The new Catholic Pope Francis made a remark about the profundity of mercy. A word so familiar to us Muslims because it is by this word that we start our daily thoughts and acts.
Our 'basmalah' consists of two desirable qualities - mercy and beneficence. As followers of the faith, we are supposed not only to form our lives by it, but to re-form and transform our lives by it. Isn't it surprising that as we look around, we are anything else but merciful and beneficent?
Mercy is about compassion or forgiveness. The Qur'an is considered God's mercy as it serves as a criterion and as a guidance. Even those who have transgressed are assured in the Qur'an by the words, "Say: O My servants who have transgressed against their own souls, despair not of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins. Truly, He is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful." (Surah az-Zumar 39:53)
There's a nice definition of beneficence from the UCSF School of Medicine and runs this way, an "action that is done for the benefit of others. Beneficent actions can be taken to help prevent or remove harms or to simply improve the situation of others". It is said that ethicists often distinguish between obligatory and ideal beneficence. The latter "comprises extreme acts of generosity or attempts to benefit others on all possible occasions"; however our obligatory beneficence depends on our individual circumstances and station in life.
We are some of the most religious people on the planet. But we need to grow beyond rituals and rites and live the essence of the mercy and beneficence of our faith in our daily lives. In the end it is not what we know, it is how we act on what we know that makes the difference. Now let's show we are true followers of the "Most Merciful, the Most Beneficent".
Have mercy
The new Catholic Pope Francis made a remark about the profundity of mercy. A word so familiar to us Muslims because it is by this word that we start our daily thoughts and acts.
Our 'basmalah' consists of two desirable qualities - mercy and beneficence. As followers of the faith, we are supposed not only to form our lives by it, but to re-form and transform our lives by it. Isn't it surprising that as we look around, we are anything else but merciful and beneficent?
Mercy is about compassion or forgiveness. The Qur'an is considered God's mercy as it serves as a criterion and as a guidance. Even those who have transgressed are assured in the Qur'an by the words, "Say: O My servants who have transgressed against their own souls, despair not of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins. Truly, He is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful." (Surah az-Zumar 39:53)
There's a nice definition of beneficence from the UCSF School of Medicine and runs this way, an "action that is done for the benefit of others. Beneficent actions can be taken to help prevent or remove harms or to simply improve the situation of others". It is said that ethicists often distinguish between obligatory and ideal beneficence. The latter "comprises extreme acts of generosity or attempts to benefit others on all possible occasions"; however our obligatory beneficence depends on our individual circumstances and station in life.
We are some of the most religious people on the planet. But we need to grow beyond rituals and rites and live the essence of the mercy and beneficence of our faith in our daily lives. In the end it is not what we know, it is how we act on what we know that makes the difference. Now let's show we are true followers of the "Most Merciful, the Most Beneficent".
Our 'basmalah' consists of two desirable qualities - mercy and beneficence. As followers of the faith, we are supposed not only to form our lives by it, but to re-form and transform our lives by it. Isn't it surprising that as we look around, we are anything else but merciful and beneficent?
Mercy is about compassion or forgiveness. The Qur'an is considered God's mercy as it serves as a criterion and as a guidance. Even those who have transgressed are assured in the Qur'an by the words, "Say: O My servants who have transgressed against their own souls, despair not of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins. Truly, He is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful." (Surah az-Zumar 39:53)
There's a nice definition of beneficence from the UCSF School of Medicine and runs this way, an "action that is done for the benefit of others. Beneficent actions can be taken to help prevent or remove harms or to simply improve the situation of others". It is said that ethicists often distinguish between obligatory and ideal beneficence. The latter "comprises extreme acts of generosity or attempts to benefit others on all possible occasions"; however our obligatory beneficence depends on our individual circumstances and station in life.
We are some of the most religious people on the planet. But we need to grow beyond rituals and rites and live the essence of the mercy and beneficence of our faith in our daily lives. In the end it is not what we know, it is how we act on what we know that makes the difference. Now let's show we are true followers of the "Most Merciful, the Most Beneficent".
The beginning of a sultanate
15th century Sulu saw the beginning of a sultanate with Sayyid Abubakar as its first sultan. It is important to note that the establishment of this sultanate is just one stage in the evolution of Sulu polity. When he arrived at Buansa, a prior polity exists in the area. In the Chinese Ming Annals we find reference to three not one polity in the Sulu Archipelago - a western kingdom, an eastern kingdom and a kingdom of the "dong" as the Chinese would refer to the indigenous population. When Sayyid Abubakar came, we encountered the last of these rulers, Rajah Baguinda. Sayyid Abubakar married Baguinda's daughter, Paramisuli (I contend "paramisuli' is not a personal name but a royal title as this is common among Malay female nobility. This is subject of another article).
There is a lot to clarify in between these two polities (rajaship, sultanate), for example, was power handed by Rajah Baguinda to Sayyid Abubakar peacefully (voluntarily) or upon marriage, or was there a war of sort resulting to Sayyid Abubakar's hegemony? The transition from rajaship to sultanate is another area for further research.
Sayyid Abubakar assumed the regnal name Shariful Hashim. He was styled as "Sri Paduka Mahasari" and this reflects Sanskrit (Hindu/Buddhist) influence; as well as "Maulana Shariful Hashim" connecting him with growing Islamic influence in Southeast Asia. Was the term "Sri Paduka Mahasari Maulana" coined during his lifetime or a later attribution? He is said to have ruled from Buansa for 30 years between 1450 and 1480 and was buried in one of the slopes of Bud (Mount) Tumangtangis.
The Johor (more aptly, Malacca) connection of both Rajah Baguinda and Sayyid Abubakar is another subject of future research.
Modern historians claim 1457 as the date of the establishment of the Sulu Sultanate. The National Historical Commission of the Philippines disambiguate the date by "around 1450", or simply 1450s for uncertainty. On the other hand, independent Muslim studies marked the day to a more exact date November 17, 1405 (24th of Jumada al-Awwal, 808 AH).
He was succeeded by his son, Kamaluddin, who reigned for about 25 years between 1480 and 1505. Another son, Alauddin, is recognized as the 3rd sultan. However, his reign appear to conflict with his brother. One Sulu tarsila (genealogy) suggests that although he made have exercise political power, he was not proclaimed sultan.
Source:
There is a lot to clarify in between these two polities (rajaship, sultanate), for example, was power handed by Rajah Baguinda to Sayyid Abubakar peacefully (voluntarily) or upon marriage, or was there a war of sort resulting to Sayyid Abubakar's hegemony? The transition from rajaship to sultanate is another area for further research.
Sayyid Abubakar assumed the regnal name Shariful Hashim. He was styled as "Sri Paduka Mahasari" and this reflects Sanskrit (Hindu/Buddhist) influence; as well as "Maulana Shariful Hashim" connecting him with growing Islamic influence in Southeast Asia. Was the term "Sri Paduka Mahasari Maulana" coined during his lifetime or a later attribution? He is said to have ruled from Buansa for 30 years between 1450 and 1480 and was buried in one of the slopes of Bud (Mount) Tumangtangis.
The Johor (more aptly, Malacca) connection of both Rajah Baguinda and Sayyid Abubakar is another subject of future research.
Modern historians claim 1457 as the date of the establishment of the Sulu Sultanate. The National Historical Commission of the Philippines disambiguate the date by "around 1450", or simply 1450s for uncertainty. On the other hand, independent Muslim studies marked the day to a more exact date November 17, 1405 (24th of Jumada al-Awwal, 808 AH).
He was succeeded by his son, Kamaluddin, who reigned for about 25 years between 1480 and 1505. Another son, Alauddin, is recognized as the 3rd sultan. However, his reign appear to conflict with his brother. One Sulu tarsila (genealogy) suggests that although he made have exercise political power, he was not proclaimed sultan.
Source:
- Adib Majul, Cesar (1999). Muslims in the Philippines. University of the Philippines Press. ISBN 9715421881.
- "The Sulu Sultanate". Moro National Liberation Front. Retrieved 2008-07-30.
Sayyid Abubakar came from where?
There are two claims explaining Sayyid Abubakar's roots.
The first claims he is from Johor. If we cross-reference this with the history of Johor, we will note that Modern Johor was established in 1528 much later than or 76 years after the establishment of the Sulu sultanate. therefore, he can't be a Johorean noble.
The second claims that he is from Malacca. Please note that Sayyid Abubakar established the sultanate in Sulu in 1450. Cross-referencing with the history of Malacca reveals that prior to 1409, Malacca (then known as Malaccawas) was a Hindu kingdom ruled by a Sri Vijayan prince, Parameswara. It became a Muslim sultanate when Parameswara converted to Islam, married a Pasai princess and assumed the title Sultan Iskandar Shah. Therefore the "sayyid" lineage all the way to Hadramaut and to the Prophet's family is very nil.
One possible explanation maybe to cut Sayyid Abubakar's Malay lineage and link him directly either to Muslim trading families from Gujarat in India or Hadramaut in Yemen. This is possible as Islamic infusion into Southeast Asia started by the end of the 13th century.
Another is to connect him to other emerging Muslim powers in the region. We have already discounted the Malacca sultanate, the second Muslim power. So this leaves us with the first Muslim power of Aceh in northern Sumatra, and the third Muslim power of Demak. Still the chronology is a bit conflicting. For example Demak sultanate was established three years later (1457) than Sulu.
Maybe he is from Pasai (also known as Samudera, Samudera-Pasai, Samudra, Samandara) in northern Sumatra, which is another possible explanation. Pasai was in existence between 13th and 15th century. In 1267, its Hindu king Merah Silu converted to Islam as Sultan Malik ul Salih. Again, this conflicts with the "sayyid" claim.
Or maybe he just came closer to home. How about Brunei?
The first claims he is from Johor. If we cross-reference this with the history of Johor, we will note that Modern Johor was established in 1528 much later than or 76 years after the establishment of the Sulu sultanate. therefore, he can't be a Johorean noble.
The second claims that he is from Malacca. Please note that Sayyid Abubakar established the sultanate in Sulu in 1450. Cross-referencing with the history of Malacca reveals that prior to 1409, Malacca (then known as Malaccawas) was a Hindu kingdom ruled by a Sri Vijayan prince, Parameswara. It became a Muslim sultanate when Parameswara converted to Islam, married a Pasai princess and assumed the title Sultan Iskandar Shah. Therefore the "sayyid" lineage all the way to Hadramaut and to the Prophet's family is very nil.
One possible explanation maybe to cut Sayyid Abubakar's Malay lineage and link him directly either to Muslim trading families from Gujarat in India or Hadramaut in Yemen. This is possible as Islamic infusion into Southeast Asia started by the end of the 13th century.
Another is to connect him to other emerging Muslim powers in the region. We have already discounted the Malacca sultanate, the second Muslim power. So this leaves us with the first Muslim power of Aceh in northern Sumatra, and the third Muslim power of Demak. Still the chronology is a bit conflicting. For example Demak sultanate was established three years later (1457) than Sulu.
Maybe he is from Pasai (also known as Samudera, Samudera-Pasai, Samudra, Samandara) in northern Sumatra, which is another possible explanation. Pasai was in existence between 13th and 15th century. In 1267, its Hindu king Merah Silu converted to Islam as Sultan Malik ul Salih. Again, this conflicts with the "sayyid" claim.
Or maybe he just came closer to home. How about Brunei?
Jabiddah Massacre at 45
18 March 1968 -
Jabidah Massacre, the trigger of the armed secession movement ...
Jabidah Massacre explained (Wikipedia), please click here ...
The Corregidor Massacre of 1968 (Corregidor Historic Society), please click here ...
What is 'Moro'?
'Moro' is a political construct, an identity imposed, shunned and eventually apportioned to ourselves with pride to define our collective resistance to colonialism. It is a powerful construct driving the so-called second longest running conflict in the world!
It is a cultural-religious fiber that unites about 13 ethno-linguistic groups in the Southern Philippines influenced by Islam. Without this unity, these ethno-linguistic groups would have been colonized like most of the Luzon and Visayan cultural groups who succumbed to the influence of Spanish hegemony; or like the indigenous groups who withdrew to the hinterlands and disadvantaged.
Moro is superficial and deep simultaneously. Its superficiality is characterized by how Moros among themselves easily succumb to ethnic comfort. Its depth is defined by how they bond together despite of this superficiality in the face of external threat.
It is a contentious word - those against its use point to its colonial beginning and the stereotypes associated with it. Those for it, point to the sacrifice and the massacres to uphold freedom from oppression.
It is dynamic and evolving ... and continues to this day.
It is a cultural-religious fiber that unites about 13 ethno-linguistic groups in the Southern Philippines influenced by Islam. Without this unity, these ethno-linguistic groups would have been colonized like most of the Luzon and Visayan cultural groups who succumbed to the influence of Spanish hegemony; or like the indigenous groups who withdrew to the hinterlands and disadvantaged.
Moro is superficial and deep simultaneously. Its superficiality is characterized by how Moros among themselves easily succumb to ethnic comfort. Its depth is defined by how they bond together despite of this superficiality in the face of external threat.
It is a contentious word - those against its use point to its colonial beginning and the stereotypes associated with it. Those for it, point to the sacrifice and the massacres to uphold freedom from oppression.
It is dynamic and evolving ... and continues to this day.
What is 'Moro'?
'Moro' is a political construct, an identity imposed, shunned and eventually apportioned to ourselves with pride to define our collective resistance to colonialism. It is a powerful construct driving the so-called second longest running conflict in the world!
It is a cultural-religious fiber that unites about 13 ethno-linguistic groups in the Southern Philippines influenced by Islam. Without this unity, these ethno-linguistic groups would have been colonized like most of the Luzon and Visayan cultural groups who succumbed to the influence of Spanish hegemony; or like the indigenous groups who withdrew to the hinterlands and disadvantaged.
Moro is superficial and deep simultaneously. Its superficiality is characterized by how Moros among themselves easily succumb to ethnic comfort. Its depth is defined by how they bond together despite of this superficiality in the face of external threat.
It is a contentious word - those against its use point to its colonial beginning and the stereotypes associated with it. Those for it, point to the sacrifice and the massacres to uphold freedom from oppression.
It is dynamic and evolving ... and continues to this day.
It is a cultural-religious fiber that unites about 13 ethno-linguistic groups in the Southern Philippines influenced by Islam. Without this unity, these ethno-linguistic groups would have been colonized like most of the Luzon and Visayan cultural groups who succumbed to the influence of Spanish hegemony; or like the indigenous groups who withdrew to the hinterlands and disadvantaged.
Moro is superficial and deep simultaneously. Its superficiality is characterized by how Moros among themselves easily succumb to ethnic comfort. Its depth is defined by how they bond together despite of this superficiality in the face of external threat.
It is a contentious word - those against its use point to its colonial beginning and the stereotypes associated with it. Those for it, point to the sacrifice and the massacres to uphold freedom from oppression.
It is dynamic and evolving ... and continues to this day.
Remembering their sacrifices
March 18 is Bangsamoro Day.
March 18 is essentially the anniversary of the Jabidah Massacre of 1968 [1]. The latter is considered pivotal in the formation of secessionist movement [2]. This year is the 43th anniversary of this massacre in Corrigedor Island off Manila Bay. About 50 Moro recruits were machine gunned by their military handlers when they refused to participate in Operation Merdeka - a covert military operation to instigate dissent and annex Sabah to the Philippines.
One man, Jibin Arula [3], survived to tell the tale. Despite of court proceedings in both military and civilian courts, the case moved only into the thicket of the unresolved cases in the justice system where it is today [4].
Beyond this massacre, I would like to believe that this is also the day to remember our ancestors, their sacrifices and the fight for freedom. Today it is to pay homage the bravery of Moro individuals who committed parang-sabil, and those in groups who raised the banner of freedom and paid the ultimate sacrifice. Men and women and young who were victims of atrocities, for no fault of their own save to be identified as Moros.
We the present generation are indebted to them. We look back in awe of their courage, patience and determination. The same values we hope to emulate and dedicate to the next generations of Moros until liberty is at hand and the benefits of freedom are enjoyed.
Postscript:
Today, we call on those who are leading in our name, learn to look back and be humbled by the sacrifice of our ancestors. They fought with their lives to enjoy the goods we have today. Have you done the same? What have you done beyond enriching yourselves and turning public office into a family livelihood?
Shame on those who are not humbled by the past and by the misery of the present. If you are not afraid of the present because you are in power, then be afraid of the future when you are all long gone and your deeds scrutinize for what it is worth. Be warned, the future is sure to come as is the curse of the next generations.
The same is true to those in our midst and among our ranks who tend to downplay the significance of this massacre. Remember the massacres committed by the Spaniards in the name of religion and subjugation. Remember the Bud Dajo massacre committed by the American regime. Remember the Jabidah massacre committed by the Philippine military. Remember the recent one in Maguindanao committed by our own. Our history is replete with it. Beyond remembering, what can we do today to make sure this is not committed in our time and in the future?
Sources:
[1] The Corregidor Massacre of 1968
[2] Bangsamoro Day commemorates
[3] Lone survivor recalls Jabidah massacre
[4] Jabidah Massacre
March 18 is essentially the anniversary of the Jabidah Massacre of 1968 [1]. The latter is considered pivotal in the formation of secessionist movement [2]. This year is the 43th anniversary of this massacre in Corrigedor Island off Manila Bay. About 50 Moro recruits were machine gunned by their military handlers when they refused to participate in Operation Merdeka - a covert military operation to instigate dissent and annex Sabah to the Philippines.
One man, Jibin Arula [3], survived to tell the tale. Despite of court proceedings in both military and civilian courts, the case moved only into the thicket of the unresolved cases in the justice system where it is today [4].
Beyond this massacre, I would like to believe that this is also the day to remember our ancestors, their sacrifices and the fight for freedom. Today it is to pay homage the bravery of Moro individuals who committed parang-sabil, and those in groups who raised the banner of freedom and paid the ultimate sacrifice. Men and women and young who were victims of atrocities, for no fault of their own save to be identified as Moros.
We the present generation are indebted to them. We look back in awe of their courage, patience and determination. The same values we hope to emulate and dedicate to the next generations of Moros until liberty is at hand and the benefits of freedom are enjoyed.
Postscript:
Today, we call on those who are leading in our name, learn to look back and be humbled by the sacrifice of our ancestors. They fought with their lives to enjoy the goods we have today. Have you done the same? What have you done beyond enriching yourselves and turning public office into a family livelihood?
Shame on those who are not humbled by the past and by the misery of the present. If you are not afraid of the present because you are in power, then be afraid of the future when you are all long gone and your deeds scrutinize for what it is worth. Be warned, the future is sure to come as is the curse of the next generations.
The same is true to those in our midst and among our ranks who tend to downplay the significance of this massacre. Remember the massacres committed by the Spaniards in the name of religion and subjugation. Remember the Bud Dajo massacre committed by the American regime. Remember the Jabidah massacre committed by the Philippine military. Remember the recent one in Maguindanao committed by our own. Our history is replete with it. Beyond remembering, what can we do today to make sure this is not committed in our time and in the future?
Sources:
[1] The Corregidor Massacre of 1968
[2] Bangsamoro Day commemorates
[3] Lone survivor recalls Jabidah massacre
[4] Jabidah Massacre
Whole together
We blame others for what we have become. We rant on what they did and didn't to make out lives better. We think we are in dire situation because of what they withheld from us. We become miserable because of what they did not allow us to become. Given this is true. Before these rants became "them" we ask, "where was we?", "what have we done to ourselves to make things better?", "Isn't it not our responsibility to better ourselves?", etc.
The reality is our lives is now entangled together. The world we live in has become a global village. What happen to us will also affect and even hurt them and vice versa. "Them" is half of the coin, half of the truth. "We" are half of the coin, half of the truth. So long as we continue the divide in our mind and use it to continue the division in real life, we will always be divided, distrusting and hurting each other. The pain will proceed, the hurt will continue, the distrust deepen, until all the blood there is has been spilled and watered the earth.
The pain need not proceed or the hurt to continue. We can start moving forward, together healing each other and making a promise that should we be in a situation of disagreement we prefer to sit around the table of peace to reconcile and resolve, rather than let our angst and pride dictate our action and unleash our fury, and turning our communities into battlefields.
This is the promise of seeing and keeping things whole. By seeing and keeping things whole, we taper our rights with responsibility. We recognize not only our own but also the right of others to live side by side with us. Let us reciprocate good deeds and let us not make violence and vendetta the inheritance of the next generations. We have live long enough through the conflict regime.
We live our lives fundamentally by our own doing. We are personally responsible. This is the obligation that came with our inherent nature and freewill. Those without are not held liable for any. Those with freewill are accountable for their action. We can not fully enjoy our rights if we do not appreciate well our responsibility. It is not a choice between the two, it is both and both are congruent with each other.
We should always remember, we make each other complete. We make each other whole.
The reality is our lives is now entangled together. The world we live in has become a global village. What happen to us will also affect and even hurt them and vice versa. "Them" is half of the coin, half of the truth. "We" are half of the coin, half of the truth. So long as we continue the divide in our mind and use it to continue the division in real life, we will always be divided, distrusting and hurting each other. The pain will proceed, the hurt will continue, the distrust deepen, until all the blood there is has been spilled and watered the earth.
The pain need not proceed or the hurt to continue. We can start moving forward, together healing each other and making a promise that should we be in a situation of disagreement we prefer to sit around the table of peace to reconcile and resolve, rather than let our angst and pride dictate our action and unleash our fury, and turning our communities into battlefields.
This is the promise of seeing and keeping things whole. By seeing and keeping things whole, we taper our rights with responsibility. We recognize not only our own but also the right of others to live side by side with us. Let us reciprocate good deeds and let us not make violence and vendetta the inheritance of the next generations. We have live long enough through the conflict regime.
We live our lives fundamentally by our own doing. We are personally responsible. This is the obligation that came with our inherent nature and freewill. Those without are not held liable for any. Those with freewill are accountable for their action. We can not fully enjoy our rights if we do not appreciate well our responsibility. It is not a choice between the two, it is both and both are congruent with each other.
We should always remember, we make each other complete. We make each other whole.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)