COMMENT | The UniMAP questions on Zakir Naik and the other race-baiting questions demonstrate the difference between mainstream Malay educational groups and non-Malay educational groups.

Dong Zong, for instance, would never be caught sanctioning questions like what the esteemed panel of multi-ethnic cabal from UniMAP did. Dong Zong and the other non-Muslim educational groups would not propagate something like this but yet they have a target painted on their backs because questions and answers like these indoctrinate young people.

Zakir has been going around suing politicians for allegedly defaming him, which is strange because he once said that it up to God to judge people, except of course when it comes to his reputation, then he is ever willing to let the courts decide. Does anyone else find this strange?

It is pointless for the Education Ministry to “wash its hands” of this nonsense because its own antics when it comes to Zakir, for instance, is evidence that there is no disagreement between the education establishment and the political establishment, beyond the fact that Zakir has been banned from public speaking - or is that public incitement? - and that certain quarters oppose this. A change of leadership obviously did not mean a change of agenda.

Before I discuss the question, it would have been productive if the vice-chancellor elaborated on the “multi-ethnic panel from various academic fields” that vetted this question. Seeing as how Zakir has exhibited utter contempt for all religions except Islam, I wonder what the discussion process of this “multi-ethnic” panel was like?

After all, Zakir has questioned the religious credibility of Muslims working with non-Muslims/kaffirs – hence a multi-ethnic panel approving this question either reinforces the dhimmi status of non-Muslims or it could mean that there was no multi-ethnic panel.
The question states that Zakir is one of the icons of the Islamic world and is active in spreading “true Islam”. What does “true Islam” mean?

For instance, Zakir says that God will take care of Muslim leaders who have sinned in the afterlife but it is the duty of Muslims – Zakir cites the Quran – to vote for corrupt Muslim leaders over righteous non-Muslims or non-corrupt Muslims in a coalition with non-believers.

Zakir claims that it really does not matter if a non-corrupt Muslim leader provides a better existence because of how long Muslims are living in the world. Is this an example of “true Islam” that is being spread on the UniMAP campus?

Think about it this way: does the late Tok Guru’s (Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, above) idea of Islam directly contradicts Zakir’s? While I may disagree with the late Tok Guru’s religious stance, his views on corruption are well known - "In 20 years under my administration, the anti-corruption agencies have never been able to convict any of my officers. We denounced Umno because of their corruption, and it will not be right if we come into power and end up being corrupt too. I tell my officers, you are answerable to God – not to me or to anyone else – you answer in the hereafter for your doings. The character is of priority and the mindset must be changed to include the world and the hereafter.” The late Tok Guru also advised his followers not to blindly follow leaders - which is what Zakir is advocating. So, which is the “true Islam”?

What is UniMAP’s stand on institutional corruption and does it diverge from the “true Islam” as propagated by Zakir? Would UniMAP endorse a corrupt Muslim candidate over an ethical non-Muslim candidate? After all, if it was a choice between a non-corrupt, environmentally conscious but Jawi/khat supporting PAS candidate and a corrupt non-Muslim candidate, I know who I would endorse, even if meant voting for a religious operative, which is not my usual political stance.

Zakir also claimed that the Bible contained pornographic passages. He further claimed that his religion did not allow him to read “obscene things in front of the audience,” so even for a million dollars, he would refrain from quoting those passages. Is UniMAP concerned that Christian students on campus are reading “pornographic” material? The question also makes the claim that Zakir is able to reason and to answer every question that is asked to him, but this is not really true, is it? He certainly does not want to face questions posed to him by the Indian authorities and instead hides out here in Malaysia where his defenders claim that he can answer any questions posed to him.

The answers to the question are also problematic and I wonder if sobriety would be an impediment when picking any of these answers.

(1) Malaysians do not bother

Does UniMAP understand that the state security apparatus has banned him from speaking because he is under investigation for allegedly inciting racial and religious discord? I have no idea how the investigation is proceeding but this has nothing to do with public apathy about Zakir.

(2) Sensitive Malaysians feel threatened for no reason

Who are these sensitive Malaysians? Is UniMAP aware of the deluge of police reports made by various groups who claim that Islam has been threatened or insulted? Indeed Jakim recently set a special unit to monitor insults against Islam and the prophet. Religious czar Mujahid Yusof Rawa said this - “Our country has laws. The offenders must be punished accordingly." So who are these sensitive Malaysians the answer is referring to? I suppose sensitive Malaysians are those who take offence at what Zakir says, right? So in other words, only Muslims can be sensitive about attacks on their religion. Is this the position of UniMAP?

(3) Malaysians who are normally submissive without any reason

Okay, so, is UniMAP saying that if you are submissive for a reason, then this would be better? Most non-Malays are happy that Zakir is banned from spreading his hate speech, hence the only people who are "submissive" are those folk who believe that Zakir should spread his “true Islam”? What would UniMAP have these “Malaysians” do? Defy the law so that Zakir can spread “true Islam”? Is UniMAP encouraging folks to take matters into their own hands?

4) Malaysians are ignorant about their own religion

Again who are these Malaysians? Zakir and his followers always claim that Hindus, Buddhists, and Christians are “ignorant” about their religions, which is why they are offended by his words. So, is this question agreeing with Zakir’s stance or is the question aimed at Muslims, who are ignorant about the history and divisions within Islam?

How sad this state of affairs is. I meet many young Malay students from various local universities. They always are eager to relate to their experiences and their aspirations for the country. While I may not always agree with their views and contradict them, I find it abhorrent that they are subjected to these kinds of questions and worse, either agree with them or there is no avenue of dissent.