The Word 'Allah' and Labelling Muslims Extreme

Yesterday, the Kuala Lumpur High Court issued a verdict on the application for injunction by the Catholic Church to quash the directive issued by the Minister of Home Affairs banning the Catholic publication from using the word 'Allah' in place of 'God'. Muslims had earlier protested against the use of the word 'Allah' by Christians whose literal interpretation of the word 'Allah' differs in many aspect from the original meaning in Islam.

When a non-Muslim judge handed out the decision, the Directives from the Ministry was overruled citing Constitutional rights for Christians to use the same word 'Allah' instead of the usual or normal term 'God.'

As a multi-racial country, Malaysia justice system should have taken serious consideration of the racial sensitivities especially with regards to religion or religious matters. In principle, cases affecting Islam heavily should be assigned to a Muslim judge who knows the Islamic tenets better. Non-Muslims cannot see any difference between 'God' and 'Allah', but Muslims know better that the word 'God' is in the strictest sense not equivalent to 'Allah'. This particular case is between Islam and Christianity. But there is wisdom in assigning the case to a non-Muslim judge who ruled according to international law. At least Muslims can appeal to a higher court for reconsideration and reprieve can be issued to the non-Muslim judge.

While the word 'God' may be used as a common term for simplicity of understanding, non-Muslims could not use 'Allah' to refer to their attributes of God, even in oral conversations. Since Christians believed in Trinity, Allah could not be associated with them. For those who want to know more about the reasons behind this fact, let us wait for a seminar or symposium on the subject which either JAKIM or PERKIM may organize in the near future.

Although as a matter of fact this controversy is a bold signal of Islam's superiority over Christianity and other world religions, even without them admitting it, nevertheless, some Muslims may not readily tolerate the name 'Allah' being used by non-Muslims in publications or other forms. Muslims are not contesting the court ruling that all Malaysians have the Constitutional right to use the word 'Allah', but they reserve the right to do so. What we are concerned at the moment is the sensitivity of some Muslims who may not tolerate Christians to use the term. They too, perhaps, have a Constitutional right to forbid any non-Muslim from using the word 'Allah', in the context of Shariah, which many non-Muslims may not be aware of.

Questions

Why do Christians have to labouriously invoke Constitutional rights just to be able to use the word 'Allah' which everyone knows is Islamic when they already have the word 'God' that they can freely use and have been using without getting into any controversy? Are they courting repercussions to portray Muslims as 'extremists' or 'intolerant'? Is the High Court giving them the prerogative to enter into this controversy knowing that it may lead into racial or sectarian trouble? Can Muslims reserve their Constitutional rights to forbid non-Muslims from using the word 'Allah' in principle?

Muslims are not objecting to the Constitutional rights of non-Muslims as the High Court has ruled, but it would have been wise for the Court to advise the latter not to fish in troubled waters. The High Court could have advised Christians to use only the term they have commonly and normally used without objection from any quarter. In doing so, the Court can avert misunderstanding and preserve the multi-racial harmony in the country?

In principle, Muslims are supposed to have more Constitutional rights than anyone else in this country, but they are not asserting or claiming anything beyond what is embodied in the Constitution. This should be appreciated, recognized and respected by all and sundry.

Bangsamoro Research Centre
Anjung Rahmat, Jalan Gombak
53100 Kuala Lumpur

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites