PERLIS mufti Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin, who has been accused of “permitting (menghalalkan) adultery”, responded by saying Islam permitted differences in opinions and allowed its followers to support or disagree with the views of certain ulama.

Although he did not mention Perak mufti Harussani Zakaria by name, Asri said as long as the subject in question was something that could be studied, there was room for differing views; and support for something should be based on arguments, and not emotions or obsessions.

“We can criticise views, but we cannot insult imams with honour by accusing them of permitting what Allah has made ‘haram’.

“Such accusations are overboard if they are uttered. The person who makes such an accusation either does not understand the wide differences of opinion on this issue, or lacks courtesy towards imams.

“If we don’t agree, we say ‘I don’t agree with this view’ or ‘I think this view is weak’. Don’t say ‘this is permitting what is haram’ and such,” Asri said on his DrMAZA.com Facebook page this evening.

Earlier today, Harussani accused Asri of appearing to “permit (menghalalkan) adultery” though his support of the Court of Appeal ruling which allowed children conceived out of wedlock to carry their father’s name.

Harussani said Malaysia did not need to “go against the flow” when it came to children conceived out of wedlock, as Muslim scholars had decided on the issue a long time ago.

Asri said the Imam of the Hanafi school of thought, Abu Hanifah once said that it was not wrong for a man, who had impregnated a woman in an extramarital affair, to marry her, cover the shame and take the child as his.

He said ulama only have differing views about “nasab” (lineage or pedigree) when it comes to children born to women without husbands.

He said views similar with Abu Hanifah’s had been cited by clerics before and after Abu Hanifah like ‘Urwah bin al-Zubair, al-Hasan al-Basri, Sulaiman bin Yasar, Ishaq bin Ruhuyah, Ibn Taimiyyah, Rasyid Ridha, Dr Yusof al-Qaradawi and many other well-known ones.

“Do we accuse them of permitting zina (adultery) or we are just shallow in our reading of other people’s arguments and reasonings?” Asri said.

The Court of Appeals ruled that the jurisdiction of the National Registration Department director-general was a civil one, and he was bound by civil law, meaning the department has to refer to Section 13A(2) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act (BDRA) when making decisions relating to a child’s surname.

The Court of Appeal ruling, which covers Muslim and non-Muslim children conceived out of wedlock, was made in an appeal involving a 7-year-old Muslim child born five months and 24 days (or five months and 27 days according to the Islamic Qamariah calendar) after his parents married.

The child was registered with NRD two years after birth and the parents jointly applied to have “MEMK” named as the father, but the department registered the child as “bin Abdullah” instead. – July 31, 2017.