A Man On A Leash

Non Muslims may skip this post. 

Here is an interview with Dr Nazirudin Mohd Nasir the Mufti of Singapore. It is a short video.

 

  

My Comments :  The Mufti of Singapore is certainly a man on a leash. But who (or what) exactly is holding his leash? His convictions or his employer? 

His convictions have a strong grip on him. Obviously his employers are tugging at him too. He is trying to balance between the two. 

If I may make a simple suggestion to the Mufti Dr Nasirudin he has to differentiate between forbidden and criminalising. The two are not the same. Something may be forbidden or discouraged (laa-takrabu) but it may not necessarily be criminal.  Riba may be prohibited (Allah and His Rasul even declare war on riba, Baqarah 279) yet riba is not criminalised.  But this is as per the Quran only.

And the Mufti may wish to look at the usage of 'haram' in Sura 6:151. Again this is as per the Quran only. The Quran certainly has numerous solutions. But this is as per the Quran only.

My view is the Mufti of Singapore will have currency only inside Singapore. For example I dont think he will be invited across the ditch to present any of his views. 

The real problem or the real issue at hand or the real challenge facing the Mufti of Singapore is that he belongs to a faith which has quite universal 'traits' (worldwide) whereby :

• the religious society ostracises different sectarian / religious views
• people of different sects may not be allowed to be buried in the same cemetery
• it is ok for people holding different religious views to be lynched by mob violence 
• people can get arrested by the Police or religious enforcers and then charged in a religious court and then get jailed, fined and/or whipped by the State or government. This is called State sanctioned religious violence. 
  
• people can be sentenced to death (eg for apostasy) by the State or government authorities. 
• This may not happen in Singapore but it is par in other countries.
• It is part of the universal 'traits' of his faith. He cannot deny it.
• And it will continuously have a dominating influence on how his flock thinks.
  

What is more important for the continued relevance of the Mufti's flock  - among civilsed societies - is to understand that it is ok to disagree. It is not a crime to disagree. 

'I know in my bones that your religious belief will not earn you a place in paradise but I will let you find that out for yourself. In the meantime I will not beat you on the head with a stick or worse'. 

Singapore is largely free from religious hatred and religious violence not because segments of their society have achieved a higher enlightenment. This includes the Mufti's own flock. Singapore is a very peaceful society because the government of Singapore enforces freedom of faith with an iron fist. You are free to believe whatever religion you want but do not encroach on your neighbour's freedom FROM your idea of your religion. Leave your neighbours alone. Hence Singapore has overcome religious strife.

But that is no guarantee that the Mufti has cleared up what goes on inside the minds of his flock.

Perhaps tiny Singapore can become a shining light and beacon for the faithful the world over. The straight path (siratul mustakim) is very simple. Singapore should create peaceful, intellectual, intelligent and unfettered discourse, discussion and debate on any aspect of the religion. Let them all speak freely - without being ostracised, without being lynched by a violent mob, without being arrested by the State or the religious enforcers and without being sentenced to death for apostasy by the State.  

This will be entirely new for the faithful  - in a very, very long time. The faithful are never in agreement. If Singapore can foster peaceful disagreement there may yet be hope for them.  

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.