The Muslim world is polarised between two groups that doggedly claim to possess what is the truth about Islam.

They are the liberals who believe that Islam has to evolve with the times and that old-fashioned pronouncements, traditions and schools ought to be dispensed with.

Then there are the conservatives who oppose social progress besides labelling anyone else who believes in progressive interpretations of Islam as murtad (apostate).

The latter could be a dangerous threat to the country's security, in the wake of Sept 11. I feel the government should ban their organisations but without resorting to the ISA which is cruel and adds to extremism from the conservative Muslims.

However, the liberals have also gone too far in their interpretations of Islam by calling on Islam to absorb the universal humanism from the non-Muslim world.

To me, their liberalism, which is characterised by their belief that Muslim women have a right to wear mini skirts and spaghetti strap dresses and that Muslim men have a right to keep their hair long and wear earrings, is a distortion of Islam not unlike the reactionary distortions of their rivals.

Indeed, so long as the liberals do not learn to accept that Islam cannot be remoulded to suit liberal tastes, they will continue to feed the virus that is conservative Muslim extremism.

It is time for progressive non-Muslims to act, to bring Muslims closer to a middle path interpretation of Islam that suits the spirit of Islam's greatest leaders Abu Bakar, Omar, Osman and Ali.

Non-Muslims have a right to talk about Islam, though not to question its traditions. In this, I fully agree with the liberal Muslims.

Muslims, progressive and middle path ones like those in the Maldives, ought to realise that in Islam, modernity is all right but not freedom of action in the liberal sense of the word.

Freedom of action must not question the goodness of the Quran, traditions and the four schools of interpretation.

Muslims are not to be revealing (women) nor extravagantly decorated (men). Theirs is supposed to be the sober yet progressive life of the boys of Victoria Institution. It is Julie (Mary Poppins) Andrews, not Julia Roberts.

If there are traditions and statements by old scholars that put Islam in a reactionary light, these should not be ditched but brushed of the dirt that clouds their true value.

Under every bit of brown mud stamped Islamic is a priceless pearl of wisdom. This should be the approach in evaluating Muslim traditions.

In the last Muslim nation state that claimed control of the Ummah, the Ottoman Sultanate, lots of the works and statements by scholars in the Ummayad and Abbasid sultanates, its predecessors, were distorted by politicians as well as by mediocre scholars.

The Ottomans were one of the many Mongolian/Turkish peoples who conquered the Arab-ruled Abbasid Sultanate and distorted whatever its scholars wrote.

While the interpretation of Islam is not the sole monopoly of the Ulama, one has to be Ulama-like to rule on Islam. To say that Islam is freely available for interpretation by laymen is not true.

While the present Ulama of the world is reactionary and Ottomanish, the liberals are not making an Ulama of themselves by being more Spartan and sober and accepting Islam as more than just a religion.

Liberals must Ulama-ise themselves by living a life like the traditional Ulama, by adding to their values by adopting a progressive outlook of life. One cannot be an Ulama by wearing mini skirts and Michael Bolton hair.

The Ulama are a historical institution and they are the sober scholars of all knowledge, worldly and cultural. The rakyat (public), represented by the parliament, had to strike a consensus with the Ulama council before a decision on Muslim culture was made during Omar's time.

This they have to do even now. Thus, it is important for all decisions of the Ulama of Malaysia to be agreed by parliament (BN, DAP, Pas and Keadilan in consensus).

This includes the rights of women, homosexuals, minorities, youths and families. And what constitutes apostasy and polygamy.

If the liberal professionals are prepared to Ulama-ise then there would be no need for the government to train a new batch of Ulama who are progressive.

Training a new batch of Ulama today means nothing because they become salaried employees of an autocratic government which has alienated itself from the true spirit of Islam, which is renewal and rejuvenation of society in the political and economic sphere.

If the Barisan Nasional government is truly serious about saving itself and the people from a reactionary Taliban-style rival, it ought to seriously change its set of values.

It should learn from the middle path Muslim nation, the Maldives, which despite poverty, is a fairly decent place.

An Islamised Barisan Nasional should be, culturally, more sober and dressed up, less extravagant, more disciplined.

Politically, it should be more liberal and humane, because Abu Bakar, Omar, Osman and Ali were the most humane of rulers after Prophet Muhammad.

While it should crack down on Muslim fanatic conservatives, it should invent a new batch of Ulama which is progressive, but Spartan and respectful of the tenets of Islam, besides being above politics (though free to chastise the prime minister).

It should also invent a new lifestyle for Muslims that distances them from both Western liberalism and the reactionary ways of the Taliban and PAS.

As for the liberals wanting Islam to change with the times, what instead should be the case is changing the times to suit Islam.

While during Omar's time, Muslims were not as progressive as they are now, the Ulama of that time believed in their community moving forward and learning newer things.

Islam is a source of progress and Muslims must keep up with Islam's demands for social progress but most of them are not doing so.