Zahid Abbas writes in malaysiakini a letter with the title Quitting Islam with conditions .

In it he articulates that Islam allows for freedom of faith. But if Muslims wish to leave Islam, he says, then they have to meet with five conditions, the first being that 'one should not do so on the grounds that there is something lacking in Islam.' He mentioned four other conditions.

I detect a logical contradiction in Zahid's postulations, for even in this first condition, I fail to see how a Muslim not 'leaving Islam on the grounds that there is something lacking' in the religion.

Right or wrong, good or bad, I think a Muslim will leave precisely because he feels there is something lacking in the religion. At the very least, this should be one of the main reasons why he would want to leave.

The other four reasons would appear to be bizarre, for some of them have very remote link with the act of denouncement of religion. I have to elaborate further on this issue.

My uztaz or religious guru, though, has always cautioned me not to make any statement about Islam if I do not have proper credentials. With this cue in mind, I wish to make an early disclaimer: I am going to address not on religion per se, but to the line of thinking, the reasoning, the logic, that I think have been employed to portray the issue at hand, that of apostasy in Islam.

On the same token I am assuming that Zahid is a Muslim with impeccable religious credentials. I also assume that I can accept his teaching with no questions asked. In short, on no account am I trying to undermine Zahid's character; I fully support his right to express his views.

Indeed, it is because I take his postulations seriously that prompts me to write this letter. Similarly, in no way am I criticising the tenets or postulates of Islam.

In the case of apostasy, the line of reasoning appears to be as follows:

Islam has said that there is freedom of faith. The inherent posture is that Islam is perfect and meant for all of mankind.

Being perfect, it is inconceivable to the mind of its followers for anyone to want to leave it.

But when a follower wishes to leave Islam, it is heartbreaking for loyal adherents to see it happening.

When a person still wants to leave it, then loyal adherents would impose restrictions, even penalties and punishments, to prevent and deter would-be apostates.

The punishment regime of imprisonment or death for apostasy under Syariah law is meted out, which in any case is very severe indeed.

Both the set of restrictions and punishment can be contradictory to the original postulation that there is freedom of faith in Islam.

The line of reasoning I listed above is my close interpretation of Zahid's articulation, unless of course I have misunderstood him completely. But there is a case on apostasy currently in the hands of the courts.

This case seems to confirm my understanding of Zahid's postulations. Which brings the case of the four individuals in Kelantan, Madyaacob Ismail, Daud Mamat, Kamariah Ali, and Mohamad Ya who wanted to renounce Islam as their religion as reported in malaysiakini on June 20.

The four individuals had formally renounced their faith before a commissioner of oaths in August 1998. But in October 2000, the Kelantan Syariah Court charged them, and sentenced them to three years of rehabilitation at an Islamic rehabilitation camp.

They filed a motion in November 2003 at the Federal Court seeking judicial acknowledgment of their renouncement. The authorities acknowledged that every individual has the right to profess, practice and propagate any religion. Even so, they had said that the group could only renounce their religion through the Syariah Court.

The sad thing is that the Syariah Court's punishment regime for apostasy includes imprisonment and even the death penalty. The four individuals seem to undergo almost the exact sequence of events as has been projected by Zahid. The full circle is complete.

As a layman, I reiterate the observation that there is a huge contradiction here: how does a religion which clearly and categorically professes freedom of faith end up with the possible killing of an adherent who wishes to desert it?

Without any fear, I can say this much - that Islam is a religion of justice, mercy, and forgiveness. Islam indeed teaches that there is freedom in religion, there is no compulsion in religion.

Zahid agrees with this, and the Federal Court agrees with it as well. Islam cannot be wrong in this case. But if Islam is not wrong then who is?

It can't be the apostate, or the four apostates from Kelantan, for they wish to leave Islam on their own volition. Islam allows for this.

By this process of elimination, my contention is that it is the mental norm that interprets Islam in a very narrow, dogmatic, and orthodox plane that is wrong.

I shall not name the persons or institutions which carry the narrow, dogmatic, and orthodox mental norm, for I might truly disturb the hornet's nest. In any case, I refrain from being judgmental.

I just say this: if you think that the cap fits, then wear it.