Setiap Artikel Malaysiawaves ke Email Anda.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Dipersilakan untuk Like Facebook Page T. Besi

Search Malaysiawaves

Monday, June 16, 2008

Haris Ibrahim Probably Will Have to Renounce Prophet Musa AS

Noticed that Islam doesn't clamp down on other religion and in fact allow other religion to flourish and operate as they wish. That's because other religion does not operate in the name of Islam. In short, other religion doesn't claim that they too are advocating Islam. Therefore, Islam has nothing against other religion.
At the end of the day, the ban (Ahmadiyya, Hadhari, Quran Alone) is nothing more than a battle against fraud. Fighting fraud is a noble thing and should be supported. People who fights fraud should be commended, not condemned. That is the logic behind Saidina Musa’s action in 02:54. It’s nothing more than a battle against fraud
.

First of all, I’d like to apologize to the Non Muslims readers should you find the content of this article a bit offensive. It’s not written for those who do not profess in the Islamic faith. It is for those who claim to believe in the Quran.

As for Non Muslims, they’re not subjected to Islamic rulings because the Quran is very clear on this: “there is no compulsion in religion”. So, non-muslims has nothing to worry about under Islam since Islam cannot force itself upon non-muslims.

Secondly, i apologize to Haris Ibrahim if the title of this article had offended Haris in any way. I did it just to make a point, that all. It's never meant to offend or put down Haris Ibrahim in any way.

I had read and participated in Haris’s recent posting entitled What next? Outlaw the Hadharites? Rehab centres, perhaps?. In it, he express his dismay of those who decides to ban Islam Hadhari. He feels that banning such ideas is very restrictive and not in the spirit of Islam.

Haris quotes Farish Nor:

“As Farish Noor put it, ‘there are ideas, and there can be stupid ideas; but to ban an idea simply because of its stupidity seems to be a rather stupid thing to do in itself’
And as Farish asks, ‘what does this entail for the Muslims and non-Muslims of Malaysia? What, in the final analysis, was the objective of this ban?’”

The problem with both Haris and Farish is that their stand seems to contradict the actions took by Saidina Musa with his people which he caught worshipping the cow. As explained below:


002.054YUSUFALI: And remember Moses said to his people: “O my people! Ye have indeed wronged yourselves by your worship of the calf: So turn (in repentance) to your Maker, and slay yourselves (the wrong-doers); that will be better for you in the sight of your Maker.” Then He turned towards you (in forgiveness): For He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.

PICKTHAL: And when Moses said unto his people: O my people! Ye have wronged yourselves by your choosing of the calf (for worship) so turn in penitence to your Creator, and kill (the guilty) yourselves. That will be best for you with your Creator and He will relent toward you. Lo! He is the Relenting, the Merciful.

SHAKIR: And when Musa said to his people: O my people! you have surely been unjust to yourselves by taking the calf (for a god), therefore turn to your Creator (penitently), so kill your people, that is best for you with your Creator: so He turned to you (mercifully), for surely He is the Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.

In the verse above, not only Saidina Musa didn’t tolerate “deviated ideas”, he also ordered those believing in such beliefs the death penalty. In other words, from a divine perspective, there is a limit to how an idea can be expressed. Apostasy is not a form of ideas that is tolerated by God as testified in the verses above. This is because apostasy is a form of lie against God.

Haris Ibrahim claims to be a follower of the Quran. Yet, in this issue it seems that he is contradicting the Quran. Maybe, he wishes to make an exception to the rule. So, I suggest Haris Ibrahim to renounce Saidina Musa AS for his “narrow actions”.

As for Islam Hadhari, it is a political Islam designed by Pak lah regime to promote UMNO and BN. Plus, Islam Hadhari lacks many essential aspect of Islam because it is designed to promote parts of Islam that supports Pak Lah and UMNO. It’s never an attempt to present the real picture of Islam rather than anything else.


Banning Islam Hadhari is a good move considering there’s so much confusion out there anyways when it comes to Islam. It is always a bad thing for those to lie in the name of Islam.
Banning Islam Hadhari will remove one of the confusion that is currently plaguing the Muslim minds. Althought Islam Hadhari is not as bad as the “Quran Alone” ideology, but for safety reason, I support the ban.

And Islam is a matter of faith and not mere ideas. This is where both Farish and Haris had missed out. Faith doesn’t have to be smart or logic. Faiths are what lies in our subconscious and it shapes our identity. It is not easy to remedy and it will result in confrontations and dichotomies.

Beliefs like Hadhari or Ahmadiyya are those who rides on Islam’s name. People who believes in these “ideas” thinks that they’re believing in Islam, when it is not. The act of tricking people into believing something like this is a form of FRAUD. Since when is fraud NOT a felony?

Noticed that Islam doesn't clamp down on other religion and in fact allow other religion to flourish and operate as they wish. That's because other religion does not operate in the name of Islam. In short, other religion doesn't claim that they too are advocating Islam. Therefore, Islam has nothing against other religion.

At the end of the day, the ban (Ahmadiyya, Hadhari, Quran Alone) is nothing more than a battle against fraud. Fighting fraud is a noble thing and should be supported. People who fights fraud should be commended, not condemned. That is the logic behind Saidina Musa’s action in 02:54. It’s nothing more than a battle against frauds.

58 comments:

Anonymous said...

i strongly support your assertations and anlalysis.whislt i would like to agree to the claims that hadhari,inter alia, is an approach towards better understanding of islam it is no more a vehicle for a political propaganda.

Anonymous said...

What makes 'Tulang Besi' think he is a Muslim? Is there any evidence? If 'Tulang Besi' says he is Muslim (he believes in Allah, the Quran and Prophet), then one has to accept that. Likewise if Ahmadiyya followers believe in the same they are also muslims. No one is judge except Allah.The ayat from surah Al Baqarah 54 quoted by you, 'anfusa-kum' means 'kill your evel desires' and not kill people.

Satria Asia said...

"Noticed that Islam doesn't clamp down on other religion and in fact allow other religion to flourish and operate as they wish. That's because other religion does not operate in the name of Islam."

-- Islam doesn't. Muslims do.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I too had thought of this the same way. your arguments are correct. Thank you for your blogs. It is much appreciated when there are so many blogs bashing and twisting Islam.

malayamuda said...

Agree with Tulang Besi all the way about Islam, but do Muslims practise what is preached by Islam ?

We prefer the most narrow, corrupt interpretation of Islam.

I agree with Satria Asia, Islam is beautiful, Muslims are not !!!

KaKiaYam said...

"...First of all, I’d like to apologize to the Non Muslims readers should you find the content of this article a bit offensive. It’s not written for those who do not profess in the Islamic faith. It is for those who claim to believe in the Quran...."

I don't think an apology is needed as I don't read anything offensive to non-muslims in this article. But if what you are trying to say (in this paragraph) is that non-muslims should not comment on this article, then I would say that is offensive to me.

Are you trying to say that Islam is beyond the understanding of people who does not profess it? Or are you implying that only those who believe the Quran should discuss about it and at the same time won't be offended by it?

How do you define non-muslims? One that does not believe in the Quran? But how am it going to believe the Quran if muslims like you draw a clear line between what can be discussed and what not? Must one be a muslim before questioning it's teachings?

I think we have heard enough about the verse "there's no compulsion in Islam". The interpretations is different among muslims themselves. It would help to define your understanding of that verse.

To me, Islam is forcing itself upon each and every citizen of the country. From khutbah in Chinese radio to the loud Azan early in the morning. From prohibition on religious building to regulation to respect muslims sensitivities.


"...Noticed that Islam doesn't clamp down on other religion and in fact allow other religion to flourish and operate as they wish...."

Do you really think so? Isn't that a blatant lie? Are you tricking your not-so-well informed readers? Are you in fact committing fraud? (just to quote your own words...)


"...And Islam is a matter of faith and not mere ideas...."

Of course, which religion isn't? Each religion has her own achilles heel..


",...Faith doesn’t have to be smart or logic. Faiths are what lies in our subconscious and it shapes our identity...."

So what makes you so sure that the subconscious of people like Haris Ibrahim are different from yours? Or in other words, what makes you think that your faith which lies in your own 'subconscious' is the correct version? Because your faith are the same as the majority?

KaKiaYam
_________________________________
http://chickenfeet.wordpress.com

HumanBeing said...

KaKiaYam,

The article is definitely VERY offensive to Hindus because they revere and worship the cow. (i'm not Hindu).

There is nothing wrong with worshipping anything if it is positive and as long as one knows it's limitations.

In anycase, "Tulong Besi" interpretation of 2:54 calling for those who merely change their beliefs to be killed is very regressive, barbaric and inhumane. In this particular issue, he appeared to have no sense of positive emotions or any room for empathy & conscience.

This sort of psychopathic tendencies indicates that the person is being more of an ape (primal & tribal tendencies) rather than being more human.

malayamuda said...

when you cannot answer u usually ban people from questioning.....

Mahathir gagged his Ministers from questioning his moves as he knew he could not answer some of his actions, or was it all his actions ?

No one can question Malay priviledges " cos its guaranteed in the constitution "

No one can question Islam as the official religion " cos its guaranteed in the constitution"

No non muslim can question some of the Islam intrepreted by Muslims " as they are not Muslims" hence forbidden to question issues relating to Islam.

In all these instances when u investigate the root cause more often than not its bcos we " DONT HAVE ANSWERS "

Anonymous said...

"How do you define non-muslims? One that does not believe in the Quran? But how am it going to believe the Quran if muslims like you draw a clear line between what can be discussed and what not? Must one be a muslim before questioning it's teachings?"

A muslim someone who believes that there is no God but God, and he is the creater and worship nothing other than Him ,and believes that prophet Muhammad s.a.w . is the last prophet of god.
Non muslim are allowed to ask and encourage to question about Islam, so that a better understanding of this wonderful religion is established.

"that Islam doesn't clamp down on other religion and in fact allow other religion to flourish and operate as they wish...."

Do you really think so? Isn't that a blatant lie? Are you tricking your not-so-well informed readers? Are you in fact committing fraud? (just to quote your own words...)"

if Islam does clamp down on other religion, we would have NOT allowed the buliding of temples, and tokongs and kuils at every nooks and crany and underneath every large trees. So, be mindful of what you say, or it might come true....

"The article is definitely VERY offensive to Hindus because they revere and worship the cow. ( not Hindu).


first of all, as what tulang besi had said, this is what is in the Quran about the jews who had professed their faith to the creator of the universe, and then suddenly turn apostate and worshipped a created being that is a cow.


"There is nothing wrong with worshipping anything if it is positive and as long as one knows it's limitations"

therein lies the flaw. why worship something that is not going to give you anything in return ? like a piece of rock or a tree? it neither benefits you nor does anything to you. something that is worshipped has to be something more powerful than you, the created being.... there is a story of how the prophet abraham destroyed statues for such that reason

HumanBeing said...

Re cow and offensive to the Hindus
"this is what is in the Quran about the jews.."
----------------
Actually the association is very obvious, it relates to anyone (Jew or Hindus) worshipping a cow. I hope the Hindus are not that sensitive.


"therein lies the flaw. why worship something that is not going to give you anything in return?"
---------------------
Btw, i am not a theist, but i respect theists and their beliefs.
Having been a theist for a long tiem, i understand the psychology of theism, i.e. the mental process of believing in god.

Inside you brain, there is no difference between worshipping and praying to god, Allah, idols, cow, images, etc.

The outer processes and expression may be different, but inside the brain, the process and the neurons involved are all the same. The spiritual process is the same for all human beings.

Do you think there is a special area and brain cells reserved for Allah and Muslims? No, there is none special brain cells for Muslims.

When one worship Allah, a cow, idol, Jesus, God, or Superman, the MAIN brain process is the same for all along a continuum. The difference is only in the not critical sub-process. Thus a person who correctly worship a cow may be more spiritual than a person who half-heartedly worshipped Allah. Spiritual optimality depend on the psychological and mental state of the individual.

Can you prove to me that worshipping to Allah, a cow, idol, or Superman is different inside the brain of worshippers?

The latest neuroscience research had explored the cognitive process in detail. It is even proven that the hallucination and seeing real object are the same but along a different continuum.

Note:
[[In a sense, we are all hallucinating all the time," Dr. Ramachandran said. "What we call normal vision is our selecting the hallucination that best fits reality."]]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/14/science/14eyes.html

btw, a cow is definitely worth worshipping in term of real gains from the milk, meat, labour, even the shit as a real resource for humans. It depend on one's hierachy of needs (Maslow).

God and Allah only provide essential psychological comforts to soothe terrific fears for the human awareness of death.

There is real milk and steak, IMO, there are no heaven and virgins after death.

HumanBeing said...

"At the end of the day, the ban (Ahmadiyya, Hadhari, Quran Alone) is nothing more than a battle against fraud."
----------------------

Nobody should be able to claim exclusivity to any words or concepts unless they violate current existing legal laws.

There is no fraud committed by the Ahmadiyya, Hadhari or Quran-Alone (QA) Muslims as long as they qualified and differentiate their version of Islam, i.e. similar to product branding. QA is obviously clearly identified and different from the rest. I think(?) a QA Muslim would not claim to be a Sunni or Shia.

Differentiation is a very natural human process.

IMO, Islam Hadhari is reasonable with its good principles but execution of these principles is a problem. Ahmadiyya and Quran-Alone are the gentler types of Muslims and they condemn violence. However, i suspect Mirza Ghulam may have suffer from temporal epilepsy.

There are many sects in Buddhism, Christianity or Hinduism and CURRENTLY there are no violent issue on this. Why Islam at present?

The reason Sunni and Shia condemned the other Muslims is due to an internal sense of psychological terror.
Note TMT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory

"TMT looks at what researchers claim to be the implicit emotional reactions of people when confronted with the psychological terror of knowing we will eventually die"

The majority of Muslims feel very insecure that they will lose their passport to heaven if other Muslims are recognized to the extent that their extremists resort to barbaric acts to exterminate them. It this extremists are spiritual, how come they become like barbarians. What happen to the sense of higher human_ness?

IMO, different Muslim sects should be allowed to exists provided they declared clearly their version of Islam. After all there is no much difference of their worshipping and spiritual process inside their brain.

The critical concern that humanity should be wary is violence emanating from any religious sect. Those religion or their followers that condone or commit violence should be condemned.

KaKiaYam said...

Humanbeing,

"The article is definitely VERY offensive to Hindus ..."

AFAIK, the cow is very much a symbolic representation of God. Hindus sees God in everything and everywhere. Hindus makes it a point to respect everything around it, very universal and balanced view of things. Anyway, I know little about Hinduism, so I may be wrong. By the way, the writer has already apologise for it...

".. person is being more of an ape (primal & tribal tendencies) rather than being more human..."

Humanbeing, the writer is merely following what was recorded in the Quran according to a certain interpretation. He cannot possibly agree in some part while disagree in others. Doing so, he would be labelled a deviant, afaik.

Many muslims are caught in such a dilemma. As such, many choose to be defensive instead of being the odd one out. IMHO, I don't think it is proper for you to label him with names.


Anonymous June 16, 2008 6:17 PM,

"....if Islam does clamp down on other religion, we would have NOT allowed the buliding of temples, and tokongs and kuils at every nooks and crany and underneath every large trees. So, be mindful of what you say, or it might come true......."

We don't need your permission in the first place, my dear. And to pull you out from your ignorance, many temples are demolished, churches that are not granted permission to be build and the fact the highest point of the any church or temples must be much lower than the tallest mosque within the vicinity. Personally, I have come across tens of churches that have the money and land but were not granted building permission. Check out your facts, before speaking. By the way, your last sentence reveal much about the mentality of muslims in malaysia.


".....first of all, as what tulang besi had said, this is what is in the Quran about the jews who had professed their faith to the creator of the universe, and then suddenly turn apostate and worshipped a created being that is a cow....."

Anonymous 6:17 PM, if you re-read the verse provided by the writer in different version, you will find that it could be interpreted in different ways.

Besides interpreting the verse as ordering that apostates be killed, have you ever asked, why would the apostates be killed if God is a Merciful and Relenting God?

Isn't it more easy for God to send lightning and strike each and every person that worship the calf? Right in front of other believers? Wouldn't that send shivers down their spine?

On another note, have you ever thought why would those who were killed worship a calf when they have seen miracles upon miracles performed by God while the jews are fleeing from Eygpt?

If God is ever knowing, He should have known that a certain portion of the Jews have weak faith. Shouldn't He then performed even more miracles to convince them?

Will God instruct man to kill to live up to His reputation of being Merciful, Faithful and Loving?

Could you accept that? I can't and as such, I always seek different interpretations when i come across difficult verses like these.

I do not interpret verses like these literally. 'Subconsciously' :), I have faith that God does not mean that literally.

Good day ahead.

KaKiaYam
__________________________________
http://chickenfeet.wordpress.com

HumanBeing said...

KaKiaYam said:
IMHO, I don't think it is proper for you to label him with names.
----------------------

'Ape' was not meant to be derogatory like dog, snake, vermins, worms, etc.

Primates (Latin: "prime, first rank"[2]), the group that contains all the species commonly related to the lemurs, monkeys, and apes, with the last category including humans.[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primate

There is a very thin line between an ape and human being as both share 98.4% of the same genes.

When i use the word 'ape' note the '-', it was meant to convey primitive thinking not on the behaviorial aspects.

Therefore is one think more toward being more human, they would not be advocating the killing of apostate. e.g. some like Haris Ibrahim who appear to be very mature spiritually.

HumanBeing said...

Note correction to last para;

Therefore when one thinks toward being more human, they would not be advocating the killing of apostate. e.g. someone like Haris Ibrahim who appear to be very mature spiritually.

KakiaYam said...

HumanBeing,

"Therefore is one think more toward being more human, they would not be advocating the killing of apostate. e.g. some like Haris Ibrahim who appear to be very mature spiritually...."

My earlier presumption is that Muslims would not suggest the penalty of death for apostacy, not if the Quran specifically say so.

I may have jump the gun.

I would like to ask this question, hopefully muslim could answer them faithfully. This would help us in understanding muslim further.

Q1. Do you feel that an apostate should be killed without referring to the Quran for justification?

OR

Q2. Do you agree that an apostate must be killed due to the fact that the Quran specifically says so?

Good day.

KaKiaYam

Tulang Besi said...

kakiayam says:

"Are you trying to say that Islam is beyond the understanding of people who does not profess it? Or are you implying that only those who believe the Quran should discuss about it and at the same time won't be offended by it?"

MY REPLY: Actually, am implying tht Quran is supposed to be understood the way the Quran wants us to understand it.

There is a methodology in understanding the Quran.

Most of the time, the people who interprets the Quran does it in a whimsical way.

I know many non muslims who studies the Quran from a correct methodlogy and arrive at the same conclusion.

As far as Haris Ibrahim is concerned, his methodology is by taking verses he likes and ignore the verses he doesn't like. That's not much of a methodology, if u ask me.

Tulang Besi said...

kakiayam says:

"To me, Islam is forcing itself upon each and every citizen of the country. From khutbah in Chinese radio to the loud Azan early in the morning. From prohibition on religious building to regulation to respect muslims sensitivities."

MY REPLY: I do not think that the examples u gave warrants what is defined as "forcing".

But then again, the azan in the morning have been here since long before you were born? Yet, no one complained? Why now?

Tulang Besi said...

Kakiayam asks:

"
Q1. Do you feel that an apostate should be killed without referring to the Quran for justification?

OR

Q2. Do you agree that an apostate must be killed due to the fact that the Quran specifically says so?"

MY REPLY: I am a Muslim and I agree to whatever the Quran says.

And the Quran says that punishment for apostates is death.

So I follow.

Remember, the Quran also says that there shall be no compulsion in religion

Tulang Besi said...

humanbeing says:

"
Nobody should be able to claim exclusivity to any words or concepts unless they violate current existing legal laws.

There is no fraud committed by the Ahmadiyya, Hadhari or Quran-Alone (QA) Muslims as long as they qualified and differentiate their version of Islam, i.e. similar to product branding. QA is obviously clearly identified and different from the rest. I think(?) a QA Muslim would not claim to be a Sunni or Shia."

MY REPLY: The sects named above contradiction to ISlam, the Quran and SUnnah is CLEARLY ESTADBLISHED.

FOr example, argument against Ahmadiyya has been estadblished in the 1930's around the time Ahmadiyya came about.

The formation of Ahmadiyya was supported by the British to weaken the Indian Muslim's resistance to British rule.

And the British helped the spread of Ahmadiyya all over the British empire and the Dutch decided it's a good idea for it to be implemented in their domain as well.

As for Quran Alone, the Quran curses these people for interpreting the Quran according to their whims

KaKiaYam said...

Tulang Besi - "...I do not think that the examples u gave warrants what is defined as "forcing"..."

Read this -
http://chickenfeet.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/rtms-proselytisation-in-bad-taste/

And while I am typing this in my 5 storey PKNS flat in Kota Damansara, I am being FORCED to listen to the Khutbah at the mosque nearby. And this is no soft speech, but shouting and heckling.

Who are they to impose this on us? Who are they to force us to listen? Why does Muslim always feel they have the right to do something to others while not respecting non-muslim doing the same?

Like I always said, Muslim have a perverted sense of justice. And I always have a hard time determining if it's the religion OR the believer fault. I guess you should read Raja Petra take on this issue - http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/8337/38/

Raja Petra - "Muslims do not understand the meaning of the word justice. Justice, to the Muslims, is only what is good for the Muslims. And what is not good for the Muslims is unjust. And justice to the non-Muslims does not matter. Being unjust to the non-Muslims is not being unjust. This is because non-Muslims do not have equal rights to Muslims. Non-Muslims are immigrants and immigrants are second-class citizens."



Tulang Besi - "But then again, the azan in the morning have been here since long before you were born? Yet, no one complained? Why now?..."

What logic is that? When you were born you drink infant formula, but why not now? Don't just retort for the sake of doing so. Besides, there weren't many mosques as much as now. Within a 100 metres radius from where I live, there are already 2 surau(s) and 1 huge mosque with 4 loud speakers beaming NSWE. Is loud speaker and electricity readily available last time?

I wonder how would you feel if churches now start beaming their weekly sermon?

KaKiaYam

Tulang Besi said...

anony. June 16, 2008 2:19 PM says:

"The ayat from surah Al Baqarah 54 quoted by you, 'anfusa-kum' means 'kill your evel desires' and not kill people."

MY REPLY: Then, you're saying the entire MAJOR TRANSLATORS of the Quran are wrong??.

Shakir, Yusuf Ali, Pickhall, Palmer, Tafsir Ar Rahman, Rodwell etc. They're all wrong because they translate "..faqtulu anfusakum.." as "kill thyself".

You know, it's characteristics of all deviated sects in the history of Islam to misinterpret the Quran as they see fit.

They come up with an idea which sooner or later contradicts the Quran.

And when that happens, they opt for misinterpreting the Quran as they see fit.

In this case, the Quran alone even CHANGE the meaning of the Quran.

Tulang Besi said...

kakiayam,

Just by hearing speeches from Masjis does not consititute forcing.

Forcing is when you're left to made a choice, whether to join ISlam or face ultimate penalty.

I don't think ANY of the examples u provided fits that definition.

You're just irritated and therefore u feel like you're being forced.

Feeling and actual forcing are two very distinct concepts.

KaKiaYam said...

Tulang Besi - "Actually, am implying tht Quran is supposed to be understood the way the Quran wants us to understand it. There is a methodology in understanding the Quran. Most of the time, the people who interprets the Quran does it in a whimsical way..."

And what methodology was that? That it should be read in context? So far you have given me only one verse to support the penalty of death for apostacy. What methodology did you use may I humbly enquire? What makes you think you interpret it correctly? Funny, the Grand Mufti of Eygpt has a totally opposite interpretation to apostacy from yours. You must be better than those theological student in Al-Azhar.

Tulang Besi - "I know many non muslims who studies the Quran from a correct methodlogy and arrive at the same conclusion."

Funny, the Grand Mufti of Eygpt has a totally opposite interpretation to apostacy from yours. You must be better than those theological student in Al-Azhar. And I don't even know him. :)


KaKiaYam

Tulang Besi said...

Dear all,

the reason why Ahmadiyya, Quran Alone, various tariqah etc are called fraudsters is because they still claim to be part of the Islamic Religion when their beliefs contradicts Islam 100%.

Hence, they're frauds.

Tulang Besi said...

Kakiayam says:

"Funny, the Grand Mufti of Eygpt has a totally opposite interpretation to apostacy from yours. You must be better than those theological student in Al-Azhar. And I don't even know him. :)"

MY REPLY: I don't think u want to bring the Mufti of Egypt, Ali Gomma into this conversation.

Especially when i have friends who stuides directly under him in Darul Iftah.

Anyways, please read the Mufti's statement below:


A Statement by the Grand Mufti of Egypt on Apostasy and Freedom of Religion

Cairo, Egypt

I never retracted my statement on apostasy and freedom of religion. On Sunday I published an article in the Washington Post-Newsweek On Faith forum discussing the Islamic perspective on apostasy. I affirmed the freedom that God has afforded all of humanity in their right to choose their own religion without it being imposed upon them from the outside. Choice means freedom, and freedom includes the freedom to commit grave sins as long as their harm does not extend to others. This is why I discussed the fact that throughout history the worldly punishment for apostasy in Islam has been applied only to those who, in addition to their apostasy, actively engaged in the subversion of society.

These two points sum up a greater religious principle: with freedom comes responsibility. My remarks on the On Faith forum were picked up in local Egyptian papers, but they only focused on the question of freedom giving the impression that leaving Islam is a light matter. Nothing could be more serious. In order to maintain the balance of the original article my press team sent out a statement emphasizing the aspect of responsibility, mainly that apostasy is a grave sin and, when combined with sedition, is punishable in both this world and the next.
This balanced opinion is one that I have held for years and I have included in both my books and lectures. It is a position that I have never retracted. Unfortunately, some members of the press and the public understood this statement as a retraction of my position that Islam affords freedom of belief. I have always maintained the legitimacy of this freedom and I continue to do so.

About Dar al-Ifta

A fatwa is an official non-binding Islamic legal opinion issued by a qualified scholar in response to a question posed by a member of the public. The institution of Dar al-Ifta was established in 1895 with the purpose of issuing authoritative, accurate, and practical legal opinions. It is considered one of the few institutions authorized to issue fatwas in the Islamic world, and it issues over 5,000 fatwas a month in response to the questions it receives from all over the world by all forms of communication.

Dr. Ali Gomaa
July 25, 2007

Tulang Besi said...

humanbeing says:

"In anycase, "Tulong Besi" interpretation of 2:54 calling for those who merely change their beliefs to be killed is very regressive, barbaric and inhumane. In this particular issue, he appeared to have no sense of positive emotions or any room for empathy & conscience. "

MY REPLY: I guess your saying the Quran is barbaric as well?

Tulang Besi said...

humanbeing says:

"In anycase, "Tulong Besi" interpretation of 2:54 calling for those who merely change their beliefs to be killed is very regressive, barbaric and inhumane. In this particular issue, he appeared to have no sense of positive emotions or any room for empathy & conscience. "

MY REPLY: I guess your saying the Quran is barbaric as well?

Tulang Besi said...

humanbeing says:

"
There is nothing wrong with worshipping anything if it is positive and as long as one knows it's limitations."

MY REPLY: Here's where you're wrong. Islam is not a mere worship or faith.

It is a complete way of life. So your argument above doesn't apply to Islam.

It's good that you use the ape an monkey example.

As far as I know, animals don't really care what religion they profess, kidda like the liberals.

KaKiaYam said...

Tulang Besi - "I am a Muslim and I agree to whatever the Quran says."

I would have to add 'according to your own understanding and interpretation'.

For all the verse where you justify the death penalty, there are many other verses that say otherwise.

I guess, when your mind is already dead set that apostacy is not permitted, it will be easy to find justification for it.

Tulang Besi - "Remember, the Quran also says that there shall be no compulsion in religion"

Different muslims have different interpretations of the above verse.
I will have to ask you to define your interpretation of that verse before I could comment further. Hey, it's not my fault okay......and remember, as a good muslim that follows what the Quran says in it's entirety, you have the responsibility to explain it to me clearly and exhaustively.

_____________________________

On another note, when I read the verse again of Musa killing those who worship the calf, I wonder was that the will of God, or was it the will of Musa?

Let's assume God indeed has the intention of killing those who worship the calf, where and when did God lay down the rule in stone saying apostates should be killed?

But God did lay down rules in stone telling the Israelites that they should not kill each other.

Look at it this way, and read the whole story in context.

- God susah payah bring the Israelites out of Eygpt.

- In the journey, God perform many miracles, and the Israelites see it and feel it - that God is real, and God is on their side. (Something which our generation long for, and we don't need the parting sea, just a burning bush or tree will do ..:)

- The Israelites are God's chosen people, and in God's eye they are the 'anak kesayangan'

- Now, what would God do to see His supposedly beloved servant kowtow to a calf instead of Him, after guiding them and showering favours upon them? What would you do as a father when your favourite daughter betrayed you?

The way I see it is that God allow these 'anak kesayangan' to be killed, and that it is an exception rather than a norm. It explains God's frustation, anger and dissapointment at that moment of time. It tells of Gods temperament and behaviour BUT certainly not telling you that apostates should be killed.

Read the book with a deep understanding that God is loving, merciful and above all just and fair. Instead of assuming him to be a straightjacket disciplinarian.


Tulang Besi - "Shakir, Yusuf Ali, Pickhall, Palmer, Tafsir Ar Rahman, Rodwell etc. They're all wrong because they translate "..faqtulu anfusakum.." as "kill thyself"..."


By the way, you quoted the Pickhall, YusufAli and Shakir, and justify your interpretations. But now you are saying they are all wrong? Apalah kau ni....

KaKiaYam

Tulang Besi said...

kakiayam says:
"
On another note, when I read the verse again of Musa killing those who worship the calf, I wonder was that the will of God, or was it the will of Musa?

Let's assume God indeed has the intention of killing those who worship the calf, where and when did God lay down the rule in stone saying apostates should be killed?

But God did lay down rules in stone telling the Israelites that they should not kill each other. "

MY REPLY: God laid down the rule. The same God made an exception.

Is that so hard to understand?

HumanBeing said...

Tulang Besi said: I guess your saying the Quran is barbaric as well?
-----------------
Wrong guess.
The mission of humanity is eternal continuous improvement and progress. The basic guide within the human psyche is pleasure and pain. Pleasure for positive acts and pain for negative acts that would impede progress.

All Holy texts including the Quran have guides that are implemented along the above principles. Some of these guides are relative to time and culture, while other guides are standard and independent of time.

2:54 is definitely a time/culture-based sort of guideline to correct a person when his/her behavior did not meet the expectations of the elders in terms of belief. 2:54 was in referenced to Moses which was another few thousand years (say 4000+ BC) before Muhammad’s time. Frankly it is difficult to establish the truth of what really happened then, but we can be sure that was a violation of expectations and a corrective action was suggested relating to change in belief.

Since 2:54 is a time based corrective solution, and a similar act, i.e. change of belief happened in 2008, then we as humane human being should apply a rational and appropriate corrective action in line with 2008 standards.
According the majority of humans, UNHR had already recommend freedom of religion and therefore there is no need for corrective actions for anything similar to 2:54.

Why I am saying your expectation in relation to 2:54 is ‘barbaric’ is because you are regressing to invoke and insisting on a time-based corrective action initiated 5000+ years ago. There is definitely something wrong with your inability to change with time. It is very pathetic and psychopathic when you are unable to feel or empathize for another human being. As I had mentioned it is due to Terror Management Theory and Cognitive Dissonance.

If you insist on the word “kill” to stick to the words in the holy texts, and if you are spiritually mature you would have used your higher human brain to shift perspective and view it as a metaphor and not literally.

Be more humane and infuse that in your consciousness to be a better human being and avoid using 2:54 as a ‘murder’ vehicle.

Tulang Besi said...

humanbeing said:

"2:54 is definitely a time/culture-based sort of guideline to correct a person when his/her behavior did not meet the expectations of the elders in terms of belief. 2:54 was in referenced to Moses which was another few thousand years (say 4000+ BC) before Muhammad’s time. Frankly it is difficult to establish the truth of what really happened then, but we can be sure that was a violation of expectations and a corrective action was suggested relating to change in belief."

MY REPLY: But, apostasy is not time binded. People apostate then, people apostate now.

Just like adultery.

So, what applies then, applies now.

Tulang Besi said...

human beings said:
"
If you insist on the word “kill” to stick to the words in the holy texts, and if you are spiritually mature you would have used your higher human brain to shift perspective and view it as a metaphor and not literally."

MY REPLY: What is I insist to follow exactly what God says?

What if I insists that God knows what He wants to say, and He says as He pleases?

What if I insists that if God wanted to say somethis else, He would've said it, but instead He says what He says in 02:54?

Am I wrong?

HumanBeing said...

Tulang Besi: Here's where you're wrong. Islam is not a mere worship or faith.
-------------------
If Islam is a complete way of life then it is a square peg trying to fit a round hole in this modern age.

Our current world is getting too complex to accomodate a 1400 years old teachings on a wholesale basis without room for revision.

The human specie will vanish if Islam is the only religion on Earth from 2008 onwards. Islam as a way of life is too incompetent to deal with potential threats from within Earth (global warming) and outer space (meteorites, Sun,etc).

To be effective, Islam must confine only to the religious and spiritual elements, and leave the rest of human activities to other fields of human endeavours.

HumanBeing said...

What if I insists that if God wanted to say somethis else, He would've said it, but instead He says what He says in 02:54?
Am I wrong?
------------------------
1. Human beings are fallible, not perfect and there is no way human beings can be absolutely sure what god (assuming god exists) intend to say. Not even with a messenger who is another fallible human.

2. From my perspective, god do not exists. If you insist that god exists for whatever reasons, go ahead, but please steer on the human and humane side. 'Murdering' someone else for mere change of mind is evil.

Tulang Besi said...

Human Being said:

"If Islam is a complete way of life then it is a square peg trying to fit a round hole in this modern age.

Our current world is getting too complex to accomodate a 1400 years old teachings on a wholesale basis without room for revision."

MY REPLY: Square peg in round hole? Since when? WHere?

As far as Islam is concenred, it is fitting into the modern world just fine.

Just because it deosn't fit into the secular liberalism frame of mind doesn't make Islam weird.

It's not like secular liberalism is that great of an ideology anyways.

HumanBeing said...

But, apostasy is not time binded. People apostate then, people apostate now.
Just like adultery.
So, what applies then, applies now.
-------------------------
Apostasy is definitely time based and its fundamental purpose has survival value for our ancestors and other apes thousands of years ago.

10,000 years ago if tribe members (esp males) were to leave freely, the strength of the tribe will be weakened and the whole tribe could be anihilated by another trible.

Therefore strict penalties (death) is used to prevent members from leaving the tribe. Long ago religion was part and parcel of life and apostasy was created to continue that primitive tradition.

The above is still used by gangs and cults. However secure and high self-esteem progressive humans has done away with the threat of death for apostasy or living the family.

Apostasy is definitely time-based. It is very unfortunate that you thinking from your lower animal brain on this issue.

I wonder do you ever have the capacity to use your higher cortical brain for such matters. I am sure you can.

HumanBeing said...

Just because it deosn't fit into the secular liberalism frame of mind doesn't make Islam weird.
It's not like secular liberalism is that great of an ideology anyways.
-----------------
On this issue you need to look at humanity in term of percentile. In general the majority of Muslims is not very progressive in terms of intellectual, scientific. spiritual and technological wise.

The best 10% of Muslims is not leading the pack for humanity. When rated with non-Muslims, they are probably average. The 80% of peaceful Muslims is just living from dusk to dawn trying to earn a living or striving to survive. There is an extreme 10% which is all out to commit violence and impede humanity's progress.

Secular is just non-religious. Let's not talk about secular liberalism. Rather let's look at non-Muslim (NM) as a whole.

10% of NM are leading the pack in terms of advancement in every field of humanity in this modern age. If a meteorite is discovered to come towards Earth, we can bet they will lead humanity to avoid this threat to the human specie.

Can we expect the Quran and Muslims to do anything about it. Muslim would probably welcome the meteorite to destroy Earth and all human beings so that they can go to heaven and get their heavenly rewards of you know what.

The majority of 80% NM is likely to be more advance in all fields of humanity. I admit the above is an approximation but i don't think i will be way off if we do serious research on it.

As with any population there will be about 10% of NM who are perverts, deviants, mentally unstable etc.

The main point is that we do not want to put 100% of the population into a rigid way of life. Freedom will enable to 10% of leaders of the pack to maximize their potential for the sake of humanity.

Your 'barbaric' expectations and interpretation of Islam would definitely impede humanity progress to save the human specie in the long run.

If you analyse rationally, your religious inclinations are solely and selfishly undertaken to soothe your primordial fear of death. Note Terror Management Theory (TMT)(chck:wiki)

Be more human and humane. Squeeze out and be charitable with some feelings of your for other non-Muslim humans.

Tulang Besi said...

humanbeing says:

"Apostasy is definitely time based and its fundamental purpose has survival value for our ancestors and other apes thousands of years ago.

10,000 years ago if tribe members (esp males) were to leave freely, the strength of the tribe will be weakened and the whole tribe could be anihilated by another trible."

MY REPLY: You don't really have proof to this claim, do you? Is this a fact or is this a joke?

it sure doesn't sound right to me,

Tulang Besi said...

kakiayam asks:

"So what makes you so sure that the subconscious of people like Haris Ibrahim are different from yours? Or in other words, what makes you think that your faith which lies in your own 'subconscious' is the correct version? Because your faith are the same as the majority?"

MY REPLY: Well for starters, my beliefs are based on clear understanding of the Quran.

As opposed to Haris Ibrahim's understanding that depends on misinterpreting the Quran?

That's a telling sign, isn't it?

KaKiaYam said...

Tulang Besi - "I don't think u want to bring the Mufti of Egypt, Ali Gomma into this conversation..."

Why not?

From your picture, I thought you are a well traveled and well read person. I guess I was wrong.

Again, I hope you could do more homework and read more of opposing views. Read the press statement again, but try reading it with a clear mind and not reading it hoping that it would say something that you want it to say.

This is the first article from the Grand Mufti -
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/muslims_speak_out/2007/07/sheikh_ali_gomah.html

This is the second article from the Grand Mufti -
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/muslims_speak_out/2007/07/gomaas_statement_on_apostasy.html

Do you see any contradictions of both? I can't. In fact the second article affirms the first.

All the article says is this -

1. In Islam there is no freedom of religion.
2. It is a a punishable crime.

And I agree! So does other major Abrahamic religions! Apostasy is a grave sin punishable by God.

If you still can't get the drift, then nothing will.

Or perhaps I will provide you with some link to read up.

http://eteraz.wordpress.com/2007/07/24/huge-news-egyptian-mufti-kills-death-penalty-for-apostasy/

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/muslims_speak_out/2007/07/khalid_zahir.html

http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/apostasy_and_freedom_of_faith_in_islam/0016063

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2007/857/eg9.htm

Why must I do all the homework for you?
Isn't it clear that from the onset you seek worldly punishment for apostasy and the Quran is merely your tool?

KaKiaYam
__________________________________
http://chickenfeet.wordpress.com

KaKiaYam said...

A more complete write up is here -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/jul/26/islamsorganicliberalism

KaKiaYam

KaKiaYam said...

I just hope now that all is clear, you won't start to label the Mufti as DEVIANT and deny his authority.
Just like the way you quoted all the translations to justify capital punishment and later on label them as sesat.

KaKiaYam

KaKiaYam said...

Tulang Besi - " God laid down the rule. The same God made an exception. Is that so hard to understand?.."

No, it's not hard to understand. Like you said, God made an exception to the rule of not killing each other. He made an exception at that time and circumstances. Like I said, did he set it in stone the rule that says apostacy is punishable by man?

Whatever exception to the rule that was made, it was made for the fact that he is God.

KaKiaYam

KaKiaYam said...

Tulang Besi - "I guess your saying the Quran is barbaric as well?.."

Yes, if that's the way you insist on interpreting the verses, then Islam is indeed Barbaric..."

But then again, most of us could differentiate Islam and Muslims. And it is for all to see that it's muslims like you that is barbaric, nothing to do with Islam.

Good day and thanks for the lively and honest discussion that we had. You have been a very good and courteous blog owner, I appreciate that tremendously. This is something which Mahaguru is not capable of doing.

Too bad we cannot agree with most things discussed but nevertheless, it was a fruitful discussion without descending into cursing and name calling. :)

Salam.

KaKiaYam

Anonymous said...

Tulang Besi,

You still have not answered the question, 'what makes you think you are a Muslim?'. What distinguishers you from e.g. a Ahmadiyya follower who you claim non-Muslim? or what distinguishers you from the fraudsters?

The Quran is word of Allah. Only Allah knows its true meaning. He reaveals it to his chosen servants, His Prophets.

Shakir, Yusuf Ali, Pickhall, Palmer, Tafsir Ar Rahman, Rodwell etc. Yes, they can be wrong! Why not? Who are they? They are just ordinary people, not the 'guided ones'. You accept their translations as correct because it suits your mentality (to kill apostates).There are other translations on the contrary.

In the subject verse, Prophet Musa was intructed by Allah to tell his people (the cow worshippers) to 'kill' themselves. Literally it would mean commit suicide, which is a sin in Islam. So, here it obviously means Musa told his followers to 'kill' their evil desires.

I hope 'Tulang Besi' and like minded muslims wont tarnish the beautiful attributes of Allah, being the Most Compassionate.



anonymous

HumanBeing said...

HB said: [Death for] apostasy is definitely time-based and its fundamental purpose has survival value for our ancestors and other apes thousands of years ago.

TB said: You don't really have proof to this claim, do you? Is this a fact or is this a joke? it sure doesn't sound right to me,
-------------------------

Hey.. you can proof this from your own experience but you need a greater of depth of knowledge to link it to death for apostasy. Studies from anthropology, primatology, tribal psychology, neuro-psychology, has explored this instinct in great details.

This survival instinct is still active in you and everyone at the present age, but most do not resort to killing those that do not meet our expectations. Every time a useful member of a human group leaves for unacceptable reasons, the other members will naturally have some sort of negative feelings for that ex-member.

Example: If you are team member of a champion football team, you would probably feel negative or even angry that your star striker left for the runners-up opposition team. If there is no law, you might even want to kill him so that your opposition does not threaten your championship status.

Now that some BN members intend to move over to PR, I am sure many BN members will feel angry or even want to kill them if they can get away with murder.

The majority would not even understand why they are feeling uneasy and react they way to do. They are ignorant that the survival instinct to keep group intact is aroused within their subconscious. This is why education is necessary.

That’s your proof. QED.

The ‘death for apostasy’ ruling was a reactive measure to preserve group survival as demonstrated above. The difference is in the period, culture, spiritual and intellectual maturity of the masses.

During Moses’ time, the people were highly tribalistics and they act instinctively more like primates than present humans. During Muhammad’s time, the Arabs were still nomads and tribalistics. Thus the threat of death for apostasy was probably the most effective measure to handle the tribal mentality of the people at those times.

As I had mentioned the reaction to members leaving a group is still inherent in the normal humans. However the majority of humans had progressed so far to the extent that they do not resort to death for apostasy. It is only the minority with sub-human tendencies that resort death for leaving a group, i.e. cults, gangs, secret societies, mafia, etc.

Many matured Muslims had viewed 2:54 as time-based or metaphorically in line with the advancement of humanity. It is very unfortunate that you still prefer the ‘barbaric’ version. My assessment is that you had failed to trigger the effective spiritual neural networks within your higher brain/mind. Your thoughts are inclined toward the psychopathic.

Here is a question for you to think about. If every human on earth was previously a Muslim and they all decide to be apostate except you. If you are given the power to kill everyone, will you do it in accordance to your interpretation of 2:54.

Tulang Besi said...

Kaki ayam,

The report u quoted are from New York Post.

The statement i quoted is direct from Ali Gomma himself.

It seems Washington Post twisted his words and applied their own interpretation of Ali Gommaa statement.

Please read the statement carefully

Anonymous said...

Dear Tulang Besi,

I think you are just wasting your time debating with these very narrow minded,very prejudiced very Islamophobe kufurs. They will obviously try to twist every word you say , every Surah from Allah almighty, hoping that we Muslims will change our religion like other religion to suit secularism and so called modern times. But Allah has promised to preserve the Quran and Islam is here to stay and will rise again. They are obviously intelligent people to read and twist so much on what the verse has to say. What a pity they won't open their eyes to the truth. Jazar Allah Khair .

HumanBeing said...

Dear Tulang Besi,
I think you are just wasting your time debating with these very narrow minded,very prejudiced very Islamophobe kufurs.
What a pity they won't open their eyes to the truth.
-------------------
Anon, re 2:54, i note your spiritual maturity is one notch higher than Tulang Besi, you should give him more advice on how to progress spiritually.

We are not doing any formal debate here, it is just a discussion or dialogue based on consensus to participate.

Btw, you need to understand what is "truth" before deciding to know the truth or call other narrow-minded. Note,

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/truth
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth

I am certain i know what is meant by the word "truth" and every statement i made is striving towards the truth (not absolute).

Tulang Besi said...

Kaki Ayam says:

"All the article says is this -

1. In Islam there is no freedom of religion.
2. It is a a punishable crime."

MY REPLY: Then the article is wrong because Islam doesn't coerce anyone into joining Islam. How can that be not free?

For 1400 we didn't force anyone to join Islam.

Tulang Besi said...

Human Being said:

"Anon, re 2:54, i note your spiritual maturity is one notch higher than Tulang Besi, you should give him more advice on how to progress spiritually."

MY REPLY: Dear Human Being,

I am still not clear about your stand on 02:54?

Are u saying that accepting 02:54 as it is as a regression in spirituality?

Or are u saying that in order to progres spiritually, we are foced to abandon God's word and make up our own n place of it?

If that is so, how can u be sure that your spirituality is in tune with Divine guidance since you already reject it in the first place?

Tulang Besi said...

anonymous asks:

"

You still have not answered the question, 'what makes you think you are a Muslim?'. What distinguishers you from e.g. a Ahmadiyya follower who you claim non-Muslim? or what distinguishers you from the fraudsters?

The Quran is word of Allah. Only Allah knows its true meaning. He reaveals it to his chosen servants, His Prophets. "

MY REPLY: Easy, God reveals the Quran and Sunnah in the form that is easy to understand and very clear.

Yassin verse 2 is an example.

Ahmadiyya, Quran Alone etc contradicts verses that has clearly been revealed by Allah SWT.

As for your claim "only Allah knows it's meaning" that's not true because God sent His Prophet SAW to EXPLAINED the Quran (16:44)

So, there.

Tulang Besi said...

Human Being says:

"Hey.. you can proof this from your own experience but you need a greater of depth of knowledge to link it to death for apostasy. Studies from anthropology, primatology, tribal psychology, neuro-psychology, has explored this instinct in great details."

MY REPLY: Do u really think that I never studied sociology Human Being?

At best, most of these stories are theories waiting to be proven.

KaKiaYam said...

Tulang Besi - "Then the article is wrong because Islam doesn't coerce anyone into joining Islam. How can that be not free?"

Now I know why our discussion are going NOWHERE.

You wouldn't have ask the question above should you read the links that I have shown you. Alas, you choose to bury your head into the sand, not willing to see counter argument from the opposing side.

And I am not even stubbornly saying these arguments are the truth NOR am I 'persuading' you to accept mine.

I am merely putting these up for the sake of discussion, and not attempting to draw a clear line on what is truth, false or half truth. I will leave that to individuals to form their own conclusion.

It's not a win-lose game, tulang besi. It's an intellectual discussion.

Something which many muslims are not willing to engage with others (including among muslims themselves), while stubbornly stressing that absolute truth is on their side.

We can see this in the form of people like anonymous 8.57pm. He accused me of twisting the verse in the Quran, when I did nothing of it. I merely ask question from a different perspective, which evidently you and him have no answers to. Anonymous even accuse me of attempting to change your religion. And what religion could that be? You mean to disagree on the capital punishment for the Quran would be a good enough reason to leave Islam?

If there are anything that I have learn from these exchanges, it is the fact that to some people, truth is NOT arguable.

Thank you.

KaKiaYam

HumanBeing said...

TB said: Are u saying that accepting 02:54 as it is as a regression in spirituality?
----------------------
It is the way you interpret and accept 02:54. It the part of the brain/mind that is actively firing that determines your degree of spirituality.


TB: Or are u saying that in order to progres spiritually, we are foced to abandon God's word and make up our own n place of it?
--------------------------
Language and words are developed by humans and are subject to ambiquity. That is why there is so much serious expounding of holy texts by many so-called experts.

In this case, it is not a question of abandon holy texts, but how you interpret the words and meaning will depend on your degree of spirituality, e.g. half-empty or half-full is the same thing.



TB said:If that is so, how can u be sure that your spirituality is in tune with Divine guidance since you already reject it in the first place?
-----------------------
The mission of humanity is the same for all humans. Just as the generic digestive process and other generic human process, there is a generic spiritual process which is the same for all humans.
If we can determine what is the optimal (not perfect) for the digestive process, we can also assess the optimality of one's spiritual process.

HumanBeing said...

TB: Do u really think that I never studied sociology Human Being?
At best, most of these stories are theories waiting to be proven.
--------------------
I had never implied at all that you had never studied sociology.

The related fields of knowledge matter of refering you to your own personal feelings of the survival instints related to death of apostasy is more towards psychology, anthropology, neuropsychology. Sociology is secondary.

At best, what i had proposed so far re human nature and experiences can be verified by your own yourself personally when you expand your knowledge base and use your higher human brain, you do not need to rely on faith to know it.

ALL human knowledge to date is subject to continuous improvement and new knowledge will appear as humans change with time.
Even if something is proven to be true, it is only true, it is only true relative to time and culture. Knowledge can never be 100% absolutely true. Newton theory was true only for certain conditions. Einstein revised his theories. Quantum Mechanics revised Einstein theories, etc.

For a scientific theory to be valid, it MUST be falsifiable, i.e. it must be open-ended to provide room for it to be proven wrong. Scientists are very happy if someone can refute their theory because it meant advancement for all and humanity.

TB said: Waiting to be proven
-----------------------
All your 'holy' assertions are based on the assumption that god exists.
Faith in god may be practical, rational and justified, but there is no solid proof that god does exists.
Therefore to advocate killing someone for merely changing their mind (2:54) by relying on something imaginary is morally wrong.

pak yeh said...

Dear writer,
I do not agree with you. It is not Islam to kill apostates.
Moses command to "slay yourselves"on Quean 2:54 is tafsir as to " slay your nafs" as slay yourselves can also mean suicide, which is haram in Islam. This tafsir is the best because an injunction to kill the apostate will be "kill them".

Qther verses of the Quran also contradicts hadis that call for the killing of apostates/mudtad.
Proofs are....

1)AlQuran 2:256 "There is no compulsion in religion(all religion including Islam)".

2)AlQuran 23:96 "Repel evil with that which is better.We are best aware of that which they alledge".
To repel murtad wiyh the death penalty contradicts this verse.

3)AlQuran 2:178 "O you who belirf, retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered.The freeman for the freeman, the slave for the slave, the female for the female.And for him who is forgiven by his brother,procecution according to usage and payment to him, in kindness.This is an elevation and Mercy from your Lord. He who transgresses will have a painful doom".
The law of retailation..an eye with an eye. Murtad with death.??? Its not law of retailation is it.???

Quran onlt is the original Islam.
The hadis corrupts Islam.Refer Quran 31:6 "Some people use lahwal(fake) hadis to mislead others from Allahs path,without knowledge, and make a mockery of it(Allahs path/Islam)".

Read more and debate at articles 1)The ying ang yang of Islamic Law
2) Bohong Sunnat = Lahwal Hadis.
3)Konspirasi seleweng Quran dan Muslim, at

http://warongpakyeh.blogspot.com

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

ARiF merupakan jentera utama Harapan Baru di dalam membantu kelancaran gerakerja semua peringkat.

Kami ARiF Melaka memerlukan sumbangan dan bantuan kewangan daripada tuanpuan untuk kami melakukan gerakerja berkenaan. Oleh kerana kami masih baru, sumbangan diperlukan untuk menampung kos pakaian, membeli peralatan komunikasi, peralatan lalulintas dan sebagainya.

Kami amat berbebsar hati jika tuan/puan dapat menghulurkan sumangan kepada kami. Segala sumbangan diserahkan kepada pemegang amanah ARiF Melaka.

MOHD AZWAN AHMAD
a/k Maybank : 104013154427

Hantarkan makluman bank-in melalui SMS/WA ke 016-981 1315 (H.ANUAR)

Semuga Allah membalas segala jasa baik tuan/puan semua.