One Christian response to the Unity and Diversity Conference, 2020
Christian history is littered with Christians maligning and killing their own and crushing “the other” while at the same time accomplishing great things. Top on my personal list of horrors are the crusades, the “Christian” wars in Europe ended by the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, the Inquisition, slavery, labour exploitation, suppression of women, corrupt Christian leaders, and privileging national churches.
Churches have taken centuries to accept differences and to figure out how to live and let live while yet upholding justice and right living – though they still fumble with infuriating regularity. My studies and experiences tell me that the journey to goodness begins, continues and ends with confession, forgiveness and realignment of individuals and groups.
Over the past three years I have often pondered the fate of Amri Che Mat and Raymond Koh who were disappeared by the Malaysian state about three years ago. Amri, for being a Shiite do-gooder and Raymond for being a pastor with a heart for the marginalized, even Muslims.
When I received an invitation to a “Unity and Diversity” conference in Malaysia, organized by ABIM – whose leaders I have collaborated with, and the Muslim Professionals Forum – whose 2014 response to the Kelantan Hudud Bill, which included amputations, seemed tepid, and a group I’d never heard of (IIIT, International Institute of Islamic Thought, said to be Saudi-funded), I was intrigued.
All the speakers were unknown to me. The titles of the proposed speeches were surprising – I couldn’t see how the titles related to the theme of unity in diversity. But I decided to be guided by the theme rather than the titles. So, I attended, on Wednesday (8th January).
I saw the speakers’ profiles when I got to the venue. They were all Muslim-foreigners. One was from Nigeria (Nuruddin Lemu). Two were from the USA (Omar Suleiman and Yassir Qadhi). None of their profiles listed research about Malaysia. All three of them sported neatly trimmed beards; two wore kopiah. Their profiles didn’t make clear what diversity they represented. Which mazhab does each subscribe to? (The answer to which could result in state-sanctioned persecution in Malaysia!)
I heard very little about differences. I heard a lot about Islamophobia, ignorance and hope. I heard a lot about misrepresentation of Islam, principally by non-Muslims.
I thought the audience were like marathon runners and the speakers were trainers, guides and motivators along the way: “Don’t give up, there’s strength along the way and reward at the end.”
There are real, pressing issues in Malaysia. Groups with clout and funding can help address them.
The issues appear to be “a Sunni-Shafie stream of Islam” which doesn’t tolerate other streams, a “Saudi-Wahhabi” inspired understanding of co-religionists and non-Muslims as kaffir, an interpretation of Sharia more as eternal, fixed rules and less as goals (maqasid), lack of acceptance of the secular state agreement vested in the Federal Constitution and the Malaysia Agreement, mere lip service paid to the Amman Declaration, conflation of race with religion, banning of books by authors such as Farouk Musa and Faisal Tehrani, disturbing fatwas – and the list goes on.
Anwar Ibrahim’s keynote was a “we’ve been maligned, but we’ve stood our ground” speech. He didn’t touch on anti-non-Muslim mania in Jakarta, the Saudi clampdown on Yemen and Qatar, the Uighur repression in China, the alliance against Iran, the persecution of activists and journalists in Turkey, etc. Instead, he flogged two old horses: “Clash of Civilizations” and “Orientalism.”
I couldn’t help recalling what Munawar Anees wrote after his abuse in Malaysia due to his friendship with Anwar. After he was freed from prison and deported from Malaysia, he wrote:
“Like so many others in the Muslim world, all my adult life I saw Western conspiracies everywhere I looked. I thought the West’s sole objective was to keep our heads firmly under the water. After this revealing experience, I find that my Western friends were the ones who succeeded in saving me, whilst Mahathir, a Muslim, has done everything in his power to destroy me … He has shown that even though he calls himself a Muslim, his heart is blind to all compassion. Tyranny is the consequence, the demonstration that his concept of ‘Asian values’ is entirely bankrupt. My own tragedy, and Anwar’s should make our Muslim co-religionists think harder when they consider the West and its role in the world. At a time when we are preparing to build our collective destiny in the 21st century, which values will be the most beneficial to us – those of Mahathir or those of Jefferson? Mahathir himself has made the choice on my behalf.” (Los Angeles Times, September 13, 1999)
I expect some conference attendees, both Muslim and non-Muslim, would’ve been ‘enlightened’ about Islam. My response is critical (but not cynical). I am critical because the antics of many “religious folks” have led to many attacks on people of faith like me.
I do not mean by this analysis to be rude to my hosts. I write as a neighbour, a fellow traveller. This response is not to condemn. It is rather to say, as a friend, the conference missed the mark. It was a talk-shop, not a workshop.
For the next conference in this series, I respectfully suggest choosing speakers with local knowledge, from avowedly different streams of Islam. I suggest choosing topics which are specific and designed to facilitate confession, forgiveness and realignment. Maaf zahir dan batin.
Rama Ramanathan is an activist for Citizens Against Enforced Disappearances
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of The Leaders Online.
