The two below are rather obsolete, but I think it is still relevant to the contemporary Malaysian society. As for the first response, please refer to the previous postings dated 23 October 2007, 31 October 2007, 1 November 2007, and 10 November 2007 respectively. (Lily)
1. Institute of World Religions
Seminari Theoloji Malaysia(http://www.stm.edu.my)
Journeying Together in Love and Peace
A Malaysian Christian Response to A Common Word
Preamble
We welcome and are greatly encouraged by the initiative taken by leading Muslim scholars and leaders through the Open Letter, A Common Word Between Us and You. This letter highlights key elements of loving God and loving our neighbour, which both faith communities deem as central.
In our shared history we have often misunderstood one another resulting in suspicion and lack of positive engagement. Therefore, this invitation is a courageous step towards fresh perspectives in Christian-Muslim relations. It also serves as a catalyst for new initiatives to move beyond conflicts and mere coexistence.
We recognize and applaud the foundation already laid by Church leaders, Christian bodies and Scholars who have laboured towards mutual respect and understanding through the ages. As Christians living in Malaysia, where the majority of our neighbours are Muslims, we would like to make our humble contribution in nurturing Christian-Muslim relations today.
We believe that the focus on loving God and loving our neighbour engenders wider implications and invites participation beyond our faith communities. The universal call to love is shared by all people of faith.
Present Reality
As Malaysians, we recognize our aspiration towards a shared destiny and the common good of all people. We are thankful for the existing good relations among people of all faiths. However, as a minority community we recognize the long term challenges of living together in a pluralistic context.
Increasingly, there appears to be a shrinking common ground for public discourse and action on mutual concerns, especially with regard to the poor and marginalized in society.
Furthermore, the implications of global realities have had its knock on effects on local sensibilities.
This includes misguided superiority, misunderstandings due to distrust, disrespectful caricatures of the other, and extremism even to the point of violence. Sometimes, such attitudes have been perpetuated by members and leaders of our own faith communities. Furthermore, religion has often been misused as a tool for political mileage and personal gain. Such actions have resulted in accentuating misunderstanding between the two faith communities, thus creating severe barriers rather than lasting bridges for peace.
Therefore, the urgency for a renewed engagement with one another becomes critical. A Common Word provides a positive way forward with mutual respect and openness whilst being faithful to our respective faiths.
Love of God and Love of Neighbour
We are thankful that the Letter highlights similarities on our key understandings of Love of God and Love of Neighbour. Fundamental theological distinctives in our understandings of God are not ignored but rather respected.
However, we are reminded of the complexities involving interpretation of our respective texts.
Selective readings can easily give rise to misunderstandings regarding each other’s belief and religious traditions. As such, we are committed to listening closely to one another, exploring each other’s beliefs with care and understanding while engaging in respectful conversation. This liberating process should then free us from parochial thinking, empowering us towards mutual learning and appreciation of one another.
We believe that the concept of Love of God and love of neighbour also encompasses commitment to Truth, Justice and Peacemaking within the wider framework of the whole of humanity and all of God’s creation.
Journeying Together in Mutual Respect and Love as people of faith, we are called to pave the way towards nation building based on justice, peace and reconciliation. We hope our journey together in mutual respect and love transcends all ethnic, ideological, political and social divisions.
It becomes incumbent upon us to practice reciprocal engagement in society undergirded with historic uniting instruments such as, the concept of Muhibbah (Friendship and Companionship) and the principles of the Rukun Negara. Such an understanding, in reality is a “dialogue of life” where there is a common sharing of aspirations, hopes, struggles, concerns, and interests. This enables us to progress from tolerance to shared respect and constructive engagement, resulting in the embracing of one another.
Concerted effort must be taken to prevent the mistakes of our past. Our shared journey compels us to draw from the wealth of our experiences and faith traditions. Present and future generations who value the common ground of love, peace and harmony could then work together towards a shared destiny, joint vision and a brighter future.
Our prayer is that this would eventually lead us towards determined action for the good of all and the ultimate glory of God.
2. Malaysiakini（http://www.malaysiakini.com)
Rocky road for interfaith relations working committee, 22 April 2010
by AB Sulaiman
I have just read about the establishment of the Interfaith Relations Working Committee (IRWC) in The Sunday Star (April 18). Datuk Azman Amin Hassan, the director general of the National Unity and Integration Department, reportedly stated therein that there is no better time for Malaysia to have an inter-faith relations body, and that we cannot sweep things under the carpet any longer.
I can't agree more. Despite the claim of tourism brochures that we are a model country for racial unity in diversity, our history of race relations has not been too good. In the recent past we have had a long list of race-related problems, most of which arguably emanate from the government's different standards and treatment on matters relating to religion.
There seems little justice and fair play, and rules by far favour the Malays and Islam.
While Malay value system appears to be quite accommodating and even generous for matters relating to Islam against other religions, it appears quite guarded and authoritative with regards to individual religious preferences and can (and does) run contrary to the universal principles of human rights.
So yes, the IRWC can play a useful role in injecting justice and fairplay in matters that pertain to race and religion. But to be sure it has a huge responsibility to undertake and there can be very many areas where its work and efforts can be frustrated.
Based on this belief and presumption, it would be an idea to have a closer look into the basic fundamentals of the Malay mind to have a better understanding of its features and characteristics, and thus be more appreciative of how it works to make it easier to deal with it. Why only the Malay mind and not of the rest? This is because the Malays are the most 'mature' ethnic group in the political arena; they are the majority incumbents in the political elite, in government service and in most government agencies.
They are the civil servants, the officials of government agencies. By accident or design they have elevated the ulemas into the government decision-making mainstream. As a collective entity they term themselves as the Ketuanan Melayu.
Their collective mind frame is the apparatus that moulds the country's public policies and their eventual implementation. The Malay mind dictates the goings-on in this country.
With that background filled in, I begin by first quoting the adage of human psychology saying that thinking influences behavior; I believe in this article of wisdom.
Many of the items of race relations cited above relate to the 'behaviour' part of Malay and Ketuanan Melayu thinking/behaviour coin.
Perception of superiority
So what are the features and characteristics of the Ketuanan Melayu mindset?
In one word, it is ethnocentric.
So what is ethnocentrism?
The Wikipedia states that ethnocentrism 'is the perception in the superiority of one's own ethnic group' and supported by 'the tendency to look at the world primarily from the perspective of one's own culture.'
It is the tendency to believe that one's ethnic or cultural group is centrally important, and that all other groups are measured in relation to one's own.
In the case of this writing, it is the aggrandisement of the Malay culture made by the Malay.
Indeed, the Malay norm is a virtual example of this thinking trait. I for one grew up within a culture that calls itself as the best in the world, one world renowned for its sopan santun and budi bahasa. It is a culture I love and cherish, and will defend its beauty and strength to the best of my ability.
While ethnocentrism relates to the current world, there is another form of self-aggrandisement that ropes in elements of the Hereafter, and it is called theocentrism. I am not sure whether this relatively new word is in the dictionary, in the event it is not, then it should.
This time it relates to the aggrandisement of the uniqueness and singularity of Islam and therefore the tendency to look at the world and the Hereafter primarily from the perspective of Islamic teachings and philosophies. I believe to this mind Islam carries the only one truth in this world while all other teachings are fairy tales.
When ethnocentrism and theocentrism are fused together we have the following mental state of affairs:
i. Of all the 'races' in the world the Malay race is the best; other races are poor seconds.
ii. Without exception, the Malay culture and value system is the best there is.
iii. Malays must love their culture and protect it against the perceived corruption and erosion from the west.
iv. They must despise all other cultures and values, especially those coming from the west.
v. Islam is the only religion authorised ('direstui') by God.
vi. There is only one truth in the world and it is that Allah is the one Supreme God and Mohammad is His prophet.
vii. All other religions are at best fairy tales.
viii. Without exception, Islam is always right and other religions are always wrong.
I believe these are the standard features and characteristics of the collective Malay thinking, unless of course I am grossly wrong, to which I'd like to hear from my critics.
Absolutist and exclusive stances
From this quick analysis we can see two fatal flaws of the ethnocentric/theocentric coin. On the one side we have the Malay absolutist and exclusive attitude and stance towards race and religion. To them there is only one truth and they are holding the monopoly to truth. Everybody else is wrong. They demonise everybody else but themselves.
On the flipside of this coin we can see that the act of self-aggrandisement indicates that the Malay is cutting himself away from mainstream human civilisation. As it keeps to itself, it does not have the benefit of cross-cultural exchange of ideas and experiences.
Most if not all of its wisdom would emanate from its own heritage, handed down from the elder generation to the younger. The contents of the wisdom would then be accepted without much doubt, criticism, or scepticism.
Because of this unilateral experience the Malay would have neither the knowledge, the vision nor the awareness to see that there can be similarities or differences between his problems and those of others like him elsewhere in the world (Wikipedia paraphrased). It is thus a case of ignorance is bliss. Or what you do not know you do not miss. Or, you do not know that you do not know. Or, in this world where no man is an island, the Malay would somehow prefer to go it alone.
Culture of poverty
So much for the thinking part of the Malay polity. Now for the behaviour part.
For this I am reminded of a concept first raised by Oscar Lewis called 'the culture of poverty'.
A person's well being can suffer income poverty, where his level of income is below a certain minimum level.
Similarly, we have a cultural version of poverty where the individual's thinking and behavioural patterns are somewhat under-par to the normal.
The Wikipedia describes the people in the culture of poverty as 'having a strong feeling of marginality, of helplessness, of dependency, of not belonging. They are like aliens in their own country, convinced that the existing institutions do not serve their interests and needs. Along with this feeling of powerlessness is a widespread feeling of inferiority, of personal unworthiness'.
If we ponder a bit about this definition we can see that the Malay psychology comes close. The Malays feels the economic helplessness, of dependency to government largesse, of not really belonging to the economic mainstream of the country. So they feel they are 'alien' in the country of their birth where as fate would have it they are in the majority.
'People with a culture of poverty have very little sense of history', says the Wikipedia further. They are a (mentally) marginal people who know only their own troubles, their own local conditions, and their own neighborhood.
Again this description more or less fits well with the Malay behaviour pattern. Just ask Ibrahim Ali (above) of Perkasa for confirmation.
Disturbed mind
The point I wish to make is that
i. when a culture claims unilateral and unsubstantiated superiority over all others;
ii. when this same culture claim superiority of religious faith and belief over all others;
iii. when this same culture refuses to see that there can and may be the existence of other alternative cultures and religions that might equal if not better than one's own; then it is understandable for this culture to demonise everybody else but their own kind.
There is a label for this thinking, and it is called a disturbed mind. I am no psychologist but a disturbed mind to me would have ample amounts of the following debilitating mental conditions:
Firstly the person is unreasonably fearful of many things, from ghosts to the Unknown. As there are many unknowns in this world, the Malay is always in a state of fear.
Secondly he harbours an inferiority complex, i.e. the conflict between the desire to be noticed and the fear of being humiliated. The person thus has a very low confidence level.
Such people would tend to go for denial whenever caught in a less than favourable position or situation. He is quick to lie.
To conclude, the creation of IRWC is bound to meet with a of obstacles and hindrances most of which would come from the ethnocentric and disturbed mind of the Malay. He harbours a culture of poverty. Committee members should be on the lookout for them. These principles might create havoc to the committee.
Some hindrances have already been expressed, like Muhyiddin Yassin (right) saying that this committee is of no consequence as it's position in the government bureaucracy and hierarchy is at a low level. It's a small fry (my word) committee in the Ketuanan Melayu scheme of things.
Also, the lamas like Harussani Zakaria have made request for the committee not to deal with religion, or something to that effect, for fear that the non-Muslims might be encouraged to demand for more concessions pertaining to their religion!
Its definitely not going to be easy. But I am putting a lot of hope on this matter.
My high hopes lays with the fact that there is the awareness of the prevalence of some race relation problems and difficulties in the country. Yes, the awareness is there and to me for any problem to be solved the awareness of the existence of the problem first of all is most important.
So, if Datuk Azman Amin Hassan is serious enough, he should do well if he nurture this awareness, popularise and propagate it and make it more acceptable to the Ketuanan Melayu polity. Who knows, even the most ethnocentric Malay minds might eventually see reason.
・AB SULAIMAN is an observer of human traits and foibles, especially within the context of religion and culture. As a liberal, he marvels at the way orthodoxy fights to maintain its credibility in a devilishly fast-changing world. He hopes to provide some understanding to the issues at hand and wherever possible, suggest some solutions. He holds a Bachelor in Social Sciences (Leicester, UK) and a Diploma in Public Administration, Universiti Malaya.
(End)
