Interfaith Dialogue UKM

It was almost 20 years ago since I last stepped on the stage of the Dewan Tun Abdul Razak (DECTAR) in UKM. Two days ago I walked on the stage again, where I received my graduation scroll in 1990. Not as a graduating student but as a panelist for an interfaith dialogue organised by UKM students.The event was organised by Kelab Pertubuhan Kebajikan Islam UKM and with the cooperation of the UKM Buddhist Fellowship.

Maybe due to the recent controversy on the usage of the term "Allah" by the Catholic Weekly Herald and torching of some churches and throwing of wild boar heads into two mosques compound, the organiser managed to invite representatives from only three religions namely Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam. I was informed that the organiser had approached many Christian speakers but were politely declined.

Other than having a decent discussion on respective religious beliefs, I had the opportunity to meet up with an UKM lecturer who was staying in the same hostel as me during my student days. He was also the moderator for the dialogue.

.

Dectar is the main hall used by UKM for many important events especially the annual convocations. The presence of about more than a thousand students (and some outsiders too) can be considered good but the representation was rather disappointing as most if not all who were there are Muslims. I did not notice any Hindus (except the Hindu panelist of course) and most probably no Christians were there too. I met some Buddhist student leaders who were involved in organising the dialogue and some juniors whom I had  met in other programs.

The audience did asked some interesting questions in a friendly and respectful way. The last interfaith dialogue which I attended in UKM 20 years ago was furiously heated with a very confrontational audience. Since this dialogue was conducted in the Malay Language, I think some the words used might be alien to the non-Buddhists who are exposed to Buddhism for the first time.

The organiser took my suggestions to record on tape the proceedings of the dialogue as a reference and also to pre-empt any interference from unreasonable or rowdy audience.

It was a courageous effort by the students to organised such an event as I was informed it has been many years since an open interfaith dialogue was last held in UKM. Since nearly all the audience are of the Muslim faith, it can be deduced that they are also keen to know and understand the nature of their fellow Malaysians beliefs. But what about those other than Islam, are the students not interested in interfaith dialogues?

Having interfaith dialogues is not to convinced others to convert to one's faith or ridicule others but as a platform to know each other better and learn to respect and celebrate the differences as fellow human being and man of faith. - Loka

Note : Due to some miscommunication by the students, the information on the backdrop/poster was inaccurate. I was formerly the Secretary General of YBAM, not as stated in the poster.

Changing color of your blood

It is normal to hear of people changing their religious beliefs, political stand or even switching support to another football team. When to comes to race or ethnic origins, is it possible to change that?

Can a person who is born to true blue ethnic Japanese parents in Japan but now lives and works in Saudi Arabia, speaks fluent Arabic, converted to Islam after her high school and married a true blue Arab man after her graduation, morphed into an Arabic lady?

One shall not confused citizentry with the cultural lineage of her ancestors. No matter how hard she changes her appearance, improves her Arabic linguistic skills or even trying too hard to aped the locals in their way of life, the blood that flows throughout her body is still very much ethnic Japanese. No matter how hard she tries she will not be able to change that, even to the extend of behaving more than the Arabs themselves. Or even to the extend of putting in every possible effort to run down or suppress her own ethnic Japanese ancestry so that she could gain the acceptance of the Arabs.

Incidences like the fictitious Japanese lady above are not alien to many of us. During World war Two, there were many who had forsaken their own ethnic ancestry by aping the Japanese or their masters to gain favours or brownie points. These people may have a good time during the three and a half years of Japanese occupation by betraying their own community which caused deaths, undue harm and unnecessary sufferings to their friends and villagers. In the eyes of the people that they betrayed, these double faced agents are traitors and shall be destined to the 18 levels of Hell, literally.

Are these sort of people stil exists nowadays? Open our eyes and we shall see them in the guise of different shapes and colours, professions and organizations. They may be just lurking around the corner or may have studied or work in the same place as any one of us. We just need to be vigilant and cautious with their existence and not to fall into any of their manipulation. We cannot do anything to help them.

It it their own choice of trying to hard to change their ethnicity even after knowing they can't change the colour of the blood that flows within them. The harm that they might possibly cause to the community and themselves, we will leave it to karma to take its own course. - Loka

Legislation for Conversion?

As announced yesterday by the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Abdul Aziz and reported in various medias, the Cabinet decides that children must follows the original religion of the parents at the time they got married if any one of the parents converts to another religion.

The Sun reported that "These were among the long-term solutions discussed by the Cabinet today in the wake of the latest case of Mohd Ridzuan Abdullah and his wife, M. Indira Gandhi, and several other similar cases before them."

This decision by the Cabinet is laudable but I hoped the AG office will come out with a specific law to ensure the Cabinet decision is to be adhered by all civil servants all the way from the top to the lower rung.

This request should be understandable since the government announcements on similiar issues in the past has been just like that. Announcements without any concrete steps to ensure it will be implemented as intended.

What happens to the April 2008 announcement that steps will be taken to set a regulation that requires any non-Muslim who is converting to Islam to inform their family before their conversion. It is already more than a year but there is no developments on this matter since the announcement by the then Prime Minister.

Do we have to wait for another similiar case to have this matter to be taken seriously by the Cabinet, again?

1Malaysia, Performance Now? - Loka

Buddhists "Chiak Too Bak"?

The Penang Syariah High Court today allowed an application by Muslim convert Siti Fatimah Tan Abdullah aka Tan Ean Huang to renounce Islam and officially revert to her Buddhist faith.

This is no doubt a landmark case but I was wondering what's the connection between praying to Tua Pek Kong and Thi Kong in declaring oneself a Buddhist? Only this morning during a meeting with a State Exco in charge of non-Muslims places of worship that I try to impressed upon the Christian YB that Buddhist temples do not includes Tua Pek Kong and Dato Kong etc. Now, will the good YB thinks I am pulling his leg when he read this breaking news.

I also hopes the lady remembers to recite the Ti-Sarana to affirm her commitment as a Buddhist. During Buddha's time, a General Siha who was a Jains, was asked by the Buddha to recite Buddham Saranam Gacchami thrice to ensure he knows and understands his intention to take the Triple Gem as his refuge. Only after General Siha recited the Ti-Sarana that the Buddha accepts him as a follower.

While many will take this landmark case as a sign of freedom of religious practice, what's the impact on Buddhism? Does it means anyone can walk in and out of Buddhism as they wishes? And implying Buddhists also prayed to many deities and also "chiak too bak"?

Why Only Islam?

The intention of the Federal government requiring potential Muslim converts to declared their choice to their family as announced by the Prime Minister is laudable and a pre-emptive step to address incidents of body-snatching and other related issues.

I would like to further enhance my earlier comment on the need of a fool-proof law to ensure the declaration will not be challenged by any parties in later years.

The cases of body-snatching that were widely reported in the media in recent years focuses on non-Muslims converting to Islam without informing their immediate families. Hence, these causes unnecessary heart breaks to the deceased convert family, headaches to the authorities and brewing tension amongst the Muslims and non-Muslims.

On the other hand, did the media highlighted cases of conversion amongst the non-Muslims namely those were converted at their death bed from one non-Muslim religion to another? Have we not heard or come across cases of "vultures of death" seeking out potential candidates to be converted to their religion in hospitals while the critically ill patient is most vulnerable and unable to think wisely and with reason?

Have we not heard children who has converted to another religion tries to convert their parents without the knowledge of their other siblings. When the parents died, a tussled develops between siblings of different non-Muslim religion on the method of the last rites for the deceased funeral. There was even an incident some years ago of opposing siblings of different religion physically fought it out to ensure funeral rites for their deceased father are conducted as per their respective religious choice!


To do the right thing right at the right time, the Federal Government are urged to deliberate further on the need to require all types of conversion, non-Muslims to Islam; Hindu to Christianity; Buddhist to Hindu; Christianity to Buddhist etc. requires a declaration and written consent from the parents, guardian or next-of-kin before the conversion of the individual is considered valid.


Although the need of consent might be taken as impeding the individual's freedom of religious practice and personal liberty, a challenging decision need to be taken to address challenging circumstances. The decision can be implimented by enacting a new law, let's say the "Religion Consent Act" which spelt out the requirements to be fulfilled for a non-Muslim person to convert to another religion.

To ensure this Religion Consent Act applies to all, the government will need to look into amending the Article 11 Clause (1) and Article 12 Clause (3 & 4) of the Federal Constitution.

Converting to Islam, Declare It!

The national news agency Bernama headlines on evening of April 10.

The Federal Government will soon make it a requirement for non-Muslims converting to Islam to declare their new religious status to their family members, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

And The Star breaking news:

PUTRAJAYA: The Government plans to introduce a regulation requiring non-Muslims wanting to embrace Islam to inform their family before doing so.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi suggested that there be a form or letter from the person declaring their family had been told and have understood his or her decision.
This, he said, was to prevent problems of families disputing the conversion of their parent, spouse, child or sibling especially upon their death when they are unable to bury or cremate their bodies.
Stating that currently there was no such regulation, he advised all who wanted to convert to inform their families to make things easier for everyone.
"We will have a regulation. When a person wants to convert to Islam, we have to ask them whether their wife knows about it.
"If they want to convert (to Islam), there is nothing wrong, why must they hide (the fact of the conversion); tell (the family).
"We don't want problems later when the man converts and converts the children also whereas the wife has rights too," he told reporters Thursday after chairing a meeting of the National Council on Islamic Religious Affairs here.
Abdullah added that withholding the information from the families also posed a problem to religious authorities performing their duties.
He said he had informed in the meeting earlier that religious issues were very sensitive and should be tackled wisely to avoid religious tension including the demolition of places of worship.

The above announcement came five weeks after this blog issued a Candidate's Compatibility Checklist on March 4, 2008 which include the following statement:

Without prejudice to the generality of Article 5 (Liberty of a person), Article 8 (Equality), Article 10 (Freedom of speech, assembly and association) and Article 11 (Freedom of religion), are you prepared to advocate and support an amendment to Article 12 Clause (4), which requires all individual intending to convert to another religion to seek consent from his/her spouse, or parents if he/she is not married?[ ] YES [ ] NO

The decision by the Federal Government requiring all non-Muslims intending to convert to Islam to declare their intention to their family is laudable but may not necessary avoid problems in the future.

Although the Prime Minister did not elaborate on the legal mechanism to ensure this requirement will be adhered by all parties, I hoped the government will seriously look into amending the respective laws to ensure there will not be any loopholes which can be challenged later by anybody or agencies.

There is a vast difference between a declaration and getting a consent before converting to Islam.

Even if those intending to convert to Islam declared they already informed their families, how can it be foolproof that the declaration has really been done by the convert and the family are truly aware of the conversion? What if in later years the Muslim convert died and the family denied they were informed of the conversion in the absence of an acknowlegement or consent letter? If consent is required, how to ensure it was obtained in accordance to the law?