A MOTHER’S RIGHTS: No religious basis to convert baby

A beautiful letter to the editor appeared in the NST today, the 28^th April 2009.

I particularly like the last few paragraphs of the letter:

“Patmanathan is a bad Muslim if he does not hand back Prasana Diksa to her mother and does not pay compensation to Indira for looking after the baby and for breastfeeding her for two years. Being breastfed by a Hindu mother does not make the baby an infidel. She is still eligible to convert to Islam after she grows up and becomes an adult.

Patmanathan himself drank the breast milk from his Hindu mother and consumed food and drinks, probably prohibited by Islamic law, until he reached the age of 40 before he suddenly decided to convert to Islam.

He should not impose his Islam-ness on his children. Let them be what they want to be like he did. He grew up as a Hindu boy, a Hindu youth and then a Hindu adult before he changed his Hinduism to Islam after he had probably encountered problems in his marriage.

I do not support non-Muslims who convert to Islam just because they want to run away from their responsibilities as husbands or wives or because they want to marry Muslim women or Muslim men.”

The last paragraph do reflect what is happening at present.

The full letter:

A MOTHER’S RIGHTS: No religious basis to convert baby

By : DR IBRAHIM ABU BAKAR, Bangi

I READ the case of Indira Gandhi and her struggle to secure her right to live with her three children -- Karan Dinish, 11, Tevi Darsiny, 12, and 1-year-old Prasana Diksa, who is still on breast milk.

The New Sunday Times reported that Indira, a kindergarten teacher, had been waiting for her baby girl in the compound of the Ipoh district police station, but her baby was not returned to her by her estranged husband, who has converted to Islam.

As a lecturer of Islamic theology and philosophy, I am of the view that K. Patmanathan, who is now known as Mohd Ridzuan Abdullah, should return Prasana Diksa to her mother. The Hindu mother has every right to look after the baby.

Islamic theology does not impose any religious duty on the father to take away the baby girl from her Hindu mother.

This baby should not be prohibited by her father from being breastfed by her mother. If he does, he is wrong and evil in Islamic theological view because Islam does not impose any religious duty on any baby regardless whether she was born to a Hindu or Muslim mother. Islam imposes Islamic religious duties upon mature men and women, not upon babies and children. Please let this baby girl be breastfed by her mother.

Some Muslims hold the view that when a husband or wife converts to Islam, he or she has the right in Islamic law to take the children with him or her and then convert the children to Islam. Islamic law does not say so.

The "Islamness" of the children is not taken into account in Islamic theology. Islamic theology will count on the "Islamness" of human beings who are mature.

The Islamic terms for mature, sensible and responsible human beings are "aqil" and "baligh". Patmanathan has been supported by some ignorant Muslims on the pretext of protecting the purity of Islam and his three children. These Muslims are wrong.

There is no Islamic legal basis for Muslims to help someone take away a baby from her mother and then convert that baby to Islam. Islam does not count on the converted babies and Islam does not reward those who have converted the babies to Islam.

The babies have no Islamic religious duties and, therefore, they are neither rewarded nor punished for such actions.

Therefore, I support the decision by the prime minister and his cabinet that the civil marriage has to be settled by the civil court and the religion of their children be the religion at the time their parents were married in civil law. With this decision, the baby should be returned to Indira as she needs to be breastfed and cared for.

I think the police should arrest Patmanathan if he is reluctant to deliver Prasana Diksa back to Indira after the court decided to give her interim custody of her three children.

Patmanathan is a bad Muslim if he does not hand back Prasana Diksa to her mother and does not pay compensation to Indira for looking after the baby and for breastfeeding her for two years. Being breastfed by a Hindu mother does not make the baby an infidel. She is still eligible to convert to Islam after she grows up and becomes an adult.

Patmanathan himself drank the breast milk from his Hindu mother and consumed food and drinks, probably prohibited by Islamic law, until he reached the age of 40 before he suddenly decided to convert to Islam.

He should not impose his Islam-ness on his children. Let them be what they want to be like he did. He grew up as a Hindu boy, a Hindu youth and then a Hindu adult before he changed his Hinduism to Islam after he had probably encountered problems in his marriage.

I do not support non-Muslims who convert to Islam just because they want to run away from their responsibilities as husbands or wives or because they want to marry Muslim women or Muslim men.

CONVERSION: What state enactments say

The letter to the editor which appeared in the NST 27^th April 2009 gave the legal perspectives of the current conversion to Islam issue.

The concluding paragraphs are points to ponder for those who are adamant in converting babies and children to another religion.

“From the above provisions, conversion to Islam is clearly a personal act of utterance of the two clauses of the affirmation of faith by the person wishing to convert. And he or she does it on his or her own free will.

So, how could a parent convert his or her child to Islam? He or she can only consent to the child's conversion. The child's conversion to Islam, in any case, is not valid if the child has not uttered the affirmation of faith on his or her own free will. A certificate of conversion, if ever issued, will not remedy the non-compliance with requirements of a valid conversion to Islam.

Does the conversion to Islam by a parent make his or her children Muslims? The legislative answer is no. This is because Section 2 defines a Muslim as (b) a person either or both of whose parents were at the time of the person's birth, a Muslim; (e) a person who has converted to Islam in accordance with Section 96.”

Quite a number have forgotten those facts.

The full letter:

CONVERSION: What state enactments say

By : MOHAMAD HAFIZ HASSAN,

International Institute for Advanced Islamic Studies Kuala Lumpur

THE law relating to conversion to Islam is dealt with under provisions of the various states' Administration of Islamic Law Enactments.

The law was simple to begin with. The earliest enactments merely provided that the Majlis (Islamic Religious Council) was to keep a register of converts, that no person should be converted otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the enactments or any rules made thereunder, that no person who had not attained the age of puberty should be converted, and that all conversions should be registered by the Majlis (see, for example, Selangor's Administration of Muslim Law Enactment 1952).

The current law is more elaborate, contained in 10 to 11 sections, depending on which state enactment one is looking at. The provisions contained in most of these enactments relate to requirements for conversion, moment of conversion, duties and obligations of a convert, Registrar and Register of Converts, registration of converts, certificate of conversion, recognition of a convert as a Muslim, determination of religious status of an unregistered convert, offence for false information, power to make rules, and capacity to convert (see, for example, Federal Territory's Administration of Islamic Law Act 1993).

Clearly, the current law retains and elaborates the statutory regime for registration of converts.

Let's look at Perak's Administration of the Religion of Islam Enactment 2004. The provisions relating to requirements for conversion to Islam are found in Section 96. It states, among others, that for a valid conversion of a person to Islam, the person must utter in reasonably intelligible Arabic the two clauses of affirmation of faith, must be aware that the two clauses mean "I bear witness that there is no god but Allah and I bear witness that the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. is the Messenger of Allah" and must utter the two clauses on his or her own free will.

As soon as he or she finishes uttering the two clauses, he or she becomes a Muslim and shall be referred to as a muallaf (Section 97). The muallaf may then apply to the Registrar of Muallaf for registration.

If the registrar is satisfied that the requirements of Section 107 have been fulfilled, he may register the muallaf's name and other particulars in the Register of Muallaf. In so doing, the registrar has a duty to determine the date of conversion to Islam and enter the date in the register (Section 100).

There is another provision which is of particular importance. It is Section 101, which provides that the registrar shall issue a certificate of conversion to every person whose conversion has been registered. It also provides that the certificate of conversion shall be conclusive proof of the facts stated therein.

Above all, there is Section 106, which provides that a person may convert to Islam only if he or she is of sound mind and has attained the age of 18 years. If below that age, he or she must have the consent of the parent or guardian.

From the above provisions, conversion to Islam is clearly a personal act of utterance of the two clauses of the affirmation of faith by the person wishing to convert. And he or she does it on his or her own free will.

So, how could a parent convert his or her child to Islam? He or she can only consent to the child's conversion. The child's conversion to Islam, in any case, is not valid if the child has not uttered the affirmation of faith on his or her own free will. A certificate of conversion, if ever issued, will not remedy the non-compliance with requirements of a valid conversion to Islam.

Does the conversion to Islam by a parent make his or her children Muslims? The legislative answer is no. This is because Section 2 defines a Muslim as (b) a person either or both of whose parents were at the time of the person's birth, a Muslim; (e) a person who has converted to Islam in accordance with Section 96.

Religious understanding

Ah, another letter which appeared in the Star of 18^th April 2009 on the perpetual issue of religious tolerant and understanding (misunderstanding?) in Malaysia.

What is pertinent is the one sided situation at the moment. Non-Muslims have ample opportunity to learn about Islam but there seems to be a dearth of avenue for Muslims to learn about other religions. Officially of course. Unofficially, there is always the internet, but it would be a major stepping stone towards a more meaningful understanding of different religions if Muslims are exposed to the others.

One paragraph from the letter said “Perhaps, non-Muslim religious programmes and inter-faith dialogues should be aired on national TV”. That hope, I am afraid would be just a dream looking at the current situation.

But, we the optimists, those who want a better nation, have eternal hope.

The letter:

Religious understanding a two-way traffic

I AM responding to G.K. Lim’s letter “Good for non-Muslims to learn about Islam” (The Star, April 13).

Personally, I believe it is equally good for Muslims to learn more about the faiths of various non-Muslim religious groups that are practised in Malaysia particularly.

And it is best to learn from the qualified sources, such as the respective religious groups, to prevent any misconceptions.

Getting to know each other is a two-way relationship and I find the situation nowadays is not so.

From my observation, most Malaysian Muslims have a long way to go in understanding and appreciating the faiths of their fellow non-Muslim Malaysians.

Perhaps, non-Muslim religious programmes and inter-faith dialogues should be aired on national TV.

I beg to differ from Lim as there are a lot of Islamic TV programmes aired on national TV to enable non-Muslims to understand Islam.

Certainly the time has come for fellow Muslim Malaysians to learn and appreciate the non-Muslim faiths as we march forward as citizens sharing common universal values.

THE ANALYST,
Kemaman.

Religious freedom: 'Allah' part of Iban prayers

I was glad when I read one particular letter to the editor of NST which appeared today, 6^th April 2009.

I was especially heartened by these two sentences:

“After the Gawai, when we return to Kuala Lumpur, the grandchildren continue to attend mengaji lessons. There is no hint of confusion among the Muslim members of the family.”, and

“he will recognise that those of us who use the word "Allah" or "Allah Taala" in our Christian prayers and publications have no other agenda but to practise our faith in our own language.”

I shall emphasise again, “there was no confusion” and “no other agenda”.

But it seems the Malay Muslims in Peninsular Malaysia do not want to accept those facts. Insecurity complex perhaps or a chip on the shoulder? Heaven knows.

The full letter:

Religious freedom: 'Allah' part of Iban prayers

By : TAN SRI LEO MOGGIE ANAK IROK, Kuala Lumpur

VIEWS attributed to influential personalities, including Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, prohibiting the use of the word "Allah" by non-Muslims are very disturbing -- including for those of us whose mother tongue is Iban.

Islam is the official religion of this country. No one questions that. Similarly, the Constitution guarantees the right of religious freedom.

Followers of different faiths worship in their own ways and there is always some sensitivity attached to religious issues. Thus, I will not touch on matters of theology or religious doctrine. Moreover, this is more a question of language.

I am told that "Allah" is a standard Arabic word for God and is also widely used in the Middle East by non-Muslims.

Datuk Daud Abdul Rahman, assistant minister in the Chief Minister's Department (Islamic Affairs) in the Sarawak government, noted that the word had been used by the followers of the Sidang Injil Borneo in Sarawak for more than 50 years.

Furthermore, the Majlis Islam Sarawak does not think that Muslims in Sarawak are confused when non-Muslims use the word "Allah" in their liturgy (Borneo Post -- March 9).

My parents and family members were baptised into the Catholic faith in 1947. As a 6-year-old boy, I was taught to pray to "Allah Taala". The Creed, the acclamation of faith in the Christian prayer, when rendered in Iban begins as follows: "Aku arap ke siko aja' Allah Taala, Apai Ke besai Kuasa, Ke ngaga Seruga enggau dunia."

In my own immediate family, through inter-marriage, there are Muslims, Christians and Hindus. Once a year, at Gawai Dayak, we visit the family longhouse. When the prayer leader reads excerpts from the Iban translation of the Bible, the words "Allah Taala" are an integral part of the prayers.

After the Gawai, when we return to Kuala Lumpur, the grandchildren continue to attend mengaji lessons. There is no hint of confusion among the Muslim members of the family.

Ahmad Zahid is no ordinary individual. He received the highest number of votes among the three newly elected vice-presidents in Umno. Going by tradition, it may be expected he will be appointed to a senior and important portfolio in the new cabinet line-up.

One hopes when he is given wider responsibility, as different from aspiring to a post in Umno, he will recognise that those of us who use the word "Allah" or "Allah Taala" in our Christian prayers and publications have no other agenda but to practise our faith in our own language.

How can that be made illegal?

Taxis again

The suggestions that appear in the letters to the editor in the Sunday Star have been brought up countless times before, but as John Inbaraj said in his letter,

“There are many simple things that can be done to upgrade the public transport system. It certainly cannot be achieved by someone who does not have the will.

I hope that the transport minister will revamp the CVLB administration.

Effective management is in identifying the right people for the job.”

The will to do the right thing is the key ingredient in solving this perennial problem. I am pessimistic about any about turn in this respect. So, shall we just abandon any hope?