Are fundamental Muslims prohibited from being moderates?
Ravinder Singh, Malay Mail Online
What is the motive of the “fundamental” Muslim, who is not a born Muslim, who scoffed at the open letter to the Prime Minister penned by the 25 moderate, eminent Muslims expressing concern about extremism that has of late been driving wedges between Malaysians of diverse religious beliefs who had been living peacefully for so long, respecting each other’s faiths and beliefs?
He questioned whether those who have retired have a right to debate (about Islam): “Should it be from among those who have retired?” “Are they experts? Why did they not make their recommendations while they were still working? “Why are they only becoming vocal after they have retired?” he asked.
There is a Chinese saying that the older a person is, the more salt he has eaten, meaning that he has acquired more knowledge, experience and wisdom. Thus their words should be revered. The 25 should be saluted for standing up to state the obvious, i.e. that if racism and extremism are not checked, Malaysia would become Talibanised.
Well, responsible people do not shout “fire” when there is none. There was no racism such as that seen since 2008, i.e. since the first time the ruling coalition lost the two-thirds majority in Parliament. The gravy train had been running smoothly until then. The 2008 election results undermined the tracks of the gravy train and racism began to raise its ugly head.
On the other hand, responsible people do not keep quiet when they do see a fire. That the 25 are retired is totally irrelevant. In fact, being elderly, retired people, they have the wisdom that younger people still in service do not have. These elderly persons speak with a wealth of experience and wisdom that the nation can benefit from. They have seen the damage that racism has done what with body snatching at funerals, bride snatching at weddings, child snatchings from their mothers, bible snatchings and the calling for the burning of bibles, etc. They can see that such extremism if not checked could only lead to dire consequences to the detriment of the nation.
Are Muslims not required to speak up when they see things that are wrong? Are the likes of Perkasa and Isma telling us that they are following in the footsteps of the Prophet in their campaigns to talibanise Malaysia?
The greatest threat to Islam in this country should have been when it was under British rule, who are Christians. Did they convert any of the Muslim children that went to the mission schools, or did they make it a rule that promotional prospects of locals in government service depended on their religious credentials?
Could the “fundamental” Muslim who claims to be defending Islam give us some figures and names to show the number of Muslims who have opted out of their faith as proof that Islam is under threat.
Does this “fundamental” Muslim who considers himself an expert tell us whether the Prophet was not a moderate person considering that the Prophet had allowed a group of Christians to use a mosque for prayers as they had no other place to use for the purpose; that the Prophet did not berate or belittle peoples of other faiths; that the Prophet taught people to live in peace and harmony; that the Prophet did not order that the religious books of other faiths be confiscated or burned.
I have lived and gone to school with Malay Muslims. Their parents did not demand that the non-Muslim canteen selling pork dishes be closed down. They did not tell us to go and eat behind the toilets. During fasting month they would sit and chat with us as we had our meals during break. In Mission schools Christianity was all around them, all the time, yet their parents did not feel that Islam was threatened. So how is it that with so much Islamic religious teaching in schools today, the Muslim faith has become threatened? Please explain how and why, giving real-life examples.
Would the “fundamental” Muslim academic please enlighten us whether the Prophet was not a moderate person? Please give cogent reasons for the answer.
