Harakah has to be the best party organ around, in terms of quality and continuity of production, scope of coverage, size of readership, and attempt at journalistic excellence.

Although designed and born as a PAS propaganda vehicle to combat media hegemony enjoyed by the BN controlled press, Harakah can - on odd occasions - show some degree of independence against party ideological hegemony imposed by PAS in its turn.

The editors must have gone through some anxious and hesitant moments before inviting Farish A Noor to give a review on PAS setback in the aftermath of the 2004 general election. After all, this particular writer's no-holds-barred writing style and his distaste for some established policies advocated by PAS are well known.

True to form, Farish A Noor, in his article entitled "PAS and the 2004 elections: Time for a serious rethinking," gave a lengthy analysis with the conclusion that, among other things, PAS should consider the possibility of allowing their younger professional intellectuals more leeway to lead the party in future.

While stressing the important role of the ulama in defending the faith, he also suggested that it is time for the ulama class in PAS to re-interpret Islam, and redefine themselves in a globalised world.

In a subsequent issue, Harakah invited PAS Information Chief and a noted ulama Harun Din (photo left) to comment on the views expressed by Farish. The following is my translation of part of Harun Din's reply to Farish:

Well known character

"I have received protests from a few readers about the article (by Farish). They have protested, not against the writer, but against his writing which shows clearly his attitude of unpleasant enmity towards Islamic movements. Moreover, his character is already well known for being uneasy about the rise of Islam."

"More than clearly, this writer (Farish Noor) has severely criticised PAS by saying that PAS fails to understand the situation in the community."

"This is as if he is claiming that he alone understands, and others do not understand. Seen from one point of view, the liberal attitude of Harakah is good. People can write anything, and we just publish it."

"But we must also think about the sensitivities of our community. Do not let this liberal attitude reach such a stage, that people get fed up with the overt openness of Harakah."

"Secondly, why don't we give space to really neutral analysts, who are not exposed to attitudes that may stir up hatred in the community?"

"There are still a lot of people who can do this (giving neutral analysis). Why do we have to invite people who criticise us in the eyes of our readership? Among PAS leadership and within Harakah itself, there must be matters in which we are sensitive. Things must be done to avoid anger and hatred among the people while showing our liberal attitude."

When told that Farish's article also received favourable feedback, Harun Din's response is as follows:

"This is the same everywhere. When we do good things, there will be support and there will be opposition. If we do bad things, there will also be support and opposition."

"But if we review Farish Noor's position as a human being who has hurt the hearts of many people, have we forgotten the incident that happened in Nigeria?"

"There, just because there was a beauty contest, and a newspaper writer stated that, if Prophet Muhammad were alive today, he would also watch the beauty contest and perhaps marry one of the beauties, it aroused the anger and hatred of the Nigerian Islamic community until riots erupted."

Writer's impressions

I have tried to give my translation of Harun Din's words to the best of my ability, so that readers can read them and make up their own mind. Those who want the full text of the interview to get a better idea of the context of his statements, can visit the Harakah website.

My reading of the above statements, however, gives the following impressions:

  • Farish Noor (photo right) is known for being anti-Islam
  • Some Harakah readers feel hurt and are angry with Farish Noor's insensitive comments
  • The liberal editorial policy of Harakah is commendable, but they must invite neutral commentators to write, and not people like Farish who make Muslims angry
  • Farish Noor is like the stupid writer in Nigeria who insulted Prophet Muhammad, and so can cause bloody riot.

Here, we encounter another fallacious form of argument, that of imputing evil motives to one's opponent, without any attempt in examining the content of his ideas.

I am given to understand that, in the past, the Malaysian Ulama Association (PUM) had lodged protests against Farish for his allegedly "anti-Islamic" writing. I believe these allegations even reached the level of the Rulers' Conference.

But mere persecution of a writer/thinker for his religious crime does not make him guilty as charged. Socrates was found guilty of preaching "false gods" to Athenian youths, and was sentenced to death 2,500 years ago. The intellectual history of the West since than has been a long vindication of his innocence.

Reading Farish's article in Harakah, I get the impression that his intention is precisely the opposite of the charge hurled at him by Harun. Obviously his criticism is born out of his good will for PAS, the ulama, and for Islam in general. To brand such a concerned engaged academic as 'anti-Islam" is the height of injustice.

Enough space for all

The world is a big place, and the sky above the earth is even bigger. There is enough space for more than the sum total of people who are either pro or anti anything. Nobody can monopolise all the good will and the noblest intentions in the world.

Mere labelling is just name-calling, or character assassination, irrespective if whether the victim is Farish Noor or Harun Din. Name-calling and labelling are tricks of rhetoric; they do not constitute reasonable argument.

Name calling based on the sensitivities of some Harakah readers' reactions is also unfair, without specifying what they are sensitive about.

Sensitivities can be legitimate, such as the sensitivities of Muslims when Prophet Muhammad was insulted by the Nigerian writer. The thing to do for religious leaders there is perhaps to educate them on how to react morally and peacefully to such insults, and not to instigate them to bloody riots.

Some demonstrations of sensitivity can also be unjustified. They can be the result of immaturity and ignorance, as in the case of children and some adults who are not well adjusted psychologically. Without mediation and treatment, anger and hatred can become the sources of psychosis, or sickness of the soul, causing great evil in the world...

Anger and hatred are both negative responses to human situations. They are born from the dark recesses of our soul. They are embedded in the irrational quagmire of the fragile ego, and may have some relationship to pride, which causes the downfall of even angels.

One of the contributions of great religions of the world is precisely the healing of injured souls through the promise of divine salvation, and the sublimation of our basest instincts to an aspiration for healthy wholeness based on universal love.

Personal example

If some followers are prone to being hurt, and show too much sensitive temptation to anger and hatred, is it not the moral duty of political and religious leaders to teach them the virtues of patience and forgiveness, which seem to be common to many great universal religions?

To react passively to the anger and hatred of unspecified and unidentified readers of Harakah and banish Farish to moral wilderness is therefore unfair. One has to question whether these people are justified in their anger and hatred, and how to guide them to the path of right thinking and right actions.

To mobilise this anger and hatred as justification to censor Harakah is also not fair. Harun is a learned ulama. He would have done better by meeting Farish head-on, offering counter argument in illustrating why the ulama class ought to be in the dominant position in PAS, and how the clerics are not out of touch with the people and the changing times.

If Harun had done so, he would have set a personal example on good leadership. He would have shown that he has the humility and the nobility of an inspired religious teacher, in meeting intra-faith and inter-faith dissent on their own ground.

The language used by Harun in his rejoinder to Farish is the language of power, in labelling, naming and moral condemnation. The language of power is aimed at domination, and not aimed at meaningful engagement and Truth.

He has to use this language of power because he, like other members of the ulama class, is involved in a struggle for power, both within PAS, and against Umno.

Power can do great good, as is the case of the all-powerful, all knowing and all compassionate God. Power, in the hands of fallible men, no matter how distinguished they are, can bring great harm, even with the best of intentions.

The Prophet brought healing

The lesson to be learned from this storm in the Harakah teacup is probably this: for meaningful intra-faith and inter-faith dialogues to begin, for the purpose of promoting consensus, understanding, love and forgiveness, the power relation between the conversing parties must be equal.

As I write, our Muslim brothers and sisters all over the world are celebrating Prophet Muhammad's birthday.

In conjunction with the event, and writing for the Independent in Great Britain, Abdal Hakim Murad, a Muslim chaplain at Cambridge University, has this to say in an article entitled "Faith and reason: Muslim terrorists embrace a secular heresy":

"Religion is meant to make people happy. Onlookers may frown, mystified, but believers rejoice. This time, the rejoicing is about nothing less than the healing of the torn human heart. God has sent a prophet to "heal hearts", as the Koran puts it. From spiritual sickness, the Prophet brings his people into wholeness. The Prophet's birthday is therefore on an emotional par with the party a cancer patient might throw when given the all-clear. There is a sense of relief and of exuberance, and also of gratitude."

"The Prophet brought healing, but the treatment itself was painful. In Turkish mosque decoration, the word "submission" is traditionally written with the Arabic dots painted red. This is, we are told, because submitting to God is so difficult that the believer weeps tears of blood. Religion juxtaposes hope with fear. The hope is in God, and the fear is of the ego. There may be no original sin, but there is certainly human perversity, waywardness, and a kind of gravitational attraction to selfishness."

Now, that is the sort of Islam that I can accept, respect, and even love.