Hadeeth is looked upon negatively because of the ignorance of certain detractors when they read it. In this article, I will attempt to show why such misunderstanding occurs. In one word, the main reason for such confusion is ignorance. Specifically, ignorance in the the Arabic language. One will notice that the Modus Operandi of every Anti Hadeeth is to take the literal translations of the Hadeeth and then make commentaries on them. All of their criticism against Al Hadeeth is solely based upon the literal translation of the hadeeth. The trouble with this method is that the Arabic language doesn’t exist only in the literal form. The Arabic language also exist in the figurative form called majaz. By taking a hadeeth in from it’s literal meaning is not doing the hadeeth justice since not all the hadeeth is spoken to refer to it’s literal meaning. For example, the hadeeth that True Muslim likes to quote: Another example TM quotes: Allah’s Apostle said, “The woman is like a rib; if you try to straighten her, she will break. So if you want to get benefit from her, do so while she still has some crookedness.” - Volume 7, Book 62, Number 114 The word “while she still has some crookedness some crookedness” here actually refers to a deal with a women using methods of somewhere between hard and soft. In other words, the Prophets says that in dealing with women one should not be too hard or too soft. Those who understands Arabic don’t find this hadeeth weird. Because TM is dumb when it comes to Arabic language, he fail to see that the phrase “the buttocks of women….move…” refers to “dancing around the Dhi-Al-Khalasa”. In making fun of this hadeeth, he makes a complete fool of himself. Unfortunately for anti hadeeth Majaz also exist in the Quran. For instance in 02:187 [2:187 ……, and eat and drink, until the white thread appear to you distinct from its black thread……. By Anti Hadeeth methodology timing for fasting during Ramadhan is determine by visual differentiation between a white thread and a black thread. But how can this be?. Everyone knows that if we put a black and white thread in a dark room, we can never tell the difference between the two. Furthermore, one’s eyes is able to tell the difference between them whether it’s night or day. The real meaning of white thread is dawn and black thread is dusk. The words “black thread” and “white thread” are figurative and cannot be taken literarily. This is an example of “ majaz” in the Quran. Another example is 59:21-22 21. Had We sent down this Qur'an on a mountain, verily, thou wouldst have seen it humble itself and cleave asunder for fear of Allah. Such are the similitudes which We propound to men, that they may reflect. 22. Allah is He, than Whom there is no other god;- Who knows (all things) both secret and open; He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Taking the literal translation of the verses above would force us to believe that mountains have the same faculties and abilities as humans. But, logic tells us that this is ludicrous. To adopt the anti hadeeth’es methodology would render the Quran as ludicorous. The verse above demonstrates to us another type of Majaz of the “similitude” type. It is used to signify the heavy responsibility of the Quran upon human beings. Bear in mind there exist many types of Majaz in the Arabic language and the Quran uses them all. One will noticed that each time the anti hadeeth methodology is applied, it carries similar implication upon the Quran. OTHER FACTORS IN UNDERSTANDING THE HADEETH PROPERLY Among factors to be considered when interpreting the hadeeth are as follows: v Context : The context of a hadeeth must be considered. Sometimes a hadeeth may sound strange when taking out of context but when it is put into it’s context it makes perfect sense. For example the hadeeth: “……meats become bad because of the Jews…” (Bukhari). The context of the hadeeth was uttered during the “Khandak” war. After the Musyrikeen had withdrawn from the Madinah lines, the Prophet was ordered to deal with the Jewish for treason. As the order was to be executed immediately, the army of the Prophet had to march all day until the reach the Citadels where the Jews lived. As a result, meats that was prepared for celebration of victory became bad after being exposed for a long time. Thus, such words was uttered signifiying the Prophet’s frustration in the Medinan’s Jews’es treachery. v Aborogation : Certain decrees were made by the Prophet as a temporary measures which in turn the Prophet SAW had repealed. In short, aborogation. Examples such as the prohibition of writing down of the hadeeth of the Prophet, the prohibition of women from visiting the grave and many more. v Timing : Certain hadeeth is spoken in the time of peace and certain hadeeth are spoken in the time of war. If understood within the correct timing, they provide a clear picture. v Arabic Local Slang (Ammeyyah): The Prophet SAW uses figurative, metaphorics in his hadeeth which is prevalent among the people of his time. For instance the hadeeth: ” The Hadith mentions that "fever" is from the "heat of hell" [Hadith 621,622, page 417, vol 7]. The truth is, it is common among Arabs at that time to use the “heat of hell” as v Expression of Miracles of the Prophet: Example, the drinking of camel urine, the separation of the moon into two parts and many more. v Timing : The timing of a hadeeth has to be understood properly as well. For instance the hadeeth v IGNORANCE IS THE MAIN FACTOR BEHIND ANTI HADEETH IDEOLOGY I have stated this once and I will state this again. Ignorance is the main reason why anti hadeeth thrives. They are completely ignorant of the Arabic language and choose to interpret Islam while being void of knowledge. The same people are referred to by the Quran by these verses: The other push-factor towards this ideology is total fanaticism towards western secular liberal paradigm. These people are afraid to call themselves Muslims and feel ashamed of Islam. They, then, uses the Anti Hadeeth ideology to misinterpret the Quran to fit it into the western secular mold. CONFUSION INTRODUCED BY ANTI HADEETH IDEOLOGY I’m sorry for the rather late response to True Muslim ( TM) ridiculous rant on Hadeeth but allow me to highlight some of his grave mistakes. We should start by highlighting TM’s inherent weaknesses in his understanding of the Quran: and many more. What is weird is that despite his inability to provide decent explanation to his own inconsistency, he goes on to write about other topics. THE ISSUE OF AUTHENTICITY OF SAHIH BUKHARI TM’s entire case is based on the booklet found at http://www.central-mosque.com/biographies/asqalani2.htm which is a secondary source. His entire case cannot be considered credible at all since he didn’t really refer to the original text. That explains why in his article no reference is made to his source at all. So, what he’s trying to debunk is merely what somebody else says about the Sahih Bukhari and not the book itself. TM quotes this reference from Al Fath Al Bari: “For Bukhari’s text has not come down to us in a single uniform version, but exists in several ‘narrations’ (riwayat), of which the version handed down by al-Kushaymani (d.389) on the authority of Bukhari’s pupil al-Firabri is the one most frequently accepted by the ulema”. (see “Ibn Hajar Asqalani and his Commentary Fath al-Bari”) And he makes this ridiculous claim: “What they have are bits and pieces of information that have been sorted and put together over a period of almost 600 years. And to them this has become 'the most authentic book after the book of Allah'.” Here we see TM making a mountain out of a mole-hill for nothing. The truth is: I fail to see why this is a problem. What is means is that Al Sahih was recorded over a number of versions of manuscripts. But, each manuscript is authentically traced back to Al Bukhari’s pupils. This happens because Imam Bukhari’s pupil did not Based on this, he makes his ridiculous claim that Sahih Bukhari exists in bits and pieces His other rants in trying to show As Sahih Bukhari is not written by Al Imam Al Bukhari is a big joke by anyone’s standard. Suffice to say that manuscripts dating back to the time of Imam Bukhari exists in the hundreds all over the world. What TM deliberately tries to confuse himself with is the fact that Sahih Bukhari is also recorded by thousands of Imam Bukhari’s students. In turn each students will provide their own commentaries. The differences in versions is due differences in the commentaries of Bukhari’s students and not in the contents. Imam Bukhari left the task to record his As Sahih to his students and the fact that the manuscripts are all the same in terms of content proves there is no discepencies. The identities of the students are also verified to be Bukhari’s and the authenticity of the manuscript can be cross checked with other versions. TM made another statement that reflects his ignorance: WHY ANTI HADEETH ARE ABLE TO CONVINCE CERTAIN QUARTERS INTO ACCEPTING THEIR LIES The real reason why Anti Hadeeth carries any credibility is that all of those who subscribe to their beliefs is ignorance. The main area of ignorance is of course the Arabic language. The Modus Operandi of every Anti Hadeeth is to take the translation of the Hadeeth and then make commentaries on them. The commentaries are based upon the literal translation of a hadeeth. The trouble with this method is that the Arabic language doesn’t exist only in the literal form. The Arabic language also exist in the figurative form called majaz. By taking a hadeeth in from it’s literal meaning is not doing the hadeeth justice since not all the hadeeth is spoken to refer to it’s literal meaning. For example, the hadeeth that TM likes to quote: Because TM is dumb when it comes to Arabic language, he fail to see that the phrase “the buttocks of women….move…” refers to “dancing around the Dhi-Al-Khalasa”. In making fun of this hadeeth, he makes a complete fool of himself. Here we also see the hypocrisy of the Anti Hadeeth seeing that Majaz also exist in the Quran. For instance in 02:187 [2:187 ……, and eat and drink, until the white thread appear to you distinct from its black thread……. By Anti Hadeeth methodology timing for fasting during Ramadhan is determine by visual differentiation between a white thread and a black thread. But how can this be?. Everyone knows that if we put a black and white thread in a dark room, we can never tell the difference between the two. Furthermore, one’s eyes is able to tell the difference between them whether it’s night or day. The real meaning of white thread is dawn and black thread is duck. The words “black thread” and “white thread” are figurative and cannot be taken literarily. This is an example of “ majaz” in the Quran. 21. Had We sent down this Qur'an on a mountain, verily, thou wouldst have seen it humble itself and cleave asunder for fear of Allah. Such are the similitudes which We propound to men, that they may reflect. 22. Allah is He, than Whom there is no other god;- Who knows (all things) both secret and open; He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Taking the literal translation would force us to believe that mountains have the same faculties and abilities as humans. But, logic tells us that this is ludicrous. The verse above demonstrates to us another type of Majaz called similitude to explain the heavy responsibility of the Quran upon human being. Bear in mind there exist many types of Majaz in the Arabic language and the Quran uses them all. In short, should we apply the same methodology used by Anti Hadeeth on the Quran, we will render the Quran ridiculous.
‘Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 232: Narrated Abu Huraira: “Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established till the buttocks of the women of the tribe of Daus move while going round Dhi-al-Khalasa." Dhi-al-Khalasa was the idol of the Daus tribe which they used to worship in the Pre Islamic Period of ignorance. ‘
And you will see this pattern throughout the entire anti hadeeth literature. And u will also see TM’s brand of ignorance throughout their hadeeth criticism.
comparison to high fevers.
The version I sent to Raja Petra contained tables and cannot be published on the blog, this particular part of the article was not presented properly.
1) Confusion No. 1: Punishment For theft and fornication as stated in the Quran (05:38 and 05:02)
Anti Hadeeth Way: Punishment can be carried out without due process because the Quran does not prescribe due process resulting in chaos and absolute anarchy in the society.
The Truth: The way punishment is carried out as stated in 05:38 and 05:02 is shown by the Prophet SAW. In the hadeeth, due process was clearly demonstrated to us.
2) Confusion No. 2: Inheritance to children who had murdered their parents (04:11 states on inheritance)
Anti Hadeeth way: The murdering children are allowed to receive their inheritance. Hurrah for the Menendez brothers.
The Truth: There is a hadeeth stating exceptions to children who murder their parents.
3) Confusion No. 3: Consuming the carcass of dead animals (The Quran prescribe to it’s followers that animals which are to be consumed must be properly slaughtered - 05:03)
The Truth: There is a hadeeth making -exceptions to sea-living animals i.e. fish, squid
4) Confusion No. 4: In 05:38, there is no mention of minimum limits for a thief to be qualified for amputation
The Truth: There is a hadeeth stating that only is the value of loot is more than ¼ of a deenar will a thief have his hands amputated.
5) Confusion No. 5: The Quran states many times about
Anti Hadeeth Way
The truth: The methods are clearly mentioned in the sunnah, ijma and qiyas.
6) Confusion No. 6: Various ibadah clearly mentioned in the Quran, i.e fasting, solat, al hajj, jihad, sadaqah, inheritance, marriage, divorce, commerce etc
Anti Hadeeth Way: AN ABSOLUTE MESS. There is absolutely no methodology shown in the Quran, so the anti hadeeth will be practicing such ibadah at best by guessing.
The Truth: The method to carry out all the ibadah above is as shown to us by the Prophet as recorded in the Al Hadeeth.
‘Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 232: Narrated Abu Huraira: “Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established till the buttocks of the women of the tribe of Daus move while going round Dhi-al-Khalasa." Dhi-al-Khalasa was the idol of the Daus tribe which they used to worship in the Pre Islamic Period of ignorance. ‘
And you will see this pattern throughout the entire anti hadeeth literature.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Hadeeth Must Be Understood in the Correct Context
Clearing Some Misguided Understanding Of Al Hadeeth An Nabawiy
So much have been floated in the net about Al HAdeeth An Nabawiy, and this is a small attempt to refute some of the hadeeth misunderstood by certain irresponsible quaters.Here is the beginning of my post. Apparently, the Anti Hadeeth is in bed with some American Evengelical Christians in defaming the good name of Al Hadeeth. The Anti Hadeeth sect apparently speak in the same tone with their “Jerry Fallwell”’s counterpart when commenting on a number of hadeeth. Here, I wish to list down some of the accusations and try to provide the true explanation of the hadeeth. 1.0 How do you explain Bukhari vol. IV, no. 543 where it states that Adam was 60 cubits tall? EXPLANATION: The more complete wording in al-Bukhari and Muslim adds "in the heaven" (fi al-Sama'), i.e. in an other-worldly context. Similarly, when the Prophet saw Ibrahim (AS) in the heaven he said he was so tall that he could hardly see his head as narrated from Samura ibn Jundub in Sahih al-Bukhari. 2.0 Satan lives in the nose over night. He can be flushed out if you snort water up and then out the nose. (Bukhari vol. IV, no. 516; Muslim vol. I, no. 462) How big is Satan? Is he in everyone's nose? Is he omnipresent? EXPLANATION : That's right. There are satans up our noses. But only in the noses of “smucks” who makes an issue out of this hadeeth. “Devil” is another way of representing danger or "dirtiness". The "devil" by itself is considered as “unclean” in Islam, so in this context of the hadeeth, it is used in place of smudge or dirt. The trouble with Anti hadeeth and their Evengelical counterparts is that they take the Hadeeth from it’s translation. 3.0 Muhammad forbade the game of chess! (Muslim vol. IV, no. 5612) EXPLANATION : No he didn't. Read the hadeeth properly next time and stop reading it from it's translation 4.0 Muslims have one intestine while non-Muslims have seven! (Muslim vol. III, no. 5113-5115) EXPLANATION : Another way of explaining 05:03 in the Quran. It shows that a Muslim is limited in terms of the things he can eat and drink as opposed to non muslims. This is another example of Majaz. Taking it in it's literal form is either stupid or very stupid. 5.0 Fevers are from the fire of hell and can be cooled by water.(Bukhari vol. IV, nos. 483,486) EXPLANATION : I've explained this before, it's a common saying among Arabs at that time that when one has a high fever, one is having a heat from hell. Another idiotic understanding of the hadeeth taken literally from it’s translation. 6.0 If you lift up your eyes towards heaven while praying, your eyes will be snatched out! EXPLANATION : Another example of “Majaz”. Anyone taking the hadeeth literarily is either blind or should blind himself like Kassim Selamat, for his/her eyes is useless. Ampunkan mak Kassim 7.0 We should drink camel urine as a medicine EXPLANATION : We should? The hadeeth doesn't say that it applies to all? Anyways, it's another form of the Prophet's miracle 8.0 A She-Monkey gets stoned / condemned, for 'adultery??! (Islam recognises human moral laws for the animal kingdom!!!). Narrated Amru bin Maimun: "During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it - the she monkey had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them." EXPLANATION : Secular-Liberalists feels very offended by this hadeeth because they have to accept the fact that their value system is lower than that of monkeys. Even monkeys regard adultery as a crime punishable by death. They, on the other hands, view it as tolerable or acceptable. Kindda like pigs. 9.0 Muhammad was a dog hater. He thought that angels could not enter a house if a dog was there and that black dogs were devils. Thus he ordered dogs to be killed and forbid the selling of dogs. Why were only black dogs supposedl;y possessed by shaitans/devils in Islam? EXPLANATION : The term "black dog" is another way of expressing "fierce looking dogs". And the word "devil" is used to mean "extreme danger". As much as we know that a devil is dangerous, we should also regard a "fierce dog" as dangerous. Nowadays, dogs that has been caught biting onto a human will be put to death summararily. The practice is common until today. 10.0 People turn into rats, pigs and monkeys. (Bukhari vol. IV, nos. 524, 627; Muslim vol. IV, no. 7135). Abraham's father was turned into an animal (Bukhari vol. IV, no.569) EXPLANATION : The Quran says that Jews were turned into apes, 02:65. So, what is so unusual about these Al Hadeeth? God can change anyone into anything and there are many verses in the Quran about it. For example, the example of Moses staff turning into snakes.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
As Sunnah Is Revelations From God
This is a letter i wrote published in Malaysiakini. In reply to Umran Kadir’s letter,” Hadith not divine revelations”, allow me to express these points: ABDUL RAHMAN ABDUL TALIB cabearth4@yahoo.ca
Dear Editor,
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Article 11 Movement is About Secular Liberalism, Period
Article 3 of Malaysia's Constitution is clearer than day, Islam is the religion of the Federation. It clearly states that Islam has a special status in this country and therefore it cannot be accorded the same treatment as other religion in Malaysia. At the same time, other religion are allowed to be practiced and believed in by their respective followers without the state interference.
Suddenly out of nowhere, came a group who calls themselves Article 11. They claim they want to set things straight in Malaysia and ensure that everything, religous wise, that occurs in Malaysia must adhere to the Article 11 of the Constitution.
Some of the members of this group considers themselves to be Muslims, yet they practice some of the things that Shariah prohibits them from doing like drinking alcohol, committing zina and many more. I don't want to name names yet, but if I am forced to I will.
Yet, can we really trust the Article 11 group? Are their interpretation of Article 11 valid? Can their interpretation of Article 11 be allowed to roam the free earth of Malaysia?
They argue that since Article 11 states that every Malaysians are accorded freedom of religion, therefore all Shariah enacments we have today are null and void. Basically, Islamic laws cannot be enforced upon the Muslims as, in their view, it contradicts Article 11 of the Constitution.
The Article 11 people have forgotten that ISlamic shariah laws have been the law of this land preceeding the country's constitution. Article 4 of the Constitution states that the COnstitution is Supreme and that any laws passed after Merdeka which is contradictory to the Constitution is nulled.
It doesn't say anything about laws enacted BEFORE merdeka. Therefore, it is safe to take that laws before Merdeka are not subject to Article 4 of the Constitution as the "contradictory" clause only applies to laws enacted after Merdeka.
Most Shariah laws enactments are passed LONG before Merdeka such as the one in Selangor, Perak, Kelantan, Perlis etc. Therefore, how could the Article 11 group claim their interpretation of the Article 11 be valid? Clearly Article 4 of the Constitution recognizes the supremacy of the various Islamic laws that had existed before Merdeka.
What about the fact that Islam is the RELIGION OF THE FEDERATION. Hamid CAJ (as he then was) in Kamariah bte Ali v Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan, Malaysia opined that in allowing Article 11 to be construed so liberally would entail making invalid entire bodies of Islamic law; e.g. Zakat laws, marriage laws, et cetera. (In short, all Islamic laws would be rendered null and void.)
By invalidating Islamic laws, wouldn't that constitute an insult to the "religion of the Federation" and by extension, an insult to the Federation itself? You insult the religion of the Federation, you're insulting the Federation itself.
What about the fact there exists Article 121 1A of the Constitution that guarantees supremacy of the Shariah courts? ANd the countless preceedence dating back to Merdeka where jurisdiction of the Shariah courts are almost always conceeded by Civil court judges? Why didn't the Article 11 group take into consideration these acts?
The truth of the matter is that Article 11 is nothing but a bunch of western lackeys trying to impose Secular Liberalism upon the Muslims in this country. They know what they stand for is HIGHLY unpopular. THey know 99% of Muslims in this country loathes, despise, hates, look down and reject their actions.
So, they have to find a way to insert their disgusting Liberal Secularism ideology and they decided to use the High Courts of Malaysia.
In truth, the Article 11 group's interpretation of the Article 11 of the constitution represents the recolonization of the West upon the Muslim population of Malaysia. It is trying to destroy Islamic institution and especially Shariah. It is trying to project Islam as a mere belief meant for private domain only.
It's classic ideological nonsense taken lot,stock and barrel from their liberal "buddies" in the West. Do they know that the Liberal policies have been exposed one after another to have been a miserable failure. All of liberal policies have been nothing but a human disaster and a failed experiment.
For instance, feminism has done nothing but promotes lesbianism. More and more western women are rejecting Feminism. More and more Western women are opting to be stay home mothers.
I think the ultimate nonsensical move by the feminists is when they started to sue launderates in the US for charging differently between men and women's clothing. I saw an episode of 60 minutes where the nonsense of feminism was exposed.
In short, from an Islamic perspective, the Muslims in Article 11 movements and their supporters are what Allah SWT describe as infidels, as enemies of Allah, as those who are trying to extinguish the light of Allah SWT.
But heed the assurance of Allah SWT in the Quran:
"61:8. Their intention is to extinguish Allah.s Light (by blowing) with their mouths: But Allah will complete (the revelation of) His Light, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it)"
I dare not call them Muslims now except maybe some of them are deceived into supporting the movement or they are genuinely ignorant.
As such, there is a group called PEMBELA who are fighting the efforts of HAris Ibrahim, Malik Imtiaz and all in trying to get judgements that will impose secular liberalism upon Muslims in this country.
THey are all imbeciles, decoits, a waste of the air they're breathing, taking up precious space on God's green earth. Their existance is unwanted and therefore unwarranted.
They are truly enemies of Islam.
And here is the rest of it.
Read more!
Friday, June 27, 2008
Hadeeth on Flies
Assalamualaikum to Muslims only, The Anti Hadith species have rejected the following hadeeth with reason that the hadeeth is ILLOGICAL. My task in this posting is to answer such accusation based upon an article written by Dr. Amin Ridha of the Surgical Department of the Medical Department in University of Alexendria of Egypt. The
article was published in 1977 in a magazine called AT TAUHID. So the Anti Hadeeth THEORISTS is a couple of decades late for the explanation. The hadith is as follows:
"When a fly falls into your cup, then we are to dip the fly into the cup since one of it's wings contains a disease while the other wing contains the antidote" (Bukhari)
The Lie: This hadith is illogical as this goes against any LOGIC and COMMON SENSE. Besides,everybody knows that flies only carry disease and the notion that flies carry antidote as well is a hoax. Bukhari is really lying to us.1
The Truth:1) In fact, this hadith contains a SCIENTIFIC PHENOMENON which was never discovered until after 1200 years this hadeeth was uttered by the Prophet SAW. For 1200 years no scientists has ever discovered DISEASES that is caused by FLIES. It is only in the last two centuries that scientist were able to discover that flies carries with them diseases. So,this hadeeth is CERTAINLY TRUE as such scientific phenomenon was UTTERED by the Prophet 1200 years before it was discovered
2) The idea that FLIES carry DISEASE only is also a hoax since ANTIDOTES has been
discovered to have been extracted from flies. This is proven by the PHDdisertation presented by an intern under me by the name of Dr. Abdul Futuh Mustafa which was presented to the University of Alexandria a few years ago. It has been discovered that flies carry with them ANTIDOTES that can cure bone fractures and cuts. This is due to the fact that flies carries with them the virus BACTERIOFAG which can kill germs at the same time that the flies carry. That is why flies are now being rared for the purpose of extracting antidotes.
3) WE all know that GERMS and VIRUS are now used to CURE diseases.
HEnce,the discovery of ANTIBIOTICS. So what is so strange about FLIES carrying germs and viruses when we ourselves use virus and germs for medical purposes.
4) Those who claim that this hadith is hoax base their argument solely on LOGIC and COMMON SENSE and none of them could come up with a scientific study, a dissertation or anything of the sort to REFUTE this hadeeth. Yet they can claim that others are lying.
5) The hadith DOES NOT forbid Doctors and Medical officers from destroying all the flies that exist in a community. So the belief that FLIES should not be killed is an
assumption only and not stated by the Hadeeth.
6) There are SO many SCIENTIFIC phenomenon that man has yet to discover.
Just because they have not been discovered yet does not make them false.
7) ALways remember that the hadeeth was uttered to a people who are ILLITERATE and UNEDUCATED. So it's kindda difficult for them to understand the hadeeth should the Prophet SAW had used modern medical terms. But many of those who doubt this hadeeth are STUPID enough not to know this.
There are other INSULTS that the good doctor has made, in a nice manner of course, to those who doubt this hadeeth. As for the people of SIGNS magazine and many in ROPE or TAATRASUL, their doubt in this hadeeth and OTHER hadeeths is based solely on IGNORANCE, ARROGANCE and EXTREME STUPIDITY. The people of SIGNS magazine are nothing but a bunch of clowns and they come up with RUBBISH in their magazine expecting people to swallow everything that they spit out.
That's what it is.... a bunch of spits. If the hadeeth on FLIES can be supported by scientific facts, then you can bet the hadeeth on camel urine and many other hadeeth of which you UNSCIENTIFIC mind thought to be ILLOGICAL and IRRATIONAL can contian
scientific proof.
May Allah SWT render His blessings on the good doctor Amin Redha and also to the great Imam, Imam Al Bukhari rhm. May Allah bless Imam Syafiee, Ahmad, Abu Hanifah, Malik, Imam Muslim, Tirmizi, Abu Dawud, An Nasai, Ibnu Majjah, Ad Dairimi and the rest. May Allah show those who doubt the hadeeth the RIGHT path and stop followingthe rubbish made by the Anti Hadeeth
Read more!
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Haris Ibrahim and his Band of Misfits Committed to Destroy Islam in Malaysia
The same straegy is adopted by HAris Ibrahim and his band of misfits. The worse is that Haris claims to be a Muslim, just like Malik Imtiaz.
Muslims in this country OPENLY rejects what Haris and his band of misfits is trying to do. Even Lina Joy's mother came out in public asking the public's help to bring her daughter back to Islam. That is the measure of unpopularity of Haris Ibrahim's agenda.
Dear Haris Ibrahim,
I'm sorry to say this, but what you and group is trying to do is unscrupolous.
Your interpretation of Article 11 is hardly objective and within the context of the Constitution.
The interpretation is based on Secular Liberalism meant to destroy the Islamic Institution of this land, and thus destroying Islam.
Your interpretation of Article 11 is meant to relegate Islam to a mere faith based system limited to within the private domains.
CLEARLY this is an insult to the Quran, to Islam and to Muslims around the world.
Your attempt to use the courts mimics your mentors in the United States where Anti Christians laws like abortion and pornography are pushed down the populations throat through Supreme Court Rulings.
They know that these laws can never see the light of day is it is pushed democratically.
Let me cite examples such as below:
a.U.S. Supreme Court’s Everson decision in 1947 which imposed an unconstitutional “Wall of Separation” between Church and State
b. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Griswold in 1965 (which found a new constituitional “right to privacy” for contraception) was the next big judicial construct. This helped the sexual revolution
c.Roe vs Wade which legalize abortion that makes promiscous sex easier and more accessible within the American Christian electorate.
d. Lawrence decision by the US Supreme Court which allows homosexual sodomy
e. THe recent gay marriage decision allowed by the California Supreme court is another example.
f. Supreme Court's decision on pornography.
You see, no politician in America would dare to champion these laws as the Christian electore will reject them outright without question.
The liberals then took the back way and used the courts to imposed laws alien to the American Christian soceity. What happened is that these laws in time demolish Christian values in America and wipe out Christianity's role in the public life.
In short, the liberals used the courts to destroy Christianity in America.
The same straegy is adopted by HAris Ibrahim and his band of misfits. The worse is that Haris claims to be a Muslim, just like Malik Imtiaz.
Muslims in this country OPENLY rejects what Haris and his band of misfits is trying to do. Even Lina Joy's mother came out in public asking the public's help to bring her daughter back to Islam. That is the measure of unpopularity of Haris Ibrahim's agenda.
Yet they openly work towards destroying Islam in this country.
I will never cease to expose your evil scheme Haris Ibrahim. Heed the assurance from Allah AlMighty in the Quran
"61:8. Their intention is to extinguish Allah.s Light (by blowing) with their mouths: But Allah will complete (the revelation of) His Light, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it)"
You will never succeed Haris, Allah will never permit it.
Read more!
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
The Lina Joy Case -- An 'Easy' Version
Beware Muslims, had they won the Lina Joy case, Islam will cease to exists as we know it. I wrote this article a while ago, to answer a certain request made by a representative from The Brunei Times. Unfortunately, my article succeeded not in getting through the editor's filter. But instead of scrapping it, I'm posting it here, so that anyone interested in the facts of the case may access an abridged version of it. And most importantly, you would be able to understand what grave implications the case would have had in store for the rest of us Muslims had it been decided in Lina Joy's favour. (The implications of the case also happen to be something few people are aware of.)
I used very simple English and tried my best not to use any legal terms, so this should be a very accessible article. If anyone has any questions, feel free to ask, and I'll try my best to answer them. (I have direct access to the PPI lawyers, so if you have any questions of legal nature that I am unable to answer myself I will immediately forward it to them.)
====================================
I think it better to grab than lose your attention, hence I will explain using layman's terms and refrain from bombarding you with legalese while I go about explaining the Lina Joy case.
Lina Joy, born 'Azlina Jailani', claimed to have embraced Christianity at the age of 26.
Over the years she has expressed her desire to enter into a legal marriage and have a child. However, she could not do this for the laws of Malaysia forbid inter-religious marriages.To this effect she then sought legal recognition of her faith from the National Registration Department (NRD), by applying for the removal of the word 'Islam' from her identity card. The NRD, thinking itself unfit to take religious affairs into its hands (being only an administrative body), insisted that she first produce a declaration from the Syariah court that acknowledged her renunciation of Islam, and went on to reject her application when she could not do so.
Lina refused to visit the Syariah court. She also claimed that it had become unfit to hear her matter, by virtue of her having left the Islamic faith. Thus began the legal battle that would span nearly a decade.
Lina Joy's claims were founded upon two grounds:
* 1) Whether the NRD had acted properly in rejecting her application, and
* 2) Her insistence that the provisions of Article 11 of the Constitution gave her the complete freedom to profess any religion of her choosing.
The respondents (the Majlis Agama Islam, the Government of Malaysia, and the NRD) based their claims upon these grounds:
* 1) Article 160 of the Constitution, which states that a Malay must be of none other than the Islamic faith - i.e. He or she must be Muslim, and
* 2) As the issue of apostasy falls under the category of Islamic matters and doctrine, the only means of recourse, as provided for by Article 121 (1A) of the Constitution, would be available to her only through the Syariah court.
The High Court dismissed Lina Joy's claims on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction to hear her matter. She appealed to the Court of Appeal, on the grounds of administrative law, but did not succeed there. She then appealed to the Federal Court.
The Federal Court's decision was handed down on the 30th of May 2007, with the majority judgment ruling in favour of dismissing Lina Joy's appeal. (One judge dissented.) In essence, the majority judgement came to these conclusions:
* 1) For a Muslim, his religious rights and duties prior to his conversion remains unchanged until he gets a declaration from the Syariah Court saying that he is no longer a Muslim.
* 2) Article 11 (1) does not give rise to absolute freedom of religion.
* 3) The right to profess and practice a religion is subject to the principles and practice of that religion.
Mention must also be made of the two languages employed to deliver the decision -- Bahasa Malaysia (by the Chief Justice) and English (Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak). (This has resulted in the dissenting judgment enjoying more immediate coverage than the former. )
-----------
The multi-religious composition of Malaysia explains why there has been so much interest from the public since the very beginning.
For brevity's sake, perspective on this case could be said as coming from two camps: In the first, the Muslims, who feel enraged that Lina Joy has attempted to circumvent the jurisdiction of the Syariah court and hold that it amounts to an act of condescension towards the current dual-legal system in practice. In the second, the non-Muslims
and a small group of Malays (whose members fancy themselves 'liberal' Muslims), who endeavour to support Lina Joy's cause for it would champion issues such as human rights and fundamental liberties, which are dear to them.
I certainly beg to differ with the opinions of some who claim that at the heart of the Lina Joy case lies a dispute on religious freedom. I am inclined to offer this correction to them: that the case of Lina Joy has all along been concerned with the question as to which court has jurisdiction to try cases of apostasy involving Muslims, and that the issue of freedom of religion was auxiliary to this.
I must bring to light the fact that Lina Joy is not restricted from leaving the religion if she wishes for that. The decision affirms this contention of mine and makes lucid the fact that she needs to apply to visit the Syariah court to obtain a formal declaration to that effect, subject of course to the limits of jurisprudence.
Why then have some groups stretched the truth to fit their claims that the Lina Joy case amounts to obstructing altogether their right to freedom of religion? There has been much ado about this, especially on the Internet. (That's not taking into account their other interesting claims; for example, that the Lina Joy case has been decided unfairly
and has thus caused devastating implications to be wrought upon the citizens of this country.)
Unbeknownst to the masses, even ghastlier implications would have come to manifest had Lina Joy's appeal succeeded. I beg you to consider these, for instance:
* 1) The nullification of a vast array of laws - Abdul Hamid CAJ (as he then was) in Kamariah bte Ali v Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan, Malaysia opined that in allowing Article 11 to be construed so liberally would entail making invalid entire bodies of Islamic law; e.g. Zakat laws, marriage laws, et cetera. (In short, all Islamic laws would be rendered null and void.)
* 2) The coming to existence of a constitutional paradox - Article 160 of the Constitution states that a Malay must be a Muslim; thus, if a Malay person declares himself a non-Muslim, what race would he (legally) belong to then? As he cannot satisfy the constitutional criteria of a Malay, he would lose not only his Malay status but his Bumiputra privileges as well.
* 3) The diminution of the powers of the Syariah court - Not only would our Islamic court would be deprived of its right to adjudicate on matters of apostasy involving Muslims, said right would then be conferred to the civil court, whose judicial members are comprised of Muslims and non-Muslims trained in the intricacies of civil laws but not Islamic laws.
* 4) Of inheritance rights - Seeing as to the fact that Muslims and non-Muslims are governed by different inheritance laws, and the fact that non-Muslims cannot inherit from Muslims, one can easily imagine then the gory court battles that would emerge from disputes on inheritance.
* 5) The impossibility of religious enforcement - Consider perhaps, a man eating eating in public in the fasting month of Ramadhan who, when arrested by religious officers, professes to having left the Islamic faith. The religious officers would be unable to perform their duties if so.
One need not look more than twice at the above list to understand that it is the Muslims, comprising roughly 60% of the country's population, who would be adversely affected the most. (Article written by Mr Wan Zafran)
Read also: