Daraba Dabble

20130815-141947.jpg

Islam is a religion of peace, is it not?

The answer to that would be yes, but it is not. The correct answer would be it is but it is being misinterpreted by its followers. And as such, the doings of Muslims have allowed anti-Muslims to further feed fuel to the Islamophobic fire as depicted above.

Many Muslim men think it is their right to beat their women if they have wronged the former. I have been quoted Surah an-Nisaa’ verse 34 (hereinafter referred to as Surah 4:34) which have been quoted again, by Islamophobists, below:

20130815-142635.jpg

In Malaysia, the number of reported cases of domestic violence hovers at around 3,500 annually. I emphasise on the word reported because there still exists the stigma about reporting and how the victim would be viewed by both family members and the society at large. With the recent video of a domestic violence act taking place in the state of Penang going viral, many comments were made about the video; ranging from “Islam does not permit wife-beating” to “maybe she deserved it.” Some even said, “He shouldn’t have kicked her. He should have used the siwak as the Prophet had taught.”

I believe it is time to clear this misconception and confusion so no one can belittle Islam – the religion of peace that places the welfare and rights of women in so many verses.

20130815-143929.jpg

In Surah 4:34, the verse was interpreted by many as such:

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand

The Quran uses the Arabic word qawwamuna in the beginning of this verse, so it reads “Men are the qawwamuna of women.” The word qawwamuna means to continuously stand over something (e.g. a guard or a caretaker) or to maintain something. The closest single word in English to the root qawwam is probably guardian. The grammatical form of qawwam combines the concepts of physical maintenance and protection as well as responsibility. The word denotes no superiority but responsibility. A correct translation of “qawwamuna a’ala aln-nisa” would therefore be “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women“. To use “in charge” is quite a loose translation.

So a husband must be a protector/guardian and maintainer of his wife. It is important to note that the expression “men are qawwamuna over women” only describes the relationship between husband and wife within the family. The expression does not refer to the relationship between men and women in general.

Abu Hurairah r.a narrated that the Prophet said: “The most perfect of the believers in their belief are those with the best manners, and the best of you are those who are best with their wives.” (Sahih Bukhari)

Therefore, why does Surah 4:34 allow wives to be beaten by their husband? Well, it does not! It ends with the sentence “….Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.” Characteristically, this reminds men that if they misbehave God is watching over them and will deal with them. It is relevant here to mention the story of how the Prophet once saw Ibnu Mas’ud with his hand raised, about to hit his slave. The Prophet cried out, “God has more power over you than you have over him“, so Ibnu Mas’ud dropped his hand and set the slave free. In the theme under discussion it is important to observe that four successive verses end in the following ways: ‘God has full knowledge of everything . . . ’ (4:32), ‘God is witness to everything . . . ’ (4:33), ‘God is most exalted and grand. . .’ (4:34) and ‘God is all knowing, all aware. . . ’ (4:35).

The Arabic word used is Surah 4:34 is “idribuhunna” which is derived from the word “daraba” which means “hit” or “beat.” The problem is, not all words derived from “daraba” carry those meanings. The word “idribuhunna” in Surah 4:34 could also mean “leave.”

Or it could mean “strike” as in “daraba al-ma’ `ala wajhihi” which literally means “to strike the face“, but if you take that in the literal sense, then Muslims would be smacking each other’s face, when in fact this sentence refers to “striking your face with water” as in performing the ablution.

If I say to you in Arabic “daraba laka mathal,” then don’t start avoiding my hands because all I just said was “give you an example.” This word was used in Surah 14:24:

Do you not see how Allah has given the example of a good word? It is like a good tree, whose root is firmly fixed, and whose branches reach the sky (اَلَمۡ تَرَ كَيۡفَ ضَرَبَ اللّٰهُ مَثَلًا كَلِمَةً طَيِّبَةً )

Another derivation of the word “daraba” is “darabtum” which means “to go forth” or “to separate” as in Surah 4:94:

Believers! When you go forth in the way of Allah…. ( يٰۤـاَيُّهَا الَّذِيۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡۤا اِذَا ضَرَبۡتُمۡ فِىۡ سَبِيۡلِ اللّٰهِ

Therefore, “daraba” can mean “beat“, “give example”, or “go forth.”

If the explanation above still fails to move the Muslim men who believe beating women is their birthright, I can quote other verses and Hadith Sahih that forbid the beating of women:

The first is Surah 4:19:

Believers! It is not lawful for you to become heirs to women against their will. It is not lawful that you should put constraint upon them that you may take away anything of what you have given them; (you may not put constraint upon them) unless they are guilty of brazenly immoral conduct. Live with your wives in a good manner. If you dislike them in any manner, it may be that you dislike something in which Allah has placed much good for you.

Next is Surah 30:21:

And of His Signs is that He has created mates for you from your own kind28 that you may find peace in them and He has set between you love and mercy. Surely there are Signs in this for those who reflect.

So do you think the beaten wife in the video deserved being pummelled as such? Even if she, hypothetically, had done something really nasty? For Muslim men, I give you Surah 3:134:

Who spend [in the cause of Allah ] during ease and hardship and who restrain anger and who pardon the people – and Allah loves the doers of good.

The Prophet whom we as Muslims claim we love and whose examples we follow underscored Surah 3:134:

Narrated Mu’awiyah al-Qushayri: “I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)”

Narrated Mu’awiyah ibn Haydah: “I said: Apostle of Allah, how should we approach our wives and how should we leave them? He replied: Approach your tilth when or how you will, give her (your wife) food when you take food, clothe when you clothe yourself, do not revile her face, and do not beat her. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2138)”

What about the right to beat a wife but not on the face? Let us examine the two Hadiths regarding this matter:

Narrated Salim: “… Omar said: ‘The Prophet forbade beating on the face.’ (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Hunting, Slaughtering, Volume 7, Book 67, Number 449)”

Narrated Abu Hurairah: “The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: When one of you inflicts a beating, he should avoid striking the face. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 38, Prescribed Punishments (Kitab Al-Hudud), Number 4478)”

Neither narration above provides any proof about beating the wife being as alright as long as it is not on the face. The striking can be used when disciplining our children, but stresses on avoiding striking the face. The importance of this is underscored in the following Hadith:

“He who has no mercy towards younger ones, and does not acknowledge the honour of our older ones, is not one of us.” [At-Tirmidzi]

There have you, why you cannot strike, beat, pummel, kick, beat lightly, beat but not the face, the woman whom you love enough to marry her and promised to protect and provide for her, taking that responsibility from her father or guardian, as in the Ijab performed during marriage.

Abu Hurairah reported: “I heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: One is not strong because of one’s wrestling skillfully. They said: Allah’s Messenger, then who is strong? He said: He who controls his anger when he is in a fit of rage. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Virtue, Good Manners and Joining of the Ties of Relationship (Kitab Al-Birr was-Salat-I-wa’l-Adab), Book 032, Number 6314)”

And I leave you with, again, what Allah SWT has commanded us:

Who spend [in the cause of Allah ] during ease and hardship and who restrain anger and who pardon the people – and Allah loves the doers of good.

If you still think it is your birthright to beat your wife, I suggest you beat up her brothers too…if you are a man.

20130815-161518.jpg
Courtesy of zaufishan.co.uk

Surat Terbuka Untuk Pengundi Melayu

Pada 9hb Mac 2008, buat pertama kalinya saya melihat seorang remaja Melayu dengan megahnya memakai sehelai kemeja ‘T’ yang tertera perkataan “DAP” dan mempunyai lambang roket DAP. Saya hanya mampu menggelengkan kepala. Di dalam hati saya teringat laporan kata-kata yang diungkapkan oleh Setiausaha Agung DAP, Lim Kit Siang:

“Melayu keluar! Apa lagi duduk sini, kita hentam lu…sekarang kita sudah ada kuasa…”

Begitulah bunyinya ungkapan beliau yang dilaporkan telah dilaung-laungkan di sekitar Jalan Khir, Kampung Baru, Kuala Lumpur pada 12hb Mei 1969. Sikap anti-Melayu Lim Kit Siang bukanlah suatu perkara yang baru, dan yang diungkapkan oleh beliau di atas bukanlah ungkapan anti-Melayu yang pertama pernah beliau ungkapkan. Sekiranya kita melayari laman http://bibliotheca.limkitsiang.com dapat kita membaca siri ucapan dan surat-surat beliau yang dibuat sejak 1968, kita dapat melihat bagaimana beliau sering menggunakan isu perkauman untuk membuat kaum lain di Malaysia ini membenci kaum Melayu.

Apabila kita langkaui masa selama 44 tahun selepas itu, kita dapati parti DAP itu sendiri masih tidak berubah, malah masih mempunyai Lim Kit Siang sebagai Penasihat Parti. Yang berubah hanyalah sikap Lim Kit Siang yang lebih cauvinis. Beliau bukan sahaja masih bersikap anti-Melayu, malah anti-Islam juga. Sebagai contoh: dalam satu risalah yang dikeluarkan di media Internet, Lim Kit Siang berkata:

“Saya berpendapat Malaysia tidak akan dapat mencapai kemuncak potensinya sebagai sebuah negara maju kerana sekatan-sekatan dalam Islam. Sekaranglah masanya untuk untuk kita mengalihkan kesemua rintangan dengan menukar kerajaan yang sedia ada dan juga perlembagaan, Ini Kalilah!”

20130503-150540.jpg

Maka tidak hairanlah kita apabila para pemimpin PAS yang kita mengharapkan dapat mengekang kemaraan sikap cauvinis ini sering lari bertempiaran dengan ekor dikepit dicelah kangkang disergah oleh DAP setiap kali isu Hudud atau penggunaan kalimah Allah dalam kitab Injil diutarakan. Malah, masih ingat saya sebuah artikel mengenai amaran Karpal Singh dalam Utusan Malaysia bertarikh 18hb Oktober 1990 yang menyebut:

“Mahu wujudkan Negara Islam langkah mayat kami dulu – Karpal Singh”

20130503-150732.jpg

Disebabkan perbalahan di antara dua parti ini juga kita melihat pendirian PAS yang sering berubah-ubah. Dalam Utusan Malaysia bertarikh 4hb Ogos 2001, YAB Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat dilaporkan berkata:

“Bukan sahaja dalam manifesto, dalam perlembagaan PAS sendiri tidak mengandungi satu perkataan pun untuk menubuhkan Negara Islam, dia (DAP) boleh tengok sendiri dan baca perlembagaan itu.”

20130503-150916.jpg

Maka, bolehlah kita simpulkan di sini bahawa menubuhkan Negara Islam itu bukanlah perjuangan sebenar PAS, malah dikeji oleh sekutunya DAP. Ini juga merupakan pendirian PKR sepertimana yang dilaporkan dalam akhbar Kosmo bertarikh 25hb April 2013:

“PKR, DAP tetap bantah rancangan PAS untuk laksanakan hudud jika menang PRU-13. Khalid tolak hudud di Selangor.”

20130503-151204.jpg

Pakatan Rakyat di dalam manifestonya (Manifesto Rakyat: Pakatan Harapan Rakyat) ada menyebut di dalam Bahasa Malaysia seperti berikut:

“Menghayati kedudukan Islam sebagai Agama Persekutuan, menjamin hak kebebasan beragama.”

Tetapi dalam terjemahan kedalam Bahasa Inggeris pula, ianya ditulis sebegini:

“Respecting the position of Islam as the OFFICIAL RELIGION, guaranteeing the freedom of religion. (menghormati kedudukan Islam sebagai AGAMA RESMI, menjamin hak kebebasan beragama)”

Saudara dan saudari perlu membaca dan telitikan dua maksud yang berbeza di atas.

20130503-151420.jpg

Jelas untuk pengundi bukan Melayu/Islam, agama Islam hanya menjadi agama resmi Persekutuan dan bukan agama Persekutuan seperti yang termaktub dalam Artikel 3(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia. Ini bakal member kebebasan mereka untuk memujuk orang Islam, terutamanya dari kaum Melayu, untuk orang Islam menukar agama, dan juga kebebasan untuk mereka menggunakan apa jua bahasa termasuk kalimah Allah dalam kitab-kitab serta bahan cetak lain-lain agama.

Untuk memahami sebab kalimah Allah tidak dipakai di Semenanjung Malaysia tetapi digunakan di Sabah, Sarawak dan Indonesia, saudara-saudari pembaca perlu memahami sejarah kolonisasi rantau nusantara serta perjanjian-perjanjian di antara Raja-Raja Melayu negeri-negeri Bersekutu dan tidak Bersekutu dengan pihak British.

Sehingga tertubuhnya Malayan Union pada tahun 1946, kecuali Pulau Pinang, Melaka dan Singapura yang membentuk Negeri-Negeri Selat, Tanah Melayu tidak pernah dijajah. Negeri-Negeri Melayu Bersekutu yang dianggotai Perak, Selangor, Negeri Sembilan dan Pahang menandatangani perjanjian perlindungan (independent protectorate) dengan pihak British dengan syarat seorang pentadbir British (Residen) digajikan oleh pihak Raja-Raja Negeri Melayu Bersekutu kerana mempunyai system pentadbiran yang seragam, manakala negeri-negeri lain mempunyai seorang Penasihat (Adviser). Contoh seorang Residen ialah Frank Swettenham, manakala Penasihat kepada Negeri Kedah ialah William George Maxwell.

Berbeza dengan Indonesia yang mana ianya ditakluk dan dijajah oleh Belanda, dan Sabah dan Sarawak yang dimiliki syarikat-syarikat kepunyaan warga British. Oleh sebab itu, di Indonesia, kolonialis Belanda memperkenalkan agama Kristian dan kitab Injil di dalam Bahasa Indonesia serta mengharamkan ibadah lain-lain agama termasuk Islam.

Thomas Stamford Bingley Raffles, yang lebih dikenali sejarah sebagai Sir Stamford Raffles, gabenor British di Singapura, merupakan seorang mubaligh Krisitan yang masyhur. Beliau telah menggunakan kuasanya untuk menjemput rakan-rakan mubaligh dari England ke Borneo Utara dan Sarawak kerana “pulau tersebut didiami oleh satu kaum yang masih hidup belum keluar dari sifat kegasaran.” Di sinilah bermulanya titik permulaan penggunaan kalimah Allah dalam kitab Injil dan lain-lain penerbitan Kristian yang menggunakan bahasa Melayu seperti Buletin Ariffin, Cermin Mata, Sahabat dan Warta Melayu.

Beliau bukannya tidak pernah mencuba untuk mengKristiankan orang Islam di Tanah Melayu, tetapi mendapatinya sukar dilaksanakan memandangkan perjanjian di antara pihak British dengan Raja-Raja Melayu yang mempertahankan agama Islam dan adat-istiadat orang Melayu. Di dalam surat beliau kepada sepupunya, beliau menulis:

“Agama dan undang-undang adalah terlalu sebati sehinggakan memperkenalkan agama Kristian akan membawa kepada kemusnahan, dendam dan perbalahan.” (Buitenzorg, 10hb Februari 1815, Mss. Eur. F.202/6)

Itulah sebabnya apabila ahli-ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri dari parti DAP mengangkat sumpah pada tahun 2008, mereka menunjukkan sikap biadap terhadap Raja-Raja Melayu. Tidak cukup dengan itu, digalakkan pula anak-anak muda Melayu bersikap biadap terhadap institusi Raja. Serang pengaruh Raja-Raja Melayu maka ianya akan melemahkan kepercayaan dan sikap hormat orang Melayu terhadap institusi Raja-Raja Melayu yang menjadi penjaga dan pemelihara agama Islam dan adat-istiadat orang Melayu.

Kita dapat lihat dengan jelas bagaimana mubaligh-mubaligh Kristian mula menyiarkan risalah-risalah dan lain-lain penerbitan dalam Bahasa Malaysia bertujuan untuk memesongkan aqidah umat Islam di Negara ini. Sebagai contoh, di Johor, sebanyak 250 buah buku bertajuk seperti Kaabah, Mengenal Rasul dan Wahyu Illahi disebarkan tetapi dirampas oleh Jabatan Agama Islam Johor dan Kementerian Dalam Negeri. Dalam sebuah negeri yang 58 peratus penduduknya beragama Islam, manakala hanya 2 peratus penganut agama Kristian, untuk siapakah yang saudara-saudari pembaca sekalian rasa risalah-risalah ini dicetak?

Semua ini dilakukan demi kuasa. Dan demi berkuasa, insan yang bernama Anwar Ibrahim sering berdolak-dalik dalam isu penggunaan kalimah Allah oleh penganut agama lain.

Pada 24hb Jun 2010 di Woodrow Wilson International Centre di Washington D.C, Anwar Ibrahim telah mengulas isu kalimah Allah dan menyatakan:

“Trend di Malaysia, yang pertama sekali isu kalimah Allah. Ia benar-benar tidak waras sekiranya tidak teruk untuk mengesyorkan, bahawa anda memaksa, bukan Muslim menerima undang-undang yang menafikan hak mereka, memanggil Tuhan mereka dengan apa-apa nama. Anda boleh memanggil nama-nama lain kecuali Allah. Tetapi perkara ini hanya boleh datang daripada golongan Pemerintah yang tidak berpandangan jauh, bersifat perkauman, tidak bersikap toleran dan tidak demokratik. Kami di dalam Pakatan Rakyat, bukan sahaja PKR dan DAP, malahan PAS telah mengambil pendirian bahawa kami tidak boleh menerima undang-undang ini. Kami mesti menghormati hak agama atau kepercayaan lain untuk memanggil Tuhan mereka dengan nama Allah.”

Saudara dan saudari sekalian, cukuplah Melayu diperbodohkan atau buat-buat bodoh terutamanya dalam isu yang melibatkan agama Islam serta maruah bangsa Melayu. Silap kita memangkah nescaya yang bakal menerima akibat khilaf kita adalah anak cucu kita. Janganlah kita fikirkan bahawa kita akan tetap selamat sekiranya calon tersebut Melayu PKR atau PAS menentang bukan Melayu dari MCA atau MIC. Kita perlu lihat siapa peneraju dan terbuktikah beliau mempertahan dan memperkasakan kedudukan Islam dan Melayu di Negara ini. Lihat juga siapa menjadi dalang utama di dalam Pakatan Rakyat – tidak lain tidak bukan DAP yang tidak pernah berubah sejak tahun 1969.

20130503-152324.jpg

Ingat saudara-saudari sekalian, satu undi untuk PKR mahupun PAS adalah merupakan satu undi terhadap penguasaan DAP ke atas agama Islam dan bangsa Melayu.

Sekian, terima kasih.

When Islamists Worship Money

“This is the Book; In it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear God” (Qur’an, 2:2)

For Muslims who are not familiar with this verse, this is the second verse from al-Baqarah. This verse talks about the Quran as a guidance for those who fear God, and serves as part of the epistemological parameters for the Quran. In other words, if you say you live on the path of Allah, you should heed to this verse. If you say you uphold Islam, this is the verse you should not veer from this. Furthermore, God said:

“…Nothing have We omitted from the Book…” Qur’an, 6:38

For 20 years, the so-called Islamist government in Kelantan have been raping the jungles of Lojing, and most recently the land given to DAP duo, Ngeh Koo Ham and Nga Kor Ming. (read here for more.)

20130209-215754.jpg

The so-called Islamist government of Kedah managed to outdo Kelantan in a short five years. Pedu Lake where I used to go back in the 1990s is now hardly recognisable. Blatant uncontrolled logging have stripped the virgin jungle bare! And this is definitely unIslamic.

As the unquestionable guidance for mankind, the Quran mentions about the role of man as the guardian of God’s Earth:

“It is He who has made you (His) vicegerents, inheritors of the earth: He has raised you in ranks, some above others: that He may try you in the gifts He has given you: for your Lord is quick in punishment: yet He is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” Qur’an, 6:165

But this does not mean that man’s vicegerency does not come unobserved:

“Then We made you heirs in the land after them, to see how you would behave!” Qur’an, 10:14

20130209-222854.jpg

Obviously, the government of the states of Kedah and Kelantan have misbehaved. The two state governments, led by members of an Islamist party, seem to prefer selling their soul for filthy lucre than to uphold the Words of God Himself as they portray themselves to the masses.

Looking at the pictures of Lojing and Pedu above, what justification do you think the two states’ government have to cause such damage? Pedu is so far away from civilisation, and so is Lojing, that it would be incomprehensible that such a magnitude of destruction was done in the name of development. As believing God’s Messengers and His Prophets is part of the six Pillars of Islamic Faith, Muhammad (pbuh) saying below should serve as a reminder not just to the two states’ government, but also to ALL Muslims who support them without question:

“He who cuts a lote-tree [without justification], God will send him to Hellfire.” (At-Tirmidhi #5239

20130209-224932.jpg

On the eve of the Chinese New Year, Mukhriz Mahathir led a group of people to protest the destruction of the Pedu ecology and the mismanagement of natural resources by the Kedah state government.

Mukhriz reminded the 10,000 who congregated at the water catchment site that the Kedah state government had plundered the area for personal economic gains with little regard for the environment and how it would affect the people of the state. He then led them in a tree-planting effort to help revive the plundered land. Even legendary singer, Zainal Abidin, known for his support for the environment, was there to lend his support.

20130209-225609.jpg

This is the kind of effort that Muslims should support, one that preserves God’s Earth as required in the Quran. Islam encourages the planting of trees. When done intentionally for the sake of God, they are considered and rewarded as acts of worshipping. Jaber reported that the Prophet [S.A.A.S] said:

“No Muslim, who plants a shoot, except that whatever is eaten or stolen from it, or anyone obtains the least thing from it, is considered [like paying] almsgiving on his behalf until the Day of Judgment.”(Muslim)

Remember Allah’s warning:

“But whosoever turns away from My Message, verily for him is a life narrowed down …” Qur’an, 20:124

The million-dollar question now emerges for the Muslims who have been supporting PAS:

Should you support the one upholding acts favoured by Allah and Muhammad, or will you continue to support the ones who use Allah and Muhammad for their own interests?

The Case For God – Jesus Must Win

When I started writing this (The Case For God) series, I had in mind the difference between the Peninsula and Sabah and Sarawak in the acceptance of the use of “Allah” in the Malay Bible, or in any other material of Christian origin. To refresh, whilst the peoples of Sabah (North Borneo) and Sarawak were British subjects as they were under direct British rule and were therefore subjugated, the people of the Peninsula (Malaya), save for the Strait Settlements, were not. Therefore, the British dared not influence especially the Malays of Malaya to convert to Christianity.

Today, I read with alarm Helen Ang’s posting. There clearly is a call by Reverend Datuk Ng Moon Hing, Datuk Rev. chairman of the Christian Federation of Malaysia and the Bishop for Anglicans of West Malaysia, for Christians to “rise during the next general election, and vote in a government that will allow Christianity to flourish”,and in his own words:

…to…propagate one’s religion is allowed, without undue curtailment from the law, restrictions or even prohibition…

No, I did not make this up. In fact, you can view it yourself in Helen Ang’s posting above, or see it for yourself below:

20130202-135836.jpg

What Bishop Ng is seeking is for the amendment to Article 11 of the Federal Constitution, and in a blatant challenge to Article 11(4), the sanctity of Islam as the nation’s religion as specifically guaranteed by Article 3(1).

And among the reasons for the call to Malaysian Christians to rise is to prevent “a government which plays God or a government which exclude God“. According to him, “It is very dangerous and bad for the nation.” The former is a veiled reference to PAS, while the latter is the Barisan Nasional that they are eager to kick out.

Evangelism, my friends, cuts across the board and knows no boundaries. Traditions die and families get broken up. I have a family friend, an octogenarian Taoist, almost paralysed by a stroke, and whose daughters have all converted to Christianity. Two out of three daughters have migrated with their husband. His concern as life ebbs away is: which daughter would burn joss sticks and incense for him when he dies? It may seem a small thing for some, but a last grasp at salvation for others.

Maybe the people of this nation was not ready for the immediate openness introduced by the Abdullah government , which Abdullah later backtracked on with dire results for Barisan Nasional. The consequence of that is gutter politics and a more polarised Malaysia. And that has nurtured disrespect, even for the very law that has held this nation together.

The Barisan Nasional may not be the best legally-registered coalition around, but in the slightly over 55 years of existence, this nation has come to be a hero from zero. Of course, there is still a lot of room for improvements. And I mean A LOT!

But to vote in the alternative, in my strong opinion, is even worse.

The Thumped Motherfuckers

From a layman’s view, it all started with the delegates at the DAP CEC election rejecting ALL the Malay candidates, including one veteran Malay who has been trying to get a seat for the past quarter of a century, and a Chinese disguised as a Malay nominated to hoodwink especially, the DAP Malays.

Perhaps, all the nation’s Malays lambasted the DAP for claiming itself to be a multiracial party when the composition of its CEC does not reflect the Malaysian demography. Pulling the scupper off instead of plugging the hole, DAP fumbled again with the CEC election results by blaming Microsoft Excel for miscalculations and put the Chinese disguised as a Malay as the 20th spot winner of the CEC election.

Another miscalculated move, and this time without an Excel sheet to blame. Quickly Lim Guan Eng threw a red herring that hungry vultures quickly grabbed – the issue of using Allah to represent God in Bibles. This time, he went too far.

While the Malays from UMNO and PAS quarrelled over the Allah issue, DAP-friendly netizens quickly went on the roll to convince the Malay voters that Zairil Khir Johari is indeed a Malay. One even sent Blackberry messages to convince, Madam Logeswary, the wife of MIC Youth Chief, T Mohan, that Zairil was born in Malaysia as a Malay, and that “he’s known Zairil since they were kids.”

Before I go on commenting on the Allah issue, let me settle this Zairil issue for the dumb Malays first.

This is Zairil Khir Johari….not Zairil bin Khir Johari, just plain Zairil Khir Johari, whose mother married the late Khir Johari in February 1996. And if Christine Lim had shat Zairil nine months after that, Zairil would be 16 years and 2 months old now. But he isn’t.

20130119-164122.jpg

And no, Zairil was not born as Zairil. He was born in Hawaii, USA, and his real name is CHRISTOPHER! CHRISTOPHER ROSS LIM whose BIOLOGICAL FATHER is HOWARD LIM!

20130119-164353.jpg

But of course, if it isn’t DAP hoodwinking the public, then what is DAP’s raison d’être?

Okay, you have the Malays fighting each other on the Allah in the Bible issue. It was raised by Lim Guan Eng, UMNO went ballistics, and PAS supporters were quick to blame UMNO for bringing up the issue. Dementia? Or plain senile?

Only one person from PAS, the MP for Parit Buntar, made a personal comment on the issue enquiring Lim Guan Eng’s motive for bringing the issue up. Kudos to the only one with balls in PAS. Of course, DAP gave PAS an ultimatum to toe the line which PAS, seemingly now being the subjugated meek within Pakatan Rakyat, gladly did.

Then, to show that it has some power, and not just some whipping boy in the PR understanding (it isn’t a coalition), the PAS-led Kedah State government pulled a fast one by announcing a ban on female performers for the forthcoming Chinese New Year celebrations, and guess what? Patrick Teoh went berserk calling it a ruling made by “Quran-thumping motherfuckers.”

Maybe old Patrick Teoh needs to read more history before he becomes one. Sir Stamford Raffles, a hardcore Evangelist, in a letter to his cousin in 1815 mentioned how “Religion and laws are so united” in Muslim dominated areas that the introduction of Christian beliefs will bring about “much mischief, much bitterness of heart and contention”.

Again, you see UMNO supporters going to town with this, while the real motherfuckers (this is now an accepted journalistic term, isn’t it?) tucked their tail in between their hind legs, whimpered and scampered away. At the command of the real masters of that side of the rakyat’s fence, the Kedah State government retracted the ban. I stand corrected on this. I am just a layman.

Not even a week later, the PAS spiritual body that governs the party’s policies, the Majlis Syura PAS, issued a statement saying that non-Muslims cannot use the name Allah. Enter DAP, through the gradually-taming Lion of Jelutong, calling on PAS’s President, Abdul Hadi Awang, to ensure that the Majlis Syura PAS toes the Pakatan Rakyat line, while Azmin Ali of Parti Keadilan Rakyat was quick to say that the Majlis Syura PAS is not part of the Pakatan Rakyat.

And now, we have people in Penang distributing the Malay Bible to Malay schoolchildren in contrary to claims by the Christian quarter that the Bibles are not meant for distribution to the Malays. Read more about it here.

Isn’t it obvious that the all-corrupted UMNO is consistently defending Islam while PAS continues to behave like the thumped motherfuckers?

Think, people. Think.

Disclaimer: all profanities are printed for effect.

The Case for God – Part 3

In the previous installment I discussed the concept of Trinity to explain how it undermines the divinity of God according to Christianity, thus making the application of the name Allah for a such God an overkill and not appropriate for the actual meaning of Allah.

As mentioned in the previous installment, too, I find the argument that Allah is the common denominator for God in this region a joke. The common denominator in the Indo-Malay speaking world would be Tuhan instead of Allah. However, Allah is the term that is inside the Quran for as long as time can remember. I cannot say the same for the Bible as it no longer reflects the Old Testament. Anyhow, you cannot find the name Allah inside the Old Testament. Just a Hebrew name that does not even resemble both the Arabic and Roman spelling of Allah. Even so, Elohim as called by the Jews, refers to The God that has no Son, nor an equivalent called the Holy Spirit. Mind you, even the Jews are totally against the concept of deifying a human being. I am sure my wife’s Iban relatives who are Christian would understand the term “Tuhan” without any problem since Bahasa Malaysia is derived from the Malay language, and the term for God in Malay is Tuhan.

We have seen the subtle tactics of missionaries of those days in the first installment and how their modus operandi is now refined by present-day missionaries. This blogger had had the opportunity to meet up with Muslims proselytized during the month of Ramadhan of 2012 and was told of the very fine and subtle methods used to proselytize Muslims in Malaysia. Back in the late 19th and early 20th century, the Malay people were not only bombarded with the Malay Bible, but also Christian publications in Malay such as Buletin Ariffin, Cermin Mata, Sahabat and Warta Melayu. Little has changed, but made only better. Recently, Johor’s Department of Islamic Affairs, together with the Home Ministry, confiscated 250 Christian literature in the Malay language. Imagine these books having titles such as Kaabah, Mengenal Rasul and Wahyu Illahi. With the state of Johor having around 58 percent Muslims, 2 percent Christians, and 40 percent other religions, who were these Malay literature targeting? Ibans? Christians? Chinese? Read more about the attempt to proselytize Muslims in BigDog’s post.

So, what about the use of Allah by Christians in Indonesia, Egypt etc.?

Tell me how good has that been for Indonesia and Egypt? How well do the Muslims and Christians get along in those countries? The very reason we do not have beheading of Christians in Kelantan or lynching of Muslims in Sarawak is because we do not step on each others toes.

But I guess, for the purpose of gaining support and diverting the attention of voters from issues currently plaguing the DAP so close tot the next general elections, Lim Guan Eng raised the “use of Allah in Bible” issue again. And the Muslims in the Pakatan Rakyat chose to keep quiet about it except for the MP for Parit Buntar, Mujahid Yusof Rawa who questioned Guan Eng’s motive. I suppose for most PR Muslims, it is okay for Muslims to be proselytize as long as they get to wrestle power from the present government. To cloud the vision of their supporters from their internal issues of corruption, cronyism and nepotism, they decided to rally the support of the mostly Chinese Christians by raising the Allah issue again, knowing very well it would somehow hurt the relationship between UMNO and the Christians within the Barisan Nasional. I hope no fool would fall for this treachery.

What is the purpose of using the name Allah in Bibles, having a Malay Bible, and Christian publications in Malay if not to proselytize the Muslims? With all due respect to my Christian friends, why hasn’t the Vatican been using Allah or Elohim? Why do they stick to the name they know? And what is the most familiar term for God here in Malaysia if not Tuhan?

Like I mentioned in the first instalment. I am called John, and wherever I go, I will still be called John. No one in Germany would call me Johann, no Arab would call me Yahya, no one in Sweden would call me Jan or Jon. So, if your common denominator is Tuhan, call as it is. Not adopt from some other language. Or else, I would question why aren’t you calling God “Deus.” Please don’t fall for the politics of hate propagated by those who are irresponsible.

We have been living together, respecting each other for more than five decades peacefully except for one dark moment in 1969. Let us not let the political ambition of some to destroy the peace and prosperity that we have maintained for so long.

May I remind the Christians, in particular the Catholics about what is mentioned in the Catholic Encyclopedia about Allah:

Let it be noted that although Allah is an Arabic term, it is used by all Moslems, whatever be their language, as the name of God

If you still cannot see that, then there will soon be trouble in this peaceful nation. So, who is not respecting who?

The Case for God – Part 2

In the previous installment we see the difference in how Christianity was spread throughout the Indo-Malay world. In this installment, we discuss the concept of Trinity and why some Christians now continue to reject it.

Allah The One God

Since Allah is the common denominator to refer to God in the Arabic-speaking world, why is it then a problem for Malay Muslims to accept its use in the Malaysian Bibles?

First of all, the common denominator for God in the Indo-Malay speaking world is Tuhan, not Allah.   Like mentioned in paragraphs above, the general Christian world believes in the Trinity where God is the Father, God is the Son, and God is the Holy Spirit.  Muslims have a problem here thinking that this is all about polytheism, but really in technical terms it is not.  But neither is it monotheism as the Jews and Muslims hold on to.  In the Trinity concept, while God is all those three persons, the Father is NOT the Son or the Holy Spirit; the Son is NOT the Father or the Holy Spirit; neither the Holy Spirit is the other two.  It is the concept of one deity in three persons.

The problem with Muslim scholars in Malaysia is that their studies are so focused on Islam that they fail at comparative religious studies and often make opinions based on what they think is being practiced in other religions.  How many other Muslims read the Bible to know that after the publishing of the King James Bible in 1611, there have been other versions including the “new version”, the “children version”, and the “American version” (I’ll call them KJV in short)? How many know of the various changes made to God’s words in the Bible that appears in the KJV of today?

Mind you, the KJV was translated and printed by Thomas Nelson Publishers.  In 1969, the publishers was purchased by Sam Moore, who started by selling Bibles door-to-door to finance his pursuit of a medical degree.  He vowed to make Thomas Nelson the leading publisher of Bibles again. In 1976, he initiated the creation of the new Bible translation calling it the New King James Version (NKJV) that propelled Thomas Nelson back to the number one spot.

Hence, the NKJV Bible is more a human dogma than a collection of divine words.  Some versions has had the word “He” changed to “It” to accommodate a politically-correct gender-unbiased view.  Personally, I would use “It” to refer either to things that are not alive, or to beings other than the human.  The Quran, on the other hand, has never been changed, and the divinity of its content unquestioned.

The concept of Trinity was also alien to some Christians.  It was during the First Council of Nicea in 325AD , the first ecumenical council of the Church that was convened by the Roman Emperor, Constantine I, that an attempt to get the Christian world to agree on the divinity of Jesus Christ.  The main topic was to discuss the teachings of a Christian presbyter in Egypt called Arius, who focused on Godhead, which emphasized the Father’s divinity over the Son.  He endorsed the following doctrine:

  1. That the Son, or the Word (Logos) and the Father were not of the same essence (ousia);
  2. That the Son was a created being (ktisma);
  3. That the worlds were created through the Word, then he must have existed before all time;
  4. However, the Word did not exist, before he was begotten by the Father.

For his belief, and for refusing to sign the Creed and accepting the divinity of Christ, Arius and two other Church leaders were banished, prompting others to sign.  One must remember that Emperor Constantine I was never a baptized Christian until he was on his deathbed and the word ecumenical means world, in reference to the Roman Empire dominating what they saw was the world to them.

The Arian church lives on in some parts of the world, notably in the Eastern Christianity domain, the Oriental Orthodox.  Due to the differences, the Church of Rome and the Orthodox Church were no longer in communion, although rivalry between the two have all but diminished since the Great Schism, but the latter still rejects the dogmatic definition published by the Pope, or by an ecumenical council, and also rejects the Council of Chalcedon.

The introduction of  the Filioque by the Western Church into the Latin version of the Nicene Creed without holding a council or gaining consent from the Eastern Churches contributed greatly to this schism. The Filioque is a phrase that states the Holy Spirit as proceeding from “the Father and the Son”, while the Eastern Churches have always held on to the fact that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, and has the same status as the Son.

As such, God the Father in this concept does not qualify itself to be interpreted as Allah to be used in the Bible. God, as portrayed in the Trinity concept, does not stand, and cannot stand alone.  The concept of God as a Supreme Being that exists even before time does not seem to hold true when it comes to the Christian interpretation of God, and although the Jews, Christians and Muslims are people of the book, only the Christians have created God as an image, whereas, especially in Islam, God is beyond human comprehension.  Simply put, if you think that it is impossible to imagine God, even that imagination and thought come after His creation and is still nowhere near describing Allah.  Both the Jews and the Muslims reject the hypostasis nature of God as projected by the Christians.

Therefore, in my humble opinion, and without prejudice to my Christian friends, God the Father should be Tuhan Bapak; God the Son should be Tuhan Anak; and God the Holy Spirit should be Tuhan Ruhul Kudus.

In my next installment, we will have a look at the common denominator and what has become of it, and what I think of this whole issue.

The Case for God

I am called John.

John F SeaDemon.

I may be called Yahya or Yahya Shaitan al-Bahri  if I were in an Arab country somewhere, but I doubt John F Kennedy would have been called Yahya F Kennedy had he gone to Saudi Arabia or even Egypt.  In fact, he would still be called Jack…or John.  But for some Christians in Malaysia, especially in the Peninsula Malaysia, God is called Allah. Maybe it is time for me to address the Logos behind the Theos in this theological subject.

The Language behind Allah

There has been many attempts at explaining the origin of the name Allah, and the similarity the name has to the Jewish word, Elohim (Elochim).  Allah is derived from two distinct Arabic words: Al (The), and Ilah (God), to describe the Supreme Being, the One God, and the word Allah, in Arabic takes a masculine form.

The Hebrew equivalent would be Eloah.  However, Eloah is the female word for God.  In order for the name to have a masculine form, the name Eloah is given a plural form, -im, making it masculine.

However, the Catholic Encyclopedia does not recognise Elohim as the Hebrew word for the God of Israel, but says that it could have been referred to an earlier polytheistic culture’s deity.

In Arabic, a female form of Allah would be Al-Lat.  Interestingly, Al-Lat during pre-Islamic times refers to one of three goddesses (female) whose shrine and temple was built in the city of Taif in Saudi Arabia.  She was a daughter of the Supreme God, Allah, along with her sisters Manat and al-Uzza.  Here you can see that even polytheistic pre-Islamic Arabs had a Supreme God called Allah.  Hence, if you ask me, an equivalent of Al-Lat in Hebrew would be Eloah, and not The One Supreme God. You can clearly see the difference between Elohim and Allah. While the former had to undergo a gender transformation, the Arabic word Allah is free of grammatical structure and corrupted meanings.

Of course, Christians in Malaysia argue that Allah is a common denominator for God for both Arab Christians and Muslims.  We’ll come back to that in a while.

The Local History behind Allah

Let us remember one thing.  Malaya (Peninsula Malaysia) was never colonised as a whole by the British, save for Penang, Malacca, and Singapore, while Sabah and Sarawak came under direct British colonial rule. Penang was acquired through a deal to lease the island made between the British East India Company and the Sultan of Kedah; Malacca was acquired from the Dutch through the Treaty of Bencoolen; and Singapore was included in the Treaty of Bencoolen by making the severely weakened Dutch to not object to the British occupation of Singapore.  The people of these three places, together with Sabah and Sarawak, became British subjects.

Through treaties with the Sultans on the Peninsula, the British helped administer the State of the respective Sultans, while the Sultans remained as the supreme head of these sovereign states.  The administration of Islam came under the purview of the respective Sultans as the protectors of the state’s religion.

So, why does Indonesia have Bibles that use the word Allah to describe God?

Unlike Malaya, Indonesia was a nation of conquered people.  Hello! Remember the Dutch?  When Douglas MacArthur met Emperor Hirohito, he purposely stood next to the Emperor to show the Japanese people that the Emperor was not a demi-God.  Victors get to do as they please, and this is probably the same case as the Ladang Rakyat issue in Kelantan.  The Dutch conquered parts of Indonesia beginning in 1595, and as part of its attempt to call the Malay diaspora in Indonesia to Christianity, the Book of Matthew was translated into the Indonesian language in 1629; and where the Dutch set foot, other religions were formally prohibited although Chinese temples as well as mosques remained in existence.

Missionaries, too, made headway in Sabah and Sarawak, converting the populace to Christianity.  Sir Stamford Raffles recommended to Rev. Thomas Raffles (Buitenzorg, 10th February 1815, Mss. Eur. F.202/6) that Borneo be given vigorous campaigns by the missionaries as “the island is inhabited by a race scarcely emerged from Barbarism.”

This does not mean that the Malays were free from attempts to proselytize them.  In fact, Raffles, in a letter to his cousin in 1815 mentioned how “Religion and laws are so united” in Muslim dominated areas that the introduction of Christian beliefs will bring about “much mischief, much bitterness of heart and contention”.

Raffles contended that Christianity must be packaged in a new form and be conveyed to the Muslim majority through a gradual approach. The “pagans”, on the other hand, required no stratagems.  His methods include the establishment of missionary schools where the Malays are taught to read and write in their own language.  Then he set up printers to publish books in Malay.  Missionaries were largely responsible for this effort with the help of local agents, and the most famous of these agents was a chap called Abdullah Abdul Kadir who is better known as Munshi (Teacher) Abdullah.  He and other Munshis taught Christian missionaries the Malay language.  His role went beyond that and became the first Muslim in South East Asia to translate the Bible into the Malay language, that he became the target of his contemporaries who called him Abdullah Paderi (Pastor Abdullah) among other things.

It is interesting to note, however, that Raffles never once attempted to convert Malays in the Federated and Unfederated Malay States where the Sultans rule and guard the interest of the religion of Islam.  This is because it would be foolhardy to anger the Sultans whom the British had a treaty with, by undermining the sanctity of Islam by converting their subjects.  In the case of Raffles, he only focused his efforts on those who are British subjects.

Here we see the subtle tactics of the Christian missionaries during Raffles’s times, and the Malay lackeys who colluded with them.  We can see the similarities in events of nowadays.  But the above is also why we have Allah in the Bibles of Indonesia and Sabah and Sarawak, but not in Peninsula Malaysia.

In the next installment I will discuss on how the concept of Trinity came about and why it was opposed by some Christians, and about Allah as the common denominator for God in the Arab-speaking world.