Beyond the pale

The Two Towers is the second instalment of J.R.R. Tolkien’s trilogy titled the Lord of the Rings.

It tells of an alliance between two parties, Saruman the white, the wizard who betrayed the Fellowship of the Ring to ally with Sauron the enemy in order to raise an army that will reignite the war between the two kingdoms of Mordor and Gondor, and win the same for Mordor, as well as restore the One Ring to its previous owner, Sauron, enabling him to rule the realm once again.

This epic Middle Earth fantasy, based on a book of the same name written by Tolkien in 1954, was made into a movie directed by Peter Jackson in 2002, enthralling many fans of the original books, and introduced many of those who were previously unacquainted with the books to the trilogy.

It is then little wonder this particular title came to mind when one of yours truly stumbled upon two very entertaining articles published by the Malay Mail Online in the course of the past three days since the start of this new month of July.

Following yet another controversy last week, where one Malay Muslim, Maryam Lee, posted in her Facebook wall that she decided (out of the blue on one fine day, it seems) to make a conscious protest to “stand up for Malaysian Muslim oppressed women”, by eating, drinking and making merry publically and openly during Ramadan within the safe confines of a Chicken Rice Shop outlet in a mall within the Klang Valley, and following her – naturally – being utterly condemned for this bizarre act on social media, two Malay Mail Online columnists, Farouk A. Peru and Zurairi AR decided that they had to write something in her defence.

It didn’t matter that groups normally aligned with their liberal stance on religion in the past, such as Dr. Ahmad Farouk Musa of the Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) had decided, in this instance, to call her out and disavow her for going a tad too far than what they would be willing to go.

No, no! They would not have it! She was an ally, and needed protection. So, like the towers existing in the fantasy that was penned by the celebrated late author abovenamed, they allied as two in the service of her cause, by writing articles in her support.

The first article, “Why I support Maryam Lee’s non-fasting protest” was published on 1 July. The writer, Farouk A. Peru, as usual, employed his routine standard operating procedure: either agree with his take on what Islam should be, or be called an “Islamofascist”. No exceptions.

He begins with an avowed admiration for Muslim women who “unflinchingly stand” against “Islamofacism”, listing Amina Wadud Muhsin as an example of one such idol deserving of this admiration of his.

Then, hailing his new darling, Maryam Lee as part of a so-called new generation of Muslim feminists, he asserted on her behalf that she was entitled to eat as according to traditional Islam, women are forbidden to pray and fast during menstruation, and thus, according to Maryam (wait, he didn’t know this himself?), it is not therefore a crime for a Muslim woman to eat and drink during Ramadan either.

We can only shake our heads at this asininity. Hey, Farouk! It isn’t the fact that she didn’t fast that was objectionable (as the various responses to Maryam Lee’s Facebook post herself made clear), it was the act of doing so in public! And they call our politicians stupid.

And while we’re on this point, we remind the same writer that there isn’t some unspoken rule that prevents Maryam from legitimately eating and drinking in public. It is the law itself.

Section 15 of the Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act 1997 (as well as various identical provisions in force within other states of Malaysia) provides that any person who during the hours of fasting in the month of Ramadan is found openly or in a public place (this includes Chicken Rice Shop outlets, by the way) to be eating or drinking AND those who sell to any Muslim any food or drink for immediate consumption during such hours is guilty of an offence and shall be liable to a fine of up to RM1,000.00, imprisonment of six months or both!

This means that not only did Maryam Lee break the law, but the man who served her meal as well! No wonder he was mistaken for being rude – he was concerned for his own culpability. Can anyone really blame him?

Having both failed to comprehend the nature of the complaint against his friend, and failed to duly research the proper implications, he wraps up his rambunctious article by taking a swipe at Isma and “Malaysian Islamofascist authorities” and lastly, with all the traits of a tantrum throwing infant, ended with a demand that others rise up to the challenge to teach the “spoilt and petulant Malay Muslim” a lesson, thus insulting a great deal of the population!

But as dreary as Farouk’s article was, it was nothing compared to the trashy piece penned by Zurairi AR, which is not just beyond the pale (although this is convenient as a title)  but beyond absurdity or even the realm of reality.

So illogical and mendacious was his article published on July 3, “We need solidarity for Muslims who do not fast”, that reading it leaves one with the acute impression that its author hails from some kind of parallel universe where time moves in the opposite direction, where gravity is repealed and where the laws of physics as we know them don’t apply.

Beginning with a prompt dismissal of the annual Fast4Malaysia as nothing but a “dishonest” event (which we have no qualms with, by the way), he goes on to bemoan the fate of some Muslims in Malaysia who won’t or cannot fast, as being denied so-called nourishment due to Shariah. Maryam Lee, who he says is a friend, is one among plenty of them.

Further lamenting the treatment that his friend Maryam deservedly got, he dropped his first incomprehensible bombshell. “I cannot make this any clearer: Ramadan is a month. And months, in general, do not care if humans disrespect them or not. Because months do not have feelings,” he wrote.

This left us stupefied as to its denotation. We are sure you, dear reader, would be at a similar loss to understand this statement as we were. What does this even mean? Ramadan does not care about respect because it is a month and not a human being? What?

Maybe that there are many different categories of respect escaped him, but we refused to believe that someone could be this inane. Surely even a five year old child knew about the difference between respect accorded to humans and one accorded any religious or cultural practice?

Using his friend’s case in point, he then continued by taking strong exception to the restriction for Muslims to openly and publicly display their Shariah-allowed non-fasting situation, as if they are the victimised Muslims in the country. He termed it as an absurdity, when in reality, he grows even more absurd by each paragraph he writes.

Muslims, he claimed, should “own up” that it is them who feel insulted when others eat in public, due to his self-proclaimed reasons, not backed by any cold hard facts or evidence, that run the gamut from self-entitlement to insecurity, and then, in a stunning display of incoherence, even questions the appropriateness of etiquette and manners as an issue.

“How could one act that is completely harmless one day, become so maligned on another?” he asks, incredibly.

Because that other day is in the month of Ramadan, duh! Why should this even need to be spelt out? Any reasonable person, much less a practising or pious Muslim, can deduce this.

His further opinion about moral policing is, in our view, not worthy of comment, because morality (Akhlak) is deeply rooted in faith (Iman) where it goes in tandem with compliance to Shariah. Both are two sides of the same coin, so to speak.

But of course, this aspect is lost to the humanist like the article’s author, who refuses to accept the Shariah proscribed co-relation and bond between manners, etiquette and morality as well as and Iman and Islam (faith and submission).

He also miserably failed to cite any instance of Muslims in countries “where public eating during Ramadan is completely allowed”. Yet another failure of his is to provide any evidence where the Muslims in those countries chose not to fast.

What we find even more insulting is the suggestion that those Muslims, if they are allowed by Shariah to break their fast) “are less well-mannered than Malaysian Muslims” (and we believe he is referring to the likes of Maryam Lee here) who decides to break the prohibition.

In a peculiar twist, he then suggests that non-Muslims brazenly join non fasting Muslims for lunch rather than with fasting Muslims “who try to demand undeserved respect,” and then asserts that it is right that Ramadan has, in his view, “peeled back the pretence of the rest of the year to show an increasingly Islamised society”.

Unbelievable. Muslims who want to follow their religion better listen up, as simply practising your faith is “unsympathetic” and should somehow be discouraged, if not out rightly prohibited, as the case is in Xinjiang, China. Oddly enough perhaps he would be happier there.

We remind all fellow Muslims, including ourselves that, lest it be forgotten, the provisions of Shariah is incumbent upon all Muslims, irrespective of their geographical location, language, social, economic and educational backgrounds.

A Muslim diplomat, for example, is as much duty bound to observe the Shariah (and be held accountable of any breach thereof) as a Muslim poor farmer or Muslim university graduate. The values of and morality as prescribed by Islam is the same in every corner of the globe.

The regulations and boundaries of this divinely inspired system of life governs the believer’s entire life, from birth to death, and it also uniquely governs matters of the bathroom as well as the boardroom and bedroom.

Muslims who follow the injunctions of the Holy Quran and Sunnah believe that Islam is the only divinely ordained ideology, system of life and value system which must be upheld in the face of all and any man-made faulty and hollow systems under any other names, brands or labels – be  they secularism, socialism, liberalism or humanism.

For them, it is the only way of life (deen) which sees no divorce between the mundane and ephemeral pursuits in life with that of their consequences in the Hereafter.

Iman (faith) becomes meaningless without akhlak (morality) and compliance (Islam) with the commandments of Allah, as soundly preserved in the main sources of life guidelines – the Quran and Hadith.

Humanists, such as the authors of the abovementioned two articles, are at a lost to comprehend this, for sure. But there’s no need to quail or insult, less still pen incoherent and boisterous articles against those Muslims who wish to live by the Islamic code, such as fasting during Ramadan.

There is even less of a need to encourage senseless scenes and dramatic disturbances by pitting non-Muslims against Muslims who fast as well.

It has never been a problem for most non-Muslims in Malaysia that a Malay Muslim should want adhere to the tenets of his or her faith by fasting during Ramadan, nor has there been any objection to the idea that Muslims who can’t fast should not be seen eating or drinking in public.

It is a matter of common courtesy that respect be shown to those who fast by not eating and drinking in front of them. Unfortunately society does not place much of a premium on the idea of respect these days, which is why we have writers like Zurairi who advocate open displays of rudeness in their articles.

Instead of encouraging senseless deeds, these writers should seek instead to understand and promote as well as practice mutual respect between different kinds and kin for Muslims and non-Muslims alike. This is not difficult.

Much like the many non-Muslims who ignore the absurd suggestion of Zurairi have found deeper meaning and understanding of Islam as a result of their decision to fast in solidarity with fasting Muslims, Maryam Lee, Zurairi AR and Farouk A. Peru might too, yet have a chance to discover what Islam as a religion and way of life is really about.

* Muhammad Luttfi Abdul Khalid and Faidhur Rahman Abdul Hadi are lawyers and the Chairman of i-Peguam and Chief Executive of Young Professionals (YP) respectively.