Pseudo Scholars  

A Spineless Castle  

We are all too familiar with the death sentence on Salman Rushdie proclaimed by the Ayatollah Khomeini and also the case of Taslima Nasreen who was proclaimed an apostate by the Bangladeshi Ulema (Scholars).

Proclaiming death sentences and branding people as apostates seems to be a favourite method for the Ulema to solve any matters that come up. Many clergy members in Iran have been murdered for having differences of opinion.

In Malaysia the writer Kassim Ahmad was branded an apostate for questioning the hadith (traditions attributed to the prophet Muhammad). And presently another Malaysian writer by the name of Othman Ali is under severe criticism by the Ulema for having translated the Quran into Malay. Othman Ali's translation is immensely readable and easily understood. The Ulema fear that the people will become too knowledgeable about the Quran and start asking questions, which are too difficult for them to answer.

The opposition Islamic "fundamentalist" party Parti Islam Malaysia or PAS (which may soon be leaving the opposition to join the ruling coalition of Dr Mahathir Mohamad) has said that Othman Ali can be killed.

This is an accurate snapshot of the Ulema. Why do they behave like this? The answer lies in the fact that they have no means of answering tough questions because what they uphold is based on fabrications and falsehoods. Many of their beliefs were never preached by the Prophet Muhammad and were never revealed by God Almighty in the Quran.

Therefore it is necessary for the Ulema that they silence any and all opposition. They simply cannot have opposition because they do not have any truthful means to answer criticisms.

For example, according to the Ulema, Islamic laws are derived from the following sources: the Quran, the hadith/sunnah, ijma (consensus) and qiyas (analogy).

The Quran is from God and the Messenger. But the hadith/sunnah, ijma and qiyas are all the works of the Ulema themselves. To depend on these sources which are not from God and the Messenger goes strictly against the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad because the Prophet brought to us the following:

"Should I take other than God as a source of Law when He has revealed to us the Book explained in detail. Those who were given the scripture before recognize it as the Truth from God. Therefore do not be among those who doubt". Quran Surah 6:114.

When we show them this verse from the Quran, they behave as though they have never seen it before. And the Ulema are indeed doubters. In order to make their laws they must have the imam Bukharis, the imam Maliks, Shafies etc.

They must refer to their own created hadith/sunnah, ijma and qiyas. By doing this not only do they poke fun at the Prophet but they also go against the whole Quran, especially the following verses:

"What is the matter with you? How do you judge? Do you have another book, which you read one that gives you anything you want? Are you guaranteed anything you want on the Day of Resurrection? Say, "Who gave you this guarantee?" Surah 68:36-39.

This is exactly what the Ulema do. They make laws using anything and everything except the Quran. They ordain laws that were never sanctioned by God and His Messenger. They write their own books. And then they cleverly attribute their laws to God and the Messenger.

There are many problems with the Ulemas' books. The main issue with the ijma and qiyas is that there is no complete collection of ijma and qiyas anywhere in the Muslim world. Also who exactly is an Ulema whose ijma and qiyas can be accepted?

Anything that is a legal document must be clearly defined. For example the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan will definitely state at some point that it is the supreme law of Pakistan. The constitution of Malaysia will state that Malaysia consists of the 11 states of the Federation and the two states in North Borneo.

Similarly the Quran clearly defines itself in many place. For example: "God has revealed the best hadith, in the form of a Book consistent with itself, which shows both ways..." Quran Sura 39:23

Hence the Quran is the best hadith, which is in the form of a Book that has no error.

The jurisdiction of the Quran is also defined over all the peoples of the world who seek guidance: "ALM. That is the book in which there are no doubts, a guidance for the righteous" Quran Sura 2:1-2.

Can we find the same in the ijma and the qiyas or even the hadith? The answer is no. There is no one book anywhere in the world that can be identified as the definitive ijma or qiyas of the Ulema. The Ulema hold that to question or reject the ijma and qiyas of the Ulema is tantamount to rejecting Islam. This belief is not only mistaken but is also a malicious lie and a falsehood.

But even if we grant the Ulema their argument, they still face a problem. If in a proper court of law the Ulema are challenged to lay down on the table a complete set of ijma and qiyas for everyone to see they will face a problem. There is no such thing.

The ijma and qiyas is simply a loose reference of various books, sayings and consensus of different Ulema, which have been accumulated over time. That is all.

Also they will be hard put to convince anyone as to who exactly is an Ulema. It has been accepted in most parts of the modern Islamic world that Al-Azhar University in Cairo is an Ulema institution of some repute. But lately a scandal has broken out when it was reported in the Malaysian Press that many Al-Azhar graduates bought their certificates and now Al-Azhar graduates are a little slow to admit where they graduated from.

In the same way the old books are full of stories of Ulema calling each other disbelievers (kafir) and apostates. It is said that Imam Malik called Imam Abu Hanifah a kafir at one time. Of course Abu Hanifah was obliged to return the compliment. Therefore one man's Ulema is another man's kafir. And since there is no objective definition of who exactly is an Ulema their hypothesis of "consensus of the Ulema" crumbles by itself.

If the Ulema are reading this, by this time they will be foaming at the mouth and screaming "apostates", "Zionists", "orientalists", "kill them" and other typically Ulema type language. But it
I does not solve their problem, as they have no basis for what they say.

Even the hadith is merely derived at as being six sahih (authentic) books (Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmizi, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawud and Nasai). lt is arguable if the collection of Bukhari, Sunan Abu Dawud etc. is fully complete because the scholars differ in their opinions. There are books that have been written on how much of Ibn Majah should be rejected. Therefore the six sahih hadith books are actually less than six and definitely less than sahih.

Even if Bukhari, Muslim and others did compile their hadith books, they did not label them as "sahih". The "sahih" labels were put there by some other Ulema, much later. The same Ulema who cannot be defined in the first place.

And the Shiites reject all these anyway. They do not accept Bukhari or Muslim at all. They have their own books - equally confusing. And who are we to say that the Shiites are wrong? Are they not Muslims too? They believe in God and the Messenger, just like any other Muslim.

This is why the Ulema throw tantrums like small children when questioned critically. They must invoke the death sentence against anyone who challenges them because they have no answers.

The Prophet Muhammad preached with wisdom and knowledge. He never banned ' nor burned any books. Neither did he kill anyone who disagreed with him. Why? Because the Prophet had the Quran in his hand - the absolute and perfect truth from God. The Prophet never ran away from any questions or from any criticism.

We are now approaching the twenty first centuries. It is high time the Ulema stop being spineless parasites and start following the true example of the prophet Muhammed, peace be upon him.