Are the ulama untouchable?

Liberals in malaysia had always had an itch towards the ulama. Its seems
that every statement the ulama came up with is deniable and has a negative
effect on society. Im not just saying small time ustaz or ustazah at surau or
mosque but it also includes the ulama or muftis in respected organization
albeit it JAKIM, PAS , ISMA etc. Take an instance at the hudud issue or the
implementation of shariah by a certain ulama in PAS. It wade a serious
backlash by liberal feminist organisation SIS saying that we are Malaysians
and hudud and Syariah law does not have a part in Malaysia's constitution
and its multiracial back ground.
When JAKIM made a fatwa saying that liberal are deviants of Islam due to
upholding the concept of religious pluralism, to equate the Quran and human
reasoning as a source of revelation and questioning the methodologies of
interpreting the Quran and Hadith. SIS then responded by declaring JAKIM
ignorant and that JAKIM could not comprehend the meaning of liberal and
what liberal represents. When JAKIM issued a fatwa on homosexuals saying
that the practice of homosexuality is bad for health and a cause for the
spread of HIV , SIS again countered saying that JAKIM is misquoting and
ignoring real facts saying that the main cause of HIV spread is between
married couples and not homosexuality .Liberals will go as far as to gamble
the health of the public in the name of human rights and the lifestyle that is
condemned by Islam.
Liberals also attacked JAKIM and certain muftis on issue like celebrating
Valentines Day and Christmas in which JAKIM raised the issue that these
celebrations could affect some core beliefs in Islam in a way that any
practice or behaviour with respect to non-Muslim festivals and celebrations
that involve the questions of aqida or conviction such as acknowledging
other religion or believing that all religions are same, are prohibited in Islam
and to give congratulatory and good wishers or to send greetings using cards
or telecommunication devices such as e-mails, short messaging system
(sms) or etc to non Muslims during their religious festivals is permissible, on
the condition that the greetings do not recognise, praise, glorify the religion
of non-Muslims and also do not use any of their religious symbols in the
greetings sent.. Liberals replied that this issues are made up to stir racial and
religious indifference in Malaysia's multi-ethnic diversity saying that these

celebrations has no ties to any religious beliefs and these celebrations are a
way Malaysians could create a more harmonious and tolerant nation.
The clash goes on between the ulama and the liberals. And of course due to
the strong media support from malaysiakini , themalaymailonline and
themalaysiainsider the ulama seem to be portrayed as ignorant , racist and
extreme while the liberals like SIS and G25 are portrayed as knowledgeable ,
tolerant and a new voice for moderation in which they are actually not.

So why are liberals soo ANTIULAMA?

The answer is very simple , they believe that the ulama think , act and
behave like the clergy in the later middle ages/dark ages. The clergy and its
institution in the dark ages was at its most condemned state. It was making
profits from the sale of the Indulgences ,stealing welfare money that was
given to the church and even persecuted anyone who went against them by
killing , crucifying , burning and impaling them. They feel that the ulama is
an impediment, a hindrance and also a restraint against knowledge and
freedom like the clergy in the dark ages.
It needs to be cleared that the clergy in dark ages rejected any new
discovery that was brought forward by scientist and researchers. They
labelled such scientist and researchers as godless infidels , apostates and
heretics. The ulama or theologians or scholars of Islam never in its history
rejected science and new discoveries , even the ulama themselves are the
pioneers in new frontiers of science such Al-Khawarizmi , Ibn Sina and Ibn
Rusyd. New discoveries were dealt with enthusiasm, curiosity and
inquisitiveness. There was always room for discussion, debates and
dialogues which was done within the compounds and spectrum of shariah.
The clergy was also infallible. To go against the church is to go against god
and the holy spirit. No one up to this day could argue and question the
church and the pope's orders and commands. These orders are from the
divine and should never be questioned. On the other hand the scholars of
Islam on the other hand are not infallible, they only convey the message and
teaching of Islam from the prophet Muhammad s.a.w and the ulama are
accountable for every word and action that they convey to the Muslim

community. The ulama could also be questioned and by any muslim who can
stand up and make their argument with the right reasoning and justification.
It is shown in countless of times in the time of prophet Muhammad s.a.w and
his successors Abu Bakr r.a and Umar r.a one of which the prophet accepted
the suggestion of Salman al-Farisi to dig a trench in the Battle of Khandak
after the performing syura and consulting his companions.
The clergy also did many ridiculous alterations and amendments to the bible
and its teachings. It started with the sudden appearance and emergence of
the Trinity doctrine first announced after the First Constantinople Conference
in the year 381 followed by the Conference of Rome in 1215 in which the
Pope was given grants to absolve and forgive any sins committed by
Christians and the clergy even made the Pope infallible after the the
Conference of Rome in 1869. All this alterations were done without any sort
of discipline and accountability with none of them being arguable. Islam on
the other hand forbids any alterations and amendments outside the barriers
of the Quran and Hadith and what is told by prophet Muhammad s.a.w and if
any , these alterations would be put into debates and discussions and the
people who are involved will the held accountable for their arguments and
the decisions made after.
Even the Quran tells us that we can ask, question and argue with the ahl zikr
or the people of knowledge and remembrance in surah An-Nahl (16:43).
We did not send (messengers) before you other than men whom We
inspired with revelation. So, ask the people (having the knowledge) of the
Reminder (the earlier Scriptures), if you do not know.
The way I see it , liberals are asking questions inside the boundaries ,
compound and spectrum of islam and shariah but not to understand them
and practise them in their lives like what the companions of the prophet did
but with the sole purpose of dismantling and striping Islam to its core until
there is nothing left of Islam but mere beliefs that are devoid of value and
impact in the lives of Muslims. This explains their attitude and behaviour
towards ulama and the people of knowledge and remembrance.

MUHAMMAD SUHAYL BIN MUSAUDDIN

ALEXANDRIA , EGYPT