Getting To The Root Of The Allah Word And Controversy

Let’s not muddle our minds when it comes to the term “Allah” being used to refer to “God” by people of other faiths. Some politicians and religious figures seem to exploit this issue without looking into the theological doctrines and the various historical facts.

The term “Allah” has been used by Christians in the Malay Archipelago to refer to God in Malay for more than four centuries (since the early 17th century) without any objection by the authorities.

In 2007 the government of Malaysia barred the use of the term “Allah” in any other context but a Muslim one. Understandably, the ruling against it must have been based on religious sensitivities in a multireligious society where the term “Allah” can be manipulated to confuse the Muslims.

After a legal scuffle that lasted more than a decade, the High Court on March 10 granted a Malaysian Christian the right to use the word “Allah” in her religious practice. The ruling quelled a three-decade government ban on Christians using the word “Allah” in their religious publications.

Malaysian Muslims in general and Christians do not speak Arabic and it would have been more appropriate if the “Allah” issue had not been brought to court but discussed amicably among the concerned parties – taking into consideration both the theological reasoning and the sensitivities of the people in a multi-religious society.

What’s more significant is that Muslims have to be edified on the use of the word “Allah” in the Arab world, which includes the days of Pagan Arabs to the advent of the Abrahamic faiths. “Lah” or “ilah” simply means God in Meccan Arabic and Hebrew as well.

And “Allah” in Arabic means “The God”.

Apparently, there is no lack of Islamic religious education in the country and yet some Muslims seem to be ill-informed on the use of the word “Allah” in the Abrahamic faiths as well as in many other religions. It’s the religious education system that has failed to disentangle minds in bondage.

Muslims should be edified that the word “Allah” (root word “ilah”) or its other derivatives were used long before Islam by the pagan Arabs, Christians and Jews.

Morphologically the term “Allah” is derived from a contraction of the Arabic definite article “al” (The) and “ilah” (God). Just emphasise to the Muslims that this “notion of God” is not the same among that of the pagan Arabs, Christian theology and Islam. The concepts associated with the term “Allah”, however, differ among religious traditions and the Muslims in the country can be enlightened on this only through proper religious education.

Hebrew and Arabic are closely related Semitic languages, and that “Allah” (root, ilah) and the Biblical Elohim are cognate derivations of the same origin. Going beyond the Semitic race, for instance in the Sanskrit language, Allah, Amba and Akka are synonyms. The term “Allah” also forms part of Sanskrit chants. It’s therefore no surprise that the term “Allah” is also found in Bengali and many other languages in the Indian subcontinent.

In fact, the origin of the root word “iiah” can be traced back to 2000 BC when it was used by the Arabs for pagan worship.

Learned Muslims and religious scholars in the country should stop politicising Islam but get to the study of the actual etymology of the word “Allah” as used in Islam and other cultures and religions.

This is not the issue or tussle between Muslims and non-Muslims or among political parties but of great educational significance to all Malaysians. Educate the masses on the universal acceptance of the term “Allah” and its cognates to refer to God and stress that theologically they may have different meanings to every religion or culture based on an individual’s perception of the Creator.

Explain to the masses

It would be more appropriate here to explain to the masses that “Allah” is the Arabic word for “the God” and “Al-“ is a definite article in Arabic; the word “Allah” or its derivatives are used in more than 60 main languages in the world to refer to “The God” and the word is notably used by Muslims, Arab speakers, Arab Christians, the Mizrahi Jews and later by the Christians in the Malay Archipelago since the 17th century. The Christians in the Malay Archipelago have inherited this term since then to refer to God. Bible translations into Malay were only published in 1733.

Christianity and Judaism came before Islam. Many Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, had long used the word “Allah” or its cognates to mean God.

In the context of Indonesia, Sabah and Sarawak, the term “Allah” has been in use for the past four centuries by those who profess Christianity. This is not something new to them, so there cannot be any coherent reason why they should stop using the word “Allah” in their translated Bibles now.

The first dictionary of Dutch-Malay by AC Ruyl, Justus Heurnius, and Caspar Wiltens in 1650 (revised edition from 1623 edition and 1631 Latin-edition) recorded “Allah” as the translation of the Dutch word “Godt”. Since then, the word “Allah” has been used to refer to God by the majority natives who profess Christianity in the Malay Archipelago.

The use of the word “Allah” by Christians has been conspicuous in Indonesia, Sarawak and Sabah. Stopping it after it has been in use for the past four centuries will be too impetuous a step and even defeats the purpose in this era of technology.

Of note, translated Bibles these days come in the form of e-books and can be downloaded free from the Internet. No law can stop this and instead of coming up with rules or decrees against the Christians using the term “Allah”, thus wisely, Muslims should be educated to see the differences in usage of this term in the various concepts of theologies and cultures.

Matter of semantics

The Christian community in the Malay Archipelago are used to the term “Allah” and its extension such as Allah al-ʾab (God the Father), Allah al-ibn (God the Son), and Allah ar-ruh al-quds (God the Holy Spirit). Herein lies the controversy between Christians and Muslims. This aspect of usage by Christians may be seen as confusing to Muslims and it cannot be accepted by them. Muslims in the country can be educated to that fact that this is not theologically accepted in Islam, but solely for the consumption of the Christian community.

Arab Muslims who speak a common language with their Christian brothers and sisters are indeed aware of these lexical and religious nuances and it is a non-issue to them. A Muslim is taught about the monotheistic aspect of Islam. If the reason for objecting to their request to continue using the word “Allah” and other Arabic words is that it will confuse the Muslims this cannot be accepted. It may only reflect on the weaknesses of the Muslims.

For instance, an Arab Christian may invoke the word “bismi-llah” (in the name of God – a term also used by Muslims) to the concept of Trinity in their religious discourse. The Muslim bismi-llah reads: “In the name of God, the Compassionate, and the Merciful.” Whereas the Trinitised bismi-llah reads: “In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, One God.” Despite invoking the same term bismi-llah by both Muslims and Christians before performing any rites or rituals every Muslim should be taught to recognise the difference in approach to the concept of “Allah” in Islam and “Allah” in Christianity.

The deeper structure and the semantics differ according to one’s belief and religious awareness, and this is what matters more in faith. Are Muslims so pathetic that they are not able to discern the various concepts of theologies in other religions? If they are, then they have not been taught enough about Islam.

It is as simple as telling the Muslims that to them, “Allah” (God) is the Sustainer of this universe, He upholds everything in existence, He cannot be associated with any other being, and humble submission to His Will, Divine Orders and Decrees is the hinge of the Muslim faith.

Too sensitive an issue

It was once reported that an Islamic religious body issued a statement pointing to the fact that the use of the word “Allah” by other religions will bring harm to Islam. It was said that the position was based on a decision of the National Fatwa Council in 2008. This, I suppose, must be another defeatist stand made by a Muslim authority.

The Malaysian Gurdwara Council was reported to have argued that it was unconstitutional to ban anyone from using the word “Allah”, insisting that the National Fatwa Council’s decree on the word could not apply to non-Muslims.

In a statement by the MGC president, he pointed out that the council does not have direct jurisdiction over non-Muslims and could not issue a fatwa to bar the community from using a specific word in their sacred books.

An Islamic cleric was reported to have told non-Muslims who insist on using the word “Allah” to convert to Islam if they refuse to accept that the word belongs only to Muslims. The contentious cleric also indicted the Christian community of deliberately provoking Muslims by pressing on with their demand to use “Allah” in their Holy Book. This avowal apparently sounds weird and to an extent ridiculous coming from a so-called “learned” cleric.

Stuck in mental servitude, he has missed many issues relating to Islam and other religions. He has missed the core semantics and theological issues relating to the word “Allah” when he says the word only belongs to Muslims.

Instead, the ecclesiastical should educate the masses on religion, stop politicising it; only with an open mind will common sense prevail when it comes to tolerance and freedom of religion. This is important if religious harmony is what Malaysians hope for in the country.

The Qur’an evidently says: “And dispute ye not with the People of the Book (who covenanted with Abraham), except with means better unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong: but say, We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we submit.” (29:46) “And indeed, Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so submit to Him. That is a straight path.” (19:36).

To surmise, lexically and theologically the word “Allah” can be used by all – Muslims and non-Muslims – but abusing or exploiting the word for some ulterior motive or in an ungodly manner to confuse the masses should be discouraged, as this would lead to religious disharmony in a society where religion is too sensitive an issue and when the people are not well-versed with religious doctrines.

lvbala said:

This article is copied paste from FMT. 

All comments are good comments. There are no bad comments or good comments. So everyone have the right to comment. How about you?

Malaysian History - Hang Tuah

Some thirty years ago I saw a bumper sticker on a Harley Davidson in Columbus, Ohio which read: “IF YOU CAN’T IMPRESS THEM WITH BRILLIANCE, DAZZLE THEM WITH YOUR BULLSHIT!”

I thought that was cute, and I am still trying to figure out in what context this might be true.Then I thought of Parameswara, whom the paid scribe of the Malacca Kingdom (Tun Sri Lanang) called the founder of Malacca. Param-Eswara (or was it another self-proclaimed Maharajah?) was said to have converted to Islam after he dreamt of meeting Prophet Muhammad; a dream which led him to take the shahada or to declare himself a believer in the oneness of Allah and the teachings of Muhammad.

He was, according to the Islamic cultural rite borrowed from Jewish practice, already circumcised when he woke up one morning. He was a Muslim and a convert from his syncretist Palembang Hindu-Buddhist ‘religion’ and he ‘reverted’ to Islam in preparation to become the founder and first ruler of Malacca.

I am still trying to figure out if I should be thinking if that story is brilliant and dazzling or a piece of bullshit and stinking. I don’t know.

I was often told that anyone who claimed to have met the prophet of Islam must most definitely either be hallucinating in a dream or simply having a bad dream – because the Devil or Shaytan (Mr Satan) is surely the one playing the role of the imposter. In other words, was Parameswara of assassin-on-the-run-hunted-by-the-Siamese founder of Malacca whispered the Satanic verses?

So – Parameswara could have lied big time. And his merry well-paid writer of the Sejarah Melayu also inscribed that big of a lie. How could Parameswara (or again, his successor) cook up the story of meeting the prophet and next, without a sign of minor surgery on his private part claimed that he is already circumcised and now ready to rule Malacca? Or again, was it a story of his son, I was not sure. Anyways can anyone be sure of these myths and glorified lies?

The lies in the phantasmagoric story in the Malay Annals or Sejarah Melayu were then made into a body of literature to be marveled at and revered by the generations to come and till today, the Sejarah Melayu as a document of lies is also considered a great work of history of a nation or a people, specifically of the Malays.

This might be the case: as with historical accounts, there are various interpretations of the story of the ‘founding’ of Malacca. Each has its own claim to truth. It all depends on the ‘bricolage’ of ideas as well as the genealogy of the events and who narrated them to be compiled into a story. That’s why history is also called fiction of varying truth-ness and falsity and plausibility (said Michel Montesquieu).

The lineage of the Malacca kings was claimed right up to Alexander of Macedonia and his countless concubines that may have produced one Raja Chola of India. If you do more research, the claim goes further beyond Alexander, said to be a ‘Muslim king’, it goes right up to Superman, Kal El, Darth Vader, and perhaps Pokemon. That’s how kings claim greatness – to paint a picture larger than their insecurities within.

Today’s monarchs the world over are losing that ability to have others write about how great they are – only hegemony, the instilling of fear, and the abuse of the ideological state apparatuses, hideous display of wealth and how they worked hard to make sure the poor are happy being poor. These are some of the strategies to keep the postmodern Master-Slave Narrative alive. But the poor and those philosophically-impoverished, too, seem happy worshipping human idols.

Ahhh -such consoling of theology we need to make today and the debunking of ancient texts so that life can be more real and those in power and money are not elevated to demi-gods.

I don’t know – as I echo Socrates, Seneca, Montaigne, Voltaire, and those who spoke of deconstructing our beliefs.

The Parameswara story smells like the story of Malaysia’s 1MDB. Of cooking up the books – of ancient stories.

Hang Tuah the fool

There was also a claim the Italian Renaissance painter and ambidextrous genius Leonardo Da Vinci once met the Malacca warrior Hang Tuah. I am not sure what is the relationship between a real person meeting a fictitious figure. I doubt the fool of the Malacca Kingdom had the rendezvous, else some of Da Vinci’s intelligence would have rubbed off on the moronism of the mythical Malacca warrior and Tuah would have a bit of a brain to think.

Tuah would not have been Hang Ketuat (one with a calloused brain and lowly mental capacity) by following the order of the sleazy sultan of Malacca who is not worth being remembered as a Malay ruler. How else can our children explain that a sultan can do no wrong by ordering his Lakshmana to abduct Tun Teja in Pahang so that the ruler can satisfy his lust – just because he has the power to order his fools around?

We must teach our children to thrash these glorified tyrants and his band of brainless warriors.

I’d say we must stop trying to even prove that the useless ancient Malay sultans were descendants of Alexander of Macedonia. Focus on the now-ness of our existence and the realism that goes with it, rather than glorify foolish warriors and schizophrenic sultans of Malacca who use women as sexual objects, enslave human beings, murder their own people, and wear that strange-looking headgear to claim legitimacy and to fool the subjects into subjugation.

That’s Malacca history we need to get right and teach to children – once and for all.

Herein lies the need to give out children in school the tools to interrogate history and to craft their own understanding of what happened in history, who wrote the narratives, and how we should craft our own heroes. We should teach them to the ugliness of the feudal culture and the immoral inner-workings of the Malacca Sultanate.

We are living in a world of the CI3 – of consciousness, individuals, institutions, ideology that dominates the human psyche.

We live in a world that is demanding our understanding of the semiotics and cybernetics of the self; to understand how to read ourselves and the world within and outside of us; to construct, deconstruct, and reconstruct our inner and outer world views; to see life as a complex process of authoring of the self and re-authoring our world that is constantly shifting; to have a sense of what the ‘core’ is if there is indeed one; to see linearity and multi-dimensionality of our invented realities as one; to see ourselves as an organic mechanism of a grand narrative with multiple subplots with no narrative structure and as a complex novel with no plot but a story begging to be told – of joys and suffering and meaning and meaninglessness; to see chaos as a beautiful pattern of randomness; to master the art of being a metaphysical anarchist that will use the sense of being to resist the hegemonising power individuals, institutions, and ideology to dominate and destroy the self; … and much more … essentially: … live free – or die happy in the hands of the State and religious, cultural, or any ideology … to live, love, liberate, and die laughing at tyrants, totalitarian regimes, and theocracies. 

We must teach our children to rewrite history, to question claims of vainglory, feudal ideology, and next, to have them write their own history closest to their own family pride and memory. Why force them to memorize other people’s glory? Of the stories of the ancient sultans’ lust for sex, power, and money? And today – haven’t we seen enough of the hypocrisy of the rulers of the so-called Islamic countries?

Racism

More than six decades after independence from the British, Malaysia continues to struggle to weave an inclusive social fabric for its racially diverse citizens.

Every right thinking Malaysian should give strong support to the National Unity Policy (NUP) and National Unity Blueprint 2021-2030 recently launched by the prime minister for they seek to promote racial harmony and foster a national identity.

The noble vision and aspirations outlined in the NUP are much needed. The policy and blueprint provide a long overdue opportunity for an honest conversation among us about the obstacles standing in the way of national unity.

In his address, the prime minister warned of political actors who serve their own agendas by exploiting racial sentiments for political gain. He, like many fair-minded citizens, is very much aware of this dangerous trend. But the key question is: what actions will be taken against the politicians and others who do so?

After all, most of us recognise that much of the country’s ongoing political turmoil is fuelled by the efforts of a few to consolidate power by using race to divide the citizens. Is the NUP drawing a line in the sand and saying there will be zero tolerance of racism?

It is time for all Malaysians, but especially the Malays who control political power, to reject all forms of racism.

Why? In the midst of a global pandemic, the squabbling among the political elite has adversely affected the social and economic lives of millions of Malaysians. The nation seems drained of inspiration and resigned to poor governance, much of which is drenched in issues arising from racially divisive politics.

There is also growing distrust and lack of confidence in the administration of the country, fuelled by the loss of jobs and inconsistent and confusing economic and social policies. Ironically, Malays in the low income groups are the worst affected by the economic stagnation.

Already dubbed as the new “sick man of Asia”, Malaysia is facing significant economic uncertainties and a decline in foreign investor confidence.

Data from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development illustrate distressing figures of a 68% fall in foreign direct investment inflows to Malaysia in 2020. The country fared much worse than neighbouring Singapore, Thailand and Indonesia.

The search for a way forward thus requires an honest inquiry into how we arrived at this low point. We can point fingers at the effects of the pandemic or the volatility of the global economy or even use the resource curse argument. But that would be a denial of the realities.

An honest examination of the nation’s current malaise will lead to one conclusion: the failure of our governance systems and its link to our highly charged race-based political landscape.

Many of the country’s race-based policies can be traced back to the New Economic Policy (NEP), which was announced in 1970 as a means to eradicate poverty and redesign society by eliminating the association of any one race with specific economic functions.

While undoubtedly successful in the early stages as it uplifted millions of poor Malays who had been disenfranchised by colonial rule, the NEP is now failing to fulfil its purpose, as any fair-minded observer can see.

Today, a large segment of the Malay population continues to struggle economically, while at the other end of the spectrum, an elite and privileged class has been lulled into a culture of entitlement. The latter, in not speaking out against a system that has become racist in practice, is guilty of tolerating and even supporting it.

As Nobel laureate Desmond Tutu famously said about those who were quiet during South Africa’s apartheid era: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

The fact is that the Malaysian political architecture is dominated by Malay politicians who have used race to consolidate power for more than 50 years.

Race has been deeply embedded into all key policies and all Malaysians have thereby been racialised.

This has in turn legitimised institutionalised racism across all spheres of public life. Malaysia today stands out as perhaps among the most chronic global examples of institutionalised racism.

Recognising the power that elite Malays have in shaping the politics of the country is by no means denying the adverse role that the elite of every other ethnic group plays in entrenching this racist architecture in the political economy.

Just as the government-linked companies are dominated by Malays, large Chinese businesses are dominated by Chinese and Indian businesses by Indians, thereby deepening the racial divide.

In a multicultural society like ours, unity is a complex pursuit that cannot be built without everyone tackling this source of disunity. It is time to recognise that institutionalised racism is the elephant in the room and that it has been accepted as the norm by the majority of Malaysians. This must change.

But the reality is also this: it is the elite Malays who have influence and control over the political architecture of this country and it is they who have to lead the change.

All the other races have to accept their fair share of the blame, and there is a lot to go around. They must do everything in their power to eradicate racism in the midst of their communities. But it is also true that they do not make the laws and regulations that have legitimised racism.

nstitutional racism takes many forms in Malaysia and most would be unacceptable in any progressive society. Racism is evident in rigid quotas for Malays – regardless of need – in public education, access to jobs in the government and government-linked companies, benefits of mortgage reduction and reserved equity in listed companies.

These go well beyond the need for affirmative action to help the segments of the Malay community that are the most disenfranchised and most needing of assistance.

The outdated and entrenched national policies only deepen the cracks between the races and are the root cause of disunity.

Calls for unity which do not address these issues are therefore superficial and merely paper over the cracks.

Race-based policies that are discriminatory and used by the political and business elites to enrich themselves at the expense of others are the reason we have become a racially divided nation. It is also why the poor among the Malays are the most disenfranchised Malaysians and regressing in more ways than one. They are the most affected victims of a racist system which uses them to enrich elites.

These policies are no longer helping poor Malays and it is time to realise whose interest they actually serve.

Policies that provide special rights and privileges to a particular race and divide citizens of a country along racial lines are not unique to Malaysia. Such policies exist in some other parts of the world, often to address injustices through affirmative action.

However, in Malaysia, these policies have been hijacked and have dangerously seeped deep into the psyche of the various ethnic groups, but particularly the Malays, including the urban and educated Malays. Apparently, they too, despite their wealth and privileges, believe they are entitled to scholarships and discounts on home purchase.

The product of the entitlement attitude and racially-skewed policies is the rent-seeking economy which pervades the country.

Rampant corruption in all aspects of public life is another result of these policies.

In this regard, the prime minister’s keenness to introduce the national unity agenda is a welcome step forward. But we would be naïve to think it is a magic-wand solution capable of rectifying years of normalising racism.

The current crop of leaders the country is turning to for answers are ageing politicians steeped in racial politics. We need a new generation of political leaders, from all races, to make the rejection of racism their primary platform and thereby help Malaysia enter the 21st century. If not, we will continue to wallow and stagnate in the 20th century backwater.

If you want unity, reject racism. If you want the economy to flourish, reject racism. If you want to fight rent-seeking corruption, reject racism. If you want to build a modern education system, reject racism. If you want a strong and competent civil service, reject racism. If you want the poor and struggling Malays and non-Malays to improve their standard of living, reject racism.

If you understand that every citizen has equal rights – and they do despite what some may say – then do not discriminate citizens by race.

We need a new generation of political and business leaders who eschew race-baiting in order to fight the torpor of a rent-seeking economy that breeds corruption and has wrought havoc on the economy.

Meritocracy and integrity need to be the foundational values that will define the country’s future success, not race. We also need laws that ensure those who promote racism are prosecuted without fear or favor.

The country needs an injection of new ideas and strategies that will build its collective capacities to meet the challenges of the new era.

This is the task for the next generation and the sooner it can displace the old, the better the chances of the country making progress.

he key, however, lies with the elite Malays, those who wield the most power and privileges and have benefited the most from the existing systems. They, particularly the young millennial whose parents and grandparents have reaped the rewards of the NEP, must take stock of their privileges and reject the racist foundations. In that way, they will contribute to the restructuring of a more united and non-racist Malaysia.

Such an endeavor calls for the cultivation of true moral courage. It is indeed a formidable task. After all, those who oppose the status quo will be attacked by fellow Malays who will resort to the usual accusation of betrayal of the race. This is the ultimate weapon to silence Malays who disagree with the racism. Are fair-minded Malays who desire a progressive and inclusive society up to the task?

Therein lies the real Malay dilemma for the 21st century. As they are the main beneficiaries of the current system and as they are now economically independent, they must actively reject racism, get involved in fighting against it and help foster a united and progressive Malaysia.

It is equally a dilemma and a challenge for the non-Malays who have bought into the system.

A Great Article written by Chandra Nair in FMT

All comments are good comments. There are no bad comments or good comments. So everyone have the right to comment. How about you?

WE ARE MADE TO BE LAZY

"How can anyone say the Malays are lazy? Have they seen how rubber tappers, padi farmers and fishermen toil? It is back-breaking work, from before dawn to late at night. The people who make the money are the middlemen and the cronies in charge of marketing their produce.

Malays who cross the Causeway every day to work in Singapore are not lazy. Malays who find both legal and illegal work on farms in Australia are not lazy. The system in Malaysia is slewed in such a way that foreign migrants work for a pittance, so who can blame Malaysians for rejecting these low-paid jobs? "

When I read this article in FMT this morning, I was noting my head sign it is agreed to what was mentioned by Mariam Mokhtar in FMT. 

I personally seen and mixed with great intelligent guys from Malay race whom I work with. But to be clear they became good and great because they were never pampered. They were send to Japan in early days and these guys adopted Japanese culture and they became great and have the responsibility to be the best and give the best.

I knew a Malay Doctor who own Shifa group of clinics who I found amazing in practicing what he learnt. I am an Indian telling you that my own family doctor is a Malay.

So how good you are and how bad you are is all determine by your exposure and willingness. 

Intelligent and smartness doesn't come from race or religion but is was made in each individual by the way they were exposed.

This exposure must be in proper manner and kindly must be with proper group. Once the group of friends come together and start thinking about how to move, how to improve, than the way to success shall follow.

But is the group friends are those who came from the family of total ciaos, than the thinking shall be in  ciaos too. 

So blaming a race for their efficiency is totally not a noble idea but some continue to be mangkuks. 

This is the kind of MO practiced but some people to take control of the majority for their own gain. Specially politicians. They are doing great by making people lazy through feeding and free bees.

And those who believed in the politicians promises shall be hoping for the moon to fall on their lap. Many Malaysian leader have practice this and remain in control over them.

What to do??

All comments are good comments. There are no bad comments or good comments. So everyone have the right to comment. How about you?