Originally posted on Ahmad Ali Karim's Weblog:
I’ll be on-air together with my parents and siblings at 11p.m. with DJ Nizal Mohammad in ‘When Night Falls-Bila Larut Malam’ on Thursday, March 6, 2014.
This is the first time I’ll be on-air in a radio show!
For international listeners, please note that time stated is 11pm on March 6, 2014 (Malaysian time) which is +8:00 GMT.
During the Dialog Anak Muda Selangor last month, Anwar Ibrahim had mentioned Sayyidina Ali as the first Caliph.
I think it is hardly necessary for me to explain to the Muslims why Anwar’s statement, “Sayyidina Ali the first Caliph” is wrong; for Sayyidina Ali r.a. is actually the fourth caliph, after Sayyidina Abu Bakr, Sayyidina Umar and Sayyidina Uthman.
Coming from the mouth of Anwar Ibrahim, “the renowned speaker on the subjects of democracy, freedom, governance, Islam” (quoting from Wikipedia), this uncorrected ‘mistake’ is far beyond mind-boggling. Even insane feels like an understatement.
The most baffling part of the whole thing is that even the audience didn’t question and seem to accept Anwar’s statement.
However, as it had been shown in the video, the Shiites or Syiahs, believe that Sayyidina Ali is the only true caliph as he was the nephew of the Prophet Muhammad but this devious belief has been banned in Malaysia as has been decided by the Fatwa Committee of the National Council for Islamic Religious Affairs Malaysia. Quoting from the e-fatwa website:
The 40th Special Muzakarah (Conference) of the Fatwa Committee of the National Council for Islamic Religious Affairs Malaysia held on 5th May 1996 has discussed Shi’ism in Malaysia. The Conference decided to:1. Agree with the decision of the Fatwa Committee Muzakarah (Conference) held on 24th-25th September 1984 [Paper No. 2/8/84, Article 4.2. (2)] concerning Shi’ism that decided as follows:“After discussing and deliberating on this working paper, the Committee has decided that only the Zaidiyyah and Jaafariyyah Shi’ite sects are accepted to be practiced in Malaysia” is abolished.2. Decided that Muslims in Malaysia must only follow the teachings of Islam based on the doctrine of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah on creed, religious laws and ethics.
In a recent interview by the Malaysian Insider, the de-facto leader of PKR, Anwar Ibrahim had ‘expressed his concerns’ over the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions Enactment 1988. Quoting from the Malaysian Insider:
Q: So what should Pakatan Rakyat do with enactments such as Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988, which seems to be the core problem in this issue?
A: The enactment has an attachment and the problem is with that. The enactment is for the protection of Muslims from efforts to proselytise but the attachment in terms of the words is generally excessive. I was in Penang speaking to religious scholars when I told them how do you explain a resident on Jalan Masjid who uses Jalan Masjid on his or her address?
So they immediately know the problem. I think this must be addressed. Unlike immediately responding to demands of non-Muslims groups, you must also know about the incessant propaganda among Muslims that has led to some of them to believe that they are under siege.
I can’t believe that of all people, the person who claims that he is the best person to become the Prime Minister of Malaysia and who is now trying to become the Menteri Besar of Selangor, would make such a silly statement regarding an enactment made in none other than Selangor itself.
Oh, come on!
The Section 9 of the Non-Islamic Religions Enactment 1988 says that the words (including Allah) cannot be used to express or describe anything of or pertaining to any non-Islamic religion. Quoting from the e-Syariah website:
A person commits an offence if he-
(a) in any published writing; or
(b) in any public speech or statement; or
(c) in any speech or statement addressed to any gathering of persons; or
(d) in any speech or statement which is published or broadcast and which at the time of its making he knew or ought reasonably to have known would be published of broadcast,
uses any of the words listed in Part I of the Schedule, or any of its derivatives or variations, to express or describe any fact, belief, idea, concept, act, activity, matter, or thing of or pertaining to any non-Islamic religion.
When a resident on Jalan Masjid uses the word masjid on his address, he uses it to describe a location. He doesn’t use it to express something pertaining to a non-Islamic religion. Just like in the ‘state songs argument’, where the person would say that it would then be impossible for a non-Muslim to sing the state songs with ‘Allah’ in the lyrics, this argument is baseless. This is due to the fact that Allah mentioned in the lyrics is referring to the Islamic God. It is not subjected to the singing individual’s religion since Islam is the religion of the federation, as had been stated in the Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution.
Not surprisingly, Anwar repeated the argument in the same interview.
Q: Like in the Selangor case, the Selangor state anthem has the word ‘Allah’… so does that mean that non-Muslims should not sing the anthem?
A: That is what has been raised. The point taken or the position of the Selangor religious department that is the law as it stands. But then the appendix to the law and manner of action is missing. So you have to see whether you should prosecute a person who puts down his address as Jalan Masjid. So far that has not happened. But that is the flaw in the legislation.
As I have copied from the e-syariah website, the Section 9 of the enactment clearly states that a person commits offense by using the words to express or describe anything of or pertaining to any non-Islamic religion. Anwar says that “the flaw is in the legislation”—it is not; the flaw is in those who innocently or not-so-innocently misinterpret the enactment.
Do your homework, get back to the facts, brother.
And this is exactly why we must never simply rely on the word of mouth (or media).
Dr. Reza Aslan, an Associate Professor of Creative Writing at the University of California, Riverside, has recently been interviewed by the BFM Radio’s Evening Edition on Allah issue as was reported by pro-Pakatan Malaysian Insider. What is the significant of interviewing a liberal person on such an important matter? May be Radio BFM, as well as The Malaysian Insider are trying hard to remind us their true colours.
Dr. Aslan mocked the Court of Appeals for unanimously ruling against allowing the Catholic Church to use the word “Allah” as the Malay translation for the Christian god in its weekly publication the Herald for which Justice Datuk Seri Mohamed Apandi Ali said:
“It is our common finding that the usage of the name ‘Allah’ is not an integral part of the faith and practice of Christianity. From such finding, we find no reason why the respondent is so adamant to use the name ‘Allah’ in their weekly publication. Such usage, if allowed, will inevitably cause confusion within the community.”
The Malaysian Insider reported that Dr. Aslan said,
“We Are Laughing At You”.
“Allah is constuction of the the word al-Ilah. That’s what the word is,” he explained. “Al-Ilah means ‘The God’. Allah is not the name of God.”
Reading the report by The Malaysian Insider, I found that his statements and arguments were rather far-fetched. Let me analyse his statements one by one:
1) Dr. Aslan says that “Al-Ilah means The God”.
“Al-Ilah means ‘The God’. Allah is not the name of God.”
Fine – Dr. Aslan says that it is okay for the Christians to call their God, Allah because to his understanding, Allah simply means ‘The God’. What Aslan failed to understand is that the Arabic word ‘Al’, meaning ‘the’ in English is used to emphasise the fact that ‘Allah’ is one and the only God. When a Muslim says ‘Allah’, he is referring to our one and only God. Now, for the Malaysian Christians who want to call their god, ‘Allah’ , does it means that they are rejecting the Christian doctrine of the Holy Trinity? Or do they think that Elohim, YHWH and Jehovah are not classy enough to refer to their god?
Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary wrote:
“When this command (Jesus commanded his followers to baptize “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit) is taken seriously and obeyed, the whole issue is greatly clarified – a Christian cannot baptize in the name of Allah,” – (see Christian Post’s Is Calling the Christian God ‘Allah’ Wrong?)
If the world-renowned theologian and seminary president has made such a strong statement against calling Christian God ‘Allah’, why must those Malaysian Christians still stubbornly want to call their God ‘Allah’ (but only in Malay texts and speeches)?
2) Dr. Aslan said that Christians and Jews in the Arabian Peninsula had been referring to their God as Allah because they spoke Arabic.
“Echoing many other Muslim scholars and writers, Aslan said Christians and Jews in the Arabian peninsula since before the time of the Prophet Muhammad had been referring to God as Allah.
“Why? Because they spoke Arabic… that’s why,”
Good, so now we know the Christians and Jews in the Arabs used Allah because they speak Arabic. So why in the world must the word God be translated to an Arabic word Allah for Malay translation, when the Malay word for God is Tuhan? Why must those Malaysian Christians translate their text to Malay when they do not want to recognise the Malay word for God? I guess the whole thing was too complicated for a foreigner like Dr. Aslan until he is confused; he has no idea that Malay and Arabic are two different languages. Maybe he thought that the Malaysian Christians are referring to Arabic translation and not the Malay.
3) Dr. Aslan says that:
“This idea that not only should Christians not be able to use this word, but that using the word is somehow a threat to Islam… that Malaysian (Muslims) are so stupid if they hear a Christian use the word Allah, they will accidentally become Christians. I mean, the idiocy of that statement speaks for itself,” he said.
In the first place who said that, ”if they hear a Christian use the word Allah, they will accidentally become Christians”? Our reason is that, “such usage if allowed, will inevitably cause confusion within the community” and not “if they hear a Christian use the word Allah, they will accidentally become Christians.” That crazy statement is so foolish. It seems like Dr. Aslan is really good at spinning stories as the Pakatan Rakyat does. Or don’t tell me that it was Malaysian Insider or BFM Radio who fed Dr. Aslan with the wrong information?
In Malaysia, Allah is the proper name of the Muslim god and exclusively referred to the one and only god of the Muslims’. But it is untrue that non-Muslims cannot mention the word Allah; they can mention the word Allah but only to refer to the Muslim’s god. So, either Dr. Aslan is purposely confusing his listeners or despite of his PhD in Sociology, he’s pretty silly after all or too confused that he can’t think straight.
4) Dr. Aslan gave an example of a threat to Islam… in Pakistan.
“A Taliban put a bomb in the Quran and took it to a mosque in Pakistan, where Muslims were slaughtered on one of the holiest days in the Muslim calendar. You want to talk about threats to Islam? That’s a threat to Islam”
So Dr. Aslan, now that you know and admit that it is a threat to Islam - why must you made such crazy statements? Oh, I’m sorry I forgot that you are an Iranian-American living in the United States. Perhaps it escapes your understanding that Pakistan and Malaysia are two different countries with separate governments and laws? Maybe, since you heard that we’re all in Asia, perhaps you made a conclusion that Asia is actually a country?
5) Next Dr. Aslan says that if anyone says that god has a name is blasphemous.
“Frankly, anyone who thinks that Allah is the name of God, is not just incorrect, but is going against the Quran itself. It is almost a blasphemous thought to think that Allah has a name. “And this is not an interpretation. It is a historical fact,” Reza added. “Any Imam that tells you God has a name, is blasphemous. It is as simple as that,” – Malaysian Insider.
Let me ask you readers – honestly, would you really take the words from a person who says that it is blasphemous to say that god has a name? So Dr. Aslan is accusing that all of the Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah as blasphemous? So no wonder he made all those rubbish statements. If that was what he really says, I wonder if he really converted back to Islam after converting to Christianity. But he couldn’t be a Christian either because the Christians believe in their lord ‘YHWH’ (or Elohim/Jehovah) and Jesus. I really think that he is really confused about almost everything that he said.
6) Dr. Aslan also says:
“We are laughing at you.”
And I’ll say that actually, the Christians in the Vatican are laughing at YOU, Dr. Aslan because you doesn’t seems to understand what you were talking about!
From Catholic Online:
CORPUS CHRISTI, TX (Catholic Online) – On the Commonweal magazine blog, Michael Peppard posted an article entitled “Pope Benedict: ‘May Allah bless you all!” While it is unquestionably true that the Holy Father gave a blessing Arabic, he did not say “May Allah bless you all!” as Peppard states. Peppard says in his article that there is only one word that could have been used by the Pope, and that word was “Allah.” But in fact, the whole article is built on a faulty premise. There are other words that may be used to refer to God other than Allah, although Allah is certainly one. The text in Arabic, which can be found on the Vatican website is: Translated, the meaning is “The pope prays for all Arabic speakers. May God bless you all.” The word used for “God,” however, was not Allah, but rather al-Rab or Lord.
Even the pope himself did not use the word Allah when he gave his blessings in Arabic (yes, Dr. Aslan, I said in Arabic), Dr. Aslan is getting head over heels over his support for the Christians to call their god Allah, until he went as far as to twist the facts and play with people’s perception (he does have a PhD in Sociology after all). But look, who’s laughing now? BFM Radio and Malaysia Insider, please do me a favour; don’t tell me that Dr. Aslan understands Christianity better than the pope himself.
The Malaysian Insider published an amusing but interesting article in it’s ‘rencana’ section titled, ‘Betul ke Umno penyelamat dunia dan akhirat?’
The reason why I find the article interesting is because of the irony of it. If you switch a few notable terms in the article (like say, from Umno to Pas) you would realise that the pot is calling the kettle black. To prove my point, I would post here the ‘edited’ version of the article in bold with the switched words underlined and in green. You can view the original article here.
(The article is in Malay but since most of my readers are Malaysians and this is a local issue, I would not bother to translate the article. My apologies to all non-Malaysian readers.)
Tuduhan bahawa kerajaan mempolitikkan isu Syiah yang dihebohkan sekarang ini tidak ada asasnya. Itu hanya permainan politik pimpinan Pas yang kini semakin terhakis daripada pandangan rakyat.
Note: The original article states that the issue between Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah (Sunni) and Syiah “has nothing to do with the faith (akidah) or the Islamic struggle” and the argument is wrong because the differences between the Sunni and the Syiah is on the basis of faith itself. Both Syiah and Sunni do not acknowledge the other in their beliefs.
Pemimpin yang menggunakan nama parti Islam sejak pilihan raya yang lalu sehingga sekarang ini tidak pun mengamalkan cara pemerintahan menurut kehendak Islam itu.
Orang Islam dalam Pas itu telah dan masih melanggar pantang larang sebagai seorang Muslim itu. Ketandusan idea politik mereka menyebabkan ada pihak yang mahu di kalangan kita orang Islam ini bergaduh, kerana sejak beberapa ketika dahulu Pas itu ‘survive’ di atas perpecahan orang Melayu yang beragama Islam itu.
(According to the teaching of Islam, Pas and Umno whose members are Muslims, must sit down and discuss (bermuzakarah) on matters related to Islam. When UMNO agrees to the idea; Pas’s leaders are divided into two teams and a number of leaders who vocally support the muzakarah idea were either kicked out of the party and being labelled as traitor.)
Note: In this article, Aspan Alias wrote that the Malays are generally Muslims. This is incorrect because Article 160 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia clearly defines a Malay as a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language and conforms to Malay custom. Thus according to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, a Malay has to be a Muslim in order to declare themselves as a Malay.
Malahan Pas yang didaftarkan pada tahun 1951 dahulu diasaskan oleh perpecahan orang Melayu dan kini ahli Pas semakin berpecah. Pas tidak mungkin ‘survive’ dalam situasi tenang dan aman, kerana jika keadaan politik itu aman, maka Pas takut rakyat memberikan fokus untuk menilai prestasi mereka terhadap rakyat.
(Until the end of the video, Ustaz Azahar, a popular Pas figure, did not dare to give the true answer to the question of how true is the fact that PKR (an ally of Pas) practice Liberalisme of Religion for not only PKR but a number of Pas’s key leaders are also liberal Muslims.)
Pas sentiasa merasakan mereka sedang berjalan dalam keadaan gelap gelita dan sunyi dan terpaksa membuat bising dengan menyanyi atau membakar mercun untuk memecah kesunyian yang amat mereka takuti. Semasa kampung saya belum mendapat kemudahan eletrik, keadaan pada malam hari amat gelap.
Sesiapa yang berjalan di dalam gelap itu merasakan di depan dan belakang mereka ada hantu atau harimau dan berbagai-bagai lagi yang mereka takuti. Selalu saya mendengar di jalan-jalan kecil yang sunyi dan gelap gelita itu anak-anak muda menyanyi dengan sekuat hati bagi memecahkan kesunyian dan menghilangkan sedikit rasa takut dan gementar itu.
Bermacam-macam lagi saya dengar. Ada yang menyanyikan lagu P Ramlee, malah ada juga menyanyikan lagu Mat Sentul. Ada yang membakar mercun dan berbagai-bagai cara untuk menghilangkan rasa takut itu sementara sampai ke rumah atau tempat lain.Pendeknya mereka akan berbuat bising untuk menghilangkan rasa takut itu.
Tetapi sekarang keadaan itu tidak berlaku lagi kerana elektrik sudah sampai di setiap rumah dan di jalan raya pula sudah ada lampu yang dipasang oleh Lembaga Letrik Negara atau sekarang ini TNB. Anak-anak muda sekarang tidak tahu kerana mereka tidak mengalami keadaan itu. Lahir mereka ke dunia ini sudah ada lampu eletrik dan air. ‘Air dalam bosi, potik ditopi di tongah menyalo’.
Tetapi masih ada lagi manusia yang masih mempunyai rasa takut dan tidak meyakinkan itu, tetapi bukan dirasai oleh orang kampung saya. Perasaan itu masih ada di dalam jiwa pemimpin Pas dan ramai ahli-ahlinya. Perasaan takut seolah-olah ada hantu di depan dan di belakang dan dalam kesunyian mereka itu membuatkan mereka mencari apa sahaja jalan untuk memecah kesunyian untuk menghilangkan rasa takut dan gementar itu.
Mereka sekarang tidak menyanyikan lagi lagu P Ramlee atau Mat Sentul, mereka menyanyikan lagu ala rap yang bertajuk, ‘Undi Pas Masuk Syurga’.
Mereka mahu menghilangkan rasa takut mereka dengan berbuat bising. Selalunya orang yang penakut ini akan bercakap besar dan garang seperti yang kita dengar di kalangan mereka yang entah macam mana duduk di atas dan memimpin kita itu. Pemimpin seperti ini terpaksa melakukan banyak perkara pelik bagi menutup kelemahan mereka yang mudah dilihat oleh orang ramai.
Kenapa Pas memilih untuk menjadikan isu agama sebagai cara mendinding diri mereka daripada kejatuhan itu diketahui ramai? Pas tahu cabaran kepadanya ialah Umno. Parti itu merupakan parti yang digeruni oleh Pas walaupun dalam ucapan pemimpin mereka, mereka cuba untuk melindungi rasa takut mereka dengan kata-kata ego dan pengecut mereka. Mereka tidak berani untuk menunjukkan jiwa besar dengan mengakui kelemahan mereka.
Pas sarat dengan pemimpin palsu yang hanya menunjuk-nunjuk kehebatan mereka sedangkan rakyat semakin hari semakin memahami hakikat ini. Mereka menyembunyikan kekayaan mereka supaya rakyat tidak tahu adalah hasil manipulasi kepercayaan dan wang rakyat juga dalam sistem pentadbiran yang begitu sarat dengan penipuan dan salah guna kuasa itu.
Bagi saya, isu tuduhan Pas ini tidak elok kita abaikan sahaja kerana ia dipergunakan oleh Pas yang mengaku Islam tetapi larangan Islam itu dilakukan secara terbuka. Bagi mereka, Pas sahaja yang dibenarkan melanggar segala kehendak agama itu.
Pas seolah-olah maksum dan tidak ada siapa yang mesti meragui mereka. Dan yang lebih dahsyat lagi merekalah pejuang dan pelindung agama kita.
Mereka lebih hebat daripada aulia dan anbia yang ditugaskan menjaga dunia dan alam ini selepas kewafatan Nabi Muhammad lebih seribu tahun dahulu.
Bagi mereka Pas adalah segala-galanya. Tidak makbul doa seseorang itu dan tidak sampai hajat sesiapa pun tanpa dikehendaki oleh Pas. Pas sahaja yang menentukan nasib semua orang dunia dan akhirat.
Saya baru sahaja tahu yang dunia dan alam ini diwariskan kepada Pas untuk menjaganya. Kalau tidak ada Haji Hadi, Nik Aziz dan Mat Sabu serta Khalid Samad, tentu kacau-bilau dunia ini.
Kalau boleh, masukkan Anwar Ibrahim sekali sebaris dengan mereka, mungkin pasti kita semua selamat di dunia dan akhirat. Mati kita mungkin mati dalam iman, bak kata P Ramlee dalam filem Ali Baba Bujang Lapuk. Di akhir kalam nak mati pun kita akan bangun seketika, dan senyum.
Mengikut jalan cerita dalam filem itu mereka yang sudah merompak pun mati mereka dalam iman. Itulah cerita yang dilakonkan kembali oleh pemimpin-pemimpin Pas sekarang ini. Selamat menonton!
(By the way, I have never heard an Umno leader claiming “Umno penyelamat dunia dan akhirat”, have you?)
The Malaysian Insider reported that Karpal Singh calls for the de-registration of all political or professional bodies which operate along racial and religious lines, saying the move would work in the interest of unity. “The government cannot allow associations to operate along racial and religious lines. It is a very serious matter,” said Karpal.
However, I greatly disagree in this matter. First and foremost, Karpal Singh needs to go back to his roots and remember the history of the acceptance of the Chinese and Indians in Malaysia. During the days when the African-Americans were segregated from the whites, the Malaysian government have already recognised the Chinese and Indians as their citizens. As a part of the social contract, the Chinese and Indians accepted the special position of Malays as the indigenous people of Malaya. In those days, countries were not being constantly pressured by outside bodies like the United Nations or the mass media. The compassion of our kings and leaders shine through the fact that even without influences from those human rights activists, they gave the Chinese and Indians such an honour that they would hardly get elsewhere at the time.
Secondly, Islam is granted a special place in the Federal Constitution such as written in Article 3 (1): “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.” This article clearly states that Malaysia is not a secular nation as the idea of secularism separates state from religion. In Karpal’s statement, he says that, “Perhaps the time has come for all racial and religious political parties and professional organisations which operated along racial and religious lines, to be de-registered.” To ban an organisation which operates along the religion of Islam simply because it is a ‘religious line’ is a clear offense against the Federal Constitution of Malaysia which is the supreme law of this country.
Thirdly, the presence of racial based political parties is not just to protect the special positions of the Malays but also to represent the Chinese and Indians of Malaysia. Although it is true that the government tries to be fair to all citizens of Malaysia, it is impossible for a person to fully understand the needs of another who conform to different cultures. By having different racial based parties under one coalition, it ensures that each of the representatives of the race has a say in the government. This system is also used in the United Nations where the representatives are not just a random blend of different people but to ensure fairness, each of the countries have their own delegates to represent the people of their nation.
And by the way, if this is Karpal’s stance, does it means that Karpal or the DAP wish for the Chinese and Indian schools to be disintegrated and for the children to study under the national curriculum like how it is done in Singapore? If so, had Pakatan Rakyat won the 13th General Elections, would DAP betray their Chinese and Indian supporters by abolishing the Chinese and Indian schools?
- Will PAS Obey To Karpal’s Order? (ahmadalikarim.wordpress.com)