OMG .... The "Hudud" debate- yet, Again!!

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

"I say the wiser non-Muslim stance would be to hold that 

if syariah is what Kelantan Muslims want 

and if we are given a cast-iron guarantee 

that it will not be implemented on us, 

we would not object to Muslims wanting it,”

-Bishop Paul Tan

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

In response to my post commending Bishop Paul Tan on his comments wrt Hudud, I got a comment, as follows:-

" The implication for ALL MALAYSIANS is grave and disastrous.
It's the initial inroad into "instituting a creeping, historically regressive and anti-democratic clericalism" which will eventually affect us all regardless of creed. The Bishop is at best naive if he thinks that it will only apply to Muslims."

First of all- let's see this debate/rhetoric for what it truly is ...
PAS is UMNO's greatest adversary- not PKR or DAP.
For PAS, "Islam" is at the same time, their strength and their Achilles Heel - unfortunately, PAS doesn't see the latter.

This is a conflict which Mahathir manufactured, to play the "politics of fear" (much like the old "May13" rhetoric) on the electorate & split the vote bank to UMNO's benefit and PAS's loss.
It is also a potent diversion from all that ails the Najib administration.
Sadly- the PAS Ulamas in their usual defensive political naivete/ stupidity, has fallen for it (and yes- OMG .. yet again!!)- hook, line & sinker!!
It really reveals the lack of political sophistication in PAS, thus revealing their weakness- and not "strength", as these PAS stalwarts believe- in their chest-thumping bravado!!
One wonders at times if they're that stupid ... while they seek to champion Islam.
They really need to brush up ...

Now wrt Paul Tan's comment-
He is I presume, well aware of the repercussions of Hudud, just as he is of being perceived as an opponent/enemy of Islam. If you noticed, he never discussed the "wisdom" of Hudud.
He's responding to the rhetoric in the best possible way to "douse the embers", lest they flare up- which could be what some "grand ol' man's" "politics of fear", to distract the people from the issues of the day and benefit Umno at the coming polls.

He makes it quite clear that while they (Non-muslims) are entitled to their opinions, it is vital that non-Muslims are not to be seen to be "interfering" in Islamic affairs, lest they're accused of being "enemies of Islam" by some myopic individuals (who are into pixelated armpits or obnoxious kafirs on television).
The "no-objection" he expressed, came with a caveat - "if we're given cast-iron guarantees that it will not be implemented on us"- and that is the most important part, which many would tend to overlook.

He merely said that the Muslims are entitled to what they want.
It is a debate to be had among the Muslims- on the nature of Islam.
So now, the Muslims have to decide for themselves, on what the nature of the religion they practice is.
Is it one of brutal retribution for "sins"?
Or is is one of compassion and respect for the sanctity of life?
Is it virtuous to deprive a man of of the free will which God himself has given? Does it really address the "evils" they presume is perpetuated by other systems, or does it actually make things go "underground"?
Would we be seeing greater frustrations and violent actions from the people exposed to violent actions in public?

These are probably questions the two schools of thought Paul Tan mentions, might consider - and makes quite clear his hopes in “I pray the Mutazilites win the debate....", - meaning that hopes that TGNA sees the facts of the matter with "reason", as "this is not a question that is going to go away but it is not a question that will continue to be framed in the same terms as it is today in Malaysia”.

As for me personally, I agree- in that Hudud isn't going to do us (Muslims & Non-Muslims alike, any good. I think these guys who talk about wanting Hudud, have lost the big picture, and are mind-bogglingly naive to actually want it for themselves

However, if Muslims insist on such brutal punishment on their own brothers is the most virtuous thing they can do as Muslims, who am I to say otherwise. Who knows - maybe Malaysia can one day be a hub for Plastic Surgery, Orthopaedic Hand/foot surgery.
Maybe we can even capitalize on it in our Tourism Malaysia calendar ... for fetishists as a blood sport and put public humiliation/ stoning high on the list................

Yup- the implications are "grave & disastrous".

**********************************
If you think of yourselves as helpless and ineffectual,
it is certain that you will create a despotic government to be your master.
The wise despot, therefore, maintains among his subjects
a popular sense that they are helpless and ineffectual."
- Frank Herbert

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

P.S
I've written about this issue long ago .... and many times too.
While I may not have addressed this issue too directly in many cases, they're there if you read through it carefully.

You may find some of what I wrote, if you were to click the "Religion" label on the sidebar. You may also read what I wrote replying to RPK back in 2008, in "Ignorance + Freedom = Chaos" to get the gist of what I try to say .....

Islamist Politics: The Making of Fascists?

What I do know is that I’m looking for is a book that will give me a sense of what Islam is, the real version as opposed to one that has been unjustly hijacked by extremism and media alike.
-Abby Wong, Seeking the truth, BOOK NOOK WITH ABBY WONG

===============================

The above is a very compassionate perspective of a "revolutionary" philosophy from the time of Mohamed. Well written, by a searcher, I must say.

(Frankly - I'm not so kind to the "religious world" ..... even where the Christian doctrines/dogma are concerned). However, I do believe that the prophets of old were real visionaries, were geniuses in their own right and really did have some "divine inspiration" - just as many of our modern "prophets" in politics, philosophy & the sciences of today. In their time, they were all, nothing short of radical and revolutionary - and had to be "guided by some force", considering the absence of "education as we know it.

There is obviously a spiritual aspect of religion - but religion per se doesn't need spirituality to condition men to its dictates. Beyond spirituality, they tend to raise more questions instead of providing answers - and it is these unanswerable questions that evoke fear in the hearts of the ignorant and gullible, and render them ripe for psychological manipulation by "religious predators". As such, what I wish to address here isn't the spiritual aspect of it, but rather the religiosity advocated by the clerics.

Religion to me is simply a guideline on morality and ethics, meant to create a proper social order - other than that, they are excellent tools of exploitation when politics is added to its "divine flavour". The evolution of every religion has to be understood within the historical context in which they evolved - or else, we tend to misinterpret the meaning of the words used to narrate the incidences, or decisions that were made into laws. Much of what Mohamed preached was in response to the cultural & socio-political trappings of the time. What is practiced today however, often don't take these factors into consideration - and hence the literal interpretations we get. The Quran is indeed a magnificent book (revealed or not) which reflects much of the Judeo-Christian ideas/philosophy in creating social order out of the chaos of pagan Arabia.

********************************************
"Where is the life we have lost in the living?
Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information ?
The cycles of heaven in twenty centuries
bring us farther from God and nearer to dust."
- T.S. Elliot
******************************************

However, the sad fact is that what may be true academically (as you & I may see it), is far from the reality that is practiced by our religious brothers/sisters in their attempt to "out-do" one another. More often than not, they advocate political authority for the clerics who haven't the faintest clue about statecraft. Meanwhile, we of course, have the more intellectual & rational ones cowering at the sight of the imbeciles who make up the clerical hierarchy and dish out edicts like they were the word of God him/herself. Scant regard is payed to the fact that they are usually less than educated or intellectual, and have an inherent inability to think beyond the confines of their skullcaps. - it was what led to the dark ages of the "Holy Roman Empire".

There are many parallels that we can draw between the Christianity of the middle ages and the Islam of today. Nations in the "east" which are "Muslim" today, IMHO, are doomed to regress, due to their psychological subservience to the Arab-Muslim mindset. The "enlightenment" of the Muslim ummah will come from the "evil west", who are more "innovative and creative" in their thinking, due to their lack of reverence for the clerics in their "fashionably pious outfits". Any religion that depends on the clerics for its philosophical evolution is doomed to fail socially, economically and politically. We can only wait to see how our Malaysian intellectuals react to the mindless clerics, who seek to stifle society in their straight-jacket of religiosity.

Lately we had the son of the late Yusof Rawa from PAS (pretending to be very intellectual -while telling all others to "use your brains"), trying to give his perspective of the Islamic State in "Islamic state debate, revisited and revised" and "Islamic State 2: Revised and Revisited". He claims that Islam is "a way of life" (like as if all other religion aren't!!) and thus, inseparable from politics. He makes it sound like with what he proposes, he could create for us a heavenly Malaysia - just as we saw in all the Islamic states of the past (and present, too).
In all their arguments for an Islamic state, never will they articulate how the rights of citizens (as per Universal Declaration of Human Rights) will not be trampled upon. The philosophy of "Liberty" and "Legitimacy" are the farthest things from their minds. Their arguments are usually quite simplistic - that these laws are "God-ordained", even if they were made by man "based on study of the scriptures". There used to be plenty of debate on this matter (those days) in Malaysia Today, and RPK did come out with an article (after March 8, 2008) saying that he isn't for an "Islamic State". (The article on "Islamic state" in TNG did draw some interesting perspectives).

To many "Islamist" politicians, the proof of their Islamic credentials lie in their ability to persecute (legally or otherwise) those who do not share their convictions. They take potshots at those who do not agree, as being "kafirs", "munafiqs", "liberals" or "secularists" (like it is such a bad thing). But of course - we have proponents of an imaginary "Islamic State" in PAS who will go on saying that Islam cannot be separated from politics, and hence should be able to govern (despite all the historical evidence to the contrary).
Yes - in the Islamist's vocabulary, these are "four letter words" which are supposed to translate to being "unIslamic" - when it is the secular and liberal states that are progressive and practice human rights - which are more "Islamic" than many an Islamic nation worldwide.

What many readers who agree with these "Islamist" views don't realize is that these apologists for the "Islamic State" often support the Fascist state in a very subtle way - but of course, it will be in the name of "God". It means that they have to do away with the Federal Constitution and Democracy as we know it. They also forget that under the medieval "Islamic State" concept, they strive to create a tiered society that advocates "apartheid". This is definitely not the the end - and these voices advocating "Islamist" dominance of the Malaysian political landscape would only grow louder as time goes by (especially when corruptions permeates the system and the intellectuals seek to hide themselves - lest they face the religious edicts of unthinking clerics).

There is a very real possibility of Malaysia descending into the world of mediocrity and orthodoxy, should the poor governance and hypocrisy advocated by our "leaders" be perpetuated. We will without doubt see the rise of the Fascists & extremists within Umno and the likes of Hadi, Nasha & Hassan Ali in PAS. Until and unless PAS refuses to play the "trojan" for Umno (in advocating the "Islamic State"), the Malaysian political landscape is bound to be very divisive and unstable - and the Pakatan Rakyat coalition is doomed to be shaky at best.

Let's just keep our fingers crossed ....

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

"Guilt that is expressed in irreverence is unliveable,
Guilt smothered by pride is unjustifiable and,
Guilt smothered by fear is unbearable"
- Ravi Zacharias, "The Haunting Spectre of Guilt"

Something About The Ahmadiyyahs ...

###########################

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (1835-1908)
Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama'at
The Promised Messiah and Imam Mahdi
#############################

Taking a break from the Perak coup d'etat and Najib for today .... I'll probably write something on the alleged hypocrisy of PR in not approving of "selling out" (misconstrued as "hopping out" by the gleeful Mahathir, & Jason Chin of MalaysianInsider) - but that's for another day ....

After my visit to the Baitusalam at Kg Nakhoda a couple of weeks ago, I happened to start reading up about the faith a little. Needless to say- I wouldn't go along with their theology in toto. Nevertheless, I intend to read up more on the Ahmadiyyahs (just as I've read up on Freemasonry), should time permit, and there's plenty for & against the Ahmadiyyah theology on the web.

Whatever said & done, one thing I do know about them is this - they strongly opposed and ruled-out any form of violent "Jihad" right from the start, which many other Muslim sects/denominations have failed to do "convincingly". Their tagline, "Love for All, Hatred for None" was stated boldly on a banner at Baitusalam, as it is on the official website (given below).
That is one principle of peace which we can all do with, in these lovely days of "jihad" galore and bloodlust.

It is definitely sad that in this time and age, there people who cannot bring themselves to accept those who believe in ideas/interpretation of scriptures different from theirs. Worst still, they who dominate the landscape seek to persecute those they deem "deviant".

The Shias and the Sunnis (Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamaah) either do not (or cannot) come to a concensus on the Ahmadiyyah faith, or simply agree that they "aren't Muslim".
In Malaysia, they have apparently been declared either heretics or just Non-Muslim, and hence, although Malay, they are constitutionally, "Non-Malay"!! (That's something that needs to be discussed over a beer - so I won't say anything about that ....)
However, it is my understanding that the Ahmadiyyah community, although do uphold the Pillars of Islam, are neither "here nor there" - the reason for which I shall refrain from stating (lest I'm told to shut up, as I'm not a Malay/Muslim, or an Umno member).

Somehow, I felt that the questions pertaining to differences that have become a sore point between "mainstream" Muslims and the Ahmadiyyah/ Qadiani weren't answered very well at the Majlis, for people to understand the true nature of the "conflict".
The issues were definitely addressed at the Majlis Mesra, but not directly enough for most to understand. Maybe it was meant to be on a "need to know basis"- I cannot be certain. Anyway, I believe that before one can start speaking for someone or something, one needs to understand the crux of the matter/controversy - or else, you'd be shooting in the dark.

Throughout, I wondered why they were referred to as Qadianis in the first place - apparently they believe in Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian ( in Gurdaspur, Punjab - I had an "employee" once from Gurdaspur!!), who is to them, The Promised Messiah. The Imam Mehdi. And they believe in the Caliphate (kind of like an Apostolic succession).
They seem to be a very progressive community, from what I read - Gurdaspur has an average literacy rate of 70%, which is far above the Indian national average of 59%! The community is also quite prosperous in the western world.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Islamic Library (which I presume is a "mainstream" website), has this to say about The claim of Mirza Ghoulam Ahmed of Qadian.
Idara Dawat-o-Irshad (http://www.irshad.org/mission.php) states the following about "Qadianiism" at its website:-
"... in 1974, after an exhaustive examination of all the evidence presented for and against the Qadiani cult in Mekkah Mukarramah, the Muslim World League (Rabita Alame Islami) -- which represents all religious scholars from every Muslim country of the world -- passed an unanimous resolution declaring the Qadiani Movement and its leadership out of the fold of Islam. As you are certainly aware, declaring someone a non-Muslim is a task taken very seriously by the Muslim scholars. The fact that they have unanimously declared Qadianism distinct from Islam should assure you that a thorough examination of their claims has been made."

An analogy in the "Christian World" could be likened to the theological conflict between mainstream "Christians" and "Mormons"(aka Church of The Latter Day Saints) or The Seveth Day Adventists or Branch Davidians who are considered "heretics" by many (that's the closest that I can think of anyways). Despite the persecutions that have been subjected to those who differ in their theology in Christendom in the early days (and currently prevalent bigotry) they are however accorded their Constitutional rights, are able to get along fine and work together to build progressive nations as law abiding citizens.

Therefore, I still don't understand why anyone who's holier-than-thou, should bear ill-will or persecute others, just because they believe something different .... especially when they do the "ungodly" in the name of "GOD".
It is probably none other than the fear factor - fear of "corrupting influences" - especially when the ignorance which is encouraged among the people, is endemic.

I went through the official Ahmadiyyah website, to read a bit (still in the midst of it), and found the following (screencaptures) from the website Al Islam. And also http://www.real-islam.org/

(Please click on this link or on image for full size view)

They also had plenty of resources on other prophets at their website. Also interesting to note was the discovery of Jesus's tomb that was discovered at Punjab! If that is what they believe, and it works for them, so be it - it doesn't hurt me anywhere, nor does it affect my faith in any way.
To those who wish to persecute his brothers in the name of God almighty,
all I can say is, "O, ye of little faith ...."


One other interesting thing I noted at an Ahmadiyyah study forum was the following - Maybe Zahid Hamidi and Hamid Albar can learn something from them?:

Explaining the Arabic word for God - Allah

Say: "Call upon God, or call upon The All-Compassionate: by whatever name ye call upon Him, (it is well): for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names. Neither speak thy Prayer aloud, nor speak it in a low tone, but seek a middle course between". (Quran 17:110)

A few months ago, while doing some contract work, the issue of religion came up. I don't remember why it came up but a colleague told me the following joke:
"These two guys go parachuting. When they're getting ready to jump out of the plane, one guy asks the other, 'What do I do if my parachute doesn't open?' The second guy says, 'Pray to Allah.' The first guy's puzzled: 'To Allah?' The second guy says, 'Just do it.'
The first guy shrugs, they both jump, and sure enough, the first guy's parachute doesn't open. At first he doesn't remember the advice and begins madly praying to God for help.
No help comes. He suddenly remembers and prays to Allah for help.
Suddenly a giant hand swoops down from the sky, catching and cradling him.
The guy heaves a huge sigh of relief and says, 'Thank God!' So the hand drops him."

I kind of chuckled to be polite, but inwardly I just felt weary, because this is one of the most common misconceptions about Islam: that Allah is something different from the God Jews and Christians worship. I hope to be clearing up some of the primary misconceptions and fallacies about Islam, in the hope of promoting better understanding of this religion, especially given the growing number of Muslims living in Western nations.

Historically, the Western media have been guilty of spreading half-truths, half-baked conjecture, and often, outright lies about Islam. Most of us get precious little accurate information about it in our education. With recent events surrounding the attacks on the United States, and the numerous subsequent attacks on Muslims and Arabs, I can hardly think of a better time to sort out some of these things.

I've even heard people refer contemptuously to the God of Islam as a "desert god," as if Judaism and Christianity originated in "Yankee Stadium" or something! The fact is that Allah is simply a compound word made from the Arabic words al (the) and lah (god): Allah (The God). In Spanish we have el (the) and in French La, le or les (again: the). Monotheism - the belief in a single, supreme, divine creator - is the central and most important aspect of Islam.

Among His Signs are the Night and the Day, and the Sun and the Moon. Do not prostrate to the sun and the moon, but prostrate to Allah, Who created them, if it is Him ye wish to serve. (Quran 41:37) The generic word for God in Arabic is therefore “Allah”.

All Arab and even Christians from the Indian subcontinent use the word “Allah” when referring to God. These Christians also say "Allah-u-akbar" (God is the greatest), "Insha-allah" (God willing) and "Alham-dul-lilah" (All praise be to God). Hallelujah also literally means “praises to God”.

All of the above rules out some of the common Western stereotypes that Allah is a Sun god, a Moon god, a Desert god, a Pagan deity, or someone made up by the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). Allah is the Creator, and our Supreme being. The word Allah is preferred by most Muslims and Arab Christians even when speaking a foreign language, because it implies no gender and absolute authority.

In the English language, the word god is often given the plural treatment, and you can have a female as well as a male version! Even humans are given the title of gods and goddesses based upon their superiority in a particular field, e.g. a love god or goddess. It is also interesting to note that in the mother tongue of Jesus Christ (pbuh), which is a dialect having links with Hebrew and Aramaic, the word for God is “Alla-ha”. You've all heard variants of Eloh, Elah and Eli - well, Allah and Alla-ha are just two more. Aramaic and Arabic are sister languages.

Sadly many lay-Christian scholars from the West choose to lie in the face of historical and present day fact concerning the word “Allah” and stubbornly deny that it is just a generic word for God in Arabic. We ask you to get in touch with some Arab Christians to verify for yourselves the exact origins of the Arabic name for God.

Comments:
EL: God ("mighty, strong, prominent") used 250 times in the OT See Gen. 7:1, 28:3, 35:11; Nu. 23:22; Josh. 3:10; 2 Sam. 22:31, 32; Neh. 1:5, 9:32; Isa. 9:6; Ezek. 10:5. El is linguistically equivalent to the Arabic "Allah," but the attributes of Allah in Islam are entirely different from those of the God of the Hebrews as we know. Elah is Aramaic, "god." Elah appears in the Hebrew Bible in Jer. 10:11 (which is in Aramaic, and is plural, "gods").
In Daniel (the Aramaic sections) Elah is used both of pagan gods, and of the true God, also plural. Elah is equivalent to the Hebrew Eloah which some think is dual; Elohim is three or more. The gods of the nations are called "elohim." The origin of Eloah is obscure.
Elohim is the more common plural form of El. Eloah is used 41 times in Job between 3:4 and 40:2, but fewer than 15 times elsewhere in the OT.
"Elah is used both of pagan gods, and of the true God" The above statement makes the claim that "Elah" was used for the True God and also the Pagan gods.
The exact same was true for the word "Allah", it was used in a variety of ways too. To make it clear for us lets look at the way we use the word "God" in the modern age. We give the title of god to anyone we feel deserves the praise for whatever reason. Is this 'lending the title of god' a new phenomenon though? I doubt it very much. Elah and Allah are both simply generic names for God.

---

The Word Allah In The Arabic Bible
Just a few examples for those who are still in doubt . . .

The images below, with the exception of the first image, were taken directly from The Holy Bible in Arabic. Referred to in Arabic as al-Kitâb al-Muqadis (i.e. ,The Holy Book), this is the scripture which is used by Arabic-speaking Christians (of which there are still about 15 to 20 million in the Middle East). So that those unfamiliar with Arabic script have something to compare these images with, the first image below is a verse from the Qur'ân - which is the Muslim scripture. In the images, the Arabic word Allah is underlined in red so that it can be easily identified. Upon comparing the images, one should be able to clearly see that the word Allah appears in both the Qur'ânic and Arabic Bible images. Indeed, the word Allah appears throughout Arabic translations of the Bible, since it is simply the Arabic name for Almighty God.

Insha'llah, the examples below will help quell the doubts of those who have been duped into believing that Muslims worship a different god - either by the hostile media or by Christian missionary propaganda. We hope that this serves as enough documentation for those who still have doubts about this.

We could think of no other way to prove this point, except to encourage everyone to do further critical and open-minded research on their own. Please, don't forget to compare the images . . .

---

[Qu'ran 1:1 - English translation]
"In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful."

[Qur'ân 1:1 - Arabic transliteration]
"Bismi-Allahi ar-Rahmani, ar-Raheem"

[Qur'ân 1:1 - Arabic]

---

[Genesis 1:1 - English Bible - King James Version]

"In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth . . . "

[Genesis 1:1 - Arabic transliteration]

"Fee al-badi' khalaqa Allahu as-Samaawaat wa al-Ard . . . "

[Genesis 1:1 - Arabic Bible]

---

[John 3:16 - English Bible - King James Version]

"For God so loved the world, that . . . "

[John 3:16 - Arabic transliteration]

"Li-annhu haakadha ahabba Allahu al-'Aalama hataa badhala . . . "

[John 3:16 - Arabic Bible]

---

[Luke 1:30 - English Bible - King James Version]

" . . . Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favor with God."

[Luke 1:30 - Arabic transliteration]

" . . . Laa takhaafee, yaa Maryam, li-annaki qad wajadti ni'amat(an) i'nda Allahi."

[Luke 1:30 - Arabic Bible]

---

[Luke 3:38 - English Bible - New King James Version]

"the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."

[Luke 3:38 - Arabic transliteration]

"bini Anoosha, bini Sheeti, bini Aaadama, abni Allahi."

[Luke 3:38 - Arabic Bible]

Education - Malaysia Style ...

Maybe they should be renamed Ministry of Persecution or something like that.
... any better idea would be welcome.
I was "tickled" to read a comment on MalaysiaKini (Vox Populi - below), describing the capacity of today's teachers' thinking faculties - needless to say, trained by the Ministry of "Education".
It looks like they "train" teachers to be stoopid!

Can you imagine your child being arrested for "illegal assembly" at a coffee shop in school compound!!??
My God! This is mind boggling - How pathetic can our Ministry of "Education" get!
With teachers-training like this, who needs schools?

Is it any surprise that the Home Ministry bans usage of BM by the Catholic Herald,
while we get kids becoming Rempits, drug addicts, or saying the things as reported Star/Metro in "Tudung-clad teens who are hooked on sex"??!!

So much for the "sexy"-Uniform/ "dress code" controversy, huh?

About time, some people realize that religious dogma indoctrination and outward religiosity doesn't translate into sound spiritualitycharacter or ethics.

The very 'macho' but braindead Malaysian defenders of Race/Religion

Is this the "Jaminan untuk anak-anak kita" which the keris-waving Hishamudin promises (I just heard that on the TV3 news - in KT, was it?)? Who needs a "Ministry" that peddles immorality, mediocrity, idiocy, and preaches bigotry/ hypocrisy to the kids under the guise of "education"?
Words such as these (mentioned in the article linked above) coming out from kids, would never even be dreamt of in the pre-Mahathirism days!

More & more, The Ministry/ Goverment appears to be prostituting education in schools, under their "Ketuanan" policies. I wonder what role BTN plays, in inculcating such "noble " values in the current crop of imbeciles who masquerade as teachers/ principals.
Whatever said and done, much "credit" has to go to the "Ministers of Education" since the inception of the NEP - especially during the time of Mahathirism vs. PAS ("Islamisation" period).

As much as I'd like to agree with Mahathir Jr. who proposed a single education system, (and disagree with DJZ on Mandarin "vernacular" education system), given the scenario in the comment below (and of course the abusive teacher - remember?), anything is better than the Sekolah Kebangsaan.
No thank you Mukhriz - your dad's "education" policies belong to the gutters, and stink to the high heavens. It highlights the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the Mahathirism/Umno/BN policies!

The kids would probably be better off left to their devices .....

On Malay-language edition of Catholic paper banned: editor

Mr Yest: My friend's daughter who attends a national school organised meetings with fellow Christians in her school to understand their religion better. The principal came to know of it and made it impossible for them to continue. So they met at a coffee shop.

The principal then reported them to the police for illegal assembly! I don't know how many brownie points he gained with masters at the education ministry but this is the reality. So it is not surprising that the home ministry acted in the way it did.

I suppose if the officials had been more fair-minded, their masters may have felt that they were giving ground to their own religion's ‘enemy' and may face the wrath of God.

We all know it took nearly 30 years for a church to be approved to be built in Shah Alam and the designated place was at the edge of the forest. We all know the restrictions placed on the height of the steeple of a church.

As long as people in government do not feel confident of their own religion, such repression will persist. Compared with the US, a country the Malaysian government has never ceased to preach about religious tolerance and other high-minded matters, Malaysia is still in the Dark Ages.

"Transformers" - In search of "Optimus Prime" ....

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

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

Last Christmas, after a very long time, I watched a movie which I considered "spinal" - it was "Transformers"!! There were two scenes which really caught my attention (other than the fantastic special effects)- the first was that of "Optimus Prime" asking that he be sacrificed so as to destroy "The Cube" and hence, the "deceptacons".
The other was when a harmless cellphone was transformed into a hyper-active & very destructive robot (a "deceptacon") when given an energy pulse from the cube.

Coming to our real world, it would not be too far fetched to imagine what the corrupting power of politics does to seemingly harmless, virtuous and idealistic men, when in power. In Malaysia, we have seen what three decades of the "Mahathirism" energy has done to Barisan Nasional and the country at large.
On the other side of the fence, we have an alliance of the most unlikely partners in PAS and DAP, with PKR as the cementing factor. On either side of PKR, although they march in formation, they appear to be heading in different directions, with very different motives. Depending on the strength of the "pull" on either side, Newton's Laws dictate that it is inevitable that PKR be swayed in either direction, should the pact prevail.

Pas appears to insist on its hardline/dogmatic Islamist stance (despite its apparently "accommodating" politics of late), while its pragmatic partners are more concerned with the socio-economic and political realities. The bottomline in PAS's politics seem to the people, is to be having a greater say in policy matters, without accepting the status quo as it is within the PR. A certain faction appears to be bent on creating discontent within its folds by looking for ghosts under the bed.
They're disturbed & ill at ease with the fact that the other partners have surpassed them in political achievement, despite their weaker "networking" - which makes them vulnerable to "Islamic overtures" from Umno.

First, it was the "muzakarah" by Hadi & Nasha which we all know about, then it is the "hudud" factor. They seem to be bent on creating a Sharia state while hiding their true intentions, with the Pakatan only as temporary allies.
They seem to be oblivious to the fact that they would hold greater sway among the Malays and the non-muslim electorate, should they be more progressive in their ways.

RPK did support Hudud "In principle", and without a doubt, with the impending KT by-elections, they are only using religion to "buy" votes among the conservative Malays of KT.
"In Principle", I too would support Hudud as a deterrant. After all why should a non-muslim complain when there'll be greater job opportunities, when their Muslim brothers walk around handless, right? Moreover, we can expect aspiring hand/ micro-surgeons of Malaysia to get much needed practice in putting hands back on those who win their appeal or at least get some medical tourism from hand/ feet (or other body parts) transplants ..... & Malaysia can be at the cutting edge of medical sciences plenty of hand donors too!

It beats me how they can say that Hudud is fine, as it doesn't affect the non-muslims when it is divisive in nature and destroys the idea of nationhood where the people are meant to live in equality under the same laws.
Hadi likens Hudud to surgery! Discussing Hadi's silly analogy would be an insult to my intelligence - so I shall leave that to the PakCik-MakCiks of Kg Cenereh/ Menjing/ Keruak or wherever, and let it pass (until of course, the day medical sciences classify Muslims differently & devise special surgeries for Muslims only).
In defence of hudud, there was an article on this matter by Zulkifli Sulong in The Malaysian Insider, equating Hudud with circumcision! It was entitled "William Leong antara khatam dan hudud". Are these columnists so brain-dead that they don't see the difference?
Let's forget the fact that Zulkifli Sulong spelt "Khatan" wrong - but to equate & compare the two, is simplistic and myopic at best.
One is a religious ritual/ covenant adopted by the faithful, while the other is a set of laws that prescribe irreversible mutilation as punishment of people declared convicts (which may be out of error, in the corruption prone human judgement), and places a Muslim's testimony above that of non-muslims', in a court of law (even if the Muslim lies).

It isn't that I oppose the spirit of Hudud per se - but I do not understand what is so "unIslamic"/kafir/jahilliyah with common law which has created dynamic societies and defeated outdated societies of the caliphates (other than what they claim the good book says). That too, when many a Caliph/ "Islamic" leadership ascended their "thrones" in less than ethical ways.
Why can't the PAS leadership stop using religion as a divide so as to achieve their ambitions of political power. Are they so bankrupt of ideas, that they have to keep harping on Arabic literature the unethical leaders of medieval times, just because they used sacred literature to justify their ideas?
Do they need to speak in unintelligible Arabic tongues to hoodwink the peasants?
They seem to be so focussed on Arabic culture/ "Islamic" laws and edicts, that they forget about instilling positive "values" through modern, progressive and scientific education.
The negative connotations of their insistence on dogmatic religiosity/ politics, does nothing to increase their stature as leaders who are in touch with the socio-economic realities of the 21st century.
Have they forgotten what "theology" is all about in preaching religious politics, or are they trying hard to be what RPK might've implied?

What is Hudud?

Noun - 1.hudood - Islamic laws stating the limits ordained by Allah and including the deterrent punishments for serious crimes hudud Islamic law, sharia, sharia law, shariah, shariah law - the code of law derived from the Koran and from the teachings and example of Mohammed; "sharia is only applicable to Muslims"; "under Islamic law there is no separation of church and state"

Here is what Aliran wrote in 2002:-

10. Is there a chance that Hudud may overstep the legal rights of non-Muslims?

In all likelihood it will. As Malaysia is a plural society and where the concentration of one ethnic community is not necessarily confined to one region or state there are bound to be clashes and overlaps in application. For example in any crime the victim and perpetrator may be of different religions. If the alleged rapist is a Muslim and the victim is a non-Muslim, there will be the question as to under what law the charge would be brought about. Under Hudud the alleged male perpetrator may stand to gain because of the impossibility of getting the testimonies of four Muslim male witnesses. Under Hudud, Muslims who commit robbery of property that is valueless in Islam e.g. liquor or entertainment equipment will have a chance of escaping any prosecution. In another worst-case scenario, such as in an incident of gang-rapes, where there are multiple perpetrators and victims (comprising Muslims and non-Muslims), eye-witness accounts of the rapes which may be offered by the victims would not be admissible as evidence as they may not be Muslim and male. In all of these hypothetical cases non-Muslims will stand to see justice taken away from them.

11. What effect will Hudud have on race relations?

The bleak scenario is that Muslim and non-Muslims will be forcibly divided not just in the cultural and social sense but in a legalistic sense too. A parallel legal system established exclusively for Muslims will lead to the enhancement of structural discrimination, where race and religion (and gender) can be legally invoked to justify unequal treatments and other unfair provisions in society. Eventually it will also lead to a geographical divide between Muslims and non-Muslims where one can expect an exodus of non-Muslims to more “non-Muslim” states or even emigration abroad.

17. What is to be done?

It will be difficult to repeal any law once passed. The strategy of stalling the implementation of Hudud (in the Kelantan case) is only temporary. If PAS manages to win the overwhelming support of the Malay electorate there will be less of a reason to postpone the implementation of the law.

On a long-term basis the struggle to repeal Hudud law must involve the struggle to repeal all draconian and unjust laws, whether passed under religious or secular guises. All laws that violate the principles of human rights and equality must be abolished. The movement to institute human rights is not necessarily western-oriented. It is as much a cultural need to want human dignity to be protected as it is a universal obligation to appreciate the rights of a community to cultural and religious practice. However, ultimately we must recognize that the greatest rights worth defending are rights that are invoked purely on the basis of us being humans. Which means equal treatment, equal access to opportunities and equal dignity for all, regardless of religion, race, class, nationality and gender. The only viable movement in this direction would be to restore our democratic institutions and push for a genuine regime of human rights.

Given the above mentioned scenarios, Hudud is anything but a fair law in a plural society and is divisive in nature - and thus would lead to a sectarian divide and conflict, and the demise of Malaysia as we know it.
IMHO, That can hardly be described as a law that's divine in nature .....
So what exactly is the PAS leadership under the author of "Amanat Hadi" up to, in trying to play up dogma and at the same time denying that it will not affect non-muslims who have an equal (if not more than the newly "Malaysianised") stake in the nation. Are they intent on playing up the delusion of an Islamic Utopia so as to hoodwink those in the dark about their humanity?
Are they trying to replace "Ketuanan Melayu" with "Ketuanan Islam" in a two-tier society?
Are they trying to deceive the non-muslims into believing that they will not be affected by Hudud?
Are they intent on injecting an energy pulse into the Muslim masses, so as to give them the "delusion of power" and have them dance around like the harmless phone which turned into a deadly "deceptacon" (in the movie I mentioned above)?

I appeal to the PAS leadership to refrain from exploitative political tactics using medieval laws & dogma, and transform itself into a pragmatic and progressive political ally in the Pakatan Rakyat for the good of the nation.
For the good of a dynamic and progressive Malaysia, please drop the Hudud & Islamic State rhetoric.
There is nothing but honour in giving up regressive ideas based on medieval laws which may be divine only in part. If it is divine, then IMHO, its divinity stops when references may be from man made texts/literature of the Sunna/ Ijma/ Qiyas, which the different Sunni or Shiite schools of thought may interpret differently. Denying human frailties in interpretations are characteristics of "Godmen Politicians" and would be very unbecoming of true "men of God", whichever school of thought they may belong to.

Let us learn to articulate our ideas well, embrace various philosophies and refrain from the arrogance of claiming to have the monopoly on truth and justice. Let us inculcate positive values/philosophy (which can be Islamic and Universal) into the hearts of people, without having to merge religion/church and state.
There are many things about which PAS needs to "level" with the general public, despite its laudable cooperation in the Pakatan Rakyat. However, for now, should I be a KT voter, come what may, I'd still vote for PAS over any BN candidate, considering the nature of the Umno/BN regime.
To me PAS is still a better bet - at least for now ....

In the words of RPK, "I challenge PAS to prove its critics wrong. Re-endorse the People’s Declaration and prove, once and for all, that a civil society and not the cutting off the hands of thieves is the priority of the party. In response to the move by PAS to, again, endorse the People’s Declaration, the civil society movements, even those whom PAS labels as ‘deviant Muslims’, will go down to the ground to explain the issue to the voters. This, we promise PAS.

I can assure you of one thing. Even those who are not Muslims plus those, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, who are opposed to the setting up of an Islamic State and Hudud will be campaigning for PAS in the Kuala Terengganu by-election. Re-endorse the People’s Declaration and see whether this happens or not."

Wish you all a Very Happy and Prosperous 2009!

====================================

Further Reading:-

• Q & A on the Hudud and Qisas Enactment

• No Holds Barred (RPK)- The hypocrisy in man

• An outline of Hudud, Ta'zir & Qisas

• Hudud

• Islam and Violence in Malaysia
  

Total Recall - "Trojans" Revisited ....

"Who are the oppressors but the Nobility and Gentry; and who are oppressed, if not the Yeoman, the Farmer, the Tradesman and the Labourer?
... your slavery is their liberty, your poverty is their prosperity; yea, in brief, your honouring of them, dishonoureth the commonality... Unlord those that are lorded by you."
- Ranter Laurence Clarkson, 1647 (p. 81), The Many-Headed Hydra

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

Lately, as I was going thru the web for some reading material, I found this image of the three legged stool at a DIY blog - and guess what I thought of as I read the author's comment (below)?
It was none other than BN and its "NEP/social contract/Ketuanan Melayu" rhetoric!
"I like the design, but crutches are pretty expensive, so unless you have access to broken ones, it’s a bit prohibitive."

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

I also stumbled upon reviews of this book which I wish to get soon:

The Many-Headed Hydra is a book which explains how the ruling elites used legitimizing myths based upon metaphors of societal "terror" to manipulate cultural understandings in order to justify repressive violence against culturally defined "punishable categories of people".......

Be that as it may be, what actually plagues the nation now isn't just BN, but also the lack of conscience among politicians - more so, among those who trumpet "religious dogma" and not "values", so as to exploit the masses.

The recent removal of YB Khalid Samad as the PAS Dty. Commisioner from the Selangor line-up spoke volumes about the sincerity of the high profile BN-moles within the PAS hierarchy.
Therefore, calling these currently defensive guys in the leadership, "Trojans", as I did in a post here (it was mainly an interesting discussion on MT - Trojan Horses in the opposition ranks - early this year), wouldn't be too far from the truth.

With the PKR AGM currently afoot, it would be wise for the leadership to bear in mind - that anything which compromises the principles of the desired end result, is morally unsound. The electorate to bear in mind the Achille's Heel of the Pakatan Rakyat coalition, which threatens to derail the process of reform that has begun with 308. Hence, it is imperative that PKR and DAP strengthen their bonds and alliance, and consolidate their position - while not neglecting other partners.
So long as "these elements" do not apologize for the threats that they pose, but remain within the fold, instability and the possibility of derailment cannot be ruled out. These are elements who feel sidelined and apparently do not have not achieved "stature" in national politics befitting their "image", despite their popularity among their faithful. They definitely feel that "smaller" politicians have stolen the limelight which they seek for themselves..... hence the refusal to "play second fiddle" to PKR, but the willingness to be the "expensive crutch" (as in the pic) to Umno's "DIY stool", so as to "hide the shame".

BN/Umno, being masters at what they do, definitely wouldn't mind paying a kings ransom to ascertain their grip on real power, while dishing out peanuts for their "allies". With the might of the instruments of state on its side, let us not be so naive as to believe that Umno doesn't have moles within PAS - they have much more than we may realize, and DSAI knows that quite well.

While I value the electoral partnership that PAS has provided, never for a minute have I been convinced of their sincerity or their intellectual prowess (referring to these "certain individuals").
Although they never expected the electoral "windfall", they did it grudgingly - simply out of their hunger for power - and now their thirst don't seem to be unquenchable! Call me "politically naive" if you like - but I still maintain, that the least trustworthy in a roomfull of politicians, are those who have the need to hide behind the cloak of religion (at least, physically).

Here we have some politicians in "religious" garbs, clamouring for posts and making a pretense of their intellectual credentials, which only impresses the politically illiterate of the nation. They never hesitate to lie to the masses to hide the greed, envy and deceit that they harbour in their hearts.
These are the people who trumpet the virtues of a "theocracy", while they espouse the politics of sectarianism and subjugation.

They are just political wannabes and Umno "drop-outs", who just like their counterparts in Umno/BN, use the platform of democracy, to garner absolute power (but under the cover of religion). They do not care about the economy, democracy, justice or nationhood - they only care for power. These "godmen" would agree to any deal, as long as it can assure them access to power and control. They wouldn't mind being just one of the expensive crutches that would hold up a thoroughly corrupt regime, despite all their religious convictions and psycho-babble.
Their tool is ignorance (of course, once again under cover of religion) among the cloistered and isolated "unreasoning faithful".
Until and unless these guys have had their fill of "power" within the coalition, the danger of BN/Umno rearing it's one of its ugly heads from within would remain.
Just like the mythical Hydra, you can chop it off - but another would grow in its place.

This doesn't mean that PAS as a whole cannot work with their allies, as there is still a significant voice of "reason" within it's fold, which is unfortunately suppressed due to the lack of progressive politics, democracy and open debate (despite all the show we see). They are however, merely "tolerated" rather than accepted in the hierarchy. When push comes to shove, I seriously doubt that people like Khalid Samad and Husam Musa can withstand the onslought of the "godmen", who hold the minds of the unthinking faithful in a vice grip. It would be best for them to align themselves with PKR, and fight for their values from there.

Considering the frail & aging Nik Aziz, and the culture of "idol-worship" that's prevalent, the salvation of PAS's politics hinges on their "Erdogan-ization" - intellectuals and pragmatic in their fold. The so called "Erdogan Faction" within PAS should be embraced for their pragmatism and intellectual clout, while the heroes of "Amanat Hadi" should be zippered. In the event that the current PAS leadership resorts to Mahathirism (or Khomeini-ism) to suppress them, they would only fade once again into the political oblivion of radicalism, even if they were to ally themselves with Umno.
Considering the circumstances, the scepticism which DAP might harbour with regard to the sincerity of these "trojans" is, I'm certain, shared by PKR and Anwar.

But let's not write them off as yet - there's still hope that PAS will embrace positive values advocated by the intellectuals. There is hope yet, that they would be willing to open the minds of their followers to change, instead of recoiling into "Amanat Hadi"s of the future.
Let's see how they evolve, and what the future holds for them in Pakatan Rakyat ..... or maybe even in Umno!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Related:
Fearing the 'Trojans' of 916?
The PAS factor - A Viable Alternative?
The PAS "Cooperation" and Vote.
Class Politics - the Other Option?

God-Talk, Fatwas & Inquisition Theology

UPDATE:- *
Irene Fernandez acquitted
S Pathmawathy | Nov 24, 08 12:12pm
* BREAKING NEWS The Kuala Lumpur High Court today acquitted migrant workers' activist Irene Fernandez, bringing an end to a 13-year court battle.
===========================================

Luther himself was convinced that the separation of the teachings from the customs of the papal Church-to which separation he felt obligated-struck at the very foundation of the
act of faith.
The act of faith as described by Catholic tradition appeared to Luther as centered and encapsulated in the Law while it should have been an expression of the acceptance of the
Gospel. In Luther's opinion, the act of faith was turned into the very opposite of what it was; for faith, to Luther, is tantamount to liberation from the Law, but its Catholic version appeared to him as a subjugation under the Law.

-Luther and the unity ofthe churches...... Cardinal Ratzinger

==================================

Of late, there's been plenty of talk about the recent Fatwas released by the religious authorities, prompting many other sectors of society being horrified at the apparent "mindlessness" of it all.
This phenomenon of "religious edicts" being passed by "Godmen" isn't as isolated as it may seem. This has been the rule, rather than the exception in the Abrahamic faiths/sects for ages. More so, when the political establishment is intellectually and ideologically bankrupt, as it was during the time when the "Holy Roman Emperors" were attempting to perpetuate their rule through ignorance. They used religion to reinforce the perception that they were indispensible, in that they were the temporal guardians of "souls" in the hereafter.
After all why wouldn't a "right-thinking" public accept them as rulers on earth, when they care for the people's souls, right??!!
It gives them reason to "soldier on" in "defense" of whatever they seem worthy, so as to divert anger & attention from the corrupt & inefficient politicians, to the taxpayers themselves.
Today, these things would (if ever), rarely happen in a civilised nation.
Thanks to the Mahathirist antidote to earlier PAS-inspired "revivalism"/extremism through "Amanat Hadi" - In Malaysia however, they are enforced through using instruments of state, at the taxpayers' expense - just as in the Papal politics or "Islamist Republics/Monarchies".
Who knows - Maybe one day, we will have Rela-like uniformed Mat Skodeng "SWAT teams" ....

Anyway, I found some interesting things on the web with regard to this "Inquisition Theology", which speaks of orthodox "Catholicism", but quite comparable to the thinking of the Godmen we have in town.
Here's something from a forum on TheologyOnline:

Well, let's define what an Inquisition is: It is the execution of convincted heretics. What is a heretic? A heretic is a baptised person who denies or obstinately doubts some part of the data of divine revelation. A heresy is a belief which runs contrary to some part of the data of divine revelation.

For this reason, is it proper to call Hindus in India heretics? No. Is it proper to call Hinduism a heresy? Absolutely.

So, is killing those who are guilty of heresy acceptable? This is easy to answer. It is absolutely acceptable, and perhaps even mandated.

Here, we should differentiate between two sorts of crimes. There is the sort of crime which affects noone, and the sort which affects others. I think it is clear that, generally speaking, law is not the sort of thing to regulate crimes which affect only the criminal. For there to be a law, generally speaking, there must be a victim.

Some say that heresy affects only the criminal. Yet, this is not true. Heresy tends to spread, and heresy breeds heresy. You don't believe me? Just think about the Protestant Deformation. Heresy spreads heresy, and leads to worse and worse heresy. First, there was Luther. And then Communism. And then Anabaptism. And then the rejection of the mass and the Eucharist. Etc.

In heresy, there is a victim: Those who might be tempted to convert to that heresy.
Furthermore, there ought to be a distinction in the sort of thing lost in a crime: There is the sort of crime which threatens physical sorts of integrity and privacy, like theft, murder, rape, and the like.
Then, there is the sort of crime which threatens the soul. Our Lord says that this is the worse crime. "Fear not those who kill the body, but the soul (Paraphrase of Matthew 10:28)."

And indeed, heresy brings the death of the soul. Outside of the Church, there is no salvation (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus). To intentionally believe heresy is to excommunicate oneself from the Church. Therefore, to intentionally believe heresy is to close to yourself the gates of Heaven, and open wide for yourself the Jaws of Hell.
We say that murder ought to be met with execution. It is much more fitting, then, that heresy be met with execution, if the heretic is unrepentent.
So, in answer to the first part...is it right that heretics be executed? Not only is it right, but it is demanded by Divine Justice.
However, what about the Inquisition now?
Well, we can't say "It was right then, but not now." Justice is justice...end of story.
The problem lies in this, though: The vast majority of those who believe heresy are only formally heretics. Which is to say, that they believe that which is contrary to the Church, but do so out of ignorance of the truth. Therefore, they are formally heretics, but not subjectively.
==============================================


In comments from the letter that appeared on Sunday in Corriere della Sera, Italy’s leading daily, the pope said the book “explained with great clarity” that “an inter-religious dialogue in the strict sense of the word is not possible.”
In theological terms, he added, “a true dialogue is not possible without putting one’s faith in parentheses.”
-Pope questions interfaith dialogue ============================================

I answer that, With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death.

On the part of the Church, however, there is mercy which looks to the conversion of the wanderer, wherefore she condemns not at once, but "after the first and second admonition," as the Apostle directs: after that, if he is yet stubborn, the Church no longer hoping for his conversion, looks to the salvation of others, by excommunicating him and separating him from the Church, and furthermore delivers him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death. For Jerome commenting on Galatians 5:9, "A little leaven," says: "Cut off the decayed flesh, expel the mangy sheep from the fold, lest the whole house, the whole paste, the whole body, the whole flock, burn, perish, rot, die. Arius was but one spark in Alexandria, but as that spark was not at once put out, the whole earth was laid waste by its flame."

Reply to Objection 1. This very modesty demands that the heretic should be admonished a first and second time: and if he be unwilling to retract, he must be reckoned as already "subverted," as we may gather from the words of the Apostle quoted above.

Reply to Objection 2. The profit that ensues from heresy is beside the intention of heretics, for it consists in the constancy of the faithful being put to the test, and "makes us shake off our sluggishness, and search the Scriptures more carefully," as Augustine states (De Gen. cont. Manich. i, 1). What they really intend is the corruption of the faith, which is to inflict very great harm indeed. Consequently we should consider what they directly intend, and expel them, rather than what is beside their intention, and so, tolerate them.

Reply to Objection 3. According to Decret. (xxiv, qu. iii, can. Notandum), "to be excommunicated is not to be uprooted." A man is excommunicated, as the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 5:5) that his "spirit may be saved in the day of Our Lord." Yet if heretics be altogether uprooted by death, this is not contrary to Our Lord's command, which is to be understood as referring to the case when the cockle cannot be plucked up without plucking up the wheat, as we explained above (10, 8, ad 1), when treating of unbelievers in general.