Stumbled on something

An article on Wikipedia today mentioned this movie, an animated short titled La Vieille Dame Et Les Pigeons (The Old Lady and the Pigeons) by Sylvain Chomet in 1998. Curious, I searched for the film on Youtube. It was there. All 24 minutes of it. Normally, I'm not into European Continental films. They tend to make you think (gasp), and sometimes, they screw with your sense of reality. No sir. Give me Hollywood flicks and Japanese anime anytime.

This animated short is that kind of film. By the time the credit rolls, you'll be repeating "W.T.F." for 3-minutes straight (lol). But it was enjoyable. And the music by Jean Corti is amazing. It's quite frustrating that you can't find the title of the song.

Anyway, here's the film (part 1 of 3):

An Important Date for Malaysians to Remember

The 25^th of July is arguably one of the most important dates in Malaysia’s history. It marked the Feast of Saint James the Greater, and on this day, 500 years ago, Afonso de Albuquerque, Caesar of the East, cried “Santiago!” and launched the first attack on the city of Malacca in a battle that would lead to the Fall of Malacca a month later.

The Fall of Malacca was one of the greatest defeats of the once mighty Malaccan Sultanate and one of the greatest conquests of the Portuguese Empire, deserving mention in the Sejarah Melayu of Tun Seri Lanang (Chapter XXIII), the Hikayat Hang Tuah (Chapter XXVIII), the Os Lusiadas of Luis Vaz de Camoes (Canto X, stanzas 44, 57, and 123), and even an epic poem titled Malaca Conquistada by Francisco de Sa de Meneses. The city, described by Duarte Barbosa as “...the richest seaport with the greatest number of wholesale merchants and abundance of shipping and trade that can be found in the whole world” was economically a strategic location. The nascent Portuguese Empire, which just discovered the Cape of Good Hope as an alternative to the Red Sea route, also conquered city-ports along the East African coast, the Arabian Sea and the west coast of India in order to secure their trade network and break the Muslim monopoly of the spice trade. Economic considerations, though with a tinge of religious fervour and political glory, was the main drive of the Portuguese Conquest of the East.

There are many reasons given for Portuguese victory, from the disunity of the enemy, to tactical superiority and good public relations. The latter reasons could be true, as the Portuguese gained the advantage after capturing the bridge of the Malacca River during battle, and won the loyalty of foreign merchants when Albuquerque promised them safe conduct and regulated the looting of the city. Regardless, the victory of the Portuguese was impressive, considering their numbers (around 1600 soldiers and 40 ships) compared to the might of 20,000 Malaccan and Javanese men (100,000 men, according to the exaggerated account of Tome Pires), 20 war elephants, and the warriors skilled in using the feared poisoned kris and Turkish guns.

On the first reason of defeat, I have heard some politicians invoke this event in order to stress on the importance of unquestioned unity under one leader. This I must disagree with. Yes, the defeat of the Malaccan forces could be attributed to disunity, but we must also remember that the people of Malacca at the time despised its ruler. Sultan Mahmud Syah was recorded by Tome Pires and Tun Seri Lanang as a maniacal despot in his youth, one who defiled his followers’ wives, assassinated his siblings like the Ottoman Sultans did for fear of rivalry and executed the family of his Bendahara in an act of paranoia. These acts have more than once cost him the loyalty of his men (Khoja Hassan, the son-in-law of Hang Tuah, for example). If anything, this event should serve as a lesson for the leaders to not overstep their boundaries, thus bringing shame to their office and losing the loyalty of their citizens.

The Fall of Malacca should be considered an important event in Malaysian history. First, it led to the formation of new Malay sultanates, such as the successor states of Johor and Perak, and the rise of a new Malay Empire, Acheh in Sumatra. These new sultanates would contribute in the development of Malay intellectual activity, with Aceh producing philosophers such as Hamzah Fansuri, and Johor producing Tun Seri Lanang, who wrote the paramount Malay history tome, the Sejarah Melayu. These new sultanates served as continuation of the Sultanate of Malacca, and they would be the precursors of some of the surviving Malay kingdoms in Malaysia today.

Second, the conquest of Malacca marked the beginning of colonialism in Malaysia. Portuguese conquest for native riches would also attract the colonialist power of the Dutch, British and Japanese empires, spanning 446 years until Tunku Abdul Rahman’s historic declaration of ‘Merdeka!’ on 31^st August 1957.

Third, it marked the arrival of Christianity in the Malay World, although the Portuguese government in Malacca seemed quite lax in this area, judging from the frustration of Saint Francis Xavier in obtaining cooperation by the authorities of Malacca in his proselytising due to economic concerns. Today, Christians number 9% of the Malaysian population, not directly due to Portuguese efforts, but they did begin this effort.

Fourth, interaction with the Portuguese led to the expansion of Malay vocabulary, with around 400 words in the Malay lexicon originated in Portuguese, such as bendera, gereja, jendela, keju, kemeja, meja, minggu, sekolah, and roda.

Fifth, the Portuguese Conquest also led to the emergence of a community, now a small minority in Malaysia. They are the Eurasian (Serani) community, a community of mixed European-Asian ancestry due to the miscegenation policies of Alfonso de Albuquerque, spread across the country and the world, but united by a quiet little village known as the Portuguese Settlement (formed 1930). This community, which incorporated Malay lifestyle, the Catholic faith and developed their own language based on Portuguese, is quite underrepresented in national policy, even in politics, much like the Orang Asli. They are not even represented in our history textbooks, but this community has contributed to the development of our nation, much like the other races. They filled the administrative and teaching positions in the civil service and schools during the British period due to their fluency in the English language; they fought valiantly against the Japanese forces during Occupation (this included one former English College teacher who was killed by the Japanese); and they have produced political leaders such as Datuk G Shelley and Bernard Sta Maria. This community deserved to be recognised as well, as scions of a mighty race and children of this nation.

So much for the effects of Portuguese conquest of Malacca, which no doubt is an important event in Malaysian history.

It is surprising, though, that for all our shared history, Malaysia has no diplomatic relations with Portugal. We have housed embassies and consulates in this country, and forged relations with other countries as well, including former colonial powers such as the United Kingdom, Japan and the Netherlands. It would be wise for Malaysia to form this relation with Portugal, in order for us to share our knowledge and learn from one another.

This essay written about the Fall of Malacca is not intended to summon some spectre of ridiculous xenophobia and nationalism for something that happened 500 years ago, but for us to understand our history and appreciate how far we have come from there.

Imam Muda: Pharisaic Piety, among other things

I first heard of Imam Muda, touted as the first reality show that seeks to find the best, brightest, and most pious person fit for the role of an Imam (cleric) (and arguably fitting sons-in-law for TV-watching parents), around last year. The show aims to find an Imam that is knowledgeable in terms of religion and also appealing to the young with his personality. Two seasons and a planned spinoff later, this show has been praised by viewers as being new and informative, a welcome alternative to the so-called mindless, ‘hedonistic’ entertainment reality TV shows. But this show is not without flaws.

I will give credit where it is due. Aiming to package Islam as being relevant to the youths of this country through its contestants, the show’s creators have prepared important tasks that might shape the so-called aspiring spiritual leaders of the community, such as being able to counsel married couples, preparing HIV corpses for burial, mixing with orphaned children and being involved in sports activities. The incorporation of courses on important subjects, such as English, psychology, and basics of economics, might provide, to some extent, credence to the contestants, where they would be seen as having a broader base of knowledge than just rituals, rules and simplistic doctrinal stances. Furthermore, Imam Muda’s success has spawned a new spinoff for aspiring female preachers (despite its adherence to a gender-separate competition, a strange definition of ‘separate but equal’ that has been discredited by Brown vs Board of Education 57 years ago).

However, I do have a number of comments on the reality show, relating to the claim of the creator, Izelan Basar, where “we want to promote a modern, tolerant Islam”.[1] In my list of comments, I wish to take this statement, as well as the entire format of the show, to scrutiny for not fulfilling the proper definition of being “modern.”

What does it mean to be ‘modern’? Considering the word to have arisen from Western civilization and school of thought, one must then look to the West to find the proper definition and application, and this includes their views on politics, economy, society, philosophy and ideals. “Modern” is a movement towards modifying traditional beliefs in accordance with modern ideas, according to the Oxford English Reference Dictionary. Modern is also defined as ‘the capacity of institutions to develop the economic and political capacity, especially social institutions, needed to support a liberal democracy.’[2] Within this definition, the idea of a modern institution (religion) requires one to also accept certain concepts such as democracy, respect to personal rights and personal autonomy, respect for rule of law, respect of women, proper deference and thirst of knowledge, and respect for differing opinions. All of these qualities I state have not been met in this new show.

On my list of comments:

1. The Pharisaic piety of Imam Muda

My first thought when Imam Muda first came to mind were the Pharisees, an ancient Jewish social movement during the Roman Occupation of Jerusalem who observed the Law of Moses and were highly self-righteous about it. After a few episodes and a number of articles, I found my initial suspicions to be correct, based on the acts and words of the contestants.

The goal of this reality show was, to quote one German news, “[to look] for a young imam who could help put an end to moral decline in the country”.[3] Is this self-righteousness not the characteristics of the Pharisees? Nothing could be more arrogant than for the religious, based on their own limited definition of morality, to proclaim the sins of the world and their own purity, and their self-appointed unquestioned authority to tell others to be as moral as them, and ‘put an end to moral decline’. What ‘moral decline’, I ask. Sexual promiscuity? Alcohol? Drugs? All of these problems within the community have secular organisations, medical, educational and psychological, that could sufficiently deal with these problems without the unnecessary burden of the clerics to claim divine authority to proclaim you as full of sin. They must at least explain the role of religion or faith in helping this problem that could not be provided by secular methods.

And I understand that some camera shots of the contestants praying and constantly praying were necessary. And of them praying some more: it is, after all, part of the job description. But would it not be enough to show one episode where they pray, just to establish that fact? It reeks of pious showmanship, another pharisaic characteristic. Maybe the contestants do not read the Bible or adhere to the ethics of Jesus of Nazareth. He does, however, have a good point in Matthew 6: 1-8, commanding his followers to eschew public ‘acts of righteousness’ before men and praying before men, lest they receive their reward on earth and not in heaven, and their sincerity be questioned. This might be the case, with the offering of a university scholarship, a pilgrimage trip, a laptop, a car, and a job to the winner, all in the name of God. This pharisaic piety belonged to the 1^st century AD, not the modern 21^st century.

2. Orang Asli visit

This drive for outward piety has also led Astro to consider, in the second season, bringing the contestants to the Orang Asli village, which raised some controversy. The controversy here refers to the possibility that the contestants would be among the Orang Asli and proselytise Islam among them. This would not sit well with them, with complaints by the various Orang Asli communities of the blatant attempts of Islamisation of the Orang Asli, leading to the loss of their identity and heritage, as well as problems of discrimination (based on studies by Nobuta Toshihiro)[4]. Regardless of the explanation given by Izelan Basar, the general manager of Astro Oasis, denying the accusation,[5] they must at least bear responsibility for this lack of research and foresight. Considering that the Orang Asli have been negatively perceived as ‘backward jungle folk’ and face problems in terms of lack of proper health and educational infrastructures, the last thing they need are a bunch of outsiders coming into their dwelling and talking to them about religion.

And if we do accept the explanation from Izelan that “visiting the indigenous people is meant for the better understanding of other cultures and building tolerance in living in a multi-religious and cultural society,” then it would be more acceptable for them to introduce the imam aspirants to join other religious communities as well, such as the Christians, Catholic and Protestants, the Buddhists and Hindus, especially when Muslims interact with them on a daily basis.

3. Khalwat raids

If there is one aspect of the show that negates the very objective of Imam Muda in becoming a show with a more ‘modern’ face, it is the blatant act of harassing people and disregard of personal space via the khalwat raids. How dare these arrogant young men, under the conceited pretence of “preventing adultery”, began to harass and embarrass couples in Titiwangsa (a public place, mind you, and a blatant disrespect to personal autonomy), and raiding hotels without proper warrants, as if the religious departments have been given carte blanche to disregard hotel privacy laws and proper procedural channels. And even if I might be proven wrong on Sharia procedure regarding raids, the fact that couples are humiliated on this show by being at the receiving end of a condescending lecture by prize-seeking cleric aspirants[6] while the entire ordeal was recorded and broadcasted for viewers to fulfil their self-righteous sadism is against a characteristic of being ‘modern’, namely the right to personal autonomy (this would remind one of the Puritans in America who would gather and cheer during the burning of witches and branding of sinners).

Furthermore, the principle of khalwat raids (which in principle must be unconstitutional) is also not discussed. Why the lone view that khalwat raids are necessary to prevent baby dumping, even though baby dumping still occurs WITH the presence of raids? Why not provide the alternative views of the illegality of conducting such raids and recording them on camera to humiliate the victims, or even the opposition to the principle of khalwat raids as suggested by Dr Asri, former Mufti of Perlis?[7] What disrespect. Would it not be better for these contestants, rather than snooping around for couples who they think might sin, they would be better off hunting wife beaters?

4. Lack of discussion on intellectual issues

They may be involved with society, but in the end, these contestants are vying to become an Imam, which requires them to have a good grasp of theology and the intellect. There were some questions given to the contestants on proper ways to conduct Islamic rituals and their sources via written tests. However, it is disappointing that the show, which is supposed to be deep and different from the ‘superficial’ shows of the West, seems to intellectually mollycoddle the contestants and prevent them from proper expression on their knowledge on serious Islamic issues.

What have they to talk about regarding interfaith relations? How do they treat non-Muslim sacred literature? Do they debate and discuss them?

What about freedom of expression? How do they deal with freedom of expression, even freedom that might offend them? What about anti-Islamic literature? How do they deal with it? Complete ban, or freedom of information, with them answering the criticisms like proper scholars?

What about the theory of evolution? Do they adhere to the view of Harun Yahya creationism, or the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection accepted by the respectable scientific community?

What about history? Will they allow the proper writing of history, or do they prefer hagiography with the uncomfortable parts removed?

What about the Israel-Palestinian conflict? Destruction of Israel, or two-state solution? What about acts of terrorism done in the name of Islam? Are they justified? And should they be called martyrs or criminals?

These questions might seem too much to be put into ten 1 hour episodes. But I cannot stress more on the importance of these serious intellectual issues being raised. After all, Malaysia is a country where opinions of the cleric is given prominence and a hearing in all issues, even ones where he has no apparent academic or intellectual qualifications simply because he carried the title Ustaz (Reverend) in front of his name, such as economy, politics, history, science, medicine, constitutional law and management of society. At the very least, these contestants must be shown to respect knowledge and other disciplines. And without these issues being discussed, the reality show would only limit these contestants as Imams who only lead prayers and harass couples in Ttitwangsa.

5. One supreme judge

Understandably, in trying to find a leader of the flock, Imam Muda would not leave the choice of choosing their champion to the same flock they would serve. They need a religious teacher, an experienced person, to judge them. Enter Ustaz Hassan Mahmud al-Hafiz.

While I do not doubt his ability to issue judgment as he sees fit, I could not but question the wisdom of having only one judge to determine the outcome. Being but human, one is subservient not only to evidence, but also ideology or personal world-view when making his decision. And having only one judge with his own views on what is proper and improper in judging the future religious leader of a community is quite authoritarian in nature.

True, there are some advisors in the show whose input in the show might contribute to the judge’s choice, but still, the final choice is with the judge. The intellectual and ideological movement within Islam is not monolithic. They have representatives among the conservative, the hardliners, the moderates, and the liberals. Why are their voices not represented, from the hardliner Datuk Harussani, to the moderate Dr Asri, to the liberal SIS? Should they not be called upon to give judgment as well? It would be fairer as well for the contestants, as they would also be exposed to various views within Islam and thawing their previous ideological bias. This, I believe, would fulfil the objective of achieving a ‘modern, tolerant Islam’ that respects and listens to other views as well.

Conclusion:

Imam Muda is a decent show, I must admit. But it is not immune from criticism. And my comments on some things may be seen as too much to expect from a ‘reality’ show. But the show’s creators have put this burden on themselves, in trying to make the show ‘different’ from the other shows ‘with no religious values,’ and contributing something positive to society. For everyone's sake, I hope they got that part right.

---

[1] Abe, Nicola (6 August 2010) “Malaysia’s Imam Idol: A Reality Show’s Search for a Muslim role Model” Spiegel Online International. From http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,710268,00.html (2 July 2011)

[2] Entry “Modernism”. In Robertson, David. The Penguin Dictionary of Politics. London: New York. 1993.

[3] Abe, Nicola (6 August 2010) “Malaysia’s Imam Idol: A Reality Show’s Search for a Muslim role Model” Spiegel Online International. From http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,710268,00.html (2 July 2011)

[4] See Nobuta Toshihiro, ‘Islamization Policy toward the Orang Asli in Malaysia,’ in Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology, 31(4): 479–495 (2007). Taken from http://ir.minpaku.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10502/3335/1/KH_031_4_002.pdf

[5] (January 10, 2011) “Astro Oasis: Contestants’ jungle visit not to preach.” The Star. From : http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?sec=nation&file=/2011/1/10/nation/7765274 (3 July 2011)

[6] (Let’s drop the whole ‘I’m doing it for God’ thing. They’re doing it for Mammon. At least be honest about it)

[7] Asri Zainal Abidin (November 2, 2008) “Bila Yang Nyata Terbiar, Yang Tersembunyi Dicari.” From http://drmaza.com/home/?p=480 (3 July 2011)

Disturbing trend in Umno

An old letter I wrote to The Sun newspaper:

10:18AM Fri, 12 Nov 2010 from www.sun2surf.com

THE end of the 61st Umno general assembly on Oct 24 left a mark on the party, the largest in the Barisan Nasional and the core of the ruling coalition. Much has been discussed – education, economy, race and the Constitution – in order to show Umno as being involved in discussing the issue of nation-building.

However, what is most noticeable in Umno is the disturbing trend that is actually weakening the party: the process of its radical Islamisation and Arabisation.

True, this process began 30 years ago and its fruits seen in ensuing years, with the case mounted on the Catholic Church for its use of the term "Allah" (which it had used in Bahasa Malaysia for a long time). However, the recent assembly has marked such a disturbing trend of moralising and pontificating by delegates and speakers, that one would confuse it for a religious conference.

For example, the term "wasatiyyah" or moderation has been much thrown around like a magic word, as if to stress on the idea of the moderation of Umno.

What is wrong with "kesederhanaan"? It is a decent Malay word and has been used without problems before. Is kesederhanaan so displeasing that one has to turn to Arab terminology to impress the audience? Would the language purists be ready to pounce on these people for mixing Arab words in a

Malay language conversation or speech, as much as they would gladly do when English was used?

The same could be said of Umno youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin’s speech, the title of which was "Maqasid dan Manhaj Perjuangan" (Goals and approaches of the struggle), as if "matlamat" and "pendekatan" were not good enough. One would expect this stunt from Anwar Ibrahim, and this has been rightly pointed out by blogger Jebatmustdie.

But it doesn’t stop there. Johor Baru Puteri Umno chief Azura Mohd Afandi took morality preaching to a new level. With no logic behind it, she blamed sanitary pad advertisements for causing "social ills" – a most asinine statement if there ever was one.

It would be a joke, if not for the scary fact that she is holding a minor leadership position in the largest organisation in the ruling coalition.

The call by Perlis representative Fathul Bari Mat Jahya for the establishment of a council of ulama on the last day of the assembly is most disturbing, especially of Umno. The ulama, with their own views of how politics should be conducted i.e. a theocratic state, would not complement Umno. They would instead be a great liability. If Umno members actually bother to study history, they would know the former Umno ulama wing of the late 1940s would turn on it and form what is now known as Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS).

This trend towards radical, unthinking Islamisation and Arabisation within Umno is most unwelcome in a party that is supposed to be the leader of a multiracial and multi-religious coalition. Datuk Onn Jaafar, the founder and visionary of Umno, understood the threat of radical Islam from outside and inside Umno, and one who would call a spade a spade, rightly labelled it as "the danger from the mountains".

Great men make great mistakes. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s greatest mistake was allowing Anwar Ibrahim into Umno, thus opening the floodgates to religious fanatics like Abim infiltrating Umno, where it is now represented by speakers with a fixation for Arabic terms, and where sanitary pad commercials are thought to give rise to unruly adolescents and social ills.

Umno should stay off this road and return to its original role: a Malay, nationalist, and most importantly, secular party. Secularism has been much maligned and misrepresented by religious fanatics over the years as an anti-religious way of thinking, and this misguided view should be answered.

The idea that Umno would not allow religion or religious interpretations to bias its decision to determine national policies is the only acceptable way it can attract the moderates. And this can only be achieved by taking the original secular approach. And it should not be apologetic about it.