Thank you Mujahid Yusof Rawa for regurgitating more vague rhetoric in yet another attempt to deflect the issues I raised. I would like to begin by stressing my point - what I said was in the provision of someone who is already a Muslim and then commits apostasy. Unlike Muslims, non-Muslims in Malaysia are not persecuted by the state apparatus on the basis of their beliefs, therefore this is a non-issue.

Firstly, whose understanding does my reading of verse 2:256 contradict? Do you profess to claim a monopoly on the understanding of the Quran? In an attempt to correct my 'misleading interpretation' you cite verse 2:217, which I reproduce below (Yusuf Ali translation):

'They ask thee concerning fighting in the Prohibited Month. Say: 'Fighting therein is a grave (offence); but graver is it in the sight of Allah to prevent access to the path of Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and drive out its members.

'Tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. Nor will they cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith if they can. And if any of you turn back from their faith and die in unbelief, their works will bear no fruit in this life and in the Hereafter; they will be companions of the Fire and will abide therein.'

This verse states that disbelief in Allah ('to deny Him') is a grave offence but nowhere does it suggest that action be taken against apostates. As far as Muslims are concerned Christians and Jews already believe in Allah, though they may know Him by a different name.

If we are to agree that 'tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter', and take this in conjunction with 2:256, then clearly this speaks in defense of the freedom of religion. Ayah Pin and his followers have undergone 'tumult' and continue to face 'oppression'. Are they also not undergoing 'compulsion' in matters of religion (2:256)?

You go on to state that 'if someone were to choose Islam out of his own will, he must understand that there is provision in the faith of Islam that apostasy is prohibited'. You suggest by implication that the (approximately) 95 percent of Muslims who were born in to the faith and by definition were given no choice are thus free to leave it. This would include the apostates I

referred to earlier

The Federal Constitution continues to provide all Malaysians the guarantee of freedom of religion. How ironic that it is this same social contract that you must rely on to justify the authority of the state-mandated Shariah law systems we find in Malaysia today.

What you fail to mention is that the Federal Constitution, which we both clearly hold in high esteem, firstly limits the sphere of influence of state-defined Shariah law only to 'people who profess the religion of Islam' (Schedule IX-II-1).

And only to personal and family law which Schedule IX-I-4 (ii) further defines as and limits to 'marriage, divorce, guardianship, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy, family law, gifts or succession testate or intestate'.

Firstly, apostates are no longer 'persons professing the religion of Islam' so these laws should no longer apply to them. Secondly, the state-defined Shariah law is not mandated to handle the issue of apostasy. This is wholly consistent with Article 11 (1) which provides the guarantee of freedom of religion. This contention is to be tested in an upcoming landmark case .

It would be most enlightening if you would kindly elaborate on the punitive consequences (for apostasy) as provided in the Syariah that you so avoided raising. How does your understanding of these consequences compare to the fatwa issued by learned scholars in Perlis?

The fatwa states that non-Muslim women who convert to Islam in order to marry Muslims who at some point revert to their original faiths are to be killed in accordance with Islamic law. It goes on to assert that because Islamic law is not implemented in Malaysia they cannot be killed but suggests in the meantime that we follow the Hanafi madhab and mercifully imprison such individuals for the remainder of their pitiful lives.

Could such menacing logic possibly be what you alluded to when you stated that 'it is the right of any faith to condemn apostasy'?

You mention that 'a Muslim understands well this ruling and considers it as a protector to preserve his faith'. Are you suggesting that those who disagree with such outrageous rulings are kafirs ?

I remain disturbed and perplexed by the premises that appear to underlie your principles.

The notion that in this day and age, a government can and should persecute people for holding divergent yet peaceful beliefs is abhorrent. If you are unsure of what is wrong with how the issue of Ayah Pin has been handled, 48 of his followers have been behind bars since July 20 and have been charged with acting contrary to a fatwa.

I am sure that these people and their parentless children would be willing to educate you on the injustices and humiliation they have had to endure over the years.

Elizabeth Wong's writing is most articulate. Through your own transparent attempts to blur the issue you have managed to befuddle only yourself. Your criticism of Dr Syed Alwi Ahmad rings equally hollow as you fail to address his valid question of what constitutes deviationist teachings.

While I am unsure of the position of PAS on this, I understand that Jakim issued a statement that has decreed any teachings which fall outside the scope of the Jamaah Wal Sunnah (ie, the four Sunni madhabs) as deviationist. Given this, can Shias in Malaysia look forward to the same treatment as Ayah Pin's followers?

Finally, I would like to ask you to clarify your statement made during a talk you gave in May in which you implored Muslim Malaysians to plant the seeds of hate towards liberal Islam ('Rakyat Islam kena menanam perasaan benci terhadap golongan ini').

It speaks volumes of your party that despite such incendiary vitriol, you continue to head the so-called National Unity Bureau of PAS. Indeed, your words have done more to reinforce current stereotypes of PAS than Syed Alwi.

To dispel the mirage you have conjured around yourself, please repeat after me: 'Freedom of religion for all is guaranteed in the Quran and in the Malaysian Federal Constitution'.