Tak Malu Ke? (Have We No Shame?)

 Tak Malu Ke? (Have We No Shame?)

The Tabung Haji Scandal

M. Bakri Musa

August 16, 2026

The Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on Tabung Haji (TH) released its long-awaited 280-page report, and my immediate reaction was visceral: Tak malu ke? (Have we no shame?)

Coming on the heels of the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) debacle—where over RM50 billion vanished into thin air, and counting—the loss of RM13 billion at TH is not just another line item on our national ledger of plunder. It is a catastrophic assault on the sacred trust of millions of ordinary, devout Muslims who scrimped and saved, ringgit by ringgit, to fulfill their lifelong dream of performing the Haj. Unquantifiable in loss is the utter destruction of public confidence and the cheapening of our maruah (dignity).

The Illusion of Inquiries

As I read through the RCI’s findings, I was reminded of Joseph Conrad’s Lord Jim, where his character Marlow observes that the object of an official inquiry is rarely the fundamental “why,” rather the superficial “how.”

The TH inquiry was conducted behind closed doors—and its findings were initially kept secret. Judging from the sanitized text of the report, the play of questions was, as Marlow put it, “no doubt as instructive as the tapping with a hammer on an iron box, were the object to find out what’s inside.” We tap on the outside of the box, admire the metalwork, and meticulously document the rust, all the while ignoring the rotting core inside. Consider that the Commissioners did not even question the Auditor-General at the time.

Prime Minister owes the public a duty to release the full transcript of the hearing.

A Tradition of Plunder

Corruption in Malaysia is not a recent innovation; it is an institution nurtured by successive generations of leadership. Virtually every past Prime Minister left behind a unique brand of financial rot.

The rare exceptions were Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Hussein Onn. When Tunku’s Minister of Education Rahman Talib failed to account for the missing RM100 million from his ministry in 1962, he was forced to resign. That was the Tunku’s benchmark for public accountability. When the Bank Rakyat scandal exploded soon after Hussein Onn succeeded Tun Razak, Hussein Onn—bless his soul— did not interfere with the case going to trial resulting in the imprisonment of Harun Idris He was a high-flying UMNO titan and another self-proclaimed wira bangsa (national hero).

Then came Mahathir Mohamad, whose trail of financial scandals could fill a library. Maminco, Perwaja Steel, and most lethal, Bank Bumiputra. That led directly to the brutal 1983 murder of Jalil Ibrahim, a principled young Malay banker investigating the bank's dirty books. Mahathir is still being venerated as the supreme architect of modern Malaysia.

Mahathir recalls with pride his famous 1981 “dawn raid” on the London Stock Exchange when his administration seized control of the British plantation giant Guthrie. He forgets that he gambled with precious public funds—money that could have built clean water systems, electrical grids, and decent classrooms for rural kampongs—just to acquire control of a sunset industry. Looking back, those colonial investors must have been quietly laughing all the way to the bank, delighted that Malaysia paid top dollar to buy them out of an aging asset.

The pattern continues unbroken. Abdullah Badawi was not too sleepy to oversee lucrative catering contracts to his brother via Malaysia Airlines, or to watch his son’s Scomi Group flourish on government-linked businesses. Likewise, his son-in-law suddenly became a successful “investment banker.” Najib Razak brought the art of state-sanctioned kleptocracy to its absolute zenith with 1MDB. Enough said. Ismail Sabri and Muhyiddin Yassin both face formidable charges of corruption soon after being kicked out of power.

Anwar Ibrahim currently leads the nation while maintaining Ahmad Zahid Hamidi—a political figure encumbered by dozens of corruption charges—as his Deputy. Appointing such a compromised character to high office signals to the world that ethical standards are entirely negotiable when political survival is on the line.

The Misplaced Triumph of GLCs

A major root cause of this systemic corruption in the obsession with Government-Linked Companies (GLCs). Privatize them! That would remove a major fountain of political patronage and corruption, as well as shield the taxpayer from endless, multi-billion-ringgit bailouts.

Canada did it with Petro-Canada, structured in stages so as not to disturb the market. Do likewise with Petronas. Aligning management incentives with real market values would force these institutions to operate on merit rather than political favor.

These GLCs also act as a sponge sucking up talented Malay professionals who would otherwise build real, competitive enterprises. We also stuffed these corporate boards with civil servants and political appointees who are, both by temperament and training, completely ill-suited to run dynamic corporate enterprises.

Before non-Malays indulge in self-righteous glee over the ineptitude of these Malay amateur corporate players, I remind them of the Malaysian Indian Congress Maika Holdings scandal in 1992. Then there was the Malaysian Chinese Association’s Deposit-Taking Cooperative (DTC) collapse in 1986. Corporate incompetence and greed are truly non-sectarian.

The Bankruptcy of Moral Preaching

I do not expect anything to change from this RCI Report. Zulkifli Al-Bakri, Religious Affairs Minister responsible for Tabung Haji during the period under scrutiny, will continue his sermonizing on the evils of corruption. This is the same character who as Religious Minister proudly showcased his son receiving zakat funds, intended for the poor, to finance his overseas college education. The cognitive dissonance is staggering. 

You cannot teach maruah. You either possess personal integrity and moral boundaries, or you do not. The greatest tragedy of modern Malaysia is not merely the billions lost to incompetence and greed—it is that our leadership class long ago lost its capacity to feel shame.

Excerpt from my Qur’an, Hadith, And Hikayat:  Exercises In Critical Thinking will resume next week. 

Ulasan Tentang Kajian Dan Memahami Hadis

 Ulasan Tentang Kajian Dan Memahami Hadis

M. Bakri Musa

Diubah suai daripada Qur’an, Hadith, and Hikayat: Exercises in Critical Thinking (2021)

12 hb Ogos 2026

Nabi Muhammad SAW, seperti yang dinyatakan dalam Al-Qur’an (33:21), ialah “…contoh teladan yang baik bagi orang yang mengharapkan Allah dan Hari Akhirat.” Jadi, tidak hairanlah kalau umat Islam memberi tumpuan yang sangat besar kepada hadis. Nabi, sebagai seorang manusia biasa yang pernah berjalan di bumi, rasa lapar, dan menempuh pelbagai kesusahan, jauh lebih mudah untuk kita memahami berbanding dengan keagungan abstrak Al-Qur’an atau kekuasaan Allah Yang Maha Kuasa. Rasa kagum dan minat kita terhadap Baginda—dan seterusnya terhadap hadis—adalah sesuatu yang sangat lumrah.

Namun, ada harga intelektual yang perlu dibayar atas kecenderungan ini. Kita terlebih mengagungkan sang utusan sehingga terlupa atau mengabaikan mesej atau utusan sebenar yang dibawanya.

Gaya Menunjuk Keabsahan

Cuba dengar perbincangan semasa tentang hadis. Penceramah biasanya akan bermula ikut skrip yang sama: meleret-leret bercakap pasal rantaian perawi (isnad) yang panjang untuk membuktikan hadis itu sahih. Lepas itu, dia akan membaca keseluruhan hadis dalam bahasa Arab dengan bersemangat, lengkap dengan senarai ulama silam yang mengesahkan rantaian tersebut. Dia tidak peduli pun kalau kebanyakan pendengar tidak faham sepatah haram Bahasa Arab. Niat atau tujuan utamanya hanyan ingin membuat orang kagum, bukannya nak memberi kefahaman.

Bila pendengar mula mengantuk, barulah penceramah masuk ke bahagian terjemahan dan ulasan—maknanya bahagian yang sepatutnya jadi teras penyampaian.

Masalahnya penceramah tidak pernah menganggap terjemahan mereka sekadar anggaran atau . Bagi mereka, itulah satunya terjemahan yang betul tanpa sebarang keraguan. “Maksudnya ialah…” kata mereka dengan penuh yakin dan agak sombong, sama ada semasa mentafsirkan hadis mahupun ayat Al-Qur’an.

Mengutamakan Gaya, Bukan Kandungan

Gaya ceramah sebegini sangat biasa dalam wacana agama media tempatan. Tontonilah rancangan TV mingguan yang popular, Wacana Al-Qur’an. Sepuluh minit permulaan membazir masa begitu sahaja dengan ucapan aluan bahasa Arab yang panjang lebar dan sesi memperkenalkan tetamu yang berlebihan, di mana masing-masing sibuk bertukar ucapan tahniah dan terima kasih.

Bila perbincangan sebenar bermula, ustaz berkenaan akan membaca ayat Al-Qur’an dan memberi tafsirannya dengan begitu yakin tanpa membuka langsung ruang perdebatan. Pihak penerbit memang wajar dipuji kerana memilih tajuk yang penting seperti rasuah, zakat, dan pendidikan. Namun, perbincangan yang menyusul langsung tidak berpijak di bumi nyata. Sangat kurang usaha untuk menghubungkan teks agama itu dengan cabaran hidup semasa.

Satu siaran baru-baru ini tentang rasuah adalah contoh terbaik. Para ahli panel seronok memetik ayat-ayat Al-Qur’an lain, membaca hadis yang berpanjangan, bercakap pasal rantaian perawi, dan memetik pandangan ulama zaman silam. Tetapi tiada seorang pun yang berani sentuh soalan asas dan sebenarnya. Adakah haram kalau kita pergi haji percuma guna duit rasuah? Macam mana hendak menyelesaikan masalah rasuah yang dah jadi barah dalam negara, dari Pejabat Perdana Menteri sampailah ke kamar imigresen?

Bila rancangan sudah hendak habis barulah masa diberi untuk sesi soal jawab. Kalau ada masa sekalipun, soalan yang ditanya tetap berlegar pasal isu teknikal sama ada hadis itu sahih atau tidak—seolah kita boleh menentukan perkara itu kini di abad ke-21, unggapan yang dibuat hamper lebih 1,400 tahun dulu.

Terlalu Terikat Dengan Pandangan Lama

Kritikan secara mendalam langsung tiada; usaha nak cari penyelesaian kepada masalah moden pula dipandang serong. Pendekatan yang digunakan cuma ulang balik pandangan ulama kuno. Mesej tersiratnya mudah: Siapalah kita manusia kerdil hari ini nak persoalkan ulama hebat zaman silam? Kita disuruh ikut sahaja tanpa perlu banyak bertanya atau berfikir.

Renungkan sedikit. Cabaran yang dihadapi umat Islam hari ini sangat berbeza berbanding dengan pada zaman Al-Kindi atau Al-Ghazali. Itu tidak langsung pernah lintas dalam fikiran ulama hari ini. Ini ibarat kita di zaman moden ini masih nak guna teori perubatan Yunani kuno untuk rawat penyakit manusia, walaupun dunia sains dan perubatan dah maju jauh ke depan.

Kebangkitan Kajian Moden

Nasib baiklah keadaan kini semakin berubah. Kaedah kajian sejarah moden mula digunakan untuk mengkaji Al-Qur’an, dan kini turut digunakan ke atas Nabi Muhammad sebagai tokoh sejarah dan hadis sebagai dokumen sejarah.

Oleh disebabkan kajian akademik ini pada mulanya dipelopori oleh ahli sejarah di universiti Barat, umat Islam secara melulu menolaknya dan menganggap ia cuma agenda sinis pendita Orientalis. Tapi hari ini, sikap menolak bulat-bulat itu nampak sangat kebudak-budakan dan sempit. Kini semakin ramai sarjana Muslim—yang kebanyakannya bermula dengan pendidikan madrasah sebelum mendalami pengajian akademik mereka di Barat—sudah bermula menerima dan menghargai pendekatan ini.

Antara tokoh dari rantau ini termasuklah Ulil Abshar Abdalla (lulusan PhD Harvard) dan Mu’nim Sirry (kini mengajar di Notre Dame University). Kedua-duanya unik kerana mempunyai latar belakang pendidikan pesantren tradisional di Indonesia, sebelum melanjutkan pengajian ke universiti terkemuka seperti UCLA , Harvard, dan University of Chicago. Usaha mereka membuktikan bahawa berfikir secara kritis tidak merosakkan iman, sebaliknya membuatkan agama kekal relevan dengan zaman.

Tajuk seterusnya: Pendekatan Berbeza dalam Memahami Hadis

Buku terbaharu penulis, Exploring Imam Nawawi’s Forty Hadith: Through the Lens of Contemporary Knowledge, bakal diterbitkan pada Januari 2027.

 

A Critique of Traditional Approaches To Hadith

 A Critique of Traditional Approaches to Hadith

M. Bakri Musa

Adapted from Qur’an, Hadith, and Hikayat: Exercises in Critical Thinking (2021)

August 9, 2026

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was, as the Qur’an asserts (33:21), “…a beautiful example for those who hope for God and the Last Day.” Small wonder then that Muslims place such overwhelming and disproportionate emphasis on hadith. Hadith are the asayings attributed to Muhammad, s.a.w. The operative word there is “attributed.” That is often forgotten or glossed over.

The Prophet, s.a.w., as a human being who walked the earth, felt hunger, and weathered hardship, remains infinitely more relatable than the abstract majesty of the inanimate Qur’an or the transcendent, All-Powerful Allah. Admiration for the man—and with it, a deep curiosity about his life and sayings—is entirely natural and predictable.

However, there is a steep intellectual price for this obsession:  the dangerous temptation to idolize the messenger while blurring or outright ignoring his message.

The Theater of Authenticity

Consider the typical discourse on hadith today. The speaker begins in predictably scripted fashion, droning on about long, convoluted chains of narrators (isnad) to establish authenticity. This is followed by a dramatic recitation of the entire hadith in flawless Arabic, alongside a laundry list of medieval scholars who vouched for its chain. Never mind that the vast majority of his audience does not comprehend a single word of Arabic; the primary objective is to dazzle, not enlighten your listeners.

By the time this pedantic performance ends and the audience has finally drifted deep into slumber land, the speaker finally arrives at what should have been the core of his presentation:  the approximate translation and its practical application.

Except that in the mind of the speaker it is never merely an approximate translation—it is the definitive one, delivered with absolute, unquestioned certitude. “It means...” he bellows with undisguised arrogance, applying the same rigid dogmatism whether interpreting a hadith or a Qur’anic verse.

Form Over Substance in Mass Media

This performative ritual dominates public Islamic discourse in Malaysia. Take, for example, the popular weekly television program Wacana Al-Qur’an (Forum on the Qur’an). The first ten minutes are inevitably consumed by a tedious exchange of profuse Arabic salutations and elaborate, self-congratulatory introductions, as guests trade exaggerated expressions of mutual gratitude and admiration.

When the actual discussion finally starts, the ustadz recites the text and delivers his interpretation with unyielding authority. Bless the producers—the topics chosen are often deeply relevant: corruption, charity, civic responsibility, and education. Yet the ensuing commentary might as well be by aliens. There is virtually no attempt to connect classical texts to contemporary realities.

A recent episode on corruption offered a textbook demonstration of this disconnect. Panelists eagerly cited additional Qur’anic verses, recited lengthier hadiths, traced intricate narrator lineages, and quoted heavily from ancient luminaries. Yet not a single speaker dared to address the elephant in the room:

• Is accepting a free Hajj trip bankrolled by illicit funds haram?
• How do we confront the endemic corruption choking the nation, from the Prime Minister’s office right down to the local immigration counter?
• 
  

When the credits roll, precious little time remains for audience questions. On those rare occasions when a Q&A segment is permitted, the inquiries inevitably devolve into pedantic squabbles over the technical authenticity of a particular narration—as if an audience in the 21st century could definitively settle a transmission of over 1,400 years ago.

The Tyranny of the Ancients

Critical analysis is completely absent; finding points of direct relevance to modern governance and ethics is treated with suspicion. The entire enterprise rests on regurgitating historical opinions. The underlying premise is as cowardly as it is unexamined: Who are we mere present mortals to question those ancient luminaries? We are expected not to scrutinize established tradition, but to submit blindly to its dictates.

The thought that the dilemmas confronting the modern ummah are light-years removed from those faced by the Al-Kindis or Al-Ghazalis never enters the minds of these contemporary ulama. It is as if, despite all our advances in medical science and technology, we were to insist on diagnosing human illness using the ancient Greek theory of the four humors.

The Inevitable Rise of Modern Scholarship

Fortunately, the tide is turning. Modern critical-historical methods are being applied first to the study of the Qur’an, and now to Prophet Muhammad, s.a.w., as a historical figure and his hadith as historical documents.

Because these rigorous textual studies were initially pioneered by historians at elite Western universities, traditional Muslim scholars reflexively scoffed and dismissed them as another mere manifestation of Orientalist prejudice. Today however, that knee-jerk dismissal looks downright childish and insular. A growing cohort of Muslim scholars—many originally trained in traditional madrasahs before undergoing the rigors of Western academic scholarship—are bridging this gap.

Southeast Asian scholars are helping lead this intellectual movement. Thinkers like Ulil Abshar Abdalla (Harvard PhD) and Mu'nim Sirry (now at the University of Notre Dame) both bring unique authority to the table: deep roots in traditional presantren education coupled with advanced training at institutions like UCLA and the University of Chicago. Their work demonstrates that critical inquiry does not diminish faith; it rescues it from irrelevance.

Next in this series: A Different Approach to Understanding Hadith

The author’s forthcoming book, Exploring Imam Nawawi’s Forty Hadith: Through the Lens of Contemporary Knowledge, is expected early next year

Ke Arah Dasar Pendidikan Yang Lebih Celik

  

Ke Arah Dasar Pendidikan Yang Lebih Celik 

M. Bakri Musa 

6 hb Ogos 2026

Keputusan Perdana Menteri Anwar Ibrahim untuk mengekalkan Tingkatan Enam di bawah Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia (KPM) dan bukannya memindahkannya ke Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi (KPT) seperti yang diumumkan sebelum ini, adalah satu langkah yang bijak. Namun, beliau sepatutnya bertindak lebih jauh lagi. Luaskan, kukuhkan, serta melembagakan Tingkatan Enam, dan dengan itu sekali gus menjadikan K–13 sebagai norma baharu.

Pendidikan awam Malaysia dibebani oleh keterlaluan kaum dan agama. Itu belum kira lagi masaalah rasuah, ketidakcekapan, dan kancah politik. Memandangkan Menteri KPM berasal daripada Parti Keadilan pimpinan Anwar manakala Menteri KPT pula daripada UMNO, saya tidak pasti di mana terletaknya keputusan terkini Anwar ini dalam matrik merit lawan politik.

Universiti merupakan satu perbadanan yang mahal dan rapuh. Sepatutnya ia menumpukan perhatian sepenuhnya kepada pendidikan ijazah sarjana muda, pascasiswazah, dan profesional, di samping perkhidmatan panjutan yang bermakna. Kekurangan semasa yang amat nyata ialah tiada satu pun universiti di Malaysia yang mempunyai Jabatan Panjutan.

KPM dan KPT menelan lebih 20 peratus daripada Belanjawan Persekutuan. Itu belum mengambil kira peruntukan besar untuk pendidikan yang terselit di dalam MARA, Jabatan Perdana Menteri (Hal Ehwal Agama), dan pelbagai kerajaan negeri. Meskipun perbelanjaan begitu melonjak tinggi, hasilnya tetap biasa sahaja dan hambar.

Kedua menteri yang bertanggungjawab dalam hal ehwal pendidikan langsung tidak menunjukkan sebarang sekelumit kewibawaan eksekutif mahupun profesional. Sebaliknya, mereka terlalu sibuk mengurus mikro sekolah dan kampus berbanding menumpukan perhatian pada peringkat dasar makro—seperti menguatkuasakan nisbah 60:40 STEM-ke-bukan-STEM serta standard penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris yang tidak boleh dikompromi. Jika mereka (pengetua dan naib canselor) gagal mencapai metrik asas tersebut, gantikan sahaja mereka.

Rekod prestasi Menteri Pendidikan Fadhlina Siddiq sudah cukup memberikan gambaran. Keputusan terbaharunya untuk membenarkan anak berusia enam tahun memasuki Darjah Satu wajar dipuji; langkah itu sememangnya sudah lama tertunggak. Namun di sini juga, kelemahan kepimpinan beliau terus terserlah: kurang daripada 15 peratus kanak yang layak sudah mendaftar. Lebih teruk lagi adalah kepincangan sikap beliau yang langsung tidak mempunyai rasa ingin tahu mengapa kelalaian itu berlaku.

Ingatkan bahawa mereka yang ketinggalan ini sebahagian besarnya adalah anak Bumiputera. Semakin meningkat mereka memilih sekolah Cina. Itu mengambarkan kebobrokan aliran kebangsaan lebih semakin nyata dan terdedah.

Langkah Menteri Fadhlina yang tergesa dan tidak dirancang dengan baik dalam menggunakan modul Hadis 40 Imam Nawawi baru-baru mencerminkan dengan ketara ketidakcekapan beliau. Pereksa teks modul tersebut; ia tidak lebih daripada sekadar pengulangan semula ulasan abad pertengahan yang tandus. Daripada memanfaatkannya sebagai latihan yang rapi dalam pemikiran kritis dan falsafah moral, modul itu telah merosot menjadi sekadar hafalan dan bacaan ritual tanpa berfikir.

Anatomi Pembaziran

Pertimbangkan pengalaman pahit dan getir yang dialami oleh pelajar Bumiputera semasa. Selepas menduduki peperiksaan akhir sekolah (SPM) pada penghujung Tingkatan Lima (Tahun 11) pada bulan November, dia mesti menunggu sehingga April berikutnya untuk mendapatkan keputusan. Jika berjaya, dia kemudiannya perlu berebut untuk mendapatkan tempat di Matrikulasi, Tingkatan Enam, atau Kelas Asasi. Namun begitu, program tersebut tidak bermula sehinggalah lewat bulan Julai. Maknanya, lapan bulan terlepas begitu sahaja. Itu satu pembaziran bagi bakat muda yang tidak dapat diganti, di samping menghakis teruk tabiat belajar baik yang telah dipupuk dengan payah.

Pelajar bukan Melayu—bersama dengan golongan kecil Bumiputera yang celik serta mampu—secara peribadi mendaftarkan anak mereka dalam pelbagai program swasta pasca-SPM pada bulan Januari. Menjelang Julai, mereka sudah jauh meninggalkan rakan sebaya dari sekolah awam yang sekadar melepak sahaja. Ibu bapa mereka mendakwa tidak mampu menanggung jambatan swasta ini kerana telah menghabiskan simpanan mereka untuk majlis perkahwinan yang mewah atau ibadah umrah yang tidak berputus.

Jadikan tahun K–13 sebagai satu aliran berterusan yang lancer. Itu jauh lebih murah dan tidak terhingga lebih berkesan berbanding meluaskan program Matrikulasi atau Kelas Asasi yang sarat dengan unsur politik. Sekali gus pertukaran itu akan memberi manfaat yang jauh lebih besar kepada lebih ramai pelajar.

Matematik Mudah, Minda Yang Hilang

Ketirisan dalam pendidikan awam amat ketara dan jelas kepada semua orang kecuali mereka yang memegang tampuk kuasa. Malaysia membelanjakan ratusan juta untuk menghantar ratusan, jika tidak ribuan, pelajar ijazah sarjana muda ke luar negara sedangkan universiti tempatan dahagakan dana asas. Saya tidak membantah sekiranya mereka memasukki Harvard, Oxford, atau MIT. Namun realitinya, tidak.

Jauh lebih murah lagi jika kita mengambil tenaga pengajar berkelas dunia untuk mengajar di dalam negara berbanding dengan menghantar seorang pelajar ijazah sarjana muda ke luar negara. Amerika hari ini mempunyai lebihan pemegang PhD terbaik. Jika diambil bekerja untuk mengajar di Malaysia, mereka akan membelanjakan sebahagian besar gaji mereka di peringkat tempatan, dan hanya membawa pulang paling banyak US$10K setahun.

Dari segi kerugian pertukaran mata wang asing, bagi setiap pelajar ijazah sarjana muda yang dihantar ke luar negara, Malaysia sebenarnya boleh dengan mudah mengupah sepuluh pemegang PhD dari Amerika. Bayangkan impak ke atas pelajar, tenaga pengajar, dan penyelidikan kita, belum lagi mengambil kira ekonomi tempatan. Namun begitu, pandangan asas ini terlepas daripada pemikiran pemimpin kita.

Jika mengambil pakar dari Amerika terlalu sukar didapati atau terlalu mahal, Malaysia boleh dengan mudah mengambil tenaga pengajar daripada senarai Institut Teknologi India (IIT) yang terkemuka dengan sebahagian kecil sahaja kos tersebut. Semasa saya berlajar di Kolej Melayu Kuala Kangsar (MCKK) pada awal tahun 1960-an dahulu, semua guru sains saya berasal dari India. Kami tidak terlalu teruk di bawah bimbingan mereka.

Apa yang tidak dinyatakan—namun kekal jelas terbukti kepada pemerhati jujur—ialah pendidikan awam di Malaysia hari ini secara umumnya adalah pendidikan untuk anak Melayu dan Bumiputera lain. Golongan bukan Melayu telah lama meninggalkan aliran ini, membuat pilihan dengan kaki dan dompet mereka.

Oleh demikian, setiap kelemahan struktur, setiap kegagalan dasar, dan setiap kesilapan pentadbiran dalam sistem awam secara tidak seimbang menghukum dan membebankan anak Bumiputera. Memperbaiki seni bina yang rosak ini bukan sekadar matlamat pendidikan; ia merupakan satu keperluan dan keutamaan nasional yang amat mendesak.

Membaiki sistem terada tidak memerlukan kita mencurahkan berbilion lagi ke penapis kementerian yang bocor. Kita hanya memerlukan mereka yang menerajui agak sedikit lebih cerdik dan berani untuk memegang tampuk kepimpinan. Itu adalah di dalam kuasa Perdana Menteri Anwar Ibrahim untuk melaksanakannya.

Towards A More Enlightened Education Policy

 Towards A More Enlightened Education Policy

M. Bakri Musa

August 2, 2026

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s decision to retain Sixth Form under the Ministry of Education (MOE) rather than transferring it to the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) as previously announced, is wise. He should go further. Expand, strengthen, and institutionalize Sixth Form, making K–13 the new standard.

            Malaysian public education is blighted with racial/religious fanaticism, quite apart from corruption, incompetence, and politics. Seeing that the MOE Minister is from Anwar’s Keadilan Party while that of MOHE from UMNO, I do not know where Anwar’s recent decision stands on the merit/politics matrix.

Universities are expensive, delicate institutions. They should be preoccupied solely with undergraduate, graduate, and professional education, alongside meaningful extension services. It is a telling indictment that not a single Malaysian university has a functioning Extension Department.

MOE and MOHE devour over 20 percent of the Federal Budget. Then there are the substantial allocations for education buried within MARA, the Prime Minister’s Department (Religious Affairs), and the various state governments. Despite the massive spending, the results remain mediocre.  

The two ministers concerned with education have not demonstrated any modicum of executive or professional competence. Instead, they are consumed with micromanaging schools and campuses instead of at the macro policy level, as with enforcing 60:40 STEM-to-non-STEM ratio and uncompromising standards of English proficiency. If they (headmasters and vice-chancellors) cannot deliver on those basic metrics, replace them.

The track record of Education Minister Fadhlina Siddiq is illustrative. Her recent decision to admit six-year-olds into Primary One deserves praise; that measure is long overdue. Again here, her leadership weakness was immediately laid bare: fewer than 15 percent of eligible children actually enrolled. Far more damning was her total lack of curiosity in finding out why.

Make no mistake; those left behind are overwhelmingly Bumiputra pupils. Pair that with the swelling numbers now opting for Chinese schools, and the rot that is the national stream becomes obvious.

Fadhlina’s hasty, poorly conceived recent adoption of the Imam Nawawi’s Forty Hadith module is another stark reflection of her ineptitude. Peruse the module’s texts; they are but a sterile rehashing of medieval commentaries. Instead of leveraging them as rigorous exercises in critical thinking and moral philosophy, the module has degenerated into ritualistic, unthinking recitation.

The Anatomy of Waste

Consider the current agonizing ordeal of the typical Bumiputra student. After sitting for her terminal school examination (SPM) at the end of Form Five (Year 11) in November, she must wait until the following April for the results. If successful, she then has to scramble for a slot in Matrikulasi, Sixth Form, or Kelas Asassi. Those programs however, do not commence until late July. That eight-month hiatus represents an irreplaceable waste of young talent as well as severe erosion of hard-won good study habits.

Non-Malays—along with the small minority of enlightened Bumiputras—privately enroll their children in the various private post-SPM programs in January. By the time July rolls around, they are light-years ahead of their public-school cohorts who have been lepaking (idling). Malay parents claim they cannot afford these private bridges, having exhausted their savings on extravagant weddings or endless umrah.

Making K–13 a seamless continuous stream would be far cheaper and infinitely more effective than expanding the heavily politicized Matrikulasi or Kelas Asasi and would benefit vastly more students.

Simple Math, Missing Minds

The leakages in public education are glaring and obvious to everyone except those in charge. Malaysia spends hundreds of millions sending hundreds if not thousands of undergraduates abroad even as local universities starve for basic funds. I would have no objection if those students were to land at the Harvards, Oxfords, or MITs. They do not.

Far cheaper to recruit world-class faculty to teach locally than to send a single undergraduate abroad. America today has a glut of top-tier PhDs. If hired to teach in Malaysia, they would spend the bulk of their salaries locally, repatriating at most US$10K annually.

In terms of foreign exchange loss, for every single undergraduate Malaysia sends overseas, she could easily hire ten American PhDs. Imagine the transformational impact on our students, faculty, and research, not to mention the local economy. Yet this elementary arithmetic escapes our policy makers.

If American scholars prove too elusive or expensive, Malaysia could easily decimate the faculty rosters of the premier Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT) for a fraction of the cost. When I was at Malay College Kuala Kangsar (MCKK) back in the early 1960s, all my science teachers were from India. We did not do too badly under their tutelage.

What goes unstated—yet remains blatantly obvious to any candid observer—is that public education in Malaysia today is effectively the education of Malays and other Bumiputras. Non-Malays had long ago abandoned the stream, voting with their feet and their wallets.

As such, every structural deficiency, every policy failure, and every administrative blunder in the public system disproportionately punishes Bumiputra children. Revamping this broken architecture is not merely an educational goal; it is an urgent national necessity and priority.

Fixing it does not require pouring billions more down the ministry sieve. It merely requires having slightly smarter and far more courageous people be in charge. That is within Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s purview to execute.

 

Hudaybiyyah: Peperangan Yang Paling Menetukan Nasib Rasullullah

 Hudaybiyyah: Peperangan Yang Paling Menentukan Nasib Rasulullah

M. Bakri Musa

Dipetik dan disesuaikan daripada Qur’an, Hadith And Hikayat: Exercises In Critical Thinking (2021)

29 hb Ogos, 2026

Nabi Muhammad s.a.w. telah menempuh pelbagai peperangan demi menyebarkan Islam kepada kaum Arab Badawi. Namun, peristiwa paling menentukan dalam misi baginda langsung tidak melibatkan hayunan pedang. Peristiwa itu ialah Perjanjian Hudaybiyyah pada tahun 628 Masihi (6 Hijrah). Satu Surah khas (Al-Fath—Kemenangan) diturunkan mengenainya. Uniknya, Hudaybiyyah bukannya satu pertempuran fizikal, sebaliknya satu perjanjian damai antara kaum Muslimin terawal dengan musyrikin Quraisy di Mekah yang berjaya mengelakkan pertumpahan darah.

Kisah ini bermula apabila Rasulullah dan pengikut baginda bertolak ke Mekah bagi menunaikan hasrat yang sekian lama terpendam—mengerjakan ibadah umrah. Beribu orang jumlah mereka, disemarakkan lagi dengan keghairahan rohani untuk menunaikan ritual Islam yang serba agung ini. Namun, sebaik tiba di luar kota Mekah, di suatu tempat dinamakan Hudaybiyyah, perjalanan mereka terhenti. Pada keesokan harinya, kaum Quraisy menghalang mereka daripada memasuki Mekah. Apabila rundingan awal menemui jalan buntu, bayangan perang saudara yang berdarah mula memuncak—perang bakal sesama sanak-sedara dan sesama ahli suku.

Setelah melalui rundingan yang panjang dan tegang, Rasulullah akhirnya bersetuju untuk menandatangani perjanjian damai. Namun, sekali imbas, syaratnya kelihatan begitu berat sebelah dan memihak kepada kaum Quraisy sehingga Baginda sukar meyakinkan para sahabatnya. Buat julung kalinya, pengikut Baginda secara terbuka mempertikaikan keputusan itu—satu tentangan yang belum pernah berlaku terhadap kewibawaan Baginda.

Antara syarat menindas yang dikenakan oleh pihak Quraisy ialah kaum Muslimin mesti membatalkan niat mereka dan berundur serta-merta, manakala ibadah umrah ditangguhkan ke tahun hadapan. Bagi rombongan yang sudah sekian jauh berjalan dengan semangat keagamaan yang membara, tindakan berundur dalam keadaan matlamat sudah di depan mata adalah sesuatu yang amat sukar diterima.

Akhirnya, Rasulullah berjaya menenteramkan pengikutnya melalui wahyu Ilahi. Di dalamnya, Allah menggambarkan perjanjian tersebut bukannya sebagai satu kekalahan yang menghina, sebaliknya sebagai "kemenangan yang nyata." Maka turunlah ayat pembuka Surah Al-Fath: “Sesungguhnya Kami telah memberikan kepadamu kemenangan yang nyata!” Baginda terpaksa menggunakan autoriti tertinggi—iaitu wahyu daripada Allah—demi menundukkan keresahan pengikutnya.

Janji Allah itu ternyata benar. Apabila kaum Muslimin kembali pada tahun berikutnya untuk menunaikan umrah yang tertangguh, lanskap politik telah berubah sama sekali. Masyarakat Quraisy dan suku berdekatan—yang dahulunya menentang keras—begitu tersentuh dengan kemurahan hati dan diplomasi Rasulullah yang amat berpandangan jauh itu. Akhirnya, mereka memeluk Islam secara beramai-ramai. Sejak saat itu, Islam terus berkembang pesat tanpa pandang ke belakang lagi.

Perjanjian Hudaybiyyah kekal sebagai pengajaran teragung dalam kearifan strategi: kadang-kala kita perlu mengalah dalam satu pertempuran kecil demi memenangi peperangan yang lebih besar. Itulah teras kearifan yang terkandung di dalam Surah Al-Fath.

Lensa Analitis: Pemikiran Kritis Berbanding Sekadar Alunan Suara

Pendekatan saya dalam membaca al-Qur’an adalah ibarat tamsilan klasik mengenai beberapa orang buta dengan gajah. Untuk memahami hakikat keseluruhan, kita mesti meletakkan kepingan gambaran berdasarkan pelbagai pemerhatian separa, disatukan dengan pengalaman hidup serta daya pemikiran kritis kita sendiri. Menerusi lensa ini, kepelbagaian tafsiran bukannya penghalang kepada kefahaman, sebaliknya merupakan bahan asas yang wajar untuk mencapainya.

Allahyaraham cendekiawan Islam, Fazlur Rahman, pernah mengungkapkan perkara ini dengan begitu tepat:  Kita mesti mengekstrak prinsip sejagat yang mendasari sesuatu peristiwa sejarah, lalu mengaplikasikan prinsip tersebut untuk mendepani cabaran zaman kini. Kedua usaha ini menuntut daya pemikiran yang tekun serta pemikiran kritis yang tajam.

Sekadar mengaji dan mengulang bacaan al-Qur’an tanpa henti—seindah mana pun hukum tajwid kita atau semerdu mana pun alunan suara kita—tidak mencukupi. Bersandar semata kepada pembacaan ritual tanpa kefahaman adalah ibarat melambai tongkat sakti sambil menjampi "Abracadabra!"

Ini bukanlah bertujuan meremehkan amalan membaca al-Qur’an. Jika dibaca dengan baik, keindahan bunyinya sanggup menitiskan air mata dan mengangkat jiwa pendengarnya—seperti mana penonton yang langsung tidak faham bahasa Itali atau muzik opera masih boleh terpesona mendengar persembahan aria yang memukau. Namun, keterujaan emosi bukanlah satu wacana intelektual.

Al-Qur’an memperkenalkan konsep fitrah—kecenderungan semulajadi manusia terhadap kebaikan dan kebenaran, serta keadaan suci bersih sewaktu dilahirkan. Apa yang jadi pada diri kita kemudiannya dibentuk oleh persekitaran, asuhan, dan keadaan masyarakat sekeliling. Bagi umat Islam, fitrah kita memang cenderung ke arah kebaikan, tetapi kecenderungan itu hanyalah satu bakat terendam. Ia tidak menjamin kebaikan moral secara automatik, mahupun memandu kita secara sendiri di atas jalan yang lurus.

Sebagai pelengkap kepada fitrah, Allah menumpahkan ‘akal kepada manusia—satu anugerah Ilahi yang unik khusus untuk kita. Menjadi satu kewajipan bagi setiap orang beriman untuk memperdayakan ‘akal mereka sewaktu menekuni wacana keagamaan mahupun hal ehwal semasa. Hanya menerusi pemikiran kritis yang aktif barulah kita bolih memborkatkan fitrah kita dan menterjemahkan al-Qur’an sebagaimana tujuan ia diturunkan: yakni satu petunjuk abadi bagi seluruh umat manusia, sepanjang zaman, dan hingga ke akhir hayat.

Sambungan: Kritikan Terhadap Kajian Hadis

 

Hadith As Sources For Critical Thinking

 

Chapter VII - Hadith As Sources For Critical Thinking

 

M. Bakri Musa

Adapted from my Qur’an, hadith, and Hikayat:  Exercises In Critical Thinking 2021.

July 26, 2026

 

H

adith are sayings attributed to Prophet Muhammad, s.a.w., while sunnah, his recorded activities and customary practices. The operative word there is “attributed.” That is often forgotten or not brought to the fore on purpose. I am excluding here hadith qudsi, where the Prophet, s.a.w, was quoting or repeating what Allah had told him. Recorded with fidelity, those should be regarded as integral parts of the revelations.

 

“Attributed” because the Prophet, s.a.w, discouraged his followers from recording his utterances, believing that those could distract from and override the revelations he had received. How prescient was he!

 

Today and throughout Muslim history, controversies (often violent and never ending) over hadith have split the ummah. It is enough for some, like the Qur’anists, to dispense entirely with hadith and revert to or depend exclusively on the Qur’an. As the Tunisian philosopher Mohamed Talbi wisely observed, Qur’an unites, hadith splits.

 

Those Qur’anists however, are missing a precious gift by ignoring hadith and the associated literature. As Jonathan A C Brown writes in his enchanting book, Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenges and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy, hadith and their commentaries reflect the struggles of early Muslims in seeking balance between reason and revelation, reconciling science with religion, and crystallizing the eternal truths of religious texts in times of changing values and circumstances.

 

Between those who reject hadith (the Qur’anists) on one extreme and those who put hadith on par with if not superior to the Qur’an on the other, are the vast majority of Muslims where the traditional hierarchy stands:  Qur’an, the ultimate and unchallenged guide from Allah; followed by hadith; ijma (consensus); and then qiyas (analogical reasoning). At the local operational or retail level, the fatwas (edicts) of local scholars and judges. 

 

Prophet Muhammad, s.a.w., was the last and exclusive bearer of the revelations. That is the tenet of Islam. As such hadith cannot by definition as well as a matter of faith contradict the Qur’an. Where there are differences between the two or between verses within the Qur’an, those must only be apparent, not real. Meaning, we have not exhausted our ijma and qiyas to reconcile them. The efforts must continue. Nor can differences in revelations be simplictically dismissed through “abrogations” where later revelations take precedence over earlier ones. God’s words are perfect; they do not need re-editing much less abrogating.

 

A variant of the Qur’anist movement is the “Qur’an centric” approach where the focus is on reading the Qur’an to clarify its meanings, using materials from and within the text itself, as per Qur’anic injunction. 

 

Aware of human tendencies and weaknesses, the Prophet, s.a.w., wisely prohibited his followers from recording his deeds or memorizing his words. Those prohibitions notwithstanding, many of his companions and followers nonetheless committed to memory many of his utterances and recorded his many deeds as well as habits. Many would emulate his many personal habits and attire, such as sporting long beards.

 

Memories however, are just that; they are less a sponge to help you absorb everything, more a filter to retain what you desire. Memories of hadith are no different.

 

The collection widely viewed as the most sahih (authentic) is that of Imam Bukhari. He was not born till nearly 200 years after the Prophet’s death, that is, many generations later. We could be generous and assume that the recollections of those upon whom Bukhari relied upon were accurate and reliable. Afterall during his time, the pace of change was glacial. Today with the dizzying speed of change we could hardly remember events and things a mere decade ago. Who could recall the sweet voices of those switchboard ladies or the rotary analog phones of only a generation ago?

 

Bukhari in his piety, honesty, and humility admitted the limitations of his methodology of depending on isnads, the uninterrupted chain of narrators. In the introduction to his encyclopedic collection, he acknowledged that he may have included a few false and excluded other authentic hadith. Muslims in our fervor have forgotten his caution. Nor were those narrators neutral players and recollectors. They were for the most part members of the establishment of their time, with their bias (acknowledged or otherwise) towards maintaining the staus quo and that power that be. No surprise that the hadith collection of the shiites are substantially different from that of the sunnis.

 

Next:  A Critique of Traditional Approaches to Hadith