Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

'We did not risk our lives simply to change the players'
A small child follows the religion of whichever of his parents is Muslim
Religious upbringing of children in Muslim-Christian marriages
Frustrated ‘fixed deposits’ see hope in DAP

'We did not risk our lives simply to change the players'

Posted: 04 Jul 2013 06:34 PM PDT

What happened in Morsy's first year in office that forced me to change my mind and decide to rebel against him? Are the millions of people who marched in the streets demanding his immediate resignation, including myself, bad losers who simply could not accept the result of the first free and fair elections Egypt has ever witnessed? Or are we revolutionaries who have seen some of the main demands of our revolution go unfulfilled?

However, Morsy undertook a series of disastrous steps that made me question my briefly held guarded optimism. Morsy had won with a mere 51.7% of the vote. I expected him to understand the implications of this figure: he did have a mandate, but Egypt was divided and his prime duty would be to close its rifts. Morsy should have worked hard to include the opposition in the key decisions facing his troubled country. He should have tried to win the trust of the half of the nation that had not voted for his presidency.

Khaled Fahmy, CNN

Two days before Hosni Mubarak was ousted as president of Egypt, I wrote an article for CNN calling for the Muslim Brotherhood to have a place in the post-Mubarak Egypt.

Back then, I wrote: "As a secularist, I am not in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood coming to power in Egypt, and I remain deeply skeptical of its political program, believing that much of it is vague and impractical. But as an Egyptian hoping for freedom and justice for my country, I am deeply convinced that the Muslim Brotherhood has a place within a free and democratic Egypt."

A year and half later, and after participating with my fellow Egyptians in an inspiring peaceful revolution, I went to cast my vote in the first free presidential elections Egypt had ever witnessed. I was not happy with either candidate: Ahmed Shafik, a hawkish representative of the former regime, and Mohamed Morsy, the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood. I invalidated my vote.

Still, given that these were free and fair elections, I recognized the winner, Morsy, as the legitimate president of Egypt. Even though I never believed that he or his organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, had a solution to my country's woes, I accepted the result of the vote, and prepared myself for the hard work that needed to be done over the coming four years, his term in office, so that we could have a chance to topple him in the next presidential elections.

All of this changed six weeks ago. At midnight on May 18, 2013, I went down to Tahrir Square to sign the "Tamarod" (rebel) campaign petition calling on Morsy to step down immediately. And on June 30, I marched with millions of other Egyptians in the largest demonstrations our country has ever witnessed reiterating the same demand: Morsy has to step down.

What changed?

Even though I had invalidated my vote, I had a sigh of relief that Shafik did not win the elections. He had pledged to adopt a policy of blood and iron to "cleanse Tahrir" of the revolutionaries. Had he won the elections, I thought, I would have had to join my fellow compatriots to hold on to our newly-won territory and to make sure that the demands of our revolution were fulfilled. Morsy's win, I thought, meant I could catch my breath and continue our struggle for a free and democratic Egypt, while keeping a watchful eye on the new president.

Instead, Morsy adopted a hard line, exclusive approach and trusted no one but the most extreme of his group, the Muslim Brotherhood. The cabinet he chose and the governors he selected were either Muslim Brotherhood members or sympathizers of the iron-clad, clandestine organization. In a revealing speech, Morsy addressed members of the organization as "my family and folk," raising doubts among many Egyptians as to his true sympathies: with the country at large or with his secretive organization. And instead of reaching out to the center, he courted the fundamentalist salafis on the extreme right. Crucially, this resulted in a constituent assembly which was dominated by Islamists and which ended up drafting a deeply flawed constitution.

Still, I considered Morsy to be my president.

Throughout the fall of 2012, Morsy and his Muslim Brotherhood launched an all-out war against Egypt's judiciary. As a student of this institution, I recognize the Egyptian judiciary's venerable history but also realize that, like many of Egypt's institutions under Mubarak's long reign, it has suffered from nepotism, corruption and ineptitude. But the president and his group were convinced that the judiciary was out to get them, so they launched a coordinated attack aiming to bring it into line.

They dismissed the Prosecutor General (akin to the U.S. Attorney General), ordered their followers to lay siege to the Constitutional Court and drafted a law sending to retirement more than 3,000 judges whose sympathies were suspected of lying with the former regime. The culmination of this pogrom against the judiciary was a constitutional coup in November 2012 in which Morsy declared himself to be above the law and his orders to be immune from any judicial oversight. With no sitting parliament and with the judiciary under a ferocious attack, we had a dictatorship in the making.

Still, I considered Morsy to be my president.

Throughout the first year in his term of office, Morsy showed little respect for or tolerance of the opposition, repeatedly accusing it of being in the pay of the feloul, a derogatory term in Egypt which literally means remnants of a defeated army, but which has come to refer to members of the former regime. Instead of accepting that the job of the opposition is to oppose, and that of the government to govern, he blamed his own shortcomings on what he believed was a conspiracy by the opposition to thwart his efforts and to bring about his downfall. Increasingly, he and his Muslim Brotherhood became more and more intolerant of all dissenting voices. Thus, they allowed their followers to lay siege on the "Media City", a congregation of studios of independent TV stations at the outskirts of Cairo. They drafted a draconian law which would have curbed the work of NGOs and which is much worse than anything that Mubarak had ever passed. A freedom of information draft law, in which I personally had participated in drafting, was rejected by the Ministry of Justice by proposing an alternative text that makes a farce of freedom of information.

Still, I considered Morsy to be my president.

For many months now, Morsy and his Muslim Brotherhood have been performing a slow and sinister "Brotherhoodization" policy, whereby senior, and not so senior, officials in Egypt's bureaucracy are being replaced by Brotherhood members. I do understand that in the wake of any elections the winning side is expected to make some changes to the administration so that the new regime can execute their policies. But these changes are typically limited to key positions within the administration, usually the first and second tiers, leaving the third and fourth ones intact to ensure stability and continuity of the civil administration.

'Brotherhoodization policy'

The Brotherhoodization policy has gone way beyond what is normally expected in any healthy transitional process. In addition to the provincial governors -- who are gradually being replaced by Brotherhood members -- the Police Academy is reportedly being infiltrated by members of the clandestine organization. Within the Ministry of Education, replacements have reached the level of school principals. And the new Minister of Culture has replaced the head of the Cairo Opera House, dismissed the head of the Cairo Ballet Company, the head of the Egyptian Book Authority (the largest government publishing house) , and the director of the National Library and the National Archives. The new appointees have no credentials except being members or sympathizers of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Still, I considered Morsy to be my president.

What prompted me to rebel against Morsy and forced me to decide that he was no longer a legitimate president -- no longer my president -- is not anything he did, but two things he did not do, namely, bring the army under civilian control and undertake a serious process of security sector reform.

I am a historian of modern Egypt, and for the past 25 years, I have been working on the history of these two specific institutions: the military and the police. I have come to realize the enormous cost paid by the Egyptian people in founding what are two crucial pillars of any modern state. I have also come to the conclusion that -- without subjecting the military to civilian rule and without undertaking a serious effort to reform the Egyptian police -- our bid for freedom, dignity and social justice will always be thwarted.

Posted: 04 Jul 2013 06:10 PM PDT

The majority (the Hanafis, Shaafa'is and Hanbalis) are of the view that what counts is the Islam of one of the parents, whether it is the father or mother, so the children are to be regarded as Muslims, following the parent, because Islam should prevail and not be prevailed over, because it is the religion of Allah that He is pleased with for His slaves.

Shaykh Muhammad S. Al-Munajjid

Firstly: The child who is born to two Muslim parents is ruled to be a Muslim, according to scholarly consensus.

If the parents have different religions, then the child follows the one who is Muslim, whether it is the father or the mother.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If the child's parents are both Muslims, then he is Muslim too, following his parents, according to the consensus of the Muslims. The same applies if his mother is Muslim, according to the majority of scholars such as Abu Haneefah, al-Shaafa'i and Ahmad. End quote from Majmoo' al-Fataawa, 10/437.

It says in al-Mawsoo'ah al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaitiyyah (4/270): The fuqaha' are unanimously agreed that if the father becomes Muslim and he has young children, then these children are to be regarded as Muslim, following their father.

Secondly: When the Muslim child reaches the age of puberty, he is not required to utter the Shahaadatayn again.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: The Muslims are unanimously agreed that if a child reaches the age of puberty as a Muslim, he is not required to renew the Shahaadatayn. End quote from Dar' al-Ta'aarud, 4/107.

And he said: The early generation and the imams are unanimously agreed that the first thing to be enjoined upon people is the Shahaadatayn, and they are agreed that if a person did that before reaching puberty, he should not be enjoined to renew that when he reaches puberty. End quote from Dar' al-Ta'aarud, 4/107

But if after reaching puberty he says or does something that indicates that he is not content with Islam, then he is to be regarded as an apostate and is to be treated as one who has apostatised from the religion of Islam.

Shaykh al-Islam said: In terms of worldly rulings, the child comes under the same rulings as his parents, because he is not independent. When he reaches puberty and speaks words of Islam or disbelief, then he is to be judged on that basis, according to the consensus of the Muslims. If his parents are Jews or Christians, but he becomes Muslim, then he is a Muslim according to Muslim consensus. If they are Muslims and he becomes a kaafir, then he is a kaafir according to Muslim consensus. End quote from al-Fataawa al-Kubra, 1/64

Thirdly: When the child reaches the age of seven, his parents should instruct him to pray and encourage him to do so, because of the report narrated by 'Abd-Allaah ibn 'Amr ibn al-'Aas (may Allah be pleased with him), according to which the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "Instruct your children to pray when they are seven years old and smack them if they do not do it when they are ten." Narrated by Abu Dawood (495); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood (466).

Al-Nawawi said: The imams said: It is obligatory for the fathers and mothers to teach their children about purification, prayer and other laws after the age of seven, and to smack them if they do not do them after the age of ten. End quote from al-Majmoo', 3/11.

Ibn Qudaamah said: This discipline is prescribed for the child in order to accustom him to prayer, so that he will feel comfortable with it and get used to it, and he will not neglect it when he reaches puberty, but it is not obligatory upon him. Al-Mughni, 1/682

If a child does not pray before the age of puberty, that does not put him beyond the pale of Islam, because he is not accountable for doing it and it is not obligatory for him.

Shaykh al-Islam said: Prayer is not obligatory for a child, even if he has reached the age of ten. This is the view of the majority of scholars.

Al-Ikhtiyaaraat al-Fiqhiyyah, 1/32; see also the answer to question number 1994.

Based on this, the child who has a Muslim father and a non-Muslim mother is a Muslim. If he reaches the age of ten and does not pray, he is not a kaafir because of his not praying, because he is not accountable for that until he reaches the age of puberty. If he reaches the age of puberty and persists in not praying, then he is an apostate from Islam because of not praying.

Religious upbringing of children in Muslim-Christian marriages

Posted: 04 Jul 2013 05:56 PM PDT

Islam does not permit the father to neglect giving his children a Muslim upbringing. It is important to remember, though, that a Muslim upbringing does not force a child to live his entire life as a Muslim. A Muslim upbringing simply prepares the ground for the child's adulthood. Ultimately, when the child reaches maturity, he will make his own decision regarding which faith to follow.

Shaykh Hamza Karamali

QUESTION

Dear Sir,

I have a question concerning religious education of children in Muslim-Christian partnerships.

I know that the dominant opinion among the Muslim community is that these children have to be raised solely as Muslims. As far as I am aware, this is not explicitly stated in the Qur'an, but based on the following assumptions:

1) Every child is a Muslim at birth. Only the parents and/or its environment make it to follow any other religion than Islam. Thus, the inherent and therefore right religion of every child is Islam.

2) The Qur'an explicitly states how children should be taught about religion e.g. with regard to learning prayers at a certain age etc. Because these are general statements, children born to parents who are not both Muslims are no exception either. These rules also exclude the Christian partner from teaching the children about her religion in the same way as the Muslim partner is obliged to do.

3) A Muslim man can marry a Jewish or Christian wife, but not the other way round. In the male-dominated society at the time of Prophet Muhammad, it was supposed that a Muslim woman might experience difficulties in practising her religion having a husband who would not acknowledge Islam and its Prophet, whereas a Muslim husband would appreciate Judaism and Christianity and thus ensure that his Jewish/Christian wife could continue practising her religion. However, the husband's dominance over his family would also imply that children would be brought up in his religion. Thus, the tolerance of a Muslim husband towards his wife practising her religion would not entail her passing on this religion to the children.

Leaving aside all practical and emotional difficulties arising from this "Islam only" stance with regard to education of children for Muslim-Christian marriages, I am aware that there are also Islamic theological positions justifying the teaching of both religions to children (and subsequently allowing them to choose one themselves once they are old enough).

Would you, please, let me know what verses in the Qur'an these are based upon and how their theological reasoning is? I would be grateful if you could, please, go into some detail in this. Also, it would be interesting to know which respected scholars hold this opinion.

Thank you very much for your help.

ANSWER

Thank you for your question. I pray that this message finds you in the best of health and spirits.

The tolerance of Islam to other religions is--as you point out in your question--borne out in the permissibility of Muslim men to marry Christian or Jewish women. The nature of a successful marriage relationship is one of friendship, love, and genuine concern for one's spouse, and non-Muslim wives are not an exception to this rule.

However, there is a difference between one's non-Muslim wife and between one's child from the non-Muslim wife. The wife is a mature adult who has the ability to reason things for herself and then choose her own belief. Her God-given ability to reason implies the freedom to choose her faith. God Almighty says in the Qur'an, "Let whosoever wishes believe, and let whosoever wishes disbelieve." (18:29)

Children do not have the ability to reason independently. Rather, they are innocent pieces of clay waiting to be moulded into whatever form their parents desire. Parents are responsible to give them the best upbringing possible to best prepare them for their lives as adults. It is not, for example, acceptable for the father to neglect educating his child and to say instead that "he can grow up and learn to read and write if he wants to." For him to not educate his child would put the child at a tremendous disadvantage when he grows up. This would constitute parental neglect.

Muslims believe that God gave all humans the ability to freely choose whatever faith they please. This freedom of choice does not, however, imply that they believe every choice to be equally good. A Muslim father believes that his Christian wife has the freedom to choose her faith. But he also believes that her choice is not the best one--that's why he retains his Muslim faith.

For a Muslim father not to give his child a Muslim upbringing would therefore constitute parental neglect on his part because the child will be at a disadvantage compared to other children who will have a "head start" over him through their Muslim upbringing. For this reason, Islam does not permit the father to neglect giving his children a Muslim upbringing.

It is important to remember, though, that a Muslim upbringing does not force a child to live his entire life as a Muslim. A Muslim upbringing simply prepares the ground for the child's adulthood. Ultimately, when the child reaches maturity, he will make his own decision regarding which faith to follow. Belief is something in people's hearts and is beyond the reach of compulsion.

I hope this answer helps clarify matters for you. Please don't hesitate to follow up with further questions if something remains unclear.

Sincerely,

Shaykh Hamza Karamali, SunniPath Academy Teacher

Frustrated ‘fixed deposits’ see hope in DAP

Posted: 04 Jul 2013 03:04 PM PDT

Fifteen years ago, the number of Muslim Bumiputra members in DAP in Sandakan could virtually be counted on the fingers of one hand, but this is changing.

Cyril Lim, FMT

KOTA KINABALU: The Muslim community in Sabah, long seen as the bastion of Umno, may be more flexible politically that commonly assumed.

The community considered as the "fixed deposit' of ruling Umno-led Barisan Nasional and said to be the poorest in the country, is showing indications of political awakening.

The glimmer of hope that their grouses will be heard after decades of neglect and their support at every election being taken for granted comes following dialogues with the opposition.

According to Sabah DAP leaders in the past the Muslim and Bumiputra community often felt they had no choice over who they should support but this view, they believe, is changing.

DAP Tanjung Papat division chairman Poon Ming Fung said that in talks he had with members of the community they had articulated their dissatisfaction with the status quo (Barisan Nasional).

Poon said the community told him that they were more often than not ignored by the government who took on an attitude "we know best."

He said several members in the community had spoke about the hardship and exorbitant costs of educating their children, the high cost of living and difficulty in finding rewarding employment in Sabah.

What Pung found worthy of note was the fact that the community had chosen to voice their grievances to DAP representatives in the kampungs.

"Hardly anything is done in the villages. What can be seen as development is how contracts have been parceled out to turn the shabby wooden walkways into concrete ones..

"They complain that their MPs hardly visit the kampungs and their state representative drop in only once every five years or during fasting month," Poon said.

Venting frustrations

Many of them are struggling to earn a living, having no marketable skills other than driving taxis. Many also complained that they have not received the government aid that has been trumpeted in the media.

Poon said this dissatisfaction has turned the once diehard local community leaders particularly those in urban areas to vent their frustration to the opposition.

Weighing-in these little changes in perception over DAP, Poon feels the opposition has a good chance in wresting the Tanjung Papat and Elopura state seats from BN in the next elections after narrowly missing out in the 13th General Elections.

Both Tanjung Papat and Elopura are state seats within the Sandakan Parliamentary constituency. In the recent GE13, DAP wrested the Sandakan seat from LDP-BN's V.K. Liew.

The Sandakan Parliamentary constituency though considered a Chinese-majority seat is witnessing a gradual change in its voting population and observers have questioned if the same anti-BN sentiment will be seen in the next elections.

For the opposition to have any prospect of making further inroads in Sandakan, the Muslim-Bumiputra vote is seen as crucial.

While the opposition failed this time in Tanjung Papat and Elopura State the party has bagged the Sandakan parliamentary constituency four times – 1978, 1982, 1986 and 2013.

An opposition candidate was also primed to win the seat in 1990 but lost out after PBS pulled out of BN less than one week before the poll and became part of the opposition.

This was the same year PBS, riding on a wave of anti-federal and BN sentiment overthrew the longstanding DAP parliamentary candidates in Gaya, Tanjung Aru, and Tawau.

READ MORE HERE

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Jumaat, 5 Julai 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan