Accepting cultural diversity part of Islamic civilisation

Accepting cultural diversity part of Islamic civilisation

Chandra Muzaffar, New Straits Times, Kuala Lumpur

Like many other Islamic parties with a similar mindset, Parti
Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) has a tendency to insist upon religious
purism. Its Nov. 12 document may not reveal this tendency but it
is important to remember that shortly after it assumed power in
Kelantan in 1990, the PAS Government banned certain traditional
performing arts such as the wayang kulit (shadow play) on the
grounds that it contained unIslamic elements.

While it is true that aspects of Hindu mythology are woven
into the wayang kulit, the Kelantanese saw it essentially as an
art form which contributed to their rich cultural heritage. They
could distinguish it from their faith and its related practices.
In that sense they were no different from millions of pious
Indonesian Muslims who are very much aware of their Hindu-
Buddhist past.

Incidentally, the State Government is now attempting to bring
back the wayang kulit -- partly because of popular sentiment --
though in a drastically modified form. Religious purism of this
sort, needless to say, goes against the grain of Islam.

For most of Muslim history, cultural and even non-Muslim
religious practices which do not impinge upon the quintessence of
faith have been tolerated as part of the community's tradition.
The acceptance of cultural and religious diversity is in fact one
of the hallmarks of Islamic civilisation.

This is why the destruction of the Buddhist shrines in
Bamiyan, Afghanistan, by the bigoted Taliban regime in early 2001
was roundly condemned by most Muslim Governments and Islamic
movements.

The official PAS leadership however did not take a stand
against the Taliban's wanton act -- though in all fairness to PAS
it must be mentioned that Kelantan is home to one of the largest
Buddhist pagodas in Southeast Asia and in both Kelantan and
Terengganu, there is an appreciable degree of accommodation of
religious and cultural diversity.

The five "isms" which constitute PAS' ideology -- legalism,
authoritarianism, exclusivism, patriarchism and purism -
establish beyond a shadow of doubt that its Islamic state project
is inimical to the larger interests of the Malaysian nation.

If anything, there are certain attitudes towards Islam within
the Muslim populace in Malaysia as a whole which would make it
even more problematic to set up such a state. The majority of
Muslims here, and perhaps elsewhere, are more attached to the
forms and symbols of the religion rather than its substance and
its essence.

The hudud issue illustrates this point. The forms of
punishment for hudud crimes -- only some of which are prescribed
in the Quran -- are given much more importance than the crimes
themselves. It is the crimes -- murder or theft or adultery --
which are related to the basic moral structure of the Quran. They
reflect the religion's fundamental notion of right and wrong.

From an Islamic standpoint, this notion of right and wrong
does not change. It is perennial. Instead of emphasising this,
the advocates of hudud are more concerned about how the thief is
punished. It is a clear case of form taking precedence over
substance.

And, yet, in Islam it is substance that matters -- though form
is acknowledged. This is the Quranic message. Surah Al Baqarah
verse 177 for instance tells us that righteousness is not turning
our faces towards East or West but believing in God, helping the
needy, freeing the slaves, being steadfast in prayer, being firm
and patient and so on.

This is reinforced by Surah Al Maun which again links faith
and prayer with good deeds such as the feeding of the indigent.
The entire mission of Prophet Muhammad was also focused upon
endowing faith with substance. Unless we understand this, any
attempt to establish a state in the name of Islam is doomed to
fail.

There is another, perhaps even greater danger facing Muslims
today. Muslims are generally not inclined to reflect, to think
about Islam. The hudud and Islamic state issues have helped to
bring this malaise to the fore.

Hudud advocates in particular and Muslims in general have
seldom reflected on this question: Were hudud modes of punishment
central to the success of Islamic civilisation? Or, to put it
differently, were the stupendous achievements of Islamic
civilisation in science, medicine and the humanities due to the
imposition of hudud laws? If Muslims lag behind today, is it
because they do not adhere to hudud? Shouldn't we also examine
critically the track record of states that claim to be Islamic?

Can states that are supposedly based upon the Quran and Sunnah
show that they have done better than others in reducing poverty,
curbing corruption and enhancing public accountability? Are
syariah-oriented states the best examples we have of societies
where justice flourishes and dignity triumphs? Shouldn't PAS
members and supporters demand a comprehensive analysis and
evaluation of the performance of so-called Islamic states before
endorsing their leadership's Islamic state venture?

Indeed, it is not an Islamic state ala PAS or anyone else that
we need at this juncture. It is thinking and reflection on Islam
and society that this hour in history demands. Only then will we
connect with the substance of our faith.

The writer is a political scientist whose writes several
books, including Rights, Religion and Reform and Muslims,
Dialogue, Terror.