PAS' mentality fixated on punishment

MM Online - SIS: Where is public caning commanded in the Quran? (extracts):

KUALA LUMPUR, July 13 — The Kelantan government should point out the section in the Quran that allows for public caning, Sisters in Islam (SIS) demanded today.

The Muslim women’s rights group said shaming and punishment would only create an increasingly repressive environment that would affect women and the poor disproportionately as in Acheh, pointing out that the Indonesian province’s Shariah laws have extended to non-Muslims too.

“Do not deceive the Muslim population here by brandishing the holy religion of Islam to justify these deplorable actions,” said SIS in a statement.

“As Malaysians, we demand that the Kelantan state government repeal the amendment in the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Procedure Enactment 2002 and observe Article 5 of the Universal Declaration Human Rights (UDHR) that no one shall be subjected to torture, cruel or degrading form of punishment,” the group added.

The Kelantan state legislative assembly yesterday passed amendments to its state Syariah Criminal Procedure Enactment that would allow Shariah offenders to be caned publicly.

PAS dominates Kelantan State Legislative Assembly

Should we be surprised that the PAS state government in Kelantan wants to flog even Muslim sinners (not criminals), yes, sinners but only in the eyes of PAS ulama in accordance with their mortal interpretation.

This has been precisely what Kassim Ahmad warned us about, that the priesthood caste who only arose 300 years after the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), would present themselves as the absolute authoritative interpreters of Islamic laws, even when its source is from the Hadith and not al Quran.

Like many modern reformists, after comparing the teachings of Hadith to the Quran, Kassim experienced a paradigm change.

He shook the Malay world with his Hadith: A Re-Examination in which he challenges the infallibility of the purported words of Prophet Muhammad.

BTW, 'purported' means just reported by someone (and not the prophet himself) who claimed those words were from prophet Muhammad but without proof (hearsay), in other words, the ahadith

 His recent book, Islamic Renaissance has been published by Brainbow Press.

As we have already found out from Wikipedia (edited for length but not meaning of contents): 

A hadith (plural: ahadith) is one of various reports describing the words, actions, or habits of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. The term comes from the Arabic language and means a "report", "account" or "narrative".

Unlike the Qur'an, which is the same literary work recognized by all Muslims, the ahadith is not one single same collection.

The ahadith refers to different hadith collections, and different branches of Islam.

The hadith literature is based on spoken reports that were in circulation in society after the death of Muhammad.

Unlike the Qur'an the hadiths were not quickly and concisely compiled during and immediately after Muhammad's life.

Hadith were evaluated and gathered into large collections during the 8th and 9th centuries, generations after the death of Muhammad, after the end of the era of the "rightful" Rashidun Caliphate, over 1,000 km (620 mi) from where Muhammad lived.

Hadithists, therefore, maintain that the ahadith are a necessary requirement for the true and proper practice of Islam, as it gives Muslims the nuanced details of Islamic practice and belief in areas where the Qur'an is silent.

At this stage I wish to highlight the Judeo-Christian Book of Jubilees which could be said to be the Christian equivalent of the Islamic ahadith.

The Book of Jubilees explains what the Bible means, in other words, interpret it, and even give names and explanations to biblical personalities who the actual Bible itself does NOT, eg. who were the daughters of Eve - Âwân who married her brother Cain and then Azûrâ who married brother Seth, thus sparing Judaists and Christians the embarrassment of Eve having sex with her sons, wakakaka.

While the Tanakh (OT) named the father of the biblical Heracle, Samson (Shimshon), as Manoah but not mum, the Book of Jubilee 'helps' lots (wakakaka) by filling in that gap, naming her as Hazelelponi (another Rabbinical source named her as Zlelponith).

Both Manoah and Hazelelponi were supposedly barren, but thanks to Hazelelponi herself alone meeting an 'Angel' quietly in a field, who told her the good news of her pending pregnancy, she gave birth to the Shimshon.

There seems to be a number of these strange pregnancies miraculously occurring to 'barren old couples' in the Bible after the women met 'angels' or heard 'voices'.

Shimshon 

Anyway, it was remarked that while some Israelites/Judeans couldn't care less about names of some women in the Bible, the Pharisees (predecessors of Rabbis) decided to help by writing them in (eg. Âwân, Azûrâ, Hezelelponi) within the Book of Jubilees, wakakaka.

And that's how we come to know of Shimshon's mum being Hazelelponi and her miraculous 'meeting' with an 'Angel' whereafter she became pregnant - Hallelujah. 

We are informed by a couple of websites including Wikipedia (relevant composite extracts):

The Book of Jubilees, sometimes called Lesser Genesis (Leptogenesis), is an ancient Jewish religious work of 50 chapters.

The first biblical scholar to propose an origin for Jubilees was Robert Henry Charles (1855–1931). Charles proposed the author of Jubilees may have been a Pharisee and that Jubilees was the product of the which had already been worked on in the Tanakh/Old Testament Books of Chronicles.

As for whether the Book of Jubilees should be in the Bible, we must first recognize the fact that God is the One at work in the Scriptures, and if He wanted the Book of Jubilees as a part of Scripture, no man (or Satan) could have prevented it.

Yes, the Book of Jubilees is NOT the Bible just as the ahadith are NOT the al Quran or in the al Quran.

To recall what biblical scholars said of the Book of Jubilees, if He [God] wanted the Book of Jubilees as a part of Scripture, no man (or Satan) could have prevented it.

... which brings us to Quranist, which Wikipedia tells us:

Quranists, on the contrary, hold the critical view on hadith that anything on which the Qur'an is silent is deliberate because Allah did not hold its detail to be of consequence, and in the case of ahadith that contradict the Qur'an, more so should those ahadith be forcefully rejected outright as a corruption of Islam.

That has been why the greatest Malay intellectual of all times, Kassim Ahmad, urges Muslims to obey only the al Quran and not the Johnny-come-lately priesthood caste and their own interpretations of the ahadith.

Logic of the Quranists tells us if Allah swt had wanted to say this or that, those would have been in the al Quran, not the ahadith, as the Quranists had emphasized anything on which the Qur'an is silent is deliberate because Allah did not hold its detail to be of consequence.

And that's why those priests in JAWI arrested and detained Kassim Ahmad, but their charges against Kassim Ahmad was dismissed by the Court which ruled that JAWI acted illegally.

The Islamic priesthood caste were sh*t scared of Kassim Ahmad and his intellect collapsing their House of Card built on sand.

A recent example of what Kassim Ahmad warned of the priesthood caste had been the Jakim DG mal-interpreting the 'sin' of a Muslim woman in keeping dogs, when there is NO such sin in al Quran.

This has been exactly what SIS asked of the PAS Kelantan state government: Where is public caning commanded in the al Quran?

I have invented a new English word, to wit, 'mal-interpreting' to indicate the malevolent intent of Jakim DG, the self-professed interpreter of Islamic law which does not exist in al Quran.

Incidentally, the word malevolent means 'having or showing a wish to do evil to others'.

To cut a story short, I regret the malevolent action of the PAS state government in wanting to flog 'sinners' in public, but it's their nature to punish, punish, punish, the very words of Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin of G25.

Star Online reported in its State govt fixated on punishment, say groups (extracts):

The Kelantan PAS state government’s move to introduce public caning for syariah offenders has been described by many as unconstitutional and showing an obsession with punishment.

Yayasan 1Malaysia chairman Dr Chandra Muzaffar said the amendments reflected PAS’ mentality, which he said focused on punishment rather than the reform that is central to Islamic jurisprudence.

“It shows their continued adherence to an interpretation of syariah that is obsessed with punishment." [...]

Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin of G25, the group of eminent Malays, said the move by PAS would only tarnish the image of Islam.

“All PAS is interested in is punishment, punishment and more punishment,” she said. [...]

PAS is obsessed with punishment

PAS have a burning need to use punishments to threaten, frighten and intimidate lay Muslims into obeying them, and the more severe the punishments the better for them. That has been why Hadi Awang wants an amendment to Act 355 to increase, among higher fines and longer imprisonments, the floggings from a mere 6 strokes to 100 lashings.

PAS crave absolute power which they believe they could never obtain from civilised compassionate courteous acts and preaching, but only through severe punishments and threats.

Additionally, I am also sick of PAS or UMNO telling non-Muslims that the UDD355 increased punishments including flogging will not apply to non-Muslims.

They think as if that's a great deal, a gift, a bonus for which we non-Muslims should be thankful and grateful to them.

We as Malaysian citizens want to be treated equally. We all are, according to PAS own preaching, creation of Allah swt, so why should Muslims be treated so harshly by PAS, for sins instead of crimes.

We want our Muslim fellow citizens to be treated as we are treated, where we are or will be punished for only crimes and not sins.

PAS should stop patronising non-Muslims by telling them constantly they won't be affected by syariah laws, when we know that's not true at all, as non-Muslim spouses of Muslim partners would be able to tell us. And in Aceh we have seen non-Muslims being flogged.

Why must non-Muslims eat Auntie Annie's 'pretzel sausages' when we like what we bite into there to be called 'hot dogs'?

Why must we have a halal certificate for birthday cakes we buy or bake to take into MacDonald for our loved ones' birthday celebrations?

PAS has become a nuisance in the lives of Muslims and non-Muslims, and should be banned and disbanded as a political party, as should all religious political parties (Christian, Buddhist, Taoist, or Hindu like Hindraf - no exception).

in Aceh 

Related:

(1) PAS loves whipping Muslims kau kau?.

(2) Theocratic 3 P's - prohibit, persecute & punish.

(3) PAS loves to punish kau kau.

(4) Why should taxes from non-Muslim sources fund JA-organizations?.