Normal 0 0 1 37 211 Malaysia Today 1 1 259 11.1282 0 0 0

In other words, rulings and punishment would be ‘tailored’ to suit local conditions. This means discretion based on local conditions and situations and whatnot would apply. So the Shariah was not static but dynamic.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Normal 0 0 1 1546 8816 Malaysia Today 73 17 10826 11.1282 0 0 0

(Bernama) -- Students of the Syariah Law Faculty of Universiti Malaya (UM) have launch a "Friends of Kartika" club to demonstrate support for the part-time model who has expressed he wish to be caned by the authorities over her transgression with alcohol.

UM Students Representative Council secretary, Shah Rizul Ayuni Zulkiply told a press conference here today that the objective of the club was to demonstrate support for Kartika by the Muslims students in the university.

She said the club was confident that the decision by Kartika to accept the punishment was a means of correcting herself and be guided by the teachings of Islam.

Kartika was recently fined RM5,000 and ordered to whipped six times by the Kuantan Syariah High Court after she pleaded to consuming alcohol at a hotel in Kuantan some time last year.

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

Many Muslims, Malays of course included, do not realise that there are 6,346 verses in the Quran (Koran) but only about 80 verses or so touch on the issue of ‘laws’. That is slightly over 1% of the Quran. How, therefore, did the Shariah or Islamic law come about?

The Shariah was developed over 300 years from the mid-600s to the mid-900s, after the death of Prophet Muhammad. Some of it was adapted from the Quran, which was revealed over 22 years during the time of the Prophet. The verses of the Quran were not revealed all in one go but came down in bits and pieces as the situation demanded and whenever a ruling needed to be made.

For example, there is the story of how certain people in Medina accused the Prophet’s youngest wife, Aishah, of adultery with a young handsome Arab man. This came about when Aishah was making a journey in the desert and when the caravan stopped she went to answer the call of nature, invariably away from public view. The caravan, not realising that she was missing, continued its journey and she was accidentally left behind.

She returned to the caravan site and discovered that the caravan had left, leaving her behind, so she sat there hoping that they would realise they had left her and come back to fetch her.

But the caravan did not realise she had been left behind until they stopped for the night. So they decided to camp there since it was already getting dark and they would go look for her the next day come daylight.

In the meantime, this young Arab man on his horse came along, saw this woman in a veil sitting all alone in the desert and he immediately recognised her as one of the Prophet’s wives. He had never met Aishah before and of course could not recognise her face -- in fact, Aishah’s face could not be seen because of the veil -- but he knew she was the Prophet’s wife because of the veil that she wore.

At that time only the Prophet’s wives wore veils.

He took her on his horse and pursued the caravan and it was not till the next day they caught up with the caravan. Imagine the people’s surprise when they saw Aishah sitting behind this young man on his horse.

And that started tongues wagging.

Ali, the Prophet’s companion, cousin and son-in-law, who later on became the fourth Caliph (which means ‘successor’) of Medina, felt that a Prophet could not afford a scandal and because of the allegations of adultery against Aishah then probably the Prophet should divorce her.

This troubled the Prophet because he really loved Aishah, who was his favourite wife. Although he refused to divorce her he did leave her and after three days the ruling on adultery was revealed. The Prophet happily went back to Aishah to tell her what had been revealed.

Those who commit adultery should be whipped 100 lashes and those who wrongly accuse someone of adultery should be whipped 80 lashes. And that was what the Quran stipulated as far as punishment for adultery is concerned.

The old pre-Islamic tribal laws for adultery was, of course, stoning to death.

While the Quran forbids the drinking of intoxicating substances, it is ‘silent’ on the punishment. But over 300 years from the mid-600s to the mid-900s, one Qadi (Kadi), the equivalent of a court official during the time of the Caliphs, decided that the punishment for drinking should be the same as that of the punishment for false allegations of adultery, meaning 80 lashes.

So, if Kartika is supposed to be punished according to ‘Islamic law’, then why a fine of RM5,000 and six lashes? Should not the correct punishment be 80 lashes as decided by the Qadi during the era of the mid-600s to the mid-900s? The Qadi during the time of the Caliphs did not impose a fine plus six lashes. It was 80 lashes.

We must remember that the Shariah was not carved in stone, so to speak. It in fact never existed during the time of the Prophet. It developed over 300 years after the Prophet had died. And by the year 1,000 there was no longer any discussion or ‘development’ allowed.

In other words, the Shariah ‘stood still’ for more than 1,000 years until now, 2009. What had been decided before the year 1,000 was accepted as final and complete and any further ‘innovation’ was declared haram and classified as bida’ah (the Arabic word for ‘innovation’).

But the Shariah itself varied from city to city and from time to time. Let us focus on just two seats of the Islamic Empire at that time -- Medina and Kufa. Medina was ruled by the four Caliphs -- Abu Bakar, Omar, Othman and Ali -- while Kufa was ruled by its governor, Muawiyah, which became the seat of the Umayyad Empire.

In Medina, the punishment of cutting off the hands of thieves would apply if the item you stole exceeded the value of three dirhams while in Kufa it was ten dirhams. This means if you stole a bicycle in Medina your hands would be cut off while it was a motorcycle in Kufa, to use this analogy as a ‘modern’ yardstick. Then, in other parts of the Empire, even stealing a loaf of bread could mean your hands would be cut off.

Different Qadi at different times and different places over those 300 years decided on rulings and punishments based on ‘local conditions’. They would take into consideration local tribal customs, the state of emergency (whether they are at war or at peace), how society functions, the ‘value system’ of the society at that time, and whatnot.

In other words, rulings and punishment would be ‘tailored’ to suit local conditions. This means discretion based on local conditions and situations and whatnot would apply. So the Shariah was not static but dynamic.

For example, in Medina, the man of the household would negotiate a woman’s marriage ‘contract’ such as dowry and so on. Women must stay out of the entire thing and just accept what has been decided. In Kufa, a woman can negotiate her own terms and can make her own decisions regarding her marriage. So the price for ‘sacrificing her virginity’ is hers to decide in Kufa, while in Medina the man of the house decides the woman’s ‘worth’.

The greatest tragedy in Islam was when by the year 1,000 or so they decided that no further ‘innovations’ would be allowed. So, for more than 1,000 years, Muslims have had to live by the rules decided long before the year 1,000 by people who took ‘local conditions’ into consideration in making these rules.

Even then, the rules were not consistent. They varied from place to place and period to period. They changed as and when the Qadi decided they needed to be changed. And some Qadi were strict while others were pragmatic. And when the Umayyad Empire was toppled and the Abbasids took over, the rules were again changed, right up to the time of Harun Al Rashid.

During the time of Harun Al Rashid, a power struggle ensued between the Caliph and the religionists. As a compromise, a deal was struck whereby the religionists would decide on the laws and the Caliph would merely implement the laws. If Harun Al Rashid had resisted he would have been ousted just like the Umayyads before that.

In that sense it was a power-sharing contract of sorts, a separation of the church and state, as they would say in the west. No longer did the state have the power to make laws. The religionists took over this function. But in this case, while the ‘church’ had the powers to make the laws, the ‘state’ was obligated to enforce them or else get kicked out.

Muslims, in particular the Malays, have to understand how the Shariah came about and how it developed over 300 years after the death of the Prophet until what it is today. And they must also understand how ‘time stood still’ for more than 1,000 years because of the many power struggles between Medina and Kufa (which saw the Muslims split into Sunnis and Shiahs, until today), the Abbasids and Umayyads, and the Caliphs and the ‘men of the cloth’.

Imam Malik had a different view and his Muwatta’ lies testimony to this. Zayd too had a different view and it was he who decided on the 80 lashes for drinking where during the time of the Prophet this had not been the case. Abu Yussuf in fact even went into conflict with Harun Al Rahid as to what the proper interpretation of the law should be. And Malik was even whipped and jailed because he and the Caliph disagreed on the doctrine.

And Malaysian Malays, most who follow Imam Shafie, would certainly disagree with Malik, who not only made it legal to keep slaves but also the slave owner is allowed to have sex with female slaves. That is not considered adultery or extra-marital sex since the slave is your property anyway.

This law has never changed until today although I would not know where one can buy female slaves nowadays.

I say we should open the doors for the reinterpretation of Islam and allow ‘innovation’, which has since been outlawed by Islam. And we need brave Muslims to study the history of the Shariah and decide what applies in this day and age and according to the environment we live in.

If we really want to split hairs, then even the Amanah Saham, which many Malays invest in, is haram. Any profit made through no effort of your own is considered usury, according to Zayd, and is therefore haram. Are we prepared to follow Islam to the letter or do we just want to pick and choose what suits us and conveniently ignore the rest since it would be profitable to do so?

That is my take on the Kartika issue and I sincerely apologise if my views differ from that of ‘mainstream’ Muslims. After all, even Malik and the Caliph disagreed on the doctrine of Islam and he was punished severely for that.

Ultimately, what we have today is what the victors or what those in power have decided for us. Those who disagreed but did not have the power to voice their opinions lost out and their views, whether correct or otherwise, died with them.

Do we not say the victors and not the vanquished write the books?

Comments (80)

...
written by DontPlayGod, October 22, 2009 17:49:28

To MSIA_RYAZA,

It is not a case of non-Muslims supporting RPK, etc. It is just a case of speaking up on facts as they are. And you are also welcome to comment on other religions, too. But then there are no reasons for you to comment on other religions because all other religions never try to impose their rules, or scriptures on their followers or non-followers. Other religions never say that their religion is perfect and is the only true religion, and all other religions are false.

And, most of all, other religions never try to set up a Christian state, Buddhist State, Hindu state, Taoist state, etc. and impose laws on all others. Other religions never stop other religions, including Islam from building their mosques, suraus, even though they may be in the small minority in that particular community. Notice how the Muslims have set up surau and big, shining mosques even though they are in the minority in some Tamans and towns? And do you hear of non-Muslims protesting or demonstrating, like in the cowhead incident in P.J? And in some Islamic states, other non-Islamic religions are banned like in Afghanistan under Taliban rule. Non-Islamic religions are also banned in Iran.

So MSIA_RYAZA, is all this clear to you now? One of the major reasons, besides many other reasons, Muslims want to politicize their religion, and this will draw flak and criticisms from all and sundry, although there is nothing in the Koran that Islam is a political ideology.

• 
• +3
• 
• 

...
written by Paramjothy, October 22, 2009 13:19:07

Religion has been the major cause for all the problems of the world. This is because man really never understood his religion. The are so many interpretation of each religion and this is causing major problems in all parts of the world.Religion is personal between you and god and only god can judge you as he only knows your intention for all your actions.Religion teaches people to be good but see what is happening all around the world. God gave man and woman something call free to choose and how many religion actually allows you to choose. If you remove all religion from the world then there will be peace and you do what you want to do except your actions are not harmful to others.No body was empowered by god to do his judgement and all this are man made to control others for their own interest. I question I would like to know is if you are punished here for your action then will you be punished again in god's land for this action again. Then where can i complain for double jeopardy.We need a rule of law so we can live without fear and respect others for the life they choose to live by. I propose that we should separate religion and the state and use common law (more common sense) in what ever we do. For example if we take the topic of stealing. All religion teaches that stealing is bad but what does common sense say's about stealing. So you do not need a religion to be good as long as you you the common sense. The sad part is in this world most religion has disabled the common sense of man.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by MSIA_RYAZA, October 22, 2009 12:52:37

kami, non partisan melayu muda yang pro-PR, jelas sangat dengan sikap pendokong PR non muslim. PR akan retak jua akhirnya.

PAS dan islam menentang penzinaan dan seks bebas.. malang sekali kebanyakan non muslim dalam PR mendokong seks bebas atas alasan hak asasi.. sudah la tuuu

• 
• +1
• 
• 

...
written by MSIA_RYAZA, October 22, 2009 12:44:41

wah RPK, now u got great non muslims supporting on u.. most chinese fellas love to condemn our religion n now, u give them the way.

n they said "Thanks YM RPK for the enlightening discourse"

kalo macam ni pendokong PR, sampai bila2 pun org melayu akan pastikan UBN kekal memerintah.. pangkah PAS/PKR ok, pangkah DAP tidak sekali

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by La Cha Mau, October 22, 2009 07:09:20

Thanks YM RPK for the enlightening discourse. As stated above and I quote:"how certain people in Medina accused the Prophet’s youngest wife, Aishah"; "he immediately recognised her as one of the Prophet’s wives" and "At that time only the Prophet’s wives wore veils". Pray tell, how many wives did the Prophet had in total? Was it four or were there more? I simply can't envision how a pious & religious man of God who spent so much time praying & preaching the word of God can actually find time fornicating with so many women. I say 'women' because I believe NONE of them were his legal wives. It so happen that he was at the head of the group so no-one dare question him...i guess just like present days where one can be charged with sedition if one questions otherwise.

• 
• -4
• 
• 

...
written by kawaafi, October 21, 2009 01:11:28

Salam..

RPK please check your fact. Aisyah did not ride behind Sufyan on the horse back. As I was made to understand, Sufyan as a gentlement, allow Aisyah to ride on the horse back and walk in front.

The Quran reveal a specific verse exonarated Aisyah from adultery. That is why Aisyah only thank Allah swt. not even prophet Muhammad pbuh for freeing her from the adultery fitnah..

100 lashes for adultery for single person. Married people who committed adultery is punishable by stoning to death. I need to say, never in Islamic court history, anybody is punished by proved of evidence and witnesses. Only through confession, and wanted to be punished as such.

You are very correct to say that syariah should and can be adjusted according to time, and sociso economic environment. But the basic thing is, there is a WANT and Readiness to refer to Quran, Sunnah and Muslim Ulama to uphold the Syariah..

• 
• +9
• 
• 

...
written by anon, October 19, 2009 13:53:10

ON SECOND THOUGHTS PETE, DO NOT CALL ME - I WANT TO KNOW IF IT IS REALLY YOU.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by anon, October 19, 2009 13:17:51

YOU MAY SAY IT IS A STUNNING REVELATION.

YOU KNOW WHO I AM. YOU HAVE MY ADDRESS AND MY CELL PHONE NUMBER.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THIS IS A FACT OR A FALLACY.

PETE, DO LET ME KNOW.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by anon, October 19, 2009 13:13:35

DEAR RPK,

I HAVE SOME INFORMATION THAT I FIND VERY INTERESTING. I WANTED TO POST IT IN MY BLOG BUT THAT WOULD BE CERTAINLY ASKING FOR THE ISA TO BE CLAMPED ON ME.

NOTHING IS MENTIONED ABOUT IT BUT I SUSPECT SOME MUSLIMS DO KNOW ABOUT IT. IT CANNOT BE IGNORED AS HARAM AND THE AUTHOR AS A KAFIR.

IF THERE IS ANY MUSLIM WHO WILL READ ABOUT IT AND THINK IN AN OBJECTIVE WAY - THAT WILL BE YOU.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF YOU ARE INDEED RAJA PETRA KAMARUDIN.

HOW CAN I SEND THIS ALL TO YOU? PLEASE LET ME KNOW.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DontPlayGod, October 19, 2009 11:21:50

To me, one of the greatest joke in our present civilization are men making ruling and laws and claiming they are God's laws. Who in their right mind would want to submit themselves to such laws? And who are these people who make such laws? Are they qualified, and who qualified them? To me, only God can qualify them, and I don't believe God qualfied anybody to rule on his behalf, yes, not even did God qualifiy the Pope, or any chief priest.

But then these "religious" people desire to control people, and make the people dance to their tune, and hence, the mose effective way is to claim they are God's agents(who have been authorised by God).

• 
• +9
• 
• 

...
written by billyong, October 19, 2009 10:56:13

If Muslims are pious enough to live like the Prophet to the very "t", they should be :
1. Living in tents and in a desert and not a RM24m estate in Shah Alam.
2. They should be using camels as a mode of transportation instead of BMWs, Mercedes, Volvos, etc.
3. They should be having bread and dates for each meal instead of palace banquet and KFC/McDonald's fast food.
4. They tell time by just looking at the sun and moon; instead of Seiko and Rolex watches.
5. They spend time in prayers; and not in front of a TV watching ASTRO.
6. The Malaysian army should only be equipped to fight with swords (curved ones), spears and arrows instead of AK-47 and M16. Fighting the enemies with submarines, tanks and MIGs is a no-no as it should be considered haram.

So what I am trying to say is, Muslims here cannot pick and choose what suits them or don't suit them. If you are a Muslim live like one of the Prophet's time.

• 
• -1
• 
• 

...
written by Century Patriot, October 19, 2009 07:02:37

Mankind greatest mistake is to allow Theologeons/religinists to decide what is GOOD, EVIL, RIGHT and WRONG!! Period.

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by Mangrovejumper, October 19, 2009 05:50:29

Alcohol is the treatment drug used to prevent toxicity from car antifreeze (ethylene glycol) overdose. Obviously religions that make blanket statements preventing alcohol consumption did not take into account its therapeutic use in the medical field.

Perhaps RPK's innovation includes redefining the word of the law to include intention, rather than just a superficial noun. For example, "alcohol" should be removed, and replaced by "abuse of mind altering substances"...crack cocaine, MJ, LSD, heroin, etc.

• 
• -1
• 
• 

...
written by cantab, October 19, 2009 00:16:19

New government circulars are constantly replacing the old circulars in the light of current developments. I am surprised why the old purported-God-inspired laws are not subjected to change for around 1,000 years -- a decree set by men. My opinion is, we should not be too indoctrinated and follow blindly what the ancient religionists taught us. We have God-given brains to think and to discern what is right and wrong. Please don't make the same mistake like the rome-based religionists when they punished people who said that Earth revolves around the sun which after over hundred of years, was proven these religionists were WRONG. The same goes for other religions.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by DontPlayGod, October 18, 2009 15:04:32

I have maintained all along that the scriptures, all religions, were not written by the prophets nor vetted and approved by them. Most of the scriptures are just a collections of the writings of the various followers, and how accurate or correct their writings are is up to us to consider. For a start, as I have written before, there were no proper writing materials in those ancient times. No note books, or exercise books to carry along, and no pencil or ball pen. Of course, there were also no recorders, etc. People have to write at their home with primitive material. As for paper, etc. has paper manufacturing or other materials been in use then? China was the first to manufacturer paper, but these are not easily or readily available, like they are now. So how can those followers write down the prophet's speeches on the spot? Of course, they can't. They can only return home, and write down from memory. And how many paper or manuscript materials do they have? And how accurate are their account, remembering that they have to write down everything from memory. And that too, depending on how fast they got down to writing what they have heard. And we are talking of them immediately returning home and start writing. But is this so? Remember that the Prophet was illiterate.

If you were to attend a lecture/talk, and you were asked to write down from memory immediately after the talk, how much do you think you can write down of what you have heard. I would give you a higher distinction if you can write down, immediately after the "talk", even 50% of what you have heard accurately. And, people, please remember that the "words" were not written down immediately, but maybe days, or weeks after. So 30% of what you have heard, perhaps, can be written from memory, say? And someone wrote here that the Koran was written 30 years after the death of the prophet, after getting a collection of the "notes" from various sources. I am not trying to put down anybody or anything, but just to discuss in an acaemic way. And of course, the religious leaders will say that the Koran is the exact words of God. They have to say this, or else, how can they control the followers, and believers, and make them believe in the Koran? The same goes for the Bible, etc. The bible was not written by Jesus the prophet, but is also a collection of the writings of the various followers.

People, just read the scriptures, and try to understand the gist of it, try to understand the message they are trying to convey, and use your own brains and interpretation. Do not by cowed by the priests, bishops, mufti's, ayatollahs, or whatever. Who are these people to cow you or control you. After all, in the final analysis, you will be 100% answerable, and no one will answer for you, not your parents, your Menteri Besar's or your PM, or even your imam, mufti's, ayatollah, bishops and cardinals.

By the way, talking of the syariah, the syariah is God's laws, otherwise why call it syariah. If it is men's laws, then it is not syariah is it? So, my question here is, is it God's laws? If it is, then how come they have different interpretations in different countries. For example, in Sudan, the syariah court imposed a 40 lashes punishment on a woman who wore trousers, the courts claiming that wearing trousers is obscene. So we can assume safely that God decreed that wearing trousers is obscene, after all that is what syariah is all about.

Stop playing God, and people, you and you alone, are answerable to God. Nobody else will bear your sins, except you. And nobody else can answer for you, not even an iota of anything.

• 
• +7
• 
• 

...
written by Rozlan, October 18, 2009 12:32:48

Please refer to Syed Qutb book "Misunderstanding of Islam" about the slavery if you really care about it..Syed Qutb had given the details about slavery concept in Islam.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by varvoom, October 18, 2009 09:19:16

Aww..in d name of free speech can i c butek writing..

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by bodohland_citizen, October 18, 2009 09:01:15

BUTEK IS KOTEK !!!

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by bodohland_citizen, October 18, 2009 08:21:45

Butek what a name to wank upon, my dog will wank 1000 times chanting his name

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by bodohland_citizen, October 18, 2009 08:19:11

Butek is an arse hole, a typical racist who doesn't know his origin. perios.

• 
• +3
• 
• 

...
written by bodohland_citizen, October 18, 2009 08:17:48

Dear RPK, anything touches on Islam and Shariah, you better get you article translated to Malay as well. You know, uneducated UMNO members will file complain against you and the UMNO police will ever ready go all out to nab you simply because they don't understand your artiles in English and that's your crime ?

• 
• +6
• 
• 

...
written by KotaDamansara73, October 18, 2009 07:33:54

RPK,

If that is the case, then the liberal Malays will have to go to war with UMNO and PAS to bring those fellow down. And then rewrite the whole law.

Make sure this time, that the Islamic laws allows prostitution and alcohol and eating pork.

• 
• -4
• 
• 

...
written by imanj, October 18, 2009 01:47:14

Butek....

I don't normally entertain childish comments but I could not resist to say this to you and many others who would have your same attitude...

Do you actually have a mind that isn't thinking rationally.It would seem from what you say,your everyday mannerisms could be just as appaulling..Did you have an upbringing that included racism that shows for your name calling and attitude? How different are you and that of many in this world who encouraged racism and even killed to wipe out any undesirable race that's in their face..?

I wonder if you would have the gall to be this expressive if you were the minority in a white dominance? Would you have what it takes to compete with the complexity of the human race that makes up this entire world...?

I hope your generation are spared this cancerous attitude that is surely the most unkind,where it's the very core of human relation destruction...

• 
• +12
• 
• 

...
written by Trigem, October 17, 2009 18:22:15

Butek,

Good ahead. Implement the Syarish law. The UMNO corrupts will be the first ones to have their hands chopped off. My Pas neighbor told that the reason UMNO rejects Syariah was the fear of this punishment. Corruption is stealing in Islam. That law does not affect non-Muslims.

• 
• +12
• 
• 

...
written by Avanza1, October 17, 2009 18:18:20

BUTEK,

We do not vote blindly just for Syariah Law. We will vote for justice, fair, clean and efficient Government.We do no wish to for ppl who will bring us back 1400 yrs. The world economy is not doing well do not spend our precious resources just to bring us the Arabian desert.

By the way, we are not pigs but we humans who eats pork. Not only Chinese eats pork in this world of ours. There are other bumiputras who eats pork too. If you don't like it as a fact and tolerate, pls go somewhere that you will see pigs or pork served.

• 
• +8
• 
• 

...
written by Trigem, October 17, 2009 18:07:36

This is for Butek only!

If this is the case, I would rally all Chinese in Malaysia to persuade our brothers and sisters in China to shun all Malays from doing any business in China. At the same time, we ask our Chinese leadership start to send a small group of meager 30 million to just squad permanently in Malaysia. If the authority dare to touch us, let the Chinese government invade the country and eliminate all Malays from the surface of the world. Chinese are good warriors with 5,000 years of experience in warfare. How's that for you, Butek?

Remember, the Chinese are not Jews who are small in population. Yes, we are rich and we are big, too. We can't be bullied like the Jews in Israel. Want to try take on the Chinese militarily?

• 
• +10
• 
• 

...
written by BUTEK, October 17, 2009 16:50:10

REMEMBER MALAY.. IF YOU VOTE FOR PKR CHINESE AND DAP PIG THEN THEY WILL PREVENT YOU TO PRACTICE SYARIAH LAW.... YOU CAN READ HOW THE CHINESE PIGS HERE REALLY HATE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SYARIAH LAW FOR MUSLIM..

GIVE YOUR UNDIVIDED SUPPORT TO UMNO... MALAY VOTE IS FOR MALAY NOT FOR OALNG MKN BABI......

• 
• -18
• 
• 

...
written by A MI, October 17, 2009 11:29:11

we can talk about this till the cows come home but will any sunni muslim listen?

There are louder more powerful mullaha and worse still those fatwa -making fellas in JAIM/ JAIS or all the xAIM and xAIS of the various states who will make fatwas for everything that freaks them out. sigh.

Just curious: I was watching some Malay Muslim women in a shopping mall last weekend who took it upon themselves to wear a headress but they wore short (cap) sleeve tight fitting tops. I would have thought it would have been less sexy even if they had their hair exposed but wore looser fitting tops. See how things get all lost? It is written in the Quran about safeguarding modesty which has been interpreted differently.

• 
• +5
• 
• 

...
written by leftygoodfella, October 17, 2009 11:23:00

written by FFT, October 17, 2009 12:42:13
Ali, the Prophet’s companion, cousin and son-in-law,...

Something doesn't quite compute here...hmmm, what could it be?

Ali was adopted and raised by the prophet as a child. He grew up in the house of the prophet. Can you tell me what bothers you? Which thing doesn't 'quite compute' here? I'm more than willing to share my knowledge of history with you. Perhaps it may clear your confusion as I believe you ask the question not out of ignorance.

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by lakian, October 17, 2009 11:21:08

Indonesia has the biggest population of muslim in the world,yet she can has prostitution not say legalised but recognised cos' as far as I know in every town there is a place or in Indo called "lokasi".There you can find hundreds and thousands depand on the scale of the town cewek doing sex.Whosoever can freely in and out.Moreover,the national health authority come once in a month to carry out health checking.They will stop sex only during solat.So what is your comment?????

• 
• +4
• 
• 

...
written by umstudent, October 17, 2009 08:47:42

Salam RPK and all MT readers.
Just want to add my 2 cents here.

Do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight and mind, all these are held responsible for that.[17:36]
They are the ones who examine all words, then follow the best. These are the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess intelligence.[39:18]
If you obey the majority of those on earth they will lead you away from God's path; that is because they follow conjecture, and that is because they only guess. [6:116]


By just quoting this two verses in Quran, we can see that today's muslim have failed to follow Quran which they acknowledge as the word of God. God's don't want a robot, there's a reason we have all of our senses. Muslim should read and study (especially the Quran) more, engage in debate, think critically etc. In my opinion, the reason why Quran only containing slightly over 1% (RPK's fact, I didn't check this one ) of verses concerning law is because God's want to make it easy for us, He only detailed what is needed, the rest? It's up to us, as long as it in accordance with Islamic value such as freedom of speech, freedom to believe, etc.
Let us ponder on the following verses:

A group He has guided and a group has deserved misguidance; that is because they have taken the devils as allies besides God; and they think they are guided [ 7:30]

When your Lord took from the children of Adam from their backs, their progeny; and He made them witness over themselves:"Am I not your Lord?" They said, "Yes, we bear witness." Thus you cannot say on the day of Resurrection that you were unaware of this. [7:172]

Nor you can say, " It was our fathers who set up partners before and we were simply a progeny who came after them. Would you destroy us for what the innovators did?" [7:173]

We thus explain the signs, perhaps they will return. [7:174]

We have committed to hell many Jinns and humans. They have hearts, yet they do not comprehend; they have eyes yet they do not see; they have ears yet they do not hear. They are like cattle; no, they are even more astray. These are the heedless ones. [7:179]

Peace.
Anything good is from God, anything bad is bad is because of my wrong choice..

• 
• +8
• 
• 

...
written by Davy McChester, October 17, 2009 08:12:26

It is a breathing, living, evolving universe,nothing is static. So is this minute planet called earth where minute life transformed to where it is today;and ,in all probability ,it would continue to do so. You have charlatans throughout ages and masses ,out of fear of the unknown,being taken advantage of. Imagine 1400 hundred years ago,had one bright Charlie invented the mere radio box instead of speaking from behind the bushes ,radio would have been proclaimed God. Grow up and ditch the BS ! We are evolving and so is our intelligence.Cut the crab out !

• 
• +5
• 
• 

...
written by AsamLaksa, October 17, 2009 07:43:05

No, Alice, they are ruled by fear. Fear that the illusion of perfection will crumble right before their eyes. Fear that they will have to face their own hypocrisy.

Imagine one day to discover that all that you held sacred is false. Doubt and inquiry removes the layers of falsehood. Thus doubt and terse inquiry becomes sin. See the pattern that applies not just to religion?

Fear clouds truth. You see it in people living in denial.

• 
• +8
• 
• 

...
written by Alice, October 17, 2009 07:26:06

RPK I did not manage to read your long article.However I still want to comment without reading.Many,many Malays do not want to know anything.Most of all the Malays don't want to know the TRUTH.I am dead exhausted trying to make them see the truth.They have a herd mentality and are actually terrified of hearing the TRUTH. GOD SAVE THEM!!

• 
• +6
• 
• 

...
written by Super Admin, October 17, 2009 05:34:07

Dear hellboykl, I do not wish the Muslims Selamat Hari Raya or the Chinese Kong Hee Fatt Choy or the Christians Merry Christmas, etc., as well. I did not even wish my Kamunting prison guards Selamat Hari Raya and neither did they wish me Happy Birthday.

So that's life.

RPK

• 
• +24
• 
• 

...
written by FFT, October 17, 2009 04:42:13

Ali, the Prophet’s companion, cousin and son-in-law,...

Something doesn't quite compute here...hmmm, what could it be?

• 
• +3
• 
• 

...
written by takbolehtahan, October 17, 2009 04:17:03

RPK, your knowledge on Islam shows that you do a lot, and i mean, a lot of reading. And reading extensively takes a lot of time because it's not only just reading but understanding what's being written in the right context. Malaysians are generally not a reading society, as evidenced by the lack of libraries in this country, compared to UK. Perhaps this is also a deliberate move by the govt to stifle the public's knowledge. So it is understandable, although not acceptable, why many Malays (and non-Malays) do not understand a lot of issues, let alone about Islam. I bet a lot of their 'understanding' of Islam comes, not from reading, but from lessons taught in schools, mosques and family members. Further reading was probably not an option.

• 
• +8
• 
• 

...
written by imanj, October 17, 2009 04:05:36

We read and read what information we get...gain better insight and hope with understanding to follow what is right...

Life given by the 'ALMIGHTY' only the ' ALMIGHTY 'to take it from us...

Has anyone really felt ultimate peace within our hearts,has anyone really understood life itself from it's first creation..?..yet we choose to judge and kill life...

RPK,thank you for your articles,whether it helps me in my life,I'm sure it would help many others...

Wishing everyone 'HAPPY DEEPAVALI'..having a drink on anyone who chooses the path of goodness would be fine by me...Cheers!!

• 
• +8
• 
• 

...
written by 1eyecls, October 17, 2009 03:43:53

Alcohol
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the generic chemistry term. For the kind of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages, see Ethanol. For beverages containing alcohol, see Alcoholic beverage. For other uses, see Alcohol (disambiguation).

Functional group of an alcohol molecule. The carbon atom is bound to hydrogen atoms and may bind to other carbon atom(s) to form a carbon chain. Methanol, an alcohol with a single carbon atom, is pictured. Ethanol, which is drinking alcohol, has two carbon atoms.In chemistry, an alcohol is any organic compound in which a hydroxyl group (-OH) is bound to a carbon atom of an alkyl or substituted alkyl group. An important group of acohols is formed by the simple acyclic alcohols, the general formula for which is CnH2n 1OH. Of those, ethanol (C2H5OH) is the type of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages, and in common speech the word alcohol means, specifically, ethanol.

Other alcohols are usually described with a clarifying adjective, as in isopropyl alcohol (propan-2-ol) or wood alcohol (methyl alcohol, or methanol). The suffix -ol appears in the IUPAC chemical name of all alcohols.

There are three major subsets of alcohols: primary (1°), secondary (2°) and tertiary (3°), based upon the number of carbon atoms the C-OH group's carbon (shown in red) is bonded to. Ethanol is a simple 'primary' alcohol. The simplest secondary alcohol is isopropyl alcohol (propan-2-ol), and a simple tertiary alcohol is tert-butyl alcohol (2-methylpropan-2-ol).

.................................................................................

first of all,kathika was consuming beer or liquor?

and,further to that,does syariah's defination on alcohol is as clearly stated in the Wikipedia above?

thirdly,in the syariah terms,how many percentage of alcohol in a drink considerd a n 'alcoholic' drink?

lastly,we are using 1000 year old laws to implement on modern lifestyle,is it saint or insaint?

• 
• +15
• 
• 

...
written by anon, October 17, 2009 02:22:42

This is what I wrote about - misinterpretations of the Koran. What do we have here - what what the Prophet said .... not recorded/documented, then after many years, written (like everyone has a photographic memory and remembers exactly what the Prophet said.

Here lies the root cause of all evil - miscontruing and misinterpreting anything and everything - to suit the person's needs. Man-made laws based on tribal laws.

And what can anyone expect from brilliant scholars of Universiti Malaya? I don't think I have to go into details about these intellectuals.

To me it's very simple. Take the good and leave the bad. Follow what YOU feel is right. Yes I believe in GOD Almighty. But I am only human and have my flaws but the one flaw that I do not have is to blindly follow so-called man-made rules which are blatantly ludicrous. According to these ignorant people, they attribute these laws as God's Laws - like God spoke to them personally. GOD gave you a mind to think and to think in a proper way.

Last night I was attending a function - the blessing was done by a Christian and the people who asked this person to bless are Hindus. There were Indians and Chines mixing freely - genuine friends. I actually was envious of my good friend - a lawyer and his wife...an excellent person, full of love and compassion. They are an excellent pair.

Why can't people be genuine like the ones I met last night? They have no semblance of animosity against any race, religion or beliefs.

In any case - HAPPY DEEPAVALI to all Hindus here and around the globe and to all Malaysians.

• 
• +21
• 
• 

...
written by talk2stop, October 17, 2009 02:13:55

Islam is no different from Christainity and/or any other teachings. We take and/or accept what is convenient to us. Religion is complicated and confusing and the verses are mind boggling.
So I will spend my moment of time on the earth and do my duty I call to do. When I die I hope I done the right thing not to religion but to (wo)mankind.
So help me GOD/ALLAH.

• 
• +11
• 
• 

...
written by safetyknob, October 17, 2009 01:54:06

"That is not considered adultery or extra-marital sex since the slave is your property anyway".

If that's the case having sex with prostitute is OK since the prostitute is rented/leased property?

• 
• +24
• 
• 

...
written by temanmu, October 17, 2009 00:30:55

"That is not considered adultery or extra-marital sex since the slave is your property anyway".

Not all 1000 year rules are bad! Haha!!!!!

• 
• +13
• 
• 

...
written by sydput, October 16, 2009 23:52:27

It is bad enough for kartika as it cost her RM5k for a mug of beer.Now she has freinds in UM. With friends like these, who needs enemies.
In the first place, there no suc thing as syariah law. The koran is a guide and not a legal document. The hadith and sunnah were supposedly historical accounts written by people with unknown distinction. So why are muslims stuck with these as reference.
We have been given common sense by God and everyone instinctively knows right from wrong. Which is what common law is based on. But for the beelivers of religion, , the wrong can be made correct and the right can be made abhorrent.Religion clouds our mind.Imagine killing innocents for 72 virgins in the next life ans I am sure, many moral guided person will undersand what I a talking about.

• 
• +21
• 
• 

...
written by SBennit, October 16, 2009 22:59:45

Dear hellboykl,

Who the fucck do you think you are to demand a deepavali greeting from RPK.

I suggest that you go read a Tamil Nessan or something like that.

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

• 
• -13
• 
• 

...
written by cheemengwong, October 16, 2009 21:11:45

Selamat Hari Deepavali to all my Hindu friends in Malaysia and the world. May God grant you peace.

Amen

• 
• +12
• 
• 

...
written by leftygoodfella, October 16, 2009 21:00:22

And to think that most Hadith in Sahih Bukhari, Muslim, and ibn Majah (considered the most authentic after Quran) was narrated by Abu Hurairah..

RPK: "I say we should open the doors for the reinterpretation of Islam and allow ‘innovation’, which has since been outlawed by Islam. And we need brave Muslims to study the history of the Shariah and decide what applies in this day and age and according to the environment we live in."

Reinterpretation, study and research, YES. Innovation, NAY. What we should do is just to go back to the basics. That's why I always call myself a fundamentalist Muslim, though I appear to the masses as a liberal Muslim. "Fundamental" means "basic", right? Just don't create a ruling or law which was never mentioned by God and call it Islamic.

You see, I'm a Muslim and I play with dog. Imagine the protest from the Muslims around me. I say, never in the Quran says that dog is haram. Dog was even respected in Quran in the verse of Ashabul-kahfi (seven sleepers of ephesus). I find it hard to believe that the same God who created such companionable creatures would have his prophet declare them "unclean."

Turns out the hadith was narrated by Abu Hurairah, a renown cat lover (Abu Hurairah means "Father of Cats" in Arabic).

So, who's being 'innovative' now? Malay call it, "memandai-mandai"..

• 
• +22
• 
• 

...
written by hellboykl, October 16, 2009 20:05:52

Dear RPK,

Today is Deepavali and I did not see any greeting's from you. Why?

• 
• +8
• 
• 

...
written by Avanza1, October 16, 2009 19:56:05

Malaya have tailored her own Law since Merdeka. Please don't let be be "colonized" by tibal laws using locals as proxies. we do not need another Judiciary and to spend more of our tax monies building more Syariah Courts and more Syariah lawyers and Islamic policemen. If our government is efficient, please stick to Federal Law. Put our resources to better uses, eg. fighting snatch thiefs, robbers, rapist, gangsters, drug pushes, illegal immigrants.

What did Quran say about rape and the punishment for rape?

• 
• +27
• 
• 

...
written by Super Admin, October 16, 2009 18:56:26

Dear leftygoodfella, yes, in fact I corrected it just before your posting. The Umayyad's lasted less than 100 years before the Abassids took over and the Karbala tragedy was between Ali's son and Muawiyah's son. And Muawiyah was Governor of what today woud be Iraq. In fact Abu Hurairah, the 'famous' writer of Hadith, was Muawiyah's governor of Yemen for two years but was recalled because of corruption, if my memory is correct.

RPK

• 
• +10
• 
• 

...
written by leftygoodfella, October 16, 2009 18:47:47

Just to correct some facts here, Pete. It was the Umayyads first, followed by the Abassids. Muawiyyah (May the Curse of God be upon the oppressor) was from Bani Umayyah.. None of the Umayyads nor Abassids were caliphs of Islam, they were all self-proclaimed king of the arabs. They hate the family of the Prophets. Muawiyyah's son, Yazid (May the Curse of God be upon the oppressor) killed the Prophet's grandson and beheaded him in the battle of Karbala out of hatred. How come the people who hate their own Prophet can be the leaders of Muslim? The Islam that we have today is a twisted version of Islam, altered by those corrupted oppressors who called themselves "Khalifah", who claimed the throne by dirty politics; just to suits their preIslamic Arab-jahiliah needs.
That is why I never protest when people said that Islam was spread by swords. The Kings of Arab (which was never elected democratically) and their supporters are guilty of this. Muslims can live in denial but history can't lie. Not all history are written by the victors, some are written by the observers.

in remembrance of the day of Ashura. in the spirit of Husayn's resistance movement against oppression. Everyday is Ashura, Everywhere is Karbala.

• 
• +13
• 
• 

...
written by Fart Fart Wah, October 16, 2009 18:35:44

RPK...you are just flogging a dead Moolayu horse. You wrote an article about "munafiques" sometime back..it repeats exactly what is being said here differently.
As for me I am of the opinion that the Koran is playing a second fiddle to the other writings. The other writings are a potpourri of tribal practice, culture and male chauvanisim and mammon(money). You will have the crowning one by Ayatollah Komeini where he okays sex with a baby.Without giving a chance for education muslim women in some countries are forced to follow like our local kerbaus. And now we have enlightened students from UM who want to cane this woman too.
With the standard of education in MU where they never learned to question things..we will have Moolayus like this. Why don't you ask them about Najib's son drinking in London while gropping some white girls????or Hishammudin and wife having a beer as students.....or Mammothir selling Queen Brandy in the 60s and 70's ...
I tell ..you are flogging a dead horse...you see they never read and never question and never investigate. With so much of information..Malays are still in a denial mode..that there is no such thing as a Malay race..that Islam began in Arabia not Malaysia..and Islam is not practiced as it should be...and that is my friend from one of our supposed TOP U's...

• 
• +30
• 
• 

...
written by Trigem, October 16, 2009 17:35:14

BUTEK, Kartika will be a lot happier she stays in Singapore because nobody there gives a shit whether she drinks or not. Sometimes, I can't understand the mentality of the religious extremists. If God is unhappy about certain individuals who commit sins, God can take care of those people. Why do you need to interfere with God's work by punishing them on his behalf? What? You can't trust God?

Leave all the sinners alone! God will take care of them later when they die.

• 
• +53
• 
• 

...
written by Trigem, October 16, 2009 17:27:44

Why god never send down prophets every century? Because he does not exist. He is only imaginary.

I know, someone will smite me.

• 
• +17
• 
• 

...
written by pwcheng, October 16, 2009 17:06:44

Good to see that our Malaysian Malays brand of Islam is following true to every inch of the Islamic teachings, except they had never mentioned that corruption is haram. Can any Islamic philosopher explain this Malaysian Muslim myth.

• 
• +23
• 
• 

...
written by BUTEK, October 16, 2009 16:50:11

If you vote DAP in the next general elaction than the syariah law will be deleted forever... you know that chinese will robe everything from you... just what Lee Kuan Yew singapore DAP did to the singaporean muslim....

vote UMNO to maintain the dignity OF ISLAMIC LAW and KETUANAN MELAYU.....

HIDUP UMNO!!!!! MAKAL SAKTHI

• 
• -48
• 
• 

...
written by Steven Ong, October 16, 2009 16:20:55

As RPK had mentioned before in MT, how can we be sure that all that was written thousands of years ago were correct? So how can we enforced or practiced something that cant be positively proven to be correct? Worst still if the rules and laws were not written down immediately but were collected and written down many years later. That is why the Caliphs and religionist fight over it. So how le?

Didn't God gives us a an intelligent mind and conscience? Why would we not used it for good is out of the minds of many.
And if syariah laws are dynamic as claimed, then is not laws but suggestions. Its up to the syariah judges to determine the interpretations and the punishment. Its also be misused and abused. Islamic laws and practices seems weird and cruel. The latest news is from Somalia, about whipping for those women who wore bras. Islamic cruelty and unfairness towards the women particularly are coming out into the open one by one. If we have compassion and love, we should ponder and ask why before its too late.

• 
• +18
• 
• 

...
written by DontPlayGod, October 16, 2009 16:18:38

I have often wondered why God can't send down prophets every century to guide his people? There seem to be so many prophets thousands of years ago. Is it a coincidence that in those ancient times, when people were uneducated and knowledge is limited, people easily believe any person who claims that they are prophets, or who can speak smoothly and volubly about God. Simple-minded, and superstitious people in those ancient times easily believe any soul who can impress them with their "spiritual" talk. To prove my point, there were prophets galore like Moses, Abraham, John the Baptist, etc. If these people like Moses, Abraham, and John the Baptist were prophets, where are their religions? And isn't it written in the Koran that God sent hundreds of prophets all over the world to inform the people the word of God? So there should be hundreds of religions, if one prophet spawns one religion! In fact, if our Trengganu teapot prophet had lived a thousand years ago, he would have spawned a religion, and who knows, his religion may have overtaken Islam now.

In fact, now is the best time to send down a prophet, with worldwide TV, radio, internet, and telephones. The prophet need only have one TV channel dedicated to himself and he can reach everyone in the whole wide world(www!). With the internet, or call-in service, he can answer queries on the spot and live, too. I am sure I don't have to suggest to God on this. This will help clear up any doubts or queries on any aspect of God's laws!!

• 
• +40
• 
• 

...
written by budakindia, October 16, 2009 16:12:37

When will they cane Kartika? Raya is already over. What happen to the promise? Don't tell me they are going to do a complete 180 degree turn again! If they did a reversal without Kartika's appeal, what happens to the Malaysian syariah law? Isn't that will open the floodgates of all previous, pending and future syariah cases? Basically you can totally disregard the syariah courts and challenge them in a open civil court using her case as a precedence? What a mess isn't it? She was supposed to be let off with a fine but due to over ego of someone she was to be whipped. It's just ironic to see a normal lady like Kartika could teach the Malaysian juduciary a thing or two about dispensing the "logical" judgement. Padan muka mahkamah Malaysia!

• 
• +30
• 
• 

...
written by Daryl, October 16, 2009 16:06:30

Muslims are so work up over do and don't when the social problem we faced are more complicated. If all your solutions is to ban this and that when it arise than you have an issue. Concentrate on helping people and their problems than you will get support. If you ban this and that you will only get resistance in this world.

• 
• +28
• 
• 

...
written by DontPlayGod, October 16, 2009 16:04:49

So, in a word, the Koran does not spell out exactly what punishment befits which crime. Punishment as meted out by the syariah courts are man-made laws. If our policewomen were to dress in trousers in Sudan, they would be whipped 40 lashes, as the syariah courts in Sudan decrees that women wearing trousers are obscene. I also note that stoning a woman to death for adultery is pre-Islamic tribal laws, as written above, but our agents(self-appointed) of Gods in some countries in West Asia and Africa decrees that this is God's laws.


The tendency to make laws and rules and decrees that they are God's laws are not confined to Islam only, but also to other religions like Christianity and Taoism.
From what I have read and seen so far, it is just a case of men playing God, and the ordinary rakyat just follow such rulings, and treat their priests and Imams as Gods.

I choose not to follow what all these idiots decree and follow my own interpretations and understanding. I do not want to live in an environment where people playing God can punish me in the name of God.

If I understand rightly, nothing is written in the Koran about forming Islamic states. This is another man-made law.

One can also see that the most brilliant and talented amongst us mankind do not usually make their careers as preachers and religionists. These leaders of religions are usually the medoicre who cannot find an easier way of making a living and thus take up priesthood where they are reasonably fed and accomodated.

Without meaning any disrespect, I do not follow blindly any priest or religious leader's interpretations of religion. I will interpret the scriptures myself and where I suspect that the scriptures are doubtful, I will discard.

In a word, stop following all these men who play God.

• 
• +55
• 
• 

...
written by BUTEK, October 16, 2009 15:12:37

If you vote DAP in the next general elaction than the syariah law will be deleted forever... you know that chinese will robe everything from you... just what Lee Kuan Yew singapore DAP did to the singaporean muslim....

vote UMNO to maintain the dignity OF ISLAMIC LAW and KETUANAN MELAYU.....

HIDUP UMNO!!!!! MAKAL SAKTHI

• 
• -80
• 
• 

...
written by cheekhiaw, October 16, 2009 15:11:18

If that particular Almighty did not know how to produce DVDs, their much touted 'know all' (and ability to foresee the future) should have at least warned them about the later 'coming' of the likes of Mr Akio Morita, and the Almighty would then have withheld His sending of that 'last messenger' to 1997 and have that illiterate messenger deliver DVDs (using spaceships instead of camels, of course) with beautiful videos of His heaven and those frolicking virgins!

Only the gods know...

xxx

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by cheekhiaw, October 16, 2009 14:28:42

Ah, what the Malays and the whole world do not know is the gods never knew what are DVDs!

xxx

• 
• +3
• 
• 

...
written by cheekhiaw, October 16, 2009 14:25:10

The more probable reason why the verses of the Quran were not revealed all in one go but came down in bits and pieces was because that illiterate messenger had to wait for some one who can write to get hold of some paper to do it.

And that was many years after he died, after they managed to conquer some more advanced civilisation further north with a supply of both literati and paper.

The gods however could have passed that messenger some DVDs direct from the gods (and made from titanium to make sure they last centuries) and saved that poor illiterate and all his similar companions all the hassle of having to kill each other and rape another civilisation for the privilege to do that.

xxx

• 
• -4
• 
• 

...
written by malgal, October 16, 2009 14:13:14

if kartika is to be punished for her sipping of beer, then how many lashes would it be for those guilty of corrupting the hapless rakyat? wah, whips would be in big demand, also axes for chopping off hands,etc.

• 
• +47
• 
• 

...
written by johnT, October 16, 2009 13:41:58

Those who bribe should be cut thier hand too. But sadly they become member of ADUN.

• 
• +48
• 
• 

...
written by AtanSian, October 16, 2009 12:00:50

A voice of reason.
Sadly in Malaysia today as in many Muslim countries there is a vocal vociferous minority which seeks to drown out reason by loud rantings, and violence. Many of their strictures have nothing to do with Islam, but a foolish attempt to ape the out-dated practices of some nomadic Arabic tribes.

• 
• +42
• 
• 

...
written by Super Admin, October 16, 2009 11:40:28

Verse 53 of the surah, Confederates, has been used to support the belief that the Prophet's wives covered their hair and even their faces. Verse 59 of the Confederates has been used to support the belief that all Muslim women should cover their hair and faces in public. Verse 53 is specific to the Prophet's wives. But just as the Prophet wore a beard which many Muslim men copy, then many Muslim women think that by wearing the "seperating curtain" of the face veil/hijab/jalbab in public they will emulate the Prophet's wives and thus be 'better' Muslims. Given that Muslims accept that the Prophet's wives were addressed from behind a screen in the home by the Prophet's companions, there is no evidence however to suggest that any of the Prophet's wives when outside the home wore the "seperating curtain" of a veil covering their faces.

Karen Armstrong in her acclaimed biography of the Prophet - 'Muhammad' - published by Phoenix Press details the fact that it was only Muhammad's wives that were to be secluded.

• 
• +30
• 
• 

...
written by cheemengwong, October 16, 2009 11:37:32

Really a shame that Muslims in Malaysia do not know and requires a self exiled Muslim like RPK to enlighten them.

On the same token, many Christians do not not what is Christian apologetics and Jews till today refused to raised their hand to even push a lift to go up to their apartments on Sunday for they it is a day of rest and no work!

What to do? Die ignorant lah. Park Lah.

• 
• +37
• 
• 

...
written by Super Admin, October 16, 2009 11:31:52

Believers, do not enter the houses of the Prophet for a meal without waiting for the proper time, unless you are given leave. But if you are invited, enter; and when you have eaten, disperse. Do not engage in familiar talk, for this would annoy the Prophet and he would be ashamed to bid you go; but of the truth, al-Llah is not ashamed. If you ask his wives for anything, Speak to them from behind a curtain. This is more chaste for your hearts and their hearts.

Muhammad, it will be remembered, had no room of his own at the mosque; he simply slept in the apartments of his wives. But as he became more important in Medina his home inevitably became a public place, as more and more people came to consult him about their personal or religious problems or asked him to arbitrate in a dispute. Some Muslims liked to approach him through his wives, in the hope of getting his ear. Aisha, for example, was known to have had several friendly chats with a particular young man, which people remembered later when a scandal broke out that threatened to split the umma down the middle. The hijab or curtain was not intended to be an oppressive measure. It was designed to prevent a scandalous situation developing which Muhammad's enemies could use to discredit him.

As Muhammad Asad has stressed in his above commentary on verse 31 of Surah 24 and verses 53 and 59 of Surah 33 the Prophet Mohammad's words were left deliberately vague, the result of which excluded any injunction that a Muslim woman must cover her hair. The Quran, in verse 31 of Surah The Light does however specifically command women to cover their bosoms.

• 
• +23
• 
• 

...
written by Super Admin, October 16, 2009 11:18:17

Muslims should concentrate on Shari'ah, not Fiqh
By K M Azam

The difference between Shari'ah (Canon law) and fiqh (Canonical Jurisprudence) is not well known as these two terms are frequently used synonymously. The linguistic meaning of the word Shari'ah is a non-exhaustive source of water from which people satisfy their thirst, while fiqh implies having a deep understanding.

Simply put, Shari'ah is the divine law, as stated in crystal clear terms in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, while fiqh is the law derived by fuqaha (jurists) from these two sources according to a specified ijitehadi methodology (Usul-ul Fiqh) comprising qiyas (analogical deduction), ra'y (subjective opinion), istehsan (moral or social preference), istidlal (inference), maslaha al-mursaleh (public interest), ijma' (consensus of opinion), and several other methods of deductive reasoning. The Shari'ah comprises only about 30 ayat ul-ahkam (verses containing ordinances - nasus) of the Qur'an and about 70 sayings of the Apostle of Allah, upon whom be peace, bearing upon various socio-political aspects of community life.

In comparison, by far the larger part of fiqhi rulings are the outcome of above listed deductive methods of reasoning. The great fuqaha of the past arrived at their legal findings on the basis of a very deep and conscientious study of the Qur'an and hadith but nevertheless, the results of such study were highly subjective and time-bound. Originally, all such rulings were intended by the authors to facilitate the application of Shari' rulings to the specific questions of their time. Subsequently, fearing lest the cultural influences of the newly conquered territories - such as Neo-Platonic philosophy and Graeco-Roman ideas - corrupt the pristine purity of Islam and the unanimity of Muslim outlook, the great scholars of the first two centuries of Islam (AH) had extended the clearly stipulated nass ordinances of the Divine Law by additional corpus jurus derived from the Qu'ran and Sunnah by means of deduction.

But the great jurists never intended that their rulings were relevant for all times. However, later generations of Muslims came to regard their rulings as sacrosanct and as an integral part of the Shari'ah.

Little do some people realize that elevating anything else to the level of the Qur'an and Sunnah is tantamount to committing a sin.

Muslimedia: October 16-31, 1998

• 
• +43
• 
• 

...
written by ONGJJJ, October 16, 2009 11:11:39

RPK, you are 600 years ahead of most of your fellow muslim brethren (1400 years ahead of Malays if Malaccan history is used as the birth date of Malay civilisation) as such critical thinking & freedom were developed from the Western Civilisation, Christianity & Church which went through the same struggles & conflicts culminating to what we have today. They just came onto the global scene some 600 years before Islam.

• 
• +63
• 
• 

...
written by citizenmy, October 16, 2009 11:09:43

I have no opinion on the issue highlighted, but the article itself is written in such a manner easily understandable. Thanks RPK.

• 
• +69
• 
• 

...
written by cabearth, October 16, 2009 11:07:44

At that time only the Prophet’s wives wore veils.

This statement has been repeated by Raja Petra for so long, yet until today THERE HAS BEEN NO EVIDENCE presented.

It's one thing to lie about matters of the world, but to lie in matters of religion, that's the lowest anyone can be

• 
• -69
• 
• 

...
written by cabearth, October 16, 2009 11:03:35

The reason many Muslims do not know the above claim made by Pat, is because it's ludicrous.

The Shariah has been in practiced by Muslims since the day the Prophet was made a Prophet.

Where did Pat get such crap from, i sure do not know.

BUT, I challange Raja Petra to present his case to Al Azhar university and debate the matter with the scholars there, if he thinks he is on the side of the truth.

I know even the most hardned Orientalist who actually took time to learn Arabic and study Islam in it's original language dare not make such a ludicrous statements such as above.

Grow up Pat. Please dont try to spread your confusion to people.

You don't even know the difference between Sharian and Fiqh

• 
• -67
• 
• 

...
written by Huador, October 16, 2009 10:53:14

If Raja Petra can express his views on this and that everyone should also have the same rights.To me, Kartika should be allowed to finish her drink, feeling a little high perhaps and wake up the following day fresh and happy. The government and the religious authority should focus on teaching what is right and what is wrong. It is up to each and everyone to decide using his own mental capacity to follow the teaching. For example if the teaching declare that having sex with someone else wife is wrong anyone trying either get a free screw by willing to take the risk of a "kapak siam" on his head.

• 
• +81
• 
• 

...
written by sambal muncha, October 16, 2009 10:47:38

It's not just the Malays, RPK. Unfortunately and arguably, majority of Muslims around the world do not know.

From love to ignorance in 1400 years.

• 
• +144
• 
• 

...
written by hellosunshine, October 16, 2009 10:42:12

It's elementary, as my dear RPK had sp rightly pointed out. All the Syariah laws were man made and not from Prophet Muhammad or Allah. Are these men, God?

• 
• +186
• 
• 

...
written by educationist, October 16, 2009 10:31:01

Yes, the victors write the books.
TQ -RPK for the above discourse.
It helps me see the issues with a different perspective!

• 
• +154
• 
•