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.

Malaysian Poetry by a Malaysian

A friend forwarded this poem to me:

Happy Diwali everyone


This is a story about Malaysian society
Where different races supposedly live in harmony
In 2003, came along a Prime Minister by the name of Abdullah Badawi
Who led his party to a resounding election victory.

This is a PM whose promises are many
All his slogans are equally catchy
As a result, many people are taken in completely
By his humble and Mr. Clean personality.

First among his chief promises is to combat corruption immediately
That has everyone applauding loudly
But until today, all the major cases are still one big mystery
Lack of evidence or is he fooling us secretly?

Not long after, he introduced Islam Hadhari
Some complained there is only one version of Islam from the Almighty
Anyway, what is it all about, no one knows exactly
Except for some broad points outlined in theory.

Then, he said we need to cut our budget deficit quickly
Which started the dismantling of Tun M's legacy
This caused us to hear about the crooked bridge flip flop story
With all the accusations, what is fiction and what is reality?

By his own admission, his son is extremely wealthy
Because he controls a listed company by the name of Scomi
Was once implicated in the shipment of banned components to a
Middle Eastern country
But his son claimed ignorance and that's the end of the story.

He also has a son-in-law by the name of Khairy
Not elected but is UMNO Youth's deputy
Got entangled in the merged Avenue-ECM Libra entity
Which happened right under the nose of the PM-led Finance Ministry.

Then, we came across a foreign newspaper reporting factually
Of his adventure to see a yacht at a faraway place somewhere in Turkey
This is not true, he said insistently
But I don't see the newspaper issuing any apology.

Next, came the jet on the itinerary
Bought or leased, he is lucky that Malaysians are not financially savvy
The jet is also for the Agong's use, he said publicly
I wonder whether the Agong requested for one specifically?

Later, we read of his holidays in an Australian city
Staying in a mansion owned by someone named as Patrick Badawi
We shouldn't be so critical if he was only away temporarily
Except for the fact that there was a major flood in our own territory.

Then, we get the case of Proton disposing off a subsidiary
Not for a large amount but for a mere penny
Many think behind the deal something's very fishy
Tun M's pet project is certainly going awry.

Overall, crime rates are going up rapidly
Confidence in our police is at its lowest historically
But the IGP got his tenure extended easily
He must be thinking everything's hunky-dory.

He has also been busy launching economic regions lately
Trying to attract foreign investments into the country
Sadly, some are saying that the northern development is benefiting a crony
While others argue the southern one will end up as LKY's colony.

You see, I can go on and on about this indefinitely
Because it is easy and I do not need to create any of them individually
They are all plucked from the web where the stories about him is aplenty
From promoting judges unfairly to always being sleepy.

Actually, I am just an ordinary Malaysian who cares about her country
And I have to state that I am not against him or his policy
For I do not care who is the Perdana Menteri
As long as the person is capable and trustworthy.