[1616] Of the shahada no longer suffices

Islam in Malaysia is probably the most difficult religion to embrace in the country. Whereas once all it took to believe in the path shown by Islam was sincerity, now it takes paperwork and various declarations because the state demands it. If Islam is to be spared of red tapes, state’s role in the religion needs to be reduced or downright eliminated.

Not too long ago, a series of disputes over the religious status of deceased individuals caused discomfort among many Malaysians.^[1] The central question was who has the greater claim over a dead body. Hilarious from afar maybe, but it is a serious emotional matter.

Those whom were directly involved suffered worse. Not only did they need to overcome grief caused by the loss of their loved ones, bodies of their loved ones were taken by force from them in the name of religion by Islamic religious department. Regardless of the religious belief of the deceased, if left unsolved, future episodes will offer polemicists from all sides to stroke distrust within our society and lower cooperation across different communities. Trust and cooperation are two of many ingredients to economic growth.

A solution is therefore required and the Abdullah administration looks to enforce a rule that requires non-Muslims whom wish to convert to Islam to inform his or her family of his or her action.^[2] Fueling the rationale behind the policy is the elimination of asymmetric information. Through this policy, the state aims to ease opposition the Islamic religious authority typically faces in various similar disputes. It is a reasonable cause and effect link.

Yet, what is the root cause of the problem? Is it because the deceased failed to inform their family of his or her decision to embrace Islam or is it because of the existence of the religious department and their power to enforce religion on the dead?

I am in the opinion that religion is a personal matter and I am sure that I am not the only person believing it so. For many of these individuals, there are reasons why they refuse to inform their family members of their decision to embrace a religion, Islam or any other. Due to that, it is best to let these individuals to decide for themselves which action they wish to take. The responsibility of informing their family — if it is at all a responsibility — is their own, not others’ or the state’s. That responsibility cannot be relegated to the state. I do not believe in subsidizing others’ cowardice — if the reason behind secrecy is cowardice — and I will certainly not fund any religious department that take upon itself to substitute others’ cowardice with coercion.

Returning to the issue at hand, barriers to entry only discourages those that wish to embrace Islam. Some individuals are always in search of a belief system to satisfy themselves. These individuals are like shoppers. They would walk around to inspect and compare goods before purchase. If a shop prevents the shopper from inspecting and comparing goods by barring the shopper from entering the shop, the loss is of the shop’s, not the shopper’s, if the owner of the shop is interested in profit-making in the first place.

The idea runs parallel to free trade. The freer a country’s trade policy is, the more likely it is prosperous. Water flows to the path of least resistant and so do capital and labor. And so too consumers of religion, if I may say so: the most receptive communities to these ever-searching individuals are the most open communities. If the Muslim community is interested in attracting new Muslims, the community must do away with many of those barriers set up by the state. It must be noted that Islam itself does not impose those state-sanctioned barriers. It means that the state must stop playing the role of regulating religion, particularly Islam. Just in case if that is unclear: the state must stop playing god.

Red tapes imposed by the Malaysian government make the Muslim community exclusive and that is contrary to the claimed nature of Islam: universality. As a result, the state is turning Islam into something that goes against the teaching of the religion.

As a child, I went to two school system concurrently: one for my formal education and another was for religious education. I will be frank and say that I hated the latter so much because I could not make sense out of it. I did learn a few things from it nevertheless; I remember, the only requirement one must fulfill to demonstrate to the world of one’s belief in the Islamic teaching is to sincerely recite the shahada.^[3] It is that simple.

The same cannot be said for Malaysian brand of Islam. To come to think of it, is the Malaysian Islam really Islam?

If the answer is no, I would blame the involvement of the state in personal belief as the cause of it. For any person that fears the state hijacking any religion, he has a case for secularization.

^[1] — SEREMBAN – MALAYSIAN police have seized the body of a Chinese man in the latest dispute between the Islamic authorities and family members over a disputed conversion to the Muslim faith.

The eldest son of Mr Gan Eng Gor, who died on Sunday, aged 74, said his father became a Muslim last July, but his other children reject the claim and insist their father was a Buddhist.. [Another conversion dispute: Police seize body of Chinese Man. Straits Times via The Malaysian Bar. January 22 2008]

^[2] — SEREMBAN – MALAYSIAN police have seized the body of a Chinese man in the latest dispute between the Islamic authorities and family members over a disputed conversion to the Muslim faith.

The eldest son of Mr Gan Eng Gor, who died on Sunday, aged 74, said his father became a Muslim last July, but his other children reject the claim and insist their father was a Buddhist.. [PM: Tell your family before you convert. The Star. April 11 2008]

^[3] — See Shahada at Wikipedia.