There’s been a lot of hype about this movie for the last two years. The reviews so far are mixed. Some say the movie is good, while others not. For me, the movie is carries a well-used plot of corruption, black money, vigilantism, and religion, till some people say its a mix of Robin Hood, Sivaji the Boss and Anniyan. For me, this is a Comedy movie due the amount of laughter in the cinema. Its not really an action or romantic flick.
The story is straight forward. India is grappling with “black money”. Income earned without proper proof and not taxed. These money is the laundered overseas or hidden from the Income Tax department. The story starts with a comedic “cocky” act by Vikram (dressed up as a rooster) who drops down from the roof (ala Jayam) and bashes up Mansor Ali Khan, the local police officer. Why? Because Mansor took the money that a lady surrendered to the police. The money was actually given by Vikram to the lady’s family. Why you ask? Because the lady prayed to Lord Kandaswamy (Murugan) in Tiruporur (near Chennai?) to ask for help since her husband needs money. You see, temples in India(and Malaysia) would have a tree where people can tie things to send their requests to God. So in this particular temple, people can write their problems and tie on the tree branches, hoping that Lord Kandaswamy will answer their prayers. The temple priest are in cahoots with Vikram (whose name is also Kandaswamy) and will pass the request slips to him. Who is Kandaswamy? Well he is an income tax officer who is anguished because all their cases takes long time in court, and the seized money lies idle. So, he and another 11 friends (hint: flashback time) team up to deliver the wishes of the people by taking up the form of a rooster, the symbol of Lord Muruga. That’s when the comedy starts. Whenever Vikram appears as a fowl, its looks funny. The imitation of chicken walk was nicely done with lots effort, but still can’t resist laughing.
The story continues where Vikram’s department raids crook PPP’s (Asish Vidyarthi) house. To avoid further questioning, he pretend to get a stroke. Only his assistant YG Mahendran (wasted talent here) knows this. His daughter Subulecthumi (Shreya), who thinks Kandaswamy is the cause of her father’s stroke and vows to avenge him. She tries the “he tried to rape me” formula but fails miserably. Next is, yes you guessed it, – “i’ll make him fall him love with me until he becomes crazy” strategy. Boring stuff, but plenty of eye candy.
The story of Lord Kandaswamy appearing in the various forms – rooster, old man, young lady, etc to fulfill the makkal’s request or to teach a lesson to those who deserve it gathers momentum. Naturally the police led by Prabhu start their inquiry.
After a some time, Kandaswamy gets caught, not by the the actual cops, but by bad guys pretending to be cops, a setup by PPP. Left with no choice (Shreya was about to be molested by a prisoner as part of the process to get Kandaswamy to admit. duh!), Kandaswamy agrees. Kandaswamy then realises its a trap set up by father and daughter team. Kandaswamy also reveals why he did the robbery – a flashback involving the loss of a limb of his friend. He admits to his “crimes” and PPP uses the admission to blackmail Kandaswamy. Every raid Kandaswamy makes, he wants 50%.
The story drags on, with timely comedy by Vadivellu, including some scenes shot in Mexico where Kandaswamy goes to get in touch with the money laundering agents. Oh ya, the director Susi Ganesan makes a cameo here as a CBI officer who tails Kandaswamy to Mexico.
To cut the long story short (it was a 3 hours and 15 minutes movie!), Kandaswamy manages to catch another big crook and also gets arrested. Since there’s no proof that he was the one who actually helped the makkal (so said the judge) he was freed, but ordered to be transferred to another state. In the last shot he is shown being in a temple, and when walking out, takes a paper from a tree (ala Anniyan ending).
Story wise, its partially OK. There are holes here and there, but passable.
Acting wise, Vikram did well in the various roles, but Kandaswamy seems to prove that Shreya can’t actually act on par with other actress of substance. You might as well replace her with any other models and still the movie will go on. I don’t think both of them had any kind of on-screen chemistry at all. Frankly speaking, I kind of got turned-off when the duo was on screen together.
The villains were quite comedic as well menacing. Prabhu acted well as a police officer bent on revealing the truth about the persons behind the apparitions.
Comedy is the strength of the movie. The main attraction is of course Vadivellu. Without him, it would have been a below average movie. Villains, Vikram, Prabhu, YG Mahendran, and other actors also provided the laughter.
In terms of direction, the movie seems to stumble along and scenes fitted in to showcase Vikram’s talent, instead of strictly adhering to the movie. Some scenes are totally unnecessary, like the Mumaith Khan’s dance (waste 5 minutes to provide a 3 second dialogue – “can afford to pay 30 lakhs for a dance”). The scenes where Vikram’s team set up the cables and wiring, and conduct the stunt are not believable. Looks like inserted just to please someone.
Songs – Lots of modern beat. My favorites are Idhellam Dupe, and Excuse Me Mr Kandaswamy. The visualisation for Allegra looked messed up, probably trying to do some medley or combo dance sequence. En Peru Meenakumari is unecessary in the movie, but a catchy song nevertheless. Miow Miow also same – disjointed and irrelevant to the movie.
Cinematography is OK. The temple scenes, and song scene in Mexico was nice to watch.
Interested to learn Yoga? Not the type in Yoga centers, but one which is more down to earth at a spiritual venue. Its not free though, RM100 for adults. Then have attended it before, and found it to be useful. Only problem is that is in Batu Caves, so may have to brave the traffic on Saturday afternoons.
The excerpt from email I received below gives more details:
The Divine Life Society (DLS) Batu Caves conducts Hatha Yoga classes based on Swami Sivananda’s teachings. The next intake for beginners and intermediate is on 3rd October 2009. This is a 3 months course, conducted every Saturday from 3:45 pm to 5:00 pm at Yoga Block, Sivananda Ashram, THE DIVINE LIFE SOCIETY, Batu Caves, Selangor.
DLS is a charitable organization. One of our primary objectives are to disseminate spiritual knowledge to members of the public. Hence, for the 3 months yoga course – the fee is RM100 for adults and RM50 for students. Any poor students or adults who are unable to afford, we will waive their fee. Since our yoga fee is one of the cheapest in Klang Valley, many Chinese people grab this opportunity and attend our yoga classes. In fact, three quarter of our yoga students are non-Hindus. We are really not sure why the Hindus are not keen in learning Yoga. Many Hindus mis-interpret that Yoga is another form of exercise only. Yes it is an exercise, but there are many benefits in Yoga. In Yogic exercises, there is harmonious development of all the muscles of the body, internal organs, nerves and the frame. There are no rapid movements, hence there is no waste of energy. In Yoga, exercise movements are gentle and rhythmic, so energy is conserved. Kindly visit our Yoga Blog @ http://dls-malaysia-yoga.blogspot.com to gain more information on Yoga.
Thus, we would like to request your kind support to assist us to promote Hatha Yoga among your friends (especially Hindus) and relatives in Klang Valley. Attached is the Yoga New Intake poster for your distribution. If you would like to add our yoga blog link in your website, we would be very grateful.
Important Note: Yoga Asanas to be practiced by young people after twelve years of age, and not before. Hence, we do not accept students below twelve years of age.
Contacted later, Mahyuddin distanced his organisation from the act of bringing the cow head to the protest.
“It is not our intention. We were surprised,” he said, denying that the act was intended to insult Hindus.
He said that the cow head was likely brought by angry residents.
“Maybe, they meant it (as a symbol of) stupidity. In Malay culture, the cow is a symbol of stupidity, or leaders that are stupid,” he said.
Looks like this guy is trying to evade responsibility for the crime the group committed. Will the investigations reveal “lack of evidence” later?
Also, The Star Online finally came out with a muted report:
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has asked the Inspector-General of Police to investigate a protest by a group against the proposed relocation of a Hindu temple in Shah Alam.
Human Resources Minister Datuk Dr S. Subramaniam said Najib had also told him that he was upset with the incident.
The protesters, numbering 50, marched some 300m from the state mosque to the state secretariat building in Shah Alam Friday.
“Their actions, if not controlled from the beginning, may create unnecessary racial tension,” Dr Subramaniam said.
MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu said the authorities should not allow anyone to challenge or ridicule any religion in this country.
“I urge everyone to be calm and let the authorities deal with it,” he said.
Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, in an email, condemned the protest and said such actions posed a threat to national security.
Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon, in a statement, urged the state government to resolve the issue quickly, peacefully and rationally.
About 50 people gathered at the gates of the State Secretariat building here carrying a cow head and warned of further action if a temple is constructed in Section 23 here.
The group marched from the State Mosque about 300 metres away after Friday prayers.
Once at the gates of the building, they unfurled several banners calling for the temple to be moved and also on the beer issue.
They were at the gates for only 15 minutes before being dispersed by the police.
Some of the residents of Section 23, protesting against the temple relocation, demonstrated in front of the Selangor State Government Secretariat in Shah Alam today. Bernama pic.
The group, who claimed to be residents from Section 23, shouted the names of Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim and executive councillor Dr Xavier Jayakumar, and said the cow head was for them.
The new temple in Section 23 was supposed to be the relocated Sri Maha Mariamman temple currently in Section 19.
The Section 19 temple is about 150 years’ old and originally located in a plantation, but when the State Economic Development Corporation decided to develop the area into a housing estate, it left the temple there.
It was supposed to be relocated, but the problem had been left idle for many years.
Initially the temple was supposed to be relocated in an industrial area in Section 22 but it was moved to Section 23 to make it more accessible for devotees.
However a group of people in the area have protested against it, saying it is a Muslim majority area and no temples should be allowed to be built there.
About 40 per cent of the population in the area are believed to be Hindus.
Meanwhile in an immediate response, MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu strongly condemned the action by the group.
“The cow is a sacred animal of the Hindus, and for this group to resort to such action, is intolerable and tantamount to challenging the freedom of religion as enshrined in the Malaysian Constitution.
He said nobody can be allowed to challenge or ridicule any religion in this country.
“I worry that this action may lead to retaliation from the Hindu community. However, I wish to urge the Hindus to be calm and let the authorities deal with it.
“The MIC is calling on the Government and the police to take action against the organisers of this group and their followers. They must be punished according to the law for endangering the racial harmony in this country.”
Meanwhile Human Resources Minister Datuk Dr S. Subramaniam said while Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was promoting the 1Malaysia concept and racial unity, this kind of action would hinder the process and turn back the clock.
Dr Subramaniam said he had spoken to Prime Minister Najib Razak on the incident.
It may be dead, but stepping on the head of cow and spitting on it is abusive, vile, vicious, and unbecoming of people who claim to profess any religion. They have brought untold shame to their religion. This barbaric action is unforgivable, given that they just finished their prayers. Their evil action did not get support from the majority (only 50 people, whereas the Friday prayers crowd will see thousands attending in Shah Alam). Its time for DVS, PAWS or SPCA to lodge police report on animal abuse
I’ve surfed NST and Star online, but nothing on this issue till 8.45pm. Same with TV3 News. Only Malaysiakini carrying the news since 3.00pm or so.
Some 50 residents enraged with the proposed relocation of a Hindu temple to their area staged a noisy protest with a severed cow’s head this afternoon.
The residents – from Section 23 in Shah Alam – who gathered after the Friday prayers, placed the head outside the gates of the state secretariat building for a short period before removing it.
“Where is Xavier? This head is for him,” shouted one of the protesters in reference to Selangor executive councillor Dr Xavier Jeyakumar.
Jeyakumar is one of those in charge of non-Muslim affairs in the state.
Earlier, the protesters had marched some 300m from the state mosque to the state secretariat building.
The protesters also condemned Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim, exco member Rodziah Ismail (as the area falls under her state constituency) and Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad.
Before dispersing, several protesters spat and stomped on the cow’s head. The cow is considered sacred among Hindus.
Addressing the crowd, Section 23 action committee deputy chair Ibrahim Sabri said: “If there is blood, you (the state government) will be responsible if you are adamant about building the temple.”
“This is a warning.Relocate the temple to Section 22. This cow is a present to the state government. This is a gift from us,” he added.
The protesters also carried several banners which among others read ‘Take Beer’ (mocking PAS’ rallying cry of ‘Takbir’) and ‘Illegal temples are very small, but once relocated, they are as big as Putrajaya‘.
The crowd gathered for about 15 minutes at the main entrance of the state secretariat building under the watch of more than a dozen police personnel. [what were the police doing?]
‘We’ll not budge an inch’
Speaking to reporters later, Action Committee chair Mahyuddin Manaf warned that the state government must give in or the residents would retaliate.
“We will not budge one inch, even if lives are lost or blood is made to flow. We will still defend Section 23 from having a temple built there,” he said.[Hmm…later don’t blame anyone if you are in trouble with the law]
He added that a protest memorandum was forwarded to the state government two months ago but there has been no response.
On Aug 11, the state government announced that the relocation of the temple from Section 19 to Section 23 was final and will be situated 200m from the nearest house and 400m from a surau.
The temple will face an industrial lot and will be separated from the houses by a playground and a multi-purpose hall.
However, some residents felt that it was not appropriate to build a temple in a Muslim-majority area.
The Pakatan Rakyat state government accused rivals Umno of instigating the crowd to protest the relocation.
Jeyakumar to lodge police report
In an immediate reaction, a furious Jeyakumar described the protest as “unwarranted, unacceptable and without sensitivity towards other religions.”
He also said that he will lodge a police report on the matter soon.
“These people should have ethics. They are inciting racial and religious hatred. I am going to lodge a police report against these people,” he told Malaysiakini.
He also expressed disappointment towards the police personnel at the scene for not taking any action against the protesters.
“The police didn’t stop anybody. The police should have arrested them and charged them for inciting hatred,” he said, adding that he could tolerate with “ethical” demonstrations.
Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak is outraged over this afternoon’s ‘cow head’ protest in Shah Alam, said Human Resources Minister Dr S Subramaniam.
The MIC secretary-general told Malaysiakini that Najib had conveyed his disappointment when he telephoned him regarding the incident.
“The prime minister was very upset. He promised to look into the problem and nip it in the bud,” he said.
“Some 15 minutes later, the prime minister called back and said that he had spoken to Inspector-General of Police (Musa Hassan) and instructed him to take immediate action,” he added. [however, I heard nothing on the TV from PM or the IGP. So, just have to take Dr S.Subra’s words]
In a statement earlier, Subramaniam said incidents such as these hinder the 1 Malaysia concept being promoted by the premier and serve to only ‘turn back the clock’.
After performing their Friday prayers, some 50 angry residents from Section 23 in Shah Alam marched with the cow’s head to protest against the relocation of a Hindu temple to their area.
The protesters had marched from the state mosque to the state secretariat building.
“The group took their protest to the extreme by bringing a severed cow’s head which clearly is a sign of disrespect to the Hindu community,” Subramaniam said.
“It has emotionally angered the Hindus and if it is not controlled from the beginning, it may create unnecessary racial tension,” he warned.
Samy Vellu: This is intolerable
Meanwhile, Penang Deputy Chief Minister II P Ramasamy called the protest a “disgraceful” act.
“It was very uncivilised and brutish…and the group had just come after attending their (Friday) prayers,” the DAP leader said.
Also seeing red over the incident was MIC president S Samy Vellu, who called it an “intolerable” act carried out by an “extremist group.”
“The cow is a sacred animal of the Hindus, and for this group to resort to such action, is intolerable and tantamount to challenging the freedom of religion as enshrined in the Malaysian Constitution.
“It is the right of Malaysians of any faith, including Hindus to build temples and other places of worships. I am very sad that this group had paraded the cow’s head on their way to the state secretariat building,” he said in a statement.
“We must not allow anyone to challenge or ridicule any religion in this country. I am worried that this action may lead to retaliation from the Hindu community. However, I wish to urge the Hindus especially to be calm and let the authorities deal with it,” he added.
Samy Vellu called on the government and the police to take action against the organisers of this protest.
They must be punished according to the law for endangering racial harmony in this country, he added.
MIC Youth was also appalled and expressed shock over the protest.
“It is a very shameful and disgraceful act and they do not seem to have any feelings for the sentiments of the Hindu community,” said the wing’s chief T Mohan.
“We strongly condemn their actions and call on the authorities to take immediate action. There are proper channels to express one’s views but ridiculing the Hindu religion reflects the shallow minds of the protesters,” he added.
Human Rights Party leader P Uthayakumar was disappointed that the police did not arrest those involved in the protest.
He said the Attorney-General’s Chambers should initiate criminal proceedings and charge them under Sections 298 and 298 (A) of the Penal Code read together with Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.
Section 298 concerns the offence of uttering words etc with the deliberate intent to wound religious feelings while Section 298 (A) is related to the offence of causing disharmony.
Makkal Sakthi Party president S Thanendran also condemned the protest as a “barbaric” act.
He urged the Selangor government as well as the police not to tolerate this sort of behaviour and to take stern action against the protesters.
“How can a temple disturb the peace of these people?
“Things can become really ugly if we start raising other questions,” he said.
Selangor police chief Khalid Abu Bakar today called on the public to remain calm in the wake of a protest against a proposed temple relocation which saw some 50 angry residents marching with a severed cow’s head in Shah Alam.
The police chief also cautioned the public against holding demonstrations which touch on religious sensitivities.
“There was no police permit for this protest. It was an illegal gathering. The crowd gathered for about 15 minutes and dispersed after they were instructed to do so.
“They were also ordered to remove the cow’s head, which they complied,” he told Malaysiakini.
As of now, Khalid said no police report has been lodged over the incident.
“If a report is lodged, we will definitely take the necessary action,” he stressed.
Expressing regret over the incident, the police chief reiterated that everyone should respect religious and racial sensitivities and not resort to such actions.
Exco to lodge police report
Selangor executive councillor Dr Xavier Jeyakumar said he would be lodging a police report over the matter soon. [waiting for what?]
He also expressed disappointment with police personnel who were at the scene for not taking action.
Following this afternoon’s Friday prayers, some 50 residents from Section 23 marched from the state mosque to the secretariat building in Shah Alam with the cow’s head.
The protesters then placed the cow’s head outside the gates of the state secretariat building before removing it later.
The protest evoked condemnation from various quarters, including MIC president S Samy Vellu and Penang Deputy Chief Minister II P Ramasamy.
Samy Vellu, who was saddened by the incident, urged the police to take action against the organisers.
Granted, this is an act by some people who were instigated, and most of the rakyat seem to know who are the perpetrators. The hooligans mentioned all kind of threats and the police still waiting for someone to make a report. How efficient and law-abiding. Since the state government said they will be meeting the folks of Section 23 to explain, why not wait? Worried that the residents will be convinced by the explanation?
There’s some hidden agenda here. While we need to address why the temple’s initial proposed location at Section 22 was changed to Section 23, the action by these few barbarians are not helping to solve the problem at all.
Since last Sunday was Vinayagar Chaturthi, and coincidentally, there was a wedding to attend in KL (Ganesan Kulai’s), we decided to drop by Kotumalai Pillaiyar Temple (Jalan Pudu). The crowd was still there at around 10am, and traffic was bad. Managed to just prayer from outside the temple.
Anyway, before reaching the temple, we saw an elephant being transported on a lorry, followed by few lorries which took part in the record-breaking convoy to mark the birthday of Lord Ganesha.
Record-breaking convoy marks deity’s birthday
KUALA LUMPUR: The country’s longest convoy of 213 lorries took part in a procession held yesterday to celebrate Vinayagar Sathurthi, which marked the birthday of Hindu deity Lord Ganesha.
Measuring some 79.5km long, the convoy, which included an elephant to signify the deity, achieve a new feat in the Malaysia Book of Records.
Hundreds of devotees walked beside the lorries, which had been decorated with portraits of the elephant-headed Hindu god, in a procession that began at 7.30am from the Sri Maha Mariamman temple in Kampung Sungai Kayu Ara.
The procession stopped briefly at various places, including the Kottu Malai Pillaiyar temple in Jalan Pudu Lama and Batu Caves, before making its way back to Sri Maha Mariamman.
Big day: Devotees marking Lord Ganesha’s birthday celebration at Court Hill temple in Puduraya, Kuala Lumpur, Sunday.
Among the devotees at the Kottu Malai temple was 47-year-old secondary school teacher J.K. Vassanthi, who has been taking a fast of silence in homage to Lord Ganesha’s birthday for the past 28 years.
Accompanying her was her husband R. Ravindren, 48, who said his wife had been a devotee of Lord Ganesha before their marriage.
“She is thanking the deity for granting all her wishes and has even named our son after Him,” he said.
Another devotee who came to offer her prayers there was a Chinese woman, who embraced Hinduism three years ago.
“I feel calm and serene in this temple,” said the woman, who only wanted to be known as Adeline.
The 32-year-old fitness trainer said she often prayed at a nearby temple but decided to drop by Kottu Malai after finding out about the festival.
Clerk C. Minatchi, 31, said she had been going to the temple every week for six years since her prayers had been an-swered.
“My brother had gone into coma after an accident. I prayed to Lord Ganesha and 10 days later, my brother recovered,” she said.
Port company executive C. Kaleappan, 51, said he had been travelling all the way from Penang with his family to celebrate the occasion at Kottu Malai for the past 18 years.
“I feel a special bond with this temple and with the blessings of the Lord, my family is prosperous and healthy,” he said, who came with his wife and three daughters.
I read the following article which appeared in the Star few days back. It was an interesting reading, because the author at first seemed to agree with automatic conversion of children when one of the parents convert, but towards the end, he focuses on the need to get the marriage dissolved properly first (under the laws/religion that solemnised the marriage) before deciding on children conversion issue.
I wonder what happened to the cabinet decision, which was deferred by Conference of Rulers so that state religious departments can give more feedback. Are we to wait until another tragedy happens?
Religious conversion, children and confusion
IKIM VIEWS
By DR WAN AZHAR WAN AHMAD
Senior Fellow/Director,
Centre for Syariah, Law and Political Science
It has been announced that when non-Muslim parents convert to Islam, the religion of their kids will remain in the same religion in which the marriage was solemnised. Such a statement contradicts the Federal Constitution, religious positions and causes confusion.
THE long existing misunderstanding over the religious status of minors resurfaced when an ill-informed Cabinet minister announced that the religion of minors from non-Muslim parents, upon the conversion of any of the parents to Islam, remains in the religion under which the marriage was solemnised. Such a statement contradicts the Federal Constitution and some religious positions. It worsens the confusion among the people and draws criticisms from both Muslims and non-Muslims.
The following explanation taken from Prof Dr Abdul Karim Zaydan’s voluminous al-Mufassal fi Ahkam al-Mar’ah (vol. 9, pp. 442-53) attempts to clear the air by explaining the standpoint of Islam.
Zaydan quotes authorities from reliable jurists of the past and their works. They include al-Kasani’s Bada’i’ al-Sina’i’, al-Marghinani’s al-Hidayah, Shirazi’s al-Muhazzab, Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi’s al-Mughni, al-Sharbini’s Mughni al-Muhtaj, etc. These scholars may come from different schools of laws but as a whole, they represent the position of Islam.
In Islam, if a child was born from Muslim parents, jurists unanimously agreed that he or she is a Muslim. Similarly, if the child was born from a Muslim father and a kitabiyah (Jewish/Christian) mother, he or she is a Muslim. The principle applied by jurists here is ‘al-shaghir yatba’u khayr al-abawayni dinan’ (in terms of religion, the child follows the best religion of his parent). Since Islam is deemed the best religion, the child follows the religion of his or her Muslim parent, either father or mother. [Herein lies the problem. Obviously each religion deems that its the best religion. So, its a bit perverted to use only one religion to make decision]
Kasani explains that a child must follow whatever religion confessed by his parent. This is fundamental as one cannot but have a particular religion whereby one is judged for all actions. For a child, due to a lack of reason and intelligence, the choice of his or her religion is made or determined through parents.
What is the status of a child’s religion if both parents renounce Islam and become apostates? Jurists from all legal schools maintain that the child remains a Muslim. This is the opinion of Maqdisi as stated in his Mughni, Kasani in Bada’i’, Shirazi in Muhazzab and Sharbini in Mughni al-Muhtaj.
Could a minor commit apostasy in the first place? A leading Hanafi jurist Imam Abu Yusuf holds that puberty is a pre-requisite for the validity of apostasy. Therefore, a minor cannot apostate.
Scholars from the Hanbali school state that a child’s apostasy is valid provided he or she is mumayyiz and do have some basic understanding about Islam, i.e. knowing that there is no God but Allah and that He has no rival, and that Muhammad (s.a.w.) is His servant and Messenger. It means that if the child is not mumayyiz and does not understand Islam in the basic sense, his or her apostasy is invalid and ineffective.
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, the founder of the Hanbali school, was in favour of the invalidity of a minor’s apostasy based on a prophetic Hadith narrated by Ali bin Abi Talib r.a. and Aisyah r.a.
Reported by great traditionists like Bukhari and Ibn Majah, it states that “The pen (i.e. accountability) is lifted from three groups of people: an insane person till he becomes sane, a child till he reaches the age of puberty, and a sleeping person till he wakes up.” The Shafi’i jurists are of the opinion that apostasy by an underage child is meaningless. If it happens, it does not fall through, even though he or she is mumayyiz because such a child is yet to bear any religious responsibility (taklif) until and unless he reaches the age of maturity.
Therefore, we can safely conclude that all three schools of law are in agreement that apostasy by a minor is immaterial.
What is mumayyiz? It refers to a certain point of age when a child attains the ability to differentiate between good and evil, right and wrong. This may happen to any child below the age of puberty.
What is the age of puberty in Islam? Some scholars say that for boys, the age limit varies from seven to 15. The majority held that the most appropriate age is 15. The main indication for this is when they experience their first wet dream. For girls, jurists unanimously agreed that they reach puberty after experiencing their first menstruation.
For both boys and girls, they begin to carry religious responsibilities, i.e. become personally accountable (mukallaf) for all their actions after reaching this age of majurity.
Let’s examine the religious status of children from non-Muslim parents. The earlier basic principle that children follow the religion of parents applies here. If a child is born from a non-Muslim parent, he or she is not a Muslim. Similarly, if a child is born from apostate parents, he or she is considered an unbeliever.
The religious status of children appears most problematic when parent converts to Islam, especially if only one party does so. Generally speaking, if both father and mother embrace Islam, their children become Muslim as well.
If only one parent embrace Islam, their underage child becomes Muslim too. Between the two parents, the position of the one who embraces Islam is ‘stronger’ compared to the non-converting spouse. Therefore, a child follows the religion of the ‘stronger’ party. [Hmm..why stronger? I guess due to nature of the country one lives in and the laws the country has.]
The above position, however, is not to be understood in isolation of other considerations. In resolving marital disputes following a divorce on whatever grounds, paramount consideration must be given to the best interest and welfare of the children. This has been acknowledged by both syariah and civil laws.
Under certain circumstances, the best interest and welfare of the kids concerned does not relate to religious status, but rather to their early care and upbringing that does not necessarily involve religious education. [Agreed. the religious status of the child is not related to the welfare and best interest, unless of course you throw in all the benefits one gets as a … you-know-who. So, it kind of makes the playing field uneven.]
In Malaysia, the application of Islamic law is largely based on the school of Shafi’i. As regard to the conversion of minors when any of the parents embraces Islam, the general public is made to believe that those underage kids simply and automatically follow suit.
Interestingly, Zaydan’s Mufassal shows otherwise. The Shafi’i jurists, like Sharbini, hold a different opinion altogether. To them, the conversion of a minor is invalid. Their ground is the Prophet’s hadith narrated from Ali bin Abi Talib r.a. and Aisyah r.a. quoted earlier.
The hadith means that anyone who falls under any of the three categories is not to be held responsible or accountable for one’s action unless one is in complete control of reasoning, i.e. doing something consciously and willingly, knowingly of its purposes and consequences.
Since minority is one of those not accountable for any action, a minor’s conversion to Islam is irrelevant. In short, a minor is not obliged to shoulder any responsibility/accountability.
Therefore, any notion that Islam sanctions conversion of minors to the religion is questionable. I am more inclined to say that all the hue and cry on this issue is the result of ignorance, leading to the mistaken emphasis or over zealousness on something having no ground or footing in religion. [Hmm…what is this fellow trying to say now? No such thing as a minor converting?]
When a marriage breaks down due to conversion to Islam, the best solution must be sought from the religion under which the marriage was solemnised or the law under which the marriage was registered. All disputes pertaining to property, custody of minors and other ancillary rights must be resolved under that religious or legal system.
Any just and satisfactory solution at this level is extremely important as it will facilitate the parents concerned, either father or mother, to proceed with the choice of education or religious upbringing he/she wants for the minor accorded to them by the court.
All parties must come to their senses that they will not get all they pray for in the court of justice. If it so happens that custody of a certain child was given to any party, all must be content with such a decision unless the court itself has ignored or overlooked certain important aspects of the trial causing severe injustice to any party.
I acknowledge the fact that it is the collective responsibility of Muslims to pay serious attention to anything pertaining to their religion, especially if it threatens their dignity and interests. The same applies, I suppose, to followers of other religions. [“I suppose” ???]
But in protecting the sanctity of each religion, followers must not turn ridiculous as it will badly damage the image of their own religion. As a result, instead of bringing one person closer to a religion, they are actually distancing many others no matter how rigorous they explain the truth of the religion.
After all, if we really believe in the omnipotence or omniscience of God, none should worry as to where one would end up in the next life. A non-Muslim today may become Muslim tomorrow, and vice versa. Even if a corpse is cremated to ashes, the Almighty God knows where his place is. [This paragraph is what I like about the article]
Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email 
