Kesepakatan Melayu langkaui sempadan politik

Saya tertarik untuk mengulas tulisan Iskandar Kamarul Amin yang disiarkan di http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/181922 pada 21 November 2011. Tulisan yang diajukan berkisar di sekitar persoalan kesatuan Melayu dan hubungkaitnya dengan kedaulatan Islam. Ada beberapa pandangan balas yang ingin saya berikan di dalam tulisan saya ini. Walaupun ia adalah pandangan seorang mahasiswa, tetapi saya yakin ia mewakili sekelompok belia yang berada di usia itu. Maka tulisan ini adalah pandangan yang saya tujukan kepada semua yang mempunyai tanggapan yang sama dengan pandangan saudara Iskandar berkenaan isu kesatuan Melayu.

1. Apabila disebut Melayu perlu bersatu, tidak semua rakyat Malaysia akan terfikir kepada penyatuan UMNO-PAS sahaja sebenarnya. Saudara Iskandar sepatutnya menyedari bahawa sesetengah pihak yang memperjuangkan persepakatan Melayu tidak menyempitkannya kepada penyatuan UMNO-PAS tetapi sebaliknya ia adalah agenda untuk ummah Melayu semua sekali.  Penyatuan UMNO-PAS mempunyai kepentingan strategiknya yang tersendiri. Kedudukan kedua-duanya sebagai parti politik Melayu Islam yang besar sudah semestinya memberikan suatu kesan strategik kepada kedaulatan Islam. Tetapi kesatuan itu tidak akan pergi jauh tanpa penglibatan bangsa Melayu seramai mungkin. UMNO dan PAS tidak mewakili keseluruhan bangsa Melayu. Masih ramai orang Melayu di luar sana yang sebenarnya tidak cenderung kepada UMNO ataupun PAS. Mereka perlu diajak sekali untuk menjayakan kesepakatan ini. Jadi perbincangan itu sepatutnya dibawa melewati sempadan dua parti politik itu sahaja.

2. Ada beza di antara ‘bersatu’ dengan ‘sepakat’. Walau pun saudara Iskandar nampak tidak berminat untuk membezakan di antara dua istilah ini, tapi tulisan beliau jelas membawa maksud ‘penyatuan’ dan bukan setakat ‘persepakatan’. Penyatuan UMNO-PAS, bukan mudah untuk berlaku. Tetapi ‘kesepakatan’, itu tidak mustahil berlaku dan ia perlu diusahakan agar berlaku. Saya amat yakin kebanyakan pimpinan UMNO dan sebahagian pimpinan PAS mahukan persepakatan itu berlaku, tetapi mungkin ada pengaruh dari luar yang tidak mahukan kesepakatan itu berlaku. Manakala usaha menyatukan UMNO-PAS, rasanya kedua-dua pimpinan parti itu tidak serius untuk memikirkannya kerana ianya agak jauh untuk berlaku di dalam suasana dan percaturan politik sekarang. Dengan ini saya ingin mengajak saudara Iskandar agar balik kepada titik perbincangan yang sebenar  (iaitu isu kesepakatan dan bukannya kesatuan) sebagaimana yang dibincangkan di dalam blog-blog dan laman-laman sosial.

3. Tulisan saudara Iskandar seolah-olah tidak mengalu-alukan perpaduan atau kesatuan atau persepakatan UMNO-PAS. Saya tidak pasti samada saudara Iskandar memang mewakili PAS ataupun saudara Iskandar adalah orang luar PAS yang memang tidak mahu kebaikan berlaku kepada PAS. Apa ruginya jika UMNO-PAS bersatu atau sepakat atau berpadu pada titik-titik tertentu? Imej PAS sebagai parti Islam tidak akan tercalar dengan korupsi dalam UMNO. Dasar perjuangan PAS juga tidak akan tersimpang hanya kerana beberapa noktah kerjasama dengan UMNO. PAS boleh menentukan apa yang perlu disepakati dan apa yang tidak perlu. Atau adakah saudara Iskandar rasa sebaliknya?

4. Saudara Iskandar juga dengan jelas kelihatan menjurus untuk menonjolkan keburukan UMNO semata-mata. Sedangkan al-Quran menuntut agar kemarahan kita kepada suatu kelompok manusia tidak menghalang kita memberikan persaksian secara adil kepada kelompok tersebut. Sebahagian beranggapan (mungkin saudara Iskandar pun termasuk sama) bahawa UMNO akan mati sendiri dengan segala korupsi yang dilakukannya. Jadi biarkanlah dia mati. Tetapi sedarkah saudara Iskandar bahawa ada ahli UMNO yang ikhlas berjuang untuk Islam dan bangsa di jabatan-jabatan kerajaan, di dalam badan-badan dan pertubuhan, di pentas akademik, di surau dan masjid, di persatuan penduduk dan sebagainya? Mereka ada kepakaran dan kekuatan yang boleh disalurkan untuk ummah. Apa format saudara Iskandar untuk mereka? Keluar UMNO dan masuk PAS? Berapa peratuskah dari mereka yang akan melakukan demikian? Sebahagian mereka lebih selesa dengan kedudukan mereka seperti sedia ada. Dengan itu format kesatuan atau kesepakatan UMNO-PAS dapat memelihara kekuatan itu dari terbiar tidak digunakan. Atau adakah saudara Iskandar memang berpendapat bahawa ahli-ahli UMNO yang ramai itu memang tidak diperlukan langsung untuk mendaulatkan Islam selagi mereka duduk di dalam UMNO?

5. ‘Kesepakatan UMNO-PAS lebih mendaulatkan Islam atau adakah Islam akan lebih berdaulat jika PAS dan UMNO tidak sepakat.’

Saudara Iskandar nampaknya berfikir dengan satu bentuk pemikiran yang unik apabila di awal penulisan beliau, beliau meletakkan persoalan tajuk ‘Berdaulatkah Islam apabila UMNO, PAS bersatu?’. Saya ingin mengajukan soalan balas ‘berdaulatkah Islam jika UMNO dan PAS tidak bersatu?’. Saya tidak pasti apa neraca yang digunakan oleh saudara Iskandar di dalam menganalisa isu ini sehingga sampai ke pernyataan demikian.

6. Saudara Iskandar juga nampak keliru di dalam mendefinisikan maksud kedaulatan Islam itu. Andaian yang dibuat oleh beliau samada ianya adalah isu murtad atau pentadbiran dan pengurusan atau keadilan untuk ummah atau sudut akhlak atau kerancakan amar ma’ruf nahi mungkar adalah andaian yang dipilih untuk menampakkan kelemahan UMNO. Mungkin juga dengan tujuan untuk menampakkan kesatuan UMNO-PAS itu tidak perlu kerana UMNO tidak cemerlang di dalam isu-isu ‘kedaulatan Islam’ yang dipilih itu. Lalu PAS boleh bergerak bersendirian untuk mendaulatkan Islam.

Kedaulatan Islam sepatutnya ditafsirkan dengan penafsiran yang luas seluas kesyumulan Islam itu sendiri. Islam sebagai agama negara, Islam sebagai sumber rujukan tertinggi, kepimpinan negara di tangan orang Islam, majoriti ahli parlimen yang merupakan penggubal dasar dari kalangan orang Islam, hak-hak muslim terpelihara, maruah Islam dan orang Islam terpelihara, orang bukan Islam memandang tinggi agama Islam dan begitulah seterusnya. Adakah UMNO sepanjang sejarahnya tidak pernah langsung memainkan peranan di dalam mendaulatkan Islam dalam ruang lingkup yang luas itu? Bukan untuk membela UMNO, tapi persoalan ini perlu dijawab oleh seorang mahasiswa dengan neraca ilmiah dan bukan berdasarkan emosi semata-mata. Metodologi ilmu di dalam penilaian mesti berdasarkan angka dan fakta yang menyeluruh bukan ambil satu kes di negeri ini dan satu lagi kes di negeri itu sahaja.

Demikianlah pandangan balas saya terhadap tulisan saudara Iskandar itu. Pada saya isu kesepakatan Melayu adalah isu utama pada masa ini. Pergolakan yang berlaku di dalam negara sekarang menjadikannya isu yang amat utama dan amat penting. Kesepakatan itu pula adalah dalam ruang lingkupnya yang luas dan tidak terbatas hanya di dalam sempadan pakatan parti-parti politik sahaja.

Wallahu a’lam.

Ustaz Muhammad Fauzi Asmuni
Naib Presiden II,
Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (ISMA)

Doa Syeikh Ahmad bin Mohd Said (Mufti Pertama) Pada Hari Kemerdekaan 1957

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ


اَللَّهُمَّ وَفِّقْ سَائِرَ العُمَّالِ وَالوُزَرَاءِ وَالسَّلاَطِينَ وَالمُلُوكِ وَالأُمَرَاءِ لِرِعَايَةِ أُمُورِ الدِّينِ وَالمُحَافَظَةِ عَلَى حُقُوقِ المُسْلِمِينَ وَإِقَامَةِ العَدْلِ فِى الأَحْكَامِ وَالتَّمَسُّـكِ بِفَضَائِلِ الإِسْلاَمِ،


اَللَّهُمَّ وَأَصْلِحْ بِهِمْ شُئُونَ الأُمَّةِ المَلاَيُوِيَّةِ حَتَّى تَتَرَقَّى وَتَتَقَدَّمَ إِلَى أَعْلَى مَا يَتَحَقَّقُ بِهِ بُلُوغُ الأُمْنِيَّةِ. اَللَّهُمَّ وَانْصُرْنَا مَعَاشِرَةَ الأُمَّةِ المَلاَيُوِيَّةِ وَاهْدِنَا وَسَدِّدْنَا خَيْرَ البَرِيَّةِ وَاهْدِنَا الصِّرَاطَ المُسْـتَقِيمَ صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ المَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّآلِينَ،


اَللَّهُمَّ اكْشِفْ عَنَّا الكُرُبَاتِ وَسَـلِّمْنَا نَحْنُ مِمَّا فِيهِ مِنَ الآفَاتِ وَاحْفَظْنَا مِنْ كُلِّ سُوءٍ وَمَلاَمٍ وَبَـلِّغْنَا كُلَّ مَقْصُودٍ وَمُرَامٍ وَأَصْلِحْ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَ غَيْرِنَا حَتَّى تَكُونَ فِى أَمَانٍ وَسَلاَمٍ. وَفَرِّجْ عَنَّا كُرُبَاتِنَا فَرْجًا عَاجِلاً بِرَحْمَتِكَ يَا أَرْحَمَ الرَّاحِمِينَ،


اَللَّهُمَّ كُنْ لَنَا وَلَهُمْ وَلِهَذَهِ البِلاَدِ حَافِظًا مِنْ جَمِيعِ البَلاَيَا وَدَافِعًا عَنَّا وَعَنْهُمْ جَمِيعَ الرَّزَايَا، وَانْصُرْنَا عَلَى الأَعْدَاءِ وَالحُسَّادِ وَاحْلُلْ غَضَبَكَ وَنِقْمَتَكَ عَلَى البَغْيِ وَالفَسَادِ اَللَّهُمَّ وَاحْرُسْ بِعَيْنِكَ الَّتِي لاَ تَنَامُ وَاكْـنُفْ بِكَنَفِكَ وَرُكْنِكَ الَّذِي لاَ يُرَام. اَللَّهُمَّ اِرْمِ رَايَةَ الإِسْلاَمِ مَنْشُورَةً وَمَوَاطِنَ الدِّينِ وَالحَـقِّ مَعْمُورَةً.


Yang bermaksud, Ya Allah! Anugerahkanlah taufiq kepada sekelian pentadbir awam, jemaah menteri, para sultan dan raja, serta pemimpin negara bagi memelihara kehendak-kehendak agama, memelihara hak keistimewaan umatnya, menegakkan keadilan dalam undang-undang dan berpegang kepada keindahan Islam.


Ya Allah! Jadikanlah mereka agen perubah hal keadaan orang-orang Melayu, agar bangsa ini meningkat maju dan kehadapan sehingga tercapai cita-cita yang diidam-idamkan. Ya Allah! Bantulah bangsa Melayu, bimbinglah serta jadikanlah kami menjadi sebaik-baik manusia. Tunjukkanlah kami jalan yang lurus, jalan yang telah Engkau kurniakan kepada umat Islam yang telah menikmatinya, bukan sebagaimana orang yang Engkau murkai dan bukan juga orang yang sesat.


Ya Allah! Hindarilah kami daripada sebarang kesusahan, sejahterakanlah kami daripada segala yang boleh memudharatkan, peliharalah kami daripada segala buruk lagi keji dan tunaikanlah segala yang diharap dan dihajati. Harmonikanlah antara kami dan bangsa lain selain kami hingga kami sentiasa dalam keamanan dan keselamatan. Bebaskanlah kami dengan segera daripada segala kepayahan dengan rahmatMu wahai Tuhan yang Maha Merahmati segala yang penyayang.


Ya Allah! Jadikanlah bagi bangsa kami, kaum yang lain dan negara ini penjaga daripada segala bala, yang menghalang kami dan mereka daripada sebarang pencerobohan. Bantulah kami menewaskan segala musuh dan orang yang dengki. Zahirkanlah kemarahanMu dan kemurkaanMu kepada orang yang melampau dan yang melakukan kerosakkan. Ya Allah! Awasilah dengan penglihatanMu yang tidak pernah lena dan bentengilah dengan perlindungan dan bentengMu yang tidak mudah diterima.

Oleh,
Al-Marhum Syeikh Haji Ahmad bin Muhammad Said, doa ini dibaca ketika pengisytiharan Kemerdekaan Negara di Stadium Merdeka oleh Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj pada 31hb Ogos 1957.

Dakwah: Bekal Seoarang Da'i

Oleh : Syaikh Muhammad bin Shalih Al-Utsaimin Rahimahullah

Seorang Da’i harus Berilmu tentang Apa-Apa Yang Didakwahkannya

Seorang da’i harus berilmu dan belajar ilmu yang bersumber dari Kitabullah dan sunnah Rasul, kerana selain ilmu agama maka harus dicerna menurut ukuran Al-Qur’an dan As Sunnah. Bila sesuai dengan Al-Qur’an dan As Sunnah maka boleh diterima dan bila tidak sesuai wajib ditolak secara mutlak berdasarkan riwayat dari Ibnu ‘Abbas, beliau berkata:

“Aku khuatir akan kalian ditimpakan batu dari langit. Aku berkata: “Rasulullah bersabda” sementara kalian berkata: “Abu Bakar dan Umar berkata”.

Jika perkataan Abu Bakar dan Umar tidak diterima kerana bertentangan dengan sabda Rasulullah, maka bagaimana dengan perkataan orang yang jauh di bawah mereka baik dari sisi ilmu, ketakwaan dan kedekatan serta kekuasaan mereka dengan Rasulullah? Sungguh, menolak perkataan dan pendapat yang menyelisihi Kitabullah dan sunnah Rasul dari selain mereka lebih utama.

Allah berfirman:
“Maka hendaklah orang-orang yang menyalahi perintah Rasul takut akan ditimpa cubaan atau ditimpa azab yang pedih”. (QS An-Nur: 63).

Imam Ahmad berkata: “Apakah engkau tahu apa fitnah itu? Yang dimaksudkan dengan fitnah adalah kesyirikan. Apabila menolak sebagian perkataan beliau dikhuatirkan akan masuk dalam hatinya suatu fitnah dan penyimpangan sehingga ia akan celaka” Sesungguhnya bekal pertama seorang da’i adalah ilmu yang bersumber dari Kitabullah dan sunnah Rasul-Nya yang sahih.

Adapun dakwah tanpa ilmu bererti berdakwah atas dasar kebodohan. Dan berdakwah atas dasar kebodohan lebih berbahaya, kerana seorang da’i telah memposisikan dirinya sebagai orang yang memberikan bimbingan dan petunjuk bila dia jahil atau bodoh, maka dia akan tersesat dan menyesatkan orang lain, wal ‘iyazu billah.

Kebodohan seperti itu dipanggil jahil murakkab (kebodohanyang sangat berat), dan jahil murakkab lebih berbahaya daripada jahil basith (kebodohan ringan). Jahil basith menghalangi seseorang untuk berbicara dan mungkin jahil basith akan hilang dan sirna melalui proses belajar. Akan tetapi masalah yang besar adalah jahil murakkab, kerana orang yang tertimpa jahil murakkab tidak mahu diam bahkan dia akan terus berbicara meskipun atas dasar kebodohan. Sehingga pada saat itu dia lebih member kerosakan/mudarat daripada menerangi kehidupan.

Wahai saudara-saudaraku…..
Sesungguhnya berdakwah menyeru kepada jalan Allah tanpa ilmu bererti telah menyelisihi jalan hidup Rasul dan jalan hidup para tabi’in. Semaklah firman Allah sebagai bentuk anjuran kepada Nabi Muhammad saw:‏

“Katakanlah: “Inilah jalan (agama)ku, aku dan orang–orang yang mengikutiku mengajak (kamu) kepada Allah dengan bashirah”. Mahasuci Allah dan aku tidak termasuk orang-orang yang musyrik.” (QS. Yusuf: 108)

Maka beliau berkata: “Aku dan orang-orang yang mengikutiku mengajak kepada Allah berdasarkan bashirah (ilmu dan yakin)”. Maksudnya yaitu bahwa orang-orang yang mengikuti beliau mengajak kepada Allah berdasarkan bashirah, bukan berdasarkan kebodohan.

Wahai para da’i perhatikan firman Allah: “‘ala bashirah”, maksudnya yaitu bashirah (menguasai ilmu) tentang tiga perkara:

·         Menguasai bahan dakwah

Seorang da’i harus memahami hukum syar’i yang hendak disampaikan, sebab terkadang dia mengajak kepada sesuatu yang dia anggap wajib padahal hakikat hukum tersebut tidak wajib. Maka dia mewajibkan kepada hamba Allah dengan suatu perkara yang tidak wajib. Dan terkadang dia mengajak kepada sesuatu yang dia anggap haram, ternyata dalam ilmu agama sesuatu itu tidak haram bererti dia telah mengharamkan sesuatu yang halal dan boleh dalam ajaran Allah.

·         Menguasai keadaan atau situasi Mad’u (orang yang menjadi objek dan sasaran dakwah). 

Oleh kerana itu, ketika Nabi mengutus Mu’az ke Yaman, beliau berpesan kepadanya:

“Sesungguhnya kamu akan mendatangi suatu kaum ahli kitab”.

Pesan Nabi ini adlah agar Mu’az mengetahui keadaan mereka dan bersiap sedia menghadapi mereka. Jadi, kalian harus mengetahui keadaan mad’u (orang yang menjadi objek dakwah) tersebut baik dari segi ilmu pengetahuan mahupun kemampuannya dalam berdialog sehingga anda dengan mudah dan penuh kesediaan berhadapan, berdiskusi dan berdebat dengan mereka. Sebab apabila anda terlibat dalam perdebatan dengan mereka dan dia berhasil mengalahkan anda maka hal ini sangat berbahaya bagi kebenaran sementara anda yang menjadi penyebabnya. Dan anda jangan mengira bahawa pendukung kebatilan itu selalu kalah dalam berdebat bahkan Rasulullah bersabda:

“Sesungguhnya kamu berselisih di hadapanku, boleh jadi sebahagian kamu lebih mahir dengan hujahnya daripada sebahagian yang lain, maka aku memutuskan hukum yang menguntungkannya sesuai dengan apa yang aku dengar”.

Hal ini menunjukkan bahawa orang yang berselisih terkadang lebih mahir bersilat lidah daripada yang lain, meskipun dia dalam posisi yang salah, sementara hukum berlaku sesuai dengan zahir ucapan. Jadi, seorang da’i harus memahami keadaan orang yang menjadi objek dakwah.

Memahami cara dan kaedah dakwah.

Allah berfirman:‏

 “Serulah (manusia) kepada jalan Rabbmu dengan hikmah dan pelajaran yang baik, dan bantahlah mereka dengan cara yang lebih baik”. (QS. An-Nahl: 125)

Sebahagian orang kadang-kadang ketika mendapati suatu kemungkaran langsung mengingkarinya tidak berfikir akibat buruk yang timbul dari sikap tersebut baik kepada diri sendiri maupun kepada para da’i yang lain.

Oleh kerana itu, wajib bagi seorang da’i memperhatikan dan menganalisa berbagai impak negatif dari setiap tindakan dakwahnya sebelum bergerak. Boleh jadi, pada saat sekarang keadaan jiwa seorang da’i penuh dengan semangat dan api kecemburuan yang menyala-nyala namun semangat dan kecemburuan tersebut padam pada masa yang akan datang bahkan dengan waktu yang tidak lama semangat itu akan luntur.

Oleh sebab itu, saya menganjurkan kepada para da’i agar berdakwah dengan penuh hikmah dan tidak tergesa-gesa. Meskipun sikap seperti agak sedikit lambat tetapi akan membuahkan hasil yang baik di kemudian hari, Insya Allah.

Seiring dengan petunjuk nas-nas syar’i dan akal sihat yang tidak tercemar oleh penyakit syubhah dan syahwat maka seorang da’i harus berbekal dengan ilmu yang benar yang bersumber dari Kitabullah dan sunnah Rasul-Nya. Bagaimana anda boleh berdakwah dan mengajak kepada agama Allah sementara anda tidak mengetahui jalan menuju agama dan syariat-Nya? Apakah anda layak menjadi seorang da’i?

Jadi, apabila seseorang belum mempunyai ilmu, maka yang lebih utama belajar terlebih dahulu dan kemudian setelah cukup ilmu boleh mula berdakwah. Ada seseorang yang berkata: “Apakah perkataanmu ini bertentangan dengan sabda Nabi: “Sampaikan dariku walaupun satu ayat?” Maka jawabnya adalah: Tidak, kerana Rasul bersabda: (Sampaikan dariku), kalau begitu, apa yang kita sampaikan harus berasal dari Rasulullah walau hanya sedikit, inilah yang kami maksudkan. Ketika kami berkata “Sesungguhnya seorang da’i memerlukan ilmu” bukan bererti harus mempunyai ilmu yang banyak dan luas, akan tetapi kami berkata “Janganlah berdakwah kecuali dengan ilmu dan jangan berbicara tentang sesuatu yang tidak diketahui”.

Seorang da’i Mestilah Berakhlak Dengan Akhlak Yang Mulia

Hendaknya seorang da’i berakhlak dengan akhlak yang mulia, sehingga pengaruh ilmu itu ternampak dan tercermin pada perangai, aqidah, ibadah dan dalam semua tingkah lakunya. Dan perilaku seorang da’i boleh menjadi contoh dan teladan bagi orang lain. Jika perilaku dan perangai seorang da’i berlawanan dengan nilai akhlak yang mulia maka dakwahnya akan gagal dan kalaupun berhasil, hasilnya hanya kecil.

Jadi, wajib bagi seorang da’i untuk berakhlak mulia dan menghiasi dirinya dengan cahaya ibadah, muamalah atau perilaku terpuji sehingga dakwahnya diterima dan dia tidak termasuk ke dalam golongan orang yang pertama kali dibakar dengan api neraka.

Wahai saudaraku para da’i……..

Apabila kita memperhatikan secara saksama maka sering kita temui beberapa da’i yang mengajak orang lain kepada kebaikan namun dia melupakan dirinya sendiri.

Tidak ragu lagi, bahawa ini merupakan satu kesalahan besar kecuali ada suatu pertimbangan yang lebih maslahah atau untuk merubah keadaan kepada keadaan yang lebih baik. Sebab sesuatu yang utama kadang-kadang menjadi sesuatu yang kurang utama untuk dilaksanakan dan sesuatu yang kurang utama lebih diutamakan/dikedepankan kerana ada beberapa pertimbangan dan maslahah. Oleh sebab itu, Rasul pernah menyeru kepada beberapa nilai dan ajaran mulia akan tetapi suatu ketika baginda sibuk mengerjakan sesuatu yang lebih penting. Maka terkadang baginda berpuasa hingga dikatakan bahawa baginda tidak pernah berbuka, dan terkadang baginda berbuka hingga dikatakan bahawa baginda tidak pernah berpuasa.

Wahai saudara-saudaraku …

Saya berharap hendaknya setiap da`i selalu menghiasi dirinya dengan akhlak mulia dan akhlak yang patut dimiliki oleh setiap da`i, sehingga perkataan dan perbuatannya lebih layak dan pantas untuk diterima.

Seorang Da’i Harus Bersabar Dalam Dakwahnya

Seorang da’i harus bersabar dalam berdakwah dan bersabar dalam menghadapi rintangan dan gangguan dakwah serta bersabar terhadap tentangan dakwah.

Seorang da’i harus bersabar dalam dakwah bererti dia terus menekuni dakwah dan tidak bosan bahkan dia harus terus menerus berdakwah mengajak manusia kepada jalan Allah sesuai dengan kemampuannya dan selalu melibatkan diri dalam berbagai aktiviti dakwah yang lebih bermanfaat dan lebih menepati tujuan atau mengena. Seorang da’i harus bersabar dalam menekuni dakwah dan tidak boleh bosan dalam menyampaikan dakwah. Sebab apabila seorang da’i ditimpa kebosanan, maka dia akan merasa lelah kemudian meninggalkan dakwah, akan tetapi apabila dia tetap beristiqamah dalam berdakwah maka dia akan meraih pahala orang-orang yang bersabar dan mendapatkan hasil yang memuaskan. Renungkanlah firman Allah yang ditujukan kepada Nabi-Nya:‏

“Itu adalah di antara berita-berita penting tentang yang ghaib yang Kami wahyukan kepadamu (Muhammad), tidak pernah kamu mengetahuinya dan tidak (pula) kaummu sebelum ini. Maka bersabarlah, sesungguhnya kesudahan yang baik adalah bagi orang-orang yang bertakwa” (QS. Huud: 49).

Seorang da’i harus bersabar dalam menghadapi rintangan dakwah dari para penentang dan musuh dakwah, kerana setiap orang yang berdakwah mengajak kepada Allah pasti mendapat tentangan sebagaimana firman Allah:

“Dan seperti itulah telah Kami adakan bagi tiap-tiap Nabi, musuh dari orang-orang yang berdosa. Dan cukuplah Rabbmu menjadi pemberi petunjuk dan penolong”. (QS. Al-Furqan: 31).

Jadi, setiap dakwah pasti mendapat tentangan dan rintangan dari para penentang, pendebat ataupun dari para penyebar syubhah, akan tetapi seorang da’i wajib untuk bersabar menghadapi orang-orang yang menentang dakwah, meskipun dakwah tersebut dituduh sebagai dakwah sesat dan batil, padahal dakwah tersebut sesuai dengan petunjuk Kitabullah dan tuntutan sunnah Rasulullah maka seorang da’i harus bersabar dalam berdakwah.

Itu bukan bermaksud seorang da’i harus berterusan mempertahankan kebatilan apabila telah nampak kebenaran. Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang tetap berterusan mempertahankan kebatilan padahal telah nampak kebenaran kepadanya maka ia menyerupai orang yang disebutkan dalam firman Allah:
“Mereka membantahmu tentang kebenaran sesudah nyata (kebenaran itu)” (QS. Al-Anfal: 6).

Membantah kebenaran setelah datang penjelasan dan hujah merupakan sifat yang tercela. Allah berfirman tentang orang-orang yang mempunyai sifat demikian:‏ 

“Dan barangsiapa yang menentang Rasul sesudah jelas kebenaran baginya, dan mengikuti jalan yang bukan jalan orang-orang mukmin. Kami biarkan ia berleluasa terhadap kesesatan yang telah dikuasainya itu, dan Kami masukkan ia ke dalam Jahannam, dan Jahannam itu seburuk-buruk tempat kembali” (QS. An-Nisa: 115)

Wahai para da’i, apabila ada suatu kritikan yang membangun dan bagus maka anda harus menerima dengan lapang dada namun jika hanya sekedar tuduhan batil jangan sampai melemahkan semangatmu dan mengendurkan langkahmu dalam berdakwah.

Demikian pula seorang da’i harus sabar terhadap rintangan dan gangguan dakwah kerana seorang da’i pasti menghadapi hal-hal yang menyakitkan hati baik berupa perkataan atau perbuatan. Inilah para-para rasul, salawat dan salam semoga tetap tercurah atas mereka, mereka disakiti dengan perkataan dan perbuatan sebagaimana yang dijelaskan dalam firman Allah:

“Demikianlah tidak seorang rasul pun yang datang kepada orang-orang yang sebelum mereka, melainkan mereka mengatakan: “Ia adalah tukang sihir atau orang gila”. (QS. Adz-Dzariyat: 52)

Bagaimana pendapatmu tentang seorang yang mendapat wahyu dari Rabbnya lalu diejek dan dikatakan bahawa “sesungguhnya kamu adalah tukang sihir atau orang gila”?. Tidak ragu lagi bahawa beliau merasa disakiti/dihina, namun para rasul tetap bersabar dalam menghadapi ejekan dan hinaan yang menyakitkan hati baik berupa perkataan mahupun perbuatan.

Perhatikanlah Rasul pertama, Nuh ketika kaumnya melihat beliau sedang membuat kapal, mereka mengolok-olok dan mengejek-ejek baginda, maka baginda berkata kepada mereka:

“Jika kamu mengejek kami, maka sesungguhnya kami (pun) mengejekmu sebagaimana kamu sekalian mengejek (kami). Kelak kamu akan mengetahui siapa yang akan ditimpa oleh azab yang menghinakannya dan yang akan ditimpa azab yang kekal” (QS. Hud: 38-39).

Dan mereka tidak puas dengan hanya mengejek dan menghina dengan perkataan dan olokan belaka bahkan mereka mengancam untuk membunuh baginda sebagaimana firman Allah:

“Mereka berkata: “Sungguh jika kamu tidak (mahu) berhenti wahai Nuh, nescaya benar-benar kamu akan termasuk orang-orang yang dirajam” (QS. Asy-Syu’ara: 116).

Maksudnya, baginda akan mengalami seperti orang-orang yang dibunuh dengan cara dirajam dengan batu. Maka beliau diancam dengan pembunuhan, iaitu dengan ancaman bahawa “Kami telah merajam orang selainmu secara terang-terangan”, dalam menunjukkan kekuatan mereka atau show off power, sementara mereka benar-benar telah merajam orang lain, dan kamu wahai Nuh termasuk di antara mereka. Akan tetapi hal itu tidak menngurangkan atau menyurutkan semangat nabi Nuh dalam berdakwah, bahkan beliau terus berdakwah sampai Allah memenangkan beliau atas kaumnya.

Begitu juga dakwah nabi Ibrahim telah disambut oleh kaumnya dengan penolakan, bahkan mereka menciptakan pendapat gila dan sesat tentang dakwah beliau di kalangan umat manusia.‏ 

“Mereka berkata: ‘(Kalau demikian) bawalah dia dengan cara yang dapat dilihat orang banyak, agar mereka menyaksikan’” (QS. Al-Anbiya’: 61)

Kemudian mereka mengancam akan membakar beliau:

“Mereka berkata: ‘Bakarlah dia dan bantulah tuhan-tuhan kamu, jika kamu benar-benar hendak bertindak’” (QS. Al-Anbiya’: 68)

Mereka menyalakan api yang sangat besar dan dahsyat kemudian mereka melempar beliau dengan manjaniq (alat pelempar batu, seperti meriam pada zaman ini) ke arah api. Mereka melempar dengan alat itu kerana sangat jauhnya tempat api dari mereka dan disebabkan sangat dahsyatnya panas api tersebut, tetapi Allah Rabbul ‘Izzah wal Jalal (Yang Maha Perkasa dan Mulia) berfirman:

“Kami berkata: ‘Wahai api, menjadi dinginlah, dan menjadi keselamatanlah bagi Ibrahim’” (QS. Al-Anbiya: 69)

Sehingga api itu menjadi dingin dan menjadi keselamatan bagi beliau dan akhir yang baik berpihak pada Ibrahim.

“Mereka hendak merancang jahat terhadap Ibrahim, maka kami menjadikan mereka itu orang-orang yang paling rugi“ (QS. Al-Anbiya: 70).

Begitu juga dengan nabi Musa yang mendapat ancaman dari Fir’aun akan dibunuh.

“Biarkanlah aku membunuh Musa dan hendaklah dia memohon kepada Rabbnya, kerana sesungguh-nya aku kuathir dia akan menukar agamamu atau menimbulkan kerosakan di muka bumi”. (QS. Ghafir: 26).

Nabi Musa diancam dengan pembunuhan, namun keberuntungan berakhir di pihak baginda ‘alaihi shalatu wa salam.

“Dan Fir’aun beserta kaumnya dikepung oleh azab yang amat buruk” (QS. Ghafir: 45)

Demikian pula dengan nabi Isa, beliau disakiti bahkan orang Yahudi menuduh beliau sebagai anak zina. Dan mereka menyangka telah membunuh dan menyalib beliau, tetapi Allah berfirman:

“Padahal mereka tidak membunuhnya dan tidak (pula) menyalibnya, tetapi (yang mereka bunuh ialah) orang yang diserupakan dengan Isa bagi mereka. Sesungguhnya orang yang berselisih faham tentang (pembunuhan) Isa, benar-benar dalam keraguan tentang yang dibunuh itu. Mereka tidak mempunyai keyakinan tentang siapa yang dibunuh itu, kecuali mengikuti persangkaan belaka, mereka tidak (pula) yakin bahawa yang mereka bunuh itu adalah Isa. Tetapi (yang sebenarnya), Allah telah mengangkat Isa kepada-Nya. Dan adalah Allah Maha Perkasa Lagi Maha Bijaksana” (QS. An-Nisa: 157-158).

Sehingga beliau selamat dari perancangan keji mereka.

Begitu juga dengan penutup dan imam para nabi-nabi serta sayyid Bani Adam, Muhammad saw, Allah berfirman tentang beliau:

“Dan (ingatlah), ketika orang-orang kafir (Quraisy) memikirkan daya upaya terhadapmu untuk menangkap dan memenjarakanmu atau membunuhmu, atau mengusirmu. Mereka memikirkan tipu daya dan Allah menggagalkan tipu daya itu. Dan Allah sebaik-baik pembalas tipu daya”. (QS. Al-Anfal: 30).

“Mereka berkata, “Hai orang yang diturunkan Al-Qur’an kepadanya, sesungguhnya kamu benar-benar orang yang gila.” (QS. Al-Hijr: 6).

“Dan mereka berkata: “Apakah sesungguhnya kami harus meninggalkan sembahan-sembahan kami kerana seorang penyair gila?” (QS. Ash-Shaffat: 36)

Baginda mendapat tentangan dan siksaan yang menyakitkan dari mereka baik berupa perkataan mahupun perbuatan, seperti yang telah diketahui oleh para ulama ahli sejarah, beliau tetap bersabar, maka kesudahan yang baik berpihak pada baginda.

Jadi, setiap da’i pasti akan menghadapi rintangan dalam berdakwah akan tetapi dia harus tetap bersabar. Seperti firman Allah kepada Rasul-Nya:

“Sesungguhnya Kami telah menurunkan Al-Qur’an kepadamu (hai Muhammad) dengan beransur-ansur”. (QS. Al-Insan: 23).

Berdasarkan ayat di atas, menurut fahaman kita seharusnya perintah untuk bersyukur namun ternyata Allah berfirman kepada beliau:

“Maka bersabarlah kamu untuk (melaksanakan) ketetapan Rabbmu” (QS. Al-Insan: 24)

Demikian itu sebagai isyarat bahawa setiap orang yang mengamalkan ajaran Al-Qur’an mesti ditimpa kesukaran yang memerlukan kesabaran yang lebih.

Maka wajib bagi setiap seorang da’i tetap bersabar dan terus berdakwah sampai datangnya kemenangan. Tidak harus kemenangan itu datang ketika ia masih hidup, namun suatu yang terpenting adalah panji dakwah tetap berkibar di tengah umat manusia dalam keadaan murni (putih bersih) dan diikuti. Dan sasaran utama dakwah bukanlah jumlah orang yang sudah mengikuti dakwah namun yang terpenting bagaimana panji dakwah tetap berkibar dan suara dakwah terus bergema meskipun dia telah tiada, sehinggga dia seakan-akan masih tetap hidup walaupun dia sudah tiada.

Allah berfirman:

“Apakah orang yang sudah mati, kemudian dia kami hidupkan dan kami berikan kepadanya cahaya yang terang, yang dengan cahaya itu dia dapat berjalan di tengah-tengah masyarakat manusia, serupa dengan orang yang keadaannya berada dalam gelap gelita yang sekali-kali tidak dapat keluar daripadanya” (QS. Al-An’am: 122).

Pada hakikatnya hidup dan tidaknya seorang da’i bukan bergantung pada bersatunya ruh dan jasad belaka tetapi seorang da’i dinyatakan hidup secara hakiki bila pendapat dan kebaikannya tetap ada dan lestari di tengah-tengah umat manusia.

Renungkanlah kisah Abu Sufyan bersama Heraklius. Pada tahun ke tujuh hijrah, Heraklius mendengar bahawa telah muncul seorang Nabi maka dia memanggil Abu Sufyan, lalu dia bertanya kepadanya tentang kenabian, keperibadian, nasab, ajaran dakwah dan tentang para sahabat beliau. Ketika Abu Sufyan telah menjawab semua pertanyaan maka Heraklius berkata kepadanya: “Jika apa yang kamu katakan benar, maka dia akan menguasai wilayahku hingga bumi yang ada di bawah kedua kakiku ini”. Subhanallah, siapa yang mengira bahwa raja dari sebuah imperium (menurut istilah mereka) akan melontarkan ucapan seperti itu tentang Nabi Muhammad, padahal pada saat itu beliau belum membebaskan jazirah Arab dari perbudakan syaitan dan hawa nafsu. Siapa yang mengira bahwa seorang kaisar akan mengatakan perkataan seperti di atas?. Oleh karena itu, ketika Abu Sufyan keluar, dia berkata kepada kaumnya:

لَقَدْ أَمِرَ أَمْرُ اْبنِ أَبِيْ كَبْشَةٍ إِنَّهُ لَيَخَافُهُ مَلِكُ بَنِيْ اْلأَصْفَرِ

“Sungguh urusan Ibnu Abi Kabsyah telah menjadi besar, Raja Bani Al-Ashfar (bangsa berkulit putih) telah gentar kepada-nya”.

“Amira“ maksudnya adalah “azuma” (besar) seperti dalam firman Allah:

لَقَدْ جِئْتَ شَيْئًا إِمْرًا

“Sungguh telah datang kepadamu sesuatu yang besar”.

Dan ternyata Nabi benar-benar telah mampu menakluki semua wilayah dan kekuasaan Heraklius dengan cahaya dakwah bukan dengan kebesaran peribadi baginda, kerana dakwah beliau datang di muka bumi untuk menebarkan dakwah Islam dan membinasakan berhala serta kesyirikan dan para pendukungnya.

Begitu juga para Khulafa’ur Rasyidin setelah Nabi Muhammad menakluki semua wilayah dan kekuasaan Hiraklius dengan dakwah dan syariat beliau.

Jika demikian, maka wajib bagi setiap da’i untuk bersabar sebab kesudahan yang baik pasti berpihak pada mereka dengan syarat mereka jujur bersama Allah baik ketika masih hidup atau sesudah mati.

“Musa berkata kepada kaumnya: “Mohonlah pertolongan kepada Allah dan bersabarlah. Sesungguhnya bumi (ini) kepunyaan Allah, dipusakakannya kepada siapa yang dikehendaki-Nya dari hamba-hamba-Nya. Dan kesudahan yang baik adalah bagi orang-orang yang bertakwa” (QS. Al-A’raf: 128).

Dan Allah berfirman:
“Sesungguhnya barangsiapa yang bertakwa dan bersabar, maka sesungguhnya Allah tidak menyia-nyiakan pahala orang-orang yang berbuat baik.” (QS. Yusuf: 90).

Wallahu a’lam.

Ibn Khaldun, Father of Economics

In his Prolegomena (The Muqaddimah), 'Abd al-Rahman Ibn Muhammad Ibn Khaldun al-Hadrami of Tunis (A.D. 1332-1406), commonly known as Ibn Khaldun, laid down the foundations of different fields of knowledge, in particular the science of civilization (al-'umran). His significant contributions to economics, however, should place him in the history of economic thought as a major forerunner, if not the "father," of economics, a title which has been given to Adam Smith, whose great works were published some three hundred and seventy years after Ibn Khaldun's death. Not only did Ibn Khaldun plant the germinating seeds of classical economics, whether in production, supply, or cost, but he also pioneered in consumption, demand, and utility, the cornerstones of modern economic theory.

Before Ibn Khaldun, Plato and his contemporary Xenophon presented, probably for the first time in writing, a crude account of the specialization and division of labor. On a non-theoretical level, the ancient Egyptians used the techniques of specialization, particularly in the era of the Eighteenth Dynasty, in order to save time and to produce more work per hour. Following Plato, Aristotle proposed a definition of economics and considered the use of money in his analysis of exchange. His example of the use of a shoe for wear and for its use in exchange was later presented by Adam Smith as the value in use and the value in exchange. Another aspect of economic thought before Ibn Khaldun was that of the Scholastics and of the Canonites, who proposed placing economics within the framework of laws based on religious and moral perceptions for the good of all human beings. Therefore all economic activities were to be undertaken in accordance with such laws.

Ibn Khaldun was cognizant of these ideas, including the one relating to religious and moral perceptions. The relationship between moral and religious principles on one hand and good government on the other is effectively expounded in his citation and discussion of Tahir Ibn al-Husayn's (A.D. 775-822) famous letter to his son 'Abdallah, who ruled Khurasan with his descendants until A.D. 872. From the rudimentary thoughts of Tahir he developed a theory of taxation which has affected modern economic thought and even economic policies in the United States and elsewhere.

This paper attempts to give Ibn Khaldun his forgotten and long overdue credit and to place him properly within the history of economic thought. He was preceded by a variety of economic but elemental ideas to which he gave substance and depth. Centuries later these same ideas were developed by the Mercantilists, the commercial capitalists of the seventeenth century-Sir William Petty (A.D. 1623-1687), Adam Smith (A.D. 1723-1790), David Ricardo (A.D. 1772-1823), Thomas R. Malthus (A.D. 1766-1834), Karl Marx (A.D. 1818-1883), and John Maynard Keynes (A.D. 1883-1946), to name only a few-and finally by contemporary economic theorists.

Labor Theory of Value, Economics of Labor, Labor as the Source of Growth and Capital Accumulation

With the exception of Joseph A. Schumpeter, who discovered Ibn Khaldun's writings only a few months before his death, Joseph J. Spengler, and Charles Issawi, major Western economists trace the theory of value to Adam Smith and David Ricardo because they attempted to find a reasonable explanation for the paradox of value. According to Adam Smith and as further developed by David Ricardo, the exchange value of objects is to be equal to the labor time used in its production. On the basis of this concept, Karl Marx concluded that "wages of labour must equal the production of labour" and introduced his revolutionary term surplus value signifying the unjustifiable reward given to capitalists, who exploit the efforts of the labor class, or the proletariat. Yet it was Ibn Khaldun, a believer in the free market economy, who first introduced the labor theory of value without the extensions of Karl Marx.

According to Ibn Khaldun, labor is the source of value. He gave a detailed account of his labor theory of value, presenting it for the first time in history. It is worth noting that Ibn Khaldun never called it a "theory," but had skillfully presented it (in volume 2 of Rosenthal translation) in his analysis of labor and its efforts. Ibn Khaldun's contribution was later picked up by David Hume in his Political Discourses, published in 1752: "Everything in the world is purchased by labour."7 This quotation was even used by Adam Smith as a footnote. "What is bought with money or with goods is purchased by labour, as much as what we acquire by the toil of our body. That money or those goods indeed save us this toil. They contain the value of a certain quantity of labour which we exchange for what is supposed at the time to contain the value of an equal quantity. The value of any commodity, therefore, to the person who possesses it, and who means not to use or consume it himself, but to exchange it for other commodities, is equal to the quantity of labour which it enables him to purchase or command. Labour, therefore, is the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities." If this passage which was published in A.D. 1776 in Adam Smith's major work, is carefully analyzed, one can find its seeds in Ibn Khaldun's Prolegomena (The Muqaddimah). According to Ibn Khaldun, labor is the source of value. It is necessary for all earnings and capital accumulation. This is obvious in the case of craft. Even if earning "results from something other than a craft, the value of the resulting profit and acquired (capital) must (also) include the value of the labor by which it was obtained. Without labor, it would not have been acquired."

Ibn Khaldun divided all earnings into two categories, ribh (gross earning) and kasb (earning a living). Ribh is earned when a man works for himself and sells his objects to others; here the value must include the cost of raw material and natural resources. Kasb is earned when a man works for himself. Most translators of Ibn Khaldun have made a common mistake in their understanding of ribh. Ribh may either mean a profit or a gross earning, depending upon the context. In this instance, ribh means gross earning because the cost of raw material and natural resources are included in the sale price of an object.

Whether ribh or kasb, all earnings are value realized from human labor, that is, obtained through human effort. Even though the value of objects includes the cost of other inputs of raw material and natural resources, it is through labor and its efforts that value increases and wealth expands, according to Ibn Khaldun. With less human effort, a reversal to an opposite direction may occur. Ibn Khaldun placed a great emphasis on the role of "extra effort," which later became known as "marginal productivity," in the prosperity of a society. His labor effort theory gave a reason for the rise of cities, which, as his insightful analysis of history indicated, were the focal points of civilizations.

Whereas labor may be interpreted from Ibn Khaldun's ideas as both necessary and sufficient conditions for earnings and profit, natural resources are only necessary. Labor and its effort lead to production, which is in turn used for an exchange through barter or through the use of money, that is, gold and silver. The process therefore creates incomes and profits which a man derives from a craft as the value of his labor after having deducted the cost of raw material. Long before David Ricardo published his significant contribution to the field of economics in 1817, The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, Ibn Khaldun gave the original explanation for the reasons behind the differences in labor earnings. They may be attributed to differences in skills, size of markets, location, craftsmanship or occupation, and the extent to which the ruler and his governors purchase the final product. As a certain type of labor becomes more precious, that is, if the demand for it exceeds its available supply, its earnings must rise.

High earnings in one craft attract others to it, a dynamic phenomenon which will eventually lead to an increase in its available supply and consequently lower profits. This principle explains Ibn Khaldun's original and insightful analysis of long-term adjustments within occupations and between one occupation and another. However, this point of view was attacked by John Maynard Keynes in his famous statement that in the long run we are all dead. Nevertheless, Ibn Khaldun's analysis has not only proved to be historically correct but has also constituted the core thinking of classical economists.

Ibn Khaldun succinctly observed, explained, and analyzed how earnings in one place may be different from another, even for the same profession. Earnings of judges, craftsmen, and even beggars, for example, are directly related to each town's degree of affluence and standard of living, which in themselves are to be achieved through the fruits of labor and the crystallization of productive communities. Adam Smith explained differences in labor earnings by comparing them in England and in Bengal along the same lines of reasoning given by Ibn Khaldun four centuries earlier as he compared earnings in Fez with those of Tlemcen. It was Ibn Khaldun, not Adam Smith, who first presented the contribution of labor as a means of building up the wealth of a nation, stating that labor effort, increase in productivity, and exchange of products in large markets are the main reasons behind a country's wealth and prosperity. Inversely, a decline in productivity could lead to the deterioration of an economy and the earnings of its people. "A large civilization yields large profits [earnings] because of' the large amount of [available] labor which is the cause of [profit]."

It was also Ibn Khaldun, long before Adam Smith, who made a strong case for a free economy and for freedom of choice.

Among the most oppressive measures, and the ones most deeply harming society, is the compelling of subjects to perform forced work unjustly. For labour is a commodity, as we shall show later, in as much as incomes and profits represent value of labour of their recipients...nay most men have no source of income other than their labour. If, therefore, they should be forced to do work other than that for which they have been trained, or made to do forced work in their own occupation, they would lose the fruit of their labour and be deprived of the greater part, nay of the whole, of their income.

To maximize both earnings and levels of satisfaction, a man should be free to perform whatever his gifted talents and skilled abilities dictate. Through natural talents and acquired skills, man can freely produce objects of' high quality, and, often, more units of labor per hour.

Demand, Supply, Prices, and Profits

In addition to his original contribution to the economics of labor, Ibn Khaldun introduced and ingeniously analyzed the interplay of several tools of economic analysis; such is demand, supply, prices, and profits.

Demand for an object is based on the utility of acquiring it and not necessarily the need for it. Utility is therefore the motive force behind demand. It creates the incentives for consumer spending in the marketplace. Ibn Khaldun had therefore planted the first seed of modern demand theory, which since been developed and expanded by Thomas Robert Malthus, Alfred Marshall, John Hicks, and others. As a commodity in demand attracts increased consumer spending, both the price and the quantity sold are increased. Similarly, if the demand for certain crafts decreases, its sales fall and consequently its price is reduced.

Demand for a certain commodity also depends upon the extent to which it will be purchased by the state. The king and his ruling class purchase much larger quantities than any single private individual is capable of purchasing. A craft flourishes when the state buys its product. With his ingenious analytical mind, Ibn Khaldun had further discovered the concept known in modern economic literature as "derived demand." "Crafts improve and increase when the demand for their products increases." Demand for a craftsman is therefore derived from the demand for his product in the marketplace.

As is commonly known, modern price theory states that cost is the backbone of supply theory. It was Ibn Khaldun who first examined analytically the role of the cost of production on supply and prices. In observing the differences between the prices of foodstuffs produced in fertile land and of that produced in poor soils, he traced them mainly to the disparity in the cost of production.

[In] the coastal and hilly regions, whose soil is unfit for agriculture, (inhabitants) were forced to apply themselves to improving the conditions of those fields and plantations. This they did by applying valuable work and manure and other costly materials. All this raised the cost of agricultural production, which costs they took into account when fixing their price for selling. And ever since that time Andalusia has been noted for its high prices ....The position is just the reverse in the land of the Berbers. Their land is so rich and fertile that they do not have to incur any expenses in agriculture; hence in that country foodstuffs are cheap.

Besides individual and state demand and cost of production, Ibn Khaldun introduced other factors which affect the price of goods or services, namely, the degree of affluence and the prosperity of districts, the degree of concentration of the wealthy, and the degree of customs duties being levied on middlemen and traders. The direct functional relationship between income and consumption as presented by Ibn Khaldun paved the road to the theory of consumption function as a cornerstone of Keynesian economics.

Ibn Khaldun also made an original contribution in his concept of profits. In economic literature, a theory of profit as a reward for undertaking risk in a future of uncertainties is generally attributed to Frank Knight, who published his ideas in 1921. There is no doubt that Frank Knight substantially advanced a well-established theory of profit. Nevertheless, it was Ibn Khaldun, not Frank Knight, who originally planted the seed of this theory: "Commerce means the buying of merchandise and goods, storing them, and waiting until fluctuation of the market brings about an increase in the prices of (these goods). This is called profit (ribh)." In another context, Ibn Khaldun stated again the same idea: "Intelligent and experienced people in the cities know that it is inauspicious to hoard grain and to wait for high prices, and that the profit (expected) may be spoiled or lost through (hoarding)." Profit is therefore a reward for undertaking a risk. In the face of future uncertainties, a risk-bearer may very well lose instead of gain. Similarly, profits or losses may accrue as a result of speculation which is carried out by profit-seekers in the marketplace. To maximize profits, Ibn Khaldun introduced a gospel for traders, "Buy cheap and sell dear," which has been widely quoted ever since. In his translation of the Muqaddimah of Ibn Khaldun, Franz Rosenthal stated in a footnote, "In 1952 a book by Frank V. Fischer appeared, entitled Buy LowSell High: Guidance for the General Reader in Sound Investment Methods and Wise Trade Techniques."

If Ibn Khaldun's gospel is applied to cost analysis, it becomes obvious that profit may be increased, even for a given price of a final product, when one reduces the cost of raw material and other inputs used in production by buying them at a discount or, in general, at a low price even from distant markets, as he indicated in his account of benefits of foreign trade. Nevertheless, Ibn Khaldun concluded that both excessively low prices and excessively high prices are disruptive to markets. It is therefore advisable that states not hold prices artificially low through subsidies or other methods of market intervention. Such policies are economically disastrous because the low-priced goods will disappear from the market and there will be no incentive for suppliers to produce and sell whenever their profits are adversely affected. Ibn Khaldun also concluded that excessively high prices will not be compatible with market expansion. As the high-priced goods sell less in the market, the policy of excessively high pricing becomes counterproductive and disrupts the flow of goods in markets. Ibn Khaldun had thus laid down the foundations of ideas which later led to the formulation of disequilibrium analysis. He also cited several factors affecting the upward general price level, such as increase in demand, restrictions of supply, and increase in the cost of production, which includes a sales tax as one of the components of a total cost. After his analysis of what stimulates overall demand in it growing economy, Ibn Khaldun stated the following:

Because of the demand for (luxury articles), they become customary, and thus come to be necessities. In addition, all labor becomes precious in the city, and the conveniences become expensive, because there are many purposes for which then, are in demand in view of the prevailing luxury and because the government makes levies on market and business transactions. This is reflected in the sales prices. Conveniences, foodstuffs, and labor thus become very expensive. As a result, the expenditures of the inhabitants increase tremendously in proportion to the civilization of (the city). A great deal of money is spent. Under these circumstances, (people) need a great deal of money for expenditures, to procure the necessities of life for themselves and their families, as well as all other requirements.

As to the impact of restricted supply on the price level, Ibn Khaldun summed it up thus: "When goods are few and rare, their prices go up."

By carefully reading the above two passages, it becomes obvious that Ibn Khaldun discovered what is now known as cost-push and demand-pull causes of inflationary pressures. In fact, he was the first philosopher in history who systematically identified factors affecting either the price of a good or the general price level.

Macroeconomics, Growth, Taxes, Role of Governments, and Money

In macroeconomics, Ibn Khaldun laid the foundations of what John Maynard Keynes called "aggregate effective demand," the multiplier effect and the equality of income and expenditure.25 When there is more total demand as population increases, there is more production, profits, customs, and taxes. The upward cycle of growth continues as civilization flourishes and a new wave of total demand is created for the crafts and luxury products. "The value realized from them increases, and, as a result, profits are again multiplied in the town. Production there is thriving even more than before. And so it goes with the second and third increase." People's "wealth, therefore, increases and their riches grow, the customs and ways of luxury multiply, and all the various kinds of crafts are firmly established among them." The concept of the multiplier was later developed and expanded by several economists, in particular by John Maynard Keynes. However, it was discovered for the first time in history by Ibn Khaldun.

Modern national income accounts were also developed and expanded using the equality of income and expenditures. Expenditures of one citizen are income to others; therefore total expenditures are equal to total incomes. This equality was first discovered by Ibn Khaldun. In fact, he used both terms as synonymous to one another after having established the equality between them. "Income and expenditure balance each other in every city. If the income is large, the expenditure is large, and vice versa. And if both income and expenditure are large, the inhabitants become more favourably situated, and the city grows."

Ibn Khaldun introduced the pioneering theory of growth based on capital accumulation through man's efforts.

(Man) obtains (some profits) through no efforts of his own, as, for instance, through rain that makes the fields thrive, and similar things. However, these things are only contributory. His own efforts must be combined with them, as will be mentioned. (His) profits will constitute his livelihood, if they correspond to his necessities and needs. They will be capital accumulation it they are greater than (his needs)."

Ibn Khaldun gave his account of the stages of economic development, from nomadic to agricultural to more "cooperation in economic matters" which occur through an expansion of a town to a city, where demand increases and skilled labor congregates and expands production both ill quantity and in "refinement." Economic growth continues so long as there is an extra effort which creates capital accumulation, which in turn, combined with effort, leads to more production and the development of crafts in the cities. As was presented earlier, wealth expands through labor and its efforts, whereas with less human effort there may occur a reversal to stagnation, followed by a downward trend in people's standard of living.

Governments play an important role in growth and in the country's economy in general through their purchases of goods and services and through their fiscal policy of taxation and expenditures. Governments may also provide an environment of incentives for work and prosperity or, inversely, a system of oppression which is ultimately self-defeating. Even though Ibn Khaldun regards governments as inefficient, "not so much calculation" is carried out by them of what is contemporarily known as cost and benefit; they still play an important role in the country's economy through their big purchases. Government expenditures stimulate the economy by increasing incomes, which are further hiked through a multiplier effect. However, if the king hoards the amount he collects in taxes, business slackens and the economic activities of the state are adversely affected through the multiplier effect. In addition to its welfare program for the poor, the widows, the orphans, and the blind, provided there is no overburden for the treasury, the government should spend its tax revenue wisely to improve conditions of its "subjects, to safeguard their rights and to preserve them from harm."

Ibn Khaldun was the first major contributor to tax theory in history. He is the philosopher who shaped the minds of several rulers throughout history. More recently his impact was evident on John F. Kennedy and later on Ronald Reagan. "Our true choice is not between tax reduction on the one hand and avoidance of large federal deficits on the other. An economy stilled by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenue to balance the budget, just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits." John F. Kennedy said that back in 1962, when he was asking for a tax decrease, a cut in tax rates across the board. But when John Kennedy said those words, he was echoing the words of Ibn Khaldun, a Muslim philosopher back in the fourteenth century, who said the following: "At the beginning of the dynasty taxation yields large revenues from small assessments. At the end of the dynasty taxation yields small revenue from large assessments….This is why we had to have the tax program as well as the budget cuts, because budget cuts, yes, would reduce government spending."

According to Ibn Khaldun, tax revenues of the ruling dynasty increase because of business prosperity, which flourishes with easy, not excessive taxes. He was therefore the first in history to lay the foundation of a theory for the optimum rate of taxation, a theory which has even affected contemporary leading advocates of supply-side economics such as Arthur Laffer and others. The well-known Laffer curve is nothing but a graphical presentation of the theory of taxation developed by Ibn Khaldun in the fourteenth century.

"When tax assessments and imposts upon the subjects are low, the latter have the energy and desire to do things. Cultural enterprises grow and increase, because the low taxes bring satisfaction. When cultural enterprises grow, the number of individual imposts and assessments mount. In consequence, the tax revenue, which is the sum total of the individual assessments, increases"; whereas with large tax assessments, incomes and profits are adversely affected, resulting, in the final analysis, in a decline in tax revenue. Ibn Khaldun made a strong case against any government attempt to confiscate or otherwise affect private property. Governments' arbitrary interferences in man's property result in loss of incentives, which could eventually lead to a weakening of the state. Expropriation is self-defeating for any government because it is a form of oppression, and oppression ruins society.

In macroeconomics Ibn Khaldun also contributed to the theory of money. According to him, money is not a real form of wealth but a vehicle through which it can be acquired. He was the first to present the major functions of money as a measure of value, a store of value and a "numeraire." "The two mineral 'stones,' gold and silver as the (measure of) value for all capital accumulations ... [are] considered treasure and property. Even if under certain circumstances, other things are acquired, it only for the purpose of ultimately obtaining [them]. All other things are subject to market fluctuations from which (gold and silver) are exempt. They are the basis of profit, property and treasure." The real form of wealth is not money, however; wealth is rather created or otherwise transformed through labor in the form of capital accumulation in real terms. It was, therefore, Ibn Khaldun who first distinguished between money and real wealth, even though he realized that the latter may he acquired by the former. Yet money plays a much more efficient role than barter in business transactions in a society where man exchanges the fruits of his labor, whether in the form of goods or of services, with another to satisfy the needs which he cannot fulfill alone on his own. Money also facilitates the flow of goods from one market to another, even across the border of countries.

Foreign Trade

Ibn Khaldun also contributed to the field of international economics. Through his perceptive observations and his analytical mind, he undoubtedly shed light on the advantages of trade among nations. Through foreign trade, according to Ibn Khaldun, people's satisfaction, merchants' profits, and countries' wealth are all increased.

The merchant who knows his business will travel only with such goods as are generally needed by rich and poor, rulers and commoners alike. (General need) makes for a large demand for his goods...it is more advantageous and more profitable for the merchants' enterprise... (that he will be able to take advantage of) market fluctuations, if he brings goods from a country that is far away...merchandise becomes more valuable when merchants transport it from one country to another.

The italicized word, valuable, indicates Ibn Khaldun's perception of the gains of trade. If a good becomes more valuable by being transported from country A to country B and still sells at a profit in B after the cost of transportation and all other costs are taken into account, then it is (1) cheaper than the same good produced internally, (2) of better quality, or (3) a totally new product. If the foreign good is cheaper than that produced internally, foreign trade will serve to economize labor and other resources by having them diverted from the high-cost good which cannot face competition to other low-cost products. The resources which are saved from this process of diversion may be used to produce other goods or may add another layer of capital accumulation. Foreign trade may therefore contribute positively to the country's level of income as well as to its level of growth and prosperity. If the foreign good is of a better quality than that produced internally, the imported good will add to the level of satisfaction of those who purchase it. In the meantime, internal producers facing the competitive high-quality product must attempt to improve their production or accept a reduction in their sales and revenues. There will be a welfare gain in either case: a rise in the quality of internal products or a diversion of resources from the production of a high-cost good to a low-cost good, as in the first case. In the last case, when the imported good is a totally new product, the welfare gain from foreign trade may be expressed in terms of an increase in the level of satisfaction of those who purchase it or in terms of an increase in quantity or quality of production of other goods if the imported item is a new tool or a modification of an existing one. Furthermore, an introduction of a totally new product through foreign trade may attract internal producers, if it is feasible, to produce it once they are capable to compete with the foreign product.

Ibn Khaldun was conscious of what was later termed the "opportunity cost." Applying valuable labor to improving poor soils means that the labor could have been better used in the production of other goods. Resources in general should be put to the best possible use. Otherwise there will be a cost which will surface in a loss in value. Foreign trade provides further incentives in the attempts to optimize the use of labor and other natural resources.

Ibn Khaldun's originality in his perceptive observations and analysis of foreign trade deserves proper recognition in the field of international economics. The subject of gains from trade has been substantially developed and expanded, in particular, since the publication of Political Discourses by David Hume in 1752. But the first original seed of the subject was planted by Ibn Khaldun four centuries earlier.

Ibn Khaldun and Adam Smith

In spite of Ibn Khaldun's overall contribution to the field of economics, it is Adam Smith who has been widely called the "father of economics." Schumpeter's view of Smith's economics is more critical than admiring. "Personally, I do not share such a view, for I still consider Adam Smith one of the great philosophers who has significantly contributed to the field of economics even by having been a mere collector of previous economic thoughts. He eloquently presented these ideas in detail in an excellent new form and style. Nevertheless, by comparison, Ibn Khaldun was far more original than Adam Smith, in spite of the fact that the former had also restructured and built upon foundations laid down before him, such as Plato's account of specialization, Aristotle's analysis of money, and Tahir Ibn al-Husayn's treatment of government's role. Still, it was Ibn Khaldun who founded the original ideas in numerous areas of economic thought.

Despite Ibn Khaldun's contributions, some economic ideas as well as some economic philosophy of the freedom of choice, as presented above, were later attributed to Adam Smith without giving due credit to the original thinker Ibn Khaldun. "Smith's great economic treatise contains both his 'preaching' of the 'gospel' of economic liberalism, i.e., economic freedom for all individuals."39 Since there is such a striking similarity in the economic thought of Ibn Khaldun and of Adam Smith, it must be left to the economic historian to ascertain direct or indirect links between these two great thinkers who were four centuries apart. However, I would like to suggest some possible and likely points of contact. Even though Adam Smith did not explicitly refer to Ibn Khaldun's contributions, it may well be argued that there were several channels through which he may have encountered the latter's pioneering and original economic thought.

Adam Smith graduated from Glasgow University, where he was influenced by his teacher Francis Hutcheson, who was in turn affected by Antony Ashley Cooper, known as Lord Shaftesbury in the late seventeenth century and early eighteenth century, and other philosophers who were concerned with "liberal enlightenment," all of whom may have been directly or indirectly affected by Ibn Khaldun's thought. After his graduation, Adam Smith devoted six years to research at Oxford University's library, where he may have been exposed to Ibn Khaldun's contributions even without having been aware of the author's name. It was not uncommon in early times that ideas were circulated, discussed, and delivered from one generation to another without the name of an author. Furthermore, ever since the Crusades, which lasted from the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries, most Western philosophers attempted to discount the impact of Muslim scholars through a multiplicity of approaches, which included using Muslim ideas without mentioning the name of a Muslim author. The protracted war waged by the Crusaders to capture the Holy Land from the Muslims created a strong antagonistic feeling, well embedded in the Western mind, from which Western scholars were not immune and which lasted for centuries, probably until modern times. Another possible channel through which Adam Smith may have been directly or indirectly exposed to Ibn Khaldun's economic thought was through his tour of Europe. During this tour he encountered Quesnsay, other Physiocrats in Paris, and other European intellectuals who may have been influenced by Ibn Khaldun in one way or another.

Adam Smith could also have been exposed to the economic contributions of Ibn Khaldun through the dominant influence of the Ottoman Empire. Ever since the Ottoman Empire rose in the fourteenth century-and vastly extended its boundaries at its peak in the sixteenth century to include much of southeast Europe, southwest Asia, and northern Africa-a new bridge was erected linking intellectuals in the Continent with their counterparts in the vast territories of the empire, of which Egypt became a part in 1517. It was in Egypt that Ibn Khaldun spent the latter part of his life revising manuscripts of his works which he had originally completed in Tunis in November of 1377. His thoughts were then transmitted from one generation to another, from one century to another, and from one country to another. Influenced by Ibn Khaldun's idea that craftsmen and industrialists play a significant role in a country's growth, prosperity, and power, Sultan Selim 1, after having successfully extended his domain of influence over Egypt in 1517, took back with him from Cairo to Constantinople the best-known artisans at that time. In modern terminology, this was a case of a "transfer of technology."

The impact of Ibn Khaldun was extensive and profound, not only in the minds of some rulers and statesmen, but also among intellectuals and educators long before his books were even translated into other languages, In response to great interest in his works, his books were finally translated to the Turkish language in 1730, exactly forty-six years before the publication of Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations.

Concluding Remarks

Even if Adam Smith was not directly exposed to Ibn Khaldun's economic thoughts, the fact remains that they were the original seeds of classical economics and even modern economic theory. Ibn Khaldun had not only been well established as the father of the field of sociology, but he had also been well recognized in the field of history, as the following passage from Arnold Toynbee indicates:

In his chosen field of intellectual activity [Ibn Khaldun] appears to have been inspired by no predecessors ... and yet, in the Prolegomena ... to his Universal History he has conceived and formulated a philosophy of history which is undoubtedly the greatest work of its kind that has yet been created by any mind in any time or place.

Through his great sense and knowledge of history, together with his microscopic observations of men, times, and places, Ibn Khaldun used an insightful empirical investigation to analyze and produce original economic thought. He left a wealth of contributions for the first time in history in the field of economics. He clearly demonstrated breadth and depth in his coverage of value and its relationship to labor; his analysis of his theory of capital accumulation and its relationship to the rise and fall of dynasties; his perceptions of the dynamics of demand, supply, prices, and profits; his treatment of the subjects of money and the role of governments; his remarkable theory of taxation, and other economic subjects. His unprecedented contributions to the overall field of economics should make him, Ibn Khaldun, the father of economics.

(Dr. Ibrahim M. Oweiss/Islamic World.net)