Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Makkal Sakti!
- Nurul Izzah’s statement “There is no compulsion in religion, whether for Muslims or ...
- Behind every politician are the Chinese
- The Election Commission should take action to prosecute irresponsible parties who are trying to ...
- Rafizi Ramli’s lawyers abuse Attorney General and Bank Negara Malaysia
- Oh My Malaysia Truly
- Censuring the confused in their erroneous reading of verse (2:256) in the Holy Qurʾān
- Bruno Manser Fund takes Malaysian money-laundering case to the Swiss Federal Criminal Court
- Stemming the incoherence of misguided Muslim pundits
| Posted: 13 Nov 2012 03:13 PM PST Nicole Tan Lee Koon I would like to comment on Aspan Alias latest article Kalau terasa akan kalah, biarkan sahaja Parlimen terbubar dengan sendirinya (READ HERE). In his article, he commented on how desperate BN are that they have to make use of the army and NGOs to organise their political functions in order to make the crowd. BN ended up spending the taxpayer's money to fund these programmes. Compare this to PR's recently held Himpunan Kebangkitan Rakyat. There were no free food and lucky draws. 30,000 people came and supported us despite the rain! I attended a Pakatan rally in Gemas for the launching of the NS manifesto in January this year. There were 6,000 people in the field with no free food or lucky draws. Most of them were sitting on the ground as there were no chairs provided. http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2012/01/16/anwar-a-hit-in-umno-stronghold/ For e.g., Madey said, "The Government is forced to take a firm stand to protect the people from being oppressed by the Rajas. Certainly, this stand was not made because of just these two incidents alone. There have previously been many incidents where the Rajas oppressed the people, the Rajas broke civil and criminal laws, the Rajas misused Government and national funds and assets, the Rajas pressuring and oppressing government officials. The incident in Johor is only, with your permission, 'the straw that broke the camel's back'. The people's reaction to these incidents clearly shows that they no longer accept and 'tolerate' these kind of acts".
|
| Nurul Izzah’s statement “There is no compulsion in religion, whether for Muslims or ... Posted: 12 Nov 2012 06:34 PM PST 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 |
| Behind every politician are the Chinese Posted: 12 Nov 2012 02:11 PM PST And the same applies to every single politician in Malaysia's brief history, campaigns need to be financed, monies paid, agreements made….and which community puts their money where their mouth is, the Chinese…..again and again and again, the hypocrisy astounds! Apaipache Dear RPK |
| The Election Commission should take action to prosecute irresponsible parties who are trying to ... Posted: 12 Nov 2012 01:53 PM PST The DAP in Negeri Sembilan took the initiative to lodge a police report in February 2012 to ask the Election Commission to investigate and charge the 2 Assistant Registrars whose status as ARs were revoked by the EC because they were found to have tried to register already deceased voters. But 9 months later, no action has been taken While the Election Commission should be given some credit for taking certain steps to clean up the electoral roll, it has failed to take any concrete action against persons who have been trying to and are still trying to manipulate the electoral roll. In a productive meeting between myself, as Project Director and DAP Election Strategist, with the Election Commission on Monday, 5th of November 2012, the Election Commission highlighted a few steps which they have taken and are taking in order to clean up the electoral roll. One such initiative is to locate the 12 digit IC number of all police and army voters to check that these postal voters were also not registered using their 12 digit IC number. Although this verification process is long overdue, it should be welcomed as a necessary step in cleaning up the electoral roll. The decision of the EC to require all new army and police postal voter applicants, starting from 2012, to include their 12 digit IC number in their application forms, is also a positive step towards ensuring that these voters are not registered twice in the electoral roll, once using their army / policy identity card number and once using their 12 digit civilian identity card number. MERAP has identified many past cases of such double registrations as well as cases whereby an army / postal voter has given their 12 digit civilian IC to their spouses to be registered as postal voters as well as army / postal voters who list themselves as their own spouse in order to be registered as postal voters using their 12 digit civilian IC numbers. Having the 12 digit civilian IC verification, hopefully, will prevent such cases from happening again in the future. I was also informed that the Election Commission has taken action to locate the 12 digit civilian IC numbers of all existing army / police voters. As of 15th October 2012, there remains 411 police and 613 army postal voters whose 12 digit civilian IC numbers have not been located. However, what is disappointing is that the Election Commission refuses to take any independent action against those who have tried to manipulate the electoral roll other than removing certain Assistant Registrars. For example, the EC found 60 voters who had tried to register as army / police postal voters AND as regular voters in Quarter 2 2012. This is a clear violation of Section 3 (1) (a) of the Election Offences Act 1954 which states that a person who 'knowingly makes any false statement on or in connection with any application to be placed on any register of electors' is guilty of committing an election offence which carries a maximum jail sentence of 2 years or a maximum fine of RM5000 or both. These voters in question clearly knows that it is an offense to register twice, once as a postal voter and another time as a regular voter since every voter has to declare that they have not registered as a voter in another constituency in Borang A Pendaftaran Pemilih. The presence of irresponsible parties and individuals who may have tried to manipulate the electoral roll was also detected in the Quarter 4 2011 electoral roll given to the members of the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on Electoral Reform. The analysis comparing the Date of Birth as well as the Date of Application for all voters found that 282,086 voters were registered before they turned 21. Indeed, there were voters whose Date of Application were before their Date of Birth! What is more worrying is the fact that the Election Commission knows of these attempts to manipulate the electoral roll. The Election Commission admitted that they have revoked the status a number of Assistant Registrars who tried to manipulate the electoral roll by, for example, registering voters who have already died. But this is not sufficient. It must take legal action against such parties / individuals in order to send a strong signal that the Election Commission is serious about maintaining the integrity of the electoral roll and to dissuade irresponsible parties and individuals from trying to manipulate the electoral roll. For example, the DAP in Negeri Sembilan took the initiative to lodge a police report in February 2012 to ask the Election Commission to investigate and charge the 2 Assistant Registrars whose status as ARs were revoked by the EC because they were found to have tried to register already deceased voters. But 9 months later, no action has been taken, either by the Election Commission, the police or the Attorney General's Chambers. As long as such irresponsible actions conducted by irresponsible parties and individuals continue to go unpunished, attempts to manipulate the electoral roll will continue. If the Election Commission is indeed serious about preserving the integrity and accuracy of the electoral roll, it must not only revoke the status of irresponsible Assistant Registrars and delete the records of dubious registrations, it must also take concrete legal action to see those responsible for these manipulation attempts charged and punished under Section 3 of the Election Offences Act 1954. When asked, the Election Commission admitted that to date, no one has been charged under this Section of the Election Offences Act for attempting to manipulate the electoral roll.
|
| Rafizi Ramli’s lawyers abuse Attorney General and Bank Negara Malaysia Posted: 12 Nov 2012 01:40 PM PST Fabiani Azmi A few weeks ago the law firm of Shafee & Co issued a few media statements, one of which was to welcome the Attorney General's remarks, "The investigation did not reveal criminal breaches as far as the Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Ministry (MOA) is concerned" and the other to plead with the Attorney General and Bank Negara Malaysia to stand firmly rooted in the ground on the Banking and Financial Institutions Act (BAFIA) charges levied against Rafizi Ramli. These statements were issued to provide audiences a clearer picture of how Rafizi's lies, misrepresentations and distortions in the NFC issue had abused BAFIA. The defendant's lawyers then emerged to speak up against Shafee & Co saying the BAFIA request was "self-serving and preposterous." In their zeal, they went on to say a lot more. In the process, N Surendran and Latheefa Koya abused the Attorney General and Bank Negara Malaysia with their remarks. Blogger journo Fabiani Azmi examines the arguments. In the last 12 months, the opposition led by PKR Strategy Director Rafizi Ramli had been spewing statements on the project National Feedlot Centre (NFC), the company National Feedlot Corporation Sdn Bhd (NFCorp), and Wanita UMNO chief Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil and her family. Rafizi had taken advantage of the social media platform to create a political ruckus to sway public opinion in his favour. Rafizi had broken laws, lied, misrepresented and distorted to rope in the support for his political agenda and that of his master. To correct misperceptions by the general public, law firm Shafee & Co decided to offer its opinion on the Internet news portals as well. The learned Datuk Seri Dr Shafee Abdullah said, "Under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, a bona fide and a genuine whistleblower should report anything he thinks bordering on criminality or other wrongs first to the appropriate authorities, to allow for them to take action. By doing so this way, we have a situation where there is a bona fide whistleblower and the integrity of BAFIA would be protected. "However, if a whistleblower is allowed to just announce in public protected materials under BAFIA without first resorting to the proper agencies, we would be courting chaos in our financial system." Datuk Seri Dr Shafee added, "BAFIA is a statutory protection provided by Bank Negara Malaysia to customers of all banks. If BAFIA is allowed to be breached under the pretext of whistle blowing, the very stratum of banking collapses." However, lawyers N Surendran and Latheefa Koya who both represent Rafizi, told Datuk Seri Dr Shafee that it was because of the PKR strategy director's exposes that the firm's client NFCorp had found itself hauled to court. They said in a Malaysian Insider report, "The charges should be withdrawn as Rafizi had acted on public interest when he exposed the NFCorp's financial documents in public, even though his actions had violated the country's banking confidentiality laws." Another news portal MalaysiaKini quoted Rafizi's lawyers saying, "Abdul Gani should exercise his discretion by not charging Rafizi's 'brave and honourable act' which benefited the public. However, Shafee & Co argued that the 21 bank accounts exposed by Rafizi were nothing extraordinary to show any wrongdoing or were of any public benefit. Rafizi had done a dishonorable act violating BAFIA which did not benefit anyone but had brought great concern and worry to a highly regarded banking and financial system. Rafizi had lied, misrepresented and distorted the bank documents to allude that loans were taken for eight KL Eco City office lots. In Rafizi's effort to melodramatise his accusations, the bank documents that he had illegally obtained breached the provisions of BAFIA under Section 97(1). Rafizi obtained the bank documents without the permission of the account holders, the bank nor the permission of Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM), the governing regulatory body. BNM Governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz told Bernama at the height of the breach, "The confidentiality of customer information is clearly protected by the Banking and Financial Institution Act 1989." She pointed out that it was an offence under the Act for any officer of the bank to disclose any information relating to the account of its customer, and banks have in place control and effective processes to ensure compliance with this secrecy provision. Zeti added that it was only when there is a suspected offence under federal law or if there is a court order or where a customer has given consent, that relevant law enforcement agencies are authorised under the law to obtain information. This information must be obtained through BNM, and if the central bank says there is no foundation for it, the information will not be given. "Shafee & Co needs to understand that the BAFIA was never intended to be used to conceal or prevent the exposure of criminal acts," said Rafizi's lawyers But were there any wrong doings in those bank documents that Rafizi distributed to the media? It would appear that BNM and the Attorney General absolutely do not think so. That's why they did a dawn raid on Rafizi on 1 August, and had him arrested and charged. We are told no loans were ever taken by NFCorp or its directors for the KL Eco City properties which Rafizi announced at a news conference to suggest there was such a case. In fact, the personal bank loan documents given by Rafizi to the media went as far back as 2005, years before NFCorp was established and 2008, years before KL Eco City properties were even launched for sale in 2011. On that premise, Rafizi had not only breached BAFIA, he even breached the Evidence Act where banking information not connected to NFCorp had been presented to allude to wrongdoing. He lied, misrepresented and distorted his evidence. The debate heats up as audiences await if Rafizi would go to trial. Arguments abound aplenty. Who does the average bloke believe from the debate running wild and wanton on the Internet landscape? As founder of MARAH Dave Avran once expressed in Free Malaysia Today, "Clearly, there is manipulation of social media channels to form public opinion. Whilst Malaysians are quick in assuming that there are always hidden hands in every picture, we are also quick to judge on issues. "Have we had all the complete facts of the case to mull over and evaluate before commenting?" Looking at the comments section of some of the Internet news portals would have us think not. Almost every outpouring comment for Rafizi is not based on researched facts but riled and emotional sentiments. The facts have yet to be presented in court. The AG would be well armed and Malaysians would know the truth at a trial. On a public relations note, Rafizi's lawyers have dug a deeper hole for Rafizi in this debate when Surendran and Latheefa went on to say, "The A-G and the central bank had instead 'disgraced themselves' for using BAFIA on Rafizi, adding that the young politician was likely only charged as his exposes on the NFC had embarassed and 'politically damaged' UMNO and BN." "Do they seriously suggest that the UMNO or BN government would have taken any action against NFC in the absence of the public pressure created by Rafizi's revelations of the banking transactions?" they asked. A bit out-of-line against the BNM, the AG and the ruling parties, would you not say? Rafizi's lawyers would need to look at the bank documents and check if there was any wrongdoing unearthed from Rafizi's revelations of the banking transactions. "Obviously Rafizi's lawyers have misplaced their decorum. These are not the kind of statements to express insults against the BNM and AG on the Internet platform. It's tantamount to waging open war in the media. Malaysia's well-respected banking and financial systems should not be compromised whatsoever for political dramas and sensationalism. This is not only our view but that of the chief executives of many banks as well as the chairman of the Association of Banks in Malaysia who came out in media news reports to emphasise that client confidentiality or secrecy must be upheld at all cost, said Datuk Seri Dr Shafee. Rafizi has been charged under Section 97(1) of the BAFIA, for allegedly disclosing customer account profiles detailing the balance summaries of NFCorp, the National Meat and Livestock Corporation Sdn Bhd, Agroscience and Industries Sdn Bhd and NFCorp chairman Datuk Seri Dr Mohamad Salleh Ismail. BAFIA's Section 103(1)(a) would also cause Rafizi to be fined a maximum of RM3 million and jailed up to three years if found guilty. This would seriously stumble Rafizi's chances of standing as a candidate in the 13th general election that must be held by April next year. About the Writer Fabiani Azmi is an avid reader of Malaysia Today, intelligent mainstream newspapers and Internet news portals. When not reading, he also enjoys the company of sapiosexuals. It's a highly stimulating discovery for him. Follow Fabiani Azmi at @FabAz88.
|
| Posted: 12 Nov 2012 01:33 PM PST
The PM and DPM wished all Indians a very Happy Deepavali. Get your facts correct please. Malaysian not Asian okay! Oh you Chinese why do you only enrich yourselves when you can enrich your neighbours as well so that all can live happily and peacefully! Oh you Malays why do you always want the best of both worlds? Why can't you be more gracious and give some to the other Malaysians! Oh you Indians! Why do you slay one another and commit atrocities to your fellow Malaysians? There is so much for the taking if only Indians study and work hard like your God fearing forefathers who came to this land from India. Oh you Mamaks! (meant to be friendly not offensive) Why do you always play fiddle to the governments that are corrupt and their cronies. And why do your restaurants put up tables and chairs on the street until people can't park or use the streets at night! Oh you Satherjees! Why do you keep quiet and silent on so many matters that has engulfed the nation? Only Karpal and son seem to be lions of Khalistan! Where are the other Aslans that we so much need in dire times to uphold freedom and justice! Oh you Sarawakians! Why do still let your beloved state be plundered and your tribesmen be brutalized by a mere handful of crooks? All the more when these crooks are married to white and foreign men and women! Wake up and deliver Sarawak from evil less you too be destroyed with it! Oh You Sabahans! Why do you let illegal immigrants flood your land! Behold all you born in the land below the wind, make haste to flood them soon lest you be washed away in their flood! Last but not least Oh you Johor Bahru! Why have you literally become the anus of Malaysia! Not a day goes by that I cannot stop cursing all the people responsible for making my beloved scenic seafront home town that it was the quagmire that it is today! Woe to all of you especially all those corrupt and incompetent federal and state officials! P/S: Was watching the news on TV3 at 8PM on eve of Deepavali. A bit of advice to PM, DPM; kick your speech writers butts. The PM and DPM wished all Indians a very Happy Deepavali. Get your facts correct please. Only Indians of Hindu faith celebrate Deepavali and not all Indians! There are Indians who are Catholics, Christians, Jains, etc etc who do not celebrate Deepavali as it is a religious festival unlike the Chinese Lunar New Year. Saddens me that even after more than a century of Indians being in Malaya/Malaysia our leaders still can't get this simple and basic racial, religious and cultural facts right! And woe to all you Malaysians who read this and do nothing about making Malaysia better! But blessed be them who rise up to the occasions when they are needed! God Bless!
|
| Censuring the confused in their erroneous reading of verse (2:256) in the Holy Qurʾān Posted: 11 Nov 2012 12:50 PM PST
Wan Ahmad Fayhsal bin Wan Ahmad Kamal It is important to note that the true scholars of Islām (ʿulamāʾ, sing. ʿalīm) who are experts in the exegesis (tafsīr) of Qurʿān are ever consistent in their interpretation and understanding on the meaning "there is no compulsion in religion" (Q2: 256). One must be aware that such command by God in His Own Words in the Qurʾān does not apply with regard to the Muslims who are already in the state of submission (hence the very meaning of the name Muslim is total and willing submission based on the correct way as decreed by Him through His Last Messenger – Prophet Muhammad) in the religion of Islām. Instead the verse is informing the Muslims not to coerce people from other religions to be submitted into Islām and becoming Muslim unwillingly. To make it clearer, this particular verse is intended to uphold the sanctity of Islamic missionary (daʿwah: literally means "making an invitation) and has proven to be imbued in the central tenets of Muslim ethics in conducting their missionary works for ages till present times – unlike, in contrast to the notorious Spanish Inquisition of the medieval time. The myth of Islam spread by the sword has long been dispelled even by the respected Orientalist – Sir Thomas Arnold (1864-1930) in his work "The Preaching of Islam: A History of the Propagation of the Muslim faith" (1896). Any attempt to invoke the notion of "intolerant" has no relevance whatsoever with regard to the verse above. From the authoritative exegesis attributed to Prophet Muhammad's Companion – Abdullāh b. Ibn ʿAbbās, who is considered to be the most knowledgeable of the Companions in tafsīr, as narrated by al-Fīrūzabādī (1329–1414) in Tanwīr al-Miqbās min Tafsīr Ibn ʿAbbās in which the phrase "there is no compulsion in religion" (Q2: 256) is understood to be referring upon the People of the Book (Christians and Jews) and the Magians after the Arabs submitted themselves into Islām. The scholars of tafsīr clearly indicated that it is addressed to the Muslims with regard to their treatment upon the non-Muslims in matters of conversion to Islām. These views are resonated in many authoritative tafāsīr (plural of tafsīr – exegeses of Qurʾān). And it has never ever being rendered in the opposite direction as pandered by certain quarters of confused Muslims – the likes of Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) and Sisters in Islam (SIS) – that merely bantering upon uncouth slogans of enlightenment and reason in providing so-called alternative reading and understanding of the verse mentioned. Furthermore many confused Muslims have distorted the established understanding of this verse as explained by authoritative exegetes of Qurʾān (mufassirūn, sing. mufassir) by reading it in piecemeal basis without having a recourse of reading the verse in its totality and organic whole via linking the verse with its precedents verses and the following verses which carrying the same theme of "truth and falsehood is clearly manifested." They tend to essentialise the command of God as rendered in Qurʾān – meaning to divorce the Qurʾānic injunctions and exhortations from its existential realities. This is wrong, as Islām is a religion that comprises both ideals and realities in which both are harmoniously linked in projecting the true image of the religion of Islam as perfectly exemplified in the living tradition of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him!) and the heirs of Prophetic knowledge and duties - the true scholars of Islam. This worthy heir of Prophets (peace be upon them all) has been guaranteed by himself in his saying: al-ʿulamāʾ warith al-ānbiyāʾ - "Scholars (of Islām) are heir of Prophets". Such endeavor of interpreting and rendering the best meaning of religious injunctions was first completed by the Prophet Muhmmad himself and followed through now by his apparent heir – the competent scholars of Islamic sciences who always ensure their efforts, to the best of their abilities, are complying to the basics of epistemology in Islām. It is not and can never be based upon mere personal speculations and conjectures that sprung out from the whims and fancy of its learned adherents i.e. Muslim scholars, what more from the laity Muslims like the confused lot of IRF and SIS. True Muslims – that is true to its namesake of 'being a Muslim' – are conscious enough, furthermore willingly submit themselves under the established religious injunctions and will know his or her limits in negotiating the boundaries without ever transgressing the extremities or coming up short in fulfilling their religious obligations as what have been delineated by the Muslim scholars which have been deduced from and originally based on the established knowledge and perfect practices of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him!) Such religious rulings and injunctions (aḥkām, sing. ḥukm) could only be derived by the able and eligible scholars that have fulfilled the fundamental and necessary requirements to perform what technically is termed as ijtihād (deriving the injunctions from established sources of knowledge in Islam) – or issuing legal opinions (fatwā), as outlined in the pristine tradition of religious sciences in Islām. Qurʾān is not a book of quotations that simply can be cherry-picked by any Muslims to form their own personal interpretation on religious rulings and injunctions. Laymen that have not possessed the right knowledge, mental and spiritual aptitude are not adept to put forth their views (in truth it is just their personal conjecture) without having recourse to the previous scholarships on the exegeses of Qurʿān. To the inept – especially current politicians and poser-Muslim scholars who have not endured rigorous and specialized training of issuing Islamic legal opinions and interpretations – the depth and systematic intricacies of Quran will never be manifested upon them as God the Almighty have said in the the Qurʾān: "But none knows its true interpretation, save only God and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge (rāsikhūn fī'l-ʿilm)." (Q3:7) Of course such exhortations above are not binding upon non-Muslims and they have total freedom in relation to the general precepts of the established Muslim scholarship with regard to the verse discussed here but it is a different case altogether for Muslims, as they must have recourse upon proper authorities in knowledge pertaining to it. One of the authorities that have untangled this confusion was Shāykh Amīn Aḥsan Iṣlāḥī (1904-1997), the celebrated author of Tadabbur-e-Qurʾān ("Pondering over the Qurʾān"), which made use of his late teacher Mawlānā Ḥamīduddīn Farāhī's (1863-1930) scholarship on the idea of thematic and structural coherence in Qurʾān. Referring to the verse 256 in chapter 2 of the Qurʾān, Iṣlāḥī is fully aware of the tendency for confused Muslims throughout the ages of using the notion of "there is no compulsion in religion" in making the religion of Islām conform to their fancy, whims and desires: "Some people unfortunately take this verse away from this sense and try to use it for rejecting all legal constraints. They argue that since there is no compulsion in Islām, any attempts to invoke punishments for certain acts are invalid in Islām and are, moreover, mere fabrications on the part of 'mullahs' (note: Muslim scholar title that is widely used in India and Pakistan). If this line of argument is accepted as valid, it would mean that the Islamic Sharīʿah (i.e. Law) is without any prescribed punishments and penalties and that it allows people to behave and act as they please without imposing any restrains on them." (pg. 601-602. Iṣlāḥī, Amīn Aḥsan, Tadabbur-e-Qurʾān, "Pondering over the Qurʾān", trans. Mohammad Saleem Kayani, Kuala Lumpur: IBT, 2007) Iṣlāḥī further explains such understanding is totally unfounded in Islamic tradition: "This is a fallacious argument, because we all know that Islām has a whole system and a penal code of its own, the implementation of which is a most important and basic Islamic obligation. An Islamic government can punish a Muslim if he fails to observe Prayer (note: especially the obligatory communal Friday prayer for men) or fasting. And this does not at all contravene the principle that "there is no compulsion in religion". Undoubtedly, Islām does not sanction the use of any compulsion to convert others. At the same time, however, it does not allow anyone entering its fold to behave in any manner they fancy without being questioned or held accountable for their conduct." (pg. 602. Iṣlāḥī, Amīn Aḥsan, Tadabbur-e-Qurʾān, "Pondering over the Qurʾān", trans. Mohammad Saleem Kayani, Kuala Lumpur: IBT, 2007) This observation by Iṣlāḥī is not a mere theoretical exegesis but can be further corroborated with ample historical evidences on the real practices of the Muslim throughout the ages – especially in the past where Islamic government was firmly established. This legal injunction of delivering and maintaining religious practices falls under the rubric of maintaining public duties in Islām or technically called "Ḥisba". Such acts that falls under the rubric of ḥisba has strong Qurʿānic bases (Q3:104, Q3:110, Q3:114, Q7:157, Q9:71, Q9:112, Q22:41, Q31:17) and is considered to be one of the most important tenets after the Five Pillars of Islām (arkān al-Islām) and Six Pillars of Faith (arkān al-Imān) in Islām which is called "enjoining good and forbidding evil" (al-amr bi'l-maʿrūf wa'l-nahy ʿan al-munkar). It is safer for us not to digress from our real discussion above on the issue of "there is no compulsion in religion". For thorough reading on ḥisba, please refer to Muhtar Holland's "Public Duties in Islam" (Leicester: Islamic Foundation, 1982) a translation of a legal treatise entitled al-Ḥisba fī al-Islām by the famed Muslim jurist of 13th century – Taqī al-Dīn Ibn Taymīyah. Alas suffice here for us to be really aware that interpretations made on the discussed verse "there is no compulsion in religion" by certain quarters of the confused Muslim is not as simple as they think, especially when it comes to really grasping the understanding of a particular verse in relation to other preceding and posterior verses, what more reading that particular verse in the light of the gestalt of Qurʾān where the dictum "the whole is larger than the sum of its part" rings louder than any kind of book ever existed in the history of man – be it religious or secular. If we want to understand Qur'ān correctly, one must resort to various other analytical tools not just limiting it to plain-dry modern notions of "analysis" that dicing things out beforehand in order to examine and arrive at the crux of the matter. Some of the analytical tools that are firmly established since day immemorial of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him!) resided in the science of interpretation (tafsīr) of Qurʾān. Such analytical and exegetical devices, the likes of the reasons of revelation (asbāb al-nuzūl) and abrogations (nasikh wa al-mansūkh) are strictly unique in the religion of Islām. Those devices (some became science of itself, e.g. ʿilm al-rijāl - knowledge on evaluating the credibility of narrators of the hadīth) have been laboriously refined by Muslim scholars via countless numbers of commentaries (shurūh, sing. sharḥ), super-commentaries and glosses (ḥawāshī, sing. ḥāshīah) and the findings have been infused into many other Islamic sciences notably jurisprudence (fiqh). That is why the learned scholar of Islām, Professor Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas keeps emphasizing that the science of tafsīr is based on established knowledge not conjecture and it is not the same as hermeneutics; which means only the competent – not just among the lay Muslims but moreover among the Learned Muslim (ʿulamāʾ) whom themselves have mastered various branches of Islamic sciences – have the rights to deliver their interpretation upon such verses, especially on the subject of this discussion that falls under one of the most basic tenets of faith (imān) and deemed to be unclear to many especially in these modern times. It is best for all Muslims especially the confused lot to pay heed to Prophet Muhammad's (peace be upon him!) saying (ḥadīth) – which is the second most important source of knowledge in Islamic sciences after Qur'ān – as narrated by al-Bayhaqī: "This knowledge (the religious) will be held in every generation by those who are just (meaning – the Learned [ʿulamāʾ]) and they shall protect it against the falsification of the extremists (taḥrīf al-ghālīn), the fabrication of the deceivers (intiḥāl al-mubṭilīn) and the misinterpretation of the ignorant (taʾwīl al-jāhilīn). If the confused Muslims keep railing about this despite umpteenth times being censured by authoritative Muslim scholars on their reckless and half-truths (which is more dangerous than plain error!) interpretations, then they are no better than the extremists who took the verse: "kill the idolaters wherever you find them" (Q9:5) by decontextualizing and accepting it based on mere face value in order to justify their anger and the continuance of their act of manslaughter in the name of religion (God forbid!). Indeed, if they continue to affirm and latch upon errors without having any thought to relinquish them and seeking the truth of the matter through proper ways and means – as explained above – they will go astray from the consensus (ijmāʿ) of the Muslim scholars in matters of creed (ʿaqīdah) where there has never been disagreement and indulgence whatsoever in matters of distinguishing and affirming the truth from the error. Verily Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him!) has stated, as narrated by Ibn Majāh: "My Community shall never agree upon misguidance, therefore, if you see divergences, you must follow the overwhelming majority of Believers (al-sawwād al-āʿẓam)" The writer is a research fellow at Himpunan Keilmuan Muslim (HAKIM). He currently reads Islamic Thought and Civilization at Centre for Advanced Studies on Islam, Science and Civilization (CASIS-UTM) as well a lecturer at Kolej Universiti Islam Selangor (KUIS).
|
| Bruno Manser Fund takes Malaysian money-laundering case to the Swiss Federal Criminal Court Posted: 11 Nov 2012 12:46 PM PST
The Bruno Manser Fund (BMF) and 255 Malaysian citizens ask to be admitted as private plaintiffs to an ongoing money-laundering case against Swiss bank UBS – Malaysian government and judiciary accused of "state failure" and "collusion" with UBS customers Musa bin Aman and Michael Chia (BELLINZONA, SWITZERLAND) Swiss NGO, the Bruno Manser Fund (BMF), and 255 citizens from the Malaysian state of Sabah are asking the Swiss Federal Criminal Court in Bellinzona to be admitted as private plaintiffs in an ongoing criminal case against Swiss bank UBS. The case has been opened by the Swiss Attorney General on 29 August 2012, following a criminal complaint by the Bruno Manser Fund. UBS is accused of having laundered over 90 million US dollars on behalf of Musa bin Aman, Chief Minister of the Malaysian state of Sabah, and his nominee Michael Chia.Musa bin Aman is accused of having raised these funds illegally from local businessmen in return for granting logging concessions and timber export permits. The rainforests in the East Malaysian state of Sabah, located on the island of Borneo, are one of the world's biodiversity centers. They have been gravely damaged by excessive logging and the massive conversion of forests into oil palm plantations. On 26 October 2012, the Swiss Attorney General ruled that BMF should be excluded from the ongoing UBS/Musa case as the NGO had not been directly damaged by the bank's laundering of Malaysian timber corruption proceeds through UBS accounts in Hong Kong, Singapore and Zurich. "State failure" and "collusion" of Malaysia's highest authorities In a complaint lodged last week by the Bruno Manser Fund against the Attorney General's decision, the NGO argues it should be admitted as a plaintiff to the case in order to represent 255 citizens from Sabah and the Malaysian public. The NGO's lawyers are arguing that the Malaysian authorities, who would have had the right to be heard in the case, are „incapable of action" in the matter due to „state failure" and „collusion" of the country's highest political representatives and its judiciary with the alleged money-launderers. Due to the authorities' failure to represent the interest of the Malaysian public, BMF and Malaysian citizens represented by the NGO should be admitted as plaintiffs to the case in order to guarantee fair procedures. BMF's submission to the Swiss Federal Criminal Court underlines that Malaysia's de-facto law minister, Nazri bin Abdul Aziz, stated in Parliament in Kuala Lumpur that UBS customer and suspected money-launderer Michael Chia was carrying 13 million Singapore dollars in donations for Sabah UMNO, Malaysia's ruling party, and that Mr. Nazri's son is driving a car registered under the name of Michael Chia. Furthermore, the Swiss court has been made aware of the fact that UBS customer and suspected money-launderer, Musa bin Aman, is the brother of the Malaysian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Anifah bin Aman, and that Musa's wife is a relative of the wife of Malaysia's Attorney General, Abdul Gani Patail. „Therefore, Musa bin Aman is not only the dominant political player in Sabah but also enjoys protection from the highest political and judicial authorities in autocratically-ruled Malaysia", the complaint concludes. It is expected that the Swiss court will decide on the admission of BMF and the private plaintiffs from Sabah to the case within two to three months. Under Switzerland's tough anti-money-laundering laws, it is forbidden for Swiss companies to be involved in corruption and money-laundering in their worldwide operations. However, only rarely have companies been held responsible for such crimes.
|
| Stemming the incoherence of misguided Muslim pundits Posted: 11 Nov 2012 12:25 AM PST Indeed, it is most peculiar while Muslim pundits especially in IRF and SIS prefer to chastise people for not looking at the context of the verse but in this case, it is they who remain blind to the context. If we allow the promissory note for such literal interpretation of the verse devoid of scholarly consensus and right guidance, then there would be nothing left to prevent the likes of fanatics, demagogues and even militant extremists from appropriating Islām in order to justify atrocities and perpetuate even further injustices. Muhammad Husni Mohd Amin, Wan Mohd Aimran Wan Mohd Kamil, Muhammad Syukri Rosli and Wan Ahmad Fayhsal Wan Ahmad Kamal We are gravely concerned with the recent development in the aftermath of forum "Islamic State: Which version? Whose responsibility?" which was held at Full Gospel Tabernacle. It is truly shameful that the affairs of Muslims were being discussed without the guidance of scholars of Islām possessing true and correct knowledge of the religion. What is even more disconcerting is that the so-called representatives who were invited to speak on behalf of Islām at the forum appeared to be allow their political expediency to colour the content and tone of their presentation. How can one even be sure that they are speaking earnestly and truthfully on behalf of Islām? To begin, let us return to the original controversial statement made by a certain politician at the forum pertaining to religious freedom and Islam as recorded in the transcript produced after the event: Nurul Izzah: Yes, umm, but the idea itself, I think, goes back. And when you ask me, there is no compulsion in religion, even Dr (Ahmad) Farouk (Musa) quoted that verse in the Quran. How can you ask me or anyone, how can anyone really say, 'Sorry, this only apply to non-Malays.' It has to apply equally… apply equally. The audience applauds. Nurul Izzah: In the Quran, there is no specific terms for the Malays. This is how it should be done. So I am tied, of course, to the prevailing views but I would say that. - Transcript produced by Malaysiakini Before we delve into the merits of her statement, let us address the oft-repeated defence made on her behalf that she was unfairly and grossly misquoted by a biased press as part of a widespread 'smear campaign' against her. Our reply to this facile objection is that even if she was misquoted, one can view and read her actual recorded statements on YouTube without the mediation of a so-called biased press and thus come to one's own free judgment regarding what she has said and how she said what she said. Hence, to absolve oneself from passing correct judgment on the merits of what she has said on the excuse that she was misquoted by a biased press does not and cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged, especially if such a position is stubbornly held by those who make Islam their political raison d'etre. If such groups persist in holding on to such a position, then it represents a cover up of one's political bias and one-sidedness. Furthermore, a non-Muslim making ignorant statements about Islām may be excused on the basis of not himself being a Muslim and of being obstinate. Yet, a greater cause for concern is when a ignorant Muslim makes ambivalent declarations about the nature of Islām as a religion. With this in mind, we should ask the important question, which is worse: somebody making untrue statements about other people's religions, or somebody making indefensible and unsound statements about his or her own religion? In her effort to salvage the situation, Nurul Izzah brought up the following argument that she posted on her blog, "Namun ditambah, saya berpegang pada pendirian umum sedia ada, iaitu setelah memeluk Islam, seorang Muslim tertakluk dengan Syariat Islam; sebagaimana seorang warganegara tertakluk dengan Perlembagaan Persekutuan." It is incorrect for Nurul Izzah to clarify her stand by equating, if not denigrating, a Muslim's being subject to the laws of Shari'ah with a citizen's being subject to the Federal Constitution. In fact, this betrays a categorical confusion on her part because from the Muslim understanding, Islām is the true revealed religion, and the affirmation of this fact has consequences both in this world and in the hereafter. In contrast, a legal document, which is man-made, is subject to societal conventions and has consequences only so long as the convention is observed and maintained. A citizen can willingly give up his or her citizenship and other rights accorded in the laws of a country. However, the case is different for the Muslim who is subjected and obligated to all aspects of the religion of Islām. Therefore, the implications of being a Muslim and the implications of citizenship are not the same. The kind of logical fallacy in which one equates between the two unequals indicates an error in the understanding of the proper definition of religion, specifically the nature of the religion of Islām. On the nature of religion as being more than just belief in the form of affirmation in the heart and utterance on the tongue, but followed by submission in the way prescribed and approved by God. The religion of Islām requires both belief (imān) and submission (islām) from its believers. Both are not identical, but they are mutually inseparable and indispensable, which means that one cannot do without the other (Qur'ān, 49:14). Thus, belief here is not in the sense we mean is to have "faith" as understood in English, but in the sense that it involves becoming true to the trust by which God has confided in on so it becomes verification (shahādah) by deeds in accordance to what is known to be the truth. Imān consists of three components; assent by the heart, verbal declaration and action in accordance with the principles of Islām (taṣdīq bi'l-qalb wa iqrar bi'l-lisān wa'l-'amal bi'l-arkān). Therefore, it is misleading to say that all that is demanded from a Muslim is simply for him to claim that he has strong belief, as though strong belief alone is sufficient to secure his commitment to the religion. Indeed, there has been a lot of misunderstanding over this particular point about the importance of belief, especially with regards to religion in general and Islām in particular. No doubt belief is important insofar as it serves as the starting point of any purposive action. But it does not follow that belief alone is enough. It is presumptuous to believe that one can simply will to be good, therefore one is good, and consequently, one ought to be recognised by others as being good. To take a simple example, if a person were to make a claim that he or she loves the mother, if his or her actions are not in conformity with that claim, then the claim is disproved. Furthermore, it is not enough for that person to simply set an intention that "I love my mother" if that is not followed up by correct and proper words or actions that verifies that belief. Rather, belief — as important as it is — is not a substitute for words and actions that conform and make manifest that belief. To put it simply, it is through correct action that one's belief is verified, actualised and acknowledged. Islam and other religions compared in terms of the Aqīdah and Sharīʿah. A clear and correct definition of religion is central to the resolution of this debate. Following upon what has been said about the concept of religion as understood and practiced in Islam, we may now proceed to further elaborate on this matter. The teachings of Islam do not accept other religions as being the same and equal to it and the Muslims do not have the authority to acknowledge other belief systems as such. Lest Muslims be accused of being exclusivists, we reply that the non-Muslims should not worry about the fact that the only religion accepted in the sight of God is Islam (Qur'ān, 3:19) since to believe in the Holy Qur'ān is not a basic tenet in their belief systems. Nevertheless, if one recognizes and accepts the argument in the Holy Qur'ān to be rationally sound and true, then one should not reject its definition and conception of religion. In Islām, "al-dīn" is understood as the proper and correct term to portray the definition and conception of religion. Since it has been proven that the Qur'anic language, with its systematic root words, is scientific in nature, one can determine the meaning of this particular word by analyzing its semantic field. One of the manifestation of the root word of "al-dīn" is "madīnah". For Muslim, "madīnah" has a profound epistemological role in the belief and practice of religion. It is the period when the belief of the religion of Islām (aqīdah) was actualized by the Holy Prophet Muhammad (upon him be peace!) who is the final Messenger of God for mankind. What was actualized during the time of Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be upon him) constitutes the reality of religion (sharīʿah). What does compulsion and coercion mean? The Holy Qur'an enjoins the Muslims to invite others to the path of Islām with wisdom and good instruction, and if there arises an argument, the Muslims should argue with them in the best way or manner (Qur'ān: 16:125). "Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold, that never breaks. And Allah hears and knows all things." [Qur'ān: 2:256] Since the verse above was revealed to the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him), who himself is first and foremost a Muslim, it is only fitting that the way we look at the issue of compulsion in religion must be within the ambit of the worldview of Islām. In Islām, religion is an important matter because it is reflection of the Truth. From the authoritative exegesis of Prophet Muhammad's Companion - Ibn ʿAbbās, as collected by al-Fīrūzabādī (1329–1414) the phrase "there is no compulsion in religion" is understood to be referring upon people of the Book (Christians and Jews) and the Magians after the Arabs submitted themselves into Islām. The scholars of tafsīr clearly indicated that it is directed to non-Muslims and not Muslims as claimed by those who condone apostasy among Muslims. These views have found resonance in many authoritative tafāsīr and it has never been grossly misinterpreted in the way that is being peddled by certain groups – the likes of Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) and Sisters in Islam (SIS) – to suit their fanciful slogans of enlightenment and reason. Referring to the verse 256 in chapter 2 of the Qurʾān, the Muslim scholar and the celebrated author of Tadabbur-e-Qurʾān ("Pondering over the Qurʾān"), Shāykh Amīn Aḥsan Iṣlāḥī (1904-1997), was fully aware of the tendency for confused Muslim throughout the ages of using the notion of "there is no compulsion in religion" in making the religion of Islām conforms to their fancy whims and desires, and said: "Some people unfortunately take this verse away from this sense and try to use it for rejecting all legal constraints. They argue that since there is no compulsion in Islām, any attempts to invoke punishments for certain acts are invalid in Islām and are, moreover, mere fabrications on the part of 'mullahs' (note: Muslim scholar title that is widely used in India and Pakistan). If this line of argument is accepted as valid, it would mean that the Islamic Sharīʿah (i.e. Law) is without any prescribed punishments and penalties and that it allows people to behave and act as they please without imposing any restrains on them." What this clearly demonstrates is the ready awareness amongst the learned scholars of Islam regarding the susceptibility of this particular Qur'ānic verse to misrepresentation and misinterpretation in the hands of those who possess neither the prerequisite knowledge nor the proper training that befits a true scholar. It may also be added that this particular verse has barred the Muslim from committing transgressions and atrocities from committing tyrannical religious persecution and forced conversion that stain the history of Europe, the likes of the Spanish Inquisition which in the course of 100 years resulted in the expulsion, forced conversion and killing of over 500,000 Muslims. Indeed, it is most peculiar while Muslim pundits especially in IRF and SIS prefer to chastise people for not looking at the context of the verse but in this case, it is they who remain blind to the context. If we allow the promissory note for such literal interpretation of the verse devoid of scholarly consensus and right guidance, then there would be nothing left to prevent the likes of fanatics, demagogues and even militant extremists from appropriating Islām in order to justify atrocities and perpetuate even further injustices. Rather, such methodology of blind interpretation is characteristic of the Wahhabi ideology that has produced extremists in the past. All of us should heed well the warning by the Holy Prophet which can be found in the Six Books of authentic traditions (Sunan Sittah) of the danger of spiritual and intellectual blindness: "A people will come out at the end of times, immature, foolish and corrupt. They will hold the discourse of the best of creation and recite the Qur'ān, but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its quarry." Those who argue along the lines of half-baked understanding of the Qur'ānic verse often do not even bother to read the second part of the verse that makes clear the distinction between Truth and error. There is no sense in holding on to that verse if this distinction is only mentioned in briefly or outrightly dismissed without equally serious consideration. The religion of Islām makes clear its claim to Truth, and this is why its content is cognitive to the human mind. If this is not granted, then the Qur'ān which is meant for guidance for mankind becomes entirely pointless, just as it is pointless for a someone, after having been forewarned of a burning house acknowledges the guidance given but proceeds headlong to enter it anyway - that is just sheer stupidity on that person's part. Hence, change of religion is neither similar to change of clothes nor the change in appetite for certain foods. A Muslim begins his religious life with the firm certainty with regards to the truth of his religion as revealed in the Qur'ān. Consequently, it follows that the act of choosing falsehood after having been acquainted with truth and living with the truth is certainly something unreasonable and cannot be made reasonable. Anyone who makes conscious decision to leave the religion WILL leave the religion; yet the onus falls on the people who are in collusion in helping him or her leave the religion, without giving us the chance to look at the reasons for leaving in the first place, which is mainly rooted in misunderstandings and ignorance of the religion altogether. Due to the fact that imān also depends on the Muslim's actions in accordance to the principles and the truth of Islām, therefore it is not correct to assert that one's own aqīdah remains intact after having consented to or worse, having participated in securing the apostasy of another Muslim. Freedom as understood in Islam - is there such thing as the freedom to do wrong? Islām conceives freedom as "ikhtiyar", which stems from the word "khayr", meaning "good", implying true freedom is choosing the good instead of the bad, the better over the worse or the best between two alternatives. A person who is presented with a choice between what is good and what is bad and proceeds to choose the bad is not exercising real freedom. In truth, the person is trapped within his own ignorance, thus unable to make the right choice in choosing for the better, and in doing so, has committed a grave injustice to his or her own self and others. God's prohibition to Adam (upon be him be peace) not to approach the forbidden tree only makes sense if he possesses the capability to do so in the first place, which he clearly demonstrated. Thus, it is wrong to say that Adam was given the choice to sin. Similarly, God's prohibitions to man only makes sense if man has the capability to do so in the first place, again, which he clearly demonstrated in the course of history. It would make no sense to issue a prohibition against flying to say, a cat, knowing full well that a cat has not the capability to fly. Therefore the argument saying that God gives man the freedom to commit sin or to change religion is not only fallacious, but also absurd. Just to tie in the knot, within the same sūrah, we are told that Adam after having realized his mistake, repented to God and He accepted it (Qur'ān, 2:37). On action and lawful enforcement - the necessity of action - double standards between political action and intellectual in-action - a perverse notion of power. The according of special position to Islām in the Federal Constitution reflects the worldview of Islām that was present in the minds of people who drafted it. In accordance with the reality that Islām as not merely an official religion but the religion of the Federation -- for the Muslim it is akin to a person who has witnessed (shahādah) and professed the truth of Islām -- no one can claim his Islām, as an ideal, is perfect, rather it is submission (aslama) that must be continuously implemented from time to time in order to grow in the certainty of faith - admittedly as human beings we have our our falling short of performing our religious duties but there is always room for improvement. There is no denying that it is of utmost importance for Muslims to reflect the highest of morals and virtues of Islām in their words and actions; this is emphasized numerous times in the the Qur'ān without the needing the cries of religious modernists as though it was only now realized by the Muslim community. What is more important is our attitude upon finding out that the reality of Islām has been misinterpreted or distorted by people whose knowledge of religion does not come to the level that qualifies them to speak on Islām; is it reasonable to allow these misunderstanding and confusion run rampant without being admonished and refuted by those who are truly qualified? Indeed, courage is not merely proven just by being violent or contentious. However, courage should not be reduced to being overly gentle and apologetic, moreover when ignorance has become rampant. Courage in that situation requires firmness that is based on true knowledge. One can contemplate on the lines by Yeat:
"Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity."
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan