A Godsend

In 1999, BN survived mainly because of the Chinese support. This support was partly due to the fear of PAS and its Islamic agenda. There was a swing of Malay votes towards PAS and PKR, but the swing was not enough to deny BN a big victory.

Then in 2004,  because of the “work with me, not for me” factor of the new PM, BN won big.

By winning a record number of votes, the government became so  big headed , arrogant and corrupted that many people chose to vote opposition in 2008.

Even Chinese and Indians, who were formerly so frightened of PAS’s ideology, had no qualm voting for PAS.  Actually it was not because they felt PAS is good, but because they were so fed up with BN that anything else was better than BN.

Some told me that nothing could be worse than UMNO. Thus the massive vote swing was not because of people liked PAS , but rather people hated UMNO more. PKR benefited in the same way, mainly because of the resentment of people towards the ruling party.

So, it would be wise for leaders of PAS and PKR, and to a smaller extent DAP, not to become too big-headed and arrogant like their counterparts in the Big Brother. To do that would be the surest way to lose support.

PR must understand that the odds are always against them winning the next election. After Bersih, things may have become brighter. Their odds have improved, and there is now a real chance of them winning the next GE. But having a real chance does not mean ‘sure win’. BN still has the upper hand.

In the run-up to the next GE, whoever fumbles and shoots himself  in his own feet would be doing a big service to the other side.

The recent JAIS raid of a dinner in a church is very high-handed and should be condemned by everyone. The MB of Selangor has tacitly acknowledged that when he regretted the action of JAIS.  But surprisingly, an exco under him, a PAS leader purportedly in charge of religious affairs, defended the JAIS action, giving the impression that he was all for it.

At the time of writing, we still do not know who ordered the raid. But the perception among the people  is that the exco in charge of religious affairs, the PAS leader, was behind it.

In PAS, like in any other party, there are factions; the more conservative and the more liberal.  But both factions must understand that the action of even one individual would affect the image and perception of the whole party. What the conservatives do would affect the liberals, and vice versa.

If he has actually ordered the raid, then he must be prepared to answer to the people and his more liberal party colleagues.   He must also realise that his very action of defending JAIS is a  Godsend to BN.

Crushing one’s own foot

I had some hope when it was announced that there is going to be an interfaith council, where dialogue between religious groups in the countries can be carried out in a frank manner. This council is something the civil society has been pushing , and I have voiced out repeatedly for such a body in this blog as well as in meetings.

I have expected that certain ultra conservative groups might object to its formation, just like before, but I feel that after the church bombing incidents, people are more coolheaded and would allow such a body to function without raising too much of objections.

We all  know  that the government as well as  BN is very good in shooting their own feet. BUt even then, I was totally taken aback when the DPM labelled the council members as small fries, thereby belittling the efforts of all those who want to see more understanding between religious groups.

By  agreeing to the formation of such a council and then labelling it as small fries, he is sending mixed signals, and in doing so, he is undermining everyone’s efforts in trying to find an amicable solution to religious issues.

His action of late has given the people a perception that indeed the rumour that the PM and DPM are not seeing things eye to eye is true. If that is so, then whatever efforts the PM is trying to do to carry out certain reforms will be in vain , since it strengthens the perception that the PM is not in total control of his deputy and his party and that there are many war lords waiting to do a “Pak Lah” to the present PM.

Now that DPm has labelled the councils as consisting of small fries, it will have certain consequences:

1. Religious leaders would not want to join such a council since by joining, they would be deemed ‘small fries’. If you are the head of a religion and you are labelled as small fries, it is not only an affront to the head but the whole religion as well.

2. It would encourage certain conservative religious groups to object to the setting up of such a council. It might be construed as a signal to these groups to object vehemently to any dialogue.

3. What started off as a good initiative to try  to solve some of the more sensitive issues will no longer has any meaning and thus these issues will remain difficult and divisive.

4. The perception that all is not well in the top ruling circle will be strengthened and this would affect the investment climate. What has been the hall mark of previous administration with leaders  contradicting one another is now affecting this administration as well.

5. A direct result of NO.4 would be that the reforms promised might not see the light of the day.

It is again a case of lifting a heavy stone to throw at one’s own foot. How to walk  when the foot is crushed?

Senseless and dangerous act!

I was shocked and sadden by the reports that pig heads have been found left at a mosque.

This is a senseless act to provoke and fan emotions. The people doing this are treading on a very dangerous ground and playing with fire.

All right minded Malaysians must unite and condemn this act of cowardice, similar to earlier acts of trying to burn churches and suraus.

I urge  the police to act fast to  catch the culprits  and at the same time  take steps to prevent such acts from occurring again.

Malaysians should realize that all of us, regardless of colour and faith,  are living in the same boat, and such acts are akin to setting fire and dragging the whole boat down.

If we treasure our peace and freedom, we should all refrain from further fanning sentiments by resorting to such senseless and dangerous acts.

Where is the beef?

There is a total lack of firm leadership in the management of the recent religious issue. After the court judgement was passed, a minister was quoted to say that government could not do much if people wanted to demonstrate, and that statement, whether correctly quoted or not, had given an impression that some of the top leaders of the country are encouraging people to show their emotions.

If  the leadership has instead  tried to calm  people ‘s sentiments down and explained to their people that the generic term has been used by the natives of East Malaysia for many many years even before Merdeka, things might not have come to this state. The ground perception is that only when the first church was burned, the leadership started to realise the seriousness of the situation, and tried  to calm emotions down.

UMNO messed up the whole issue and missed the boat, while PAS has taken the middle ground, even though there is a segment within PAS feeling very uneasy about their party stand. Apparently, one of the reasonings that PAS leaders used to address their supporters’ unease and disagreement is that the means justify the end result, which is to win GE13 and form the next Federal government , and with that they thought they could have a better chance to realise their ultimate aim of a Islamic State.

If PAS can move to the middle ground, why could not UMNo do so, especially when it is advocating 1Malaysia?

I think there are a lot of politicking within that party. The more conservative group is trying to use this issue to garner support  while the more liberal group is afraid that they might lose support if they are seen to be too liberal.(What goes round really comes around; it was not too long ago that the exTop leader  was pushed out in another power play, and now the top leader must be feeling the heat, too).

I think the position of their top leader is also not as strong as what people might have thought. But for the sake of the country, he should have taken a risk and gone ahead and be firm on this issue, revert back to status quo before the ban of the term, and call for the setting of a interfaith council to discuss the differences among the different faith.

The whole issue smacked of confusion and poor management. Now that there are strong feelings in both sides, it is virtually impossible for the issues to be resolved.

Whatever the Appeal Court decision, it would not please all sides.

With this issue, what little goodwill that the government has gained back has been all lost, and instead, it is now trying to use this issue to harness support from the more conservative Malays.

I hope there will be  cooler heads on both sides, and that there must be a continuing dialogue between the various groups, MINUS the politicians. The best setting is an Interfaith Council where frank discussions could be held.

We must also not forget that under the 20 points Agreement, Clause No 1. stated that “while there was no objection to Islam being the national religion of Malaysia there should be no State religion in North Borneo, and the provisions relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malaya should not apply to North Borneo”. (Read the 20 points agreement here).

With this row, I see a lot of uncertainties have crept in the political arena, and the possibilities of realignment of political forces are now higher than ever.. Some of the more moderate and multiracial parties within BN would have done better in such an realignment if they are neutral and remain outside of the framework of BN.

I hope all sides would tread carefully and do not politicise this issue further and do not fan emotions further.

We need leaders to exert leadership on this aspect, and rein in their more extreme supporters on this issue. After all, a leader is supposed to lead, and not be led or swayed by the very supporters that they should be leading.

The Malay psyche in the ‘Allah” row

An excellent analysis by Professor Marranci, Asso Prof of Anthropology, University of Western Sydney and a research fellow at the Asian Research Institute, NUS, Singapore.

I will post some excerpts here.  For the whole article, please read this link:

http://marranci.wordpress.com/2010/01/18/the-allah-case-in-malaysia/

Recently Malaysia has been at the centre of another controversy. After the fatwa against Yoga (in which it was suggested that Muslims were better to abstain from it), the sentence against Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno (who was condemned to strokes of an “Islamic” cane), and the severed cow heads left on an area awaiting the construction of a Hindu temple, today churches, and other non-Muslim places of worship, have been torched over the issue of whether non-Malay Muslims, and in particular Christians, can use the word ‘Allah’. The Malay government, controlled by UMNO, clearly supports the opinion that “Allah” is, at least linguistically, a Malay Muslim theo-semiotic possession, despite the word being Arabic. Yet to understand the present situation we need to look at how Muslim Malaysians make sense of their social political identity within the country.

To do so we must refer to Article 160 of the Constitution of Malaysia in which a ‘Malay’ is described as a Malaysian citizen, born to a Malaysian citizen, who professes to be a Muslim, habitually speaks Bahasa Melayu, adheres to Malay customs, and is domiciled in Malaysia or Singapore. Furthermore, the constitution, in article 152, defines some privileges for Bumiputra, the Muslim ethnic majority of the country.

read more here.

an unscrupulous act

Malaysians should be very calm not to react to the ‘cow-head’ march yesterday in Shah Alam.

Religion is a very sensitive issue, and sentiments can be easily worked up. The person who brought the cow head perhaps intent to stir up emotions, and that is more reason that we should be calm and not to fall into the intended trap of creating emotions which can lead to dire consequences.

Most Malaysians are peace loving and most respect the freedom to practice one’s religion.I am heartened by this comment in Malaysiakini by a Muslim commentator Amir. I think the majority of Muslim Malaysians would not condone this provocative act.

AMir said : ” As a Muslim, I am ashamed at the behaviour of these hoodlums especially during the holy month of Ramadhan. I really wonder who the head honchos are behind this unscrupulous act.”

Our Federal Constitution article 3(1) states that:

Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.

So religious freedom is quaranteed in law. Those who are out to create religious disharmony should be hauled up , since the law is supposed to protected religious freedom.

Police should have acted yesterday to stop the march. While freedom of gathering should be allowed , and that is my view all along, any threat to insult the religious feeling of others should not have been allowed. And there is no greater insult to the Hindus than this ‘cow-head’ incident.

According to the latest news in Malaysiakini that the police has apologised for not taking prompt action . This follows the call of the PM asking the IGP to take action. The junior officer on the spot is now being blamed for not tkaing prompt action, but I suspect he is the fall guy to defray the police inaction yesterday.

I think politicians from both sides of the divide must join hands to settle this issue amicably , and no one should try to fan emotions like what happened yesterday.

We should also go back to the spirits of the Constitution, whereby nonMuslims should respect Islam as the state religion, but other religions must be allowed to be practised in peace and harmony. This spirit of religious tolerance is important if we want to coexist peacefully together in this country we all called home.

(PS. Pls be sensitive when commenting on religious issues. All religions are for tolerance and peace, and it is only the wayward behaviour of certain so-called followers who have hijacked the true spirits of the religions for personal interest and created all the unrest in this world.)

The essence of humanity

I don’t eat beef, because many generations ago, my ancestors were farmers, and they needed their cows to help them plough the fields in order to plant crops. So they treated their cows well, since no one in their right mind would harm anything that would help sustain their livelihood.

So it became a sort of family culture and  for many generations until mine, even though we are no more farmers, we do not eat beef.

But  although I do not eat beef, I do not object to my friends eating beef around me. I do not object to beef being sold in markets or supermarkets and cows being slaughtered for their meat. Because I know that I am only one of many people who  live here, and being so, I need to respect the custom and habits of the many others who eat beef.

I do not smoke. To tell you the truth,  I really hate the notion of my lungs inhaling the various carcinogens present in second-hand smoke.

Nevertheless, whenever I see people smoking, I do not approach them and ask them to stop. The only exception was when my expert opinion was sought and as a doctor, i will give them the  advice that doctors all over the world would do: quit smoking because smoking is bad for health. 

But other than that, whenever I see people smoking, I just move as far away as possible, without making a fuss asking them to stop. This is to respect their right to choose. If it is their choice to inhale bad substances, who am I to stop them except when my counsel is sought?

Even though the second-hand smokes are bad for my lungs and body, I do not object but just quietly move away. This is tolerance.

Similarly, I respect and tolerate other people’s dress codes and other people’s faiths.

In this world where there are people having different habits, customs and faiths, respect and tolerance are essential.

When I respect and tolerate the customs and habits of other people, I expect others to reciprocate that respect and tolerance towards me.  

I eat pork, so I expect other people to respect my right  to eat pork just as I respect their right to eat beef. Of course, being a sensible person who cares how others feel, I normally do not eat pork in front of those countrymen of mine that belong to a certain faith. This is called mutual respect.

I drink occasionally. I am not a compulsive or heavy drinker . In fact, I do not particularly like to drink alcoholic drinks.  I normally would prefer a nice cup of hot steamy coffee; but when occasions warrant, I am game to having a few glasses of wines or a few cans of beer.

But I understand a lot of people like to drink.    Most of these drinkers are not the heavy and compulsive type. For the latter groups, of course, they might become a menace on the road, if their blood alcoholic contents go up to a certain level. For these people who may become a menace , there is already a law to deal with them and they can be fined heftily for drink driving.

For the majority who drink, they are responsible people, and most do not really exceed their own limits.

Since there are people who drink, there is a  demand for these drinks to be sold. Just like when there are people who eat beef, there will be a demand for beef to be sold.

There will therefore be businesses that cater to these needs. After-all, businessmen’s business is to make money, and if there is a demand, they will supply to fulfill that demand in order for their businesses to grow.

If there are people who eat beef, we must allow beef to be sold, since this is the basic right of the beef eaters to have access to beef whenever they feel like eating beef.

Similarly, if there are beer drinkers, then we must allow beer to be sold, since this is their right to have access to these drinks whenever they feel like drinking.

By all means, punish those whose religions do not allow them to drink such drinks but they are caught drinking them.

If your child is caught stealing his friends’ pocket money in schools, by all means punish your child but you cannot punish those who bring pocket money to schools.

 It is up to you to teach your child to curb his temptation to steal. The fault is not the money which tempted your child. The fault is in his succumbing to his temptations.

Therefore, the onus is on the relevant authority to monitor, catch, punish and educate those who disobey the rules of their religions; those whose faiths disallow them to drink alcohol, but they succumb to their own temptations to drink.

So the recent call by PAS in Selangor to ban shops like 7-eleven from selling beers is totally illogical. It is like asking all schools to ban students from bringing pocket money to schools, because a few students were caught stealing.

It is like banning women from the streets because of a few guys who could not curb their own temptations and committed rape.

In a multicultural and multi-religious country , mutual respect and tolerance are the basis to build trust and peaceful co-existence.

But before people can respect and tolerate you, you must be prepared to give the same respect and tolerance to them first.

That is the essence of humanity.

A matter of conversion 2

This is an extension of my yesterday’s post, A matter of conversion, in which I discussed the case of Indira Gandhi and the forced conversion of her children.

I welcome the cabinet decision as reported in Malaysian Insidertoday that children should be raised in the faith of the parents at the time of the parents’ marriage, even if one of the spouses has converted to Islam.

Attorney General has been tasked to look into amending existing laws to allow for this provision.

I think this is an excellent move and this should resolve a lot of uncertainties arsing from this type of conversion.

A matter of conversion

I have written several  posts in 2007 and 2008 on the need of a mechanism to regulate  the  conversion of a person’s religious belief under certain debatable circumstances.

This is from a post written in June 2007 as a letter to Malaysiakini:

           

            Inform the spouse when a person converts

After all the letters and views expressed recently in media such as Malaysiakini on the issue of conversion , I suggest that the government should enact a law to inform, as a matter of courtesy and an obligation under the oath of matrimony, the spouse of a person wishing to convert to Islam.

This law must specify that when a person converts to Islam, it should be made compulsory to inform his or her spouse and his/her spouse should sign a statement before an officer of law acknowledging that he or she has been informed.

There should also be a period of , say, 2 weeks between informing the spouse and the actual conversion, so that the couple can have a heart to heart discussion on the matter. This is necessary because any conversion will have a direct impact on the spouse regarding the status of children, the inheritance, the burial and so on.

This will avoid a lot of confusion or misunderstanding like in the case of the Mt Everest climber Moorthy Maniam, a Hindu by birth but buried as a Muslim in 2005.

Islamic administration officials”acquired” the body after a headline grabbing tussle for it with Moorthy’s wife Kaliammal, saying he had secretly converted to Islam.

Kaliammal disputed the claim and asked the court to declare her husband a Hindu, but the court instead said since one party is a Muslim the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case.

By making it compulsory to inform the spouse, at least the spouse will be given a choice whether to seek seperation from the other party or follow the partner’s path and be converted as well.

I would like to think that if you believe in a certain faith, you should let your family members know and not keep it a secret. What is there to be secretive if you really believe what you do is right?

I have also written against death bed conversion,regarding the Gan family in Seremban,  in January 2008, in an article titled : Convert someone only when he truly believes. For those who have not read this article, just click this link since I am not posting it here in order not to make this post too long.

Having written all these, I think there is also a need to have a mechanism to safeguard children from being converted when one of the parents convert without the knowledge and consent of the other parent, especially when the issues of custody has not been determined.

The latest case of Indira Gandhi ( not the late Indian PM but her namesake)  is indeed worrisome to those of us who believe in freedom of choosing one’s own faith. She has 3 children , the youngest only a few months old.

The whole thing started when there was a fallout between her and her husband, there was a quarrel/fight, the husband allegedly grabbed the youngest son and took the birth certificates of the other 2 kids, and later on the husband went to convert himself as well as all the 3 kids (using their birth certificates) , without the knowledge of the wife.  ( Read this Malaysiakini report ).

While we do not know what actually transpired between husband and wife, and we are unable to determine, as outsider, why there is a fall out between the husband and wife, and we are in no way to judge who is right and who is wrong,  a few points needed to be considered.

Point one, since the couple has not been officially divorced, , there is a need for a spouse to be informed before the other spouse could convert (see my reasoning in the above article ).

Point two, as an extension of point one, the children should not be converted, since the other spouse has not been informed prior to the conversion of the husband.

Point 3, even if the couple is now filing for divorce, there should not be any conversion of the children , unless the issue of custody has been clearly determined.

Point 4, there should never be any conversion just using the birth certificate without the physical presence o f the children or the other spouse.

I think in a multi-religious country like ours, where religious issues are highly sensitive, we must have clear cut law and guidelines to safegurad all parties, before any actual conversion can take place.

In fact, since religion is a matter of individual belief and faith, freedom to choose is of utmost importance. It is of no use, as I have oft mentioned, that to convert someone when he or she does not really believe in the real teaching of the religion.  It should really be a matter of freedom of choice..

( As a matter of respect to all religions, this blog hopes that all commentators on this topic should exercise self restraints in their comments on this case, and should not attack any religions .. We need to have sensible discussion on this matter. Thank you for your cooperation).

 

 

 

 

 

\

Yoga, Yoga, Yoga

Has the NAtional Fatwa Council been misinformed about yoga being Banned in Singapore?

A friend emailed this to me. Apparently this is taken from SIngapore Straits Times dated 9th Novemebr 2008:

A MUSLIM cleric in Malaysia has called on Muslims to stop doing yoga exercises, but some religious experts in Singapore do not share that sentiment.

They are largely of the opinion that yoga is harmless as long as its spiritual aspects are not practised.

Professor Zakaria Stapa, a lecturer at University Kebangsaan Malaysia’s faculty of Islamic studies, said recently that yoga is based on Hindu elements and could affect the faith of Muslims practising it.

That sparked a nationwide debate and the Malaysian National Fatwa Council may issue a fatwa, or decree, on yoga soon.

The country seems to be alone in its concern.

Yoga centres are flourishing in more orthodox Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

In Iran, yoga is so popular that there are classes for children.

In Singapore, Mr Mohammad Yusri Yubhi Md Yusoff, 33, executive imam of Al-Falah mosque, said: ‘Yoga may have its roots in Hinduism. But if you take away the meditation and other spiritual aspects, it becomes just another form of exercise.’

Veteran religious expert Pasuni Maulan, 64, agreed. The former registrar of Muslim marriages said spiritual elements in exercises are not exclusive to yoga. Silat, which has its roots in Malay culture, can sometimes involve hailing spirits, a practice not allowed in Islam.

‘Those who are not sure about what is allowed may want to do other exercises,’ he suggested.

As a rule of thumb, avoid the spiritual forms of exercises and embrace only the physical aspects, said religious teacher and counsellor Abdul Manaf Rahmat, 50.

Teacher Hafiza Yahya, 26, who studied yoga through books five years ago, has been doing just that.

‘In classes, instructors may ask you to say Hindu incantations. I simply did the exercises without all that,’ said the mother of two, who shed more than 30kg through yoga after each pregnancy. She now weighs a trim 46kg.

 

 

 

 

United religions Initiative – Malaysia needs interfaith dialogue

 In a country where the people practice different faiths and religions, clashes of opinon and different views on matters of life are unavoidable. To prevent these differences of opinion fathom into hatred and violence, there must be engagement between people of different faiths , so that any misunderstanding can be trashed out peacefully, so that people of different faiths can “agree to disagree”.

In other words, dialogue between people of different faiths is of utmost importance to prevent hatred and violence between different religious groups..

In the West, there are many groupings such as the interfaith councils, where people of different faiths can sit and discuss ways to cooperate, despite the differences of beliefs.

One such grouping is the United Religions Initiative.  “United Religions Initiative (URI) was founded in 2000 by an extraordinary global community committed to promoting enduring, daily interfaith cooperation and to ending religiously motivated violence. Today the URI includes thousands of members in over 65 countries representing more that 100 religions, spiritual expressions, and indigenous traditions… ”  according to the homepage of URI.

URI is a bridge building initiative. It encourages dialogue, cooperation and finding common universal values to help the community.

If these can be done in over 70 countries of the world, where Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and people of other faiths can sit down, talk about thier difference and plan activities together, I see no reason that why this cannot be done in Malaysia as well, knowing that Malaysians are actually nice and friendly people.

I would like to call upon the various religious leaders to seriously consider taking such an initiative to promote inter-religious cooperation, and I wish to call upon all politicians to move aside and let the various religious leaders take the initiative to cooperate. Once politicians come into the picture,  even religions will be politicised , which should not be the case.

I will quote the preamble and the purpose of URI here, for my countrymen of different faiths to read. Please adopt an open mind when reading this; do not shut the door for dialogue:

Preamble

We, people of diverse religions, spiritual expressions and indigenous traditions throughout the world, hereby establish the United Religions Initiative to promote enduring, daily interfaith cooperation, to end religiously motivated violence and to create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings.

We respect the uniqueness of each tradition, and differences of practice or belief.

We value voices that respect others, and believe that sharing our values and wisdom can lead us to act for the good of all.

We believe that our religious, spiritual lives, rather than dividing us, guide us to build community and respect for one another.

Therefore, as interdependent people rooted in our traditions, we now unite for the benefit of our Earth community.

We unite to build cultures of peace and justice.

We unite to heal and protect the Earth.

We unite to build safe places for conflict resolution, healing and reconciliation.

We unite to support freedom of religion and spiritual expression, and the rights of all individuals and peoples as set forth in international law.

We unite in responsible cooperative action to bring the wisdom and values of our religions, spiritual expressions and indigenous traditions to bear on the economic, environmental, political and social challenges facing our Earth community.

We unite to provide a global opportunity for participation by all people, especially by those whose voices are not often heard.

We unite to celebrate the joy of blessings and the light of wisdom in both movement and stillness.

We unite to use our combined resources only for nonviolent, compassionate action, to awaken to our deepest truths, and to manifest love and justice among all life in our Earth community.

 

Purpose

The purpose of the United Religions Initiative is to promote enduring, daily interfaith cooperation, to end religiously motivated violence and to create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings.

 

The Report card (after 3 months)

Yesterday was exactly 3 months after the General Election.

Being a Sunday, I went to my favourite coffee shop in Paramount Garden, a shop by the name of Sky and Ocean,( a very popular coffee shop). As usual, being a Sunday, the shop was so packed that my wife and I shared tables with another couple about our  age. I chatted with the gentleman who was with his wife and daughter. The couple was from Penang and was visiting their daughter working and staying in PJ.

I asked the gentleman  how he felt about the performance of the Pakatan Governments. He mentioned that he voted for Pakatan and he never regretted it. He said that 2 things made him proud of his voting for the opposition, the first being that the Perak government has given freehold titles to all the new villages, and secondly the Selangor government has announced that all restrictions on buildings of religious premises be removed.

The first move has helped thousands of families, and at last they can claim the places they now reside as their real homes.

The 2nd move  is equally significant. By allowing followers of different faith to build without restriction places of worship, the government is tacitly acknowledging  Article 11 of our Federal Constitution in which was stated :

Article 11

1. Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.
2. No person shall be compelled to pay any tax the proceeds of which are specially allocated in whole or in part for the purposes of a religion other than his own.
3. Every religious group has the right –
   • (a) to manage its own religious affairs;
   • (b) to establish and maintain institutions for religious or charitable purposes; and
   • (c) to acquire and own property and hold and administer it in accordance with law.
4. State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.
5. This Article does not authorize any act contrary to any general law relating to public order, public health or morality.

The gentleman which I shared my breakfast table with further mentioned that he hoped that by doing so, it would show to the people of Malaysia that it is possible to have mutual respect among religious followers of different faiths, and for once people of different faiths will feel that they are being treated equally and with respect. BY extension,  people will feel that at last, that it may be possible one day that a fair and equal society emerges in Malaysia.

I have blogged before that I hope the Pakatan governments in the 5 states can succeed in carrying out the promises under their manifesto, to treat all races equally and to do away with the NEP. If they can succeed , it would then generate tremendous pressure on BN parties to do away with race politics and race economics, and these BN parties will have no choice but to adopt similar approaches of non racial policies in order to stay in power. A 2 party system, with both sides adopting nonracial approach, may then be possible , and a true Malaysian unity and a Bangsa Malaysia may finally come about. 

Therefore, Malaysians, no matter what your political affiliation is, if you sincerely believe in a fair and equal society emerging in Malaysia one day, you must hope that the Pakatan state governments do well.  Only then, BN will become truly non racial and the racist policies of opportunitsic politicians  can be done away.

Thus, the hope of many Malaysians of living in a fair and equal society  may hinge on how the 5 Pakatan governments perform, and so far, I would say, they have done fairly well in the first 90 days of government .

Court allows reversion

The Star online reported that a muslim convert has been allowed to revert to her original religion.

Well, good news! I hope this is the beginning of a more sensible approach to conversion and reversion.

After all, religion is what someone believes in his or her heart. You can force people to follow certain ‘forms’  outside, you can never change their thinking inside.

I will post it here:

Court allows Muslim convert to return to Buddhism

An end to conversion rows ?

A very good piece of news indeed… and I really got a lift last night when I read it on Malaysiakini.

Malaysiakini reported that :

 

The government today proposed new rules on converting to Islam, in a bid to prevent wrangles that have split families and incited racial tensions in this multicultural country.

“We are working on a law that non-Muslims who are converting to Islam must inform their spouse and family,” Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said after meeting Islamic religious authorities.

“They will have to fill out a form and declare that they have informed their family of the pending conversion,” he said.

The move follows a series of allegations of “body-snatching” by Islamic authorities, who have seized remains for burial according to Muslim rites, against the objections of non-Muslim family members

 

This blog has repeated urged the enactment of such as mechanism to prevent not only body snatching incidents such as what the Gan family experienced when the elder Gan passed away in January, but also any misunderstanding or foul play that may be involved in such a conversion.. Please read my post on this in January 2008  : A mechanism or a Law is needed to prevent conversion controversy.

In fact even much earlier, I have written another post on this need of a mechanism for conversion controversy. In June 2007, I have written a post which was also published as a letter in Malaysiakini. I will quote part of the article here for the sake of those who are new to this blog:

After all the letters and views expressed recently in media such as Malaysiakini on the issue of conversion , I suggest that the government should enact a law to inform, as a matter of courtesy and an obligation under the oath of matrimony,  the spouse of a person wishing to convert to Islam. 

This law must specify that when a person converts to Islam, it should be made compulsory to inform his or her spouse and his/her spouse should sign a statement before an officer of law acknowledging that he or she has been informed.

There should also be a period of , say, 2 weeks between informing the spouse and the actual conversion, so that the couple can have a heart to heart discussion on the matter. This is necessary because any conversion will have a direct impact on the spouse regarding the status of children, the inheritance, the burial and so on.

This will avoid a  lot of confusion or misunderstanding like in the case of the Mt Everest climber Moorthy Maniam, a Hindu bybirth but buried as a Muslim in 2005.

 Islamic administration officials”acquired” the body after a headline grabbing tussle for it with Moorthy’swife Kaliammal, saying he had secretly converted to Islam.

Kaliammal disputed the claim and asked the court to declare her husband a Hindu, but the court instead said since one party is a Muslim the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case.

By making it compulsory to inform the spouse, at least the spouse will be given a choice whether to seek separation from the other party or follow the partner’s path and be converted as well.

I have argued that   if you believe in a certain faith, you should let your family members know and not keep it a secret. What is there to be secretive if you really believe what you do is right?

So, by having such a mechanism, doubtful conversion such as the Gan Eng For incident can be avoided. For those who are not familiar with the case, they can go and view the documents in this link… documents which leave a lot of questions unanswered……

(Pls also look at this picture in this post: How do you feel?)

………………………………

Another piece of good news is that NST reported today that the PM would be setting up a judicial Commission to decide on the promotion and appointments  of judges. This is also what this blog has been fighting for.

I hope things can be speed-ed up and this Judicial commission would go the way of the proposed IPCMC which was supposed to be set up 4 years ago and which until now, we are still waiting.

If the government has been doing all these during the past few years, it would have won itself more votes and support and the 12 GE results would be much different.

Well, it is still not too late. Institute reforms such as ICAC, overhaul the civil service, reform the education system, bring back the glory to our universities and judiciary, give more freedom to the expression of opinion, allow more press freedom, do away with ISA, release the Hindraf 5, reform the police and the Election Commission, bring back the local government elections, give fairer treatment to all,  etc etc…If  the government is able to do all these in the next few months , I am sure they would get back the support that they lost.

 

Why can’t we be like this ?

 My wife forwarded an email to me showing these pictures and a short write up.

I was very moved by these and I would like to share it with all of you.

If a tiger can take the piglets as her own, why can human of different culture and religious belief live in peace?

Why are there instigators (batu api) in every organisation, every society? These instigators fight for the sake of fighting, create factions for the sake of creating factions. They are worse than the animals.

In the local scene, this is why DAP and PAS can now co-exist.

 

In a zoo inCalifornia, a mother tiger gave birth to a rare set of triplet tiger cubs. Unfortunately, due to complications in the pregnancy, the cubs were born prematurely and due to their tinysize, they died shortly after birth.

The mother tiger, after recovering from the delivery, suddenly started to decline in health, although physically she was fine. The veterinarians felt that the loss of her litter had causedthe tigress to fall into a depression. The doctors decided that if the tigress could surrogateanother mother’s cubs, perhaps she would improve.

After checking with many other zoos across the country, the depressing news was that therewere no tiger cubs of the right age to introduce to the mourning mother. The veterinariansdecided to try something that had never been tried in a zoo environment. Sometimes a motherof one species will take on the care of a different species. The only ‘orphans’ that could befound quickly were a litter of weanling pigs. The zoo keepers and vets wrapped the piglets intiger skin and placed the babies around the mother tiger. Would they become cubs or pork chops??
Take a look…

 Now, please tell me one more time……
Why can’t the rest of the world get along??

 

Convert someone only when he truly believes

Last minute conversion while a patient is dying is not an uncommon phenomenon.

Ask anyone who has worked in a hospital before, they will tell you this. Sometimes when a person is very ill, there will be certain religious workers (not from the dying man’s faith) coming to visit him , comforting him and perhaps even praying for him . Sometimes the dying person is asked to pray together with them. Often this is done when the dying man’s relatives are not around.

SO when the person dies, a dispute can sometimes occur. Those workers will come forward and claim that the dead man has embraced their faith at the last minute, and very often it is their words against the relatives words.

When a person is very ill, he might not be in the right frame of mind to decide whether he should stick to the faith that he has believed all his life, or changed to the faith that those preachers are preaching. Very often he would allow these people to pray for him out of courtesy , out of apprehension of death or,  simply,  he is so ill he does not know what is really going on around him.

 It is really inconceivable to think that a person will abandon something that he has believed all his life all of a sudden and embraced the new religion. It is also inconceivable that he can understand and believe in something within such a short time.

When there is a dispute arising out of this, the people that suffer most will be the spouse and the family. Just look at the photograph of Gan’s widow that I posted yesterday. All religions profess compassion. No religion would want to cause  such great sufferings and sadness to the family . It is only the action of the overzealous followers of religions, who may just follow the form but not the true spirits of their religious teachings, that is causing so much of sufferings and bitterness.  God would not condone this.  God would not want a family to be separated, either in life or in death.

A reader who is also a fellow blogger under the name of “A True Malaysian” said it all.

I feel miserable with this kind of thing happening. When a husband passed away, irrespective of what his religion or belief, his body should rightfully goes to the custody of his wife / family. This is only fair.

What kind of funeral rite to be performed over the body should be decided by his wife / family, definitely not by third party.

By all means pray for the dying person. By all means do all the good deeds to help him. But if ever he wishes to be converted in his death bed, please let the family know in advance.

It would be better to try to convert someone when they are healthy and kicking, so that they are in the right frame of mind to decide whether there is anything in the new faith for them to abandon their old faith and convert.

 To convert someone just for the sake of converting or for the sake of statistics is not what God wishes. If you wish to convert someone, you must make sure that he really understands and fully believes in the teachings of that particular faith. Otherwise, you may keep his body there, but his heart will be somewhere else. This is not what religion is about.

The world will be a much better place if only we remember a simple teaching from Confucius: Do not do onto others what you do not want others to do onto you.

How do you feel ??

Gan Eng Gor’s widow when Gan’s body was taken away.

My eyes became moist when I saw this picture. I just could not help it, because we are all humans with feelings.

 How do you feel??

Documents of the alleged conversion

I wish to post here a few scanned documents regarding the alleged conversion of the Late Gan Eng Gor.

I urge the readers of this blog to go through these documents carefully and make your own conclusion, bearing in mind that the late Gan had been paralysed for 2 years as he had a severe stroke in 2006 according to the letter by the family which was published in an earlier post today. The conversion was alleged to have taken place on 3rd July 2007.

   click to enlarge

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

click to enlarge

pls read this:

A mechanism is needed to prevent conversion controversy

A mechanism or a law is needed to prevent conversion controversy

The Gan family conversion controversy is not an isolated case. There were many cases before this, and I am sure there will be more cases in future. There is really a need for a mechanism or a law to prevent such misunderstanding arising from alleged conversion.

I have always stressed that to prevent any more of these cases happening, there must be a law to compel anyone who wish to convert to Islam to inform the spouse and the immediate family of his conversion, before such conversion can be officially performed.

I am re-posting an article which I have written on this issue dated June 10th 2007. This article was published as a letter in Malaysiakini and NST in June 2007.

          Inform the spouse when a person converts

After all the letters and views expressed recently in media such as Malaysiakini on the issue of conversion , I suggest that the government should enact a law to inform, as a matter of courtesy and an obligation under the oath of matrimony, the spouse of a person wishing to convert to Islam.

This law must specify that when a person converts to Islam, it should be made compulsory to inform his or her spouse and his/her spouse should sign a statement before an officer of law acknowleging that he or she has been informed.

There should also be a period of , say, 2 weeks between informing the spouse and the actual conversion, so that the couple can have a heart to heart discussion on the matter. This is necessary because any conversion will have a direct impact on the spouse regarding the status of children, the inheritance, the burial and so on.

This will avoid a lot of confusion or misunderstanding like in the case of the Mt Everest climber Moorthy Maniam, a Hindu bybirth but buried as a Muslim in 2005.

Islamic administration officials”acquired” the body after a headline grabbing tussle for it with Moorthy’swife Kaliammal, saying he had secretly converted to Islam.

Kaliammal disputed the claim and asked the court to declare her husband a Hindu, but the court instead said since one party is a Muslim the court had no jurisdiction to hear the case.

By making it compulsory to inform the spouse, at least the spouse will be given a choice whether to seek seperation from the other party or follow the partner’s path and be converted as well.

I would like to think that if you believe in a certain faith, you should let your family members know and not keep it a secret. What is there to be secretive if you really believe what you do is right?

Please also read:  a letter from the Gan family

                             Another Burial Controversy

                             Documents of the alleged conversion

A letter from the Gan family

This is a letter,  taken from the blog ‘A journal of my life’, from the Gan family regarding their father the late Gan Eng Gor.

Letter from Gan Hok Ming on behalf of Gan’s family seeking justice for their beloved father. Please take note on the points that i have highlighted

Justice and Fair play for the family of Gan Eng Gor (deceased)

1. Our father was seventy‐four (74) years old. He suffered a severe stroke in 2006. He was immobilized, bedridden, mentally unsound, cannot speak, partially deaf and has very poor vision.

2. We transferred him to stay with one of our brothers in Klang. Our aged mother looked after, bathed and fed him. She also helped to look after our nephews and nieces.

3. Our father died on 20th Jan 2008. As Gan Hock Seng (the eldest son) is a member of the family, we informed him of our father’s death. He was then told us that our father is a muslim, we were shocked and did not believed him. So we continue to perform the wake service as our father have never led a muslim life. The Majlis Agama officers came and attempted to snatch the dead body, all our family members more shocked and angry, we resisted and strongly protested against the removal of our father’s body.

4. We obtained his alleged conversion papers from Majlis Agama the second day.

5. We were advised by our solicitors that there are serious irregularities in the said conversion papers especially the Declaration of Conversion into Islam.

a). The declaration was before a Pegawai Ukhuwah. His rubber stamp was on the paper but that officer did not sign.

b). Further there was no signatory at the certification column.

c). There was an illegal alteration on the date to 3rd July 2007.

d). The thumb‐print was questionable as we are certain that our deceased father was in Klang and not at the address No. 451, Taman Megaway, 70400 Sikamat, Seremban as stated in the application form.

e). His address stated in the Borang Perakuan Memeluk Islam is No: 1272, Jalan TBK 6/2, Taman Bkt Kepayang, 70200 Seremban, the residence of the eldest son. We wish to state that our father has never resided at this address.

f). The Majlis Agama Authorities claimed that our deceased father made an oral declaration in Arabic accepting the Muslim faith. Our family has medical confirmations from three doctors that our father was unable to speak.

g). We were asked to appear before the Syariah Court Seremban, we believe the Syariah Court is for Muslims only.

h). We refused to attend at the Syariah Court on a matter of principle as non‐Muslims. We refused to submit to the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court.

i). The Syariah Court made a unilateral declaration that our father is a Muslim and is to be buried in accordance to Muslim rites.

j). We filed an application at the High Court Seremban to adjudicate on the validity, authenticity,veracity and legality of the conversion paper especially the declaration of acceptance into Islam.

k). The High Court Seremban dismissed our application on the ground that he has no jurisdiction to hear this matter as the subject matter falls within the purview of the Syariah Court. We beg to differ.

l). We were indeed shocked and aggrieved at the simplistic way the High Court disposed off this matter. We only seek justice, fair play and to find out the truth on his alleged conversion.

10. The eldest son Gan Hock Seng converted to Islam years ago. Our father and mother had strenuously opposed his conversion.

11. This eldest son had allegedly converted our father without the knowledge of our mother and all other seven siblings.

12. Further, the eldest son had NEVER taken care of him physically and financially. He hardly visited him too.

13. Even if the eldest son had converted our father, we like to ask :
‐
i). Why is it that he did not take care of him and brought him to stay in his house to lead a Muslim life?

ii). Why did he allow our father to continue living in a non‐muslim home in Klang ? Our father had never prayed and continued eating pork and other non‐halal food. He never revealed to anyone that he has converted to Islam.

iii). Why he as a Muslim, did not ensure that our father (if he had been indeed converted) led a Muslim life ?

iv). Why is it that the Agama Islam authorities did not visit and follow up with our father – the alleged new convert, after his conversion?

14. We believe we have been unfairly treated by our eldest brother and the Agama Islam authorities in this alleged conversion of our father. If there had been a conversion, we firmly believe that the Agama Islam authorities should have informed all members of the family. There should not be a fight over the body of dead person. There should be dignity and respect on the dead person.

15. We hope the PM and the higher ups in the Islamic Authorities review this case and to ensure that the truth is unraveled. We hope that all conversions to Islam is fair and transparent and made known to all the next of kin of the convert.

We Seek Justice, Fair play and Truth in this matter.

From
Gan Hok Ming for and on behalf of the family members of Gan Eng Gor (deceased)
Date: 25th January 2008

Pls also read this:

A mechanism or a law is needed

Another burial controversy

Documents of the alleged conversion