The future of our interfaith dialogue


by Azly Rahman

Must engaging in dialogue on religion be painful? Must it be greeted with hostility? Or is it a moot question—that the answer lies in what we failed to have done through our education system, decades ago?

I have faith that we will one day be ready to appreciate interfaith dialogue. On this note, I too believe that we will one day appreciate philosophical discussions and scientific debates. My experience conducting interfaith dialogue every semester in the American classroom setting gives me the assurance that we will be ready. It would be good to one day know that our corridors of academia are filled with passionate discussions on the self, the universe, God, and fate of humanity.

The core of each religious foundation is there for us to explore and to learn from. We need to escape from being trapped in the particular and liberate ourselves into explorers of the universal. Of course this will take time given the nature of class and caste system we are in; developments that have impacted upon our consciousness. But evolve we must, if we are to see a progressive country emerging out of these ruins of communal politics, immorality of modern capitalism, and persistent religious misunderstandings. Ignorance is the greatest enemy of knowledge, as the sage Socrates once said.

What is interfaith dialogue?

The incident of the aborted Bar Council forum was a good example how we will continue to approach inter-faith dialogue. There is vision in chaos, creation in destruction, and opportunities in threats. Educators of peace and social justice must not give up. In a country in which we have for example Center for Civilizational Dialogue in Universiti Malaya, and in a country wanting to be known as a “moderate country with a Muslim majority”, we are seeing contradictions. It will get uglier if we fail to reflect upon the means and methods of religious dialogue. We do not know much what each one of us believes in and what are the rituals and practices of our neighbours. We do not know what scripture they read, let alone the meaning of the prayers, the doa, zikir, the pujas, and the mantras. We lack the knowledge of the fundamentals. This is understandable – fear governs our consciousness and directs our actions and ultimately reproduces itself inter-generationally. Religion is a “sensitive” issue, they say— which needs desensitization, I would contend.

Back to the protests on the Bar Council forum. It is a misrepresentation of what Muslims are and a reflection of how we have approached not only dialogue on religion but also on other “sensitive issues” as well. In this environment and in this regime where exploitation of issues are orchestrated by opportunists at the expense of peaceful dialogue, we will always be at the losing end of education for critical consciousness and for peace.

We must go back to the drawing board of our approach to teaching religion in terms of curricular design and how to juxtapose or even infuse it with core idea of humanism and rationalism. This will take another few decades given the complexity of our society and how it has evolved in line with the “half-bakedness” of hypermodernity.

Here in the United States, I have just finished teaching two summer classes on “Religions of the World” and Introduction to Religion” in a college where I have also been asked, for the last three years, to teach “Islamic Scriptures”. I find it liberating to conduct classes after classes in which my students not only are American and foreign-born Muslims but also Jews, Christians, Catholic, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Agnostics, and even Pagan. At the end of each semester, they have a different perception of each other — more in-depth understanding of what could have remained antagonistic. We read the Quran and the Hadiths and look at the scriptures from a hermeneutic perspective, situate it in the present and projecting it into the future. Most often, our discussions on jihad evolved into a reflection on the struggles for the human self to explore suffering, violence, and liberation in all religious traditions. It includes passionate discussions on media representation of the concept.

Dialogue in Malaysia?

I often wonder if what I am doing is possible in Malaysia but I certainly have the confidence and hope that given the most peaceful way to approach it, a lot can be gained. Essentially religious dialogue need not be painful. It ought to help foster deep understanding and dispel misconception of ANY religion. It ought to make us become deeply religious and to learn to explore what others believe, to respect them, to learn from the universal themes of spirituality, and ultimately to contemplate our existence within the context of the struggle between Good and Evil and to evolve as more ethical and rational beings – so that we may participate better as political and social beings..

I believe we need to revamp undergraduate foundation courses in our public and private to include one that teaches the classics of the thoughts of the Eastern and Western tradition and the scriptures of the major religions. But then again, our university students are not even allowed to be involved in politics and to engage freely in public forum on political matters – how might this be possible with interfaith dialogue then?

We have a long walk to mental freedom and to a philosophical understanding of Islam and other religions. Unfortunately we are now known as people who are good at disrupting dialogues. I hope this perception will change.

But then again, education is about hope, peace, empathy, intelligence, and liberation — these we must use as a basis for a new design once we see major restructuring efforts under way, undertaken perhaps via a new political, social, and educational arrangement.

Let us look at possibilities in interfaith dialogue. Let education for peace and justice do that.

[NOTE: I have gathered some background materials on various major religions, on my website. Please scroll down to the very end http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/]

———————-
My Facebook supporters page.

  1. #1 by bennylohstocks on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 1:23 am

    Where is…

    “HOLY” COW

  2. #2 by boojander on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 2:24 am

    Americans love to talk about people’s faith. But do you think they really believe in faith? Some of them do and I’m not stereotyping Americans here but this is a fact. Do you really know what happen in Iraq? Do you think there is a war between Sunni and Shia? My Iraqi friends said “no”. Then, why they don’t even care about what Israel did to Palestine? Why don’t they just try to stop it like how they try to stop Saddam’s “nuclear”? The fact is they indeed have problems with us. Interfaith talk is useless because it has no meaning and useful outcome.

    ++ My Iraqi friends also told me that Saddam deserve to die because he is not a good person.

  3. #3 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 2:31 am

    Holy Sh*it!!

  4. #4 by trublumsian on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 3:02 am

    what are we saying if we can’t sit down and talk about religion and race in a CIVIL manner? if a dialog cannot be held without emotions and fanatical overreactions (like protests and slogan hurling) coming into play we are in serious bomb waiting to explode trouble. by engaging in a dialog, we agree to disagree, and it’s not like people on either side does not already know what the other party is thinking all along. a forum put things out in the open and will help ease for more heavyweight exchanges. and by criticizing the forum umno is doing more damage by reminding and reinforcing the fanaticism among some of the hardcore followers.

  5. #5 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 5:02 am

    we cannot even agreed on tangible issues , and yet we try to act like we are able to be on issues of faith. how silly.

    lets be real , if since the beginning, that we are born different , and speak different – it must be for a reason.

    dear yb lim,
    why cant you please get religion off the topic and delve on the issues of politics that affect the lives of the raayat – like cost of living and corruptions and scandals.

    it is only being a hypocrite, that we pretend that we can tolerate each others’ differences. nyet. man have been seeking God in all forms – from the sun to the moon . why dont we let it rest please.

  6. #6 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 5:21 am

    pas and dap are at extreme poles when it comes to religion. if pas and dap can sit down and talk about religion in the most civil manner and comes out with a solution, THAN and only than other parties can try to follow suit.

    if pas and dap cannot even agreed to disagreed on religion ( coalition of pkatan raayat ) , my dear trublusiam – forget about you and me.

    dear yb lim,

    my deepest respect for you. if uncle kit and nik aziz can have a open forum to discuss religion ( any religion ) and comes off with a solution – than you may be the ‘enlightened one”. but that day will never come even when pr comes to rule the federal.

    dear friends,

    this religion of yours and mine , are merely 2000 years old,compare to the creation of mankind. if for millions of years, we have been living apart, and following our faith and beliefs, YOU think, some lawyers in the bar counsel and mps can change that>.

    dear godfather and gundam,

    i think limkamput is not the only one,that is frustrated that the pr is not on course. pr is actually off- course. i voted for change,but i see no changes.

  7. #7 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 5:29 am

    dear trublumsian,

    you be the moderator for a open forum to discuss religion with karpal and nik ( both are members of the pr ). and can you honestly believe that both learned and aged man offers a solution ?

    i dont think so. do you?

  8. #8 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 5:31 am

    YB Kit,

    The Bar Council takes up issues pertaining to law as if affects puiblic interests. The forum entitled “Conversion to Islam: Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution” disrupted last Saturday concerns one such issue. It proceeded with the forum on the assumption that people are or ought to be matured enough to discuss inter-faith issues civilly and rationally. 150 individuals and representatives of various organisations had registered for participation in the forum. Speakers were drawn from wide spectrum including those knowledgeable in Shariah such as director of the Syariah Law and Political Science Centre/Senior Fellow of the Institute of Islamic Understanding Dr Wan Azhar Wan Ahmad, and lawyers Ravi Nekoo, K. Shanmuga, Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdul. It was a forum opened to public.

    This is what civil society is all about. Civil society is as a “third sector,” distinct from government and business. Civil society refers essentially to the so-called “intermediary institutions” such as professional associations, religious groups, labor unions, citizen advocacy organizations, that give voice to various sectors of society and enrich public participation in democracies. The evolution of civil society and civil discussion promotes open society and democracy.

    Being “intermediary institution” a civil society is apolitical. It sides what is right, just and good for the country; it does not take political sides whether BN or PR : it is pro Malaysia. That is why the Bar Council did not take into purview political calculations whether the timing of the forum was right or not right or might be exploited in light of the imminent Permatang Puah by election.

    Arrayed on the opposite side are 300 protestors. They threatened to storm the Bar Council forum if the forum did not stop as they wished. They represented a group opposed to civil and rational discussion of complex issues confronting society.

    Threatening violence, was an uncivil group outside in the streets uninterested in dialogue and rational discussion in confrontation with the group inside interested in rational and civil discussion. It was a classic confrontation between the voices of force, intimidation and violence versus the voices of reason, dialoque and civil discussion.

    It is a sad indictment of the state of openness, maturity and democracy in this country that authorities took the side of the former group.

    According to Malaysiakini, “various leaders of Islamic NGOs, Malacca Chief Minister Mohd Ali Rustam, Umno Puteri information chief Shahaniza Shamsuddin and PAS Youth chief Salahuddin Ayub were among those who have suggested that Ambiga and the Bar Council be cited under the ISA and Sedition Act for Saturday’s incident”.

    What is ominious is that amongst those calling for action against the civil society is Salahuddin Ayub Youth chief of PAS, an important component of Pakatan Rakyat. Another is Zulkifli Noordin, a PKR’s MP leading the protest against the Bar Council forum.

    To my mind if Pakatan Rakyat tolerates the actions of key players from its own component parties to attack civil and rational dialogue, civil society as epitomised by the Bar Council, the PR is no different from BN in placing greater priority on political opportunism than the principles of civil and rational dialogue and tolerance of different views that is what democracy is all about.

    It means that after 50 years this country is going down the road of a society more close than open as ever, where might triumphs over right, force prevails over reason, uncivil society will have its way over civil society, and race and religion over nation, the political tsunamy of 8th March notwithstanding will signal no advancement whatsoever in Malaysian democracy.

    The future of interfaith dialogue? There is no future in nascent democracy : if after 50 years years we can regress like this there is no cause of optimism of progress for the next 50!

  9. #9 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 5:42 am

    dear Sir Jeffrey QC,

    the bar counsel should not have and ought not have ASSUMED , that people are matured to discuss interfaith issues.

    even Pope Benedict and The Grand Iman discussed in private after 2000 years. and it is mere courtesy call to each other. what transpired? nothing.

  10. #10 by Kathy on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 6:19 am

    The Bar Council should realise that most Muslims in Malaysia are not ready to sit down and have a civil discussion on the matter of religion. I agree with Adam that though it good to know more about the consequences of conversion of non-muslims to muslims, Malaysians in general are not ready yet to have it done publicly.

  11. #11 by lew1328 on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 6:33 am

    Greetings!

    Well says Jeffery.

    Please allow more time for Malaysian to adjust, taught not another 50 years.

  12. #12 by patriotic1994 on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 6:37 am

    It is not all of us cannot talk publicly on religion. Only that small group of people, extremists, can’t. Is there a way we can measure or ask the public, especially Muslims, on their view on talking religion publicly? May be a survey like this will really tell us the exact situation we are in.

  13. #13 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 6:46 am

    There are other questions : whilst we respect the feelings and sentiments of all sections of Malaysians, why do we make the determination that the 300 vociferously opposing civil discussion by a civil society like the Bar Council really represent the majority???

    In a hypothetical situation of a vociferous high profile 300 making a stand on the streets and threatening to rush into the building there may be another 3000 supporting or at least have no beef against interfaith dialoque. Could it not be the case that 300 have managed to stake a claim and exert an influence on the course of events wholly disproportionate to the actual numbers of people who sympathise with their cause?

    Secondly I concede that I am bias in favour of all that free speech exchange and dialogue stand for.

    Take for example Copernicus the founder of modern astronomy. In 1530, Copernicus completed and gave to the world his great work De Revolutionibus, which asserted that the earth rotated on its axis once daily and traveled around the sun once yearly.

    It is true but it went against the philosophical and religious beliefs that had been held during those medieval times when the world was thought to be flat.

    Was Copernicus given the chance to expound and defend his view ?

    Luckily he was smarter than Bar Council officials in choosing the timing of publication of his work (after his death) to escape an unatural death.

    Two other Italian scientists of the time, Galileo and Bruno, embraced his views.

    Giordano Bruno went further to expand on it – that space was boundless and that the sun was and its planets were but one of any number of similar systems. For such views, Bruno was tried before the Inquisition, condemned and burned at the stake in 1600.

    Galileo was tried, under the threat of torture and death, he was forced to his knees to renounce all belief in Copernicus’s theories and was thereafter sentenced to imprisonment for the remainder of his days.

    Do the people who gave the world the truth deserve to be so punished? Where is the justice that civilised people uphold??

    Aren’t we not facing the Copernican dilemma of not being able to speak in quest for truth without threat to life and personal freedom? Did n’t we hear of Sharizat’s home being thown 2 Molotov’d cocktails meant for Ambiga from whom Sharizat bought her house?

    Do we want to progress by tolerating freedom of expression a condition for truth to flourish or we wish to return to medieval times???

  14. #14 by jus legitimum on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 7:24 am

    The violent protest staged by either individuals or groups against the Bar council were not just uncivilised but also barbaric.They were the real kurang ajars but astonishingly they were backed and supported by people who were given the mandate to rule this country comprising of not just muslims but a lot of non muslims too.

  15. #15 by ktteokt on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 7:48 am

    This barbaric reaction all stemmed from the “protectionism” given to one specific religion which made them feel “superior”! Such low mentalities!

  16. #16 by ahluck on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 7:51 am

    where is the gong? this is religious issue. He is living happyly ever after with public’s money. He suppose to handle the issue. give justice for the families of unresposible husbands. Islam means pure. The demonstrators are no different than terrorist. what would happen if Bar Council too acted uncivilised? next forum – do we need monachy?

  17. #17 by cheng on on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:11 am

    Those violent demonstrators should detained and charge for participating in illegal assembly, causing public nuisance, or maybe rioting. If applicable, give them 1 or 2 strokes of the rotan!

  18. #18 by yhsiew on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:13 am

    When I was a student in UK, the university Christian Union held a talk on “Christianity vs Islam”. The organizer invited Muslim students to participate in the talk. Surprisingly the Muslim students agreed.

    During the talk there were no violence, no yelling and no people storming into the building and everything proceeded peacefully. When the talk was over, some Muslim students politely expressed their dissatisfaction with some of the points raised.

    I wonder when Malaysians are going to achieve this kind of maturity pertaining to religious beliefs.

  19. #19 by just a moment on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:20 am

    Nice write up by Azly Rahman.
    First of all, Azly have first hand experience on the entire process of discussion before and is sharing with us the benefits of holding such subject.

    It would be good to one day know that our corridors of academia are filled with passionate discussions on the self, the universe, God, and fate of humanity.(Glimmer of hope)

    The core of each religious foundation is there for us to explore and to learn from. We need to escape from being trapped in the particular and liberate ourselves into explorers of the universal
    (We need to move on)

    In this 1.environment (This is precisely the problem!)
    and in this regime where exploitation of issues are orchestrated by 2.opportunists at the expense of 3.peaceful dialogue, we will always be at the losing end of education for critical consciousness and for peace
    I strongly believed Malaysian can hold such forum in the near future. The only questions begins with
    1. Environment! Who sets the environment?
    Of course – The people in power!
    PM, Home Ministry, The Law. Sad to say: All these are currently lob sided and to most PR they are deadwoods. Look at some of the photos how our Police (Law)stand guard along side hooligans, gangsters, and dirtworms against other races. Its always the same, the law is always with Muslim/Islam stuff regardless..

    2.Opportunist, the same PIP.

    3. Whose expense? The PR and 95% of Malaysians.
    What expense? Future.

    In short, this kind of forum can be done IF The Law goes to work. Police should guard against (not with) hooligans who disrupt the forum.
    PM, Home Minster, etc..Media should support and encourage such forum. Tall order eh? Well, thats the way to proceed. If theres no blessing from the top – Very susah.

    I remain hopeful that one day we will be able to conduct such forum in safe, exciting enviroment.
    There’s light at the end of the tunnel. PR and the rest of us must make sure its not an on-coming train, thats all.

  20. #20 by Bigjoe on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:40 am

    The Malay by history are accepting of global changes. What has been debilitating to them is their poor leadership and constantly feel the need tap feudal, underhanded ways to maintain power and marshall resources. There have always been some Malays that are in tune with the changes and challenges of the world BUT have never been able to lead their fellow men into it.

    Think of the Malays in South Africa that precedes even China’s venture to South East Asia. Think of Tunku and his ideas which PKR are now seeking to go back to. There are many others but they failed to bring the entire people with them and their ideas.

    The truth is until Malays choose to change their leadership, they will never free themselves of these balls of chain that weigh them down in these issues.

  21. #21 by just a moment on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:48 am

    Agreed absolutely Bigjoe! Its true, the Malays are really fun people to be with if not for politics here. They are creative lot and given half a chance to explore, they will do it. They are being subdue, they are brainwashed, they are being held bondage from their very own kind. They know it. They need real help, only problem No avenue for them.

  22. #22 by drngsc on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:51 am

    I think that you ask the wrong question. The question should be, is the country ready for dialog and open discussion of issues important to the Rakyat? Or, are the political leaders able to deal with a populace who likes to discuss issues as a means of solving them? After 50 years, sad to say, the answer is NO to both the questions. Maybe the second know over-rides the first. They do not want dialog, because they do not wish to know the truth and they do not care for the truth. FIRST WORLD INFRASTRUCTURE, THIRD WORLD MENTALITY.

  23. #23 by drngsc on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:52 am

    I think that you ask the wrong question. The question should be, is the country ready for dialog and open discussion of issues important to the Rakyat? Or, are the political leaders able to deal with a populace who likes to discuss issues as a means of solving them? After 50 years, sad to say, the answer is NO to both the questions. Maybe the second NO over-rides the first. They do not want dialog, because they do not wish to know the truth and they do not care for the truth. FIRST WORLD INFRASTRUCTURE, THIRD WORLD MENTALITY.

  24. #24 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:52 am

    dear jeffrey,

    ambiga is no copernicus.
    bruno was burned to death.
    galileo was imprisoned.

    that was than.
    who came to the rescue of poor bruno and galileo , Sir Jeffrey?

    none.

    would you have stood by galileo’s side . doubt so. would i have stood by galileo’s side. not a dime.
    but history remembered galileo for his scientific works , rather than his theology.

  25. #25 by manusia ada akal on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:54 am

    Religion is for oneself development in order to stay away from bad things. If one practice with diligents, the results obtain is for oneself only and cannot be share with others. One cannot impose the practice onto others. If others has seen the goodness in the practice, it will tempt them to follow, as it is something good. That is how the religion can be expanded. By showing that it brings goodness and happiness to the practisioner.

    To have dialogue is learn about things which will brings better understanding of its nature. You have “akal”, it can tells you how to seek happiness, better your lives and how to survive in this modern world.

    It is up to you to have dialogue with others in order gain additional understanding as above mention, apart from your own believe which in turn,are subject to being analyse from time to time, to see if it is still practical and brings benefits to you, like makes you happy.

  26. #26 by greenacre on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 8:55 am

    Many of this so called leaders don’t know the basic of faith yet they are talking of interfaith.

    When one have no faith in oneself how on earth are they going to have interfaith communication.

  27. #27 by Freddy on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:04 am

    Since the day when I was an active participant in Bungaraya forum, I had always insisted that it is a misnomer to say that it is all about Ketuanan Melayu in Malalysia. However you put it, translate it, define it, it is all about Ketuanan Islam in reality. Mahathir ain’t pure Melayu and neither is Bodowi. That too goes to all our Prime Ministers.

    If I say that I know of a person who is PURE CHINESE but yet classified Melayu, would you believe me? His mother was given away for adoption to a Malay family while a baby and grew up as a ‘Malay’. Back then, during the 50s and 60s, such practises were common and no need for adoption papers.

    Well, she grew up and then married a Chinese who ‘masuk Melayu’lah. So this friend of mine, though a pure Chinese, is considered a ‘pure Melayu’lah though both his parents are Chinese, but technically Melayu.

    Confused already? Welcome to Malaysia …. and oh, remember a certain UMNO fella said that it is easy to become a Melayu???

  28. #28 by Mr Smith on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:06 am

    The fact is, there is an ongoing interfaith dialogue among Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and Taoists in the form of the Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism.

    This has been going on for some 20 years. (Note: Taoist is the latest to join the council).

    So who says we have not progressed? Who says we are not matured and civilized?

    The problem is when one group thinks it is superior to others and holds the monopoly to Truth.
    It is this hollow pride of a few which is the cause of disharmony in our society.

    How then can we explain the naked display of arrogance, violence and use of expletives and racial slurs to protect one religion? Is this how one defends his religion?

    The problem is compounded by the tacit (even overt) support of government leaders who claim to be leaders of all races!

  29. #29 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:12 am

    jeffrey,

    the reason why the 300 made such a high profile, because we have among them pkr mps. and the loudest and the most rude of the 300 is non other than the kulim mp- pkr mp @ pr mp.

    so , that shd answer your question. and what does pr stand for?

  30. #30 by kiren on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:15 am

    yeah you are right, i think malaysian should be more open minded… by the way i dunt understand why were the 300 malays were angry with this forum? i heard th participants were all non muslim only 5 percent were muslim…. but why were they angry?? maybe it is just the tittle of the forum made ppl confused …they ahould have been given a proper detailed tittle… maybe more precise.. making ppl understand easily…no matter how long it takes… by words. what do you all think?

  31. #31 by boh-liao on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:20 am

    Ignorance and no self-confidence are the greatest stumbling blocks here for an open dialogue.

    The prevailing mentality is: If I cannot win in a civil dialogue, I will stop the dialogue by force and threat.

    Y no FRU and water cannon used against the frothing mob last Sat outside the Bar Council forum? Or, did the mob gather there with a police permit?

  32. #32 by seage on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:22 am

    It is amazing whenever reading reviews/opinions in this blog but on this thread, particularly Adam’s entry:

    ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH Says:

    Today at 05: 02.27 (3 hours ago)
    …lets be real , if since the beginning, that we are born different , and speak different – it must be for a reason. (seems like we are going for the wrong fish here! Difference should not be resolved but should be communicated,understood and accepted. Its just like a marriage, just because my wife is different, doesn’t mean that I bar all discussion on each other’s differences be it good or bad. I take it in my stride and knowing that I am not perfect while not condemning her of not being perfect too. Discussions brought forth understanding, and understanding knowledge, and knowledge wisdom and wisdom conviction)

    dear yb lim,
    why cant you please get religion off the topic and delve on the issues of politics that affect the lives of the raayat – like cost of living and corruptions and scandals. (Agree on this point but then again, YB’s concern is not wrong per se. The outburst due to the forum does shows something or am l the only one thinking that it is a problem? Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. If the current govt’s double standard and PKR’s rep’s outward behavior not fighting for the Malaysian are both accepted, perhaps we are missing something… aye?)

    it is only being a hypocrite, that we pretend that we can tolerate each others’ differences. nyet. man have been seeking God in all forms – from the sun to the moon . why dont we let it rest please. (This is one big issue Adam! While all of us here are trying to create a Malaysian’s Malaysia, you are calling all the ppl that has make such effort to tolerate the differences between one to another a HYPOCRITE! Pls Adam, while I may not like someone doesnt mean that I can call him/her “BABI” and proclaim that I am not a hypocrite and thus a person that is true to my heart. See the light?)

    Off point: One of things that gave me more comfort than anything is to see a sportsman playing in any event bearing the flag of MALAYSIA. It so touched my heart to see people like the Sideks, CSK + SBK, FKK and more recently Lee Chong Wei played in a major event i.e. Beijing Olympics 2008. Seeing all the Indians, Malay, Chinese, Mamak and all (The order of race does not imply significance or anything alike) identify as one to cheer and applaud not that “malay” player or “cina” player but MALAYSIAN PLAYER (Did you see a glizter of tears from my eyes?) representing Malaysia to play, it is the Malaysia of my dream.

  33. #33 by alikim on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:25 am

    Islam and politics in Malaysia are inseperable.
    Malays in Malaysia are born muslims, whether they follow the teachings of Islam is another matter. It is an issue betwen God and each individual.

    All we know is : God is the most powerful and All knowing. So, let us see Malaysia on August, 26. 2008.

  34. #34 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:36 am

    my dearest seage,

    we have witnessed two world wars. recorded.
    and many other wars unrecorded.

    are you implying, that those that lived before us , have made no attempts to have civil and open dialogue and communication ?

    be real. we have georgia now in war with russia. bet russia will win. the united nation security counsel is having a “forum and dialogue” for ceasefire. russia cares?

  35. #35 by 5titlah on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:46 am

    They are no better than the mujahhiddin! Destroy first, talk later…
    Having a dialogue is like having a discussion. Without these the country will forever be oppress by only one religion.

    How come i don’t see any FRUs, water cannon or the army there???
    This scenario is the same as Hindraf. Why so one sided? Is this religion so good that it does not need other races?

    They must be doin something good coz this is its own race that WANTS to destroy Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
    Ahem….. what race that commit the highest crime rate?
    what race that commit the dumping of babies wherever?
    what race that commit drug abuse in all manner?
    Errr… I can go on… & on… but we all know worst!

    What’s so superior about this race till they can say & do whatever & manage to get away with it?
    ISA cannot charge them coz NOTHING has started at all coz the “Devil” himself barged in & told the chinese & the indians to go to hell…
    Some malays were there too. Where did he tell them to go..???

    RPK was sent to jail for his remarks.
    Can the Bar Council sent this “Devil” to HELL too…?

    What are our rights now? There seems to be only Malay Malaysians.
    I thought we ARE Malaysians…!

    How come the BN components are so……….. silent???
    Perhaps the “Biggest Devil” got their balls !

  36. #36 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:48 am

    my dearest seage ,

    what happened to the judiciary reforms?
    what happened to the police reforms?
    what happened to the aca reforms?

    what happened to the correctcorrectcorrect lawyer investigation?

    these are all tangible matters that the bar counsel can assist.

    and on matters of sports, i certainly agree with you. but will you seage join in chorus with the tibetans . thank you.

  37. #37 by seage on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:51 am

    We have witnessed two world wars. recorded.
    and many other wars unrecorded.

    are you implying, that those that lived before us , have made no attempts to have civil and open dialogue and communication ?

    be real. we have georgia now in war with russia. bet russia will win. the united nation security counsel is having a “forum and dialogue” for ceasefire. russia cares?[Adam Yong]

    Most dearest Adam, I am not implying what you reckon that I implied. While making an effort does not necessary yield results, it does not mean that we should not make an effort at all. Are you not agreeable with whatever that I have mentioned previously OR you partially agrees?

    Its not the matter of being real or not but a matter of making enough effort or just blatantly jump the gun at any instances brought up in relation to differences? I am utterly disgusted w Russia on their attack and so does any country at all that initiated war (I hope that you have the same sentiment on this case). It doesn’t matter who “wins” because the ultimate losers are the ppl.

    While your opinion and mind differs, we still discussed it openly as civilised ppl. I agree with you on certain things and also disagrees with you on others. Through discussion like these that we may have understanding and understanding… (so it goes).

  38. #38 by seage on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:54 am

    You know what Adam? We could just hang out for coffee sometimes and chat.

  39. #39 by hibou on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:02 am

    Over and over again we are told that forums like the one attempted to be held by the Bar Council recently, infringe on the sanctity of Islam and therefore the sensitivities of muslims. Never, however, are we told how, or in what way this so-called infringement can possibly come about, not even a simple explanation from the highest leaders of our land, the PM and DPM who are both muslims.

    Islam claims to be the final relevation and religion for ALL men regardless of race, so why, as muslims, the PM and DPM persistently call for behind closed door discussion?Are there aspects of the practise of Islam in Malaysia that the Malaysian muslims are ashamed about?

    Perhaps more accurate, the hijack of Islam by politicians in Malaysia for political means has resulted that if there is any discussion between muslims and non-muslims in this country, it will eventually expose the so-called defenders of Islam in this country to be politicians with very cynical agenda?

    It would be difficult I think for the present government to be asked, in an open forum, to reconcile its position on ISA, OSA, NEP, etc with the basic tenets of Islam.

    Open forum on race and Islam is therefore vigourously discouraged in Malaysia presently, purely because the present government’s position is indefencible.

  40. #40 by oknyua on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:04 am

    Adam yong ibni Abdullah,

    You brought out an interesting possibility, PAS and DAP (and PKR) sit together and trash out religious issues and make clear definition or demarcations where applicable.

    I am privileged to have attended bible school and I can appreciate the background where many PAS religious edicts come from. It is not a surprise as Christian and Islam originated from the same basic root – Judaism. The main difference is the passing age of judgment which enters the age of grace. Christians hate sin and a sinner must make restitution; the basic concept applicable for both Christian and Muslim. Purity in everyday life is prerequisite, not only when public office demands it.

    Why I mention this is that DAP – on its part – must try to see the view point of religion. For PAS to understand secularism is very easy; everyday they see it in operation. But has DAP ever tried to understand the basis of PAS’s action from the viewpoint of religion? We have members who are fine Christians eg YB Hannah – and I am sure she can meaningfully sit down with the religious leaders from PAS.

    Personally I see PAS as an easier partner to understand when compared to UMNO (or even PKR). PAS hasn’t changed for the past 30 years. PAS meant well even if some of their religious edict appears harsh. To me, its up to DAP to make the first move.

  41. #41 by jus legitimum on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:08 am

    Some people say Islam is a religion that promotes peace and tolerence.I do not think people now can accept it anymore.The unruly behaviour of the protestors,their shoutings and the passing of racist and uncalled for remarks at the Bar council premises only served to lend credence to the general perception that this religion is very terrible.Many people now are reminded of the violence,the bloody killing of the innocents committed by suicide bombers and the like elsewhere.After this incident which was condoned by the police,irreparable damage has been done to the image of this religion at least in the eyes of the non muslims in this country.

  42. #42 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:14 am

    dearest seage,

    you can get my mobile number from yb lim kit siang, and i certainly will love to meet you. no problem . my point still remains that there are so much major issues at the moment that the raayat need attentions, that the mps are voted in by us. that we respond to the call of change. get the priorities right. WE ARE MERE MORTALS.

  43. #43 by k1980 on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:14 am

    Confusedcius says: “There will never be any real interfaith dialogues as long as one faith continues to insist that it alone is greater than the other faiths”

  44. #44 by milduser on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:16 am

    Say what you like, politics and religions do not mix just like oil and water. This is substantiated by world history. Let the politicians discuss politics, the religious, religions and the lawyers, laws (what ever they are).

  45. #45 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:24 am

    dear okynua,

    thank you for supporting the mooted and remote idea.
    i guess you can already forsee what will happen if yb karpal and yb hadi will have a forum. both are learned. both are matured. both are great leaders. but will yb lim take this risk????

    bn will be enjoying the show than.

    but why not , as suggested by seage , that we are not hypocrites, let dap and pas have the first inclusive forum.

    and since dear okynua, has the priviledge of knowledge of the books of PROHPETS, bridge them.

  46. #46 by HJ Angus on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:28 am

    “Let the politicians discuss politics, the religious, religions and the lawyers, laws (what ever they are).”

    If only life were that simple. If we cannot hold discussions on religious matters then we should allow anyone to change religions as they will and that will remove the state’s meddling in personal matters.

    http://malaysiawatch3.blogspot.com/2008/08/time-that-more-malaysians-grew-up-and.html

  47. #47 by oknyua on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:32 am

    Adam,
    YB Karpal and YB Hadi – cannot lah,- Immoveable meets unstoppable objects. It won’t be a discussion!!

  48. #48 by seage on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 10:43 am

    Dear Adam…asking from YB LKS? Think he has other priorities than being a phone directory aye?

  49. #49 by taiking on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 11:04 am

    Azly’s words of wisdom and hope may have been piped directly into our view via the web but the meaning and significance of his wise words were actually lobbed across from where he sits onto our land and into our minds in an intercontinental ballistic fashion. They are aliens.

    They are aliens at least to a minority in our midst. The minority who, to the great misfortune of the majority, found their extraordinary vocal cord somewhere in the grounds of those who detest and feared challenges and changes.

    But challenges and changes are inevitable in life for neither time nor age nor tides would remain static and unchanging even momentarily. And changes bring new perspectives to known things and establised ideas. There in lies the challenge – the challenge to meet the changes. Together, changes and challenges form the twin engine that drives mankind to greater heights and advances.

    It is of course known to all that changes are not necessarily or always good but the challenge which the forces of change mount can not be ignored or evaded. Adaptive steps are the least in terms of the measures available. Resistance is not an available option.

    In ordinary parlance, buck up or buzz off you BOZOs.

  50. #50 by Saint on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 11:30 am

    The demonstration had nothing to do with religion but only a “show of power”. Might wins, Right takes a back seat; at most times.

  51. #51 by gundam on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 11:36 am

    it’s nt abt religion or faith, it’s abt survival of mankind.

    scientists believe that the separation between the ancestors of modern man and the ancestors of a modern apes occured between 4-7 million years ago. modern looking Cro-Magnon man appeared somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago. however, there was a dramatic change in tool use and creativity abt 40,000 years ago. tis was not a physical change, bt involved thinking and problem solving. If you ask fundementalist christians, the answer is around 6,000 years ago when God created man.

    so mankind lived for million of yrs without religion, and they survived.
    will religions lead us into total destruction one day?

    somehow sometimes i believe the world could be a better place without religions. still, i do nt believe in communism.
    nothing is too sensitive and too sacred to be challenged as spirit of inquiry is wat driven mankinds’ advances.

  52. #52 by gundam on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 11:40 am

    dear adam,

    i still have faith in PR though.

    from a non-intellect with a pure heart for change.

  53. #53 by i_love_malaysia on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 12:01 pm

    John 14:6 TNIV

    6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

  54. #54 by Captain on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 12:40 pm

    ‘We read the Quran and the Hadiths and look at the scriptures from a hermeneutic perspective, situate it in the present and projecting it into the future.’ – Azly

    If Malaysian muslim can understand this, all our problems can be over.
    jus legitimum Says:

    “Some people say Islam is a religion that promotes peace and tolerence.I do not think people now can accept it anymore”

    This is what we say … the demonstrators are traitors to Islam.

    The fault is really with Bar Council. They only invited civilised people for the forum. So the donkeys, monkeys and pigs did not come in. So they created havoc lah outside.

  55. #55 by Kathy on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 1:52 pm

    Captain, least you forgot that pigs were one of the invitees (that is why the demostrators can actually call “Babi”).

    It is the governments fault for not taking firmer and faster action in updating and changing the relevant laws to go with the current times. The longer they take to amend the laws, the more misunderstanding would occur between Malaysians.

  56. #56 by tenaciousB on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 2:04 pm

    Malaysia has not developed mentally as yet, it will be a long time before such forums can ever be considered again. At present all races should be at peace with each other and stop these racial slurs. I’m sure Islam does not condone these terrible hurtful words hurled at the non malays.

  57. #57 by taiking on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 2:08 pm

    I got it!

    I finally figured the whole issue out.

    Yes.

    They were unhappy because an invitation was extended to a pig and none to them.

  58. #58 by Adolf_Napoleon on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 2:30 pm

    Dear YB And All
    **************************************************
    HARD LESSON TO US BUT MUST REMEMBER FOREVER
    *************************************************
    Rule #1

    Since young and our Malaysian history speaks that, the word “racist” and “sensitive” only could be use if one discuss Ketuanan Melayu (Malay Rights) and Islam. Any other thing would not be deemed racist and sensitive. So you can openly discuss about any other thing and ISA will close its eyes.

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

    Rule # 2

    Its wise that the Chinese and Indian not to involve in politics, involve in street demos and talk to much BECAUSE it will give more opportunity to race-based politician to spark the fire again. Bear in mind that many race-based politicians still carrying the May 13 torch in their heart.

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

    Rule # 3

    The word “Special Rights” exist because of the existence of Chinese and Indian. If is 100% malay than there is no more special right. And now Chinese and Indian is only 30%, let the “Special Right” continue and is how many “Right” could be evenly distributed to the remaining 70%.

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

    Rule # 4

    For Chinese and Indians, just concentrate on our family and livelihood and recite or chant the above Rule #1 – Rule# 3 everynight before we go to sleep.

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

    Rule #5

    NO MORE RULE #5 anymore. Is just Rule #1 – Rule #4.

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

  59. #59 by haris01 on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 3:28 pm

    sad sad sad things happening now…..
    now suddenly so many dumbfcuk become so clever about religions…
    we all are middle age civilians…so…
    just follow how it was yesterday….
    racist our terrorist…..

  60. #60 by zak_hammaad on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 7:03 pm

    Must engaging in dialogue on religion be painful? No, but where you have a non-Muslim minority trying to dictate their anti-Islamic agenda on a national level, this will be more than just painful. Ignoring the social demography of Malaysia is the first folly.

  61. #61 by boh-liao on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 7:40 pm

    How can we expect to have any meaningful civil dialogue on religious issues when Malays are so sensitive even with the mention of opening of UiTM to a small number of non-Malays?

  62. #62 by cancan on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 7:56 pm

    The idiotic and the patriotic

    Link: http://www.kingsmary.blogspot.com/

  63. #63 by badak on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 - 9:41 pm

    Zak_hammaad.I feel sad for your parents .After spending so much money on your education.Yet you don,t see what the BAR FORUM is all about.So let me tell YOU.( By the way i am a kindergarden drop out )
    The forum is not about Malay or the rights of the Muslim.The FORUM is about the rights of NON MUSLIM. Who are forced to hear their cases in SYARIAH COURT.
    The FORUM is about a poor Old Hindu lady whose bachelor son died,and his Insurance money was taken away by a rich ISLAMIC association.Just by saying that her has converted to ISLAM.
    The FORUM is about a chiness family losing everything.Just because their eldest brother who converted to ISLAM.Put his dying father,s thump print on the converting form.
    The FORUM is about an Indian man who converted to ISLAM and later coverted his two sons without the knowledge of his hindu wife.
    The FORUM is about NON MUSLIM who converts to ISLAM just to escape civil courts and at the same time uses the SYARIAH COURT to their advantage.
    So kasim hammaat is this the teaching of ISLAM.I for one don,t thing so.

  64. #64 by taiking on Wednesday, 13 August 2008 - 8:55 am

    Father Lawrance, editor of the Herald, said: “The editorial is only asking people to pray for a just and fair by-election [in PP]. Cant we christians ask fellow christians to pray? Is that against the law?” – Star Online, Aug 13, 2008.

    He said that because the Herald was threatened by the Home Ministry with revocation of its publication permit for proposing to carry an article to that effect.

    So guys, brace ourselves for an unfair and unjust by-election.

  65. #65 by taiking on Wednesday, 13 August 2008 - 10:07 am

    Zak said this:

    “a non-Muslim minority trying to dictate their anti-Islamic agenda on a national level”.

    We are not mere minority. You are aware of this, I am sure. In fact our (i.e. non-muslims) presence in this country is well represented in very significant numbers. Take away indonesian and filipino muslims who were made citizens in the last twenty years under the fast track system, the muslim majority here may even plunge into the realm of insignificance.

    I presume that you are from a muslim family and were borned a muslim. Do you know what it is like for one to change course mid-stream? And do you know that he who made that decision to change course mid-stream, was not sailing solo in a tiny boat. There are others on the boat and in other boats as well, all sailing along with him; and all of them would be affected by his decision? Do you know what it would be like for them? Dont you want to know? Arent you concerned?

    There is nothing anti-Islamic about the topic under discussion. It is merely a forum for people to bounce their views about on some practical issues (and the legal impact) facing muslim converts.

    Actually, to my mind the topic under discussion was meant for non-muslims for the issues under discussion do not apply to those who were borned muslims. It touches on the hypothetical situation where a non-muslim converts and becomes a muslim. The discussion actually hinges on the periphery of the religion.

    If you dropped your wallet, dont you want to know what has gone missing? I am not equating conversion to muslim to dropping one’s wallet. So lets not mistake the significance of my analogy which really is this: The occurance of an event would bring about effects and consequences. What are those effects and consequences? In the name of prudence, shouldnt we be equipped with fore-knowledge? Cant those amongst us who are minded to convert be so equipped?

    There is nothing anti-islamic about the forum. There is no such agenda in reality. And it certainly is a folly to view the forum as an attempted dictation, by the minority upon the majority, of anti-islamic agenda.

    Like any other blogsites, where the hammer head weighs lighter than the nip of a pen and moves quicker then the flow of ink, I say this:

    OPEN YOUR EYES AND EARS AND HEART.
    OPEN UP.
    OTHERWISE YOU WOULD BE WASTING YOUR TIME AND ENERGY.

  66. #66 by Sagaladoola on Wednesday, 13 August 2008 - 12:47 pm

    My Opinion on the Recent Interfaith Dialogue

    Link:
    http://sagaladoola.blogspot.com/2008/08/my-opinion-on-recent-interfaith.html

  67. #67 by sirrganass on Wednesday, 13 August 2008 - 3:49 pm

    Has PAKATAN RAKYAT been “pakat”ing to discuss about the entire Interfaith problem? Get all the BEST ULAMAK from PAS to gether with the most religious individuals from PKR and invite 10 or 20 representatives from DAP. Sit down and talk about SYARIAH COURT and those family-related problems.

    Then, PAKATAN RAKYAT will definately come up with the true situation. THis will determine if Malaysia will be the IDEAL place to live in.

    Soon after the discussion, DAP will see whether or not PAKATAN is the viable team. It may be otherwise, cos Haji Awang has said that his and PAS’s agenda must be the ISLAMIC APPROACH to multiracial society. PAS has never talked about UMNOPutra. But talking about ISLAM? Yes it does it openly!

    PAS may have to leave PAKATAN if majority of you rejects ISLAM but first please organise this face-to-face discussion and see what is on the table. If at the end of the day we still see the dark future, then… too bad… we just couldn’t be together again!

  68. #68 by emgbrl on Monday, 18 August 2008 - 3:31 pm

    Dear Readers,
    For those interested, here’s the mugshot of the infamous History teacher who caused a controversy in her school with her racist comments and got promoted to a Smart School by the Education dept!!
    The History teacher’s name is Cik Rusitah Bt Abu Hassan, B. Ed (Hons), Guru DG 44. Another mug shot of her can be seen using the link below. Please note her mugshot has been removed from the school’s website (SM Teluk Panglima Garang ). Anyone who knows her new school, please alert the parents of the students to be aware of this racist pig-faced teacher!!!

    http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:wXAIm5M2gHMJ:groups.yahoo.com/group/Indian-Malaysian/message/26465+cik+rusitah&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=my

    Leave a Reply

  69. #69 by zak_hammaad on Saturday, 23 August 2008 - 1:41 pm

    “Interfaith dialogue”? This is simply another by-word to reduce the influence of Islam in Malaysia and to relegate it to a faith of mere rituals. In conclusion, interfaith dialogue means a move towards secularism which can never be accepted by Muslim majority Malaysia!

You must be logged in to post a comment.