By Farish A. Noor
Not too long ago, a certain Dutch politician Geert Wilders, leader of the far-right Dutch Freedom party, caused a stir in that rather flat country by suggesting that the Quran should be banned on the grounds that it was a “dangerous book” that spread the message of hate and violence. As the rather pointless and tiresome debate took its course, other right-wing politicians chipped in, suggesting things such as new laws that forbade the reading of the Quran in public, limiting the sale and dissemination of the Quran in Dutch society, controlling the number of Qurans being brought into the country, etc. Needless to say, Geert Wilders got what he wanted, which was to project himself yet again on the national stage as a rather loud and outlandish advocate of far-right causes.
Predictably, the Muslim community of Holland and other European countries were upset by Wilders’ remarks. Many came to the fore to insist that all this talk about banning Qurans was part and parcel of a wider trend of Islamophobia in the EU; that it was essentially racist and that it was an attempt to rob Muslims in Europe of their fundamental rights and liberties. What offended many Muslims was the suggestion that the Quran could be seen by some as a “dangerous text” which Wilders even compared to Hitler’s Mein Kampf: An ironic comparison to say the least considering Wilders’ own far-right political leanings.
That Muslims would be offended by such claims and demands is understandable as no doubt most faith communities regard their sacred books as precisely that: sacred arks that bear the message of God and divine revelation. To even suggest that the Quran could be read profanely as some terrorists’ manual or guidebook for fanatics was to demean the text, and by extension Islam and Muslims.
Yet the question remains: If Muslims can get so worked up by the fact that some right-wing Dutch politician hungering for publicity can stir up a debate by demeaning the Quran, why is it that so many Muslims remain indifferent to how their fellow Muslims treat the holy texts of other faiths and belief-systems?
A case in point is the recent seizure of thirty-two Bibles from a Malaysian Christian who was on her journey back to Malaysia from the Philippines. Upon arrival in Malaysia, her bags were checked by the customs authorities and all of the Bibles were confiscated, on the grounds that they had to be vetted by the Ministry of Internal Security. But since when were Bibles deemed a security threat in Malaysia, and to whom might they pose a danger?
More worrying still is the fact that the customs officers who we were told were Muslims had seized the Bibles on their own initiative, despite there not being any formal ban on Bibles in the country. (After all, there are literally millions of Christians of all denominations in Malaysia and they have lived there for decades if not centuries, so why the fear of Bibles now?)
In the event the Bibles were eventually returned to the Malaysian Christian in question, but worrying doubts remain. What will be the fate of other books of other religions and belief-systems? As a scholar who teaches comparative religion, I have in my collection not only numerous editions of the Bible but also Taoist, Buddhist, Hindu, Tantric, Animist and Jewish texts. Are these to be screen and vetted too? And on what grounds; that as a person born to the Muslim faith (a contingency of history that I did not decide or determine, I might add) I am not allowed to read such texts for fear that I may be “contaminated” by alien ideas of alien creeds?
Predictably the first to react to the seizure of the Bibles were the Christians of Malaysia. But it is sad to note that the same level of anger and outrage that was expressed by Muslims over the Muslim-bashing sentiments of a Dutch politician thousands of miles away was not evident when this outrage was perpetrated on their own shores.
Universally this has become the norm, where religious communities the world over have grown more introverted, inward-looking and consequently selfish in their motives and concerns. In the same way that non-Muslims seemed relatively indifferent to the constant Muslim-bashing that is taking place in places like Europe today; Muslims are equally indifferent when injustices such as the seizure of holy books are meted out to those who are not of their flock. Should this trend continue then we are certainly on the verge of a balkanisation of the religious communities of the world, and this spells trouble for multi-faith nations like Malaysia and the countries of the West.
The remedies are primarily political ones, which include controls on hate-speech and fear-mongering by far-right demagogues like Wilders in Holland and other equally right-wing demagogues in other communities, including Muslim communities too. But all this can only work if we begin with the fundamental premise that sacredness is not something exclusive to ourselves and our own faith community. When Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists alike realize and respect the sacredness in the other, and drop the claim that they alone monopolise all that is good and holy; perhaps then we will be one step closer to recognising the fundamental humanity we share with each other, whether we like it or not.
Dr. Farish (Badrol Hisham) Ahmad-Noor
Senior Fellow, Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Research Director for the Research Cluster ‘Transnational Religion in Contemporary Southeast Asia, Nanyang Tech Uni, Singapore Tel (off) 6790 6128
This entry was posted
on Friday, February 8th, 2008 at 5:03 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:57 am
When religion and one’s faith is politicized this is what you get – kaki bodeks and Mat Skodings and who conveniently, or perversely, see their egregious deeds as services to the One True you know what (pssst, I, being a non-Muslim, am not supposed to even whisper Allah, in case you didn’t know) when they either are deviant or just out to please their political masters..
I hope the confiscation of bibles incident is not another permutation of the me-holier-than-thou contests between UMNO and PAS
February 9th, 2008 at 7:31 am
Why is it so difficult for Malay Muslims to understand that part of the Rukun Iman is that Muslims believe in the Books of Allah which include the Torah and the Bible.
February 9th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Well one thing for sure the dutch case was just a rhetoric, but in Malaysia it actually happened. That is a big difference!! The Bible did get confiscated in Kuala Lumpur but in Holland it was an outcry that is substantiated by the current events - that terrorists who did use the Quran to support their case.
So far in Malaysia nobody has used the Bible to support blow himself up and kill others at the same time.
The problem lies in the closed-mindedness of Muslim society where they always think that their religion is better while they never actually look at other ideas and religions. And worse Mohammed preached a message that direct his follower to mix religion and politics together at the same time.
And when the Moslem fare worse against others(economically, socially and politically) they become very disappointed and project their anger and frustration at others while the root problem lies in themselves not the US or the Jews or whoever the in their top hate- list.
February 9th, 2008 at 9:16 am
I believe that fear of the holy bible sparked from the fear of the unknown and lack of knowledge in true teachings of Islam as well. This is the current situation in Malaysia and other so called Muslim countries. One of the Islamic teachings, is to respect the faith of others. As for the holy Bible, it is part of Islamic tenets of faith to believe and love the Bible in Armaic (original language of Bible). Since now the said form does not exist anymore, we still have the respect for the Holy Bible.
I’d like to comment on the prior comment that non-Muslim is not allowed to say Allah in Malaysia. That is so unfortunate if it is true. The Arab Christians called God in their Arabic Bible “Allah”. I think Malaysian Muslim should be aware of that.
“Allah” which is in Arabic only means “the one God worthy to be worshiped”. So I hope when anyone hears the name Allah, automatically in our minds, the word is translated to mean “the only One God worthy to be worshiped”.
I’d like to share a website with readers (muslim and non muslim alike), who would like to know more about Islam. http://www.shareislam.com and http://www.whyislam.com
February 9th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Alex, I totally agreed to the notion that Muslim society is narrow minded but the comment that you had made is totally different and it is a perfect example that the Non-muslim is suffering the same syndrome as well.
Unfortunately, the moment you wrote “And worse Mohammed preached a message that direct his follower to mix religion and politics together at the same time” , you intentionally or unintentionally condemned the teaching of other religion as well.
This only shows how shallow is the understanding of majority of people towards their own and other religious beliefs. Non-muslim and muslim alike. I stayed in developed country most of my adult life and this kind of statement was thrown to me all the time by people from the street. True academia would never made such statement.
If we truly understand the nature of this kind of discussion, we would refrain ourselves from questioning the teaching of Islamic religion and discussion of secularism itself.
February 9th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Well, I do not aspire to be an academic or anyone else for that matter but I am just telling the truth that politic and religion comes hand in hand in Moslem belief, as any good Moslem will tell you Mr. Khairi.
But modern day, respected leaders from the Islamic world like Mahathir and Attaturk(sp) see the great danger in mixing them, and thats why they stand out and did very well in bringing up the countries, as you know.
February 9th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
As far as Malay politicians are concerned Islam and politics go hand in hand. This is a recent development when Umno decides to out-Islam Pas in order to remain relevant in the eyes of their supporters, especially the rural ones who are easily swayed by religious rhetorics. And since most of the enforcement agencies are filled by Malays of this genre, the incident at LCCT is no surprise. What they need is education as the exposure they get within and without their organisations is limited. There is this profound belief that being the majority whatever they do (or don’t do) is right. This is too self-serving and naive.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
A.D, I’ve followed closely the development of Muslim countries.
Just to correct your statement, Mahathir’s development program was based on Islamic principles and he did well in bringing up the country (many may not agree to that). He was the first to establish islamic banking and International Islamic University in Malaysia. His development program (vision 2020) is based on Islamic principles. His approach was totally different from Attaturk’s. Many would still argue that he was not islamic enough.
Again, as I mentioned before, it will not be fair (at least academically) to judge others sacred beliefs (and our own for that matter!) if we do not have a correct understanding of its teaching. Our exposure to the western media have fed us with the a lot of misconception about other religions especially Islam.
February 9th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
well, i think this was the works of ‘little napoleons’ which goes against the country policy.The question is why, is there fear? normally ppl scare of something because of insecurity or unknown.If one faith is strong, no externality could affect you, the key word is mutual respect and understanding, then this world will be a better place.
I like to quote what Sheikh of Dubai said,-”…i don’t care what faith you belong,as long as you got skills,respect and do not disturb your neighbours, you are welcome here to do business and make money…”
February 11th, 2008 at 3:27 am
I came across a quote below :-
“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”
I think everyone of us should adopt such attitude that mentioned in the quote when reading / studying holy books. What’s wrong if we adopt certain values that contained in other religion’s holy books, which we think, after research, are suitable to us while we remain as believer of our own religion? Such attitude will only enrich ourselves and our beliefs. We should not have fear that after reading / studying holy books of others, we would convert to that religion. We should not have blind faith on what we believe at.
For your information, the above quote is the teachings of Buddha. So, by adopting this Buddha’s teaching will not make you a Buddhist. It will only make you a better Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Toaist or whatever.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Sometimes people do get carried away, by doing that,they think they were defending their religion just as politicians always ask malays to vote for them so that their political party will defend islam for them.
Beside this issue, personally, i think the media is inappropriate to label muslims under one banner because there is so much diversity in the muslim world- many types of muslim with different views. For example, our PM say that religion cannot be separated from politics but the Turk leaders will disagree with him.I remember one of them say that religion is pure and politics is dirty, how can you mix them together!
FYI, Turkey and Malaysia remain the most developed nations in the muslim world, they are both democratic,they started secular but now moving in different direction. However, whether they stay status quo next decade remain to be seen as the world getting very competitive.
February 13th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
I hate the generalisation that “muslim society is narrow minded”. Maybe you guys need to get things into perspective. I am just tired of the muslim bashing.
Try having a holiday in the Bible belt of America, you’ll come out and say that “Christian society is so narrow minded”.
If you don’t have the time to visit the US, try listen to Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell (he has since passed away). Same message of hate as well.
The holier than thou syndrome affects not only the Muslim but the Christians as well. We have had wars for hundreds of years basically some of us think that my God is better than your God. It will not go away.
I agree to a certain extent what Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens have surmised, religious belief provokes war. It has always been and it will always be.
And a note to Alex, you said “And when the Moslem fare worse against others (economically, socially and politically) they become very disappointed and project their anger and frustration at others while the root problem lies in themselves not the US or the Jews or whoever the in their top hate- list”.
That is missing the point by a mile. While I agree that Muslims have issues of disunity but the discontent in the Muslim world against the Americans and the West has very little to do with just being envious of the West. The chief consternation has always been the unfair US policy in the Middle East.
Much as I hate to say this, but in Islam religion and politics comes hand in hand. No 2 ways about it.
February 19th, 2008 at 11:44 am
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
“First they came…” is a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power
February 19th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
A. Salleh
Give us something new to ponder. This poem is stale already and have been posted on this blog numerous times by numerous commentators.