What Is going on, will ISA be used?

[denver]

So if the marriage between a Muslim and "ahli kitab" is allowed, by the Quran, if they practice accordingly, then how come the ulamas' have the power to decide that this is not allowed in Malaysia?

Actually, the example that I gave is for Malaysia. For example, a Christian who practice the old testament and of direct descendants can marry a muslim. This is the same for the majority of Islamic country, although some Middle East country may be more strict in this. Indonesia is the odd one out, being the very few Islamic country that adopts a variation to this teachings.

How come ulama has the power? Every religion has its "governing body". For example, for the Roman Catholics, they have the Vatican, or The Holy See, which is the governing body of the Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican City headed by the Pope. And the chain goes down, with every country has their own "governing body".

For Islam and the Malaysia, it is the council of ulama's. Most Islamic countries also have their council of ulama's. The practice of Islam in different countries may vary due to the different branches and teachings that they adopt. This is the same for other religions as well.

An interesting case study would be about the ruling of gay Priests in the US and other countries. Some countries allowed it, some dont. All decided by the respective governing body of the religion. You can find out more through google if you want.

[bslee]

Actually, the example that I gave is for Malaysia. For example, a Christian who practice the old testament and of direct descendants can marry a muslim. This is the same for the majority of Islamic country, although some Middle East country may be more strict in this. Indonesia is the odd one out, being the very few Islamic country that adopts a variation to this teachings.

The blunt truth is all East Asian with Christian faith (because all were converts sometime earlier) DON'T qualify in that category!...no joke and period!

[denver]

The blunt truth is all East Asian with Christian faith (because all were converts sometime earlier) DON'T qualify in that category!...no joke and period!

Yes, you are correct.

[isarahim]

So if the marriage between a Muslim and "ahli kitab" is allowed, by the Quran, if they practice accordingly, then how come the ulamas' have the power to decide that this is not allowed in Malaysia?

Well as also RPK pointed out recently, Malaysian official 'Islam' is, in fact, a deviationist teaching. And since most Malays seldom read the Qur'an and rather follow those ulamas blindly, they do not realise the difference.

[denver]

Well as also RPK pointed out recently, Malaysian official 'Islam' is, in fact, a deviationist teaching. And since most Malays seldom read the Qur'an and rather follow those ulamas blindly, they do not realise the difference.

Sorry, but what nonsense has the RPK been saying about Islam?

All the different branches of Islam - the Shia, Sunni and and their respective schools of law such as hambali, hanafi, maliki, and even small sects like al-Arqam, are all based on the Quran. What is the difference in all of these different teachings? Interpretations. So what the RPK is saying is that, they, a political party, can interpret the Quran better than the council of ulama's in Malaysia, and probably better than the council of ulama in Saudi Arabia too because Malaysia follows Saudi. And teachings other than those preached by RPK is a "deviationist", implying that its wrong. Only Islam according to RPK's interpretation is right. Do you realise how ridiculous this is?

Maybe, just maybe it is not the majority of malays that follow the governing council of ulama's who are blind, maybe its the few who follows the word of a political party.

[isarahim]

So what the RPK is saying is that, they, a political party, can interpret the Quran better than the council of ulama's in Malaysia, and probably better than the council of ulama in Saudi Arabia too because Malaysia follows Saudi.

This is your own invention. There was no statement to this effect in the article.

Only Islam according to RPK's interpretation is right. Do you realise how ridiculous this is? Maybe, just maybe it is not the majority of malays that follow the governing council of ulama's who are blind, maybe its the few who follows the word of a political party.

I'm not defending RPK in general but I do not think that is what he meant. You could bring it up on his site. He will usually answer. In any case that's not what I meant.

My own view is that, yes, there are numerous ideas in Malaysian (and Saudi) variants which are either not supported or fundamentally against statements in the Qur'an. From material details to interpretations. Even Hanafi school as it's used in Saudi (and to lesser extent here) is not pure, but influenced by Wahabbists and others.

Lastly, I think you should take a look at who's actually sitting in the council of ulama and which party they belong to! Also take a look at their various statements the last year or so, and you - if you have a trace of common sense and human virtue left which I think you do - will see TRUE ridiculousness.

[denver]

This is your own invention. There was no statement to this effect in the article.

Not invention, but interpretation based on your earlier statements. When you say things like "Malaysia's Islam is a deviation", followed by general sweeping statement like "most people don't read Quran, they just follow the ulamas blindly", well, whether intentionally or unintentionally, you are implying quite a number of things. I was just responding to what I thought you (or the RPK) were implying from your statements.

I'm not defending RPK in general but I do not think that is what he meant. You could bring it up on his site.

No, I don't hink I will. He can believe and practice whatever (variations of Islam) he wants, I have no problem with that. But I do have a problem if he or anybody else starts saying or implying that his interpretation is right and everybody else is wrong.

Lastly, I think you should take a look at who's actually sitting in the council of ulama and which party they belong to! Also take a look at their various statements the last year or so, and you - if you have a trace of common sense and human virtue left which I think you do - will see TRUE ridiculousness.

You seem to be implying that because certain ulamas are aligned to a certain political party, that their rulings must be skewed to favour that party. If I read you correctly, this is such a big accusation (in the eyes of Islam) and I will not respond to this, mainly because I do not have all the information to agree nor disagree. Maybe you could PM me some of these statements that you are referring to.

[isarahim]

When you say things like "Malaysia's Islam is a deviation"

Well, I can only say that I've heard the same thing being said by foreign ulamas/sheikhs.

But I do have a problem if he or anybody else starts saying or implying that his interpretation is right and everybody else is wrong.

I think you need to understand the basic mechanisms of debate. In a debate you present your view on a topic matter and then you open for other people's views which may agree or disagree with your view in whole or in part. It is not about claiming or implying that everyone else is wrong. But by testing your view with those that disagree with you, you will be able to identify the strengths and weaknesses of your view.

The early days of Islam had a lot of debate. That's why Islam was strong. Today, debate is stifled because people are taught that ulamas and other scholars are authorities which you should not question. People are being told to shut up because even though they might have studied the Quran deeper, than some ulamas, or perhaps just presenting human common sense, they are told that the act of presenting a different view is the same as claiming to know more than the ulama. I think this is fundamentally wrong and a reason why Islam is in a state of crisis today.

You seem to be implying that because certain ulamas are aligned to a certain political party, that their rulings must be skewed to favour that party. If I read you correctly, this is such a big accusation (in the eyes of Islam) and I will not respond to this, mainly because I do not have all the information to agree nor disagree.

Well just go an pray in any Selangor or WP mosque these days and good chances are that about 1/3 to 1/2 of your time will be spent listening to a political speech...whereas praying in a Singapore mosque will be praying only. In any case, giving a complete list of this year's crop of umnlamas requires far more work than I have time to spend, but let's just list a few popular areas:
- Royals as religious heads
- Racial based privileges
- Dogs
- Alcohol as a substance
- JAIS
- Corruption
- Apostacy

[firefox]

the so call experts of religions have complicated the holy books to suit their own agenda so much so now brother kills brother.

[denver]

Well, I can only say that I've heard the same thing being said by foreign ulamas/sheikhs.

And who are these foreign ulamas/sheiks exactly? High ranking Saudi and Middle East countries' ulamas have also said that Malaysia is an exemplary moderate Islamic state.

I think you need to understand the basic mechanisms of debate.

I know the mechanism of debate. But I wasn't responding to a debate, I was responding to what seems to be a statement of malicious intent. A debate is meant to be constructive, to bring good. I would not have a problem if you had presented your case openly and neutrally, with relevant supporting facts for discussion. Instead, you started off stating that Malaysia's Islam is wrong (i.e. conclusion has been reached, no more debate), then proceeded to blast the malays for being blind. And from what I can see, the basis for that statement hinge mostly on an article by the RPK whose merit is at best, debatable (no pun intended). It may warrant further discussion and "testing of ideas" as you would call it, but it is far from conclusive.

To be honest, I am a bit wary on things like this. I have seen one too many of these "small groups" claiming their interpretation of Islam is "right" or "better" than what the majority is practicing. Remember that Al-Arqam and Jemaah Islamiah is in this category too.

Well just go an pray in any Selangor or WP mosque these days and good chances are that about 1/3 to 1/2 of your time will be spent listening to a political speech...whereas praying in a Singapore mosque will be praying only. In any case, giving a complete list of this year's crop of umnlamas requires far more work than I have time to spend, but let's just list a few popular areas:

Again, there is not enough facts for me to agree nor disagree. I will not condemn or think-ill of another person(s) without sufficient proof or at least listening to both side of the story, especially if the subject is religion. And I am open to different opinions. Did I not ask you for more detailed information about this matter? Information which I hope is sufficient would sway my opinion one way or the other? So far all I see are general statements which can be refuted in many ways (its just that I can't be bothered). I figured either you probably have more information that you have not shared here, and/or you already already reached a conclusion and nothing will change that.

the so call experts of religions have complicated the holy books to suit their own agenda so much so now brother kills brother.

Religion, be it Christian or Islam, has been twisted to suit individual's need since hundreds/thousands of years ago, from the times of the mass killings during the Crusades, the witchhunts, Nazi (Positive Christianity), to the whole 9/11 thing. So long as there is religion, there will always be small groups of people who will try to twist it to their own needs.