http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2232&Itemid=199
Making Sense of the God Question
Written by Marina Mahathir
Friday, 08 January 2010
A prominent voice speaks out for moderation on the Allah issue in
Malaysia
With Malaysia embroiled in racial tension over the use of the word
"Allah" in a Catholic publication, there are few voices on either side breaking
through the static. The following is by Marina Mahathir, the daughter of former
Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. It appeared on her blog, "Rantings by MM."
(http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/) We reproduce it here in the hope that a
moderate voice will be heard by a few.
I found by chance this article the other day: "Prophet Muhammad's promise
to Christians". The document is not a modern human rights treaty but even
though it was penned in 628 AD it clearly protects the right to property,
freedom of religion, freedom of work, and security of the person, says Muqtedar
Khan.
Muslims and Christians together constitute over 50 per cent of the world
and if they lived in peace, we will be half way to world peace. One small step
that we can take towards fostering Muslim-Christian harmony is to tell and
retell positive stories and abstain from mutual demonization.
In this article I propose to remind both Muslims and Christians about a
promise that Prophet Muhammad made to Christians. The knowledge of this promise
can have enormous impact on Muslim conduct towards Christians.
Muslims generally respect the precedent of their Prophet and try to
practice it in their lives.
In 628 AD, a delegation from St Catherine's Monastery came to Prophet
Muhammad and requested his protection. He responded by granting them a charter
of rights, which I reproduce below in its entirety. St Catherine's Monastery is
located at the foot of Mt Sinai and is the world's oldest monastery. It
possesses a huge collection of Christian manuscripts, second only to the
Vatican, and is a world heritage site. It also boasts the oldest collection of
Christian icons. It is a treasure house of Christian history that has remained
safe for 1,400 years under Muslim protection.
The Promise to St Catherine:
"This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who
adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
"Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them,
because Christians are my citizens; and by God! I hold out against anything
that displeases them.
"No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed
from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a
house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the
Muslims' houses.
"Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and
disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter
against all that they hate.
"No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The
Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it
is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from
visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are
neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their
covenants.
"No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last
Day (end of the world)."
The first and the final sentence of the charter are critical. They make
the promise eternal and universal. Muhammed asserts that Muslims are with
Christians near and far, straight away rejecting any future attempts to limit
the promise to St Catherine alone. By ordering Muslims to obey it until the Day
of Judgment the charter again undermines any future attempts to revoke the
privileges. These rights are inalienable. Muhammed declared Christians, all of
them, as his allies and he equated ill treatment of Christians with violating
God's covenant.
A remarkable aspect of the charter is that it imposes no conditions on
Christians for enjoying its privileges. It is enough that they are Christians.
They are not required to alter their beliefs, they do not have to make any
payments and they do not have any obligations. This is a charter of rights
without any duties!
The document is not a modern human rights treaty but even though it was
penned in 628 AD it clearly protects the right to property, freedom of
religion, freedom of work, and security of the person. I know most readers must
be thinking so what? Well the answer is simple. Those who seek to foster
discord among Muslims and Christians focus on issues that divide and emphasize
areas of conflict. But when resources such as Muhammad's promise to Christians
are invoked and highlighted it builds bridges. It inspires Muslims to rise
above communal intolerance and engenders goodwill in Christians who might be
nursing fear of Islam or Muslims.
When I look at Islamic sources, I find in them unprecedented examples of
religious tolerance and inclusiveness. They make me want to become a better
person. I think the capacity to seek good and do good inheres in all of us.
When we subdue this predisposition towards the good, we deny our
fundamental humanity. In this holiday season, I hope all of us can find time to
look for something positive and worthy of appreciation in the values, cultures
and histories of other peoples.
(Dr Muqtedar Khan is director of Islamic Studies at the University of
Delaware and a fellow of the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding.)
Now, when that delegation from St Catherine's monastery came to meet with
Prophet Mohamad (pbuh), I suppose it's fair to assume that they spoke Arabic to
one another. And when they were conversing, surely the word "God" must have
come up. As in "May God Be With You" and such like. What word did the Prophet
use for "God" I wonder? And what did the St Catherinians use in return? For
monotheists like them, was there a "your God" and "my God" type of situation,
or did they understand that they were both talking about the same One?
While some idiots are mourning over the "loss" of the word "Allah" and
therefore basically telling the world that they are people easily confused by
nomenclature, and others are predicting riots over what is basically a
"copyright" issue, let me define what I think a confident Muslim should be:
1. A confident Muslim is unfazed by the issue of God's name. God speaks
to all of humankind in the Quran and never said that only Muslims could call
him by the name Allah.
2. A confident Muslim has 99 names to choose from to describe that One
God. My favourites are Ar-Rahman (The All-Compassionate) and Ar-Rahim (The
All-Merciful).
3. A confident Muslim never gets confused over which is his/her religion
and which is other people's. For instance, a confident Muslim knows exactly
what the first chapter of the Quran is. And it's not the Lord's Prayer.
4. A confident Muslim will not walk into a church, hear a liturgy in
Malay or Arabic where they use the word "Allah" and then think that he or she
is in a mosque. A confident Muslim knows the difference.
5. A confident Muslim is generous, inclusive and doesn't think that his
or her brethren is made exclusive through the use of a single language. The
confident Muslim is well aware that in the Middle East, all services of ANY
religion are in Arabic because that's what they all speak.
6. A confident Muslim knows the basis of his/her faith are the five
pillars of Islam and will not be shaken just because other people call God by
the same name.
7. A Muslim believes in only One God. Therefore it makes sense that other
people should call God by the same name because there is no other God.
ART THOU NOT aware that it is God whose limitless glory all [creatures]
that are in the heavens and on earth extol, even the birds as they spread out
their wings? Each [of them] knows indeed how to pray unto Him and to glorify
Him; and God has full knowledge of all that they do: (Surah Nour, Verse 41)
(Asad).
So I would ask those people demonstrating against the court decision,
have you no pride? Are you saying you're easily confused?
And before anyone says I have no qualifications to say these things, read
what Dr Asri Zainal Abidin (who does have qualifications no matter what JAIS
says) has written about this very subject here.
And here's something interesting. In 2007, the Majlis Agama Negeri
Perlis, which is a large majlis filled with people very learned in Islamic
religious knowledge, discussed the question of the use of "Allah" by
non-Muslims. Their unanimous decision? They issued a fatwa to say that there is
absolutely nothing wrong with non-Muslims using the word at all. (This was told
to me by Asri but I cannot find the fatwa anywhere online because all the
religious departments' websites are so useless.)
Are we now going to excommunicate the whole of Perlis?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
