Copyright Notice

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the author, at the address below.

Sakmongkol ak 47

ariff.sabri@gmail.com

Saturday, 9 January 2010

Pagan God and Uslub Mujadalah.

They are many bloggers supporting the court ruling coming out with reasoned arguments. These I can accept even though we do not agree with each other. But those that come into my blog leaving remarks like fucking extremists, narrow minded religious bigot, guarantee their remarks will never see the light of day. Worthy adversaries however, deserve honour and respect.

There is this argument going around saying that if even Nik Aziz has agreed to its usage, why are you people still opposing the ruling of the court? With due respect to NIk Aziz, his views are not representative of all Muslims. Or even the PAS rank and file. And I am not even sure that you people who quote his name favourably now on this issue, are even on the same wave length with him. For all I know, you may be running with the hare while hunting with the hounds.

The next question often asked, why can't we be allowed to use Allah as you Muslims do? Because we Muslims use Allah conscious of the meanings read into it. You may be using the name just to refer to God.

I need to answer the following issues.

One.

One writer on his blog asked possibly with a dash of triumphalism, what religion did the Prophet's grandfather profess? The grandfather was some sort of keeper of the many idols found in the Kaabah and the Pagan Arabs called one god as Allah. Hence the writer, just like RPK did before him, asserted that Allah was used by Pagan Arabs.

The point intended by the writer is, if the name Allah was used even by Pagans then, why should we Muslims be tearing our hair out if the same name is wanted by the Catholics?

The answer is the Allah used and accepted by Pagan Arabs is not the same as the Allah accepted by Muslims. Not the same sir, that's why we are sticky about it.

This is not a debate about a dispute of the truth that we ALL worship One true God. We all do, but please call him by any other name you like except Allah. Because if you accept Allah then you must accept the full import and meaning of the word Allah as Muslims do.

How does a Muslim accept and understand the name Allah? The foundation of the name is founded on the principle of Tauhid, testification to the Oneness of Allah through tauhid Rububiyyah, Tauhid Usluhiyyah and Tauhid al-Asma was sifaat. I have answered that in my article.

The mystery is solved when one appreciates the distinctions of the 3 categories of tauhid.

Now, you others who want to use Allah to refer to God, would you do so in the same manner as Muslims do? I don't think so, and we respect that. I have not heard of Christians of any denominations in the Peninsular refer to God as Allah. They only do so in East Malaysia.

The term Allah is a noun which incorporates into it, His Essence ( Dzat) which is His Oneness founded on the principles of Tauhid. This is the meaning with which Muslims understand by the name Allah. It is therefore not just a nominal name, which is used to refer to God simpliciter. When a Muslim uses the name Allah, he understands it as the Name which incorporates the Oneness of God. He qualifies the name by knowing that It is founded on Tauhid.

All the names of God in various religions are given in accordance to the capacity of the respective languages. Thus the English assign a name to refer to their God- Lord or something. The Hindus and Arabs all give names to God in accordance to their language capacities. But through nominal names, understandable to a limited extent by humans, are not sufficient to teach us, the Essence of God. To us Muslims the name Allah is the only name that is able to incorporate the idea of His Oneness.

That is why we cannot allow the name Allah to be used if that usage is not understood as Muslims do.

TWO.

Allow me to try to answer another argument put forth by many commentators. I saw one on Din Merican's blog the other day. One commentator later wrote: Sakmongkol, read this. 29:46. And my answer is as follows:-

29:46

A favourite quote of those in favour of allowing the usage of Allah by Catholics is a verse from our Holy Quran: The Qur'an commands Muslims to declare that the God they worship and the one worshiped by the followers of revealed books, including Christians, is one:  "… and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit". (Qur'an 29:46)

The commentator says that verse should make sense to a lot of us. It does, but allow me to explain.

You don't read the Quran as you do a story book or novel. You sometimes need to investigate the circumstances which caused the revelation of particular verses. There is a companion book known as Asbabun Nuzul that explains these.

Likewise in the particular verse 29:46, you need to do the same. Why was 29:46 revealed to our Prophet? What were the circumstances?

I found a persuasive rebuttal from one Ustaz Zamihan Mat Zin Al Ghari who has his own blog. This is what he said in relation to people who use verses such as Quran 29:46.

Firstly, the above verse and other similar verses are classified as 'uslub mujadalah. These are stylised methods used in debating.

In those days, the musyrikins were in the habit of debating with the Prophet on matters concerning Tauhid. Winning debates by appealing to logic and intellectual reasoning was the preferred method. Argumentative and clever fellows worked at exposing the internal flaws of their opponents reasoning. They were not interested to argue to arrive at the TRUTH.

How to beat the doubters at their own game? By employing the same methods, i.e. using reasoned arguments.

Hence Allah commanded the Prophet and those that followed him to debate intelligently. Hence 29:46. One such method is to offer equally convincing argument employing the method known as uslub mujadalah. For example, when people argue with you, you argue back putting forth reasons and facts that support your views and stand.

Illustration: we have been taught, in order to win arguments and win over our opponents, we get them to agree with our propositions most of the time. Since we are agreeable on all points leading to the objective of our argument, we may be actually talking about the same object. We can ACCEPT that only the same unique object is capable of generating the elements that we find agreeable. Now from there, the one who employs the method of uslub mujadalah, can finally present his case, that the object that we want to accept is the one we propose.

From there you can move on to demonstrate why even though before the argument, you were attached to the same object which you refer by another name, you must now leave it. It's like discovering new facts that render your previous stand untenable. The other name of the object you previously refer by another name was founded on a set of your belief system elements. The rational you who accept what we propose just cannot adopt the name by which WE call our object without also changing the elements of your belief system.

For example, I can't expect that Catholics who now want to use Allah which is the name we call our God, to abandon the elements of Catholicism. We respect your belief system.

But that next step of the argument is an undertaking doable by more knowledgeable people in another forum.

If we start with the proposition that the God that we worship asks us to be kind, sincere, truthful, compassionate to others etc- these are common grounds of any belief system. If we therefore discover we have so much common grounds and similarities, might we not in reality, be talking about the same One God? That only the same object could generate the same commonalities?

Hence verses such as these were revealed to guide our Prophet in his work. That he is commanded to argue intelligently so as to prepare doubters to have the requisite open mindedness. You have to use a methodology to bring argumentative fellows onto a level playing field as it were. One such methodology was to make the musyrikins and other argumentative fellows accept the common ground rules, then a meaningful debate about the true meaning of Allah can be worked at.

So, how do we treat 29:46 then? If we now realise that this verse belong to the specie of uslub mujadalah category, 29:46 cannot be used as a valid argument to allow the usage of Allah. 29:46 was revealed to command our Prophet when dealing with musyrikins and doubters, to debate intelligently with people whose intention is to perpetually argue and dislodge faith by the use of semantics and nomenclatures. In truth, their aim was to dispute whatever the Messenger of Allah says.

Hence 29:46 is a verse incorporating the concept of Al Jadal- i.e. to confront reasoned argument with reasoned argument. We use this method to remove objections and disagreements leading to the object of our mission. Getting our opponents to agree on features or elements of a belief system leads us nearer to the object of our debates.

30 comments:

Anonymous,  9 January 2010 at 14:20  

The revealed books do not mention god as having a son. If the Catholics truly believe in god as one, and not having a son, then truly they have every right to call their god Allah. Saying Allah as having a son is a most abominable concept in Islam. But we do not go about telling Catholics what to believe. Your religion is your religion and mine is mine. Therefore the only perspective I can take from this episode is the Catholics are testing the limits of tolerance of Muslims. This is playing with fire. Know this. Muslims shall fight with his soul when his religion or his properties are attacked. Surah Al_Tawba does not start with "In the nAme of God, the benevolent , the merciful".

Mat Kong

donplaypuks® 9 January 2010 at 14:21  

Bro

You admit, and rightly so, that the word "Allah", an Arabic and not Malay word, was in extensive use by Pagans in Arabia and Mecca long, long before the advent of Islam in 632 AD.

I agree with you that the "Allah" of Muslims is very specific i.e. the monotheistic God of the Koran.

But, how can you claim exclusivity to that word for Muslims, when it is also used widely by non-Muslims even today in Arabia, Egypt, India, Indonesia and parts of Africa without protest from their Muslim citizens there?

More than that, there is a right of antiquity usage in E.Malaysia where non-Mulsims have been using that reference for over 400 years without rancour, confusion or protest.

It's that scurrilous Syed Hamid Albar who unnecessarily opened the Pandora's Box which Dr.M closed in a statesman like manner. Now, the racist and bigoted Kerismudin has fanned further the flames of discontent, supported by PM Najib!

I have no issue with the status quo remaining as it is in W.M'sia before Justice Lau's ruling since we in W.M'sia have never referred to non-Isamic Gods as "Allah". But why cause a ruckus in E.Malaysia, supported as it is by antiquity and international acceptance?

Don't tell me it's 1 M'sia. We have already had the NEP with it's 2 systems for 40 years while a 3rd system exists since W.M'sian's need to show their passports when entering E.M'sia and have no automatic right to seek employment or settle there!!

Perhaps, you'd care to clarify.

dpp
We are all of 1 race, the Human Race

Anonymous,  9 January 2010 at 16:27  

Mat Kong,

So you are very tolerant. Joker.

Why dont you go the Other countries using the word Allah freely to mean "God the father" and hammer them after all you are soooooo tolerant? They are calling the holy father.. a part of the Holy Trinity as God.

Hope you know the meaning of the world "tolerant". Let me assure you .. by the dictionary definition... you are definitely not tolerant.

Joker

Anonymous,  9 January 2010 at 16:55  

In the great democracy that is India, it is not uncommon to hear reports of churches being burnt and priests murdered even at the slightest of incident.

How tolerent can the Malay Muslims be. Get the drift?

Even the most catholic of my good Malaysian friends are quietly embarassed by this Paria Pakiam.

And so much for the daughter of one former PM for trying to be more catholic than the pope.

Please lah!

Anonymous,  9 January 2010 at 18:08  

Eloklah isu ni keluar...otak lama x berfikir...berkarat. Ni klu pegi dgr ceramah ugama kt masjid balik2 psl solat...taharah...pose....haji...zakat. Ulang dari kecik smpi ke pencen. kan menarik sikit.

Anonymous,  9 January 2010 at 21:38  

Why can't the Christians take the name of God as called by Jesus in Aramaic. Jesus preached the Jews in Aramaic and fortunately there are Aramaic verses in today Bible e.g Eli Eli lama sabachtani.Jesus called his God "Eli" or "Eloi". Why can't Christians as a whole adopted a single God name instead the name changes according to language. God in English, Deus in Latin,Theos in Greek, Shang Di in Mandarin,Allah in Arabic, Alah Taala or Tuhan in Malay etc.

Christians have many choices to call their GOD but why for Malaysia they need to call their God "Allah" as Allah is not GOD in Malay but Tuhan.Look like a sinister motive to confuse the Muslims in Malaysia

Anonymous,  9 January 2010 at 22:26  

Bro Sak , your ability to present you views in a clear concise manner is indeed commedable. Perhaps, you should volunteer on behalf of the muslim community (those who agrees with you) to have an open interfaith dialogue.
Perhaps, you would be able to reason with the Christians (not only Catholics believe in Jesus Christ as son of God) to drop the term "Allah".
Also it is understandable that you would be angry with anybody who uses foul language especially those who are do not agree with your views. Those who agrees with your views are not censored, even when foul language or threats were thrown. Why is that so?

Mat Kong, ever thought that it maybe GOD that is testing the limits of tolerance of muslims and the christians ?
Every human beings are only God's instrument. God is everywhere and maybe walking amongst us.

Ever thought what Allah would say when we die and meet our maker ?
Eg. Why did you fight over my name ?
Why did you prevent others from using my name in their teaching as their God ?
What did you do when others blasphemous my name ?
Are you a muslim or a christian ? In your whole life as a human being what good have you done in my name ?
Think of the possible questions asked by God and try answering them ? If you are very sure God would be very satisfied with the answer, than your conscience is clear. God bless you.

One Pip 9 January 2010 at 22:55  

That's why there is a verse in the Quran which says, "when asked about who their Lord is, they answered, it's Allah. (Say)Then why then do you idolise other than Allah?

We must understand that no followers of any religion on this planet believe that a Jesus (or Mary) statue, stone, tree or a picture is Allah. They just believe that these idols can intercede with Allah on their behalf.

If we saw someone worshipping a stone and yet he believes his Lord is Allah, we cannot force him to stop believing that his Lord is Allah because he is worshipping something other than Allah. The lost soul was already committing a spiritual crime by worshipping other than his Lord, and now we want him to believe that his Lord is not Allah so that we don't share the same Lord with him.

Anonymous,  9 January 2010 at 23:16  

Dear all,

Let's see who is more tolerant.

The Christians will gather in church and say in their prayers...

" Oh Lord, forgive them . They know not what they do.

Amen"

Retaliate ? No Christians do not do that. They forgive in their prayers.

Why I know? Because I am one of them

Amen.

NanaDJ 9 January 2010 at 23:29  

Dato',
Thank you for a very logical, lucid and objective explanation. Allah to Muslims cannot be accepted as mere translation of the word God. When we say Allah we are specific in that Allah embodies all the 'sifat' and attributs as stated in the Koran. And I agree with you, you cannot quote verses from Koran in isolation or in the way that you quote poetry etc, understanding of the deeper meaning and implication is of utmost important.

Anonymous,  9 January 2010 at 23:57  

Dato'

I am a retired non-Muslim. I count Anwer Ibrahim as my contemporary in UM in the early 1970's.

I have no specific academic knowledge about Islam and therefore cannot have an objective opinion on the issue of Allah. However, with my very close working and social relationships with numerous Malay Muslims, I am convinced that the term Allah is exclusively reserved for the Muslim faith in the local West Malaysian context.

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 00:23  

Anonymous 23:16 said

"The Christians will gather in church and say in their prayers...

" Oh Lord, forgive them . They know not what they do.

Amen"

Retaliate ? No Christians do not do that. They forgive in their prayers."

Hmmm... Christians forgive in their prayers,In bible there are aslo few interesting verses that encourage Christians to "turn the other cheek"

"But I say to you, That you resist not evil: but whoever shall smite you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue you at the law, and take away your coat, let him have your cloak also. And whoever shall compel you to go a mile, go with him two. Give to him that asks you, and from him that would borrow of you turn not you away.

In reality, did the Christians live-up with this verse? Remember how different Caliph Umar and Saladin in treating the Christians compared to the crusaders treating the Muslim during the Crusades?

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 01:28  

Anon 23:16

Christ preached "forgiveness" very strongly and evidence is there for all to see Christians generally do follow this compared to certain religion. Surely you do know what is going on in the world right?

Have you compared how Christians reacted so far? Peaceful or violent?

Evidence , evidence and evidence.

(But if you come to burn my house, yes I would whack you - Christian or no Christian. That is my human side .. not the spiritual side)

Buddhism too generally do the same. They dont even want to kill animals for food.

But then, one cannot expect all to do be same and obey. They have their own human side too.

I am a Chritian but not a Catholic and seriously the last name I wish to call my God as "Allah" for reasons I prefer not to say. There are just too many world happenings out there.

It is just that the East Malaysians have been using the words "Allah" for centuries and Herald Malay edition is read by them mostly. Hardly in West Malaysia. They just wish to continue their worship in peace when suddenly the Ministry started to interfere.

Most Peninsula Catholics do not read the BM version but rather the English version). Yet this is made into a West Malaysian issue.

Now they are faulted. What a world.

Yes, most Christians really do not want to be associated with the name "Allah". It was just that for hundreds of years it has been used by Malay speaking population of Sabah to refer to our Father God.

.. and in our hearts really, we wish the East Malaysian not to use it too for there are much better names to use.

It is not as though we really want to use it.... gosh.

One Pip 10 January 2010 at 02:07  

Dear Anonymous,
What about the Spanish Acquisition? The fact is (self-proclaimed) followers of every organised religion are capable of genocide and murder? If what u say is true, why were there about the same number of deaths in Maluku between Muslims and Christians? If Christians don't retaliate because they r do full of love, why did the Maluku and Bosnia conflict take place?

Frank,  10 January 2010 at 04:04  

Datuk Sak

How do you reconcile your arguments on PAS's position. These are ulamas and Islamic scholars, no some kampung politicians albeit on the opposite fence of UMNO.

I thought their arguments are convincing both from the religion stand point and from the political standpoint.

Whether Allah is different as used by pagans in pre-Islamic time and that after Islam came into being, the fact of the matter Allah is in reference to the Abrahamaic God once Islam enjoined itself to the Judaic tradition, like the Christians do.

The debate becomes polemical and politically motivated once it gets into the realm of Allah as how Malay Muslims view it and Allah as how OTHER Muslims view it.

There is only ONE Islam.

My point is this: Are these people in PAS wrong when they supported the High Court decision that Allah can be used by Christians:

Read Here:The Rationale Behind PAS's Support of the High Court Decision that Catholics Can Use the Word Allah

http://malaysianunplug.blogspot.com/2010/01/rationale-behind-pass-support-of-high.html

Il nome mio nessun saprà,  10 January 2010 at 04:30  

Salam dan Selamat sejahtera Dato'.

The following was my comment to Marina's "Confident People Do Not Get Confused" and with your permission, I would like to share this with your readers. Thank you.

***********************************

Dear Datin Paduka Marina

Salam and Happy New Year to you.

I’ve read some of the postings/comments at various blogs over this “Allah” issue. Some were coherently and eloquently argued. The way I view it in my simplistic thinking and understanding (or an idiot as your good self puts it and not being an expert on religious matter), the whole situation should and could have been handled differently with lots of common sense, understanding and being respectful.

What’s the real issue here? Was it ever just about a translation? If it was, then we already hear and read on the reasoning that “Tuhan” is more appropriate. But then it will be argued that “Allah” has been used by the non-Muslim Bumiputeras in Sarawak since the beginning. True, only because the bibles used by preachers to convert the locals there back then and until today were/are in Bahasa Indonesia, a language easily understood by them. So, if Indonesians have no issue with the “Allah” word, and even the Arabs too, why most Muslims here were offended and aggrieved with the Court’s judgment?

“Allah” to a Muslim’s psyche, believes and ‘akidah’ here is not the same and we should not equate it in the same context as the Indonesians or the Arabs.

In my idiotic way, a word or any word that means different things to others and deemed provocative and offensive even, should never be used, lest we intended it as such. In Indonesia (I’m sure you are familiar with and I don’t mean to be disrespectful to you or your readers), “butuh” and “pantat” are normal every day words used frequently there for they mean different things to them. Yet the very two words when spoken here in our country carry a different meaning altogether.

If your children speak Bahasa Indonesia with such ease like their dad, they probably used them every day too when talking to their relatives there and it wouldn’t be an issue at all but try using them here, especially to their elders. My Indonesians friends even apologized after subconsciously using those words while being here in Malaysia because they understood and being sensitive. And they don’t take too kindly either, when we call them “Indon”.

Closer to home, try calling our Indian friends “keling” (my apology to all Indian readers and interestingly, the same Justice Lau Bee Lan presided the case when Dewan Bahasa dan Pustake was sued over the same word) and you can argue all you like about its definition or origin, as most would be fond of doing, but the truth is you know you will upset, hurt and offend them. That’s the reality. When you care enough and not wanting to hurt and offend others, you will avoid and refrain from using such word unless you want to get into trouble. And just look at where we are now.

So, are majority of Muslims in Malaysia lacking in confidence or a confused lot as you opined, Datin Paduka?

mingxhin 10 January 2010 at 05:03  

And why would you want to bring up old history of the Crusades and such? The Christianity of today is not the same as the Christianity of a thousand years ago.

The same can be said for Muslims. I urge the Muslims to be more open-minded and creative, how are you going to restore Islam back to it's glory days when Christianity was still in the Dark Ages?

Now the reverse is happening. The Christians are progressing and becoming more open and tolerant while the Muslims are moving in the opposite direction.

There is a direct correlation between the rise of the Christian nations and the reformation of the Church.

In order for Islam to be great once more and respected throughout the world, Muslims as a whole must drop their negativity and rancor, must learn to be accepting and thinking positive, forward looking and not backward looking and drop their siege mentality and mantle of victim hood.

Do not harp on past glories while in the present it is mired in hatred, intolerance, jihads, dogma and whatnot. This is no different than the Christians of a thousand years ago with their hatred, intolerance, Crusades, dogma and whatnot.

In the end, all we wish for is for the People of the Book who follows the God of Abraham (Nabi Ibrahim) to reconcile and live peacefully with each other, accepting each other and not quarreling over the name of God. Isn't the source the same i.e. they are not called the Abrahamic religions for nothing.

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 08:18  

Mingxhin,

You forgot. We are not going back into ancient times. Far from it.

WW1 was started by Christians.
WW11 was started by Christians.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuked by Christians.

Aren't the above recent anough for you.

Now go back and read your history books. And I am no Muslim.

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 09:24  

Anonymous 1:28 said

"Christ preached "forgiveness" very strongly and evidence is there for all to see Christians generally do follow this compared to certain religion. Surely you do know what is going on in the world right?"

Hmmm.. Let see the evidence then,

1.Crusaders slaughtered hundreds of thousands Jews and Muslims during the Crusades compared to Muslim tolerant towards the Christians e.g Caliph Umar entry to Jerusalem and Saladin re-conquest of Jerusalem
2.Spanish Inqusition that forced Muslims and Jews to become Christians compared to the peaceful Islamic rule of Spain
3.Forced conversion of Indigeneous people in South America and Phillipines
4.Hundered of Pogroms against the Jews
5.Ethnic cleansing at Bosnia
6.Iraq War etc etc..

I can give you more examples of claimed by you that "Christ preached forgiveness".As Muslim, I believed that Christ did preached that but historically Christians did not practised it.

I believed Christians must have been following the other teaching of Christ; Jesus said: "Think not that I am come to send peace on
earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." (Matthew, 10:34)



"Have you compared how Christians reacted so far? Peaceful or violent?

It seem that you are insinuating that Muslims in Malaysia were violent and the culprits in torching the churches. Since the time the Portuguese/Dutch/Englishman colonised this country, it was unheard of any incident of any attack by Malays/Muslims to places of worship, be it churches, Hindu or Buddhist temple.It was totally not a Muslim character for Muslim to attack places of worship.

Since independence, even though under the constitution,Islam was the official religion, non Muslims can practised freely their religion because the Muslims are tolerant towards the Non Muslims.Only in Malaysia,that you can find Mosque,Temple and Churches are located side by side.

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 10:20  

Mingxhin said

"And why would you want to bring up old history of the Crusades and such?"

We need to learn from history in order not to repeat the same mistake. Famous quote by George Satyana 'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.'

"The Christianity of today is not the same as the Christianity of a thousand years ago."

Is it ? Remember World War 2,Bosnia conflict,Rwanda Ethnic Cleansing and Iraq War.There was a common factor in all these conflicts - perpetrated by the Christians.



"There is a direct correlation between the rise of the Christian nations and the reformation of the Church"

I think it was the reverse. Christians nations progressed because they abandoned Christianity and Muslim nations deteriorated because they abandoned Islam.Science progressed under Christian nations when they started to question the Christian dogma such "Earth is flat". In 1492,Christopher Columbus proved this theory was wrong and the Christian nations progressed after that.

"In the end, all we wish for is for the People of the Book who follows the God of Abraham (Nabi Ibrahim) to reconcile and live peacefully with each other, accepting each other and not quarreling over the name of God. Isn't the source the same i.e. they are not called the Abrahamic religions for nothing."

How true, Abraham (Ibrahim),Ishmael(Ismail), Isaac(Ishak), David(Daud), Aaron(Haron), Elias(Alias), Jesus(Isa) and Mohammad preached the same message to their people. Believe to the oneness of God. Only Christians (Trinatrians) belieived otherwise.If God is a trium god, Abraham, Moses and the previuos prophets must be preaching a different message then.

If Christians are Unitarians, I believe the Muslims will not had objected for them to use Allah.

Interestingly and historically, only when Spain and Jerusalem were under Islamic rule that you can see Christians, Jews and Muslim can live and prosper together.In Arab and Muslim countries,for centuries Christians had been living there and up till now there is still a significant minority in Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq and Syria.In Iran, the Jews are protected and represented in the parliament.

In Malaysia, Muslims and Christians had been living in harmony for centuries .This will be true as long both communities will respect each other and the current status quo remain.

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 10:32  

History, History, history. A lot has been said about wars made in the name of GOD. In truth, in every war there is a hidden and selfish agenda by human beings.
It don't matter who started it, but it is never GOD's plan.

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 11:47  

Anon 09:24

Frankly if you want to bring in history, there is nothing to discuss further because it is irrelevant to today's situation.

There are a thousand more times more intolerance occurring on all sides because they are only human.

The issue I am bringing up here is here in Malaysia or the world TODAY is that generally Christains do not go violent on behalf of their faith. I say generally.

You can destroy this or that, many will get disgusted but many will not go violent unless their lives are in danger.

The Pastor or Priest will say " they are only destroying physical things...not important- they cannot destroy our faith"

Your logic is indeed very warped. When I asked to look around in Malaysia, whether the Christains are violent.

Did I say Muslims are violent? To say that is wrong, because many are not. But those who are, are giving the Muslim faith a very bad image.


You would notice that generally Christains are very peaceful. Do you see mass demonstrations by Christain faiths on behalf of their religion here or globally?

I have nothing more to say about Muslims and I have no right to say anything about Muslims. I only observe and say to myself " they belong to a different faith, we act differently"

I dare say, you need to look around not only here but globally and feast yourself with the facts. Do I need to even mention it? Use your head.

We are talking about today not history. Today we know who we are and how we should behave. We as much as possible follow "forgiveness" as much as we can. That is the way Christ and many other faith preaches.

But then we do have our human side too... and we do strike back when we are in danger ourselves. No we will not give you the other cheek to be slapped. WE do slap you back.
That is our human side. Our faith will tend to restrain us not encourage us.

Actions speak a thousand words.

Just know this... if you are matured enough to know the damage it is doing to Malaysia economically and image for generations to come.

Can Malaysia now claim to be a modern moderate Muslim country the honour she earned yesteryears? Will investors who are mostly non Muslims around the world want to invest in a non moderate Muslim country say like Pakistan or Alfganistan?

... all for a "word".

Cool heads should be the day. Not rhetorics that nobody hears nor benefits anybody.

Leaders should know how to lead. Leaders represent the entire country not a particular community.

Unless we know that, there is only darkness in the horizon and more good and high income people will act with their feet. No these people are not going to react violently to such "trivial" matters in their view.

Right now many of us among friends and in discussions are weighing.. where is the best place to have our our head office? Many names came up.

A Malaysian Christian

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 17:58  

Dear Marina d/o ex-PM,

Mosques in Gaza and the West Bank are systemically being destroyed by the Jewish State of Israel. And the action of these Zionists are sponsored by Christian America.

With your intellectuality, sense of fairmindedness, protector of the oppressed and champion of the underdog, we look forward to your kind assistance.

Thank you.

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 18:58  

Anon 17:58

Again another warped logic in public.

"Mosques in Gaza and the West Bank are systemically being destroyed by the Jewish State of Israel. And the action of these Zionists are sponsored by Christian America."

For your ignorant information, America is not a Christian country.

They are not even allowed to display the cross in public office places.

The Jews are even victimising Christians in Gaza and in fact the number of Christians have fallen very much over there. Christians have accused them to be killers of Jesus.

But then what has governments and for that matter in Gaza got to do with whether Christians generally are peaceful on people level.

We are talking about Christians who follow Christ not those supposed "Christians" who are in name only.

We are talking about guys attacking churches in public..not against governments.

To be a Christian is easy.. to continue to be one ... wow is real hard. To harbour hatred is a sin. That is very hard indeed when you are put into the extremes.

So we try to be as much as we can although sometimes we just cant.

Hence you dont see many violent demos or attacks from Christians.
It is a sin.

But then, we can counter through other ways... with our feet. You do not want to work with us, well we work with others. What is the big deal?

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 21:43  

Dear Dato,
Even the churches in Sarawak were attacked. What next?
It looks like Malaysia is heading towards the route to Pakistan.

My advice is Sarawak & Sabah should leave Malaysia now and formation a federation with Brunei.
They will be better off than with Bodoh Malaysia.

AA

Anonymous,  10 January 2010 at 23:20  

A Malaysian Christian said

"Frankly if you want to bring in history, there is nothing to discuss further because it is irrelevant to today's situation."

History is relevant. From history we can get the correct perspectives why certain things happened? It is our duty to prevent future conflicts if we read and understand the history well.

"There are a thousand more times more intolerance occurring on all sides because they are only human".

Agreed, historically there were more intolerance by the Christians towards the Non Christians,right brother?

"The issue I am bringing up here is here in Malaysia or the world TODAY is that generally Christains do not go violent on behalf of their faith. I say generally."

Can't agree with your statement. Todays conflicts are mainly perpetrated by the Christians.

"Your logic is indeed very warped. When I asked to look around in Malaysia, whether the Christains are violent."

Agree with your observation that Christians here are not violent.Wonder why they are not violent here while the rest in other part of the world, they can be violent and brutal. I give you two reasons:

1. Christians here are a minority here and being a minority they have to conform to the local norm.

2. The Malays/Muslim here are a good host to the Christians.They protect the Christians right except preaching to Muslims.


"You would notice that generally Christains are very peaceful. Do you see mass demonstrations by Christain faiths on behalf of their religion here or globally?"

You must sleeping or just came back from your long journey to MARS. You miss the fun in Bosnia, Rwanda, Iraq,Indonesia and Afghanistan.

I have nothing more to say about Muslims and I have no right to say anything about Muslims. I only observe and say to myself " they belong to a different faith, we act differently"

Tell that to your Archbishop. Why disturb a peaceful co-existence that we had cherished and had enjoyed for the past centuries. We Muslims would not blinked another eye even if you prayed to Mother God..Why for one word that he intended to change the status quo and in doing so destroyed the long established rapport between Muslims and Christians. Will the Christians here will miss going to heavens if they did not call their GOD "ALLAH"?

"Cool heads should be the day. Not rhetorics that nobody hears nor benefits anybody.

Agree,tell that to your Archbishop,too.

"Leaders should know how to lead. Leaders represent the entire country not a particular community".

The reason Malaysia is still a stable country in spite of multi racial,multi lingual and multi religious outlook because of our leaders are willing to compromise.Sensitive issues are discussed and resolved behind closed doors.

Here in Malaysia, the minority rights were protected since 1957.Overall, Malaysia was blessed with a harmanious relationship among the race and religion except in 1969.

I think it is a blessing that this things happened now.At least our leaders can sit and discussed the issues and resolved it . Sometime we take for granted the peaceful atmosphere that we had enjoyed so far that we tend to forget that certain issues are very sensitive and due to the sensitive nature, we should tackle it differently.

Dialogues, not demo and not court should be the way to go.Enough said, brother!

Loken PaL-aNi-SaM-y 11 January 2010 at 02:57  

Excellent piece of writing. Months ago I had argued against the use of the word Allah by the Church.

Does not being allowed to use the word change one religious freedom/meaning/etc.

All I have to say is ..father forgive them.

Anonymous,  11 January 2010 at 05:49  

Dear Dato,
If the article by RPK is true that Umno is behind this church attack, then Malaysia is really in big 'shit'.
[Perhaps you are the one who may know more]
This will definitely drive the Western (Christian) investors away from Malaysia and perhaps even trade embargo.
The future prospect: No economic advancement and the poor Melayu will suffer more. So how stupid is the UMNO? I sure a lot of readers would like to hear your comment.

AA

walla 11 January 2010 at 08:05  

..and a church in Indonesia:

http://is.gd/629ox

alfijam 11 January 2010 at 23:11  

Salam Dato',

"You don't read the Quran as you do a story book or novel."
Betul, betul (eh, bunyi mcm upin dn ipin lak). I see a lot of it these days. Pluck any Quranic verse to support your stand. Tanpa siasat, context dsb nya.

An englightening piece, Dato. Bagi saya ada munafaat baca blog ini. Tahu lah saya sekarang bahwa Dato' ada lah seorang yg terpelajar di dlm ertikata yg sebenar nya.

Ps, I visit your blog daily, and leave a comment (Anon AA) once in a way -- the last on your jan 5 posting. Well, as I've just discovered today there's another Anon AA, I really must sign in. Shame on me for being too lazy to do that. Now must mosey over to listen to JMD's kutbah to our Vuittonic angels.
Thank you and regards.

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP