SENATOR DATUK DR MASHITAH IBRAHIM ARE YOU THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH TO PASS JUDGEMENT ON NURUL

SENATOR DATUK DR MASHITAH IBRAHIM ARE YOU THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH TO PASS JUDGEMENT ON NURUL

Posted by suarakeadilanmalaysia on November 8, 2012 · Leave a Comment (Edit)

Of the Jews, Allah says :
If they come to you,
you can either judge between them
or turn away from them.
If you turn away from them,
they cannot harm you in any way.
But if you do judge,
judge between them justly.
Allah loves the just. (Qur’an : 5. 42)
Those who do not judge by what Allah has sent down,
such people are kafirun.
1
(Qur’an : 5. 44)
Those who do not judge by what Allah has sent down,
such people are wrongdoers. (Qur’an : 5. 45)
Of the Christians, Allah says :
Those who do not judge by what Allah has sent down,
such people are deviators. (Qur’an : 5. 47)
Of the Muslims, Allah says :
And we have sent down the Book to you with truth,
confirming and conserving the previous books.
So judge between them by what Allah has sent down
and do not follow their whims and desires
deviating from the Truth that has come to you.
We have appointed a law and a practice for everyone of you.
Had Allah willed, He would have made you a single community,
but He wanted to test you regarding what has come to you.
So compete with each other in doing good.
Every one of you will return to Allah
and He will inform you regarding the things
about which you differed.
Judge between them by what Allah has sent down
and do not follow their whims and desires.
And beware of them lest they lure you away
from some of what Allah has sent down to you.
If they turn their backs, then know that Allah
wants to afflict them with some of their wrong actions.
Many of mankind are deviators.
Do they then seek the judgement of the Time of Ignorance?
2
Who could be better at giving judgement than Allah
for people with certainty? (Qur’an : 5. 48-50) 2
He gives wisdom

“no compulsion” verse as well as the concept of abrogation.

From the Tafsir Ibn Kathir (found at http://www.tafsir.com - www.tafsir.com ):

[2:256] There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the right path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.

Allah said, There is no compulsion in religion, meaning, “Do not force anyone to become Muslim, for Islam is plain and clear, and its proofs and evidence are plain and clear. Therefore, there is no need to force anyone to embrace Islam. Rather, whoever Allah directs to Islam, opens his heart for it and enlightens his mind, will embrace Islam with certainty. Whoever Allah blinds his heart and seals his hearing and sight, then he will not benefit from being forced to embrace Islam.”

It was reported that the Ansar were the reason behind revealing this Ayah, although its indication is general in meaning. Ibn Jarir recorded that Ibn `Abbas said [that before Islam], “When (an Ansar) woman would not bear children who would live, she would vow that if she gives birth to a child who remains alive, she would raise him as a Jew. When Banu An-Nadir (the Jewish tribe) were evacuated [from Al-Madinah], some of the children of the Ansar were being raised among them, and the Ansar said, `We will not abandon our children.’ Allah revealed, There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the right path has become distinct from the wrong path.” Abu Dawud and An-Nasa’i also recorded this Hadith.

As for the Hadith that Imam Ahmad recorded, in which Anas said that the Messenger of Allah said to a man,”Embrace Islam.” The man said, “I dislike it.” The Prophet said, “Even if you dislike it.”

First, this is an authentic Hadith, with only three narrators between Imam Ahmad and the Prophet . However, it is not relevant to the subject under discussion, for the Prophet did not force that man to become Muslim. The Prophet merely invited this man to become Muslim, and he replied that he does not find himself eager to become Muslim. The Prophet said to the man that even though he dislikes embracing Islam, he should still embrace it, `for Allah will grant you sincerity and true intent.’

From the Tafsir Ibn Kathir (found at http://www.tafsir.com - www.tafsir.com ):

[2:106] Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh (We abrogate) or Nunsiha (cause to be forgotten), We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is Able to do all things

To read about the meaning of nanskh: http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=2&tid=2938 - http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=2&tid=2938

Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 33:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.

See these additional hadith:

Sahih Muslim, Book 19, Number 4294

Sahih Muslim, Book 19, Number 4366
Sahih Muslim, Book 31, Number 5917

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 643

Also, read the story about Abu Sufyan’s forced conversion in Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasoul Allah.

western culture is predicated on questioning: inquiring of authorities how they came to the conclusions they reached — a concept from the ancient Greek word “historayn,” to learn by asking. Although in the Shiite world questioning occurs among religious authorities and the educated elite, in the Sunni world, for centuries, asking questions of those more learned or in positions of authority has been unacceptable. Until Muslims once again allow themselves to ask questions and engage in critical examination, they are disabling themselves from accomplishing as much as they otherwise might.

Allah says in the Quran “they planned and Allah planned, and Allah is the best of planner”.

When Pharaoh was killing all the baby boys of the children of Israel, it was Allah (SWT) who defeated his plans. Allah says in Surah Al-Qasas:

[28.7] And We revealed to Musa’s mothers, saying: “Suckle him, then when you fear for him, cast him into the river and do not fear nor grieve; surely We will bring him back to you and make him one of the messengers.”

[28.8] And Pharaoh’s family took him up that he might become an enemy and a grief for them; surely Pharaoh and Haman and their hosts were wrongdoers.

God Almighty Allah (SWT) is ‘All Knowing’ — This mean; He knows everything which has happened in the past, He knows everything which is happening in the present, and He also knows everything which will happen in the future. Therefore, Allah (SWT) already knew that UMNO and their allies will do this, so when the enemies of Islam were planning the demise of Muslims in malaysia, Allah (SWT) has already planned the demise of UMNO-BARISAN which will “become an enemy and a grief for them” and bring an end to the dreams of these clever ELIST MALAY and their co-conspirators. And so we see the hints of this plan in the ahadith of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH). One can argue that so far these statements don’t appear to be holding much water, but as you will read further and also as the time will progress you will see how beautifully these statements apply.

Lately there has been a public discourse on whether Malaysia is a secular country or otherwise.

Let us take a break. And take a visit down memory lanes. Perhaps history might shed some lights on the issue.

To begin with, Article 3 (1) of our Federal Constitution provides as follows:

“Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.”

Initially, when the Reid Commission was set to draft our Constitution, the Alliance (Umno, MIC and MCA) presented a 20 page memorandum to the Reid Commission. On Islam, the memo says:

“The religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion, and shall not imply that the State is not a secular State.”

After 118 meetings, the Reid Commission wrote its report in Rome and published it in February 1957. On the position of Islam, it says:

“We have considered the question whether there should be any statement in the Constitution to the effect that Islam should be the State religion. There was universal agreement that if any such provision were inserted it must be made clear that it would not in any way affect the civil rights of non-Muslims — ‘the religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion and shall not imply that the State is not a secular State’.

There is nothing in the draft Constitution to affect the continuance of the present position in the States with regard to recognition of Islam or to prevent the recognition of Islam in the Federation by legislation or otherwise in any respect which does not prejudice the civil rights of individual non-Muslims.

The majority of us think that it is best to leave the matter on this basis, looking to the fact that Counsel for the Rulers said to us: “It is Their Highnesses considered view that it would not be desirable to insert some declaration such as has been suggested that the Muslim Faith or Islamic Faith be the established religion of the Federation. Their Highnesses are not in favour of such declaration being inserted and that is a matter of specific instruction in which I myself have played very little part.”

Justice Abdul Hamid, a member of the Reid Commission from Pakistan however disagreed. He proposed to include the following article;

“Islam shall be the religion of the State of Malaya, but nothing in this Article shall prevent any citizen professing any religion other than Islam to profess, practice and propagate that religion, nor shall any citizen be under any disability by reason of his being not a Muslim.

A provision like one suggested above is innocuous. Not less than fifteen countries of the world have a provision of this type entrenched in their Constitutions.

Among the Christian countries, which have such a provision in their Constitutions, are Ireland (Article 6), Norway (Article 1), Denmark (Article 3), Spain (Article 6), Argentina (Article 2), Bolivia (Article 3), Panama (Article 36) and Paraguay (Article 3).

Among the Muslim countries are Afghanistan (Article 1), Iran (Article 1), Iraq (Article 13), Jordan (Article 2), Saudi Arabia (Article 7), and Syria (Article 3).

Thailand is an instance in which Buddhism has been enjoined to be the religion of the King who is required by the Constitution to uphold that religion (Constitution of Thailand, Article 7).

If in these countries a religion has been declared to be the religion of the State and that declaration has not been found to have caused hardships to anybody, no harm will ensue if such a declaration is included in the Constitution of Malaya.

In fact, in all the Constitutions of Malayan States a provision of this type already exists. All that is required to be done is to transplant it from the State Constitutions and to embed it in the Federal.

In proposing as such, Justice Hamid was actually mirroring the memo by the Alliance. He said:

“It has been recommended by the Alliance that the Constitution should contain a provision declaring Islam to be the religion of the State. It was also recommended that it should be made clear in that provision that a declaration to the above effect will not impose any disability on non-Muslim citizens in professing, propagating and practising their religions, and will not prevent the State from being a secular State. As on this matter the recommendation of the Alliance was unanimous their recommendation should be accepted and a provision to the following effect should be inserted in the Constitution either after Article 2 in Part I or at the beginning of Part XIII.”

In “The Making of the Malayan Constitution” by Joseph Fernando, the author states:

“The Umno leaders contended that provision for an official religion would have an important psychological impact on the Malays. But in deference to the objections of the Rulers and the concerns of non-Muslims, the Alliance agreed that the new article should include two provisos: first, that it would not affect the position of the Rulers as head of religion in their respective States; and second, that the practice and propagation of other religions in the Federation would be assured under the Constitution. The MCA and MIC representatives did not raise any objections to the new article, despite protests by many non-Muslim organizations, as they were given to understand by their Umno colleagues that it was intended to have symbolic significance rather than practical effect, and that the civil rights of the non-Muslims would not be affected.”

Shortly after the London Conference the British Government issued a White Paper in June 1957 containing the Constitutional Proposals for independent Malaya. Paragraph 57 deals with the Religion of the Federation and reads:

“There has been included in the Federal Constitution a declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation. This will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular State, and every person will have the right to profess and practice his own religion and the right to propagate his religion, though this last right is subject to any restrictions imposed by State law relating to the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the Muslim religion.”

The Constitutional Bill was then was passed without amendment.

In an effort to mollify them, the Colonial Secretary, Lennox Boyd, wrote to Lord Reid on May 31, 1957 offering tribute and gratitude to the “remarkable” work done by the Reid Commission and stated:

“The Rulers, as you know, changed their tune about Islam and they and the Government presented a united front in favour of making Islam a state religion even though Malaya is to be a secular state.”

It is interesting to note that Justice Abdul Hamid, the sole member of the Reid Commission who proposed article 3 (1) to be inserted had described the provision as “innocuous”. What does that innocuous little provision mean then?

Professor Sheridan, a well-known expert on Malaysian Constitution opines as follows:

“A Federation, as opposed to the people within its territory, having a religion is a difficult notion to grasp….. It has been suggested that the probable meaning of the first part of Article 3(1) is that, insofar as federal business (such as ceremonial business) involves religious matters, that business is to be regulated in accordance with the religion of Islam” – The Religion of the Federation”, [1988] 2 MLJ xiii

Considering recent events, that provision has however ceased from being innocuous. Hopefully, it would not be monstrous instead. — art-harun.blogspot.com
Nurul Izzah Anwar, who has been accused by Umno of supporting apostasy for Muslims, will meet Selangor religious officials tomorrow to explain to them that she has been the victim of slander by Utusan Malaysia, the newspaper owned by the Barisan Nasional (BN) party.

The PKR vice-president’s statement, at a public forum on “Islamic State: Which version, whose responsibility?” in Subang Jaya last Saturday, has resulted in attacks from several religious hawks and Umno politicians suggesting that her remarks meant she supported Muslims renouncing Islam and turning “murtad” or apostate.

“I will go to JAIS office at 11am tomorrow to lodge a complaint against Utusan Malaysia for their slander against me,” Nurul Izzah (picture) told the media in the Parliament lobby today, referring to the Selangor Islamic Religious Department.

Yesterday, popular Islamic scholar Datuk Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin defended her, and pointed out that her remarks that Malays also have freedom of religion meant there was no compulsion in Islam.