In the article the author brings into focus the recent controversial decision by SANHA to certify Israeli products, and a subsequent radio debate in which the author was one of the participants. SANHA was represented by an Alim. In the course of the debate the author expressed his view that the decision by SANHA to certify Israeli products was wrong, to which the SANHA representative responded that ‘people with no qualifications should not be saying that the Ulama are wrong.’

Granted, the decision by our esteemed colleagues to certify Israeli products lacked expediency, and that the statement made by the SANHA representative to the author was unfair. After all, a true Alim realizes that he is not infallible, and should never disdain to take advice, provided it is sound, from even a child. The author had every right to complain, which he did by means of his article. Up until that point in his article, he was perfectly justified, but that’s where it should have ended. He might even have gotten some sympathy. But no.

Rather disappointingly, in the remainder of the article the author gleefully goes and does exactly what he accuses the SANHA Alim of doing. Where he accuses the Alim of using the Quran to justify his opinion, he attempts to use the Quran to lambaste the entire Ulama fraternity (with a few vague exceptions), not just of today, but for the last few decades! Besides that, in his emotion-and-prejudice-charged frenzy, he breaks several laws of intelligent and fair discussion, such as:

1. Concealing the facts
The author makes reference to the early days of the Muslim Youth Movement (MYM), when the members of the group arranged Quran study ‘halaqat’ as they were called. Very good, no problem there: a group of Islam-conscious youngsters, eager to increase their knowledge of Islam by studying the Holy Quran. Rather commendable, really. So why would the Ulama oppose such a thing? It seems illogical!

Well, the author leaves out an important fact: the underlying intention of the halaqas was not to simply study the Quran, but to re-interpret it! Groups of people would gather around a translation of the Quran and say, ‘I think this’ or ‘I think that’. What were the Ulama supposed to do? Sit back and allow the Quran, and consequently Islam, to be interpreted and re-interpreted until it is beyond recognition, just a shell of the Islam of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) and his companions? Until the Quran faces the same fate as the Bible and other books of the past? No way! Qualified or not, no one will be allowed to do that!

2. Distorting the facts
The author then goes on to claim that the Ulama ‘controlled’ the Musjid platforms and media, subtly alluding to some kind of cartel. This is a clear distortion of the truth, which is that it was the people who made that choice, not the Ulama. If the people wanted, they could have chosen just about anyone to lecture at their Masaajid, but they chose the Ulama. Why? Because the Ulama taught them about the pristinely pure Islam of the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alaihi Wa Sallam), not some distorted version! Isn’t that what we call democracy?

Even today, throughout the world large numbers of Muslims are turning to the pure Islam that is preserved and presented by the Ulama. In fact, it is so popular that the West even has a name for it: fundamentalism!

3. Self-contradiction
It is really strange and amusing how people sometimes contradict themselves while trying to make a point. This typifies people who debate emotionally rather than intelligently, without facts, or unjustly. The author demonstrates a classic example of self-contradiction in the following extract:

“This idea that only an Alim is allowed to understand the Quran or comment on it is ridiculous when one considers that many Arab children read and understand the Quran from a very young age. And because the Arabic of the Quran is not the Arabic that they speak, their understanding is sometimes unusual.”

First of all, the claim that only Ulama are allowed to understand the Quran is, in the least, absurd. Even a layman will tell you that. But that’s beside the point. The point here is that the author agrees that Arab children do understand the Quran, and that their understanding can be ‘unusual’. Our point exactly. If a child can derive an ‘unusual’ and possibly misguided understanding of the Quran, then is it not possible that an adult without the proper training can do the same? It is not just possible, it is highly probable. Yet, when the Ulama graciously attempt to correct the erroneous ones, what do they say? ‘Qualified or not, the Quran is ours!”

We agree that the Quran belongs to everyone, not just the Ulama, but that does not mean it can be toyed with by anyone who feels like it. The Quran is the kalaam (speech) of Allah the Almighty Himself, not some school set work novel, and has to be approached with extreme caution. There are several rather stern warnings issued by the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) against carelessness in this regard.

The author’s claim that qualifications are not necessary is totally illogical and absurd. After all, no sane person would like to be operated by a ‘surgeon’ who has never been to medical school, and hence has no formal qualification, but acquired his knowledge through self-study! So why should it be different when it comes to Islamic matters? Or is Islam less significant than medicine?

Much of the remainder of the article is nothing more than emotional hodgepodge, loaded with rhetoric, false claims and insults, such as when the author refers to the Ulama as being ‘arrogant.’

Steadfast and tenacious in the protection of Deen? Yes. Arrogant? Certainly not! It’s just a matter of interpretation!

Jamiat Comment: It must be borne in mind that the work of the Ulama is never to insult anyone, but to guide. It is hoped that this article is taken in that light. After all, in these difficult days it is necessary for all sincere Muslims to put aside personal prejudices and to work alongside each other, not against each other. May Allah Ta'ala guide us all.

Staff Sgt Camilo Mejia, a member of the Florida National Guard, yesterday was sentenced by an eight-member military panel to the maximum penalty of one year in prison and a bad conduct discharge. His pay was reduced by two-thirds to $US795 ($A1,143) a month.

Mejia, a nine-year US Army veteran, was deployed to Iraq early last year and took a two-week furlough to the United States in October. He was gone for five months before surrendering to Army officials in March. He has filed an application for conscientious objector status.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Wednesday acknowledged that June was a difficult month for American and allied troops in Afghanistan, saying the higher death toll there was because troops are taking the fight to Taliban militants. President Bush says Wednesday he's confident the strategy to root out the Taliban and al Qaeda is working.

"It has been a tough month in Afghanistan, but it's also been a tough month for the Taliban," Bush said at a Rose Garden news conference in response to reporters' questions about several sobering milestones last month.

Forty-six U.S. and allied personnel lost their lives in Afghanistan last month, the highest monthly toll since the war started. The 28 American troop deaths also marked the highest U.S. monthly death toll in Afghanistan in the conflict.

In May and June, the American and allied death toll surpassed those in Iraq, where there are far more U.S.-led coalition troops.

In June, 46 foreign troops died in Afghanistan and 31 troops died in Iraq, according to official figures tallied by CNN. In May, 23 foreign troops died in Afghanistan and 21 in Iraq.