There is some hidden mischief in bringing in religious speakers who are touted as experts to speak on topics like ‘similarities in Islam and Hinduism’ in a multi-racial society.

It is heartening to note that one government minister, Nazri Aziz, has seen through this mischief and plainly said that “it is unnecessary for a controversial preacher such as Dr Zakir Naik to come to this country and create a mess which the public would have to clean after”. Thank you Nazri for your forthrightness on this issue even though some quarters might have the audacity to say you are not defending Islam.

You are perfectly right to say “It’s not about freedom of speech, but what’s most important is the harmony between the different races and religions”.

It is very surprising that even some lawyers had defended the ‘freedom of speech’ to talk on such an incendiary subject. Are they ignorant of the law, the Penal Code, that contains a section on offences relating to religion and that Section 298A (1) states:

“Whoever by words, either spoke or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or by any act, activity or conduct, or by organising, promoting or arranging, or assisting in organising, promoting or arranging, any activity, or otherwise in any manner -

(a) Causes, or attempts to cause, or is likely to cause disharmony, disunity, or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will; or

(b) Prejudices, or attempts to prejudice, or is likely to prejudice, the maintenance of harmony or unity,

on grounds of religion, between persons or groups of persons professing the same or different religions, shall be punished with...”

This provision of law unequivocally puts a limit to freedom of speech and actions. Did the lawyers mean to say that certain persons or personalities are not subject to this provision of the law? Are they saying that the inspector-general of police IGP was wrong to have disapproved of the talks or lectures on such a topic?

A topic of this nature is for discourse among philosophers if at all, and I wonder even then for what ends, and definitely not for the ordinary men in the street who are living in a multi-religious, multi cultural society and whose education, knowledge and level of understanding is far from being philosophical.

A teacher must talk to children at the children’s level of understanding and perception of the subject, not at the philosopher-teacher’s mental level and perception. He or she must not say and do things that would leave certain children swell-headed and who will then bully the others whom they have been made to believe are inferior to them. How will that superiority complex syndrome be removed from the minds of the swell-headed when the bullying gets out of hand?

What’s the hidden motive?

Isn’t it plain stupid to compare things that are the same or similar? So what’s the hidden motive for such a talk in a multi-racial society? If there are similarities in Hinduism and Islam, then expounding on them to a multi-racial audience should mean telling them that they can choose to be either Hindu or Muslim as both will receive the same favours from God.

It would also mean that a Hindu can leave his religion for Islam and vice-versa without courting the wrath of God, without anyone of them going to hell for changing religions. It should mean telling the audience of their right and freedom to choose their religion, if they want to have a religion. No, this is not the message. The message ends with a certain religion being pronounced as the one and only true religion.

So of the supposedly two similar religions, one ends up as the true religion and the other false. Where then is the similarity? Great glib talk, like that of a snake-oil seller along the pavement of a city street.

The title is cleverly chosen to camouflage the actual motive, to deceive the public. It is plain doublespeak.

The talk is now going to be on ‘Islam, problems and solutions to humanity’. For this talk to achieve anything meaningful, it should focus on real-life problems at hand and not on wishful talk. There are so many real-life problems to address in this country.

For instance, just a few weeks back a minister lamented that all the mat rempits were Muslims and he couldn’t understand why. Several high ranking persons were arrested recently for corruption, Muslims among them. Why are Muslims involved in corruption? Almost all incest cases involve Muslims. Why? Almost all baby-dumping cases are Muslims. Why? These are but a few of the problems among those professing Islam.

It would therefore be very useful to the country if the causes of these maladies could be identified and practical solutions provided by the speaker. Charity begins at home. So let’s begin by solving the problems at home before talking of the rest of humanity. Please advice the Malaysian government on what it could and should do to solve such problems among the Muslims as they, even a ‘small’ number, give a bad name to Islam and embarrass the good Muslims.