim Fadlullah Suhaimi, who lived and taught in Singapore and Malaya for many years (1970: 85, fn. 37). In passing, it may be mentioned that the present Malaysian ambassador to Saudi Arabia and former UMNO Chief Minister of Terengganu from 1974 to 1999, Wan Mokhtar Ahmad, is Sheikh Muhammad Fadhlullah Suhaimis son-in-law and reputedly a practitioner of the Aurad Muhammadiah; a fact which he had never admitted in public, probably to safeguard his political interests. 30. Day of celebration to mark the end of the month of Ramadan, throughout which Muslims are obliged to fast from dawn until sunset every day. 31. The video-recording was eventually never shown on television, lending credence to suspicions that it was a government hoax and propaganda effort. 32. Thai police investigations failed to provide any concrete evidence to 120 Ahmad Fauzi substantiate the suicide army charge (Thailand Times 26.06.94, Bangkok Post 28.06.94, The Star 12.07.94). In a letter published in the New Straits Times (23.06.94), Surapong Posayanood, the Thai ambassador to Malaysia, wrote: As regards the Al-Arqam movement, the embassy takes note that there are still differences of opinion within Malaysia and that a dialogue between the two sides has been advocated ... With regard to the alleged training of the armed unit in Thailand, there has been no clear evidence put forward by any party. 33. Pusat Islam atur strategi selamatkan 6,000 pengikut, Berita Minggu, 17.07.94. 34. For explicit Darul Arqam denials of operating a suicide army and of Ustaz Ashaaris claims to Mahdiship, see respectively, the statement by Hassan Mokhtar, secretary of the Majlis Syuyukh, in Arqam nafi punyai tentera Al-Mahadi, Utusan Malaysia, 14.06.94; and Asiaweeks (20.07.94) interview with Ustaz Ashaari, who called the accusation a big lie which had been clarified many times. 35. As believed by some Darul Arqam members and sympathisers (personal communication). Some others, perhaps the more committed ones, upheld the basic veracity of the recording, but suspected that such inside information could only have reached the authorities via government agents who had infiltrated Darul Arqam and who may have defiled the original contents. 36. The term is derived from the Quran; for example Verily, when He intends a thing, His Command is, Be, and it is! (Quran: XXXVI: 82). 37. See for example Action against staff with Al-Arqam links, New Straits Times, 06.07.94, and the text of the Friday sermon entitled Penyelewengan Al- Arqam (Al Arqams Deviationism) delivered at the National Mosque, Kuala Lumpur on 05.08.94, in Utusan Malaysia, 11.08.94. 38. One is reminded of the ulamas misunderstanding of the paroxysmal utterances of the phrase anal-haq, meaning I am the Truth i.e. God by the legendary Persian sufi al-Hallaj (d. 921), who was ultimately condemned to death on charges of heresy (Attar 1990: 11320, Al-Jiasi 1976: 72). In Aurad Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam, Ustaz Ashaari Muhammad (1986: 181) acknowledged the supernatural abilities of al-Hallaj. This apparent approbation of al-Hallajs mysticism was at least partly indicative of Ustaz Ashaaris sufi inclinations. 39. This saying was itself derived from a Prophet Muhammads hadith, which, given a mystical interpretation, would probably absolve Darul Arqam of charges of deviously comparing God with His creation. The hadith, related by Bukhari on the authority of Abu Hurayrah, reads: Allah the Almighty The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 121 has said: Whosoever shows enmity to a friend of Mine, I shall be at war with him. My servant does not draw near to Me with anything more loved by Me than the religious duties I have imposed upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his hearing with which he hears, his seeing with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes, and his foot with which he walks. Were he to ask (something) of Me, I would surely give it to him; and were he to ask Me for refuge, I would surely grant him it (An-Nawawi 1976: 118). 40. The Ahmadiyyah sufi order derived its name from the afore-mentioned Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris, a progenitor of Islamic revival in nineteenth- century North Africa. Despite his strong sufi credentials, Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris has not unusually been identified by scholars as a fundamentalist, whose criticism of degenerated forms of mysticism bore resemblance with Wahhabi views and earned him the wrath of traditional sufi brotherhoods. Disciples of Sheikh Ahmad ibn Idris were instrumental in the founding of the Tijaniyyah and Sanusiyyah sufi orders, both of which were similarly revivalist in orientation. See Mortimer (1982: 724) and Tomai (1989: 1023, fn. 97). 41. That the author mentioned here Suhaimi instead of Aurad Muhammadiah may be due to factual misinformation in his research, or to the possibility that the Suhaimi tariqah was another name for Aurad Muhammadiah. It has not been known that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Al-Suhaimi had founded any other tariqah besides the Aurad Muhammadiah, although he did mention that before practising the Aurad Muhammadiah, he was a practitioner of the Alawiyah tariqah (As-Suhaimi n.d.: 3). 42. Personal conclusion from the scrutiny of mainstream newspaper articles and reports on the Darul Arqam versus the state conflict from June to August 1994. 43. cf. special report in Editor, Al Arqam: Pro dan Kontra (Pros and Cons of Al Arqam), June 1990; Azyumardi Azra, Terlalu Banyak Campur Tangan Politik (Too Much Political Interference), Dunia Islam, October 1994; interviews in the special report in Sinar, Kerajaan Bisnis Darul Arqam (The Business Government of Darul Arqam), 01.08.94; Jalaluddin Rachmat, viewpoint in Sinar, 08.08.94. 44. cf. Nordin tidak mengaku salah, Berita Harian, 09.04.96; Nordin mengaku Imam Mahadi kurun ke-15, Berita Minggu, 21.03.04. 45. cf. Former Al-Arqam redefines itself: The movement now concentrates on its business enterprises, New Sunday Times, 30.04.00. 122 Ahmad Fauzi References Abdullah Hassan (ed.) (2002), Prosiding Persidangan Antarabangsa Melayu Beijing ke-2 Jilid 1: Agama, Budaya, Pendidikan, Ekonomi, Sejarah dan Seni, Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Abdul Khaliq (1993), Senjata Makan Tuan: Kesan Tekanan Terhadap Darul Arqam (Self-Devouring Weapon: Impact of Pressures on Darul Arqam), Kuala Lumpur: Penerbitan Al Munir. Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid, Dr (1999a), Malaysia Daulah Pemuda Bani Tamim: Rahsia Keagungan Ummah, Kuala Lumpur: Abuku Hebat. Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid (1999b), New Trends of Islamic Resurgence in Contemporary Malaysia: Sufi-Revivalism, Messianism and Economic Activism, Studia Islamika: Indonesian Journal for Islamic Studies, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 174. Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid (2000), Political Dimensions of Religious Conflict in Malaysia: State Response to an Islamic Movement, Indonesia and the Malay World, vol. 28, no. 80, pp. 3265. Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid (2001a), Pemerintah dan Gerakan Islam di Malaysia (The Authorities and Islamic Movements in Malaysia), Pemikir, no. 23, pp. 11158. Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid (2001b), Sufi Undercurrents in Islamic Revivalism: Traditional, Post-Traditional and Modern Images of Islamic Activism in Malaysia Part 1, Islamic Quarterly, vol. XLV, no. 2, pp. 11937. Ahmad Fauzi Abdul Hamid (2001c), Sufi Undercurrents in Islamic Revivalism: Traditional, Post-Traditional and Modern Images of Islamic Activism in Malaysia Part 2, Islamic Quarterly, vol. XLV, no. 3, pp. 17798. Al Alwani, Taha Jabir (1993), The Ethics of Disagreement in Islam (trans. Abdul Wahid Hamid), Herndon, Virginia: The International Institute of Islamic Thought. ALIRAN (1988), ISA dan Keselamatan Negara, Penang: Aliran Kesedaran Negara. Al-Jiasi, Mustapha Mohamed (1976), Mengenal Diri dan Wali Allah (Recognising the Self and the Saints of Allah), Kota Bharu: Pustaka Aman Press. The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 123 An-Nawawi (1976), An-Nawawis Forty Hadith (trans. Ezzeddin Ibrahim and Denys Johnson-Davies), Lebanon: The Holy Koran Publishing House. As-Siddiq, Abdullah ibn (1985), Jesus, Al Mahdi and the Anti-Christ (trans. Imam Ahmad Darwish), New York and London: As- Siddiquyah Publishers. As-Suhaimi, Muhammad bin Abdullah (n.d.), Hembusan Kasturi: Maulid Nabi SAW (Musky Breeze: Birthday of the Prophet, peace be upon him, trans. Md. Taha Suhaimi), Singapore: Peripensis. Ashaari Muhammad, Ustaz Hj. (1986), Aurad Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam: Sekaligus Menjawab Tuduhan (Aurad Muhammadiah: The Conviction of Darul Arqam), Kuala Lumpur: Penerangan Al Arqam. Ashaari Muhammad, Ustaz (1987a), Siapa Mujaddid Kurun Ke 15? (Who is the Mujaddid of the Fifteenth Century?), Kuala Lumpur: Penerangan Al Arqam. Ashaari Muhammad, Ustaz (1987b), Bahaya Syiah (Dangers of Shiism), Kuala Lumpur: Penerbitan Shoutul Arqam. Ashaari Muhammad, Ustaz (1988), Inilah Pandanganku (My Contemplations), Kuala Lumpur: Penerangan Al Arqam. Ashaari Muhammad, Ustaz (1989), Berhati-hati Membuat Tuduhan (Be Careful in Making Allegations), Kuala Lumpur: Penerangan Al Arqam. Ashaari Muhammad, Abuya Syeikh Imam (1993), Assalamualaikum Dato Seri PM: Surat-surat Kepada Perdana Menteri Malaysia (jawapan kepada tuduhan-tuduhan) [Assalamualaikum Dato Seri PM: Letters to the Prime Minister of Malaysia (answers to allegations)], Kuala Lumpur: Penerbitan Abuya. Attar, Syeikh Fariduddin (1990), Tazkiratul-Auliya: 62 Orang Wali Allah (Reminders of Saints: Sixty-two Saints of Allah, trans Abdul Majid bin Haji Khatib), Kota Bharu: Pustaka Aman Press, ninth edition. Atiqul Haque, M. (1990), Muslim Heroes of the World, London: Taha Publishers. BAHEIS (1986), Penjelasan Terhadap Buku Aurad Muhammadiah Pegangan Darul Arqam (An Explanation to the book Aurad Muhammadiah: The Conviction of Darul Arqam), Kuala Lumpur. 124 Ahmad Fauzi BAHEIS (1993), Penyelewengan Aqidah Darul Arqam (The Deviation of Darul Arqams Theology), Kuala Lumpur. BAHEIS (n.d.), The Deviation of Darul Arqam Teaching, Kuala Lumpur. Barraclough, S. (1985), The Dynamics of Coercion in the Malaysian Political Process, Modern Asian Studies, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 797822. Case, William (1993), Semi-Democracy in Malaysia: Withstanding the Pressures for Regime Change, Pacific Affairs, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 183205. Crouch, Harold (1996), Government and Society in Malaysia, St. Leonards: Allen and Unwin. Darul Arqam (1993), 25 Years of Darul Arqam: The Struggle of Abuya Syeikh Imam Ashaari Muhammad At Tamimi, Kuala Lumpur: Penerbitan Abuya. Debernadi, Jean; Forth, Gregory and Niessen, Sandra (eds) (1995), Managing Change in Southeast Asia: Local Identities, Global Connections, Edmonton: Canadian Council for Southeast Asian Studies. Deliar Noer (1975), Islam in Indonesia and Malaysia: A Preliminary Study, Review of Indonesian and Malaysian Affairs, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 5170. Haswan (1993), Menangani Ancaman Al Arqam (Confronting the Al Arqam Threat), Kuala Lumpur: Penerbitan Al Munir. Hussin Mutalib (1990), Islam and Ethnicity in Malay Politics, Singapore: Oxford University Press. Ibn Arabi (1976), Whoso Knoweth Himself ..., Abingdon: Beshara Publications. Ibn Kathir (1991), The Signs Before the Day of Judgement (trans. Huda Khattab), London: Dar Al Taqwa. Ibn Muhammad, Sayf ad-Din Ahmed (1994), Al-Albani Unveiled: An Exposition of His Errors and Other Important Issues, Blackburn: Islamic Promotions. Jamil, Fadzillah bin Mohd. (1988), The Reawakening of Islamic Consciousness in Malaysia 197087, Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh. Kedah Religious Affairs Department (1994), Penyelewengan Al-Arqam dari Ajaran Islam (Al-Arqams Deviation from Islamic Teachings), Alor Star: Jabatan Hal Ehwal Agama Islam Negeri Kedah. The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 125 Khadijah Aam (1994), Ayatullah, Siri Terkini Era Kasih Sayang, Kuala Lumpur: Penerbitan Hikmah. Khoo Boo Teik (1995), Paradoxes of Mahathirism: An Intellectual Biography of Mahathir Mohamad, Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press. Khoo Boo Teik (2004), Malaysian Politics in 2004: Transitions and Elections, Political and Security Outlook 2004: Political Change in Southeast Asia, Trends in Southeast Asia Series monograph 7, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Lent, John A. (1984), Human Rights in Malaysia, Journal of Contemporary Asia, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 44258. Means, Gordon P. (1991), Malaysian Politics: The Second Generation, Singapore: Oxford University Press. Meuleman, Johan Hendrik (1996), Reactions and Attitudes towards the Darul Arqam Movement in Southeast Asia, Studia Islamika: Indonesian Journal for Islamic Studies, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 4378. Mohd. Murtadza Sheikh Haji Ahmad, Sohibus Samahah Al Sheikh and Mahmud Saedon Awang Othman, Prof. Dr. (1993), Mengenal Al- Tarekat Al-Ahmadiah (Introducing the Ahmadiyyah sufi order), Seremban: Jabatan Agama Islam Negeri Sembilan. Mohd. Taha Suhaimi, Ustadz Hj. (1990), Sejarah Hidup Syeikh Muhammad Suhaimi (The History of Syeikh Muhammad Suhaimis Life), Singapore: Peripensis. Mohd. Taha Suhaimi, Ustadz Hj. (1994), Jawapan Bagi Tuduhan-tuduhan Terhadap Sejarah Hidup Syeikh Muhammad As-Suhaimi dan Aurad Muhammadiah (Answers to allegations concerning the biography of Sheikh Muhammad as-Suhaimi and Aurad Muhammadiah), Singapore: Peripensis. Mortimer, Edward (1982), Faith and Power: The Politics of Islam, London: Faber and faber. Muhammad Labib Ahmad (1980), Siapa Imam Mahdi? (Who is Imam Mahdi?), Singapore: Pustaka Nasional. Muhammad Syukri Salleh (1992), An Islamic Approach to Rural Development: The Arqam Way, London: Asoib International Ltd. Muhammad Syukri Salleh (1995), Islamic Change in Malaysia: The Politics of Unfavourable Responses in Debernadi, Forth and Niessen 1995, pp. 22743. 126 Ahmad Fauzi Muhammad Syukri Salleh (2003), Perniagaan Gerakan-gerakan Islam di Malaysia (The Businesses of Islamic Movements in Malaysia), Pemikir, no. 31, pp. 13385. Mustaffa Suhaimi (2000), Iktikad Ahli Sunnah Waljamaah (The Sunni Creed), Kuala Lumpur: Progressive Publishing House. Nagata, Judith (1984), The Reflowering of Malaysian Islam: Modern Religious Radicals and their Roots, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. Nagata, Judith (1997), Ethnonationalism versus Religious Transnationalism: Nation-building and Islam in Malaysia, The Muslim World, vol. LXXXVII, no. 2, pp. 12950. Nagata, Judith (2004), Alternative Models of Islamic Governance in Southeast Asia: Neo-Sufism and the Arqam Experiment in Malaysia, Global Change, Peace and Security, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 99114. Nidzam Sulaiman (2002), Anjakan Paradigma Budaya Politik Melayu Dari Feudal Kepada Neo-Feudal (Paradigm Shift from Feudal to Neo-Feudal Malay Political Culture) in Abdullah Hassan 2002, pp. 61217. Pengurus Besar Nahdlatul Ulama (1994), Keputusan Pengurus Besar Syuriyah Nahdatul Ulama Tentang Aqidah Darul Arqam (The Decision of the General Manager of the Nahdatul Ulama Legislative Council on Darul Arqams Faith), Jakarta: Nahdatul Ulama, 12.08.94. Roff, William. R. (1970), Indonesian and Malay Students in Cairo in the 1920s, Indonesia, vol. 9, pp. 7387. Safie bin Ibrahim (1981), The Islamic Party of Malaysia: Its Formative Stages and Ideology, Pasir Puteh: Nuawi bin Ismail. Sirajuddin Abbas, K.H. (1991), Iitiqad Ahlussunah Wal-jamaah (The Sunni Creed), Kota Bharu: Pustaka Aman Press, sixth edition. Tomai, Husain Hasan (1989), Masalah Berjumpa Rasulullah Ketika Jaga Selepas Wafatnya (The Question of Consciously Meeting the Messenger of Allah after his Death, trans. Ustaz Anuar Hj. Abdul Rahman), Kota Bharu: Pustaka Aman Press. Wan Mohd. Shaghir Abdullah, Hj. (2000), Penyebaran Thariqat-thariqat Shufiyah Mutabarah di Dunia Melayu (The Spread of True Tariqahs in the Malay World), Kuala Lumpur: Khazanah Fathaniyah. The banning of Darul Arqam in Malaysia 127 Newspapers and magazines Al Islam, Kuala Lumpur. Asiaweek, Hong Kong. Bangkok Post, Bangkok. Berita Harian, Kuala Lumpur. Berita Minggu, Kuala Lumpur. Buletin Demokrasi, Kuala Lumpur. Daily Express (Sabah), Kota Kinabalu. Dunia Islam, Kuala Lumpur. The Economist, London. Editor, Jakarta. Harakah, Kuala Lumpur. Kompas, Jakarta. Kosmo!, Kuala Lumpur. Malaysian Digest, Kuala Lumpur. Media Dakwah, Jakarta. Mingguan Islam, Kuala Lumpur. The Nation, Bangkok. New Straits Times, Kuala Lumpur. New Sunday Times, Kuala Lumpur. The Star, Petaling Jaya. Sinar, Jakarta. Straits Times, Singapore. The Sun, Kuala Lumpur. Sunday Star, Kuala Lumpur. Thailand Times, Bangkok. Time, New York. Utusan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur. Utusan Melayu, Kuala Lumpur. All Quranic references are from The Holy Quran: Translation and commentary by A. Yusuf Ali, Durban: Islamic Propagation Centre International, n.d. (first edition 1934). 128 Ahmad Fauzi