Were Muslims More Tolerant Before Madani

---

 


“For centuries, we have lived and intermingled harmoniously. Muslims are well aware of the do’s and don’ts of their religion - there is no need for external dictates on our behaviour,”
- Former minister Rafidah Aziz
To be clear, “tolerant” is an odious word that is indicative of how fascistic lingual norms have become normalised in the Malaysian political and social landscapes.
Democratic societies are accepting or empathic of cultural and religious differences but fascistic societies tolerate such differences in the pursuit of compromised political stability.
ADSHaving said that, the question remains.
The recent announcement of guidelines for Muslims attending non-Muslim religious events by the prime minister’s religious czar was brazen in its disdain for religions other than that of the religion of the state.
It is a shocking display of the normalisation of demonising other religions and the fact that it happened in Parliament should tell us everything we need to know about the religious agenda of the state.
According to the religious czar, non-Muslim religious events, symbols, and even devotional music can offend Muslim sensitivities.
I have no idea if this is contextual or a general statement. After all, why would religious symbols for instance pose a threat to Muslim sensitivity in a specific time and place, even though such symbols are ever present in Malaysian life?
Now of course Madani has backtracked after the blowback this so-called policy received. But the damage has already been done.
The question we should ask is where was the National Unity Minister Aaron Ago Dagang when the religious czar first mooted this policy in Parliament?
Here we have the prime minister’s religious czar essentially calling non-Muslim symbols and devotional practices as something that offends Muslims sensitivities. What does this say about the kind of Islam Madani advocates?
Interference of the religious bureaucracy
All laws are created to discourage certain types of behaviour and thinking. What were these rules or guidelines designed to discourage?
Are these laws meant to further racial and religious divides by discouraging Muslims from attending events that encourage interaction and empathy between divergent religious and cultural sections of society? What exactly did Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s religious czar hope to encourage or discourage with these laws or guidelines?
ADSAaron said in a joint presser with the religious czar - “However, the advice cannot be construed as a policy. We must be reminded that any policies made must consider national unity and get cabinet permission first.”
So let me get this straight. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Religious Affairs) Na’im Mokhtar did all of this, and made these pronouncements in Parliament without informing the cabinet about this?
Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Religious Affairs) Na’im MokhtarHe decided on his own, that this was the policy for Muslims and non-Muslims in this country? This is a blatant example of how the religious bureaucracy is attempting to interfere in the lives of non-Muslims and Muslims in this country.
Does all of this sound like the kind of powers the proposed Mufti Bill gives the religious bureaucracy? The bill is best defined by Sisters in Islam – “The Mufti Bill, which grants unelected officials the power to legislate without transparency or due process, exemplifies the dangerous erosion of democratic principles and constitutional rights.
“Such laws risk undermining the fundamental freedoms of Malaysians, fostering a culture of control rather than empowerment, and silencing diverse perspectives crucial for a progressive society.”
Madani made this an issue
Recently the prime minister said - “Some have raised the issue of Malays celebrating Chinese New Year, Thaipusam - things that have never been a problem for decades are now being made into an issue.”
So this begs the question. Why did Anwar’s religious czar make this an issue? If for decades Muslims were celebrating and grieving through religious events with their non-Muslim brethren, why is it an issue now? Do not blame Perikatan Nasional, this is all about Madani.
Did Anwar know about these laws or guidelines? Even the members of his coalition were taken by surprise because as Bangi MP Syahredzan Johan said - “Amongst others, this will affect Muslim wakil rakyat (people’s representatives) who are invited to events in their capacity as elected representatives.”
Bangi MP Syahredzan JohanNow of course the prime minister as reported in the press says “the guidelines are unnecessary as Muslims know their limits”.
The question is, does his religious czar know his limits?
For decades before Madani, Muslims were attending religious events of non-Muslims. For decades before Madani, Muslim political operatives and the average rakyat not only attended events but their sensitivities were not offended.
For decades before Madani, Muslims who attended non-Muslim religious events did not stray from their faith. However, Madani has made this an issue.
Anwar cannot have it both ways. He cannot play the ingenue and ask why the lack of tolerance now and imply PN has something to do with it and on the other hand have a religious czar who creates policy which further stokes racial and religious division in this country. Then Madani backtracks after giving enough policy ideas to PN to carry out when they assume power.
This is why PAS Youth chief Afnan Hamimi Taib Azamudden wants the religious authorities free from political interference because he knows that in a theocracy, religious authorities and the political apparatus are one and the same.
Similarly, Umno Youth chief Dr Akmal Saleh warns non-Muslims not to interfere in the affairs of Muslims even though with these guidelines, non-Muslims have to be supplicant before the religious authorities if they want to have friends or even more tragic family members attend their religious observances.
Umno Youth chief Dr Akmal SalehImagine a daughter who has embraced Islam not being allowed to attend the funeral of her Buddhist father if the funeral is not stripped of everything that would offend her sensitivities.
Furthermore, Akmal is engaging in the kind of class preoccupations which is emblematic of theocracies, where the average rakyat are considered ignorant and the wealthy are considered learned in religion, hence there is no need for moral policing in the wealthy or upper classes but the lower classes constantly feel the harsh glare of the religious authorities on them.
What rational Malaysians should be worried about is - is the religious czar merely an incompetent political operative or is the religious bureaucracy testing the waters.
Can you imagine what operatives who had mala fide intentions to religious harmony could do with the legal power of the Mufti Bill? - Mkini
S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum - “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---