Saturday, August 16, 2008

Inventing new religious rituals

Inventing new religious rituals
17 Aug, 2008

How valid is this swearing on the Quran, which Saiful conducted in the Federal Territory Mosque? Does such a thing exist in Islam? Apparently not, according to Dr. Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin, Abdul Hadi Awang, Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Dr Haron Din, and the host of other Islamic scholars regarded as authorities on Islam by most Malays

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Mahathir dares Anwar to swear

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has dared Pakatan Rakyat leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to swear on the Quran to prove he is innocent of the sodomy charge he faces. He said Anwar should do so just like his accuser Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan who had sworn upon the Quran that Anwar had sodomised him. “Anwar should also be doing the same thing, instead of just giving ceramah everywhere, to prove his innocence,” Dr Mahathir said.

Referring to Saiful's swearing on the Quran at the Federal Territory mosque here yesterday, Dr Mahathir said it was the former Anwar aide’s way of proving he was not lying when he alleged he had been sodomised by the PKR adviser on June 26.

Dr Mahathir said that as a figure on the Malaysian political scene, Anwar should act in accordance with public sentiment that he said, required that he give a sworn statement pertaining to the sodomy allegation. However, the action would be considered to be just a good political gesture because Anwar himself had to provide legitimate evidence to prove that he was not guilty in the matter.

Terengganu Mentri Besar Datuk Ahmad Said said Saiful did the right thing by swearing upon the Quran. “It is to demonstrate that he was telling the truth. I congratulate him for his courage,” he said.

Former PKR Youth chief Mohamed Ezam Mohd Nor said it was not easy for Saiful to do what he did. “If I were Anwar, the next thing I’ll do is to go to the mosque and prove my innocence. The legal way is not enough.”

The Muslim Consumers Association of Malaysia said in a statement that Anwar should respond to Saiful's latest move. (Bernama)

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

“I’ve done this for God and I took my oath in the house of God, that I was humiliated and sodomised by Anwar Ibrahim and I do not wish to lie to the world as he has done” - statement by Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan after swearing on the Holy Qur’an at the Masjid Wilayah at Jalan Duta yesterday, as reported by Malaysiakini.

Err, Saiful, you did lie to the whole world yesterday.

Saiful was asked by a reporter to explain how the timing was so close to nomination date for the Permatang Pauh by-election.

Saiful replied: It’s all a coincidence. We don’t know that Anwar is going to contest…

Yet, on 2nd August, Malaysiakini reported that in a posting in Saiful’s blog on 1st August, ‘Saiful also briefly wished Anwar ‘good luck’ in contesting for the Permatang Pauh by-election’. (http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2008/08/16/sai-full-of-lies/ )

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


So, finally, Saiful has sworn on the Quran that Anwar buggered him, against his will. I suppose any 61-year old man with a bad back who can force himself on a 23-year old man who is bigger and stronger than him should be strong enough to become the Prime Minister of Malaysia. This demonstrates how strong Anwar is, physically, and that he is certainly nowhere near over-the-hill. Mentally, of course, no one has any doubts that Anwar can out-think the sharpest cookies. They will literally foam at the mouth in any live debate with the incoming Member of Parliament of Permatang Pauh.

Nevertheless, how valid is this swearing on the Quran, which Saiful conducted in the Federal Territory Mosque? Does such a thing exist in Islam? Apparently not, according to Perlis Mufti Dr. Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin, PAS President Abdul Hadi Awang, PAS Spiritual Leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat, PAS Deputy Spiritual Leader Dr Haron Din, and the host of other Islamic scholars regarded as authorities on Islam by most Malays. Anyway, even before Saiful pulled off his little circus stunt, and even before these scholars commented on the spectacle, I had already said that there is no such thing in Islam and is the act of deviant Muslims.

Let us reflect on what happened about 1,400 years ago when Prophet Muhammad’s wife, Aisha binti Abu Bakar, was accused of adultery with Safwan bin Al-Muattal. According to popular and accepted Islamic history, the whole incident happened as follows:

Aisha was travelling with the Prophet and some of his followers through the desert and they had stopped to camp for the night. The following morning, when she discovered she had lost her necklace, Aisha left the camp and went to search for it.

No one realised she had ‘broken ranks’ and the caravan packed up and resumed its journey. When Aisha returned to the campsite, she found that the caravan had left without her. There was nothing she could do but to sit right there and wait, in the hope they would realise they had left her behind and come back to fetch her. But they did not return for her because they did not realise they had left her behind.

Later that same day, a young and handsome Arab man named Safwan bin Al-Muattal came along and spotted Aisha sitting all alone in the desert. Though he had never met Aisha before, he immediately recognised her as one of the Prophet’s wives because of the tudung that she wore. It seems, in those days, only the Prophet’s wives wore the tudung to distinguish them from the other women.


Apparently, the tudung was ‘decreed’ for only the Prophet’s wives and not for all women. Anyway, that is another topic for another time as, today, we wish to talk about Saiful swearing on the Quran and he does not wear a tudung, yet.

Safwan rescued Aisha and took her on his horse to chase after the caravan. It was when the caravan, again, stopped to camp for the evening did they realise that Aisha was missing. But there was nothing much they could do because it was about to get dark and looking for Aisha somewhere in the desert in the middle of the night was just not viable.

It was not until the following morning that Safwan and Aisha caught up with the Prophet’s caravan. The scene of Aisha returning to the caravan with another (young and handsome) man triggered rumours that she had committed adultery with Safwan. The Prophet’s enemies immediately spread the rumour faster than a special report on Malaysia Today could ever have done.

Prophet Muhammad never doubted Aisha. Nevertheless, he called for a family conference to discuss what to do and his adopted son, Zayd, defended Aisha. Ali, his son-in-law, however, felt that a Prophet can’t afford to be the target of rumours, especially one involving his wife, and he suggested that Prophet Muhammad divorce Aisha.

Aisha steadfastly proclaimed her innocence. Muhammad felt very troubled by the whole matter and it is said he left Aisha’s house and did not return for many days. Aisha was the Prophet’s youngest and favourite wife who is also the daughter of his most faithful comrade, Abu Bakar, who went on to become the First Caliph of Islam after Prophet Muhammad died.

Aisha was devastated. Shortly after that, Prophet Muhammad announced he had received a revelation from God confirming Aisha's innocence and directing him that adultery be proven by four eyewitnesses, rather than simply inferred from opportunity (The Quran Surah 24:4). Prophet Muhammad also rebuked those who had slandered his wife (The Quran Surah 24:11) and ordered them to receive forty lashes, among them his poet Hassan bin Thabit.

So there you have it. Prophet Muhammad did not ask Aisha to swear on the Quran in the mosque that she is innocent and did not commit adultery. And neither was Safwan, who was accused of ‘penetrating’ Aisha, also asked to swear on the Quran in a mosque that he had kept his pecker in his pants at all times when he was alone with Aisha. In fact, those who made the allegation were instead punished.

We must also note one very important point. The Quran, in the book form that we know today, did not exist yet at the time of Prophet Muhammad. It was Osman, the Third Caliph, who compiled the Quran into the book form that we know today, long after the Prophet had died. That is why the Quran is sometimes referred to as the Osmania Quran. Before that, the Quran was etched on pieces of tree bark and animal skin with the bulk of it memorised by hundreds of companions of the Prophet.

If Aisha had been asked to swear her innocence on the Quran, then they would have had to recall all the pieces of tree bark and animal skin from all over the Arabian Peninsular, plus they would have had to assemble the hundreds of men who had ‘recorded’ the Quran in their heads. These tree barks and animal skin, plus the hundreds of Quran memorisers, would then have had to be lumped into a huge pile in the middle of the mosque and Aisha would have had to place her right hand on this mountain of men, tree barks and animal skin with her left hand raised to the sky as she swore her innocence on the ‘Quran’.

According to Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar, this is what constitutes “religion”:

“If you are to write on religion, then you are supposed to touch on matters pertaining to:

- questions on rituals,
- adherence to God,
- followers and
- anything related to your divine mission.”


Okay, it is interesting that this ‘Arab’ has spoken out on what constitutes ‘religion’. Most Malays believe that ‘Syeds’ are descendants of the Prophet and, therefore, would be the most qualified to talk about Islam. But is it not strange that this Arab ‘descendant of the Prophet’ does not mention that corruption, fraud, wastage of public funds, abuse of power, racism, discrimination, persecution, injustice, and many more are also abhorred by Islam? Islam simply detests all those things perpetuated by the government and upheld by Umno.

The government and Umno do all those very things that Islam is against. Islam makes it mandatory for Muslims to oppose the transgressors of God’s commands. Muslims who do not oppose it are considered very weak Muslims who are accessories to these crimes. There are no two ways about it. Muslims who keep silent are endorsing these crimes. Islam is very clear about this matter. Nothing any Arab who pretends to be a descendant of the Prophet can say will change this.

Oh, and one more thing, Saiful also swore that this swearing ceremony, one day before the Permatang Pauh Nomination Day, is a coincidence as he did not know that Anwar was going to contest the by-election. Hmm…..is Saiful prepared to also swear this on the Quran? Earlier he had wished Anwar good luck in the Permatang Pauh by-election. Talk about making a mockery of Islam. Have I not always said that the Muslims are Islam’s greatest enemy? You still want to dispute this or can I now rest my case?

1 comment:

Nostradamus said...

Racism to Satanism

1. If anyone thinks as a Malaysian at heart you will never support any of the current political parties who speaks only about championing or protecting their own race and religious interests. Whether it comes from UMNO, PAS, MCA, MIC, PKR, Gerakan, HINDRAF, PBS, DAP, PPP or whatever new name, it’s called racism and whoever supports that party is called a racist. It is no different from apartheid. It dirties and poisons your soul.
2. Those who are racists but speak with a fork tongue (Jeyklls), hiding it behind other causes like religion, meritocracy, education, poverty, social reengineering, ethnic rights etc are even worse than self declared racists and can only fit into the category of Satans.
3. Malaysian racists and the MSN have corrupted the following words which meant differently in other countries example - nationalism, patriotism, royalists, freedom, liberty, corruption, democracy, humanity etc.
4. Power, Greed, Selfishness and Racism rule in Malaysia and now we include Satanism.

(Versi Bahasa Melayu)
Sifat Perkauman kepada sifat Setan(Syaitan)

1. Jika sesiapa memikir sebagai rakyat Malaysia di hati, anda tidak akan menyokong parti-parti politik sekarang yang cuma bercakap tentang ketuanan atau pembelaan bangsa dan kepercayaan ugama mereka sendiri. Samada ia datang daripada UMNO, PAS, MCA, MIC, Gerakan, HINDRAF, PBS, DAP, PPP atau sebarang nama baru, itulah maksud perkauman dan sesiapa yang menyokong parti tersebut dipanggil seorang rasis. Ia tidak berbedza sangat dengan aparteid. Ia mencemarkan dan meracuni jiwa anda.
2. Mereka yang rasis tetapi bercakap dengan lidah bercabang (Jeyklls) dengan menyembunyikan di belakang alasan ugama, meritokrasi, pendidikan, kemiskinan, kerombakkan social, kepentingan pribumi dsbnya adalah lebih teruk dari seorang rasis yang diketahui umum dan harus dikategorikan sebagai Setan.
3. Rakyat Malaysia yang rasis dan MSN telah mencemarkan perkataan-perkataan yang memberi maksud lain di negara-negara asing seperti – nasionalisme, patriotisme, penyokong Raja, kebebasan, kemerdekaan, korupsi, demokrasi, perikemanusiaan dsbnya.
4. Kuasa, Tamak, Kepentingan diri dan Sifat Perkauman bermaharajalela di Malaysia dan sekarang kita memasukkan Sifat Setan.

http://patek1472.wordpress.com