You know, I really thought I wasn’t going to comment anymore on the non-Muslim use of the word “Allah” controversy and the whole Molotov-cocktail throwing fiasco which ensued. I really was going to blog about something else today. But then, I came across this really interesting article in today’s edition of The Sun (the Malaysian one, not the trashy British one) and it got me thinking again.
Zakiah Koya interviewed Professor Tariq Ramadan, a European Muslim academic who advocates reform in Islam and promotes interfaith dialogue, named by Time Magazine as one of the 100 Most Important Innovators of the Century. Some excerpts:
ZK: Muslims say that their religion is perfect and it is because of this many are against interfaith dialogues......
TR: We have a perfect religion but we are not perfect........ (interfaith dialogue) may make you see something which you have neglected to see. For example, when I was in South America, the priests there were talking of love. So, I learnt to also talk of the spiritual dimension of love in Islam and its importance in life.
I always suspected that the religion had something more to offer other than eternal damnation and suffering. Tariq Ramadan further adds, “Malaysia cannot have social cohesion if you do not have dialogue.” Of course, in Malaysia, in place of dialogue, we have balas pantun – where 2 out of 4 sentences we say doesn’t actually mean anything – just some bullshit that’s been thrown it for rhyming purposes. Ayat pembayang galore!
ZK: Since Muslims say that their religion is perfect, why are you talking about the need to reform Islam?
TR: ... Islam does not need to be reformed and Islam has in itself tools for Muslims to have a true understanding of it. What we need to reform is the Muslim minds. .... It is our static rationality that is betraying the text (the Quran & the Hadith). Active rationality is what makes the text universal.
ZK: Malaysia is country with a lot of diversity.... How does Islam view these diversities?
TR: The Quran says that if God wants it. He could have made you one community. He said: We made you tribes and nations so that you may know one another. It is God’s will. It is therefore, not enough to tolerate others – we must respect them.
.......At the same time, Muslims must stop the belief in this illusion that we have one and the same thought in Islam. There is diversity among Muslims too. It is a reality.
ZK: Most Muslim societies are guided by their ulama and religious scholars. In time, they have become revered people. Whatever they say is accepted without question. Thus many Muslims grow up with a fear of asking questions...
TR: ------- there is no deep faith without a critical mind.....The scholars must listen to the community and know what is happening. By definition, a scholar is serving the community – not to be served by the community – his power or authority is coming from the community he is serving. What we have now is the other way round.
(And I think the same can be said, not only for certain ulama and religious scholars, but also for most of our politicians). The professor goes on to say, “We have to revive the questioning mind. During the time of the Prophet, when he gave an opinion or a ruling, his companions questioned him, “Is this coming from God or is this coming from you?” When he said, “This is my opinion,” they said then we challenge you. They were his authority to find out how he came up with his opinion.”
- ZK: You must have heard that there is a request by a Catholic publication, the Herald, to use the word “Allah” when referring to God in its articles in Bahasa Malaysia. The government has objected to this. What is your view?
- TR: In the Arab world, Allah is used by all Christians – Coptics and others. The point is the substance and the substance is one God. When the Christian Arabs speak Arabic in their Bible, they use “Allah” to speak about God. This has been the case for centuries. The Roman Catholics among them do not use “Allah” to describe Jesus. There is no problem there. And my understanding of their general hypothesis is that the Trinity is Three in One but they are not confusing the three dimensions of One God. If that is not a problem for them, neither is it for us.
Well, that should solve the problem. But the moral panic that has swept a segment of Malay Muslims doesn’t seem to have so much to do with “Allah” being used to describe Jesus Christ (which it isn’t) or something other than the One God, but over the fact that the Christian missionaries are out to confuse and convert us all, because you know, we apparently have so little ability to think about our own beliefs.
To add to all this, I’ve been receiving shitloads, and I mean SHITLOADS of inflammatory e-mails about this matter at work (further affirming the fact that I work for a company of idiots. I’m sorry I have to use the word ‘idiot’ but I can’t be bothered to sugar coat it)! WORK! A General Manager in my company actually forwarded me an e-mail yesterday with the subject: Beware Malays!
The e-mail relates to the story of a man who was born into a Malay Muslim family in Kedah. He went to Johor Bahru looking for work – and failed. He was penniless, homeless, sleeping out on the streets at a train station. He was taken in by a Christian priest and taken care of, and after quite some time, he became a Christian himself. Now, this e-mail is full of accusations that the man was fed with “holy water” which apparently, works like some magic voodoo potion and this, and this alone, led to his conversion. (dude, really? DRINK the holy water?) Right then. Sooo, I have an atheist friend who accidentally drank a whole bottle of air zam zam which my mom had brought back from Mecca. And guess what? He’s still an atheist! That friend has also been dragged to church before by an ex-girlfriend where he ate communion wafers and sang hymns. And guess what? He’s still an atheist! He has also gone to Sikh temples and ate the sweets they served (no, I don’t know what it is with this guy and eating food from holy places) And guess what?! Yup, that’s right – he’s still an atheist! The person who wrote the “Beware Malays” e-mail, along with the people who thought forwarding it was a good idea must have forgotten about the very thing that makes us human: free will. God said so himself. He gave us free will.
People, you enjoy the benefits of living in a “democratic” country, don’t you? And that should include freedom of religion. And what does freedom of religion mean? It’s the freedom to practice your religion, be it the one you were born and raised with or the one you choose to hold on to. Or, you can choose not to practice your “religion” at all; like my zam-zam-water-drinking, Communion-wafer-eating Atheist friend who despite not believing in a “Higher Power” is more or less a good friend, a good son, a good citizen and as a human being, he doesn’t seem to be any better or worse than you and I. As much as some of us might personally worry, about others who do not choose to take the same “path to salvation” we do, worry of how they will burn in Satan’s pits with the rest of the “disbelievers”; that is our own problem and another’s choice. I’m sorry, but that’s what you have to put up with if you like the idea of a free country, free will, and God’s will for us to have free will.
I do think it’s about time that we not only re-examine our view of Islam but particularly for this country, the way we view Islam and the Malay identity. And to begin, we can go straight to the definition of “Malay” in our Constitution. No wonder we assume ourselves to be easily “confused” people. The Constitutional definition for “Malay” itself confuses ethnicity with religion.
*And please, before you so casually accuse me of blasphemy and being a disbeliever, and start to lightly throw around heavy phrases like murtad, kafir, ahli neraka, liberal wanker....oh what the hell; it’s a free country – those words are your problem, not mine.
** Also, as a side note, I don’t understand why international news networks decided to interview Anwar Ibrahim on the Herald controversy and the Molotov cocktail church attacks. I’m sorry, but the guy has no real insight, nor any real solutions to offer – neither do I, but then I’m an unknown office drone with a blog that no one reads – he’s the de-facto leader of the Opposition and is on an international news network and therefore, has higher expectations to meet. Anwar is one opportunistic fucker. Does anyone remember that he used to present himself as an ultra-Malay Nationalist and when that didn’t quite work out; he’s Mr. Equality Ladida? Like I said, fucker – he’ll fuck about with any stand as long as it gets him your vote.
Alright, enough ranting for now. To end:
ZK: Would you describe yourself as a moderate Muslim?
TR: I am not using this vocabulary. This qualification is coming from the colonisers who always had a binary view of the colonised – the good and the bad, the moderate and the fundamentalist. All the people who resisted colonisation were bad and fundamentalists; and all those with them were good and moderate. I think it’s silly.
Me too.
10 comments:
Assalamualaikum,
Let's leave aside whether or not the Catholic Church should continue to use the term "Allah" and ask a different question.
If the Church went through all the trouble to translate the Bible from Latin/English to Malay (presumably word for word), why did it choose to use "Allah" (clearly an Arabic term) rather than the actual term used by Malays to refer to God i.e. "Tuhan"? What is wrong with using "Tuhan" instead?
Regarding the concept of free will, you might want to consider reading up on the Islamic concept of Fardhu Kifayah. It might change your view on some of those Muslim "idiots".
Please do not let the few lesser-educated beings of this world (Muslim or non-Muslim) get to you.
Thank you for your comments anonymous. I see where you're coming from. I understand that many people question the Herald's motivation to use the word "Allah" instead of Tuhan. Yes, since the Malay word for God is Tuhan, I suppose the question of "What is wrong with using "Tuhan" instead?" can be directed not just towards the Catholic Church here, but also towards the Malay Community. Perhaps, you might have a reasonable answer for this and I invite you to share more of your thoughts on the matter.
At this point, I would like to clarify that my use of the word "idiot" is not in reference to EVERYONE who is against the use of the word "Allah" by the Herald - as I understand that they are a diverse bunch too. I'm using the word "idiot" to refer to:
i) those who were responsible in the molotov cocktail attacks
ii) some of the people whom I work with. And please note that this issue aside, I would still refer to them as idiots anyhow. I help run the employee volunteer programme at my work place and these are the people who will spout a lot of fire and hot air about "jihad in Palestine" and "killing the Jews" when I cannot even get them to wake up before noon on a Saturday morning to help out at a children's shelter home, just down the road. We have gone to the trouble of sending them for CPR/ First-Aid Courses in hope that they will be well-equipped to serve the community and in turn, what do they do? When a cleaner at our office fainted, they did not lift a well-trained finger to help saying "Oh, she's just a cleaner." And yet, with much righteous indignation, they protest against the use of the word "Allah" by the Catholic Church and stand in support of the church attacks as "part of defending our faith". What part of our faith, and of themselves, are they defending? This is the question that I really wanted to ask through my blog entry, not so much to say whether it is right or wrong for the Herald to be using the word "Allah".
In my line of work, I have had the opportunity to work with the rural and marginalised communities of East Malaysia. I have seen the positive impact the Christian missionaries has had upon the well-being of these communities - education, etc.. They have managed to reach out where our large and bureaucratic government has failed to even blink at (except when it comes to election season). Even if their intention is to convert these people to their belief system - and so? Theological concepts and phrases aside there is one simple, basic truth about Humankind and that is: people respond to demonstrations of kindness and compassion.
Additionally, for me, if anything, the Herald's request to use the word "Allah", has not added any kind of appeal to Catholicism but has actually made me want to look further into Islam and what it means to be a Muslim. It makes me want to understand the religion that I was raised in better and I admit, that it's not something that I was concerned with before.
We can never truly know the motivation of others. And a legal directive won't essentially change them. Instead of questioning the motivation of others, why not sit back and reflect upon our own?
Sometimes, and this is only my personal opinion, I can't help but think that the Malaysian Malay community frequently feels so threatened by Others (as frequently reflected in the articles in Utusan Malaysia), that we feel so vulnerable, because deep down, subconsciously, we are acknowledging that we are failing ourselves. Perhaps, I am wrong. In fact, I hope to be proven wrong - (and I don't say this very often. I usually prefer to be in the right) I hope that we are not actually failing ourselves and this is all but teething problems and growing pains of a community within a nation that is rapidly maturing and evolving along with the times.
As for why would the definition of Malay not include religion....well, I'm not so much saying that it definitely shouldn't. I'm saying yes, let's talk about it. Let's talk about the Malay identity. Let's see where we stand and where our place is in the world today. So thank you for contributing your opinion.
You mentioned that Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs are largely defined by their religion. I'm aware of that. So their religion defines them as 3 distinct groups - and here I have to ask you, how well did that turn out for our friends in the Balkans?
There's nothing like imaginary boundaries set in the name of "religion" to add fuel and fire to what may have started out as territorial, political/ economic conflict. Sometimes, people are more emotional, less willing to come to a compromise when we force "religion" to come into play.
Another look at what it means to be "Malay" does not mean an overhaul of what we have previously understood.
I have a copy of my dad's old chemistry textbook from 1960 something and much of the information in it has been revised since as new discoveries have been made. Dictionaries are frequently revised just as language continually evolves. Why should we not occasionally look at our Constitution or our definition of something or another just to see if it still works? If it does, fine. We can all be happy, keep calm and carry on. But if something doesn't, why sit back and say "well, others over there are doing it."? and follow the Pied Piper's song down into the river?
My non-linear, rambling, badly-punctuated style of writing aside, I hope that with this reply, you also see my point and where I'm coming from.
Thanks for taking the time to reply to my comments.
To answer your first question, I wouldn't disagree that the same "Tuhan" question could be diverted to Malay Muslims as well. Fortunately, unlike the Catholic Church, Malay Muslims (MM's)don't have an ulterior motive in using the term "Allah".
As Muslims, Malays are taught from a young age that the "official" language of Islam is Arabic. MM's might use Malay, English, etc. in their daily life but when it comes to matters of religion (praying, supplicating, learning theology, etc.), Arabic is the preferred medium. Naturally, when MM's refer to God, the most appropriate term to use is "Allah" and not "Tuhan". From the MM point of view, "Tuhan" is more of a generic term that does not necessarily refer to "Allah".
I hope this helps in shedding some more light on the matter.
In any case, let's not be naive. The Catholic Church is after all, no spring chicken. It knows full well what it is doing and the implications of its actions. This is no "honest" mistake or some publicity stunt gone horribly wrong.
Your definition of "idiot" is quite true though. On the other hand, before passing judgment on the lack of Muslim in involvement in East Malaysia, I'd ask you to bear in mind the Muslim concept of "what the right hand gives, the left hand shouldn't know" (well something along those lines-I'm no Tariq Ramadan you know). Muslims tend to shy away from publicity for their charitable work as it is discouraged and frowned upon. So, if you don't see or hear of it, it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.You might just have to look harder.
I see your point. Let's talk about Malay identity. But what is there to talk about especially when it comes to the Malays and Islam? Change for the sake of changing? What has happened to the Malays or Islam that has made the two incompatible these days?
The Balkan conflict started out as a political/geographical/economic conflict. Nothing more. The fact that the beligrents adhered to different religions was a matter of coincidence.
Religion was only introduced later in the war when the 3 sides realised that they could generate support by playing the religion card.
It isn't the various religions' fault that the people in the Balkans decided to kill each other. So why blame religion? Are you saying religion is a bad thing because of what people do (albeit falsely) in its name? Remove the excuse and thereby reslove the problem?
Anonymous still doesn't get it. Maryam's point is it's not religion that is idiotic, it's people. Full stop.
Don't you just love it when anonymous commentators NEVER leave their names? Pandai comment but again too cowardly to say who they are
Dear Anonymous,
I'm not entirely sure if you do actually see my point. Please refer to Kere's first comment that pretty much sums up everything.
But let's just review what you said in your response here, for the sake of it.
1. You asked so why blame religion for the problems in the Balkans. My question is, why ask me? I already conceded the fact that the problem clearly stems from centuries-long territorial, political and economic dispute.
Please do not paint me to be so naive as to say that "remove the excuse (religion) and thereby resolve the problem." Where did I say that religion, in itself is a bad thing? I said that people's misuse of "religion" adds fuel to the fire.
When you said that "Religion was only introduced later in the war when the 3 sides realised that they could generate support by playing the religion card" - well, yes, I think I already made that point in the earlier response. So apparently, we are in agreement here.
I only wanted to put forth the idea that we try to find a solution where "the religious card" can be removed from up the sleeves of politicians. But of course, that might be easier said than done. I am not under the illusion that my writing on this blog offers a solution. But what I would like to do is to keep a door open - just in case a wise man or woman out there has a good idea to throw in.
Your need to see things in black and white shuts that door close. When i said let's talk about Malay identity - you follow it up immediately with:
"What is there to talk about especially when it comes to the Malays and Islam? Change for the sake of changing?"
Now, how did we go from "let's talk about it" and straight into "Change for the sake of changing?" I did not insist that Malays and the practice of Islam are incompatible. Nowhere did I suggest we change for the sake of changing. I said:
"Another look at what it means to be Malay DOES NOT MEAN A COMPLETE OVERHAUL OF WHAT WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY UNDERSTOOD.......but why should we not occasionally look at our Constitution or our definition of something or another just to see if it still works? If it does, fine."
You can scroll up to check this statement in my original response. I'm not suggesting CHANGE - I'm suggesting THOUGHT, perhaps thought into the leeway that we have given our politicians into playing the religious/racial card in their power struggles, thought into who we are and where we stand as a community. Why would THOUGHT automatically lead to changes that don't make sense?
Of course, in case my statement is misinterpreted once more, I'm not saying that if one does not want change than one doesn't think. I'm sure you've thought about it and perhaps, you've come to the conclusion that you are personally against the separation of the Malay Identity from the Muslim faith. Good on you. You are of course, entitled to your own opinion.
2. You said "before passing judgment on the lack of Muslim involvement in Malaysia..." Alright, when I talked of the social work that the Catholic Church has done in East Malaysia, it was not followed by a statement about what the Muslim community has or hasn't done in East Malaysia. Please bear this in mind and do not pass judgment on me.
Of course, the Muslims are also heavily involved in charity work. I'm just saying that while we're talking about the "bad/ ulterior motive" of others, we also be fair and acknowledge the earthly good that has come out of it. One community or organisation alone, whatever their affiliations may be - Catholic, Muslim, government, NGO - cannot fill in the education, healthcare and social welfare gaps in this still developing nation. Like it or not, there are gaps which the Church has filled, just as there are gaps where Muslim organisations and individuals have filled.
Once more, I'm not kumbaya-love-fest-naive as to think that the motivation behind the Church's social work is proselytization. People like Mother Theresa admitted to this herself back when she was alive.
But look, everyone - be it centuries-old religious institutions, nation-states, corporate entities, - is out to look after their own self-interest. Do you agree?
When we strongly disagree with the use of "Allah" by Non-Muslims in Malaysia, for fear that it will corrupt our akidah, we are also looking at what serves us best. Of course there's nothing wrong with that.
But if it's not okay for one party to act in self-interest then it's not okay for all.
You know, this discussion could go on forever. Perhaps, there might not be enough room in this little comment section for you to properly elaborate on what you have to say and being human, there might be a few other things which I might have failed to consider.
Try leaving a link to your own blog and we'll see.
And if you don't have one, maybe it's time to start.
I read that article too and was really heartened by its bountiful...well, common sense.
Maybe we're friends because we're somewhat like-minded. Or maybe it's because we use common sense.
Either way, I'm glad you posted. And I'm glad we're friends :)
Post a Comment