Poetic Justice

Charles Baudelaire once said that the greatest trick that the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn’t exist. Well, he said that but the saying probably remained out of the limelight until Verbal Kint popularised it in the cult hit The Usual Suspects.

Not that it matters either way. They were both wrong. The truth is the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that no evil comes out of doing a “good” thing.

So when I first heard about the Home Minister’s prohibition of the use of the word “Allah”, I must confess that I had mixed feelings. Allow me to explain.

Let’s skip to a couple of weeks back. On June 27, 2009, the Star reports that the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, Rev. Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam, withdrew his 2008 application for judicial review of the “prohibition” but was still pursuing the one that he filed in 2009. He did so for good reason as the 2008 application, according to the Star, related to a 2008 publishing permit and the same had lapsed. The subject matter was therefore academic.

The same could not be said about the 2009 publishing permit. Still, it seemed sensible to ask, why was this man — who for all intents and purposes was a man of faith — so driven in his quest for the review?

It seemed too easy to succumb to the malicious whispers going around some circles that this was all part and parcel of a grand design to obtain more converts to “their” faith. But if you really think about it, if you really ponder over the articles of the Islamic faith, it challenges a Muslim in every way possible —   ultimately, compelling him or her to decide on any matter and any issue by using his aql or reason.

Armed with that worldview, let us consider question anew. Why was this man so driven in his quest for the review? Doesn’t Allah, the noun, the name, the intellectual property, call it whatever you may, belong to Muslims and to Muslims alone?

No. It does not.

The fact is “Allah” has for a long time been utilised in the religious texts of those beyond the Muslim faith.

Take the Shri Guru Grant Sahib for example; it utilises the word “Allah” approximately 46 times throughout its passages! The word “Allah” can also be found in localised translations of the Bible. This has been the case, like it or not, since — at least — the 1800s.

By this stage, it is becoming clear that the prohibition over the word “Allah” is more than just a mere “intellectual property” dispute between Muslims and other faith groups. The religious rights of non-Muslims are being impinged upon and it does tremendous disservice to the reputation of Muslims and to the image of Islam if the Prohibition is countenanced.

Way back in 2003, a similar issue arose in relation to an Iban-language Bible, better known as Bup Kudus. It utilised the word “Allah Tala” and was banned because it was similar to the phrase “Allah Ta’ala” used by Muslims. Yet, in April 2003 — presumably after careful study and perhaps being somewhat wary of offending the right of other faith groups to profess and practice their faith as assured by Article 11(1) of the Federal Constitution — the Malaysian Government chose to lift the ban.

So, why has the issue been revisited? If called to speculate, well, maybe someone, somewhere, within the Home Ministry had a religious experience. But this still does not explain the reversal in policy as the end product of the religious experience is unsupported by the religious narrative.

Take the Quran for a start. Three verses in the Quran, as pointed out by the Research Committee of Islam Today (which operates under the general supervision of Sheikh Salman Al-Oadah, a scholar who has published approximately 50 books on Islam and reputedly gained classical Islamic education in accordance with Wahabbi tradition), i.e. Sûrah al-Mâ’idah: 64, Sûrah al-Mâ’idah: 73 and Sûrah al-Tawbah: 30 shows “Allah” being used by the Jews and Christians.

No doubt in those verses “Allah” was used in a relatively conversational tone but the point is if the use of “Allah” is exclusive to Muslims, then the Quran would not even have made reference to its use by the adherents of other faiths in any form — conversational or otherwise.

There is also the conduct of the Prophet to be taken account in this regard, whose conduct the Quran itself acknowledges as the perfect repository of “… beautiful pattern (of conduct)” (33:21) — the Prophet never forbade pre-Islamic Arabs from using the word “Allah”.

In this regard, i.e. the situation then in pre-Islamic Arabia, the Research Committee of Islam Today makes a further important point i.e.:

“The people of Arabia all referred to the creator of the heavens and the Earth as “Allah”, whether they were Jews, Christians, or pagans. This is the reason why, in pre-Islamic times, many people of all three faiths already carried the name `Abd Allah.

They included the Prophet’s father `Abd Allah b. `Abd al-Muttalib who died before the Prophet (peace be upon him) was born, as well as the Prophet’s cousin `Abd Allah b. Abî Umayyah who only accepted Islam shortly before the conquest of Mecca.

They included the prominent Jewish rabbi of Madinah, `Abd Allah b. Salâm, who became one of the most eminent of the Prophet’s Companions. Of course, he had been given the name `Abd Allah by his Jewish family long before Islam.”

Yet, despite the clarity provided by the religious narrative, the Home Ministry made the Prohibition and it is apt to ask why they did so.

The obvious answer is that the Prohibition will be perceived to be — as Muhammad Asad puts it in his book Islam at the Crossroads — part of “a construction of a worldly frame for the best possible spiritual development” of a Muslim and therefore will be tacitly, if not expressly, supported.

However, the construction of such a worldly frame comes at the cost of the spiritual comfort and religious rights of other faith groups. More than that, it is also rejected by the religious narrative. So, what beneficial “spiritual development” are we talking about here? You tell me.

That said, I trust I can be permitted to end on a more cautionary note and there are two points I wish to make.

Firstly, “Allah” cannot be used in reference to anything other than god, the creator. To say otherwise would be disrespectful and insensitive to the reasonable spiritual comforts of the various faith groups who do use the word “Allah”.

Secondly, there may be words – such as the “Quran” for Muslims or whatever other words iconic of any other religion – which certain faith groups may rightfully consider as being exclusive to them. We need to ask ourselves if it is right and proper that there should be an absolute free for all where words are concerned.

Freedom is always a good thing. Just keep in mind that the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that no evil comes out of pursuing a “good” thing.

(Malaysian Insider: 21.07.2009)

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.