I refer to two letters Find more contemporary interpretation of Islam and Don't blame religion, blame man written by Dr Syed Alwi Ahmad and Ushiv respectively.

What I shall demonstrate is that the confusion suffered by the two writers is all based upon their keenness to apply a whimsical interpretation of the Quran, namely the verse:

02:254: 'Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error, whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things'.

Syed Alwi contends that, 'It may interest Abdul Rahman Abdul Talib to know how little the Muslim world has contributed to modern science'. Allow me to point Syed Alwi to one (out of many) very significant contributions of Islam to science, the Arabic numeral system (as it is still called until today).

Should Muslims decide to claim patent on this system, Muslims would not have to rely on oil revenues to become rich. This is because the basis of all that is known as science and technology today is based upon this numbering system. Without which, the entire scientific world would cease to exist. I am surprised that Syed Alwi has failed to realise this.

On the issue of compulsion in Islam, both Ushiv and Syed Alwi based their argument on their interpretation of verse 02:254 above. Based on their interpretation, they contend that Islam does not prohibit apostasy. Ushiv dared to venture further by implying that the followers of the Quran devised rules contradictory to the Quran in order to maintain their flock.

My initial response to Ushiv is that he needs to get a refund on the courses in comparative religion that he took for I think the courses he took did not provide him with the right information.

The actual interpretation of 02:254 is limited within the context of coercing people into becoming Muslims. The verse strictly prohibits coercing others into Islam. It is important to understand 02:254, among all, within its intended context. Let alone the need for understanding the Quran in the Arabic language.

Ushiv's and Syed Alwi interpretation of 02:254 is whimsical based upon the its literal translation.

Syed Alwi's call for a more a more contemporary interpretation of Islam is also amusing. My question to him is who decides what part of Islam should we discard? What is the basis for doing so? Syed Alwi contends that Islam should alter itself to fit the secular-liberal mould in order for it to be 'relevant'.

Unfortunately, Syed Alwi's line of though is very unpopular nowadays as proven by the status of liberal Muslims status in Malaysia. At best, they exist on the fringe of the Muslim community in the country.