Religion, it is generally believed, is inherently ‘irrational’ because it is based upon faith, and to hold to something on the basis of faith means to be firm in one’s conviction regardless of any apparent ‘evidence’ to the contrary. If we accept these premises we must also accept the conclusion that the faithful are irrational and the stronger one’s faith is the more irrational one becomes. If rationality is a virtue faith must be a vice, and antithetical to peace and socio-political stability. What may be the consequences for a minority if the majority hold a particular faith and are unwilling to be proven wrong? Will the minority be allowed to hold different belief even if it is certain that as far as the majority is concerned the belief is wrong?
If we accept the first principle of Rukun Negara we cannot be thinking along that line of thinking unless we do believe that our country is actually founded upon an irrational principle. If we are to accept the assumption that faith is inherently irrational we must also accept intolerance and bigotry as a fact of life as long as there is religion.
In our country, Islam is the official religion, and we can find among its citizens a significant number of followers of various faiths living side by side peacefully. After more than fifty years of independence they have achieved a lot of wonderful things together. No right-thinking citizen of this country would want to see what we have painfully built be destroyed by our own hands due to intolerance and bigotry in the name of religion. But religion is also too important to the majority of us for it to be undermined in the name of peace and unity. Furthermore, being an Islamic country, it is the obligation of the government to safeguard the special place of Islam and protect the rights of the non-Muslims to practice their religions peacefully. A secular country would not do that.
Nevertheless religion is still generally regarded as a ‘sensitive’ subject, meaning it needs to be dealt with ‘carefully’ because it is likely to cause disagreement or make certain people angry or upset, leading to communal violence and bloodshed. If we want to have a peaceful co-existence, goes the logic, we must not say or do certain things out of ‘fear’ that the faithful might get offended or become upset. It means that certain amount of fear must be maintained in order to maintain peace. Fear is not altogether bad, but irrational fear is. This fear is, to my mind, our real enemy and the greatest obstacle to progress and unity. This fear must be conquered before it becomes out of control.
In the long run we cannot co-exist based on that arrangement alone. What will happen if the fear eventually goes away and hatred takes its place? It is counter productive as well as dangerous to restrain discussion on religion out of fear. Today people may go to the internet if they are not allowed to do that in the mainstream media. It is actually futile trying to restrict let alone stop people from doing that. It is like attempting to enforce ignorance, which we all know is the root cause of fanaticism and bigotry. The real challenge now is how to make discussion about religion something interesting, enjoyable, enriching and beneficial to all. Serious and continuous efforts have to be made in order to promote a genuine mutual respect instead of fear (mixed with hatred) as the true basis of a peaceful co-existence.
In order to understand and to be understood we need to talk to each other. If we do not talk about religion how are we going to understand it, and make others understand and appreciate its importance in our personal and social life? The need to talk and have dialogue is even greater today in a globalized world where access to information and misinformation is almost unlimited. But how can we have talks and dialogues with the faithful if we believe that being faithful means being irrational? Who is going to have talk and dialogue with the irrational people? This brings us back to the first question: is faith inherently irrational? Based on our experience so far we can confidently answer in the negative. We have been able to keep both and together we should work harder and smarter to ensure that faith and rationality would prevail harmoniously.
In tandem with the first principle of Rukunegara the government should play an important role in encouraging and supporting both intra and inter-faith dialogue. Religion should be seen as something good for the society, and as such it has to be shared, promoted and defended. If this effort is carried out properly and sincerely we might be able to foster better knowledge and understanding, and based on that a framework of cooperation might be worked out. It is within this framework that all outstanding religious issues might be properly adressed and resolved.
In this regard the Muslims have an important role to play, and a huge responsibility to shoulder. They must show good example to other communities because it is through their action and behaviour that the non-Muslims get their perception of Islam. Since they are the majority and are in charge of the affairs of the country they should be mature enough particularly in dealing with criticism. Criticism against certain conduct of the Muslims must not be quickly and automatically construed as criticism against the religion of Islam. It is possible that the criticism is due to their own disregard and ignorance of the true teaching of Islam. This point is reflected in recent controversy about azan (call to prayer).
Everybody wants to live in peace, but peace of mind is more fundamental because it is personal. It has to do with one’s certainty about the nature of the ultimate reality, namely about the nature and purpose of existence, about God, about the external world, and about what constitutes virtues and values. These are the foundations of all religions. They explain why we live the way we do. They explain why we are different. They explain why religion matters to all of us. These problems are not to be solved but they have to be adequately understood if we want to promote mutual-respect among the believers. Only then issues related to rituals, practices and policies can be properly addressed.
Plurality is not alien to Islam, and it does not and will never seek to eliminate it. Islam promotes peaceful co-existence based upon mutual-understanding. Hence Islamic religious and intellectual tradition strongly encourages rational discourse and condemns blind imitation and fanaticism. From the very beginning the Muslims have been aware of the need to articulate and defend their faith through a systematic application of rational principles. Islamic culture is a culture of discourse and dialogue, and Malaysia has all the reasons to revive and promote this culture.
