Category: Daily Whatevers

This is a spin-off from my previous posting about DOGS IN ISLAM, where I am trying to point out how unIslamic Muslims have become by not trusting Allah’s Holy Quran but instead take the words of the scholars as if they’re gods.

Over a year ago I wrote in an UMNO forum in response to a member saying that women must cover up their hair. Of course I responded in the negative and challenged the person to show me where in the al-Quran does it say so, he never replied.

Before I begin, let me quote a verse from the Holy Quran in the chapter called THE PROPHETS (al-Anbiyaa’)21:24. Allah said:

“Have they found gods besides Him (Allah)? Say, “Show us your proofs. This Quran is my proof,it covers the present and the past.” Indeed most of them fail to recognise the truth, this is why they turn away.”

I don’t know how Islamic can one be by wearing or not wearing the tudung or hijjab. I don’t even know if it is Islamic to do that. The Quran only tells women to cover their breasts and to pull their outer garments over them. And for 1000 years or more, scholars are still debating whether Muslim women should cover their hair.

However, in the Bible, there is a clear order for women to cover their hair and their heads especially during prayer. Here is the reference:

Corinthians 11:5-6

“And every women who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head – it is just as though as her head was shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgraced for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.”

This reminds me of a few incidents where school children had had their hair cut by religious teachers, or their tudung cut shorter for not wearing the long tudung sometime last year (NST – 25th Feb 2006). A school in Bukit Mertajam even withdrew their participation in a netball competition because their players were not wearing tudung.

Sheer blatant stupidity and ignorance on the part of the teachers. 30 years ago when I was schooling I never hear of such nonsense. it seems that deviationist Islam has rooted itself firmly within the minds of these teachers, and they abide by the words of their scholars without questioning the facts.

And what about Muslim men being told that it is the sunnah (tradition of the Prophet) to wear turban, have beard etc? They say that men must (bordering divinely compulsory) to wear turban and have beard like the Prophet, and do other things that the Prophet used to do. This brings me to another case of three boys who were expelled from school because the students were adamant to wear turban to school. A PAS lawyer represented them and told the court that WEARING THE TURBAN IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF ISLAM.

Another narrow minded bastard who is bent on misguiding Muslims, if you ask me. No where in the Holy Quran is mentioned about the wearing of the turban and robes and growing beards etc. However, in the Bible, those are mentioned as the accoutrements of the priests.

Exodus 28:4

“These are the garments they are to make: a breastpiece, an ephod, a woven tunic, a turban and a sash. They are to make these sacred garments for your brother Aaron and his sons, so they may serve Me as priests.”

Leviathan 21:5

“Priests must not shave their heads or shave off the edges of their beards or cut their bodies.”

Leviathan 19:27

“Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.”

So, there you have it. “Defenders” of the faith (scholars’ faith) will say of course it is not mentioned in the Holy Quran. It is the traditions (sunnah) of the Holy Prophet!

So why do they go to work in cars instead of camel-backs?

Let me just quote you from the Holy Quran again to underscore what I have been saying about the lies attributed to Allah and Muhammad conjured up by the so-called faithfuls for over a millenium:

THE FAMILY IMRAAN (Ali Imraan) 3:78

Some of them even twist their tongues to simulate the scripture, to make you think that it is from the scripture when it is not from the scripture, and claim that it is from God, when it is not from God. They invent lies and attribute them to God, knowingly.”

So if you are a woman and you are not wearing tudung, and if you are a man and you do not have a beard or wear turban and robe, then let it be known that you are not unIslamic; you are in fact very unChristian.

Two days ago, Selangor Exco Dato’ Ch’ng Toh Eng told people in the Klang Valley to wash and prepare all their pails for another round of water rationing, as happened back in 1998, due to El Nino. If you hadn’t noticed it has been hotter than usual lately.

Back in 1998, when the water shortages was about to begin, I was already stationed at the (then spanking new) National Sports Council complex to prepare for the North Pole parachute expedition. When I came back from Russia, water rationing was already in full swing. So what I used to do was to drive along the North South Highway, between KL and Tanjung Malim, stop at any of the rest areas or R&R to shower, then go back to my apartment where I was living alone then. Not that I had any problems with my water supply as I was living alone (I was already divorced and my children were staying with my ex-wife then), but I made full use of public facilities. So as my neighbours hurried downstairs with pails when the water truck arrives, I was washing my car, much to the disgust of my neighbours. I remember one scolded me for wasting water. I told her to go suck on her boyfriend’s dick for water because I pay my own water bills.

Now, there are nine people living in this house. I’ll need to buy huge water storage tanks just in case. It would be to obvious driving to R&R’s for nine people to shower.

The following is an e-mail comment I received from a friend who is a Syariah Lawyer:

Yes, you are right. Issue of what is right or wrong seems to be blurred by those who claim to be the keepers of knowledge in Islam.

In actual fact, even the major scholars ( and by this I mean ‘major’ in the sense that they are accepted by all as Muslim Scholars) whose school of thought were documented and of which there are their respective followers, never and I repeat never said that their fellow brethren scholars were wrong where there exist different opinions of thought.

What we all forget is that Islam and the holy Quran which was brought to the Prophet s.a.w was meant for all time and to last till the end of time at that.

Its flexible and subject to interpretation. They are traditional ways of interpretation such as ihjtihad, ijma and qiyas but this does not separate logic and common sense in anyway. That’s the reason the all mighty had given us that little grey matter between our heads.

As for dogs, yes they are creatures of the all mighty just like you and me, the little piggy down the street and the Imam’s and self righteous people of this world. So who is to say that one is impure and the other is not save for the express decree of god where applicable. If you are to keep dogs, just make sure that hygiene is maintained and that the dogs do no harm to your neighbours/the community at large by attacking them etc!!

At the end of the day, the only person to judge would be the all mighty and no one else. So to each his own….

I am posting this reply to the comments by Diverdel and Shawn:

There is one thing that i do not believe in: the school of thoughts. While there are some good guidelines that I can use, as Diverdel has pointed out, we take the prescriptions by these schools of thoughts as something that MUST be done, and to go against is sinful.

First and foremost, who rightfully can say whether or not such and such an act is a sin? Who dishes out rewards for good deeds and punishments for bad deeds? Only the Almighty has that power.

Shawn, there is nowhere in the al-Quran that says you cannot touch a dog. There are FIVE prescribed findings by these schools of thoughts: 1) you cannot touch at all; 2) you can touch only when it’s dry; 3) you cannot touch unless its nose and tongue are dry; and some others I cannot remember. Even amongst the scholars they are divided over this. But which NAS or DALIL did they use to come up with these guidelines when the Quran says nothing about it? Even the hadith used are DAIF (weak) and some PALSU (false). The only school of thought that goes back to the Quran on this is Maliki as mentioned above.

Diverdel’s point on having to follow strictly to Imam Shafie’s teachings here in Malaysia is something that is actually a cause for alarm. Muslims in Malaysia cannot understand that it is just an intepretation by Shafie…therefore whether you follow it or not has nothing to do with sins and rewards. Shafie says he’s right; Hanafie says he’s right…but why do we need to do the act of adopting another mazhab as mentioned about the Tawaf above? Back in England, I have seen followers of Shafie and Hanafie and Hanbalie whack each other in a mosque because the imam for the Aidil Fitri prayers is a Hanafie. If there is a Shiah here in Malaysia performing rites according to Shiah’s traditions, he can be jailed! In Iraq, such strict followings are causing thousands of innocent Muslims lives lost annually – and all because of schools of thoughts.

Aren’t we all praying to the same God? If we uphold the Six Pillars of Faith and believe in it without a single shadow of doubt, why are we taking teachings prescribed by scholars as “our way of life and no two ways about it”? We read the books they write and subscribe to it strictly..but when it comes to the Quran that we’re supposed to be guided by and with, we question its contents and ask what the scholars thought about what God has decreed.

When doing my A Levels in the UK, I used to take my neighbour’s dogs for walkies. I even pat them. My fellow Malaysian Malay Muslims would cringe and ask if I am a Muslim.

Dogs are being labeled as najasah (dirty impurity) by Muslims who take the words of so-called scholars (Ulama’) as something inscribed in stone, without once refering to what God has said in the al-Quran about dogs. The fact is God reated every living thing on this earth as belonging to an ummah (community). So human beings, cats, dogs, pigs are all of one community that was created to be subservient to the One God. There is no distinction between these creatures as to whether a pig is more pure than a human being, or if a cat is better than a dog. The fact is, dogs have been mentioned in the al-Quran several times…5 times if I read correctly.

The concept of a dog being dirty came about with false hadiths claiming that the Prophet (pbuh) ordered the killing of dogs and that dogs can only be kept for the purpose of guarding and hunting, due to their dirty status. If Muslims are able to read the Quran, then such hadith should be decreed as lies fabricated to ridicule the Prophet (pbuh).

God tells us in the Quran about the story of the dwellers of the Cave (Surah 18)……in verse 13 God tells us that they were good believers and that God guided them. In verse 18 God tells us that they had their dog with them. Now if dogs are prohibited and dirty, would God speak of those dwellers of the Cave (who had a dog) as good believers?

In 5:4 God tells us that it is OK to eat what the trained dogs catch (dogs are used in hunting)……….if dogs are dirty would God say that it is OK to eat what they catch with their mouths.In 5:4, God said:

“They consult you concerning what is lawful for them; say, Lawful for you are all good things, including what trained dogs and falcons catch for you. You train them according God’s teachings. You may eat what they catch for you, and mention God’s name thereupon. You shall observe God. God is most efficient in reckoning.”

Islam is a way of life. It is when it is being given the brand of a religion that its followers have gone bonkers and come up with lots of ridiculous hogwash taboos. Imagine this: in the Shafie school of thoughts, a dog is impure and therefore anything that it touchs requires a massive cleaning operation that is 6 times with water and one time with dust/clay-water. Now…if the Arabs have hunting dogs and a dog retrieves a bird that has been shot, imagine what clay-water would do to the taste of the bird. According to Imam Malik‘s school of thoughts, a dog is not impure. You can touch it, you can hug it, it will not affect your wudu’ (ablution).

So whose Islam is right? Malik’s or Shafie’s? Don’t we all pray to the same God? And what did God say about who is a Muslim? Isn’t it about abiding to the five pillars of Islam (Rukun Islam)? And what about the six pillars of Faith (Rukun Iman)? What do they say?

The first is to believe in God’s Lordship,Oneness (Entity concept) and Attributes; second is to believe in His Angels; third is to believe in His books (the al-Quran, the Bible, the Torah and Zabur (Psalms of David); fourth is to believe in all His Messengers…25 main ones in all; fifth is to believe in the Day of Resurrection; and lastly, to believe in Fate and Divine Decree.

But as “believers” we chose not to believe in His books; what we choose to believe instead is in the sayings and writings of certain scholars whom have intepreted the Quran and hadith according to their own whims and fancies.

Back to dogs, one laughable taboo is the dog is so impure that if you were to allow dogs in your home, the Angels wouldn’t enter your house to bless it..much like garlic is to Count Dracula, or cats to Imhotep, the Mummy. But to my surprise, one Angel seems to have some kind of immunity towards dogs and still enters the home of believers and non-believers alike to take away their life.

Because we, the Muslims, have rejected God’s Quran, therefore we live in obscurity and backwardness. And we blow people up, treat women like slaves, and tell people how great we are.