A response to those who consider the laws of apostasy barbaric
������ ����� ���������� �����������
A response to those who consider the laws of apostasy barbaric
Muslims are often accused of following an outdated system which has not yielded to the
realities of modern times. We are told that all major systems of thought and religious
practices have modernised to meet the changing values and the challenges of modernity.
Our response to this is often defensive at best and more realistically apologetic.
Whenever the ideas of Islam are placed under the microscope by non-Muslims, they are
subjecting its value system in a dock based upon the criteria of their systems. Why
should we as Muslims not react to this approach in a manner that behoves a people who
resolutely accept that Islam is correct and does not need justifying? How often do we
subject their systems to the same scrutiny and demand they justify their position.
They demand a reform for Islam which we reject, but we must demand a radical change in
the systems they adopt and carry to the world as the only model for any �civilised�
people. The intellectual fight back starts here; from this
day on we cannot and will not allow for the attacks of the Western Capitalist nations
to go unheeded. Our response will be forthright and unequivocal, not from the position
of equality of our civilisations nor the acceptance of the premise that there is no
absolute truth. It must be in a manner that recognises that the corrupted roots of any
system which is formulated by man is prone to contradiction and vagueness. Such a
system elevates values which conform to the basest of instincts and adopts positions
which are diametrically opposed, as well as flawed criteria which benefit those who
are able to wield power over the impoverished and weak.
One idea that requires a response is the attack on aspects of the Shar�iah as
barbaric. They claim that the standards for acceptability over 1400 years ago are
different from the acceptable norms today. Therefore they say it is barbaric to stone
the adulterer and lash the fornicator and cut the hand of the thief and - most
controversially in their eyes � to kill the apostate. There I�ve said it. I can just
imagine the human rights organisations rallying their capitalist brethren and the
defeatist Muslims cringing. Yet it is an irrevocable command from the Creator, without
distortion, abrogation or capitulation. The Messenger of Allah SalAllahu alaihi
wasallam said:
�� ���� ���� �������
"Whoever changes his religion, kill him". (Bukhari)
This goes against the Capitalist grain. How can someone be killed for choosing to
reject Islam, does this not go against the concept of Freedom of Religion? And what
about the Qur�anic injunction,
��� ��������� ��� �������� ��� ���������� ��������� ���� �������� ������ ��������
������������� ��������� �������� ������ ����������� ������������� ����������� ���
��������� ����� �������� ������� �������
"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from error: whoever
rejects Taghut and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold that
never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things." [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 256]
Doesn�t this safeguard the right of Freedom of religion? The simple answer to this is
it doesn�t. This verse relates to the rejection of forcibly converting someone to
Islam against their will not to a Muslim who rejects Islam and becomes an apostate
(Murtaad).
Instead of defending or sidelining this command, we must take the fight back to the
Capitalist West.
In Britain for example the death penalty for Murder was only abolished in 1965, but
few even know that it remained on the statute books for killing a member of the
British Royal family and for acts of treason including military offences until 1998.
Therefore theoretically up until 1998, a person could be executed for an act against
the state.
Aside from the states which carry the death penalty for civilian crimes, the US also
has a stipulation for execution of military servicemen during wartime. There are 15
offences which carry the death penalty in wartime, they include desertion and
disobeying the orders of an officer.
What this tells us is that there is an acceptance in the US and until recently in the
UK that the one who betrays his country ought to be killed. The reaction amongst the
lower sections of Britain�s tabloid press of the Muslims who were accused of fighting
in Afghanistan was to label them as traitors that ought to be tried as such, some even
called for them to be killed if they were found guilty, yet in the eyes of tabloids
they had already been tried and found guilty in the court of tabloid public opinion.
Therefore there is an actual acceptance in the US and a wide base of opinion in
British society as a result of the sensationalist press that the one who betrays �his
country� ought to be punished severely, whilst the one who breaks the covenant with
his Creator ought to be allowed to practice his personal freedom. Why does there exist
such a disparity in their thinking, surely if they believe in freedom it must extend
to all cases and not only to those that suit their views.
They adopt these disparate positions and are not ashamed despite there originating
from the fallible, how can we disregard or be ashamed of the ahkaam of Allah subhanahu
wa ta�aala despite the fact that they are divine in origin. How dare we argue on the
position of weakness? We must be forthright and unflinchingly adhere to Islam when we
engage in discussion.
O' Muslims it is not allowed for the Muslims to dilute the pristine Islamic thinking,
believing it will contribute to the acceptance of Islam by the masses. Allah subhanahu
wa ta�aala revealed this Deen as it is and as guardians of the prophetic message we
are obliged to deliver it as it was intended. The manner by which we present Islam
will either be a source of happiness or dread when we meet our Rabb for
accountability. Surely changing Islam to suit the whims of the people angers Allah and
pits us against Him.
Muslims must present all of the Islamic rules and laws in the pure and pristine manner
that they were conveyed by the Messenger of Allah salAllahu alaihi wasallam. We should
not hesitate to present them as part of Allah subhanahu wa ta�aala�s Deen, which is
based on a completely different fundamental philosophy to Capitalism - while the laws
in the West emanate from the mind of mankind and are constantly in a state of flux,
the laws of Islam are from Allah (subhanhu wa ta�aala) and are constant and
unchanging. In addition to presenting the Islamic rules, we should also highlight the
inconsistencies in the Western system and the injustice that mankind faces under the
yoke of secularism. We need to turn the tables and put Capitalism, not Islam, in the
dock.
==================================================
"And what is wrong with you that you fight not in the Cause of Allah, and for those
weak, ill-treated and oppressed among men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our
Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You
one who will protect, and raise for us from You one who will help." (The Quran 4:75)
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/TcOolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Memetakan Tumpat dalam IT.
http://edi.bebto.com
http://panduan.7p.com
E-mel web base percuma untuk warga Tumpat
http://tumpat.mail.everyone.net/email/scripts/loginuser.pl
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Tumpat/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
