"Origins" by Charles Darwin

I grew up in the belief that creation was opposed to evolution: man was either created by God OR he evolved from monkeys.  'Belief' according to Bucky, is when you let someone else do the thinking for you - lazy me!

Charles Darwin first published his book in 1859  with the title "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection" and it has been available ever since.  I never had any intention of reading this book but for the fact that someone had translated this book into Malay and the Malaysian Authorities thought fit to BAN the translation, though not the original English.  (Read my post here.)  I had to read the book for myself.

I remember reading somewhere that "Origin of Species", Thomas Malthus's "An Essay on the Principal on Population" and Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" form the 'triumvirate' of Capitalism - now 2 other books on my 'to read' list.

I got the book on-line.  It's not easy reading, the language can be a little too technical for a 'lay-person' like me, but I persevered as I wanted to know how this book was going to affect my Islamic Faith.

I consider myself orthodox in matters of my Faith and I did not find anything in this book that would challenge that.  In fact, Darwin appears to be a deeply religious man (Christian though and not Muslim) in this book.  He does not challenge God as I have heard some accusing him of.

"... it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that He created a few original forms capable of self-development into other needful forms, as to believe that He required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of His laws."  

Nature according to him, is not necessarily the creative agent (i.e. God) but "the agent of an agent (God)".

There is also no mention in this book of man being descended from monkeys.  That is the subject of another book, "The Descent of Man" published in 1871.

An 1871 caricature following publication of The Descent of Man was typical of many showing Darwin with an ape body, identifying him in popular culture as the leading author of evolutionary theory.
(Image and caption from Wikipedia.)

Could it be that our Authorities were actually spooked by the sub-title of the book, "Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"?  I wonder how it would have looked in translation.

When Asking Questions is Dangerous

I came across this article in themalaymailonline.com and I wanted to share my 2 sen worth here.

Wan Sulaiman Wan Ismail
(photo from themalaymailonline.com)

In my experience, people ask questions for one of two reasons - (1) they don't know something and are keen to know or (2) they are not really interested in knowing but want to show off as someone superior to the person being questioned.  There may be other reasons but I have no experience with those others.

The subject of the article, Wan Sulaiman Wan Ismail, is what some would call "Anti-Hadith" (I think 'name calling' makes it easier to demonize someone). 

Actually asking questions is encouraged in the Quran.  Even the Prophets asked questions of Allah.  Take the example of Prophet Ibrahim AS who wanted to know how Allah returns life to one who has died.  Was the Prophet Ibrahim AS of weak faith?

Logic, however, tells me that when I have a question I need to ask, I need to approach someone who would be in a position to answer.  When it concerns my heart (the organ in my body that pumps blood) I talk to a cardiologist not my GP, although the GP would be the first person I approach.

Similarly, concerning Islam talk to the 'experts' in the particular branch of 'religious knowledge' not the 'Ustadz Pondok' (village teacher).  More so when the Ustadz tries to stop you from questioning.

Coming back to the article, Wan Sulaiman (I am only inferring here) seems to have read the Quran.

".... Wan Sulaiman wanted to know the origin of the shahadah, which comes in two parts: to declare a Muslim’s belief in the oneness of Allah, and the acceptance of Muhammad as Allah’s prophet.

Indeed, a semblance of the first part was mentioned in the Quran, specifically verse 3:18. But one might ask: where did the second part come from?"

Verse 3:18 is verse 18 of Surah Al-Imran which translates as, "There is no god but He: that is the witness of Allah, His Angels, and those endued with knowledge, standing firm on justice.  There is no god but He, the Exalted in Power, the Wise."

When he read that, how come he missed Surah Al-Fath verse 29,  "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; ……. " (48:29)

Translation from: The Meaning of the Holy Quran; Text, Translation and Commentary; by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. Published by Islamic Book Trust, Kuala Lumpur (2010 Reprint). (There are so many Abdullah Yusuf Ali translations that I need to be specific which translation I referred to.)

Without Allah who will help? – Orang Asli Christians

The above title is the title of a post that appeared in the blog "uppercaise" (click here to read) which was adapted from the Malaysian Insider.  

In that posting, Bong Alang, the village headman is quoted as saying, "Without 'Allah' who is going to help us?  This is our history, how are we supposed to suddenly change God's name?"  

A picture of the hymnal (which was seized by the police but was subsequently returned) was also included in the post.

I find the headman's question a little strange and they have chosen to omit a comma in the  hymnal's title.  Why I think so?

Well according to the Bible, Deuteronomy 6:4 reads, "Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one!" and also Mark 12:29, "... Hear, O Israel, the LORD our GOD is one."

The Al-Kitab translates the above verses as: "Dengarlah, hai orang Israel: TUHAN itu Allah kita, TUHAN itu esa!" (Ulangan 6:4) and "... Dengarlah, hai orang Israel, Tuhan Allah kita, Tuhan itu esa." (Markus 12:19)

Or does the headman use a different translation of the Bible?

Is the Sharia really bloodthirsty?

Origin of Species

It was interesting to hear that the Malay translation of the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin is banned in Malaysia. (Read about it here.)

Image from Wikipedia

Even more interesting is the reason for the ban - "endangers public harmony" and "... it goes against Islamic teachings ...";  AND the ban only applies to the translation not the original English version.

I have only read an illustrated and abridged version of the book (comic book version) which I got at one of the Big Bad Wolf sales some years ago.  While the book has some interesting theories about 'natural selection' it did not actually disprove the 'creation theory' many people who believe in religion hold to.  At least that was what I understood then.

There is a saying that the sleep of a knowledgeable person is superior to the ritual worship of an ignorant one.  I'm sure the authorities here are also aware of that saying but are choosing to define knowledgeable and ignorant within very narrow limits.

I wonder what would happen if "The God Delusion" gets translated.  After all that he writes, the best Richard Dawkins can arrive at is 'God probably does not exist'.  To me that's another way of saying 'He probably does'.

Image from Wikipedia

End to the "Allah" issue?

"All right to use Allah", says the Sun quoting Selangor Executive Councillor for Islamic Affairs, Sallehin Mukhyi. (Read the report here.)

According to the report, Non-Muslims can use "Allah" provided it is not 'misused' such as to propagate other religions among Muslims.

Isn't propagating other religions to Muslims against our Federal Constitution, with or without use of the word "Allah"?

What about the misuse of the word in the Al-Kitab for god and gods (lower-case or small 'g')?  As far as I know, there is no 'allah' (lower-case or small 'a') in Malay or even in English. (I had to disregard spell-check.)  It is definitely not found in the Arabic Bible (Al-Kitab Al-Mukhandas) - there are no upper/lower case letters in the Arabic Language.

Arabic Bible
(from Google Images)

I found this on someone's Facebook wall (I've forgotten whose) some time ago and I think I'll share it here.  No special reason but you're free to think whatever you want.  I'm not responsible for your thoughts.

Malaysia Airlines MH370 again

From Malaysia Airlines MH370 - Tribute
on Facebook

I love a good story, and the speculations and conspiracy theories surrounding the disappearance of Flight MH370 provides for some awesome reading.  Don't get me wrong, my thoughts and prayers are still with those aboard that flight and their grieving families.  I am still hopeful of a happy ending.  I have a strong belief that miracles do happen.

Among all those stories, I am (or rather was) of the opinion that the only plausible theory was that of the Canadian pilot who thinks that the pilot of MH370 was turning back towards Langkawi but, for whatever reason, he was overcome and the plane probably crashed into the Indian Ocean.  The place to look for debris would be following the trajectory the plane would have taken flying over Langkawi.

A day after the Kajang elections, the Prime Minister announces that the plane crashed into the Indian Ocean and it is presumed that there are no survivors.  At this point there was no evidence one way or other, making me wonder how or why they came to this conclusion.

Soon after there are satellite images of 2 pieces of debris some 2,500 miles off Perth, Australia.  Then the number became more than 100 and rose to over 300.  Our oceans are indeed polluted.

Copied from www.globalresearch.ca

Looking at the map of the search area, the "Diego Gracia" theory suddenly seemed plausible, more so than the "Langkawi" one.  Then our Government had a moment of genius and the search area was moved away from that location.

After nearly one month, no evidence of a crash has been forthcoming.  Add to that the Prime Minister's use of "condolence" and "bereaved" even on the first day the plane was declared missing, are we to suspect some form of a cover-up with the tacit approval of the Malaysian Government.

Like they say, "the Plot thickens."

Do continue to remember the passengers and crew of MH370 and their families in your thoughts and prayers.

Malaysia Airlines MH370

At this moment, my thoughts and prayers are with those on board the missing flight MH370 and all their family and friends.  I am still hoping for a miracle to happen.

Sand sculpture at Puri Beach, India
from the Facebook page "Malaysia Airlines MH370- Tribute"

What irks me about all this is that with 300 odd lives at stake, the people resposible just took their own b****y time to react.  A plane goes missing at 2.30 a.m. (even earlier than 1.30 a.m. by some accounts) and they only alert the rescue control center at 5.30 a.m.  What if their own family was on board?

Then they call for press conference after press conference - come prepared lah, don't let the journalists get the better of you.  From what I saw, the journalists were better informed than the panel.

I used to know a guy who was the PA for a federal minister.  Whenever his minister was to attend a press conference or any meeting for that matter, he would be frantically running around to prepare a brief which included answers to possible questions that may be posted.  Don't they have good PAs anymore these days.

They tell us not to speculate and the PM goes on to use the words like "bereaved" and "condolences".  What are we supposed to make of that?

To top it all we have the morons who, because they HAVE to say something, post the darnnest things on social media not at all bothered about the sensitivities involved.  And the bigger morons who actually share these postings.

When this is all over, and I hope and pray that it will end well, I think we need to evaluate our crisis management capabilities, even for us as individuals in our own homes.

Maulid Rasul - Should we or shouldn't we?

Part of the Prophet's Masjid showing the green dome
 above the final resting place of the Prophet SAAW

Today (14 Jan 2014) is a public holiday in Malaysia in conjunction with Maulidul Rasul or the Birthday of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Ah'lihi Wa Sallam).

Maulid has been celebrated here as far back as I can remember.  When I was younger I used to attend the Maulid recitals (poetry composed in honor of the Prophet SAAW) during the first 12 days of Rabiul Awal at Masjid India Kuala Lumpur.  I even took part in the Maulid procession that was held from Stadium Merdeka to Masjid Negara in those days.

These days there are some who speak against this practice of celebrating Maulid.  They claim that this is a new innovation (bida'ah).  They say that the Prophet SAAW nor his Noble Companions celebrated it, neither did any of the Imams of the Four Schools of Jurisprudence.

They go on to claim that this was started by the Fatimid Caliphs in Egypt who were Shiites.  This is probably true and for the same reasons why Governments today sponsor concerts i.e. to lull the population into a feeling of complacency and/or contentment.

To be fair to these people, no one knows when exactly the Prophet SAAW was born.  Various historians have proposed various dates.  They are not even agreed on the month.  While many give the year as 'the year of the elephant', there are those who place it a few years after or even before that year. I have read one narration claiming the birth occurred 15 years before the year of the elephant.

The only thing certain from authentic traditions (hadith) is the the Prophet SAAW was born on a Monday.  That was why he (SAAW) used to fast on Mondays.

Hey! Wait a minute, doesn't this mean that the Prophet SAAW did celebrate his (SAAW) birthday every week?  The Companions used to follow him (SAAW) as do many of us to this day.  So where does this "The Prophet SAAW and his Companions NEVER celebrated his (SAAW) birthday" come from?  If by "it" they mean that we should not be celebrating the Maulid only annually but on a more frequent interval, then I think we should all agree.

Maybe it is the poetry recital that these people are against.  I do not understand Arabic, so I have to rely on translations.  The poems for the most part trace the life of the Prophet SAAW and his achievements. In one or two places though the praise heaped on the Prophet SAAW is rather excessive.  I don't know if this is what the poet meant or if it's just what was understood by the translator.  Either way, the proper thing would be to correct the mistake rather than 'ban' the poem.

We are living some fourteen hundred over years from the time of the Prophet SAAW and it is always a good idea to re-connect with the Prophet SAAW by reading his SAAW seerah (life history) listening to lectures on it.  The Maulid celebrations provide an opportunity for this to happen.

One thing we are surely missing in our lives is the ADAB (often translated as 'good manners' and/or 'courtesy' but I think it means very much more than these) thought by the Prophet SAAW.  When we do that, all this bickering among ourselves will be a thing of the past.

Coming back to "Should we or shouldn't we?" I respect whatever your choice, but do have the adab to respect the choice of others who may differ from you.

The ALLAH Issue Again!

This time the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) has raided the Bible Society of Malaysia.  Even if there was a need for it, the reported high-handed manner in which it was carried out does not bode well for inter-ethnic, inter-religious relations in the country, and the raid itself could be illegal.

Then there is news that some political groups want to picket in front of churches.  The Police have issued a ‘stern’ warning against this, but considering the parties involved, we need to wait and see what happens and how the Police will respond.

As I have voiced out before the Islamic Authorities, both at Federal and State levels, seem to insult the intelligence of Muslims in the country.  They think that we are some sort of imbeciles who cannot think for ourselves and they have to do the thinking for us.

And just because the Christian God does not have a proper name, the Church should not be adamant in misusing words to insult other faiths, in this case Islam.  (The Arabic alphabet does not have upper and lower case letters, how is ‘allah’ written in the Arabic Bible?)

The only way forward, in my view, is for the Church to work with Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP) to produce a Malay version of the Bible.  (If you have a better solution, please feel free to voice it.)

This will not only resolve the issue of the ‘Allah’ word, but all the words that are ‘banned’, not because “Muslims will get confused” as the authorities seem to think, but to maintain the integrity of meaning of those words.

When we want to say ‘The Late so-and-so’ in Malay, it is AlMarhum Tengku Abdul Rahman, Allahyarham Tun Abdul Razak, and Mendiang Tun Tan Siew Sin.  It is not about the person writing, it could be Johan or John, it is about the person referred to, whether Royalty, an ordinary Muslim or a non-Muslim.

Similarly, ‘Firman’ in Malay is exclusively for what Allah says in the Quran.  If it is something that the Prophet said, the word is ‘Sabda’.  The King ‘titah’ and the rest of us ‘kata’. (I hope you get where I'm going.)

If a non-Muslim is Guest of Honor at a breaking of fast ceremony, and in his/her speech, he/she decides to quote from the Quran, he/she should be able to say, “Allah berfirman dalam AlQuran…”  There is no ambiguity is what is said.

There are those who say that language is ever changing and meanings change with the times.  I am well aware of that.  A word, which, in my younger days, would have meant what a happy and jovial character I was, will only raise eyebrows if I described myself as such now.  I don’t think I want to see religious terms reduced to that level.

Take not Jews and Christians for your friends...

Can I send Christmas greetings?  Can I join in the celebrations? The authorities are no help.  On the one hand they say NO! and on the other hand our leaders are officiating Christian functions.  Then again I don't need to worry, Christmas is over and 2014 is upon us.

Some views of Jerusalem
(Image from Wikipedia)

In the Quran, verse 51 of Surah Al Maidah translates as follows: "O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other.  And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily God guides not a people unjust." (Abdullah Yusuf Ali translation)

I do not have Jewish friends but many of my friends consider themselves Christians.  So how?

My problem often is trying to understand specific verses independently of other verses, forgetting that the Quran should be taken as a whole and that should form the basis of guidance for Muslims.  It's like taking only the beginning portion of the Muslim's Attestation of Faith (Kalimah Shahadah) i.e. "I believe that there is no god" and then going on to claim that Muslims are closet atheists. (Richard Dawkins should be pleased.)

Earlier this year I performed my Umrah/Ziarah (Lesser Pilgrimage to the Grand Masjid in Makkah and Visitation to the Prophet's Masjid in Madinah) which included a stop-over in Jordan and a visit to Jerusalem.  Talking to our guide in Amman, I could see that he was proud of the fact that his family had fought for independence from the Turks.

The Arabs wanted to free themselves from the 'yoke' of the Turks so they befriended the British and the French and sought their help and protection.  To honor the now independent Arab States, their new-found friends bestowed upon them Israel.

Today, almost every 'Muslim' State still looks up to Israel's foremost backer and protecter to make that problem go away.  I, for one, won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

In the meantime I'll still love all of my friends and remember them in my prayers, and Allah is my Guide.

How to ask Quality Questions

I just noticed this in my 'draft' folder where it's been sitting for more than a year.  I suppose that now's a good time as any to share it.

Its said that the quality of your questions determine the quality of your life. When I mentioned that to someone, he asked me, "What is a quality question?" Funny thing is how we think we know something, but when someone asks about it you cannot answer. This was one of those times for me.

I found this note on a friends facebook page which I think will help in answering that question. He had got it from www.aspirenow.com.

Re-framing questions to maximize our power:

Original question: “Who am I?”
Revised powerful question: “What do I stand-up for?”

Original question: “What are my goals?”
Revised powerful question: “How can I just BE and yet be complete?”

Original question: “What is my life purpose?”
Revised powerful question: “What can I do where I maximize my life, my love, my happiness, and my burning desire to contribute?”

Original question: “How can I attract more love?”
Revised powerful question: “How much love can I give out and to whom do I want to give it to?”

Original question: “What am I getting out of this?”
Revised powerful question: “Who am I becoming from doing this?”

Original question: “Why is this happening to me?”
Revised powerful question: “How am I growing and learning from this situation?”

Original question: “Why did they hurt me?”
Revised powerful question: “How can I rise above the hurt to grow?”

Original question: “What else is there?”
Revised powerful question: “How can I be open to discover more?”

Original question: “How can I get more money?”
Revised powerful question: “How can I add more value to other’s lives?”

Original question: “How can I stay looking young and beautiful?”
Revised powerful question: “How can I share in the beauty in all things?”

Original question: “What will I do with my time?”
Revised powerful question: “What matters the most in this moment?”

Original question: “What do I want now?”
Revised powerful question: “What can I do to just be and not want or need anything?”

Original question: “How can I become more secure and protect my family?”
Revised powerful question: “How can I imagine the lives of those I love as “secure” in a way where nothing can harm us?”

Original question: “How come I feel out of control?”
Revised powerful question: “What can I do in this moment that is true to my self?”

~~~ from www.aspirenow.com ~~~

The Open Letter - Additional Comments

You know that my letter got published in The Malaysian Insider.

I can only clarify points for those who don't understand me, but for those who choose to misunderstand me, I can only say that they are well entitled to their opinions as I am to mine.  However, if someone finds some fact wrong in what I wrote, then please enlighten me that I can make any correction that may be necessary.

As I have said in earlier postings, I have no personal objections on anybody using the term Allah provided they maintain the integrity of the meaning of the word.  Anyone who says that non-Muslims using the word may confuse Muslim me is surely insulting my intelligence.

I would like to thank 2 readers, bimasakti and yk001nul, for their comments (reproduced below) which I consider is helpful in explaining my letter.

Instead of condemning Shaik Dawood with the standard criticisms of who owns which word, why don't you read once again what he has actually written. Why use the lower case 'allah' in the al Kitab to refer to to non-Judeo-Christian/non-Islamic deities like baal, ishtar, ishwar? Do you really believe your typical East Malaysian reading the al Kitab can distinguish between an upper case Allah and a lower case one? – bimasakti

The writer has highlighted accordingly the Muslims' concern. That is the point of contention when Muslims object to the usage of Allah in the Malay Bible. It was never about permission, but it's always about the literal meaning. 

To understand the 'confusion' the Muslims are always talking about, try visiting other places or country where the Bible is presented in the local vernacular. You can see that the word referring to God changes from country to country, from place to place. It's 'ibshaq' in Assamese areas of India, 'atoatl' in Nahuatl-speaking provinces of Brazil, and of course, 'allah' here in Malay-speaking Malaysia. Heck, in Hebei province of China, there used to be a Bible publication calling the God as Buddha, before some pressure from Buddhist groups corrected the problem. 

For a really central important concept in Christianity to be represented in such non-uniform way across the globe, isn't it a matter of concern to all Christians? In this, our Muslim brothers obviously has the better hand; the God is uniformly referred to as Allah no matter wherever they go, and you don't see them usurping the God concept from other religions for their own use. Interestingly, I read the Arabic version of Bible, and nowhere are there such transliteration confusion as the one found in our Malay Bible. Proper nouns are properly addressed as Allah, while references to generic deities and pagan gods are addressed either as 'rabb' or 'latt' (a generic name derived from pre-Islamic Nabatean goddess Latta). Thus it was no wonder that Arabic Christians are confused on the Allah ban ruling by our authority. So, it is inherently a Malaysian problem then. (Emphasis mine)

I've no idea why the missionaries of yore chose Allah instead of the pre-existing Malay-Sanskrit over-god word 'Mahadewa' when they first published the Malay bible in the 17th century. It just didn't follow the pattern used by contemporary missionaries elsewhere in the world around that time. Many reasons can be thought of; Christianization among Muslims, colonial politics, Muslim tolerance, or maybe just bad command of Malay language. 

One thing for sure though, is that it is a move worth reconsidering for mutual peace between these two great religions. I hope that Christians and Muslims here can get over their emotions and find a common ground to settle this issue once and for all. – yk001nul