My response to Kee Thuan Chye

Wee Ka Siong called on Malaysians to reject laws based on religious theocracy. That would mean reject the Shariah, plain and simple, because laws based on religious theocracy means the Shariah. Hence this would also mean Malaysia becomes a Secular State where Muslims can become Christians and need not fast or pray and can drink beer and eat pork, etc.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

This was a comment posted by Kee Thuan Chye in my article MCA’s bold move in secularising Malaysia.

Where on earth in the NST report is it said that Wee called for Shariah law to be abolished??? RPK is making too much of a meal out of this. Wee was just making the same old, same old call we have heard many a time from the MCA to reject PAS's Islamic state. That's what he meant by rejecting laws based on religious theocracy. For all we know, "laws based on religious theocracy" might have been wrongly phrased by the NST reporter when writing the story. So, please, RPK, don't try and make the MCA look like a pioneer or doing something significant when it really is not. It wouldn't have the chutzpah or cojones to call for the abolition of Shariah. You and I know that. No way in Hell.

*********************************

Dear Kee, my reply as follows:

(NST) -- PAS' aspiration to introduce its interpretation of the Islamic law, or hudud, if the opposition coalition came into power was strongly criticised at the MCA Youth and Wanita assemblies yesterday.

(My response) -- Wee said  “...its (PAS’) interpretation of the Islamic law, or hudud...”.

First of all, it should not be “...its interpretation of the Islamic law, or hudud...”. Islamic law is called Shariah law and Hudud is one branch of the Shariah. Hence Islamic law (Shariah) and Hudud mean two different things.

Secondly, there is no such thing as PAS’s interpretation of Islamic law. Either there is such a thing called Islamic law or Shariah law or there is no such thing. Is there or is there not such a thing called Islamic laws or Shariah laws?

If there are none then how can the UIA (International Islamic University) offer Shariah law courses and degrees? How can there be Shariah laws, Shariah lawyers, Shariah judges and Shariah Courts? How can Muslims face punishment for drinking beer under the Shariah law?

Islamic laws are called Shariah laws and Shariah laws are based on:

1. Interpretations of the Qur'an.

2. Interpretations of the Sunnah.

3. Ijma or consensus amongst scholars ("collective reasoning").

4. Qiyas/Ijtihad or analogical deduction ("individual reasoning").

Can you see that the four items above form the foundation of the Shariah?

Hence there is no such as PAS’ interpretation of Islamic law. Hence, also, Wee and/or MCA are either misleading the people or are trying to talk about something they know nothing about.

The Shariah comes under six main branches as follows:

1. Ibadah (ritual worship).

2. Mu'amalat (transactions and contracts).

3. Adab (morals and manners).

4. I'tiqadat (beliefs).

5. Uqubat (punishments).

6. Munakahat (Islamic marriage jurisprudence).

There are four main schools of Shariah law:

1. Hanbali.

2. Hanifi.

3. Maliki.

4. Shafi'i.

There are four categories of punishment under Islamic Penal Law:

1. Qisas.

2. Diyya.

3. Hudud.

4. Tazir.

(NST) -- MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong called on Malaysians to reject laws based on religious theocracy and to denounce Pas' call to implement hudud.

(My response) -- Wee and MCA (and probably you as well) do not understand the difference between an Islamic State, the Shariah, Qisas, Diyya, Hudud and Tazir. One does not equal the other, as they are different issues.

NST said: Wee Ka Siong called on Malaysians to reject laws based on religious theocracy…

That would mean reject the Shariah, plain and simple, because laws based on religious theocracy means the Shariah. Hence this would also mean Malaysia becomes a Secular State where Muslims can become Christians and need not fast or pray and can drink beer and eat pork, etc.

(NST) -- Wee likened the mindset of Pas leadership to one that belonged to the Dark Ages.

(My response) – The Shariah is part of Islam. To say that the PAS leadership belongs to the Dark Age means Islam, the Prophet Muhammad, the Qur’an, etc., also all belong to the Dark Ages and are no longer relevant. 

Is this what Wee and MCA mean? PAS quotes Islam. If PAS is wrong then Islam is wrong, plain and simple. PAS can only be stupid if Islam, the Prophet Muhammad and the Qur’an, etc., are stupid.

I repeat, there is no such thing as PAS’ version or Umno’s version of Islam. There is only one version because there is only one version of the Qur’an unlike the Holy Books of some other religions where there are many different versions.

I trust this clarifies why I say MCA is secularising Malaysia. That is what they are trying to do. There is no half-Islam just as there is no ‘little bit pregnant’. Islam is all or nothing.

And, this, the kafirs do not seem to understand or appreciate although they comment as if they are graduates of Shariah law.