Harrussani and Article 3 (and no it's not a K-Pop Band name)

I just came back from a very nice honeymoon. And what do I find on the papers while I was gone for a while?

This:

KUALA LUMPUR, July 27 — The Federal Constitution should be amended to exempt Muslims from the legal provisions granting a mother equal rights to raise her children in relation to religious education, Perak Mufti Tan Sri Harussani Zakaria (picture) has said. The conservative Islamic cleric’s proposal came in the wake Hindu mother M. Indira Gandhi’s legal victory earlier this week to reverse the unilateral conversion of her three young children to Islam by her estranged Muslim convert husband.

“That provision (chapter on child’s religion) should be amended or added by excluding Muslims,” Harussani was quoted as saying by Malay daily Utusan Malaysia today, referring specifically to Articles 3, 5 and 11 of the country’s highest law. Articles 3, 5 and 11 relate to the religion of the federation, liberty of the person and freedom of religion respectively. Articles 3, 5 and 11 relate to the religion of the federation, liberty of the person and freedom of religion respectively. “In the Constitution now, Islam is only for practice but not from the legal aspect as it is not implemented.

That’s what’s difficult. Laws that are in conflict with the Constitution are dropped, that becomes perplexing,” Harussani was quoted as saying. According to the mufti, non-Muslims should not feel discontent if the provisions in the Constitution were to be amended as he proposed, as they had agreed to a social contract and had accepted the Constitution as a condition that allowed them to live in the country before Independence. In a landmark ruling on Thursday, the High Court quashed the conversion certificates of Indira’s three children, declaring it unconstitutional to unilaterally force a minor to embrace a different faith. Harussani also appeared to suggest that legal disputes on the religious status of a child when it involved Islam should be brought before a syariah court even if one of the parties is a non-Muslim. “Should be heard at the syariah court but because it involved Hindus, the case cannot be heard at the syariah court, they become confused. “Have to ask the Attorney-General why the Constitution does not allow us to hear the non-Muslims,” 

Utusan reported him as saying. Custodial tussles in cases of unilateral child conversions have been a growing concern over the years and provide a high-profile glimpse of the concerns of Malaysia’s religious minorities over the perceived dominance of Islam in the country. It also highlights the complications of Malaysia’s dual legal systems where Muslims are bound by both civil and syariah laws, the latter of which do not apply to or recognise non-Muslims. Right-leaning Muslims have argued that the National Fatwa Council had met in 2009 and decided that any underaged child must be placed under the care of the parent that has embraced Islam should a marital dispute arise with a non-Muslim spouse."

God knows it is difficult to get angry after spending time in Honeymoon-Land (or rather cloud 9). But I will try my best to get angry because when it comes to the matter of human rights, when it is so much as suggested that it be trampled on, we SHOULD get angry. There are by the way, so many “shoulds” in Harussani’s statement but the one “should” that is left out that no one dares to speak out is “He SHOULD have think twice before taking that halal tapai before releasing statements that sounded like makes no difference whether it came out from his mouth or the other end”.

Why I say he should shut the eff up in the first place is that, had he done that, I will not have read his statement and I wouldn’t have gotten angry about how he finds human rights to be easily disrespected and disregarded by hiding behind his authority and using Allah’s name by proxy. I’m sure there are many who shares the same sentiments as me. The only difference is, not many dare point out the big pink elephant present in the room.

Now, before someone dispense a suicide bomber to me, let’s sit and discuss this rationally, for in the Quran, it is stated that people who do not use their brains deserve the effect from the cause the cast upon themselves.

10:100 It is not for a person to acknowledge except by God's leave. He casts the affliction upon those who do not reason.

So, before affliction is cast upon us all, let’s start reasoning. Article 3, 11 and 13 guarantees us, the Rakyat, freedom of religion, Muslims included. As a Muslim, we have the Quran as the prime source. One can follow the hadith only if it does not supersede the word of God, which is the Quran. This is common sense. And what did God say regarding the issue of Islam?

2:256 There is no compulsion in the system; (deen) the proper way has been made clear from the wrong way. Whoever rejects the transgressors, and acknowledges God, has grasped the firm branch that will never break

God is Hearer, Knower. Applying 10:100, the word “THERE IS NO COMPULSION IN THE DEEN” meaning there is no compulsion in the way of life, which is what Islam is about. Islam is a way of life, not a religion. Please try to reason as to what the difference between a religion and a deen is. So what is it that these imbeciles, who fancies rulings like apostasy and what not, don’t get into their alleged brains? Which part of the translation they do not decipher? Is it not crystal clear?

No? Not clear? So what was God thinking when He said, 14:4 We did not send any messenger except in the language of his people, so to make it clear to them. But God misguides whom He wills, and He guides whom He wills. He is the Noble, the Wise. Of course you will hear garbage about abrogation and blah blah blah, but here’s the thing. Humans have agendas, it’s in our genes and how one interprets the Quran depends on these agendas.

You want to conquer the world of course you need majority, the more idiots in bulks, the better, so of course these people will reject that “There is no compulsion is Islam”…it’s political suicide!! But if you are a compassionate kind who believe that Islam is a beautiful way of life and that the beauty in itself will attract people who search for such beauty in their lives, then you will accept 2:256 without cooking up illogical unjustified not to mention ridiculous arguments to distort this simple meaning so as to fit your own agenda into it.

But here’s the thing. Allah said in


39:18 :“Those who listen to the Word then follow the best thereof; those are they whom Allah has guided, and those it is who are the men of understanding.”

Applying 10:100, 2:256, 39:18 and the whole of Quran in totality, tell me, how will you understand, wait…let me rephrase that, “how will you choose to understand” pertaining to the matter of freedom of choosing Islam as a way of life. And here’s another thing, (there is almost always another thing when it comes to Islam)). If your answer is “I leave it to the Knowledgeable”, then BHAM!!! There you go…you are one of the statistics who are the victim of brainwashing so as for you not to or scared of using your own god given brains. You’ve made some gatekeeper of Islam very happy. Happy because now they own you. They own your mind and can now tell you what is right and what is wrong without you having the right to think for yourself. Happy because you are one of the statistics who falls into the

6:116 : "If you obey the majority of those on earth they will lead you away from God's path; that is because they follow conjecture"

And that is because they only guess So you think this surah and verse is referring to the “infidels”? Think again. It’s ironic though. The very people who are paid in money and perks, comprising of our money are the same people who are inserting sometimes ridiculous shit served on a silver platter claiming it is from our Creator. When clearly it is written in the Quran:

36:21 : "Obey those who ask no wages of you (for themselves), and who are rightly guided."


Again, depending on what agenda and whose side you are on, there are many interpretation of this surah and verse.  There are many who are rightly guided yet they don’t ask for a single cent dispensing their knowledge because they have actual jobs they go to everyday to sponsor their lives. Like what my kid use to tell me when she was in her early teen, “Do the math mommy” So where does all this ranting lead us to?

A question.

Why are we, when it comes to Islam, become somewhat scared to speak up and chose to remain reticent instead? Is it because we do not know our own religion, other than what is fed to us and we swallowed it without ever questioning it, or because we are too lazy to think or because we genuinely believe that depriving a human being of their right to choose is justified. If you say yes to either one, then I have just pointed out to you ONE of the problems in Islam. As for those who said “yes” to all questions, then I have just been made into a pessimist and what I see is that there is no other way to go from here except to enrol into the Club of Doom.