Court upholds death penalty of Aasia Bibi

LAHORE: A court on Thursday upheld the death sentence of a Christian women convicted of blasphemy four years ago, as her lawyers vowed to appeal.

Aasia Bibi, a mother of five, has been on death row since November 2010 after she was found guilty of allegedly making derogatory remarks about Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) during an argument with a Muslim woman.

“A two-judge bench of the Lahore High Court dismissed the appeal of Asia Bibi but we will file an appeal in the Supreme Court of Pakistan,” her lawyer Shakir Chaudhry told AFP.

Two high-profile politicians — then Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer and minorities minister Shahbaz Bhatti — were murdered in 2011 after calling for reforms to the blasphemy law and describing Bibi’s trial as flawed.

The blasphemy allegations against Bibi date back to June 2009.

She was working in a field when she was asked to fetch water. Muslim women labourers objected, saying that as a non-Muslim she was unfit to touch the water bowl.

A few days later the women went to a local cleric and put forward the blasphemy allegations.

Over a dozen religious clerics — including Qari Saleem who brought forward the initial complaint against Bibi — were present at the court on Thursday.

“We will soon distribute sweets among our Muslim brothers for today’s verdict, it’s a victory of Islam,” Saleem told AFP outside the courtroom as the clerics congratulated each other and chanted religious slogans.

Last month a prison guard at the Adiala jail in Rawalpindi shot and wounded a 70-year-old Scottish man with a history of mental illness who is on death row for blasphemy.

The jail also houses Mumtaz Qadri, the former bodyguard of governor Taseer who gunned him down in an Islamabad market place.

Blasphemy carries the death penalty, though Pakistan has had a de facto moratorium on civilian hangings since 2008. Only one person has been executed since then, a soldier convicted by a court martial and hanged in November 2012.

Religious court on collision course with civil court over Kassim Ahmad’s case

A shariah court is insisting on proceeding with activist Dr Kassim Ahmad's case despite an ongoing judicial review, his lawyer said today.

Counsel Rosli Dahlan said the court wanted the trial to begin on October 20, where Kassim had been alleged to have insulted Islam and defied the religious authorities.

Rosli said he was informed by a religious court official in Putrajaya yesterday and that the case would go on as fixed because the Federal Territories shariah chief prosecutor Ibrahim Deris and the Federal Territories Islamic Religious Department (Jawi) were not agreeable to an adjournment.

"The irony is that Ibrahim and Jawi are parties to the judicial review filed by my client. I am dumbfounded why the religious court wants the matter to go on, based on the insistence of interested parties," he told The Malaysian Insider.

On July 24, the Court of Appeal ruled that the High Court has the jurisdiction to hear Kassim's judicial review application to challenge the shariah prosecutor’s decision to charge him with insulting Islam.

The High Court has fixed November 17 to hear the judicial review application.

Rosli said following the Court of Appeal's ruling, religious authorities and the government had asked for some time to file their court papers before the High Court could hear the merit of the case.

"We have no problem with that but we are not deliberately delaying the proceedings because we need to obtain the decision of the civil court first.”

Rosli said he may file an application to stop the Monday's proceedings in the religious court.

A three-man Court of Appeal bench, chaired by Datuk Balia Yusof Wahi, in allowing Kassim's appeal, had said the conduct of (the Federal Territories shariah chief prosecutor) Ibrahim and Jawi could be scrutinised.

On July 14, judge Datuk Zaleha Yusof allowed the Attorney-General’s preliminary objection against the judicial review, citing that the subject matter was within the exclusive jurisdiction of the religious court.

However, Balia said a shariah criminal matter did not come within the meaning under the Federal Constitution.

"Shariah offence is only an offence against the precept of Islam," he had said, adding that the bench was bound by a 1988 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Mamat Daud vs public prosecutor.

The bench chaired by the then Lord President Tun Salleh Abas said all offences created under state shariah enactments were for violation against precepts of Islam.

The offences include consumption of alcohol, eating and drinking in public during day time in the fasting month, and going against a fatwa by religious authorities.

"It is not a criminal matter and therefore subject to judicial review," Balia added.

Kassim, 81, had filed a leave application for judicial review on June 26 and had named Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, Ibrahim, Jawi and the government as respondents.

He is seeking, among others, an order to strike out Ibrahim's decision on March 27 to prosecute him for allegedly insulting Islam and defying the religious authorities.

He wanted his case in the Shariah Court to be suspended, pending the decision of the judicial review.

Kassim also wanted all actions and decisions by Jawi enforcement officers who raided and seized his publication materials, as well as detaining him from Kedah to the Federal Territories, to be revoked.

He sought a declaration that the action by the Jawi officers and the prosecution against him was ultra vires and contravened the provisions in the Federal Constitution, Federal Territories Shariah Acts and Kedah Shariah Enactments.

Kassim also sought a declaration that the offence of violating a fatwa (edict) issued in the Federal Territories only applied to Muslims in that locality. – October 16, 2014.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/religious-court-on-collision-course-with-civil-court-over-kassim-ahmads-cas#sthash.tLkTN9UK.dpuf

Path to leave Islam simple, but far from easy

KUALA LUMPUR, July 12 — An Indian woman whose Hindu wedding was recently disrupted by Selangor Islamic officials insisting she is Muslim despite her efforts to leave Islam has again put the spotlight on the difficulties in exiting the religion.

Like many Malaysians who dispute their official identities as Muslims, she was told to go to the Shariah courts in order to remove the status from her official documents.

Despite being the standard response in such instances, little is known of the procedure and potential dangers — detention, fines, jail, whipping and even a theoretical death sentence — that one might face in such applications.

In a recent interview with The Malay Mail Online, the Department of Syariah Judiciary Malaysia (JKSM) said that the Islamic courts are the only place according to current laws for Malaysians seeking to be no longer known as a Muslim.

Non-Muslim or apostate?

Explaining the process for a switch in religious status, JKSM identified two types of applications at the Shariah courts, namely to renounce Islam or for a declaration that one is no longer Muslim.

The first involves practising Muslims regardless of ethnicity who want to renounce Islam and convert to other faiths; the JKSM said it could not find any such application in its official records, however.

For the second type of application, JKSM further carves up

applicants into three categories. The first subgroup are those mistakenly listed as Muslims because of naming conventions, typically involving residents of Sabah and Sarawak.

Another group covers those who embraced Islam but now wish to revert to being non-Muslims, which includes applicants who had converted when marrying a Muslim but want out of the religion after the marriage fails.

The last includes non-practising Muslims who want to be recognised as non-Muslims, with this third group cutting across ethnicity; this includes those who were born as Muslims and “by virtue of the documents are Muslims, but never practise the religion of Islam”, it said.

Children from an initial non-Muslim marriage who were unilaterally converted by one of the parents who had converted to Islam also fall within this third group. They may apply personally to be recognised as non-Muslims once they are 18 years old.

According to Muslim non-governmental organisation Sisters in Islam, Islamic Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Jamil Khir had in 2011 said that the Shariah Courts had only approved a total of 135 out of 686 applications by Muslims seeking to change their religious status for the 2000-2010 period.

Two classes of applications but one route for both

According to JKSM, the procedure for anyone who wishes to renounce Islam or declare a change in religious status is the same, regardless of which category they fall under.

In a typical application by way of summons, the state religious council and department — who are interested parties as keepers of the record of conversions — will have to answer the case in the Shariah court as defendants.

Usually, the defendants will file a response stating the reasons why they object to the application, and apply to the Shariah Court to send the applicant for counselling sessions that typically last in most states for a maximum of six months.

“The plaintiff will be sent to a committee to reconcile, to persuade him or her to remain in the religion,” JKSM said, noting that Negri Sembilan is the only state with laws on the procedure to renounce Islam.

The Administration of the Religion of Islam (Negri Sembilan) Enactment 2003 states that counselling sessions should not exceed 90 days, but also allows the Shariah court to order a further counselling session not exceeding a year if it believed “there is still hope that the person may repent”.

The reconciliation committee will submit a report to the Shariah court, with a repentant applicant then resulting in the case being either struck out by the courts or being withdrawn on the request of the state religious council or the applicant himself, JKSM said.

But if counselling is unsuccessful, the court will hear evidence from both sides before deciding whether to allow or dismiss the application.

There is “no penalty” and no mandatory counselling session if the Shariah court rejects the application, while applicants also have the right to appeal, JKSM said.

Attempted apostasy: A Catch-22 scenario?

Successful applicants may find their victory in the courts bittersweet.

According to JKSM, five states in Malaysia have laws that prohibit apostasy or attempted apostasy.

For Sabah and Kelantan, those found guilty of attempted apostasy will be detained in Islamic Rehabilitation Centres until they repent or for up to 36 months, while those in Malacca would face up to six months of detention in such centres.

Those convicted of apostasy in Perak may be fined up to RM3,000, jailed for as long as two years or both; in Pahang, this is RM5,000 or three years along with as many as six lashes of the cane or a combination of any of these three penalties.

According to SIS, Kelantan technically has a death penalty for apostasy, but this falls under the 1993 hudud penal code that it cannot yet enforce due to conflicts with federal law.

Under Terengganu’s 2002 Islamic criminal laws which it also cannot enforce now, any Muslim who fails to repent within three days upon conviction of apostasy will also be sentenced to death, SIS said.

JKSM said the Syarie chief prosecutor has the “absolute right according to the law” to initiate criminal proceedings for apostasy or attempted apostasy against those who seek the Shariah court’s declaration of change of religious status.

But it also said it had no records of the states’ Syarie chief prosecutor doing so.

“Of course it is quite an anomaly if you give an opportunity for a person to file an application which is tantamount to ‘percubaan murtad’ (attempted apostasy), and at the same time you make it as an offence. That is the reason, because of that contradiction, so far we have not come across,” JKSM said.

Why no Malay Muslims applicants?

Having laid out the steps to leave Islam, however, the JKSM said that its records showed that no Malay Muslims have ever applied to change their religious status, acknowledging that this may be due to the constitutional definition of a Malay as Muslim, among other things.

“It could be one of the reasons. The landmark case of Lina Joy — in that case the Federal Court has confirmed the interpretation, the stand taken by Datuk Faiza Thamby Chik who was the presiding High Court judge where he interpreted Islam or Malay and the religion of Islam as two integral parts, that means if you were to be known as a Malay, you have to be a Muslim at the same time,” JKSM said.

Born Azlina Jailani, the Malay Muslim who converted to Christianity and later sought official recognition as Lina Joy would have been the first of her kind to apply at the Shariah courts for a declaration of her religious status.

But after failing to get her religious status in her identity card changed, she did not file an application at the Shariah courts and is believed to have fled the country.

State religious body rules Kassim Ahmad expressed ‘apostate’ thoughts

(Bernama) – The Terengganu Fatwa Committee has unanimously ruled that the statements made by social activist Kassim Ahmad (pic) at a seminar in February as “kufur” (disbelief) and apostate thoughts.

State Islamic Affairs Commissioner Datuk Mohd Rozali Salleh said the decision was made at a special meeting of the committee on March 9.

Such thoughts were deviant and a threat to public order and damaging to Islam, as there were elements of irregularities like disputing the “syahadah”, hadis, Islamic rules, women’s hair as aurat, the selawat, and condoning apostasy, Rozali told a news conference in Kuala Terengganu today.

Kassim was alleged to have uttered statements at “The Thoughts of Kassim Ahmad: A Review” Seminar organised by the Perdana Leadership Foundation on February 6.

He reportedly accused religious scholars of controlling Islam through a “priesthood caste” system, questioned the use of the hadis (Prophet’s sayings and actions) to explain Quranic teachings, and said it was wrong for Muslims to beatify the Prophet as “he was just a messenger of Allah”.

He also questioned the wearing of headscarf by Muslim women, saying “the hair is not part of the aurat” (parts of the body which need to be covered) in his lecture.

Rozali said the committee banned publication, broadcasting and dissemination of any books, pamphlets, films, videos and anything relating to the anti-hadis belief while Muslims were forbidden from possessing, printing, selling or distributing the material.

The meeting also agreed that the decision against anti-hadis movement to be gazetted as a fatwa and action could be taken against those who defy the ruling.

FOR "CLAIMING TO BE AN APOSTATE,SAYING ALLAH DID NOT EXIST AND RIDICULING PROPHET MOHAMMAD"POLICE REPORT FILED AGAINST FACEBOOK PAGE "APOSTATE IN THE EAST COAST"(MALAYSIA)

Kelab Anak Muda Indera Mahkota (KAMI) today lodged a police report against a Facebook (FB) account, claimed to have insulted Allah, Prophet Muhammad and Islam.

Its chairman Muhammad Faiz Hashim said the FB account, known as "Murtad in Pantai Timur" (Apostate in the East Coast), also claimed to be an apostate and was rude by stating that Allah did not exist and also ridiculed Prophet Muhammad.

"The existence of this account was realised on Feb 17 and its contents tend to insult Islam and Islamic clothing, besides condemning those who cover up.

"KAMI, being against anti-Islamic misdeeds, feels challenged, angered and disturbed by the existence of this FB account as it insults Islam, besides inciting others to be apostates."

Muhammad Faiz, who is also Indera Mahkota Umno Youth chief, said this to reporters after making the report at the Indera Mahkota police station, here.

He said most of status uploaded onto the FB account were provocative in nature towards Muslims and using the East Coast dialect in the postings.

Muhammad Faiz wants the authorities to take immediate action against the offending FB account owner.

READ MORE 

http://www.mysinchew.com/node/95949?tid=4

Saudi Blogger Raif Badawi Sentenced to Death for Apostasy

Saudi blogger Raif Badawi

Raif Badawi is a Saudi blogger, who created the website "Free Saudi Liberals" to encourage open discussion in the Arab world. He was arrested and charged with insulting Islam and apostasy.

In July, Raif was sentenced to seven years in prison and 600 lashes for creating a website deemed offensive to Islam. The apostasy charge, however, had to be handled by a higher court. CNN is reporting that Raif was found guilty by the higher court and has been sentenced to death.

Once again, we see the consequences of pretending that Islam doesn't teach what it obviously teaches. When Rifqa Bary was on trial, politicians, the media, and Muslim organizations assured us that Islam doesn't promote the death penalty for apostasy (in spite of Muhammad's clear commands to kill anyone who leaves Islam). How many bloggers must die before we face the truth?

(CNN) — Raif Badawi, a blogger in Saudi Arabia who has been imprisoned for violating the nation's anti-cybercrime law, has been given the death penalty for apostasy by a higher court, his wife told CNN on Wednesday.

Badawi founded the Free Saudi Liberals website and was originally given a seven-year sentence in July. A Jeddah criminal court found Badawi, who has been in prison since June 2012, guilty of insulting Islam through his website and in television comments.

A district court found him guilty of apostasy, his wife said.

"It is an emotion I cannot describe. I never imagined this would happen," she said. "I thought maybe they would reduce the sentence but this is unimaginable. The whole thing is about a website." (Source)

***UPDATE***

CNN posted a correction to their story this morning. Badawi's wife clarified that he has been recommended for trial for apostasy, which carries the death penalty.

(CNN) — A judge in Saudi Arabia has recommended that imprisoned blogger Raif Badawi go before a high court on a charge of apostasy, which would carry the death penalty upon conviction, according to Badawi's wife.

Ensaf Haidar initially told CNN on Wednesday that her husband had been sentenced to death. She later clarified to CNN that a judge has recommended he be tried for denouncing Islam, or apostasy. Apostasy carries the death penalty in Saudi Arabia, according to Amnesty International.

For a discussion of apostasy in Islam, see this video:

Saudi website editor could face death for apostasy-rights group

(Reuters) - The editor of a Saudi Arabian website could be sentenced to death after a judge cited him for apostasy and moved his case to a higher court, the monitoring group Human Rights Watch said yesterday.

Raif Badawi, who started the Free Saudi Liberals website to discuss the role of religion in Saudi Arabia, was arrested in June, Human Rights Watch said.

Badawi had initially been charged with the less serious offence of insulting Islam through electronic channels, but at a December 17 hearing a judge referred him to a more senior court and recommended he be tried for apostasy, the monitoring group said.

Apostasy, the act of changing religious affiliation, carries an automatic death sentence in Saudi Arabia, along with crimes including blasphemy.

Badawi’s website included articles that were critical of senior religious figures, the monitoring group said.

A spokesman for Saudi Arabia’s Justice Ministry was not available to comment.

The world’s top oil exporter follows the strict Wahhabi school of Islam and applies Islamic law, or sharia.

Judges base their decisions on their own interpretation of religious law rather than on a written legal code or on precedent.

King Abdullah, Saudi Arabia’s ruler, has pushed for reforms to the legal system, including improved training for judges and the introduction of precedent to standardise verdicts and make courts more transparent.

However, Saudi lawyers say that conservatives in the Justice Ministry and the judiciary have resisted implementing many of the changes that he announced in 2007.

Nurul Izzah’s statement in the Kaum Muda-Kaum Tua context

by AB Sulaiman - CPI

The case of Nurul Izzah Anwar, the PKR vice president, making the statement that there is no compulsion in religion and that this should apply not only to non-Malays but to Malays as well is now commanding the public domain.

Thanks to Utusan Malaysia and the Internet, the speed at which Nurul’s statement spread was staggering. The very next day, it appeared as a front-page headline in the Malay daily but with a twist: it was reported that she had been ‘suggesting’ Malays could commit apostasy; or showing the way to do so. (Apostasy is considered the greatest sin in Malay reckoning.)

To the Malay-Muslim, she has committed a grave offence for which she must be taken to task.

I will try to identify what really is at issue by way of asking some pertinent and relevant questions.

Cutting through the confusion

First question: Nurul quoted the Quranic edict that “there is no compulsion in religion”. Is she right? The answer is yes, she is, as in Surah 2.256.

Following question: Did she state that this edict should apply to Malays as well? Her words spoken at the Nov 3 forum held at the Full Gospel Tabernacle church in Subang Jaya, according to the transcript provided by Malaysiakini, were:

“How can anyone really say, ‘sorry, this only applies to non-Malays.’ It has to apply equally.”

Her statement can be understood as meaning that the Article 11 constitutional provision on the freedom of religion must apply for Malays as well. Since nowhere in the Quran does it mention the Malay ethnicity, we should logically infer that Nurul’s remark was a comment on Malaysian law rather than on Islamic jurisprudence.

Next: why then did former PAS deputy president Nasharudin Mat Isa reportedly say that the Surah was not applicable to Malays? I do not wish to answer for him, but according to the reports it is because as a religious scholar he feels qualified to comment on such things while others are not.

Sri Gading Member of Parliament Mohamad Aziz raised the Nurul issue in the House on Nov 7 saying

“Apa hukum dari segi syariat Islam atas kenyataan Ahli Parlimen Lembah Pantai yang menyatakan orang Melayu Islam bebas memilih agama yang diminati? Dalam erti kata lain, boleh keluar daripada agama Islam yakni murtad. Kenyataan ini seolah-olah meraikan orang Islam menjadi murtad.”

Translated into English, the MP had described Nurul’s remark as more or less as a statement to celebrate Malay conversion because apostasy will now be permitted among Muslims.

You might ask: Did she actually encourage apostasy for Muslims? The answer is no.

Syariah augmented by civil laws

In her reply to Mohamad Aziz, Mashitah Ibrahim – the Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Islamic affairs – said that under the law, anyone found guilty of mocking or maligning Islam could be sentenced to prison not exceeding two years, fined RM3,000 or both.

If wielded, this piece of prohibitive legislation portends a conflict and tussle pitting a reformist and progressive Malay-Muslim mind such as Nurul Izzah’s on the one hand, and the orthodox and conservative mind represented by Mashitah, Nasharudin, Mohamad Aziz and the rest of them on the other.

This conflict is common enough in any religion and Islam is not spared. In Islam, this conflict stemmed from the tussle between Revelation and Reason, which I shall delve into immediately.

For this discourse, I will refer to a scholarly work Crisis in the Muslim Mind by Dr Abdul Hamid Ahmad AbuSulayman who was a Rector of the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). In his 1993 book, the author explained the relationship between Revelation and Reason.

Which takes precedence?

Revelation in Islam decrees that all knowledge comes from God via His Revelations found in the Quran which is ‘God’s word’. Reason is Man’s ability to rationalise by using his God-given intelligence and memory. Reason is God’s way of making mankind understand Revelation.

As Revelation is ‘stored’ in the Quran, mankind must use his reasoning ability to adhere to all of the edicts, rules and regulations inherent in this holy book. It is at this point that there appears a split in understanding between the orthodox and the progressive.

To the orthodox, as the Quran is God’s Words, its entire contents are to be the ultimate Truth. The Quran has to be adhered to without any hesitation, doubt, scepticism.

To progressives the Quran might indeed be God’s Words but mankind has been given intelligence by God. The Muslim can and should employ thought and rationality to everything, even to the Quran.

Bow and obey

An illustration taken from Islamic history might help you to understand the point. For this I will refer to the writing of Pervez Hoodbhoy’s work, Islam and Science (1992) from where I take the case of Abu Yusuf Yaqub ibn Ishaq al-Kindi or better known as al-Kindi (801-873 CE) – a philosopher, mathematician, and musician during the Caliphate of Al-Mutawwakil in Baghdad.

Al-Kindi pointed out that Surah 55.5 of the Quran states that the sun, moon, stars, mountains, trees and beasts ‘bow themselves’ before God. For the unsophisticated, this invokes an idea wherein all creation literally bends in prayer – a bowing tree, a bowing mountain (for example) bending in prayer.

He had some doubt over this term in its literal sense. After a long mental search, al-Kindi interpreted that ‘bow’ could mean ‘obey’ – the mountains and trees and all other creations obeyed God’s Words but did not bow in doing so.

A point to note is that al-Kindi lived during the period when human civilisation was rudimentary and the literacy rate was low. The aristocratic class was all-powerful and feudalism was the norm. There was also an emergent clergy or ulama class of citizens, usually aligned with the aristocracy. In the event, al-Kindi’s radical views had to be acceptable to the rulers and the ulama class.

Apparently in this specific ‘bowing’ case, they did not agree and deemed his opinion a heresy.

The reaction was swift to his heretic and dangerous beliefs. The Caliph had al-Kindi flogged in public and confiscated his library the ‘Al-Kindiyah’. The old philosopher fell into depression and silence, and died a broken man.

Revelation had won over Reason. God’s Words (and by extension the Syariah) are an immutable set of rules which cannot be modified according to the times.

Sure enough when the four Imams – Maliki (d.795 CE), Hanafi (d.767 CE), Shafii (d.820 CE), and Hanbali (d. 855 CE) – codified the Islamic jurisprudence that is applied right up to today, they were all under the influence of Revelation over Reason.

“There were slight differences in weight they attached to various Quranic verses and degree of validity they assigned to various Prophetic traditions”, says Hoodbhoy. Nonetheless their philosophies were otherwise uniform: Revelation over Reason.

The orthodoxy and conservatism of Islam was later strengthened by the immensely influential Al-Ghazzali (d.1111 CE).

Islamic commentators claim that by the end of the 11th century, all major problems of Islamic jurisprudence had been resolved between these Islamic schools. After that, all the doors for discourse or Ijtihad were slammed shut.

Bolting the Gates ofIjtihad

Let’s pause a little over the points made in the last paragraph. Before the closing of Ijtihad, the flame of learning had burnt bright in Islamic civilisation. Scholars like al-Kindi, Ibn Sina, Omar Khayyam and many others were leading the known world in intellectual development and study. Modern day scholars and adherents of Islam will not miss the opportunity to remind the non-Muslim world of Muslim contributions to human knowledge and science.

But after this glorious era, there was the ascendency of an ossified religiosity making it harder for secular pursuits to exist. It appeared that the closing of Ijtihad had also closed the minds of the Islamic civilisation.

Partly because of this closed mind, the Muslim civilisation missed out in the subsequent human intellectual developments: the thoughts of Copernicus, Galileo, and Newton and a long list of illustrious names that had led to the explosion of science and scientific thinking; the growth of democracy, capitalism, the Industrial Revolution. It missed out from the burgeoning economic, social, political, intellectual and technological opportunities and advancements faced and undertaken by the universal human civilisation.

When Islam was brought into this country (circa 1403 CE), it was this orthodox and conservative version that arrived. I have not come across of any record of any meaningful intellectual development from the Malay civilisation from this date.

Kaum Tua, Kaum Muda

Malay intellectual discourse began in the early 20th century, as shown by recent Malay social history. During this time there appeared the tussle between the Kaum Tua and Kaum Muda. Farish Noor has written a concise and fairly authoritative account of these factions under an article titled Pre-Net Reformists in Malaysiakini (22 March 2001).

According to Farish who is presently a senior fellow at the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, the Kaum Tua comprised mainly the traditional ruling elite led by the royals and aristocrats of the Malay sultanates on the peninsula while the Kaum Mudawere the modernist reformist Malay and Peranakan intelligentsia based in the more cosmopolitan centres on the West coast.

Both groups were worried about the future development of the country and their collective fate under British rule.

The royal families and aristocrats, Farish writes further, launched a number of initiatives that were aimed at protecting the interests of the local communities against the onslaught of British political and economic hegemony. One such effort was the Majlis Agama Kelantan (Kelantan Religious Council) that was formed in 1915. But the Majlis and many other bodies like it soon came under the leadership and patronage of Malay rulers who were more interested in protecting the interests of the traditional ruling elite than the Malay masses.

Another source quoted the conflict between Kaum Muda and Kaum Tua as centring on the validity of Reason to verify religious matters (or Ijtihad) versus those who blindly followed the teachings of early scholars (or Taqlid), see Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 7 (special issue of ‘Diversity of Knowledge on Middle East’: 07-13, 2011 © IDOSI Publications, 2011).

The advocators of taqlid, Kaum Tua, rejected the use of reason in religion as they claimed that the practice conflicted with the Quran. The task of genuine social reform and political organisation therefore devolved instead to the new generation of Malay reformers and modernists who came to be known as Kaum Muda, writes Farish Noor.

Kaum Muda had this modernist opposition towards blind imitation (taqlid) and their emphasis was on the dire need to use Reason. To them, instead of simply accepting the words and opinions of the religious scholars, Man is required to make use of Reason to distinguish between the valid and invalid opinions, or to reinterpret them.

Those arguments are strikingly familiar and from this I can safely deduce that they refer to the tussle of Revelation over Reason in the Malay social context.

In that pre-Internet era, the Kaum Muda was trying to disseminate the new mental order via newspapers, journals and magazines. One prominent personality, Syed Sheikh al-Hadi who hailed from Penang went over to Singapore and Malacca to open madrasahs or religious schools hoping to spread progressive Islam.

The win goes to Kaum Tua

From what I can gather, the inter-generational tussle was ‘won’ by the orthodox Kaum Tua, replicating the win by the clergy over al-Kindi in the early years of Islam as mentioned earlier.

What could have caused this loss by the Kaum Muda? Again I would attribute it to the social environment surrounding the Malay community during the material time or to borrow Farish’s label, the ‘pre-Net’ period.

During that era, the country was under colonial British rule and the rural Malays were an agrarian society. Coupled with this were a low literacy level and the great influence of informal education which centred religion, Malay customs and local traditions.

I remember Malay schools teaching students just the rudiments of reading and writing, basic arithmetic and some history and geography. There was this glaring absence of imparting to the students the ability to think and intellectualise – an endeavour which requires the ability to look for alternatives in the search for truth. There was no teaching them to be critical, innovative, creative, and imaginative.

Without these abilities they had very little capacity to accept change.

Post-Net and info-have era

All this brings us back to the present ‘post-Net’ also known as the ‘info-have’ era. What do we have and where are we today?

We have an independent Malaysia, a higher level of formal education and literacy, knowledge, the ability to analyse and an open mind that can roam far and wide. We have economic progress and a huge middle class.

We are living in the ‘info-have’ era of the second decade of the 21st century.

We have the potential and opportunity to give Reason precedence over Revelation. We have the opportunity to join the Reason-based post-modern universal human civilisation. And within this context, I feel that in addition to Nurul’s answer to the question being spot-on, she is also a true champion of the progressive Kaum Muda of today.

Her Kaum Tua detractors appeared inadequate in clear and independent thinking. Utusan Malaysia had to use the power of suggestion to smear the truth. Nasharudin had to add his own prejudice to corner Nurul by claiming that Surah 2.256 was not meant for Malays. Mashitah had to admit that Malaysian legislation prohibited missionaries to proselytize other religions to Muslims but our law failed to cover Nurul’s situation.

In their ‘Revelationist’ enthusiasm (or blindness) to ‘protect’ Islam, they had all been intellectually dishonest.

Nurul Izzah seems to me to be a victim of the type of criticism levelled by the Kaum Tua mentality that overtly and habitually champions Revelation over Reason in any religious dispute.

Capitalizing on the orthodox and conservative Kaum Tua mindset, it is no surprise that her political enemies seem to be seizing the opportunity to dampen and destroy her promising political career.

Diary of an Islamic apostate

CHARLOTTE, November 17, 2012 – On December 22, 2011 a woman known only as the “Liberated One” began blogging about her apostasy from Islam.

Because she still lives in an Islamic country, the Liberated One is extremely cautious about her identity, her location and her methods of communication, though she is boldly unafraid and outspoken about her former religion.

Following are some of her entries which have been shortened, but have not been edited in any way that would alter the meaning of her descriptions.

Saturday, December 24, 2011 – “I was born in a very typical Sunni Muslim household, not very conservative like the Arabs, but nevertheless religious enough. I was born in Karachi, Pakistan to a very respectable family. I moved to another Muslim country with my parents when I was just 10 years old and still live there.”

“Have you ever read the Quran in English? All my life I just recited the Quran in Arabic without understanding a single word until…I purchased a copy of the English Quran and read the translation for the first time. I reached the conclusion that this book…teaches nothing except hatred and violence. I can no longer be a part of a cult which subjugates its followers, making them mere blind puppets with no mind of their own.”

Islamic scholars explain that the Koran can not be translated, it can only be interpreted. The word Koran means “recital” and experts say the poetry of the original Arabic is completely lost in translation.

Saturday, December 31, 2011 – “I am a very new apostate, just…over two months now when I actually gave up Islam.”

Monday, March 26, 2012 – “I was almost on my way to being an atheist. I was extremely angry at Islam and Mohammed for making me live in fear and guilt all my life. He had created a fear of Allah. We were not human beings, but zombies who had a blind faith in an evil man who claimed to be the last prophet of God. It was right then when I had almost lost faith in God that I met the love of my life, John. He made me start believing in God again.”

Friday, October 26, 2012 – “Regarding Islam being a peaceful religion, that is precisely what I believed in most of my life, and why I was a practicing Muslim. I thought Islam means peace and there is no compulsion in religion because that is what the Quran says. Little did I know that those peaceful verses were later abrogated by the harsh and deadly ones which ordered Muslims to kill non Muslims wherever they found them.

“For the last…year, I have been an apostate of Islam, which means no praying, no fasting, no quran recitation, no zakat, no nothing. But…there was something missing. I could not…pin point what it was till I met John and he showed me the path that leads to Christ.”

“Islam is a hateful religion…created by a psychopath for his own benefit. I…request all Muslims to please wake up and see what you are doing.”

Islam by definition means “submission.” Abrogation is a major aspect of the religion and the Koran that is either conveniently overlooked or frequently eliminated from discussions about specific passages in the text.

Saturday, November 3, 2012 – “I…finally told my family today about my apostasy. I told my mother and my two sisters in law that I am no longer a Muslim. It's been a few hours since the bombshell. My parents have already disowned me, perhaps tell the world their daughter is dead, or worst come worse, they would just kill me, which is highly unlikely in this part of the world.”

“Sara and Uzma (sisters-in-law) told me this morning…you went against the teachings of Islam. You didn't just offend your parents, but offended Allah and his prophet, to which I said, Yes,…you see, I don't believe in Allah and his so called prophet anymore. I disowned Allah and Mohammed a year ago, and you know what? I have never been happier.”

“Islam is nothing but pure deception, created by…the self proclaimed prophet Mohammed. I said, Mom, how can you say Islam is a religion of peace when the first thing it says is to kill anyone who leaves it. Isn't that ample proof that it's an evil cult?”

Tuesday, November 6, 2012 – “It feels wonderful to know that people…are so concerned about my safety. Rest assured that I am absolutely safe. I am sure…you must have guessed that I live in UAE, not Saudi or Kuwait or Iran, or worse still, Afghanistan and Pakistan. This country is too westernised and far too eager to be in the good books of dear old uncle Sam. There is a nightclub and bar in every area and alcohol is freely available, but you need a liquor permit for that. I have a Pakistani passport and am a Muslim on paper. There has never been a case of honor killing in this country.”

The diary continues for the “Liberated One” who lives in anonymity in a Middle Eastern country. Follow the Liberated One here.


Read more: Diary of an Islamic apostate | Washington Times Communities
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

Murtad: Mesej jelas dari Tok Guru

Sesiapa sahaja orang Islam yang memperlekeh agama Islam dengan sengaja maka ia boleh jatuh kepada murtad (terkeluar dari Islam).

Hakikatnya, Mursyidul Am PAS Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat memberi mesej yang jelas bahawa sesiapa saja yang memperlekeh dan menolak Islam telah murtad, termasuk Umno.

Beliau yang juga Menteri Besar Kelantan berkata, sesiapa sahaja orang Islam yang memperlekeh agama Islam dengan sengaja maka ia boleh jatuh kepada murtad (terkeluar dari Islam).

Katanya, tindakan memperlekeh Islam boleh berlaku dengan banyak cara termasuk menolak Islam sebagai dasar perjuangan kerana menganggap Islam itu sudah lapuk dan tidak sesuai lagi pada zaman ini.

Nik Aziz berkata demikian kepada para pemberita di Muktamar Tahunan PAS kali ke 58 di Pusat Tarbiyah Islamiyah Kelantan (Putik), Pengkalan Chepa dekat Kota Baharu semalam.

“Tak kira siapa pun kalau tok guru berserban berjanggut sekalipun kalau tolak Islam dengan hati yang sengaja, dia kata Islam tak guna, dia murtad sekalipun tak ada mufti bagi tau dia, lapor beberapa laman web.

Utusan Malaysia, akhbar milik Umno hari ini memperbesarkan isu murtad dengan memuatkan berita ini di muka hadapannya bertajuk “Nik Aziz dakwa Umno murtad”.

Ini merupakan satu lagi percubaan Utusan untuk memburuk-burukkan peribadi Nik Aziz dan PAS dengan memuatkan komen dan ulasan para pemimpin dan ulama Umno dengan membuat pelbagai andaian.

Mereka kononnya mendakwa umat Islam ditegah dari berdoa kepada Allah untuk menghancurkan saudara sesama Islam dan langkah ini akan mengundang perpecahan di kalangan umat Islam.

Isu murtad kali ini timbul berpunca daripada doa pimpinan Ustaz Nik Razi Nik Mat (adik Nik Aziz) pada Himpunan Kebangkitan Rakyat di Stadium Sultan Muhammad ke IV di Kota Bharu pada malam 16 November lalu.

Beliau mendoakan agar kerajaan yang zalim, Umno-Barisan Nasional (BN) di hancurkan oleh Allah s.w.t seperti mana Allah menghancurkan kerajaan Fir’aun, Hammam, Qarun dan Abu Lahab.

Laluan mudah ke Putrajaya

Di antara doanya, beliau menyebut “hancur Umno, tumbang BN” dan “Umno K.O., K.O. Umno” dan memohon kepada Allah supaya memberi laluan yang mudah kepada Pakatan Rakyat mara ke Putrajaya.

Ramai di kalangan umat Islam di negara ini telah mula sedar bahawa doa untuk menghancurkan kezaliman, kejahatan dan ketidakadilan yang dilakukan oleh seseorang, sekumpulan, parti atau kerajaan dibolehkan dalam Islam.

Malahan kenyataan Nik Aziz ini juga disokong oleh Presiden PAS Datuk Seri Tuan Guru Abdul Hadi Awang ketika ditanya wartawan dengan merujuk kepada Kitab Mustika Hadis yang diterbitkan oleh Jabatan Perdana Menteri.

“Baca kitab itu, ada hukum mengenai orang yang memperlekehkan Islam. Kitab ini ditandatangani Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad,” katanya walaupun enggan mengulas lebih lanjut.

Memandangkan pilihan raya umum ke 13 semakin hampir, berkemungkinan pada Disember ini atau selewat-lewatnya selepas Tahun Baru Cina 2013 nanti, maka jentera Umno khususnya media miliknya akan menyemarakkan isu agama, selain dari isu Raja dan perkauman.

Isu sensitif

Umno tidak boleh ‘survive’ tanpa memainkan ketiga-tiga isu yang sensitif ini dan cuba mencetuskan keadaan yang tidak stabil dan berkemungkinan huru hara jika mereka melihat survival politik mereka terancam.

Selepas isu Ahli Parlimen Lembah Pantai Nurul Izzah Anwar yang didakwa membuat kenyataan bahawa semua orang bebas memilih agama termasuk orang Melayu tetapi enggan disentuh oleh perwakilan muktamar, di ikuti pula dengan isu doa Nik Razi kepada isu murtad.

Isu murtad ini dicuba ditikam ke dada PAS memandangkan kerajaan Umno-BN sendiri gagal membendung meningkatnya kes murtad di kalangan orang-orang Melayu beragama Islam.

Inilah bencananya apabila sesebuah kerajaan sekular yang mengaku sebagai sebuah negara Islam di rantau ini menolak sistem perundangan dan syariat Islam daripada dilaksanakan secara keseluruhannya.

Undang-undang atau Akta Murtad yang diketengahkan oleh ahli-ahli parlimen PAS di Parlimen sudah tiga kali ditolak, bermula dari zaman pimpinan arwah Ustaz Fadhil Noor sebagai presiden PAS sehingga ketika pimpinan Hadi Awang dewasa ini.

Barangkali mereka bimbang undang-undang murtad ini terkena pada batang hidung mereka sendiri atau kaum kerabat mereka yang sering kali mempersendakan hukum Islam.

Islam akan terus terpinggir selagi Umno menerajui kerajaan pusat dan sebab itulah Nik Razi yang memimpin doa di Stadium Sultan Muhammad ke IV tempoh hari menyeru agar rakyat membuat perubahan.

Semoga Allah memperkenankan doa orang-orang yang dizalimi dengan menghancurkan Umno-BN.

Mubarak gesa anggota Islam PKR keluar parti

Majlis Bekas Wakil Rakyat Malaysia berkata ahli-ahli PKR beragama Islam harus bertanya mengapakah sampai kini Nurul Izzah belum bertaubat atau menarik balik kenyataannya.

(Bernama) - Majlis Bekas Wakil Rakyat Malaysia (Mubarak) hari ini menggesa ahli PKR yang beragama Islam mengkaji semula keahlian mereka dalam parti itu berikutan kenyataan kontroversi Naib Presidennya Nurul Izzah Anwar berhubung dengan kebebasan beragama.

Ketua Penerangan Mubarak Abdul Rahmman Sulaiman berkata ahli-ahli PKR beragama Islam harus bertanya mengapakah sampai kini Nurul Izzah belum bertaubat atau menarik balik kenyataannya walaupun dinasihatkan Mufti Negeri Perak Tan Sri Harussani Zakaria supaya berbuat demikian.

“Mengapa Nurul Izzah enggan menarik balik kenyataannya, adakah dia percaya dengan kenyataan yang dibuatnya,” kata beliau.

Mufti berkenaan dilaporkan semalam menasihatkan Nurul Izzah bertaubat serta menarik balik kenyataan berhubung kebebasan beragama pada sebuah forum di Subang Jaya baru-baru ini kerana ia mengelirukan dan membawa implikasi kepada akidah.

Laporan portal berita pro-pembangkang pada 3 Nov lepas memetik Nurul Izzah, yang juga anggota Parlimen Lembah Pantai, sebagai berkata: “Rakyat tidak seharusnya dipaksa menganut agama tertentu dan perkara ini juga patut terpakai kepada orang Melayu.

“Apabila anda bertanya saya, tiada paksaan dalam beragama…bagaimana seseorang itu boleh berkata, maaflah, ini (kebebasan beragama) hanya terpakai kepada orang bukan Melayu, ia sepatutnya diguna pakai secara sama rata,” katanya pada forum bertajuk “Negara Islam: Versi Mana; Tanggungjawab Siapa?”.

Sebelum ini, bekas timbalan presiden PAS Nasharuddin Mat Isa juga menyifatkan kenyataan Nurul Izzah mengelirukan serta beliau meminta anak sulung Penasihat PKR Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim itu supaya bertaubat.

Anwar mendakwa kenyataan anaknya telah diputarbelit oleh media pro kerajaan tetapi seorang peserta forum itu yang merupakan seorang peguam tampil menyatakan bahawa Nurul Izzah memang membuat kenyataan itu yang berbangkit daripada soalan beliau seperti dilaporkan dan dirakam.

Abdul Rahman berkata semua orang Islam harus menjaga kemurnian akidah termasuk ahli-ahli PKR yang beragama Islam.

“Kalau ahli-ahli PKR hendak menjaga akidah, mereka tiada pilihan lain kecuali memikirkan semula kedudukan mereka dalam parti tersebut,” kata beliau.

[KENYATAAN MEDIA] Isu Kenyataan YB Nurul Izzah Mengenai ‘Tiada Paksaan Dalam Agama’

Wahai orang-orang yang beriman! jika datang kepada kamu seorang fasik membawa sesuatu berita, maka selidikilah (untuk menentukan) kebenarannya, supaya kamu tidak menimpakan sesuatu kaum dengan perkara yang tidak diingini – Dengan sebab kejahilan kamu (mengenainya) – sehingga menjadikan kamu menyesali apa Yang kamu telah lakukan.” (Al-Quran, Al-hujurat: 6).
 
Ayat di atas mengajar kita agar berhati-hati dalam menerima berita dari orang-orang fasik. Seorang Muslim Al Walid bin Uqbah bin Abi Mu’id diutuskan oleh Nabi Muhammad saw melakukan suatu tugasan ke Kampung Bani Mustaliq.  Al Walid menyangkakan mereka sudah murtad lalu segera pulang ke Madinah melaporkan kepada Baginda Nabi apa yang ditanggapinya. Hasilnya, baginda mengarahkan Khalid al Walid bersama anggota tenteranya bertindak terhadap kampung tersebut. Namun, selepas melakukan risikan, Khalid Al Walid mendapati bahawa mereka tidaklah murtad sebagaimana didakwa. Ini dilaporkan kepada Rasulullah. Diketika inilah ayat ini diturunkan sebagai teguran dan panduan buat orang beriman dalam menerima khabar berita dari orang fasik.

Media-media utama tertentu milik pemerintah UMNO dan Barisan Nasional  telahpun kerap didapati bersalah oleh mahkamah kerana melaporkan berita yang tidak tepat, berunsur  fitnah dan sengaja diputar belitkan.  Pemimpin-pemimpin organisasi berita ini sendiri mengesahkan bahawa harus diputarbelit sesuatu berita demi mendokong aspirasi parti yang menjadi pemiliknya.

KEADILAN melihat bahawa  serangan menggila terhadap Naib Presiden Parti YB Nurul Izzah,  yang sedang berlaku sekarang ini adalah langkah terbaru UMNO dalam percubaan mengembalikan sokongan dan kepercayaan rakyat yang semakin terhakis. Hampir kesemua pemimpin tertinggi mereka memberikan ulasan semborono ‘bagaikan menunda najis yang hanyut’.  Media milik mereka dengan sengaja membentuk persepsi yang tidak betul mengenai apa yang dinyatakan oleh YB Nurul Izzah.  Kemudiannya, dengan sengaja pula komen-komen berdasarkan persepsi yang salah ini disebar dan dijajakan.

Amatlah jelas, UMNO sedang begitu tertekan dan desperado.  UMNO gagal menghakis  tanggapan buruk rakyat terhadap dirinya dalam pelbagai jenayah dan pengkhianatan terhadap rakyat dan Negara – penyelewengan SPR, NFC, Lynas, BERSIH, Kugan, Teo Beng Hock dan sebagainya.  Isu terbaru yang paling menekan adalah skandal RM40 juta yang melibatkan beberapa menteri kanan UMNO. Ia begitu hangat diperkatakan ketika ini. Disaat kritikal inilah, kenyataan YB Nurul Izzah yang diputarbelitkan itu dijadikan isu besar untuk mengalih perhatian rakyat.

Sesungguhnya, kenyataan spontan dan bersahaja YB Nurul Izzah pada majlis berkaitan adalah secara umum dan memang boleh mengundang pelbagai persepsi dan tafsiran.  Namun, kekeliruan yang timbul telahpun diperjelaskan sendiri oleh beliau kemudiannya dengan tegas dan jelas.  Peliknya, penjelasan lanjut itu dengan sengaja ditenggelamkan demi mengelakkan rakyat mengetahui hakikat dan apa sebenarya yang diperkatakan.

KEADILAN ingin menjelaskan bahawa, YB Nurul Izzah sendiri adalah seorang yang komited kepada agamanya – Islam.  Beliau merupakan antara pemimpin harapan generasi muda Negara, merentasi semua agama dan kaum.  Latarbelakang keluarga dan penampilan yang sederhana jelas menzahirkan ketrampilan diri yang berpaksikan jiwa yang tauhidiq pada Ilahi dan agama Islam yang syumul.

Sesungguhnya, seluruh lapisan kepimpinan KEADILAN dan Pakatan Rakyat sedang terus mara mengemudi kebangkitan rakyat demi masa depan Malaysia yang lebih gemilang.  Dengan kehendak Ilahi, tiada apa yang dapat menggugatnya, InsyaAllah.

Dr Muhammad Nur Manuty
Ketua Penerangan, PKR
13 November 2012   

Constitutional provisions on Malay rights, land, promote discrimination, study suggests

The Malaysian Insider
by Clara Chooi

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 14 — Malaysia should repeal or amend two constitutional provisions protecting the special rights and land of the Malays to avoid discrimination on the basis of race or ethnicity, according to a UK-based study on discrimination and equality in the country.

The four-part study, jointly conducted by international charity organisation Equal Rights Trust (ERT) and Malaysian rights group Tenaganita, said the existence of Articles 89 and 153 of the Federal Constitution were among the strongest causes behind racial discrimination in Malaysia as both had purportedly failed to meet the original intention for positive action.

Instead, the provisions had “violated international law standards”, it was said in the executive summary of the “Washing the Tigers: Addressing Discrimination and Inequality in Malaysia” study published on the ERT’s website late Monday.

“The positive action measures under these provisions are not time-limited or function-limited.

“The permanent privilege enjoyed by the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak therefore appears to maintain unequal and separate standards, on the ground of race, in conflict with the constitutional prohibition of discrimination,” the summary said.

Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia grants the Yang di-Pertuan Agong responsibility “to safeguard the special position of the ‘Malays’ and natives of any of the states of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities”. The provision also goes on to specify ways to do this, such as establishing quotas for entry into the civil service, public scholarships and public education.

It is among the most controversial provisions in Malaysian law with critics often arguing against the necessity of a race-based distinction between Malaysians of different ethnic identities.

While right-wing Malay groups and political hardliners have used the provision to argue the need for the continuation of affirmative-action policies, opposition politicians have accused the ruling government of wielding it as a “weapon of aggression”.

But the ERT report said the provisions were among other legislation in Malaysia that it found to be either directly or indirectly discriminatory in nature, adding that the country has a human rights obligation to respect an individual’s right to be free from discrimination.

“Malaysia is urged to undertake a review of all federal and state legislation and policies in order to (i) assess compatibility with the right to equality; and (ii) amend, and where necessary, abolish existing laws, regulations, and policies that conflict or are incompatible with the right to equality.

“This process should include the repeal of all discriminatory laws, provisions and policies. In particular, the following discriminatory provisions should be repealed or amended to remove discriminatory elements,” the study said, before listing Articles 5(4), 8(2), 9, 10, 11, 12(1), 14, 15, 24, 26, 89, 153 and 161 of the Federal Constitution.

According to the study, the provisions discriminate against individuals on the grounds of residence, political opinion, religion, gender, race and ethnicity.

As an example, the report said that Article 10 of the Constitution, which outlines freedom of speech, assembly and association, is discriminatory on the grounds of political opinion by setting out exceptions and conditions aimed at restricting the activities of political opponents to the government.

“The picture of inequalities in Malaysia would be strongly distorted without an understanding of discrimination based on political opinion.

“The main patterns of politically-based discrimination are related to voting rights and other political participation rights, arbitrary detention on political grounds, freedom of association and assembly, and freedom of expression,” the report said.

FORUM: Kebebasan Beragama atau Murtad?

Part2 

Part3

Part4

Nurul Izzah’s statement “There is no compulsion in religion, whether for Muslims or non-Muslims” – the legal and scriptural perspectives

As Malik Imtiaz rightly opined, ''Malaysia is not an Islamic state, Malaysia is a secular state and the constitution is the supreme law of the land”, in Malaysia the Federal Constitution prevails. Article 11 prevails. Article 160 merely defines who a “Malay” is.

Nicole Tan Lee Koon

I read with much excitement the current debacle over Nurul Izzah’s (MP for Lembah Pantai) statement that there should be no compulsion in religion and that it applies to Muslims as well.

Nurul Izzah is right in saying that all Malaysians, including Malays, have the right of freedom of religion, that is freedom to choose their own religion. This is a basic fundamental right as enshrined in Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.

The legal perspective. Article 11 of the Federal Constitution provides that every person has the right to profess and practice his own religion. Every person has the right to propagate his religion, but the law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among Muslims.

Article 160 defines a Malay as inter alia a person who professes to be a Muslim, habitually speaks the Malay language, and adheres to Malay customs.

Article 11 contains a proviso only against proselytising to Muslims but not a proviso against professing another religion. Therefore, under the constitution, a Muslim has the freedom of religion. If a person who habitually speaks Malay and practices Malay customs but does not profess to be a Muslim is by definition not a “Malay” under the constitution.

I agree with Malik Imtiaz when he said that Nurul’s statement is consistent with the Federal Constitution (http://www.freemalaysiakini2.com/?p=54761). As Malik Imtiaz rightly opined, ''Malaysia is not an Islamic state, Malaysia is a secular state and the constitution is the supreme law of the land”, in Malaysia the Federal Constitution prevails. Article 11 prevails. Article 160 merely defines who a “Malay” is.

Since I am not a Muslim scholar, I shall be reiterating what other people wrote on the scriptural perspective. Surah Al-Baqara 2:256 : “Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And Allah hears and knows all things.”

Surah Al-Imran 3: 85 : “And whoever desires other than Islam as religion, never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers. How shall God guide a people who disbelieved after their belief and had witnessed that the Messenger is true and clear signs had come to them?”

I totally agree with Haris Ibrahim’s scathing article against Nasharudin Mat Isa (http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2012/11/11/do-you-have-licence-from-god-to-lord-over-us-nash/) that even God allowed the freedom of religion under Surah Al-Imran 3: 85-90 albeit those who chose to leave Islam shall be condemned to Hell.

Anisah Sukry’s article is like a compendium on freedom of religion with legal, scholarly and scriptural references : http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2012/11/12/apostasy-compulsion-in-religion-and-nuruls-point/. She deftly argued that what Nurul Izzah said is nothing new and has basis both in the Quran and in the viewpoints of certain Islamic scholars. My favourite is the one by the former chief judge of Pakistan, SA Rahman who wrote “There is absolutely no mention in the Quran of mundane punishment for defection from the faith by a believer, except in the shape of deprivation of the spiritual benefits of Islam or of the civil status and advantages that accrue to an individual as a member of the well-knit fraternity of Muslims.

“He should, however, be free to profess and propagate the faith of his choice, so long as he keeps within the bounds of law and morality, and to enjoy all other rights as a peaceful citizen of the State, in common with his Muslim co-citizens.”

SA Rahman also added that apostasy is an offence in the realm of the rights of God, rather than the rights of mankind, thus there would be no pressing necessity to punish a peaceful change of faith.

Dr Chen Man Hin (DAP’s Life Adviser) said that the threat of apostasy was used frequently in the Middle Ages. Then, Christianity was a very strict religion. Wrongdoings were frequently said to be heresy and apostasy. One outstanding example was Joan of Arc. Her enemies used the church to discredit her despite her many exploits of heroism for France. She was burned at the stake for heresy. Sadly, some people in Malaysia are possessed with minds mired in the Dark Ages. Any Malay or Muslim who dares to think differently is quickly accused of apostasy. He or she is ostracised and denied the rights of a citizen. Nowadays, apostasy and heresy is not a crime in present day Europe. Likewise, the mindset of the our people must change. Nurul Izzah wants young Malaysians to be free and open minded so that they will be the scientists who can create a new society. She wants to encourage the people to be adventurous and enterprising so that Malaysia can play a dynamic role in the new century which is destined to be an Asian Century.

Nurul Izzah is a courageous and conscientious leader. Malaysia needs such leaders in order to progress lest we stay in the Middle Ages’ mentality. All the three Abrahamic faiths allowed for free will, lest we all become like robots. The choice is ours and we bear the consequences of our choices. Nurul Izzah has opened up a fundamental truth that religious freedom is for all, including Islam religion. Many Malaysian Muslims will sample a new freedom. I urge all you closet and/or “closed door” supporters to come out in full force to support Nurul Izzah as well !

Even Pak Lah said “Allow Muslims to convert if they choose to” (http://malaysiansmustknowthetruth.blogspot.com/2012/11/pak-lah-said-in-2007-allow-muslims-to.html) in 2007.

I would like to end with Wen Jiabao’s quote “I am neither nervous nor afraid because I speak from the heart.” Nurul Izzah, we support you all the way !!

Nicole Tan Lee Koon

Secretary, Seremban branch, DAP NS

Tweet handle : @loyarbaik

Facebook : http://www.facebook.com/nicoletanleekoon

Facebook Page : http://www.facebook.com/nicoleleekoontan

Why apostasy is good for Islam

I suppose one way to solve the serious AIDS and drug problem amongst the Malays-Muslims would be to allow them to leave Islam. Once all these people have left Islam then the high incidence of AIDS and drugs amongst the Malays-Muslims would also end because these people would no longer be Muslims but would be ex-Muslims. (And, according to the Constitution, you must be Muslim to be Malay -- so ex-Muslims would also be ex-Malays).

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

“Call to reject Muslim leaders who do not uphold Islam,” said The Borneo Post. Bernama, on the other hand, said, “At Islamic meet, Jakim hopes to slow Muslim AIDS spread”. You can read both news reports below.

I remember Tan Sri Sanusi Junid, the one-time Menteri Besar of Kedah, saying that the highest incidence of AIDS is amongst the fishermen community. He also said that the state with the highest incidence of AIDS is Kelantan.

Sanusi was then the Minister of Agriculture when he said that (in a gathering at the MCOBA building) and what he really meant was that the highest incidence of AIDS is amongst the Malays-Muslims, and the poorer segment of society on top of that.

It was roughly 25 years ago when Sanusi said that. Apparently, after 25 years, Malaysia still faces the problem of Malays-Muslims having the highest incidence of AIDS.

According to the authorities, not only is AIDS the highest amongst Malays-Muslims (estimated at 70%), but it is highest amongst drug addicts (90%) as well. Hence it is drugs (the sharing of needles) and not sex that is the main cause of AIDS -- although in many cases it can be both because drug addicts also become ‘sex workers’ to earn money to finance their very expensive drug addiction.

Someone once told me (I don’t know whether this is true or not) that the highest divorce rate is also amongst the Malays-Muslims. This could be true because it is easier for Muslims than non-Muslims to divorce. The husband just needs to utter the words “I divorce you” and the divorce is complete.

Of course, the wife can always go to the Shariah Court to lodge a complaint. But anyone who has ever dealt with the Shariah Courts will tell you that these courts are male-friendly and female-unfriendly. Hence expect the wife to not receive justice.

And I speak from personal experience because many of my lady friends who were divorced by just these three words were subjected to that injustice. (Yes, I do have many divorced lady friends). I must say I felt strongly for these women (but not in the way you think, though) who were manipulated by the system and mocked by their husbands who abandoned them without any income.

Back in the 1970s, I used to frequent the bars in Kuala Terengganu and Kota Bharu. (Well, I never said I am an angel, did I?). Of course, that was when I was in my 20s and before I became a Born Again Muslim.

Most of the bargirls I spoke to all had one story to tell. They got married in their teens. They now have children. And their husband had abandoned them and had ‘disappeared’.

These girls (many in the 20s and even some in their late teens) have no education or qualification. Hence they need to work as bargirls to earn a living and feed their child/children.

By why do they need to live such immoral lives? What are the Shariah Courts doing about their plight? Nothing, of course, and many of these abandoned girls/women indicated that they would be happy to become my second, third or fourth wife (or even my mistress) for just a couple of hundreds of Ringgit a month ‘allowance’.

Yes, for a mere RM1,000 a month, I could have supported three additional wives (at least back in the 1970s). However, when you are married to a Thai (like me), never try that. Thailand has the most number of ‘Bobbitt’ cases in the entire world. (And if you don’t know what ‘Bobbitt cases’ mean, read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_and_Lorena_Bobbitt. Charles…this part is meant for you, mate).

Anyway, this piece is not meant as a Malay-Muslim bashing exercise. What I wish to highlight is regarding the serious social problems faced by the Malays-Muslims, which the government has known about for more than three decades and which it can’t seem to solve.

I used to joke that the way to solve the high divorce rate amongst Malays-Muslims would be to not force them to get married. Let them just live together, and then when they separate they just separate. If they are not married then their separation would not be called divorce. Hence the high divorce rate amongst the Malays-Muslims would end.

I suppose one way to solve the serious AIDS and drug problem amongst the Malays-Muslims would be to allow them to leave Islam. Once all these people have left Islam then the high incidence of AIDS and drugs amongst the Malays-Muslims would also end because these people would no longer be Muslims but would be ex-Muslims. (And, according to the Constitution, you must be Muslim to be Malay -- so ex-Muslims would also be ex-Malays).

Anyway, jokes aside -- because this is certainly no joking matter -- we have a serious problem. Or rather, we have a serious problem amongst the Malays-Muslims whether it is divorce, AIDS, drugs, or whatever. And it is an old problem since the 1970s that looks like it can never be solved.

So why are these religious people and the religious authorities talking about this person or that person saying the wrong thing and getting all hot and bothered about it?

Okay, so someone said there is no compulsion in religion and Muslims are free to leave Islam if they wish to. Do you think by stopping people from saying there is no compulsion in religion and Muslims are free to leave Islam if they wish to this will make Muslims better Muslims?

Who cares about how many people become Muslims or how many leave Islam? This is not a numbers game. This is not a contest to see who can beat the other in number of ‘followers’? Should not the focus be on the quality of Muslims rather than the quantity?

I am not so concerned about how many Muslims there are in Malaysia. I am more concerned about what type of Muslim these people are. Currently, when we talk about corruption, abuse of power, divorce, drugs, AIDS, or whatever other social ills you can think of, it appears that the majority of the transgressors are Malays-Muslims.

Aren’t the Malays-Muslims ashamed of this? Then, when the non-Malays/non-Muslims point out that the Malays-Muslims are highly immoral, the Malays-Muslims get angry. They say you are insulting them. They say you are cabaring them. They threaten you with ‘May 13’.

The mindset of the Islamists is becoming very ridiculous. They focus on form rather than function. They worry about whether the woman is too sexy or is indecently dressed. The fact that the woman keeps her tudong on but lifts up her baju kurung for a quickie in the pantry is of no concern to these Islamists.

So you want everyone to dress like Mother Teresa. Does that solve our social problems?

The Johor Wanita Umno head, Datuk Sharifah Azizah Syed Zain, wants us to reject Muslim leaders who do not uphold Islam. What does she mean by ‘do not uphold Islam’? Not a single Muslim leader upholds Islam in the real sense of the word. So that would mean not a single Muslim leader should get our support and must be rejected, even those from the opposition.

Of course, what Sharifah Azizah meant is that we must reject Muslim leaders who propagate freedom of religion. This is the only act of not upholding Islam as far as Sharifah Azizah is concerned.

And this is why the Malays-Muslims can never progress. They have a very narrow worldview. Not upholding Islam just means freedom of religion. All other social ills, sins and crimes are not included. Those do not come under the ambit of ‘not upholding Islam’.

Mampuslah Melayu kalau macam ni!

************************************************

Call to reject Muslim leaders who do not uphold Islam

(The Borneo Post) - The confusing statement made by Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar on religious freedom should be an eye-opener for the people to reject leaders who failed to protect the sanctity of Islam, said two Wanita Umno leaders.

Johor Wanita Umno head Datuk Sharifah Azizah Syed Zain said such a statement should not be made by a Muslim leader as it could be misinterpreted, especially by the young people.

She said stern action should be taken against the Lembah Pantai member of parliament to serve as a lesson to her not to attempt to misuse Islamic teachings for politics.

“She seems to be desperate to win (in the coming general election) to the extent of exploiting religion.

“I hope this will open the people’s eyes to reject such a leader,” she told Bernama.

On Nov 3, a pro-opposition news portal had quoted Nurul Izzah as saying that the people should not be compelled to adopt a particular religion, and that this should also apply to Malays.

“When you ask me, there is no compulsion in religion … how can anyone say sorry, this (religious freedom) only applies to non-Malays, it has to apply equally,” she was quoted as saying when speaking at a forum on “Islamic State: Which version; Who’s responsibility?” in Subang Jaya on the same day.

Sharifah Azizah said she did not believe that Nurul Izzah had unintentionally made the statement.

“She made the statement to show that she is not an Islamic fanatic, supports lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT), rights to religious freedom,” she said.

She also questioned the action by Nurul Izzah in suing the mainstream media, instead of the pro-opposition news portal which posted her controversial statement.

Wanita Umno religious bureau chairman Datin Paduka Mesrah Selamat said a Muslim leader, regardless of the party he/she represented, who failed to uphold Islam was not qualified to lead and should be rejected by the people.

She said Nurul Izzah’s statement could have an impact, especially on Muslim youths.

Meanwhile, an organisation called Pertubuhan-Pertubuhan Pembela Islam (Pembela) described Nurul Izzah’s statement as irresponsible and disrespectful, and urged an investigation be conducted by the relevant authorities.

This controversy, if not stopped, can give a wrong perception of Islam, it said in a press statement issued here yesterday.

In a related development, Cheras Umno leader Datuk Wira Syed Ali Alhabshee said he did not rule out the possibility that the spread of liberalism and pluralism in Malaysia was supported by enemies of Islam from outside the country.

He said the enemies of Islam never ceased with their efforts to erode the faith of the Muslims and cause a split among them, and this situation was exploited by those with vested political interest in the country.

“Nurul Izzah’s statement on religious freedom has made the enemies of Islam happy. It can give a bad implication to Muslims,” he added.

Syed Ali said the relevant authorities, including the Selangor Religious Council and the National Fatwa Council, should investigate and address the issue

************************************************

At Islamic meet, Jakim hopes to slow Muslim AIDS spread

(Bernama) - It is hoped that the best guideline and resolution to tackle HIV/AIDS can be produced by the three-day 2012 International Islamic Conference and HIV/AIDS from Monday, here.

Malaysian Islamic Development Department (JAKIM) said, the conference would also explain efforts by Muslim leaders, Islamic social activists and numerous parties to tackle HIV/AIDS.

“The conference will enable Islamic scholars, scientists and researchers to discuss issues of HIV/AIDS among Muslims and share experiences and studies,” according to Jakim in a statement today.

The conference was organised by Jakim in cooperation with the Health Ministry, Malaysian Aids Council, Ihtimam Foundation and Malaysian Aids Foundation.

It would be attended by 300 participants from government agencies, local and foreign non-government organisations and universities.

Jakim said, the conference would also promote the Islamic approach in tackling the HIV/AIDS problem, as found in the Islamic and HIV/AIDS Manual.

“Currently, Malaysia is the only country with a manual on Islam and HIV/AIDS resulting from close cooperation between Jakim and the Health Ministry”.

Four topics of discussion would be tabled: ‘Strategy To Prevent HIV/AIDS In Malaysia’, ‘Addressing HIV/AIDS Epidemic: Analysis of Best Practice’, ‘Role Played By Malaysian Government & NGO’ and ‘Social Research On HIV/AIDS’.

Among local presenters were Johor Islamic Religious Council Adviser Datuk Noh Gadut, Malaysian Islamic Doctors Association president Prof Dr Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman, Malaysian Aids Council president Dr Raj Karim and Malaysian Aids Foundation chairman Prof Dr Adeeba Kamarulzaman.

Meanwhile, the foreign presenters were from Uganda, Australia and Qatar.

Nurul Izzah teraniaya

NURUL Izzah telah teraniaya seperti bapanya Anwar Ibrahim.

Sama ada ucapannya tentang tiada paksaan dalam agama tersilap, keliru atau kurang jelas, maka dia telah dipelupuh hingga hampir mati oleh orang yang benci kepada anak beranak itu.

Saya mengambil sikap melayan Izzah sebagai mana-mana orang yang didakwa belum bersalah selagi mahkamah belum mendapatinya bersalah.

Sebagai manusia dia terdedah dengan segala macam kelemahan. Dia boleh melakukan kesilapan dan kekeliruan dan dia juga boleh jadi jahat.

Tetapi semua dikehendaki adil terhadap semua sebagaimana kita mahu semua adil terhadap kita.

Pertama dia bercakap tanpa teks. Walaupun ucapan itu dirakamkan tetapi ia tidak menghalang dia membuat kesilapan. Eloknya rakaman itu memungkinkan kita tahu kesilapan dan boleh dibetulkan.


Sesiapa saja yang berucap khusus yang bukan nabi mesti ada kata-kata tersasul dan kesilapan dan ada yang tidak jelas yang memerlukan penjelasan.

Misalnya seorang ustaz bercakap tentang Firaun dan Nabi Musa a.s. Dalam ucapannya itu dia terkata Nabi Musa itu kejam. Orang yang mendengarnya tahu cakapnya tidak betul. Biasanya orang tahu ustaz itu tersasul dan bukan itu yang dimaksudnya. Yang dia hendak kata kejam itu ialah Firaun, bukan Nabi Musa.

Jika ustaz itu sedar dia tersasul, dia akan betulkan. Jika dia tidak sedar, dia rasa dia betul. Kecualilah sepanjang ucapannya itu terus menerus dia kata nabi itu begitu. Yang itu bukan silap tetapi dia benar-benar jahat.

Apabila berlaku tersasul dan kekeliruan biasanya orang akan bertanya minta penjelasan. Jika yang bercakap tidak bermaksud seperti yang dicakapkannya, dia akan membetulkan kesilapannya dan menjelaskan apa yang kurang jelas.

Tok-tok guru pondok yang mengajar agama pun kadang-kadang tersasul. Maka itu dia minta murid-muridnya bertanya apa yang kurang jelas.

Saya yang terlatih sebagai wartawan, diminta bertanya kepada orang yang membuat kenyataan apabila ada perkara yang kurang jelas atau salah maksud itu. Tidaklah nanti kita membuat laporan yang tidak betul.


Tidaklah pemberita itu dikira salah lapor apabila dia melaporkan cakap yang salah cakap dari seseorang. Beritanya itu betul tetapi dia benar-benar pandir kerana dia tidak minta penjelasan dari orang yang bercakap.


Kekeliruan boleh berlaku bila-bila dan oleh sesiapa. Nabi SAW pernah membuat kenyataan yang mengelirukan seorang tua. Orang tua itu bertanya adalah dia boleh masuk syurga. Baginda menjawab, mana ada orang tua masuk syurga. Lalu menangislah orang tua itu. Nabi pun menjelaskan maksudnya betapa dalam syurga nanti semuanya muda-muda belaka. Orang tua seperti Nabi Nuh a.s. yang seribu tahun usianya, di syurga nanti jadi muda juga.


Jika pemberta dengar cakap Nabi seperti itu dan tidak minta penjelasan, dia buat berita seperti yang didengarnya, maka huru haralah sekalian orang tua.


Makhluk pertama melakukan maksiat ialah iblis apabila dia enggan sujud kepada Adam. Allah tanya dulu iblis menggapa dia begitu? Allah tidak terus laknat dia. Setelah dia jelaskan mengapa dia memusuhi Adam, maka barulah dia dilaknat.


Tetapi mungkin wartawan pandir itu hendak memberi rezeki kepada Izzah dengan membuat laporan begitu tanpa minta penjelasannya. Izzah lalu menyaman mereka. Jika nasib Izzah baik, dia menang saman dan dapat bayaran berjuta.

Apostasy, compulsion, and Nurul’s point

The PKR vice-president said last week that religious freedom is for everyone, even Muslims and Malays. Well, here are the facts to prove she has a point.
COMMENT

Yet again, Umno as well as the likes of Ibrahim Ali and Nasharudin Mat Isa have resorted to misusing Islam to discredit a member of the opposition bloc.

According to a transcript provided by Malaysiakini, Nurul Izzah Anwar said at a forum last weekend that “…there is no compulsion in religion… How can anyone really say, ‘sorry, this only applies to non-Malays.’ It has to apply equally.”

Hishammuddin Hussein, the home minister, described Nurul’s statements as insensitive and causing public anger.

Nasharudin, the former PAS vice-president, said that she must repent and what she said goes against Islam.

Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the former prime minister, said her statement was stupid.

Now, putting aside the fact that nearly every time good ol’ Hisham, Nasha and Mahathir open their mouths, they say something stupid and insensitive that anger the public, Nurul, on the other hand, did not say anything “radical”, “liberal”, “dangerous to the faith” or even new.

On the contrary, what she said has been discussed among Islamic scholars across the globe for years.

It’s just that no one seems to have clued the Powers That Be on this.

A blanket rule for all

Nurul said that there is no compulsion in religion, whether for Muslims or non-Muslims.

And she has a point.

Islam is all about an individual’s own voluntary submission to Allah; there can be no coercion because faith cannot be forced upon anyone, even on those Malays who are born Muslims.

I mean, if I asked you, at gunpoint, to believe in Islam, would you? Unless you’re already a believer, then of course not. You’d probably blubber a bit about how being at the brink of death has opened your eyes to Islam, but your convictions would remain the same.

So compulsion is not the answer – education is, just as Nurul mentioned in a later statement.

In fact, even in the Quran, Surah Al-Nahl, verse 126 states:

“Invite [all] to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance.” (16:126 – translated by Yusuf Ali)

Now, for those of you who are going to say that I’m no scholar and should just keep my mouth shut and let the experts talk it out, allow me to produce a quote from the former Chief Judge of Pakistan, SA Rahman.

“Man is free to choose between truth and falsehood and the Prophet’s function is to convey the message, exemplify it in his own life and to leave the rest to God – he is no warder over men to compel them to adopt particular beliefs,” he wrote.

This is further fortified in several Islamic verses, including Surah Ali Imran, verse 20 and Al-Ma’idah, verse 92, which state if individuals turn away from the message of Islam, then the Prophet Muhammad’s duty is only to educate – not force nor coerce.

Freedom to choose still exists

Unfortunately, we still have the likes of Nasharudin who argue that the “no compulsion in religion” verse (2:256) only applies to non-Muslims in the issue of converting to Islam.

In other words, once one becomes Muslim, let the coercion begin!

Now, I challenge him and other like-minded individuals to point out any verse in the Quran which states that that sort of double standard exists.

Nasharudin did mention Surah al-Ahzab verse 36 as “proof” that there is no freedom in religion for Muslims.

“It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger, to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.” (33:36 – translation by Yusuf Ali)

But, as you can see, this verse just states that when Allah has commanded something, it is not fitting for a believer to have any choice in their matter – the freedom to choose still exists, as mentioned several times in the Quran.

But while freedom exists, the Quran still states what is right and wrong.

And if one chooses what has been forbidden, then one will face the consequences of that decision, whether in this life or the hereafter.

Islam and apostasy

Now, by virtue of the fact that freedom of religion exists in Islam, does that mean Muslims, and Malays, have the freedom to renounce their religion and should not be coerced or punished into remaining as Muslims?

Since I’d rather not have 15 policemen raid FMT’s office over this article, I’ll refrain from stating my stand, but just share the views of several revered scholars in Islam who are not Malaysians, not Malays, and do not have any vested political interest in the issue.

The former chief judge of Pakistan, SA Rahman, wrote in his book “Punishment of apostasy in Islam” that:

“There is absolutely no mention in the Quran of mundane punishment for defection from the faith by a believer, except in the shape of deprivation of the spiritual benefits of Islam or of the civil status and advantages that accrue to an individual as a member of the well-knit fraternity of Muslims.

“He should, however, be free to profess and propagate the faith of his choice, so long as he keeps within the bounds of law and morality, and to enjoy all other rights as a peaceful citizen of the State, in common with his Muslim co-citizens.”

He also added that apostasy is an offence in the realm of the rights of God, rather than the rights of mankind, thus there would be no pressing necessity to punish a peaceful change of faith.

Meanwhile, Dr Ahmad Ar-Raysouni, a professor of principles of Islamic jurisprudence, wrote:

“…if Allah did not coerce His creation towards belief in Him, nor did He permit his Prophet [pbuh] to do so instructing him, then how could He allow, or order, the leaders of the Muslims to force one to remain as a Muslim or return to it under the threat of death?”

Another Islamic scholar, Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, wrote:

“…all of the moral teachings of the Quran are based on the notion of moral responsibility, which entails the freedom of choice. Therefore, to state that one must be put to death for choosing to disbelieve would only undermine the entire moral edifice of the Quran.”

Controversy over nothing

In the end, it’s clear that what Nurul said on that fateful day has its basis – both in the Quran and in the viewpoints of certain scholars.

And while some people, including Siti Kassim, may view her later statement as a “retraction”, I don’t – just because Nurul doesn’t condone nor support apostasy, doesn’t mean she is denying that freedom in religion exists. She is just not supportive of fellow Muslims making the wrong decision.

So, really, the fact that Umno is latching onto this issue and fanning the flames of religious sentiments is just another sign of its desperation to stay in power.

But in this case, Umno is signing its own death warrant because misusing religion for political mileage does not go down well with (thinking) Malays and Muslims.

As for Nurul? Kudos to you for answering Siti Kassim’s question honestly and risking your own political standing to do so. A Muslim should never hide the truth from another just to save his/her own ass.

So I suggest the best thing for you to do from here on out is to stick to your stand, and the facts that support it. Because we Muslims are behind you all the way on this.

Do you have licence from God to lord over us, Nash?

By Haris Ibrahim,
“And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet” – The Book of Exodus, Chapter 7, verse 1, The Holy Bible.

Now, you can read this verse in many ways.

Literally, too, if you wished, and no one could fault you if you imagined Moses walking up to Pharaoh and saying, “I am your Lord. Do as I bid you do”.

I had wanted to stay away from this whole apostasy controversy sparked off by Nurul’s statements at a recent forum as we have bigger and more important battles to fight, but Malaysiakini’s report today really pissed me off.

This UMNO wolf in PAS sheepskin contends that what Nurul said about there being ‘ “no compulsion in religion” was tantamount to giving religious freedom to Malay Muslims as the verse which she quoted can only be applied to non-Muslims’.

The verse can only be applied to non-Muslims?
Let’s look at the verse again.

“There shall be no compulsion in religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in idols and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And God is Hearing and Knowing” – Chapter 2 verse 256, Holy Qur’an.

Now. like the verse in Exodus, you can read this in many ways, too, but if you’re not going to do a literal read, Nash, and read into it something that’s not there, you, oh scholarly one, ought to be mindful of this verse.

“So woe to those who write with their own hands, then say, “This is from God ,” in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn” – Chapter 2 verse 79, Holy Qur’an.

Whilst we’re on the scriptures, oh scholarly one, since you say Muslims have no choice, pray tell us, who was God addressing in the following verses, marked in red?

“And whoever desires other than Islam as religion, never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers. How shall God guide a people who disbelieved after their belief and had witnessed that the Messenger is true and clear signs had come to them? And God does not guide the wrongdoing people. For those, their recompense will be that upon them is the curse of God and the angels and the people, all together, abiding eternally therein. The punishment will not be lightened for them, nor will they be reprieved. Except for those who repent after that and correct themselves. For indeed, God is Forgiving and Merciful. Indeed, those who reject the message after their belief and then increase in disbelief – never will their feigned repentance be accepted, and they are the ones astray” – Chapter 3, verses 85 to 90, Holy Qur’an.
Who, oh scholarly one, is God addressing in the words marked in red?

Seems to me that God was addressing those who had believed and bore witness to the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and then were now professing unbelief.
No?

And seems to me God was saying He would take back those who sincerely repented but not the others.
And that means they had a choice, no?
Oh, scholarly one?

Now, oh scholarly one, you don’t have to answer this if you can produce a licence such as was given to Moses way back in the days of Exodus, in which event I’ll give you a Hi-5, prostrate before you and do a 2 : 131. ( For the non-scholars like me, the Qur’an narrates that God asked Abraham if the latter would submit to the former. In Chapter 2, verse 131 [ hence 2:131], Abraham is said to have replied : “I submit to the Lord of the Worlds” ).

If you cant produce that licence, and refuse to say who is referred to in the words marked out in red above, I am commanded by God in Chapter 6 verse 148, Holy Qur’an to say to you :

“Do you have any knowledge that you can produce for us? You follow not except assumption, and you are not but falsifying”.