What is Religion anyway?

It’s always a refreshing challenge to discuss religion openly, no barriers. Have been contemplating issues (again) of science, evolution, predestination vs. freewill, creation, life cycles, time, universes and the like.

According to my Blue Bible (chunky peacock blue Sociology textbook that I carried faithfully around during A Level-days, by Haralambos & Holborn), religion is defined in its simplest terms as the belief or subscription to the supernatural. Given that this is a British text, it’s no wonder that its focus, and hence my entire studies on Religion back then, was upon Western Judeo-Christian religions. Any ‘new’ form of religion undertaken by the authors was new age spiritual mysticism and so on.

If religion really is the belief in the supernatural, are systems which do not in fact subscribe to any higher life form considered a religion? By its very definition, the answer is no. What can you term it as, if not a ‘religion’ then? A set of beliefs and values?

Many people attribute Buddhism, for example, to a ‘way of life’. True that its primary focus is upon the way in which daily living is carried out. A set of moral guidelines from which suffering can decrease and happiness increase.

However, it does include teachings of a supernatural. Supernatural meaning anything that deviates from the natural order of the university and humanity. Supernatural in that rebirth is still a teaching. Supernatural in that there is something beyond the human brain, transcending the physical. Supernatural in labels of karmic energy, mental energy, the life flame that carries forth into separate realms. This is to me out of the ‘natural’ sphere.

If it does then carry teachings of the supernatural, is it considered a religion, even if the focus is not upon this? Even if it is of secondary importance, the fact that it still does carry teachings of the supernatural points towards the induction that it is a religion.

What then of its followers? Buddhism differs from other religions in the sense that it teaches one not to accept any of the teachings if one has not personally experienced it. Simply put, it is a “accept what you can accept. reject the rest” religion. Can a person who doesn’t fully believe in the whole of a religion’s teachings be considered an adherent to that religion?

In Christianity, I would say that one has to accept the very basic truths of Jesus’ existence and His life which led to death on the cross for all.

In Buddhism, it is trickier. One practices as far as possible the Five Precepts. Whether or not any other beliefs are subscribed to is immaterial.

My conclusion is that a set of beliefs which include the supernatural is by definition a religion, whether or not it is the primary concern. Secondly, the adherent to the religion who does not necessarily accept the supernatural aspect of it is still considered a follower of that religion.

This may sound foolishly simple and understood but I just had to reason it out, you see… Buddhism is a religion. A follower of Buddhism is a Buddhist.

Posted in Religion | 4 Comments

ZAMan Informasi

Our new Information Minister Zainuddin Maidin, or ‘Zam’, has been getting a lot of flak recently. Is this grounded? Perhaps. 

Zainuddin told journalists that he is a “friend” of all reporters, when questioned today.

“I am meeting you (for the) first time.

Oh how exciting indeed it is that he is a ‘friend’ of all reporters. I’m truly touched.

Never mind that this is the same person who, in 2003, flared out against Free Media group Reporters without Borders.

Zainuddin Maidin reacted sharply to Malaysia’s being assigned 110th place in the Reporters Without Borders worldwide ranking of countries according to respect for press freedom. The organisation was a “political tool used by certain countries with the aim of discrediting Malaysia,” he said. The pro-government daily Malaysian Star a few days later accused Reporters Without Borders of not “respecting national culture.”

What is the future of Malaysian Freedom of Information? In an age where information and technology are increasingly being made available to all, can any singular person block out what naturally flows forth?

Are we living in an Information Age, or a Zaman Informasi?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Touch of Life

Admit it. We’re all humans in need of the physical touch. Studies have found that children with constant affection and touch develop better in emotional and interpersonal relations. Some researchers have even found that there may be health benefits in touch. But in this day and age where modern technology takes over, physical interaction with colleagues and friends is reduced to the occasional meeting or bumping into the other in the kitchen. Communication is more efficiently and effectively done on the computer, sms, phone, web messaging and the like.

Take the average person’s physical interaction, divide that by ten and you get what the typical Asian man experiences in his daily life. The norm rather than the exception is the manner in which Asian men relate to even their loved ones.

Japan, ever the country spilling over with ideas, has come up with a new solution. In the past, they already indulged their invention juices by creating stuffed toys that hug back, promoted specially for the elderly in Japan who live alone in isolated areas.

The new solution is creation of a lap pillow, shaped like the bottom half of a kneeling woman, complete with sexy legs and torso. Men can now rest their tired heads on the lap of an imaginary woman to experience some semblance, minimal though it is, of physical intimacy. They are also developing a male version of it, although this emphasises the man’s muscular arm and torso instead. What sexiness is to man, security is to woman.

Innovative though new entrepreneurs are, I can’t help but feel rather sorry at the state of humanity. Are we really reduced to relying upon synthetic material to provide the equivalent warmth and care of the physical touch? Can this really honestly help people even despite knowing how it can never unequivocally match that of a real human?

I’d rather prefer the real thing. Do you?

Posted in Reflections | 1 Comment

Caught in the Web

I admit it. I’m hooked on the Internet. It’s impossible to get anything done without connection to that World Wide Web that offers communication and information, both necessary for work and pleasure. Computers and servers down at the workplace and home have made me frustrated. More importantly, how crucial it has been to facilitating efficient work.

How many of you are caught in the web? If you are, there’s a way out! Check out the Center for Online and Internet Addiction. But while I jest, I understand how this is becoming a real disease of the 21st Century.

Internet addiction is a type of compulsive disorder that can impact individuals, couples, and families.  Based upon clinical research, the disorder can impact those who also suffer from depression, anxiety-related disorders, relationships problems, and other addictive behaviors. To provide assistance for individuals, partners, and parents in crisis, I offer telephone and online counseling so that you can find help no matter where you live. Sessions provide education and intervention for Internet-related issues such as coping with cyberaffairs, pornography addiction, online gaming, eBay addiction, and parenting advice for children caught in the web. Sessions address underlying issues such as relationship problems, anxiety, depression, social phobia, problem drinking, and related health issues leading to addictive online use.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Little Miss Fickle

The Islamic Family Law Bill was passed in December last year and created a host of complaints, uproar and cries from womens’ activist and other human rights groups. Other Muslim women groups, however, seem to deny that the Bill truly encroaches upon womens’ rights. Let’s look at the debate.

Women’s Aid Organisation says the following:

The recent passing of the Islamic Family Law Bill (Federal Territories) (Amendments) Bill 2005 by the Senate is the latest in a series of alarming trends that are damaging to women. These amendments, which have been passed and gazetted in 12 states in Malaysia, now give men even more power to divorce their wives, to contract polygamous marriages and also to freeze the assets of their wife/wives to claim matrimonial property, while women are denied effective remedies.

While amendments made to the Islamic Family Law Bill seemed to be welcome on the surface, Sisters in Islam says this:

However, these two positive amendments and other amendments contain loopholes and weaknesses that are open to abuse and will further discriminate against women. 

For example…

Section 23(9)(b): The gender neutral language used in this amendment masks existing inequalities between men and women. While it enables a wife to claim her share of harta sepencarian, it also enables a husband to claim from his wife or existing wives.

This is open to abuse by irresponsible husbands. In practice, the amendment could enable a husband to force the sale of the matrimonial home or to claim that property given as gifts to the wife to be harta sepencarian in order to support his subsequent dependents. This will cause injustice to the first wife and children.

 And to the nation’s surprise, our very own Minister of Women, Family and Community Development has made a turnabout in her opinion. First, she said this:

Women, Family and Community Minister Shahrizat Jalil has upped her rhetoric, saying she will petition the nine Sultans who are the religious heads in their states, to appeal for the bill to be substantially amended.Shahrizat said Malaysian women were slighted by the law and that their rights needed to be protected by correcting discriminatory clauses.

And then turned around to say that the Islamic Family Law Bill is not flawed. Make up your mind, woman! It’s no wonder men accuse us of being fickle in nature. We certainly have exemplary behaviour from the country’s leading lady woman.

Posted in Religion | 4 Comments

60 Ringgit (none the) Poorer

I spent good money yesterday on my Takamine acoustic plug-in guitar.

RM18 on a new capo. (brandless)

RM22 on a new jack. (brandless)

RM20 on new strings. (Gibson)

Slick and smooth sounding, crisp and clear twanging, I’m RM60 poorer but not quite so if one measures value in terms of utility and not dollars and sen! Here’s to more music-making from my personal studio at home.

Posted in Music, Personal | Leave a comment

Scheibenkleister

My German friend constantly said “Scheibenkleister” whenever something went wrong. Literally translated, it means “slates of cement”. I found it very amusing that one would say “slates of cement” whenever one cut oneself, or dropped something by accident. It’s no more a swear word than is: Strawberry Shortcake.

The truth is that it sounds phonetically similar to the word Scheisse, which means shit in German. Plainly, shit is the common swear word across the globe. My friend, in attempting to disguise an ugly word in the language, replaces it with an innocent-sounding word.

We laugh about it and Scheibenkleister has become an internal joke whenever we meet up.

But this naturally begs the question of what constitutes a swear word? In the Bible, we are taught not to curse and swear from the same mouth that is used to bless others and worship God. Cursing and swearing at others is seen as a negative act, simply because it inflicts some level of pain towards the person it is directed at. Buddhists also believe that it is wrong to cause any harm towards anyone other than self.

So we have established that cursing and swearing is wrong when it comes to relating to a second party. What happens when this takes place out of no consequence to an other? Is using nasty language in everyday situations right or wrong? Is it alright for us to spew out verbal abuse, if even merely upon an inanimate object that has recently taken to hitting you on your leg (as you kicked it, but never mind).

Everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial.

Why curse and swear at something, which is merely a manifestation of unworded frustration and anger?

Furthermore, a word is a word is a word. The form and shape of an innocent word has the exact meaning attached to it as does the word it replaces. If used for all the same intent and purposes, nothing is taken away nor added to it. Fish is the same as F**k, Basket is the same as Bastard, and sadly enough for me, Scheibenkleister is the same as Scheisse.

Having said that, this does not give me free reign and permission to immediately start swearing in heavy language. The solution is simply not to say anything at all, of course. But if necessary, it is also responsible acting not to use a word when one knows this will have a negative impact on someone. Depending on the recipient and level of maturity, one ought to be careful in conversation. This doesn’t require much; just a responsible act.

And so, to qualify myself for my final statement, 1) I am not directing this at any party; 2) This is not a result of latent frustration and anger at this very moment; and 3) I do not feel this would negatively affect someone either by circumstance or character.

I just like the word… Scheibenkleister!

Posted in Language, Theology | 4 Comments

Chap Goh Mei

Chinese New Year came and went. My tabs this year:

1) One Lion Dance

I love the loud booming of the drums. As a child I would run out in search of any lion dance I heard of from afar. Last night I saw my first lion dance of the season. I found it rather strange that the lion was dancing to and around a car, instead of any shop or building or home. Right in the middle of the KL roads, the car must’ve been owned by some bigshot owner of a hotel or club. The lion tried in vain to squeeze through the narrow spaces between the cars around it. The modern lion has to take on new challenges, including opening and closing car doors, pressing on the horn, and taking ang paus from the windscreen wiper. I found the whole affair rather amusing. The many foreigners also looked on in amazement.

2) Three Yee Sangs

I don’t come from a typically Chinese family, so much so that my ‘reunion’ dinner and any consequent dinners with my extended family did not include any yee sangs at all. In fact, the ones I had privy to were related to work and company affairs. It is only tonight at the Chap Goh Mei (15th and final day of the Chinese New Year) that my nuclear family decided that we ought to (reluctantly or un) sit together and have some semblance of a Chinese New Year dinner after all. But let’s look at the yee sang business.

The Chinese yee sang is a traditional food item to be eaten at the start of the New Year. It consists of a number of food ingredients placed together on a plate at the table centre. This includes pomelo strips, brown crisp crackers, oil, sweet-sour sauce, sesame seeds, raw salmon, vegetables, ginger, garlic and other little unidentifiable bits. Family members are to stand up with chopsticks in hand and mix all the ingredients together, saying Lo Hey, Lo Hey and more traditionally Chinese-oriented families continue to quote a string of Chinese sayings that nobody save themselves understands. The significance of the yee sang is that of long life, thus the higher up you lift the food with your chopsticks, the longer you live. This is the only time of the year where children are given free reign to play with their food.

But if we think about it further, this is a rather strange and acquired custom. Only introduced in Malaysia, no other country in the world practices this supposedly Chinese custom of yee sang (which directly translated, means fresh fish, I think). The mainland Chinese have not ever heard of this dish. Typical Chinese dishes during the Chinese New Year, or Spring Harvest Festival, as it is known there, are meat dumplings boiled and eaten with soya sauce, and Hot Pot (also known as Steam Boat in Malaysia and Singapore).

Reflecting on Chinese customs made me wonder about my own personal identity. How do I truly identify myself as?

In Malaysia, I would say I am Chinese first and only Malaysian second.

But when I travel overseas, the obvious answer to give when asked is I am Malaysian first and Chinese second.

What parts of me are really Chinese in nature? Is there a standardized value system that Chinese ought to, and really do, adopt in general? Are the Chinese in Vancouver, Australia, England, America and Malaysia vastly different from the other? Or is it such that after three generations or so, I have been so surely and steadily absorbed into the Malaysian society such that all value systems and lifestyles taken up by the Chinese are essentially Malaysian in nature?

There are obviously many factors to take into consideration, and neither can be fully explained as either a cause or an effect. The interplay of cultures.

The conclusion I make of myself is this:

1) I am Chinese insofar as my blood and filial ties go.

2) I am Malaysian insofar as my lifestyle preferences.

3) I am Christian insofar as my values, goals and overall outlook of life.

4) I am global insofar as my adoption of new habits, learning new things, absorbing of knowledge and the like.

So, is it sad that I am not part of a Chinese family that usually places much importance on traditional Chinese practices and traditions? Perhaps there is a slow ebbing away of the culture, but the reality is, it has never been ingrained into my system. Sure, I will willingly learn Chinese (which I am still passionate about), visit China (to try and understand my roots) and appreciate its culture (especially the arts, which has an incredible history). But I won’t feel guilty if I don’t know about typical Chinese delicacies like ning gao and tang yuen. I was not brought up that way.

Unfortunate but true, Chap Goh Mei means as much to me as does Thaipusam.

Posted in Reflections | 5 Comments

The Socio-Political Realm

I quite unexpectedly bumped into an old friend of mine in a work-related day seminar the other day. We were two amongst the very small group of Malaysian Postgraduate students at the University of Warwick, and it was quite a surprise to see her, much less to find out her interests were similar to mine. We are thinking of taking part in this competition!

The Friedrich Naumann Foundation invites all young Malaysians to enter a project competition on “Young Socio-Political Entrepreneurs”. We would like to encourage you to create a project on a matter that you think should be placed as top concern in your society. The project proposal should aim to promote the openness of the Malaysian society and should seek to achieve one of the following objectives: liberal democracy, market economy, privatisation, human rights, free society and social responsibility, the rule of law, freedom of information and freedom of expression.

Will be thinking and brainstorming on issues to write about. I shall update on what our conclusion is later. Right now we are thinking of focusing on social responsibility. Much research and work to be done!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Bounded Freedom?

What is it that motivates people to so wholly believe in something that any slightest insult to the basis of belief provokes extreme reaction? I want to understand.
I am a Christian and those who know me understand the deep conviction I have of God and His love for all. I do truly believe in the fact that He saves, and that He is real.

I therefore emphathise with those whose prophet has been recently ridiculed and put to shame by many. It is not merely an issue of religion, but rather that of scorn and utter contempt made by one party of another. Nobody in their right minds would stay silent in an offense conducted against one they truly love. Paparazzi baring your wife or daughter naked on the newspapers, in compromising positions. Is this the equivalent of how Muslims feel? I don’t know, and I am in no position to judge.

What many papers use as defence: Freedom of speech. Now what exactly is freedom of speech? Or Freedom, for that matter. Are we truly free to do everything and anything we want to as humans? Taking it further, if true, is absolute freedom beneficial to all?

“We have the freedom to do anything we want.” Not True.

We are constrained by laws of nature. Gravity restricts us from floating around in the air. Our bones and joints restrict our arms and legs from moving 360 degrees.

We are constrained by laws of society. We are not free to run naked in the middle of a highway. (You could if you wanted to, but it would cause many accidents and you’d be called in by the police.) We are not free to enter into toilets of the opposite sex in Public Areas.

We are constrained by laws of tolerance. We are not free to beat up someone’s ass just because he is of a different ethnicity, religion or sexual preference.

The truth of the matter is that freedom is granted within a certain jurisdiction. The issue arises when just who is able to decide what sort of and the degree of freedom to be granted.

I therefore believe that freedom is to be propagated but one has to be watchful of what one does. Certain laws, legally transcribed or not, govern the ways in which humanity operates. There is no escaping a reasonable circle of constraint.

Since I postulate that tolerance is a virtue to be practised where possible, I also believe that one ought to be cautious in reacting violently, even when one’s convictions have been severely and ridiculously tested. Being inflamed with anger is one thing; acting upon it in physical hatred is another. Consequences are bound to take place. What is the point of injuring others who have injured you?

This is a tricky situation. Respect for one’s religion, race and culture vs. Freedom of Speech. Despite recent events, I still believe the balance is possible. Very possible.

People just have to take time to understand the others’ motivations and core beliefs.

But perhaps it’s gone past all that. What will we next see unfolding in tomorrow’s news?

Posted in Reflections, Religion | 7 Comments