A Doctor in The House: A Memoir of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad (75 page)

Islam was and is to me a religion that tolerates the existence of other religions and their followers. Later when I began to read translations of the Quran in Malay and in English, I found that there is a full verse which proves that I was not wrong in my assumption regarding the attitude of Islam towards other religions.

The verse in the Quran, from 
Surah
 Al-Kafirun
 or The Unbelievers reads:

“
Say: O ye who reject Faith!
  I worship not that which ye worship,
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
To you be your religion, and to me mine.”
In another verse the Quran states that there is no compulsion in Islam (
Surah Al-Baqarah,
 verse 256).

In Malaysia we may not be applying what is regarded as Shariah law in every case to avoid injustice. We do apply other laws but by upholding justice for everyone in this multireligious country, by keeping the nation free of conflict and instability, we are following the teachings of Islam. Similarly our tolerance of other religions is also in keeping with the teachings of Islam. Indeed in everything that the Government has done, Islamic principals were upheld.

Therefore we have every right to call Malaysia an Islamic country.

Islam and the Islamisation of the Malaysian administration were not causes of contention before. What is a fact is that during the period when Malaysia adopted Islamic values and declared itself an Islamic country, there was peace and stability and the country developed and grew as never before.

Unfortunately many “learned” Muslims are not quite happy with tolerance as taught by the Quran. They would like Islam to be stricter, more severe and violently opposed to other religions. In fact a very learned mufti once told me that other than Islam, there was no religion. I found this very disturbing. Although the religion that is recognised by Allah is Islam, there are many references in the Quran to the religions of Moses and Jesus. In fact, in the passage from 
Surah Al-Kafirun
 quoted above, reference is made to the religions of those who do not accept the “faith”, i.e. Islam.

I studied the history of religions and I discovered that invariably, over the passage of time, the interpretations of religious teachings would change. We know that the Christians had broken up into three major denominations, the Orthodox Eastern Church, the Catholic Roman Church and later on, the Protestants. But the break-up did not end there. Various religious scholars and prelates set up their own particular sects based on their own understanding and teachings. I will not comment further about the Christian denominations, as my knowledge about them is inadequate.

In Islam the same thing has happened. The Prophet brought only one Islam embodied in the verses of the Quran and the true sayings and deeds (the Hadith, or traditions) of the Prophet.

But today we have numerous sects of Islam with each claiming that the others are not Islam or not quite Islam. In fact such are the differences in their teachings that they often fight wars against each other.

The emergence of these sects may sometimes be due to charlatans wanting to gain from the gullibility and ignorance of some of the followers of the faith. Such has been the success of these opportunists that their followers go so far as to proclaim them as prophets, or even the Mahdi—the Messiah who is believed to reveal himself as the world comes to the Day of Resurrection. That these people have always been proven false has not deterred others from making similar claims from time to time, and from gathering followers who believe passionately in them. Incidentally, even among Christians there still are similar claimants and their followers have been known to commit mass suicide on the day they believed the world would come to an end.

But many of the founders of Islamic sects were great religious scholars who genuinely believed that they were giving the true or the correct interpretations of Islam. But because their interpretations and teachings differed so much from each other, they could not all be right.

Differences in the interpretations and teachings are only to be expected since these learned ones are after all only human, with all the frailties of humans. Their understanding and interpretations were therefore subject to these weaknesses.

They may not intend to cause the conflicts and separations into sects, and they often modestly implore their followers not to be fanatical about their teachings. But the followers are often far more rigid than their teachers and might not accept any other teachings as Islamic.

With the passage of time the fanaticism of the followers and the tendency to amplify and add to the teachings would be such that the differences between the sects would become irreconcilable. Any one of the followers trying to lessen the rigidity in their beliefs, or trying to reconcile the teachings of others (or even to observe the injunctions of Islam against schisms) would be regarded as disloyal renegades if not heretics.

And so today we see Muslims divided into innumerable sects, each with its own interpretations of Islam. The worst division is between the Sunnis and the Shiites. Within these two sects there are sub-sects and followers of different imams. The adherence of the followers is very strong and uncompromising. Self-sacrifice is a strong trait as is fighting for their beliefs. Shiites are more prepared to die for their beliefs than are the others. The belief is that such a sacrifice will be well rewarded in the afterlife.

The Sunnis are more numerous then the Shiites but they are less fanatical in the practice of Islam. But the animosity against the Shiites is nevertheless very strong. Violent attacks by Shiites against Sunnis invariably meet with similar violence by the Sunnis. At one stage the Shiites were not allowed to perform the Haj in Mecca by the Saudi authorities.

Islam is a tolerant religion but, as I said, some of the learned interpreters of Islam are not quite happy with it. They and their followers would like the religion to be much more intolerant, rigid and strict. This is especially so in the attitude towards non-Muslims. The yearning is to impose Islamic practices and laws on non-Muslims by force if possible. This does not endear Islam to non-Muslims, and their rejection of Islam is thereby made stronger. In other words, intolerant behaviour, extreme rigidity and fanaticism, which are contrary to the teachings of Islam, have not only given Islam a bad name but have prevented the spread of the religion.

The early Muslims were much more lenient and accommodating towards non-Muslims. This is why Christianity and Judaism thrived quite well in Muslim countries. In fact such was the Muslims’ tolerance of the Jews that whenever the latter were persecuted by European Christians, they would flee to Muslim countries in North Africa and the Turkish-ruled regions in Eastern Europe.

By contrast when the Christian Spanish re-conquered Spain, the Jews as well as the Muslims were given the choice of converting to Christianity, being put to death, or being expelled from Catholic Spain. That is why a large number of Jews followed the Muslim evacuees to North Africa.

It is worth noting that despite Iran being apparently extremely Islamic, there are still Jews living in Iran and their synagogues are protected by the Government. The Jews are even represented in Parliament. The Iranians, despite their enmity towards the Israelis and Americans, seem to practise what is enjoined by the Quran with regard to peoples of other faiths.

But elsewhere in the Muslim world today Jews are not welcome. This includes Malaysia. When I tried to help the peace process in Palestine by allowing Israeli schoolchildren and an Israeli cricket team to visit Malaysia, I was soundly condemned by Malay Muslims. Yet in the Quran it says that when an enemy offers to make peace we should respond positively.

But the intolerance is not confined to non-Muslims. We are also critical of fellow Muslims in the performance of their religious obligations and rituals. Despite the Quran saying that Islam is not meant to be a burden to the faithful, many Muslims want to make it a burden. They reject the flexibility of Quranic teachings regarding minor prohibitions and the performance of certain rituals.

We are enjoined to pray five times a day. But if the learned in Islam can have their way, we would have to add to the five prayers various other prayers and recitations so that the prayers would be prolonged. Most of these additional rituals and recitations are optional but the learned ones would like to make them compulsory.

As an UMNO politician I had to contend with the religious quotations of PAS speakers. They were very impressive, quoting the verses of the Quran and immediately translating and dramatising them with very colourful Malay.

I learned to memorise some of the more frequently quoted verses and their Malay translations but I was at a disadvantage. My Arabic was not fluent enough even when the verses I quoted were correct.

I began to study the Quran more thoroughly, reading the Arabic text and then the Malay or English translations. I found that the interpretations made by the politicians, while being more colourful, were often not quite accurate. Often only half the verses were quoted.

While doing this I became more interested in reading the Quran because knowing the Malay and English translations made the study more interesting. Soon I was reading through the whole Quran several times in order to know what really were the fundamental teachings of the religion. Until then what I knew about my religion was what my tutors and teachers had taught me. They focused on certain passages only and on those verses which I had to learn by heart for my prayers.

It was really an eye-opener reading the Quran in a language I understood. The religious teachers were quick to point out that the translations of the Quran were not really the Quran. But then I pointed out that when they taught me they also translated Arabic into Malay so I could understand. According to their own arguments, their translations were therefore also not the words of the Quran, not truly the Message of Allah.

Later I was to learn that even those whose mother tongue was Arabic could not on their own truly understand many of the passages in the Quran. They still needed interpreters and what they understood was what the interpreters understood. And being human the interpreters, no matter how learned they may have been, might still have understood wrongly or differently from others, and consequently their teachings might not have been similar—or even be contradictory—to each other.

I assumed that the reason why the Muslims had been divided into different sects was because the understanding of these interpreters differed and their teachings differed accordingly.

Yet we need interpreters if we are to understand the teachings of the Quran, more so if Arabic is not our mother tongue or we just do not know the Arabic language well enough. I therefore accept that the translations of the Quran into Malay and English, while they cannot be regarded as the Quran itself, are still as acceptable as the Islam taught to me in Malay.

However, the verses of the Quran are divided into two fairly distinct categories. These are the 
Muhkamaat,
 the verses whose meanings are clear and unambiguous and do not lend themselves easily to different understandings and interpretations.

Then there are the 
Mutashaabihaat
 which are not clear or direct and may take the form of allegories or parables, opening themselves to varied and sometimes contradictory interpretations.

The clear 
Muhkamaat
 verses can be understood quite easily, even if one does not speak Arabic, provided someone translates the verses. They are simple and direct, and almost everyone translates them with no detectable difference from others. Thus the Quran says “A Muslim is a brother to other Muslims”. It cannot be misunderstood or interpreted to mean anything different. The Quran also says “A Muslim must not kill another Muslim”. Again it is very clear.

Yet we see Muslims fighting and killing other Muslims. Are they not transgressing? Surely they must be. But they declare that their adversaries are not really Muslims and therefore they are not killing Muslims and are not going against the injunctions of Islam.

There are other clear verses which enjoin Muslims to honour promises and undertakings, to be honest, not to accept gratification, to acquire knowledge, to be prepared to defend the
ummah
(the global Muslim community), to care for orphans, to divide inheritance in the prescribed way, to accept offers of peace, to judge with justice, not to allow hate to influence decisions, not to use force to convert, and many, many more which should not only guide the way of life of a Muslim but make an honourable and upright man of him. He should also become successful in his endeavours in life, but he should not forget the afterlife when his behaviour in life will be judged and where he will be punished or rewarded for what he has done.

Islam, as many Muslims will repeat, is “a way of life”. It is not just a “faith” but a comprehensive guide to how a Muslim should live. By living the prescribed way then his afterlife, his 
akhirat,
 would be as good as is promised in the Quran. The “Way of Life” is about everything that he does and not just the performance of rituals.

Since the 
Muhkamaat
 verses are clear and unambiguous, their understanding and interpretation should not differ and therefore they should not divide Muslims. But as illustrated above in the case of a Muslim killing other Muslims, despite this clarity, the wicked and the misguided will still kill by claiming that their adversaries are not “real Muslims” or are not Muslims at all.

Another problem arising from differing interpretations is the tendency to stress the literal rather than the substance of the message.

The Quran is emphatic about the need to read (
Iqraq
). When one reads one will certainly acquire knowledge. Thus the early Muslims obeying this injunction read everything they could lay their hands on in order to acquire knowledge.