An excerpt from GCF i-commentary
The 48th general assembly of PAS has just been concluded, and in the assembly, its top leaders pledged that the party would unveil its model of an Islamic state (should it come to power) to Malaysians soon.
While some are anxious to know about the fate of non-Muslims under an Islamic state, other non-Muslims already fear that their religious freedom and other civil liberties will be eroded under an Islamic state, irrespective of whether it is ruled by PAS or otherwise.
It is logical for non-Muslims, as well as a good number of moderate Muslims, to be wary of what is in store in a country where clerics (ulama) have the sole and ultimate right to interpret Islamic teachings, and then impose it upon the rest.
How then, should Christians respond? Attend more Bible studies, more prayer meetings, or get involved in more social work? Don't get me wrong, for all these are necessary regardless of how "Islamised" our society is.
However, I feel that a more systematic study of Islam by Christians should also be part of our normal Christian activities given the increasingly important role that Islam has in shaping our social and political landscape.
Nevertheless, it is good to bear in mind that one should not study Islam by adopting an "us-versus-them" attitude. Rather, we should approach our study with a genuine desire to know our Muslim brethren better and deeper.
Getting to know our Muslim brethren should go hand in hand with the exhortation found in 1 Peter 3:15, whereby we are called to be "prepared to given an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have" (NIV).
Yew Choong
Dave: Check out Rachel Loo's reflection on why we should be politically active. Here are some good questions posed by a friend
You are entirely right to say that the hudud cannot change the heart of a person. He who thinks evil thoughts cannot be dissuaded from thinking them even if the external punishment for the carrying out of these thoughts are as severe as some of those promised by the hudud. We all of people should realize the dangers of repeating the same legalistic mindset of the Pharisees 2000 years ago who thought that legislation and external righteousness could replace an inner and genuine faith.
But does this mean that we should follow the separation of church and state principle as practiced by that bastion of democracy, the USA? Does this mean that we should not care about national policy at all given that these concern the external and therefore is separate from our internal faith? Are there any alternative ways of examining how faith and legislation can work hand in hand in a democratic and equitable manner?
I went through a certain thought process as I examined these issues. My thoughts were muddled and jumped from one area to another but as I coalesce these thoughts, I hope to give some sort of structure towards how we can examine this complex issue.
1) Understand the perspective of the Muslims in Malaysia
Given my many interactions with PAS members, it has been necessary for me to put myself in their shoes. It's of no use saying to them, we want a secular state and what you're doing impinges on the framework of our secular constitution, therefore you should stop what you're doing and stick to the constitution.
For the Muslim, Islam is not a religion, Islam is a way of life. Just like, we say that Christianity is not a religion but a relationship, a Muslim would say
that what he practices is not a religion but 'adeen' or a way of life. Given that Islam is a way of life, it is not possible to fathom the separation of church from state (or of mosque from state in this case) because the daily living out of 'adeen' must be in an environment where is it conducive for Muslims to do
so. Our children need to learn the Quran and if the government is truly an Islamic government (or at least not against Islam), it should allow for the teaching
of Quran in schools. In fact, the government should fund teachers who are capable of teaching our children the Quran, the pious Muslim would say.
Indeed many Muslims 'tolerate' the presence of activities in their midst which are considered 'haram' or illicit in the eyes of a Muslim, activities such as the drinking of alcohol, the presence of discos and other nightspots, gambling and the eating of pork, just to name a few. For many of them, it's not a question of allowing the non-Muslims to indulge in activities which are not considered illegal by their respective religions (if any) but not wanting to be seen as sanctioning these 'haram' activities as well as opening the door for Muslims to be tempted. This kind of thinking taken seriously would result in what has been happening in Kelantan where liquor can only be consumed indoors at very selective outlets and where nightspots and gambling have been banned. Hence, by restricting or banning completely these 'haram' activities, the Kelantan government sees itself as living out the true Muslim way of life, the adeen.
But of course, this does not prevent those living in Kelantan and Terengganu, both Muslim and non-Muslim from going to the state borders in Pahang or Perak to buy a 4D lottery ticket or from driving up north into Thailand to experience the 'sins of the flesh' which are not available in their own states. Immorality cannot be legislated away, echoing what you mentioned.
The government in Kelantan is of course not impervious to this but in their hearts and minds, the fact that they have tried to implement Allah-inspired legislation means that they have done what is right in the eyes of Allah and that is enough.
2) Our understanding of separation of church and state
Many have said (especially non-Muslims in this country) that we need to preserve the separation of church and state in Malaysia just as what they have done in the US. What they fail to realize is that public prayer is not allowed in schools in America and that government funding of religious education of any type is strictly prohibited. What this means is that policies in the US are explicitly anti-religious and not religion neutral. In Malaysia, religious subjects even in Non-Muslim religions are funded e.g. bible knowledge, catechism classes. Hence one should be very careful in recommending a strict separation of church and state in the American context.
We should also ask ourselves what is it that we really want when we say a separation of church and state. Does it reflect the state of our own lives where we do
not want our 'religion' to intrude into our private space, where we conveniently restrict our 'religion' to going to church every Sunday? Perhaps this is
something that we can learn or be reminded of by our Muslim friends who are not afraid of 'exhibiting' their religion and does not want to confine their
religion to every Friday at the mosque.
I'm not trying to say that I support their attempts to legislate morality into the public sphere especially if it is mortality as interpreted by one religion or
by some members of one religion. What I'm asking is for us to question our own understanding of the concept of the separation between church and state and
why we would want such a concept here in Malaysia.
3) Examining the alternatives
This is probably something which should be taken up by a doctorate student who wants to study Political Islam in a Parliamentary Democracy or something like that.
I believe that religion should not and cannot be taken away from the public sphere. But bringing in religion into the public sphere needs to be done in a sensitive and well thought out manner which is not exclusive. There should be common standards which all religions can adhere to and government policies should be built first and foremost on these common values.
Anything which affects the practice of any particular religion needs to be deliberated in detailed in an inclusive and open manner. Although one should not
subscribe fully to the separation of the church and state doctrine, I believe that the structure of a modern democracy including the parliamentary democracy
which we've inherited from the British can be conducive for this kind of discussion and debate to occur. Unfortunately, because of the unique position
of Malaysian politics, this seldom occurs.
The UK model which is not anti-religion but which adopts the Anglican church as its official church and where officials from the Church of England are entitled to seats in the House of Lords is a model worth investigating in more detail and is one where possibly Malaysia can learn from.
Anyways, to draw this email to a close let me pose 3 questions for further discussion.
1) What kind of effect do you think government policies have on you in terms of how you live your Christian life?
2) How much or how little do you think religious values should be brought into the public sphere in Malaysia e.g. in policy making?
3) What lessons (if any) can we learn from our Muslim neighbors in terms of their attitude towards their religion as 'adeen' or all encompassing?
Look forward to hearing from you guys.
OKM
The 48th general assembly of PAS has just been concluded, and in the assembly, its top leaders pledged that the party would unveil its model of an Islamic state (should it come to power) to Malaysians soon.
While some are anxious to know about the fate of non-Muslims under an Islamic state, other non-Muslims already fear that their religious freedom and other civil liberties will be eroded under an Islamic state, irrespective of whether it is ruled by PAS or otherwise.
It is logical for non-Muslims, as well as a good number of moderate Muslims, to be wary of what is in store in a country where clerics (ulama) have the sole and ultimate right to interpret Islamic teachings, and then impose it upon the rest.
How then, should Christians respond? Attend more Bible studies, more prayer meetings, or get involved in more social work? Don't get me wrong, for all these are necessary regardless of how "Islamised" our society is.However, I feel that a more systematic study of Islam by Christians should also be part of our normal Christian activities given the increasingly important role that Islam has in shaping our social and political landscape.
Nevertheless, it is good to bear in mind that one should not study Islam by adopting an "us-versus-them" attitude. Rather, we should approach our study with a genuine desire to know our Muslim brethren better and deeper.
Getting to know our Muslim brethren should go hand in hand with the exhortation found in 1 Peter 3:15, whereby we are called to be "prepared to given an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have" (NIV).
Yew Choong
Dave: Check out Rachel Loo's reflection on why we should be politically active. Here are some good questions posed by a friend
You are entirely right to say that the hudud cannot change the heart of a person. He who thinks evil thoughts cannot be dissuaded from thinking them even if the external punishment for the carrying out of these thoughts are as severe as some of those promised by the hudud. We all of people should realize the dangers of repeating the same legalistic mindset of the Pharisees 2000 years ago who thought that legislation and external righteousness could replace an inner and genuine faith.
But does this mean that we should follow the separation of church and state principle as practiced by that bastion of democracy, the USA? Does this mean that we should not care about national policy at all given that these concern the external and therefore is separate from our internal faith? Are there any alternative ways of examining how faith and legislation can work hand in hand in a democratic and equitable manner?
I went through a certain thought process as I examined these issues. My thoughts were muddled and jumped from one area to another but as I coalesce these thoughts, I hope to give some sort of structure towards how we can examine this complex issue.
1) Understand the perspective of the Muslims in Malaysia
Given my many interactions with PAS members, it has been necessary for me to put myself in their shoes. It's of no use saying to them, we want a secular state and what you're doing impinges on the framework of our secular constitution, therefore you should stop what you're doing and stick to the constitution.
For the Muslim, Islam is not a religion, Islam is a way of life. Just like, we say that Christianity is not a religion but a relationship, a Muslim would say
that what he practices is not a religion but 'adeen' or a way of life. Given that Islam is a way of life, it is not possible to fathom the separation of church from state (or of mosque from state in this case) because the daily living out of 'adeen' must be in an environment where is it conducive for Muslims to do
so. Our children need to learn the Quran and if the government is truly an Islamic government (or at least not against Islam), it should allow for the teaching
of Quran in schools. In fact, the government should fund teachers who are capable of teaching our children the Quran, the pious Muslim would say.
Indeed many Muslims 'tolerate' the presence of activities in their midst which are considered 'haram' or illicit in the eyes of a Muslim, activities such as the drinking of alcohol, the presence of discos and other nightspots, gambling and the eating of pork, just to name a few. For many of them, it's not a question of allowing the non-Muslims to indulge in activities which are not considered illegal by their respective religions (if any) but not wanting to be seen as sanctioning these 'haram' activities as well as opening the door for Muslims to be tempted. This kind of thinking taken seriously would result in what has been happening in Kelantan where liquor can only be consumed indoors at very selective outlets and where nightspots and gambling have been banned. Hence, by restricting or banning completely these 'haram' activities, the Kelantan government sees itself as living out the true Muslim way of life, the adeen.
But of course, this does not prevent those living in Kelantan and Terengganu, both Muslim and non-Muslim from going to the state borders in Pahang or Perak to buy a 4D lottery ticket or from driving up north into Thailand to experience the 'sins of the flesh' which are not available in their own states. Immorality cannot be legislated away, echoing what you mentioned.
The government in Kelantan is of course not impervious to this but in their hearts and minds, the fact that they have tried to implement Allah-inspired legislation means that they have done what is right in the eyes of Allah and that is enough.
2) Our understanding of separation of church and state
Many have said (especially non-Muslims in this country) that we need to preserve the separation of church and state in Malaysia just as what they have done in the US. What they fail to realize is that public prayer is not allowed in schools in America and that government funding of religious education of any type is strictly prohibited. What this means is that policies in the US are explicitly anti-religious and not religion neutral. In Malaysia, religious subjects even in Non-Muslim religions are funded e.g. bible knowledge, catechism classes. Hence one should be very careful in recommending a strict separation of church and state in the American context. We should also ask ourselves what is it that we really want when we say a separation of church and state. Does it reflect the state of our own lives where we do
not want our 'religion' to intrude into our private space, where we conveniently restrict our 'religion' to going to church every Sunday? Perhaps this is
something that we can learn or be reminded of by our Muslim friends who are not afraid of 'exhibiting' their religion and does not want to confine their
religion to every Friday at the mosque.
I'm not trying to say that I support their attempts to legislate morality into the public sphere especially if it is mortality as interpreted by one religion or
by some members of one religion. What I'm asking is for us to question our own understanding of the concept of the separation between church and state and
why we would want such a concept here in Malaysia.
3) Examining the alternatives
This is probably something which should be taken up by a doctorate student who wants to study Political Islam in a Parliamentary Democracy or something like that.
I believe that religion should not and cannot be taken away from the public sphere. But bringing in religion into the public sphere needs to be done in a sensitive and well thought out manner which is not exclusive. There should be common standards which all religions can adhere to and government policies should be built first and foremost on these common values.
Anything which affects the practice of any particular religion needs to be deliberated in detailed in an inclusive and open manner. Although one should not
subscribe fully to the separation of the church and state doctrine, I believe that the structure of a modern democracy including the parliamentary democracy
which we've inherited from the British can be conducive for this kind of discussion and debate to occur. Unfortunately, because of the unique position
of Malaysian politics, this seldom occurs.
The UK model which is not anti-religion but which adopts the Anglican church as its official church and where officials from the Church of England are entitled to seats in the House of Lords is a model worth investigating in more detail and is one where possibly Malaysia can learn from.
Anyways, to draw this email to a close let me pose 3 questions for further discussion.
1) What kind of effect do you think government policies have on you in terms of how you live your Christian life?
2) How much or how little do you think religious values should be brought into the public sphere in Malaysia e.g. in policy making?
3) What lessons (if any) can we learn from our Muslim neighbors in terms of their attitude towards their religion as 'adeen' or all encompassing?
Look forward to hearing from you guys.
OKM
Comments