Are you more Islam than anyone

By AO Musa

If I have a choice I will choose the best. What is most painful is the way society treats you. I’ve gone through this and now my children are going through the same problem. This situation has never changed from the past 32 years and in fact is getting worse every day.  

I hope after you read this, you will better understand the feelings of a discriminated citizen. I’m proud of what I am and I prefer to be known as an Indian Muslim rather than change my race to Malay. This is my story ….

If you are an Indian in race and Islam in faith, then you will be automatically called a “convert”. That is what is planted in most of the Malays' brain in Malaysia, no matter whether adults or children. I don’t blame the children as they learned this from their parents.

For the past 32 years, I always get this from most of the Malays that I come across in my life. A Malayalee by race and Islam in faith has dragged me into this discriminated stance for as long as I can remember. “Saudara baru ke?” “Bila masuk Islam?” “Satu family ke masuk Islam?” is something that I am used to hearing. At first, I always took the trouble to explain to them that I’m Islam from the beginning and never converted.

However, at one point of time I started to question myself “am I surrounded by idiots or don’t I have any sign of Muslim in me?” At this point, I started to do my research about my own family background. I learned that my great grandfather on my mom's side was a dae’i migrated from Yemen to India somewhere in the 1800’s to start his life as a merchant and also to preach about Islam. Married to my great grandmother who is the daughter of one of the prominent Muslim leaders in the state of Kerala (but I’m not in any way associated with TDM!).

My grandfather was also one of the notable figures in Kerala who fought for the freedom of India as well as a highly respected religious teacher. It was told to me that when he passed away (3 days before I was born), the state of Kerala announced a public holiday as a sign of mourning and respect for his contributions to the country and the state.

My great grandfather on my father's side migrated to Malaya from India also somewhere in the 1800’s to become a religious teacher in Rawang. Rawang used to be a plantation area and the majority of the population there were Indians. There were a number of Malay communities but further down towards Serendah to Tanjong Malim. He was invited by the Indian Muslim community who migrated earlier since there were not many religious teachers around to educate their children. I was told that during this time, the Islamic knowledge among the Malays was very poor. Mixing religion and culture is something that blended into their daily life.

The point is, I couldn’t find the point when my ancestors converted to Islam. As far as I ccould track, all of them were Muslims. This makes sense since Islam was brought to India by Malik Bin Dinar somewhere in 625 AD. The first mosque built in India was in Kodungallur, Kerala in 629 AD which was about 22km from where my ancestors came from. There are high chances that they converted to Islam during the Prophet Muhammad's lifetime (571 – 632 AD).

Islam came to Malaya somewhere in the 12th-13th century. The Terengganu Stone Monument was found at Kuala Berang, Terengganu where the first Malay state to receive Islam in 1303, Sultan Megat Iskandar Shah, known as Parameswara prior to his conversion, is the first Sultan of Melaka. He converted to Islam after marrying a princess from Pasai, of present day Indonesia. The conversion of the Sultanate of Malacca by Rowther and Marakkar traders from Tamil Nadu into Islam is the milestone of Islamification of Malay people in Malaya or Tanah Melayu (fact from Wikipedia).

So, the Indian Muslims converted to Islam 700 years before the Malays even heard about Islam. History tells us that Islam is brought to Malaya by Indians, Arabs and Chinese and yet we are the ones called converts. Yes, we are converts and in fact all of us are converts. However, Malays should not forget that the Indians are 700 years senior than them in Islam.

Who is the “convert” now? Are you still telling me that you are more Islam than anyone else???

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified. To share the above article, please click the followings:

 

 

When ‘Allah’ was not the only word banned

By Debra Chong

KUALA LUMPUR, March 10 — Allah is not the only word banned by the Home Ministry from use by non-Muslims.

The Malaysian Insider recently obtained a copy of two letters sent out in 1986 by the  ministry through its publishing division and addressed to the Council of Churches Malaysia (CCM).

It lays down a laundry list of words the federal government claimed — and still claims — are sensitive to Muslims who make up the biggest group in multi-religious Malaysia.

The first letter was dated April 1, 1986 and was undersigned by one Tengku Ali Tengku Chik on behalf of the secretary-general of the home ministry, better known by its initials in Bahasa Malaysia, KDN (Kementerian Dalam Negeri).

Tengku Ali wrote: “I am instructed to inform that this Ministry is concerned with the use of Islamic phrases in the translated Bible (Bahasa Malaysia) in which use of those words could confuse followers of the two religions. For example, ‘Tuhan’ is translated as ‘Allah’ in which the term has been used in the religion of Islam and have always been mentioned in the religion of Christianity as ‘God’ or ‘Tuhan’ only.

“Therefore, the Ministry requests your cooperation to refrain from using those words considered sensitive. As a guide, a copy of Appendix A is attached with suggested phrases for your use when translating into Bahasa Malaysia. Other terms, if any, will be told later,” he added.

“For your information, recently the Ministry had similarly chided a publication in Sabah, that is ‘Catholic Sabah’ to stop from using those confusing words when making translations,” he highlighted.

The appendix listed 16 words that were considered “sensitive to Muslims” and came out with their replacement without apparently consulting the CCM beforehand. They are:

• “Al-Kitab” to be replaced with “Baibel (Bible)”.
• “Allah” to be replaced with “Tuhan (God)”.
• “Firman” to be replaced with “Berkata (Say)”.
• “Rasul” to be replaced with “Utusan (Massanger – sic)”.
• “Syariat” to be replaced with “Ajaran”.
• “Iman” to be replaced with “Percaya (believe)”.
• “Kaabah” with no suggested replacement.
• “Ibadah” to be replaced with “Amalan (worship)”.
• “Injil” to be replaced with “Baibel/ Bible”
• “Wahyu” to be replaced with “Revelasi”.
• “Nabi” to be replaced with “Propet”.
• “Syukur” to be replaced with “Terima kasih”.
• “Zikir” to be replaced with “Mengingatkan/ Menyebut”.
• “Solat” to be replaced with “Sembahyang”.
• “Doa” to be replaced with “Memohon”.

The ministry’s instructions do not stop there. In a separate column, it also notes the whys behind the ban.

“Maksud Al-Kitab ialah Al-Quran. Oleh itu istilah nama ini tidak boleh digunakan (The meaning of Al-Kitab is Al-Quran. Therefore the term cannot be used.)

“Firman ialah kata-kata mulia khusus bagi Allah sahaja (Firman is a specific noble word for Allah only).

“Rasul ialah nama panggilan kepada Utusan Allah yang disebut dalan Quran. Nama Jesus Kristas tidak disebut di dalam Al-Quran (Rasul is a name for Allah’s Messenger as mentioned in the Quran. The name Jesus Christ is not mentioned in the Quran).

“Syariat dikhaskan kepada Ugama Allah sahaja (Syariat is specially for the religion of Allah only).

“Injil yang sah sudah tidak ada masa ini (A legitimate Injil no longer exists).

The ministry noted there were no replacement words for “wahyu” and stated that only the word “revelasi” could be used.

The curt tone adopted in the letter appeared to suggest a superiority complex towards the practitioners of religions other than Islam, in particular, Christians who are considered by Muslims elsewhere in the world as fellow Children of the Book with a  shared history.

The home ministry letter also claimed that the “Injil” no longer exists because the Muslim understanding of it is limited to the Old Testament; for Christians, the focus of their religion is in the teachings of Jesus Christ which forms the New Testament

The apparent arrogance was summed up in the afterword to the appendix, which ironically is sub-headlined “Panduan Umum” or general guide.

“Bible ditulis dalam Bahasa Inggeris (dan Bahasa Latin Romawi). Bahasa rasmi Agama Kristian ialah Bahasa Inggeris (dan Bahasa Latin Romawi). Jadi ‘Bible’ hendaklah ditulis dan disebarkan dalam Bahasa Inggeris (atau Latin). Jangan gunakan sedikitpun Bahasa Arab dalam Bible kerana Bahasa Arab adalah bahasa rasmi Agama Islam. Menggunakan Bahasa Arab

dalam ‘Bible’ boleh mengelirukan dan mempengaruhi orang Islam kepada Agama Kristian. [Bible is written in the English language (and in Roman Latin). The official language for the Christian religion is English (or Roman Latin). So ‘Bible’ must be written and disseminated in English (or Latin). Do not use even a little bit of Arabic in the Bible because Arabic is the official language of the religion of Islam. Using Arabic in the Bible can confuse and influence Muslims to Christian religion.]”

In that brief paragraph, the home ministry also explained the real reason why words of an Arabic origin are “exclusive” to Islam.

It also appeared to have seen fit to decide, on behalf of both Muslims and Christians, how they should each practice their respective religions although the Federal Constitution states the Malay monarchs hold sway over Islamic practices in their own states.

The Federal Constitution also states Malaysians who are not Muslim are free to practise their own faith, which most would sensibly understand that their religions are not subject to Islamic interpretations.

Eight months later, the ministry sent out another letter, this time addressed to Christian publications.

This time, it was undersigned by one Hassan Jantan on behalf of the ministry’s secretary-general. A copy of the letter was also forwarded to the police Special Branch director at Bukit Aman.

Dated December 5, 1986, the letter refers to a “confusion” that has happened within the community over the use of “Islamic words” used in the Bahasa Malaysia edition of Christian publications.

The letter then states the federal government had decided to allow Christian publications to use 12 words — from the original list of 18 banned words — on the condition that the books or pamphlets to be distributed or sold carry the word “For Christians” on the front cover.

The 12 Arabic-origin words allowed for use are: “Al-Kitab, Firman, Rasul, Syariat, Iman, Ibadah, Injil, Wahyu, Nabi, Syukur, Zikir, Doa”.

The ministry remained unconverted on four other words: “Kaabah”, “Batitullah”, “Solat” and “Allah”.

This time, the ministry did not give a point-by-point explanation on why certain words could now be used.

Instead, the letter said the federal government had relaxed its stand “only to preserve public peace and avoid misunderstanding between Muslims and Christians”.

At the same time, it reminded the Christian publications that the state Islamic councils had the power to decide on all Islamic affairs in their respective states, which is redundant because that fact is already laid down in the Federal Constitution and the Christian publications had no tried to impose their views or rules of their beliefs on anyone who was not a Christian, let alone a Muslim.

The ongoing dispute pitting Muslims and Christians has been raging these past 20 years behind closed doors without the public being any wiser until the churches, seeing no other avenue to have their case heard by a neutral panel was forced to take it up with the court.

It has been reported that the National Fatwa Council, which oversees the practice of Islam throughout the country but has no authority over the practice of other religions, had suddenly in 1982 declared certain words, including “Allah” as exclusive to the religion of Islam.

But “Allah” is the only word the Christian churches are seeking to use. They have not laid any claims on “Baitullah”, “solat”, or “Kaabah”, church officials say.

They argued that then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s Cabinet issued an order which has effectively curtailed the freedom of non-Muslims in the practice of their religions.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified. To share the above article, please click the followings:

 

 

Anwar Ibrahim Stance on "ALLAH"

Baru Daniel faham kenapa Anwar sanggup melacurkan kalimah Allah kepada penganut agama lain. Rupa-rupanya beliau memang bersifat sedemikian sejak dahulu lagi semata-mata kerana ingin popular di kalangan orang bukan Islam.

Tambahan lagi beliau mahu dilihat sebagai seorang muslim yang liberal di seluruh dunia terutamanya di negara seberang tambak dan di negara Uncle Sam, Amerika Syarikat.

Hal ini dibuktikan dalam ceramah beliau yang bertajuk 'Masa Depan Islam di Malaysia' di Marina Mandarin Singapura pada tahun 1989. Seperti yang ditulis dalam laporan berita di atas.

Dalam ceramah itu beliau membentangkan wawasannya tentang masa depan Islam di Malaysia tidak hanya ditentukan oleh orang Islam tetapi juga bukan Islam. Di hadapan intelektual Singapura beliau tampak lebih liberal tentang soal agama dan bermuka-muka.

Menurut beliau lagi orang Islam perlu menghormati kebebasan masyarakat untuk bersetuju atau sebaliknya:malah mempersoalkan asas dasar penerapan nilai-nilai Islam. Pendirian ini bagi Daniel menjadi asas untuk Anwar membenarkan penganut agama lain menggunakan kalimah Allah.

Tambah sadis lagi apabila Anwar terang-terangan tidak mahu menggunakan label Islam dalam pemerintahan tetapi hanya mahu mementingkan keadilan kepada semua orang walaupun dalam konteks kalimah Allah itu hanya milik mutlak penganut agama Islam.

Keadilan apa yang diperjuangkan?

Dalam ucapan beliau itu lagi beliau berkata adalah lebih baik untuk membincangkan isu dan rancangan yang dilaksanakan seperti Bank Islam dan Universiti Islam daripada kemungkinan Malaysia menjadi sebuah 'negara Islam'.

Begitulah sedikit sebanyak ucapan Anwar yang jelas bermatlamat untuk mengambil hati masyarakat bukan Islam di Singapura.

Hal ini pernah diulas dan dikritik oleh pimpinan PAS pada tahun 1989 tetapi pendirian Anwar yang liberal dan tidak berubah ini dihalalkan serta dilupakan mereka tatkala Anwar telah membantu mereka menang pada pilihanraya umum yang lalu.

Adakah pemimpin yang bisa melacurkan agama dan pendirian kerana ingin popular di kalangan orang bukan Islam ini akan kita tabalkan menjadi Perdana Menteri Malaysia?

Daniel persilakan untuk ahlul-ahlul PAS berfikir mengenai perkara ini. Takkan kerana kuasa akan kita halalkan semuanya.

 

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified. To share the above article, please click the followings:

 

 

Malaysia’s decades-old Christian ‘Allah’ issue

A view of a SIB church in Borneo.

By Debra Chong

KUALA LUMPUR, March 10 — The issue of Christians not being allowed to use “Allah” goes back to the 1980s when the authorities ring-fenced a list of Arabic terms first on national security grounds then later in order to prevent confusion among Muslims.

The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF), an umbrella body for Christian groups in Malaysia, said the use of the word “Allah” became a “problem” because of the distortion of certain facts by a government department in the mid-1980s.

“First, they say it is national security. Then they say it will confuse Muslims. But why are they listening only to Jakim?” quizzed NECF’s Bahasa Malaysia section executive secretary Alfred Tais, referring to the Department of Islamic Development Malaysia.

The department proposed a ban of certain Arabic words being used by non-Muslims which was then endorsed by the Cabinet in 1986. However no action was taken to completely enforce the ruling until 2007, prompting the Catholic weekly Herald to dispute it.

The Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB), an evangelical church founded in 1928, also wanted a review of the decision three years ago after a shipment of imported Christian religious books meant for Sunday school children were seized by the Royal Customs and Excise Department at the KLIA low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT).

The ministry’s basis for doing so was because the books contain the word “Allah” and may confuse Muslims although the books are meant for Christians only.

But the Home ministry, which also oversees the Customs department, quietly returned the books to SIB two years ago, just before the historic 12th General Elections which saw Barisan Nasional lose its traditional two-thirds grip on Parliament.

The ministry then followed up with a letter signed by Yaacob Samat from its Publication Control and Al-Quran Text division, in reply to the SIB’s earlier appeal and listed 16 reasons for the ban, which are:

1. “That Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution states that Islam is the official religion of the Federation.
2. “That Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution permits laws to be made to control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.
3. “That several states have made laws or control or restrict propagation among persons professing the religion of Islam and have prohibited the use of certain words or phrases of the religion of Islam in publications of other religions.
4. “That due to the differences in the words and phrases prohibited, confusion has arisen as to what words and phrases are prohibited in particular in Christian publications in the Indonesian language.
5. “That in the late 1970s and early 1980s there was uneasiness among the community and problems of enforcement among religious officers in the various states due to differences as to the words and phrases prohibited.
6. “That following the above, the issue had become sensitive and had been classified as a security issue.
7. “That the Government had decided that the Ministry of Internal Security [now called the home ministry] which controls published materials under Section 7(1) of the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 is to deal with the issue.
8. “That vide PU (A) 15/82, the Government had gazetted the prohibition of the Alkitab in Malaysia under Section 22 of the Internal Security Act 1960.
9. “That special exemption was made to the said prohibition vide PU (A) 134 permitting the Alkitab to be possessed by Christians in churches.
10. “That there was continuing confusion and uneasiness in the community when enforcement on the use of the words and phrases in religious publications was not effective.
11. “That on 19.5.1986, the Government had decided that the words ‘Allah’, ‘Kaabah’, ‘Baitullah’ and ‘Solat’ are words and phrases exclusive to the religion of Islam and cannot be used in published materials of other religions save to explain concepts pertaining to the religion of Islam.
12. “That the Government had permitted the use of the Alkitab by Christians in churches only and not in any other places.
13. “That the aforesaid permission did not extend to other Christian publications other than the translation of the Bible in Bahasa Malaysia, i.e. the Alkitab.
14. “That the Government practices religious freedom as enshrined in the Federal Constitution but bears the responsibility of avoiding any confusion in the community of various religions which if allowed to occur will threaten security and public order.
15. “That religious sensitivity must be respected and preserved by all.
16. “That the Applicants [SIB] as a religious institution with a large number of followers also bears the responsibility for promoting religious harmony in the community.”

The ministry told the church to just comply, leaving no room for disagreement.

Two judges, Datuk Abdul Kadir Musa and Datuk Aziah Ali, who have been entrusted to sort out the dispute have been eagerly pushing for the two parties to settle without the court’s interference, especially after another High Court ruled on the Catholic Herald’s case on the use of the same word three months ago.

The Home ministry plans to appeal against this even as it is holding closed-door talks with the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur.

The High Court has given the state and SIB until April 30 to try and settle the dispute amicably, failing which it will set a hearing date.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified. To share the above article, please click the followings:

 

 

Gerakan calls on Perkasa not to play race card

(The Edge) - A Barisan Nasional component party has urged Malay nationalist group Perkasa not to use the race card in commenting on the government's proposed new economic model (NEM) which is being drawn up.

In a statement today, Gerakan vice-president Datuk Mah Siew Keong said racial statements ran against the prime minister's 1Malaysia spirit and would not bode well for the country.

He was responding to Perkasa's economic bureau director Dr Zubir Harun, who reportedly said Perkasa was worried that the NEM would have a "Chinese agenda".

"What is he (Zubir) trying to prove? Both Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin have stated that the NEM would benefit all Malaysians.

"Non-governmental organisations and politicians should not send the wrong signal to the world that the government was looking after the interests of only one community. The government should look after every race and ensure every race is competitive. This is in line with the 1Malaysia spirit," Mah said.

Mah, who is also Gerakan's head of economic development bureau, added that Zubir's remarks were especially "worrying" as the economy was recovering.

Zubir was reported as saying on Monday that the Chinese viewed the next general election as the "best opportunity" to gain power in the country. The comments came after the first meeting of the newly formed Malay Consultative Council (Majlis Perundingan Melayu), which demanded that the NEM protect the rights of Malays and bumiputeras.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified. To share the above article, please click the followings: