Living Together With Different Religion

The different religious beliefs and faiths in the world have caused a lot of wars, woes and miseries. But are they really the most significant factor which tears people apart, causes mass killing, and launches countries to go to war with each other? Did religous difference cause WW1 and WW2 and will it probably cause (God forbid) WW3?

History tells us that religious differences did in the past shatter countries and people. But not any longer. People have learnt to respect and live with the differences. What makes them go to war and kill each other without mercy even in this age of civilization is not religion but politics and greed for power and wealth. Some may even say it's because of the need to survive. But that claim can be easily rejected because you can't afford to be aggressive and antagonize people if you feel weak and insecure. You normally try to make friends. You only become aggressive and haughty whn you know that you've powerful friends to protect you.

Religious people are never a threat to each other for no religion in the world encourages the spilling of human blood. It's always the irreligious and the non-God fearing people who would take power unto themselves to judge, condemn and kill other people. Human life and blood are no longer sacred to them. Killing becomes just a matter of pulling a trigger, exploding a bomb or launching a rocket. They forget that human being cannot create life even in an amoeba or an ant.

The existence of many religions and faiths in the world, has never prevented people from living together or interacting with each other to. establish a comfortable and meaningful life. Even when people of different countries and religious faiths live close to each other or live in the same country, county or village,, they can live in peace until some 'trouble-makers' begin to create and highlight the differences in culture and religion, causing people to be suspicious and angry with each other. The 'trouble-makers' invariably do this to promote their own interests which they can hide under glorious and respectable objectives such as promoting a national consciousness (nationalism), creating a cultural Identity, or just promoting national consolidation and integration.

Many multiracial nations today face the problem of "undoing" the work of these trouble makers. This includes Malaysia where racial and religious differences in the past have not been causing much trouble. The racial clash of May 1963 was clearly political in nature; otherwise the country and its multiracial population had enjoyed relative peace and harmony. But lately, the racial and religious issues seemed to have surfaced again as rapid development makes the poorer majority (mostly Malays and Indians) more aware of their deprivation. Religious problems even took center stage recently on the issue of using Allah ( the Muslims' name for God) by Christians in Sarawak in their publication. It lead to the consecration of some mosques and the abortive burning of some churches followed by angry protests on the street.

Consequently an Inter-Religious Committee was set up to diffuse the issue and promote better understanding between the Muslims, Christians. Budhists. Hindus etc. An Inter-Faith Commission established earlier to undertake a similar function had been bitterly opposed by the Muslims. It seems that even the new Committee is being opposed by the Muslim leaders for they felt that Islam cannot be compromised with other religions. An explanation by the Minister in Charge of Religious Affairs in the Prime Minister's Department that the Committee only plays a consultative role did not allay the worries of the Muslim leaders and 'ulamaks'.


I think it must be made very clear that a religion or a faith cannot be changed or adjusted to accommodate the teachings and practices of other religions. There must be total respect and recognition of each religion but there's nothing to prevent its leaders and adherants from trying to know more about the religion of the others, in order to give better respect and recognition to the rights and practices of its adherants. We can raise common awareness about different religions but not expect an exchange of or an adoption of some common values and beliefs by all. To the Muslim that would be tantamount to "erogding the Islamic Aqidah" - a process that leads to "Murtad" or total expulsion from Islam and turns one into a "kafir". Hence the protest against any such suggestionz.

But a committee to explain the religious philosophy of the major religions in Malayia to various multiracial groups so that the major tenets of each religion can be better understood by all, would surely not be offensive to anyone. The leaders of the major religous groups will participate in the program thereby giving them the opportunity to have a direct exchange of views with the multiracial audience. Such discussions or dialogues will not therefore be viewed as an attempt to proselitize people but only to make them aware of the demands of the various religions on their followers. Thus the sanctity of each religion will not in any way be compromised and people will remain free to pursue their own religious faith.

The Kampung Baru Dilemma

One of the hottest issues that have singed many parties in the development of Kuala Lumpur is in regard to the problems of Kampung Baru. It has remained what has been termed as a 'slum and squatter area' although situated right in the heart of the city. While some peripheral development had been undertaken and the Malay shops in and around the area have undergone some changes, the development as a whole is negligible when compared to the changes that have occurred elsewhere in the city of KL and its metropolitan areas.

There had been and there are now plans to develop the area so that the lands can be utilized to their full potentials. Kampung Baru if given the right conditions for investment and commercialization could easily become another golden triangle. But the 100% Malay residents and landowners are not comfortable with the idea of non-bumi investors coming in to buy over the lands from them, nor are the Bumiputras of the nation as a whole willing to see Kampung Baru "invaded" by the non-Bumis. As such no real progress has been made since Merdeka.

To develop the area and attract non-Bumi and foreign investment, there is no doubt that Kampung Baru has to be opened to the non-Malay towkays and taycoons. No Malay entrepreneur would be able to come up with the kind of capital investment necessary to turn the "slump area" into a buzzling commercial and residential center. While such development would not require that the present residents of Kampung Baru be displaced or pushed out since they can be offered luxurious homes with millions of ringgit as payment (or compensation) for their lands, the fact remains that they will loose the lands that they have owned for generations. And THAT is the most sensitive of all the issues involved.

So, how can that issue be resolved? One land owner and an ex-senior government officials with considerable experience in development planning, suggested to me that the answer is quite simple. Just allow the land to be utilized ON LEASE for say 60-90 years as necessary to allow the investors to get back their money with a comfortable margin. In this way the land DOES NOT ACTUALLY LEAVE the hands of the currents owners. Will the business community buy up the commercial and residential
premises if they will not become the outright owners? Or should the premises be only rented out? These are the ensuing issues to be considered. In either case the proposal will become less attractive to the potential investors who want to make their fortune on the development of the prime land.

Another possibility is for the government itself to take over the development of the last bastion of Malay settlement in KL. It should not let the matter be handled by a private agency which would certainly try to make as much profit as possible at the expense of the landowners. Only the government can protect and preserve the ownership rights of the landowners in Kampung Baru, who, left to the 'seduction' of the wealthy private investors would succumb to their monetary temptations. The greed for money among the landowners themselves would let Kampung Baru slip into the hands of the non-Bumi capitalists.
The need for the non-Bumi entrepreneurs to help boost up the commercial value of Kampung Baru should be confined to the development of business and commercial activities, not the sales of prime land.

The Hero and the Villain

There're many things which make life today rather confusing. For example we're all very concerned about our health and so we always listen to the advice of doctors given through the newspapers. magazines, TV and the radio. But if we do, almost all kinds of food and drinks seem to contain chemicals that can be harmful t our health or can cause cancer. Even coffee or tea. We all use handphone nowadays. That too is said to be harmful to our hearing, Even the television and the computers can cause a lot of harm to our eyes, hearings and our health in general.


But most confusing to me is in regard to giving our respect to the heroes of our country. The men (or women) whom we respect and honour for many years since small, may suddenly turn out today as the villains of society. In the same way the villains of the past may suddenly rise in popularity and become a celebrated hero. A good example is Hang Tuah and Jebat. For years we consider Hang Tuah as a hero and Hang Jebat as a villain. But today there are many who consider Hang Tuah as a mere chattel for the Sultan of Melacca and that Hang Jebat is the real hero who fought against injustices. Munshi Abdullah was a literary hero when I was a student but today many consider him as a stooge for his British master, Sir Stamford Raffles. Chin Peng had always been the enemy no:1 of Malaya before but recently some considered him to be instrumental in pushing Malaya (now Malaysia) to get its independence.

Npw look at our current heroes on the national horizon. Even some past PMs who have brought so much changes and development to the nation are being picked out for something undesirable that came out of their decisions and are, therefore, looked upon as a villain with the laurels they had won in the past being slowly withered away. Walking around amongst us today are people regarded as leaders and heroes by some but looked upon as villains by others, with a long list of the injustices they have committed. There are also the wealthy icons who have made their way to join the Forbe's international list of billionaires but looked upon by some like they have smelled a rotten fish. At the lower end of the scale some rich and famous characters are simply classified as the 'plunderers' of the nation.

In such a situation is it surprising that we have no heroes that our young can look upon to emulate? The line between being a hero and a villain seems so thin or amorphous that one can not only fall on either side on the line but also qualify to appear on both sides of the divide at the same time.

The Nouveau Riche of Malaysia

It's no secret that most of the richest people in South East Asia whose names are listed in the Forbe's List are Chinese with Ananda Krisnan representing the Indian. They are all business tycoons as are the other billionaires of the world, representing leaders in their own individual field of business with their own legendary style of making their fortune.



Enough has been written about them in the Papers and Magazines. What i would like to focus on are the nouveau riche among the Malays. A number of them, without mentioning names, are also business tycoons and timber merchants, especially from Sabah and Sarawak. But they are few and far between. Who are the others whose living style and luxurious homes easily point them out as one of Malaysian's new Bumiputra millionaires? No doubt there are some businessmen too. But otherwise they are current or ex-'Yang Berhormat' or corporate leaders. The most visible transformation from 'rags' ( not necessarily very poor but very much of kampung standard) to 'riches' ( not necesairly millionaires but with country homes and a fleet of BMWs and Mercs) are found among the former group, and they exist at all levels ie. Federal, State and Local. You can easily meet a friend in the village who was once a humble teacher or even a carpenter, who is now a YB, and moving around in a chauffeur driven Merc or BMW.

This is indeed a magnificent example of social mobility that Malaysia has achieved it its 52 years of Independence. It's a sign of achievement we should all be very proud of, although there's a tendency among the Malays to give such achievement 'the sour grape look'. We shouldn't be bothered about that for all good Muslims believe that worldly endowment or 'rezki' comes from Allah, and He gives it to whomsoever He wants. And that 'rezki' did not come by itself but had to be earned.

What should be given some thoughts to is the fact that more of the new rich seem to come from the political ranks rather than the business hierarchy. This fact itself must be statistically proven or disproved, but that seems to be the situation as of today.
If true than the political business is producing more successful entrepreneurs than the trades and economic enterprises. Is that wrong? Maybe not but the consequences could be very undesirable. Let's give it some deep thoughts.

In the first instance the Bumiputras will be more interested in the political business rather than the trade and economic enterprises which form the basis or real progress and development. The NEP in the past had tried to increase the number of Bumi entrepreneurs to achieve a balance in the occupational structure of the population. If the number and equity target faialed to be achieved could it not be due to the fact that the political business was more attractive in that it presents a shortcut to prosperity? Our leaders must give this a serious atention for the political business is easier to enter into than the real trade and economic business that our Chines and Indian friends have excelled in all these years.

Another undesirable consequence is that the political business being easier to enter into gets mixed up with the real trade and economic business. The first is used as a prop for the second and therefore the vicissitude of political progress and standing affects the latter. A company can go bust if the leader looses his political position and clout. We must take note that in the case of our Chinese and Indian friends. success in the trade and economic enterprise often comes first before they are chosen to become leaders in the political business.

As a result of the above the Bumiputra trade and business enterprises , even after reaching some level of corporate success, might not continue to prosper and might even begin to crumble when the political fortune of their leaders declines. And this can happen very often because of the effervescent nature of politics. I might add here that even the most successful of our national corporate bodies such as Petronas etc might ultimately suffer because of changes in leadership as required by the political business.

Finally, the long term goal of the nation to even up the participation of the Bumis in the business and corporate sector of the national economy, increase equity participation and reduce identification or race with occupation ( which should have been achieved through the NEP) in order to promote national unity, could be stultified by a greater interest among the Bumis to participate in the political business rather than in the trade and economic enterprises. Such tendency might be further enhanced by the fact that even getting some of the funds allocated for the promotion of Bumiputra business enterprise can become easier if you have some political pull. The situation is made worst if the political business partners themselves get more of the fund.

So, politics must start to become less of a business and more of a dignified profession if the Bumis are to be stopped from crowding into that concern and go into the real trade and economic enterprises. We must see more Bumiputra millionaires coming from the trade and economic business sector rather than from the Dewan Undangan Negeri and Parliament or from the Yang Berhormat group of businessmen. The line between businessmen and politco-businessmen must also be drawn to stop a business from going bust if a politician looses his power.

( Suggested Readings: Google Wealthy Politicians and read: 'Do not elect wealthy politicians' and Celebrity Politicians and Wealthy CEOs)

The UPSR and PMR Controversy

Many views and comments have been heard about whether the two exams should be abolished or not and the DPM invites more views on the matter. Yes, we can go on listening to more views while the children and the young students involved grope around in the darkness of uncertainties surrounding their future with the teachers unable to give any help or assurance.

Views are easy to come by. What we lack is expert findings based on research and ground experience with the kids and students. Is the education policy of the nation to be based on popular views, majority vies that will make people happy and support the government even if the future of the Malaysian children is endangered by shortsightedness and political convenience?

I feel strongly that we should be guided by the views of professional educationists from all over the world as contained in learned journals and magazines. What bothers the public most, it seems to me, is not the examinations but the kind of questions asked, the nature of alternatives given in the objective tests, and the quality of teaching that goes into preparing the students for the examination. When the questions asked are so narrow and subject-specific or, on the other hand, too general such that the alternatives given from which to select an answer are so vague and overlapping, the student will surely become confused. UPSR examination must surely be more on testing the IQ and ability to discern between right and wrong (ethics), possible and impossible , logic and illogical. facts and fiction. It must be aimed at bringing out the children's understanding and grasp of the life and the world.

Can such an evaluation be done by the school itself? Yes but sooner or later the school's own standard will prevail or be imposed and you cannot compare the achievement of students in various schoois on the basis of some common criteria. We also have vernacular schools which impose their own priorities and standards. How will you be able to compare the achievement of these UPSR level students on a national basis?

The same can be said for allowing schools to arrange their own PMR level examination. The implication is greater for streaming begins after PMR and a wrong selection will have disastrous effect on the children's education. Even with a nationally standardized examination, the wrong streaming of children can happen resulting in children with no interest in science being forced to go into that stream. Imagine what can happen if a school is given the full authority to select students for the science and arts stream. It might take the heat away from the central authority now responsible but it will not help the students to pursue studies in the field where they have a greater potential to achieve.

In conclusion, I wonder if the continuation or abolition of the UPSR and PMR is the right issue to debate at all. The more pressing issue is on the all-consuming emphasis given to the examinations and what is actually evaluated by the two exams, whether they help evaluate the total personality and capability of the children or just their ability to learn things by rote. Our basic concern today is that school children don't seem to be able to think for themselves and that our education system is not geared towards creating individuals who can think both logically and creatively. Teachers just teach and don't help to develop the personality and mental capability of the children. Leaving the evaluation of their progress to the individual schools will just perpetuate this type of teaching and not arrest the tendency to produce little zombies that will later cause more problems to the nation instead of becoming agents of change and progress.

Stages towards a Wedding

thought there were only two stages towards a wedding ie, engagement and then the wedding itself. That would generally be true for most mainstream religion including Islam. But after attending a family discussion on the matter - whose wedding we were talking about shall remain a secret until later - I was made aware of the fact that actually there are 4 stages towards a wedding according to the Muslim custom. Whether this is the requirement of the Muslim religion itself or merely a part of the local custom and moors (adat tempatan), I will leave it to the voice of Authority.

The fist stage is the the Adat Bertanya ( Making Inquiry) or Merisik ( seeking information) where the male suitor will send a team of close relatives to the girl he would like to marry, to find out if she was available and agreeable to a be his wife.This can be a very informal affair where the parents of both parties ( the boy's and the girl's) will meet each other for the first time at the girl's house to talk about the possibility. But it can also be a more serious affair where the boys' party will come with a proposal ring or Cincin Bertanya. When the latter is the case the Marriage Proposal Money ( Wang Hantaran Perkawinan) will also be dicussed and the date when the actual proposal will be made. The following pics show what can happen at the first stage.





A second stage is when the Cincin Bertanya ( Inquiry ring) after it had been seen and approved by the girl's relative, will be officiall accepted and the acceptance communicated to the boy's team of representatives. It will also be the occasion for more relatives of the girl and the boy to meet and get to know each other to celebrate the acceptance of the proposal and show the proposal ring around. Hence this ceremony is called Mengembang Cincin or Spreading the Good News that the proposal has been accepted. It is at this meeting that the third stage - the Engagement Ceremony - will be discussed in all its details including the details of the Hantaran (expected gifts in terms of money, clothes and jewelry for the bride- to- be)) and the mandatory payments Mas Kahwin as imposed by Islam.

The third stage is the Engagement Ceremony or Pertunangan. This is a real big do as is almost as big though never as grand as the Wedding itself.
Often the second stage is combined with this one. The boy's party will come to the bride-to-be's house with a big retinue of relatives and friends bearing gifts and a new Cincin Pertunangan, different from the Cincin Bertanya. The gifts may cpmprise of 5, 7, 9 11 or 13 beautifully decorated baskets of various shapes and forms containing a set of clothing and other wears such as a watch, cufflinks, a pair of shoes a cap etc together with fruits and other delicacies. The number of baskets brought by the boy's party must be in an odd number and this matters very much for the bride-to-be must reciprocate the gifts exceeding them by 2. Hence 5 must be reciprocated with 7, 7 with 9 and so on. So, an overzealous groom-to-be can cause quite a strain on the budget of the bride-to-be. The Pertunangan or Engagement ceremony includes a full scale feast for the relatives of both parties and friends, including neighbors and the local Jemaah ie, all who prayed at the nearest mosque or madrasah where the bride-to-be's parent normally goes to pray. It's a big do indeed.

Finally, we arrive at the Wedding stage or the Installation of the One-Day King and Queen. That we have seen so often where both the families will go all out to celebrate the nuptial of their beloved son and daughter. No expenses will be spared to give them the best and most memorable celebration of their life. They may be celebrated in a trendy hotel or at the home of the bride, on a date that is different from another reception at the home of the groom. Modern cooperative arrangements and financial constraints often combine the two receptions and held at one go in a grand hotel, to attended by invitees from both the bride's and goom's families, relatives and friends.

So, marriage is no simple business when carried out according to the proper Custom (Adat) and Syariah requirements. For the invitees it's often a matter of attending the Bersanding and the Wedding feasts, a matter of a few hours. But for those involved in the arrangement - the parents, relatives and friends of the bride and groom, it's one hectic experience that can be very exhaustive physically, mentally and financially. Just imagine then what parents with many girls to be given away in marriage
must undergo. The parents of the boys might not have to worry that much for the receptions are often smaller in scale and the
groom-to-be usually help the family in a big way financially. The parents can easily turn to the boy and say, "If you don't have the money. don't think about marriage!" but they cannot do that to the girls. When some boys get interested in them, the parents must get ready for the wedding splurge at the request of the boy's family.

The Social Dimensions of Development

Little do we realize that rapid economic development and the monitization of society ( aside from its politization) also have their undesirable consequences, though maybe less distasteful than no development at all. The social scientists had always warned us that a country that focusses on economic development alone without giving due consideration and emphasis to the social aspects, could be running itself into some intractable and insurmountable problems.

Question is few leaders bother very much with the warnings of the social 'prophets of doom'. Their argument is that once a country is launched on a trail of rapid economic development with people getting good jobs. better income, better physical amenities and public services to promote the convenience of life. its quality will also improve and everything will be bright and rosy.

One needs only to look at countries will a lot of social tension and internal instability to know that rapid economic development and a higher income for all is not the answer to overcoming societal ills. The industrialized countries may all appear prosperous and progressive but are not free from heineous crimes, immoral social behavior, discrimination against minority groups, neglect of the poor, exploitation of the weak etc. More importantly a country which had just moved into a higher level of development and indstrialization may also begin to show those ills in graver forms. Consider Malaysia itself. Did we have the kind of interacial suspicion and tension, immoral behavior among the youth, crimes like abandoning unwanted babies, drugs abuse, murders, rapes, breach of trust, corruption, disrespect for our seniors etc which we see now, some twenty or thirty years ago? Are the cities, towns and villages much safer than they were years ago in spite of the social amenities that have been introduced?



The trouble is, it is not easy to state the kind of social degradation or regression that we have gone through. Let alone measure it in quantitative terms. However social scientists have identified some some kind of social dimensions along which the social development of a nation can be evaluated. Talcott Parsons( black and white pic) for example identified the five Pattern Variables which can place a society along the traditional-modern continuum. The dimensions include: (1)affectivity vs affective neutrality (2)diffusiveness vs specificity (3) particularism vs universalism (4) ascription vs achievement and (5) collectivity orientation vs self-orientation. Geert Hofstede (top color pic) on the other suggested a different set of five social dimensions. They include (1) large or small power distance , (2) individualism vs collectivism (3) masculinity vs femininity (4 strong or weak uncertainty avoidance and (5) long or short term orientation. David Riesman suggested three cultural types of society and peopla (1) tradition-directed (2) inner-directed and (3)other-directed. 

The various dimensions of social development as identified by these and other social scientists can help us to analyze the Malaysiaan society as it is today after more than 50 years of independence, with all the modernization, successes, conflicts, disillusionment, frustrations and hopes that we entertained. It may help to explain why many GLCs are not making good progress and loosing a lot of money, why corruption is prevalent in spite of the all-out efforts to stamp it out, why racial sentiments are reemerging and causing serious social strains, why racial integration is not going on as fast and as smoothly as we'd like it to be. Pushing headlong for economic and material progress may not solve but rather enhance the problems mentioned, taking us to a point of no return.There's an urgent need for a long term study on the social dynamics of our multiracial society as it has evolved over the years for many of the old values that held us together before had been eroded. These have to be renewed or replaced, otherwise it's so easy for the fabrics or the Malaysian society to fall apart.

The consequences would be disasterous, more disasterous than the 2019 bankrupcy threat that Idris Jala had warned us about. It could be deleterious.