Hari Pahlawan, Quran & Bible

By Syed Akbar Ali

First a news report (truncated) about today's Hari Pahlawan

Malaysia sambut Hari Pahlawan ikut fatwa Sabtu ini

Oleh Adib Zalkapli

KUALA LUMPUR, 29 Julai — Hari Pahlawan disambut di Dataran Merdeka pada Sabtu ini — buat kali pertama berlangsung tanpa acara letak kalungan bunga dan bertafakur selama seminit di Tugu Negara, yang menjadi amalan biasa sebelum ini.

Tugu Negara menggambarkan sekumpulan perwira memegang bendera

Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan pernah mengeluarkan dua fatwa mengenai Hari Pahlawan iaitu amalan seperti tiupan “Last Post”, bertafakur dengan menundukkan kepala, meletakkan kalungan bunga, bacaan sajak, nyanyian dan tiupan “Rouse” yang dilakukan di hadapan tugu dalam upacara menyambut Hari Pahlawan adalah bercanggah dengan Islam dan boleh membawa kepada syirik.

Oleh itu, Islam mengharamkan perbuatan membina, mengukir atau memahat apa jua bentuk patung sama ada manusia atau haiwan untuk tujuan pemujaan, peringatan atau sebagainya.

To make a short story even shorter, the Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan (MFK) has made a fatwa that placing flowers in memory of our dead and glorious soldiers, observing a minute’s silence in respect of our glorious perwira, playing Taps and even the National Monument itself is against their understanding of religion.

To my knowledge the fatwa of the MFK do not have the force of law as compared to fatwa made by the State Muftis. This is because in Malaysia, religion remains a State matter where the Sultan and the Head of State are the heads of religion. And the Sultan appoints a Mufti to advise him on religious matters. There is no equivalent power accorded to the MFK (I am not sure about the Federal Territory of KL and Labuan).

To digress, remember when the TV started telecasting live the Parliamentary debates some time back? People saw the YBs jumping up and down in Parliament like higher simians. A very young Mufti of a certain State (recently retired now) sent me an sms that said, ‘kalau live telecast mesyuarat Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan lagi tahu’.

Anyway when a State Mufti makes a fatwa, and the fatwa goes through certain bureaucratic procedures and gets “gazetted” it then acquires the force of law. After a fatwa has been published in the Government Gazette (by the way where do you buy a copy of the Government Gazette?) Muslims in that State can be arrested if they go against an officially gazetted fatwa made by a State Mufti.

For example many years ago one Mufti of Selangor (Ishak Baharom) made a fatwa that smoking cigarettes was haram. This fatwa I believe went through the process and was gazetted and is still in effect. So technically in Selangor a Muslim who smokes cigarettes can be hauled off to the religious courts. I doubt however that anyone bothers about that particular fatwa. It simply shows that even State Mufti can make fatwa that no one really cares about.

The MFK does not have the same stature as the State Muftis when it comes to enforcing their fatwas. I don’t think any of the MFK fatwas are gazetted at the Federal level either. Their fatwas are ‘advisory’ in nature. It is up to the State Muftis to officially gazette a fatwa passed by the MFK in their own States.

I recall during the Arqam witch-hunt, the MFK made a fatwa declaring them deviant. But it was up to the States to make their own fatwas again (based on the MFK fatwa) and have the anti Arqam fatwa gazetted in their respective States. Not all States did this, Kelantan being one of them I think. The fatwa made by the MFK has no force of law in the States.

Back to the subject, the MFK says the Tugu Negara which has that magnificent statues of our soldiers in action defending our country is haram.

This is part of a wider belief held by the religious people that statues of humans and animals, carvings of humans and animals, art and painting of animals and humans and even photographs of humans and animals are haram. Recall the Mullah Omar, the leader of the Taliban – we don’t know what he looks like because he never allowed anyone to take a picture of him.

Taking photographs is also haram – according to the religious people. However we see some hypocrisy among the ‘religious party’ politicians who just love to have their photographs taken. Some of them say photographs are not haram. The Saudis solved this problem earlier when one of their ‘religious experts’ made a fatwa that pictures are ok because a picture is just like looking in the mirror. It is just a reflection, so it is ok to have your photograph taken. It is not a carving or a statue. If the reader is getting confused, you are in good company. Remember this is religion – logic is not required.

The following site http://www.e-fatwa.gov.my is the official ‘Fatwa Portal’ where all the fatwa in Malaysia are hosted. I think it is set up by the Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia or JAKIM. You will see this crest at the top right hand corner of their web portal.

This is of course our very beautiful National Crest with the two snarling tigers. I am trying to imagine what the crest will look like without the two snarling togers? What if the tigers smile, like this one :

If the tiger looks familiar, it is Sher Khan from the cartoon movie Jungle Book (Folks, better watch out, even cartoon tigers may become extinct if there is a fatwa issued against them).

Even at the official website of the JAKIM, you can see the two Malayan Tigers snarling at each other. Here is a picture of JAKIM's organisation chart. Note the two snarling tigers :

(By the way here is some feng shui : Malaysia will always have good feng shui and prosper because our Federal Crest or Lambang Negara carries two snarling tigers. You must be very strong and brave to carry two tigers on your crest. Maybank has only one tiger. I don’t believe in feng shui.)

To reduce your agony, let me say straight out that nowhere in the Quran does it say that carvings or statues or pictures of humans and animals are haram. The belief that statues and carvings of humans and animals and photographs of humans and animals are haram is therefore extra-Quranic - meaning it comes from outside the Quran.

There is an interesting verse in the Quran about the Prophet Solomon and the making of statues. Solomon, a Prophet of Allah was given power to make the djinns work for him. Among the things that Solomon commanded them was to make statues for him. Here is the reference from the Quran :

Surah 34:13 “They made for him anything he wanted - niches, statues (thamatheela), deep pools, and heavy cooking pots. O family of David, work (righteousness) to show your appreciation. Only a few of My servants are appreciative.”

The Arabic word for statue here is ‘thamatheela’ which is rooted in the Arabic word ‘mithal’ from which we get the Malay word ‘mithal’ which means ‘an example of’, ‘a representation of’. Statues and carvings are representations.

To be sure, lets look at the same Arabic word ‘thamatheela’ which is also used to indicate statues in another verse in the Quran. This time when the Prophet Abraham scolds his father for worshipping statues. Here is the verse from the Quran :

21:52 He (Abraham) said to his father and his people, "What are these statues (thamatheelu) to which you are devoting yourselves?"

Looking at these two verses in the Quran it is clear that while the Prophet Solomon had statues made for him, obviously he did not worship them.

I am quite positive that the religious scholars never pondered any of these verses from the Quran regarding the “thamatheela” or statues. How then do they derive their fatwas? The same way that you, my dear Muslim reader derive your understanding of your religion – from extra Quranic sources. The Quran plays a very minimal or zero part in religious deliberation.

I am the only guy here who keeps harping that we must read and refer to the Quran. Is anyone willing to lend me some support on this one?

Anyway here are some non-Quranic sources which do say that statues, carvings and images are prohibited or “haram”. This is from the Bible.

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I The Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me" (The Bible, Book of Exodus 20:4-6 King James Version).

The Bible forbids making a graven image (a representation or “thamatheela”). The Bible fears that making graven images will lead to worshipping them.

We all know that even the Catholic Pope does not believe this part of the Bible. The Vatican is so full of statues of Jesus, Mary etc. This leads to the question if the Pope has stopped believing in the Ten Commandments too because the 2^nd Commandment says the same thing :

TWO: 'You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.'

Isnt this the same fatwa?

More Arab Rojak : Mossad & Saudi Arabia

If the Israelis and Americans do bomb Iran what will the Islamic countries do? Will they all protest? Will the Saudis protest? Will we protest? Will there be 'Islamic' unity to speak against the Zionist / American aggression in one voice?

Or will we be the only ones to protest while the Arabs keep quiet? Will Ghaddafi protest?

Mossad chief reportedly visited Saudi Arabia for talks on Iran

Account on WorldNetDaily follows series of recent reports on increasing secret cooperation between Israel and the Saudis, including defense coordination on matters related to possible military action.

By Anshel Pfeffer

Mossad chief Meir Dagan visited Saudi Arabia recently, if unofficial reports published over the weekend on the WorldNetDaily website are accurate. The Internet news site attributed the story to Arab sources.

According to the reports, the talks conducted in Saudi Arabia with the head of Israel's espionage agency dealt with Iran and its nuclear program. The account follows a series of recent reports on increasing secret cooperation between Israel and the Saudis, including defense coordination on matters related to possible military action against Iran's nuclear facilities.

According to the reports, the talks conducted in Saudi Arabia with the head of Israel's espionage agency dealt with Iran and its nuclear program. The account follows a series of recent reports on increasing secret cooperation between Israel and the Saudis, including defense coordination on matters related to possible military action against Iran's nuclear facilities.

Mossad Chief Meir Dagan

Two months ago, the Times of London reported that during the course of a Saudi military exercise, air defense system operations were halted for a few hours to rehearse a scenario whereby Israeli fighter planes would cross Saudi Arabian air space en route to an attack on Iran.

Arab and Iranian media outlets have also reported Israeli air force planes and helicopters landing in Saudi Arabia for the purposes of positioning equipment there.

Three weeks ago, it was reported that the United Arab Emirates' ambassador in Washington said at a conference that the consequences of nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranians would be more serious than an Israeli assault, because a nuclear Iran could not be tolerated. His remarks reflect a common concern felt in Israel and the Persian Gulf states over nuclear weapons in Iranian hands.

Here is a part of the report from the Times of London dated June 12, 2010. You can read the full report here.

Saudi Arabia has conducted tests to stand down its air defences to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The Times can reveal.

Questioned on the option of a Saudi flight path for Israeli bombers, Aharaon Zeevi Farkash, who headed military intelligence until 2006 and has been involved in war games simulating a strike on Iran, said: “I know that Saudi Arabia is even more afraid than Israel of an Iranian nuclear capacity.”

In 2007 Israel was reported to have used Turkish air space to attack a suspected nuclear reactor being built by Iran’s main regional ally, Syria. Although Turkey publicly protested against the “violation” of its air space, it is thought to have turned a blind eye in what many saw as a dry run for a strike on Iran’s far more substantial — and better-defended — nuclear sites.

sraeli intelligence experts say that Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan are at least as worried as themselves and the West about an Iranian nuclear arsenal

It was also reported that Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad, met Saudi intelligence officials last year to gain assurances that Riyadh would turn a blind eye to Israeli jets violating Saudi airspace during the bombing run. Both governments have denied the reports.

Malulah MCA

By Syed Akbar Ali

Dr Ling denies cheating Govt over PKFZ scandal

PUTRAJAYA: Former Transport Minister and MCA president Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik has become the highest-ranking person yet to be charged with cheating the Government over the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal and he pleaded not guilty.

What can I say : the MCA has become a major embarrasment. (Yes because they got caught - you might add). That is NOT what I mean. What I mean is three presidents of the party have so far got embroiled in serious wrong doing.

We recall Tan Koon Swan - an MCA president too, who was jailed not just in Malaysia but also in Singapore for commercial crime relating to cheating and embezzlement of money too. I believe he was also made a bankrupt. After he was released he married some woman who wore an RM70,000 wedding gown on her wedding day.

It was a statement : bankruptcy or no, it was a grand wedding.

Recently we had Chua Soi Lek being caught with his pants off and on video tape. He gallantly admitted to the escapade and resigned his post. Despite that the MCA went ahead and super gallantly re elected Chua Soi Lek back to the party presidency.

I say kawan, lu orang tak ada malu kah? Why do you behave like the Opposition? Their leader can sodomise anyone he wants to and they keep electing him to office. Has the MCA sunk down to that level too? Your president can frolick around with dubious company and you elect him to be party president?

Now the former MCA president Ling Liong Sik has been charged in Court with cheating the entire Cabinet ! ! What an accolade and what a resume for the MCA.

Tan Koon Swan - president, jailed in Malaysia & Singapore

Chua Soi Lek - resigned after sex video escapade and then got elected party president.

Ling Liong Sik - former president, charged in court over cheating committed during his tenure as president.

Malu lah

When The Learned Are Not : The Latest In Religious Discourse

By Syed Akbar Ali

Looks like some of you have seen a sneak preview of this post when I 'tertekan butang' accidentally yesterday. I was just drafting it and it was incomplete. The title in the draft version was also different "Fatwa Crazy & Crazy Fatwas". Here is the complete version.

A few days ago, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad wrote in his Blog about 'Sunat dan Wajib'. You can read it in full here. I have extracted some relevant parts. Here they are :

5. Islam tidak membebankan penganutnya. Oleh itu banyaklah amalan yang sunat, yang jika dilakukan mendapat pahala tetapi tidak berdosa jika tidak dilakukan.

6. Ramai orang Islam yang tidak puas hati dengan kelonggaran-kelonggaran yang diberi oleh Allah Subhanahuwata'ala Mereka lebih suka jika yang wajib ditambah dan yang sunat diwajibkan.

7. Ada yang sampai memaksa yang sunat dilakukan dan jika tidak, tidak Islam atau kurang Islam. Tidak ada kelonggaran yang dibenarkan.

For those who are not familiar, the scholars have divided things into obligatory (wajib) and optional (sunat) actions. Wajib or obligatory are those things which they say are ordained by God which you must do. Optional or sunat are those things which they say are attributed to the Prophet, which is not obligatory but optional.

This is what they say ok. I did not say this.

Dr Mahathir has pointed out in his Blog that people often make the optional become obligatory. And as for the obligatory, they add to it. In this way they make their own lives even more difficult.

This is also where the problems also start. If the scholars start making their own lists of what is obligatory or what is optional they actually start playing God. Especially in the long lists of optional things that they have created. It is argued, even among themselves, if indeed what they say is true or not.

Often times they say things that are quite ridiculous. They may make strange or illogical rules which cause them to trip up and fall down. They shackle themselves up.

Then to free themselvs of their own shackles they make even more strange pronouncements and rules. Here are some quite recent examples from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran. I have written about Izzat Attiya before. His crazy fatwa was made in 2007. Then most recently this year some fellows in Saudi Arabia have started up on this issue again. This issue is therefore quite current among them.

Saudi Clerics Advocate Adult Breast-Feeding

(June 5) -- Women in Saudi Arabia should give their breast milk to male colleagues and acquaintances in order to avoid breaking strict Islamic law forbidding mixing between the sexes, two powerful Saudi clerics have said.

Al Obeikan, who made the statement after being asked on TV about a 2007 fatwa issued by an Egyptian scholar about adult breast-feeding, said that the breast milk ought to be pumped out and given to men in a glass. But his remarks were followed by an announcement by another high-profile sheik, Abi Ishaq Al Huwaini, who said that men should suckle the breast milk directly from a woman's breast.

You can read the full story here. First here is a picture. The guy wearing the table cloth on his head is the Sheikh Al Obeikan. He advocates using the pump. The picture below him is that of Abi Ishak Al Huweny who advocates 'straight from the tap'.

What handsome hairy chumps they are.

In the 21st century, this issue about adult suckling first came to the fore in 2007. (I had raised it a few times even before that.) At that time another cleric in Egypt by the name of Izzat Attiya, a Professor of Hadith at the infamous Al Azhar University had made the same pronouncement. Attiya was promptly fired from Al Azhar. Now according to this news, he has been reinstated in his job.

"The case of the male breastfeeding fatwa, or religious ruling, just took another strange turn as the scholar who issued the controversial opinion was rehired after being fired by Egypt’s al-Azhar University.

The Cairo Administrative Court overturned the decision by al-Azhar's disciplinary committee to expel Ezzat Attiya, the president of the hadith department, for issuing a fatwa condoning the symbolic breastfeeding of grown men in 2007.

The court annulled the university’s decision to expel Attiya after he issued a fatwa permitting symbolic breastfeeding of men as a way to loosen the customs of segregation between the sexes in Egypt."

Here is a picture of Izzat Attiya. He is much less hairy than the other two.

Now here are two You Tube Videos. The first one discusses the 'breastfeeding' fatwas. You can see that the West is of course equally shocked by these things. What makes me flinch is that they blame Islam. Do listen to them because this material is all over the world, available at light speed through the Internet. I shuddered when one of these guys spoke of a '.. a deeper problem with Islam..'.

Ultimately it is always Islam and the Quran which get the blame for all these brain dead fatwas that are put out by these so called scholars. And I can assure you there will be that group of people, even in our country, who will speak up in defense of these religious guys.

Not to be left out here is another You Tube Video about another fatwa, this time coming out of Iran. A Shiah cleric in Iran has made the pronouncement that earthquakes are caused by women's "improper" dress. In Iran "improper" means showing more than two strands of hair through your tudung. Do watch the video.

Again the Internet and You Tube helps to show their stupidity at light speed around the world.

Where do these folks get these ideas? In the case of the adult suckling story, they get it from a book called the Al Muwatta allegedly written by a fellow by the name of Imam Malik. This book is often referred to as the "First Formulation of Islamic Law" (Nauzubillah - may Allah protect us).

I have already written before that there is no evidence that the Al Muwatta that we have today is actually written by the hands of Imam Malik. There are many versions of this book, from 12 to 27 different versions. The religious scholars themselves dont know if Imam Malik is the real author of which particular version.

If you are interested you can see the reference here. For those who have the tenacity here is this story from the Al Muwatta:

Section: Suckling of Older People

Book 30, Number 30.2.12:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that he was asked about the suckling of an older person. He said, ''Urwa ibn az-Zubayr informed me that Abu Hudhayfa ibn Utba ibn Rabia, one of the companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who was present at Badr, adopted Salim (who is called Salim, the mawla of Abu Hudhayfa) as the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, adopted Zayd ibn Haritha. He thought of him as his son, and Abu Hudhayfa married him to his brother's sister, Fatima bint al-Walid ibn Utba ibn Rabia, who was at that time among the first emigrants. She was one of the best unmarried women of the Quraysh. When Allah the Exalted sent down in His Book what He sent down about Zayd ibn Haritha, 'Call them after their true fathers. That is more equitable in the sight of Allah. If you do not know who their fathers were then they are your brothers in the deen and your mawali,' (Sura 33 ayat 5) people in this position were traced back to their fathers. When the father was not known, they were traced to their mawla.

"Sahla bint Suhayl who was the wife of Abu Hudhayfa, and one of the tribe of Amr ibn Luayy, came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said, 'Messenger of Allah! We think of Salim as a son and he comes in to see me while I am uncovered. We only have one room, so what do you think about the situation?' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'Give him five drinks of your milk and he will be mahram by it.' She then saw him as a foster son. A'isha umm al-muminin took that as a precedent for whatever men she wanted to be able to come to see her. She ordered her sister, Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr as-Siddiq and the daughters of her brother to give milk to whichever men she wanted to be able to come in to see her. The rest of the wives of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, refused to let anyone come in to them by such nursing. They said, 'No! By Allah! We think that what the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered Sahla bint Suhayl to do was only an indulgence concerning the nursing of Salim alone. No! By Allah! No one will come in upon us by such nursing!'

"This is what the wives of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, thought about the suckling of an older person."

I just want to say that none of this is in the Quran. The Quran is not a book of crazy, wild horse stories. I find the Quran a no nonsense, completely logical and scientifically consistent book. And here is something interesting too. The Quran does not claim to be original. Whatever is in the Quran has been revealed before (Please refer Surah 87:18-19 and others). It definitely has a collection of wisdom that has held through the ages. This is very logical. Since there is only one Creator, then the message has to be the same. Takkan the same Creator would reveal different messages through time.

Throughout history and until now, people have resorted to making a career out of religion as a last resort. You will rarely find a student who scores 9As in the SPM saying 'I want to go and study religion'. The smart kids all want to do better like becoming a doctor, an engineer or something like that. Most unfortunately for the human race, usually only the left overs end up studyng religion. It is a last choice option.

At the Government universities in Malaysia, usually those who dont make the cut for the other faculties get admitted into the 'religious faculties'. It is well known that in University Malaya (at least for a long time, I dont know the latest position) those students who cannot get into the more preferred faculties get into the 'Malay studies faculty' or the 'religious studies faculty'. I think both Slumberjack and the Brader were Malay studies faculty. In India it is well known that young men from the villages who drop out of even village school may get sent off to join the madrassahs, where they ultimately graduate and become the imams at the mosques. That is why they are doomed too.

The same applies here. The imams and the guys who run the mosques are not exactly the cleverest people who qualified for medical school or engineering school. And these are the type of people you listen to when you sit in the mosques. Think about that for a minute.

Even the cleverest among them end up writing books like the Al Muwatta or they may end up making fatwas in Al Azhar or in Saudi Arabia.

While the rest of the world is moving ahead at light speed with new Apps for the Apple I-Fone or the next generation I-Pad which will be out soon, this is the latest religious discourse in the world infamous Al Azhar University and Saudi Arabia, home of I dont know what.

Conclusion : Table cloths are best spread on the table.