Written by Pak Sako
(Translated from Malay) PAS (Parti Islam SeMalaysia) which previously did not receive the support of a large part of the non-Muslim community in Malaysia is now getting a rather positive response from them. This can be gathered from the result of the Bukit Gantang by-election in Perak where PAS candidate Nizar Jamaluddin snagged 75% of the Chinese votes compared to 65% [won by the party’s candidate Roslan Shaharum] in the General Election of March 2008.
Nonetheless, any precipitous or premature inference that PAS has now become the preferred choice of many, owing to [their support for] the party’s struggle and objectives, is misplaced. Instead the Bukit Gantang by-election was very likely a reflection of (i) non-Malay support and endorsement of the Pakatan Rakyat concept (not necessarily of PAS), and the coalition’s pluralistic ethos and vision, (ii) concerted efforts by DAP which worked hard in Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau to garner and retain the support of Chinese and other minority groups, (iii) rejection of Barisan Nasional by the people, and (iv) the image and personality of PAS candidate Nizar Jamaluddin who was seen as sincere, open and not ‘fanatical’.*
In this context, PAS is a vehicle delivering the Pakatan Rakyat propositions of justice and multiculturalism.
PAS’ mission and the ideological foundation of its struggle is possibly obscure to the public (in fact, these aspects are not all that apparent either in the PAS official website)
*** despite the slogan ‘PAS for all’ being loudly hailed to win over the non-Muslims.*** The question here is whether the party’s fundamental struggle is at odds with Pakatan Rakyat’s basic principles anchoring a large portion of the non-Malay community as well as a certain segment of the Malay demographics.
Selangor state assemblyman Khalid Samad is often touted as a PAS leader who is open-minded and has a good relationship with his colleagues in DAP and PKR. As such, Khalid – someone from the PAS leadership who is seen as being amongst the most open and purportedly pluralist – might be serve as a barometer for us to determine the minimum or ‘baseline’ policy of PAS, especially with regard to his take on non-Malay/Muslim rights and his openness to other religions. Khalid [as the embodiment of the liberal faction in PAS] should be assessed on his ideology before voters reach a conclusion as to how far PAS is compatible with their best interests.
Among the relevant questions pertinent to the above premise are:
• does PAS genuinely accept the concept of multiculturalism and pluralism, and consequently
• does it truly reject the ideology of race supremacy, or the ideology that one religion is greater than other religions?
**** With this, I wish to call readers’ attention to a blog posting by Khalid titled ‘Berdakwah Satu Kewajipan’ (on April 2, 2009).***** Khalid Samad explains what is ’dakwah’, who should proselytise, what should be the propagation strategy and who should be targeted. He explains that bearing witness to the Word of God is ‘the obligation of every Muslim individual’ and that it is ‘very important’ for ‘Islam’s teachings continue to achieve growth among the ummah’.
He proceeds to review three main strategies in carrying out the task of dakwah, that is a missionary needs to possess wisdom in spreading the Word, he is required to give ‘good advice and proper instruction’, and he has the capacity ‘to [engage in theological] debate in the best manner’.
Khalid then discusses the moral downfall of Man and proffers that one is hard-pressed to find redemption unless he is willing to ‘return to the practice of true Islam’.
He stresses that ‘the teachings of the Muslim faith must be also be spread through dakwah’ and this process must start with one’s family, and thereafter extended to one’s community (qoriah), workplace, and thence through the electronic and mass media, and websites and the Internet so that the teachings of Islam continue to spread and forge the path taken by mankind'.
Important questions in the context of Malaysia’s multi-racial communities and in the interest of justice and ethical practice are as follows:
• Is it appropriate to suggest such dakwah activities?
• How should a political leader who desires to endear himself to the Malaysian public in general tackle such issues of religion and dakwah, especially in light of the various other religions present in our plural society?
The aforementioned considerations are crucial and relevant, but unfortunately they were not discussed nor touched upon by Khalid Samad. It is as if he did not take other religions into account, or minded the sensitivities of their adherents. It is not said, implied or emphasised in his writing that we should honour other religions. This shortcoming is apparent given that he is a political leader who represents a multi-racial constituency holding to various faiths.
Respect for other religions and a person’s beliefs are the basis for maintaining harmony in the country, if not globally. If we want our beliefs to be respected, and not have them questioned, ridiculed or eroded by other people, then we must in return respect and not question, mock and diminish another person’s beliefs and faith.
Hence Khalid’s suggestion appears to be in conflict with the reality of a multiracial Malaysia and the sensitivities congruent with this reality. If circumstances arise whereby it is felt necessary for us explain our religion to another person so that he understands, so that he is not confused or frightened by our religion, then there should be reciprocity: we must in turn permit the other person to introduce their religions to us so that we do not misunderstand other religions, and for us to appreciate the values of their religion too.
Only then will there be a two-way exchange that is meaningful and beneficial. Leading Malay academician Dr Azly Rahman often stresses this aspect as well as the good values to be derived from the world’s major religions.
With regard to the issue of dakwah, the situation is no different. If we wish to be free to proselytise our religion to another person, then must accept that the other person should also be free to proselytise his religion to us. This is what we call playing fair. But is this stipulation acceptable to us?
If the shoe is on the other foot, we see how dakwah, in the context of a multiracial society, can be a sensitive issue. However we fail to realise this as long as we’re not at the receiving end, or while the matter does not redound on us. We may feel offended when a person tries to propagate his religion, or if he persuades us to embrace his faith. By the same token, might not other people similarly take offence when we proselytise to them? Therefore should we not agree ‘to me my religion, to you yours’?
In a nutshell, the issues related to religion and dakwah involve the question of rights, that is, do other people have the right proselytise to us, and vice versa. It also involves a question of justice, sensitivity, tolerance, and respect and acceptance of the beliefs of others. Do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Furthermore, each religion has its good values and the world’s major religions – be it Islam, Christianity, Buddhism or Hinduism – share core values. There are many positive things we can learn from each of these religions. We can make every religion an avenue for learning and to build inter-faith fellowship. There is no need for conflict or rivalry between religions.
This pluralistic message was not discerned in Khalid’s article. And if Khalid Samad was to be the yardstick to measure PAS’s openness to faith freedom and the religious diversity found in our country, then there is no convincing proof that PAS accepts the notion of religious pluralism. PAS must show sincerity and frankness concerning its principal ideological struggle. It must be prepared to commence an open discourse on its stand pertaining to dakwah, religious diversity and respect for other religions. Only then can PAS measure its popularity and ascertain whether it is has gained the acceptance of all. By doing this, PAS can determine if it is really a political party ‘for all’, or otherwise.
Author's additional comment:
# This should be a matter for consideration in PAS's upcoming general assembly in June, during which a fresh line-up of party leaders will be elected. These prospective personalities, the new faces of PAS in the next Malaysian general election, have much to gain by demonstrating genuine moderation and inclusive acceptance of other beliefs and religious practices. By doing so, PAS does not only avail itself to greater, cross-demographic electoral support (as have the more moderate political parties of Indonesia; witness the results of their recently concluded general elections); more crucially, they have the historic opportunity of making good the goals of finally re-uniting our long-divided society and vanquishing the polarising demon of Malaysian opposition politics."Notes:
* Non-Muslim support collecting under the banner of Kelab Penyokong PAS is possibly due to the same reason, namely that leading figures in the party such as Nik Aziz Nik Mat for example, are seen by members as just and fair, and not fighting the cause of ethnic chauvinism. These points are most likely the pull factor for many of the club’s supporters. But the nature of this club also begs the question – if a PAS is a party ‘for all’, why does it not open its membership to Malaysians who are not Muslim? In this respect, PAS [in its exclusivity] somewhat parallels Umno which is not open to non-Malay citizens of Malaysia.
** In contrast to PAS, DAP and PKR clearly list party objectives and mission in their respective websites.
*** However, you can read here for example how the pro-PAS groups object to the appointment of non-Muslims to important positions in government.
**** In methodology, this article analyses the issues through an objective lens, not siding or favouring any particular beliefs, and eschewing religious and scientific terminology. My analysis is predicated on respect, which is a universal value. I do this so that all readers regardless of race and religion can follow the arguments presented here with ease, and in the hope that these arguments are as seen as reasonable and putting all on an equal footing.
***** For those less fluent in the national language or not conversant with religious terminology, ‘berdakwah’ means ‘to preach’ or ‘to propagate Islamic values’, or to look at it from a wider perspective, dakwah means ‘persuading others to one’s point of view’ and the activities linked to this endeavour.
Pak Sako is an economist and an anak Bangsa Malaysia. This article ‘Parti PAS dan slogan "PAS Untuk Semua": satu penilaian kritikal’ was originally published in the blog Suara Keramat Pak Sako.
