Last week, the video of an ustaz who declared Buddhists will pray to King Kong went viral. The Chinese convert also mocked Buddhism as “the religion of ‘Kong Kali Kong’,” prompting some Buddhist groups to call for a probe.

This week, another video has resurfaced of an Indian-Muslim missionary denigrating Hinduism. Both recordings began to be touted in blogosphere after prominent Muslim blogger Zainol Abideen - better known by his blog name Mahaguru58 - made a police report against a purported Christian pastor on Sept 27.

So we have three videos presently making the rounds, and their dates uploaded on YouTube :

1. ‘Benjamin Stephen’ allegedly insulting Islam - 2006

2. Ann bin Abdullah (formerly Ann Wan Seng) mocking Buddhism - approximately 2007

3. Shah Kirit bin Kakulal Govindji mocking Hinduism - approximately 2008

While the public cannot positively ascertain the identity of Stephen, Ann is a public figure whereas Shah Kirit represented the Islamic Information Services (IIS) when the controversy erupted two years ago surrounding his slurs.

These three video clips were floated in cyberspace due to the religious contestation between the country’s various ethnic communities and draw for the public a picture of how the state, though its inaction, tacitly sanctions the culprits in Cases (2) and (3) although it was quick to act on Case (1).

The story behind the story is:

1. Double standards, i.e. a one-sided show of concern by the authorities vs the ‘no further action’ (NFA) syndrome

2. Shooting the messenger

3. Minorities remaining in the dark on what is said about them behind closed doors

With regard to Stephen, Information Minister Rais Yatim ordered an immediate investigation by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission while Housing and Local Government Minister Chor Chee Heung urged the government to take stern action against anyone insulting religion.

namewee nah 030910 The authorities are inconsistent. It’s clear that when Islam is in the crosshairs, the police is brutally swift about despatching three squad cars to the home of rapper Namewee ( left ) at close to midnight.

It’s equally clear that the government couldn’t care less when the Hindu pupils’ prayer bracelets were ordered cut by their school principal, according to details in one of the many police reports against Siti Inshah Mansor. But till today, NFA by any of the authorities.

Another group of Chinese students were publicly humiliated for ‘breaking’ the rule (i.e. fasting during Ramadan) of a religion they do not belong to. The Kedah principal who berated them at school assembly is but the tip of the iceberg on how some Little Napoleons are unreasonably encroaching into the public space of non-Muslims. In spite of the national outcry, Ungku Aznan Ungku Ismail also enjoyed the luxury of NFA.

In April 2008, Hindu Sangam lodged a police report against Shah Kirit. Is his file gathering dust? What was the outcome of the police investigation, if any?

Hindus worship rats

The political arm of Hindraf, the Human Rights Party, on Tuesday again highlighted the Shah Kirit video. In it, the pendakwah (proselytiser) was introduced as an IIS officer, manager of Saba Islamic Media as well as a lecturer often invited by the religious departments, state mufti offices and local universities to speak to government officials and students.

Shah Kirit had caused the uproar by saying : “ Ada orang Hindu sembahyang sembah pada bulan, ada orang Hindu sembah kepada pokok, ada orang Hindu sembah kepada batu, ada orang Hindu sembah gajah, ada orang Hindu sembah ular, ada orang Hindu sembah kera, ada orang Hindu sembah lembu, ada yang sembah tikus. Cerita pasal tikus ini, dekat India ada kuil khusus untuk menyembah tikus ”.

(Translation: There are Hindus who pray by worshipping the moon, there are Hindus who worship trees/rocks/elephants/snakes/monkeys/cows, and there are those who worship rats. Talking about this, in India there is a temple specially for the worship of rats.)

hindu temple What he said is not a fair portrayal of Hinduism. Taking a fringe and isolated occurrence of rat worship to misrepresent to an unfamiliar all-Malay Kedah audience the great religion was meant to invoke contempt and disgust in his listeners. The comparison was to illustrate the superiority of Islam over Hinduism when Shah Kirit, though born and raised a Hindu, is sadly ignorant of the spiritual philosophy and civilised tradition of the faith he has repudiated.

NONE However, the bigger issue undergirding Shah Kirit’s religious supremism is the existing power structure that typically enables speakers to insolently tarnish the religion of the minorities and get away with impunity.

Biro Tata Negara deputy director Hamim Husain ( left ) reportedly made derogatory remarks about the Thaipusam custom at Batu Caves and its ‘drunkard’ devotees. That the ‘ si mata sepet ’ do not go to the mosque or surau is another cause for his derision.

And furthermore, Hamim even had the nerve to turn the tables by lodging a police report instead against the journalist who reported his utterances. With Shah Kirit, he and IIS trained their guns on the whistleblower who uploaded his ceramah on YouTube.

Blaming the ‘victim’

IIS in its press statement reply in April 2008 had reiterated the material was “not for public viewing”. One should read their stance as meaning it hardly regretted the content delivered but was only sorry that their man had been caught on camera.

Shah Kirit himself admitted he would not have been as “frank and candid” had he known his words would “one day find its way into the public domain”. He explained that he already cautioned discretion in his audience! Well, just too bad then that the words were somehow exposed when they were really supposed to be out of the earshot of Hindus.

Not content with shifting the blame for sparking the furore to the unknown person who put up the video, IIS inverted the equation by brazenly faulting the commentators who left outraged responses. In IIS’s reckoning, it was really the “state of high emotion” of the Hindus that reflected “a worrying attitude of total disregard for peace and harmony in a multiracial country”.

The in-denial deflection by IIS was perfectly of a piece with the thinking mode of its officer. At minute 1:34 of the footage, Shah Kirit said:

“ Orang Hindu ini sensitif, dia emosional, dia kurang rasional, ya, kurang rasional. Sebab itu, apa yang saya nak cerita kalau ada orang Hindu di sini, saya tak boleh cerita sebab dia akan naik angin, dia akan naik marah. Walaupun apa yang saya nak cakap ialah petikan-petikan daripada kitab mereka. Memang kepercayaan mereka tetapi mereka tak boleh terima, sensitif, emosi. Kalau tak percaya cakap saya, cuba bincang ugama dengan orang Hindu, dia kata ‘Oh jangan cakap pasal ugama, saya tak mahu dengar ’.”

Translated: “... what I’m telling you, if there were to be Hindus here, I would not be able to say because they would ‘ naik angin ’, become angry”.

By this, the burden is transferred. It is the “emotional” Hindus who are making a mountain out of a molehill, he implies, because of their “sensitivity” and “irrationality”. He complains that they don’t want to discuss religion - “they don’t want to listen”.

Looking at the browbeating that the Tamil underclass has been subjected to by the overbearing religious supremacists, isn’t it ultimately a wiser decision for Hindus to steer away from the topic? It’s after all, ‘heads the Muslims win, tails the Indians lose’.

Business as usual

It’s noteworthy that the ‘rat worshipping’ lecture was conducted for a Malay audience by an Indian-Muslim convert - although he prefers to refer to himself as a ‘revert’.

The ‘King Kong’ ceramah was similarly given by a Chinese-Muslim convert to a Malay audience too. It’s a phenomenon in Malaysia, this spitting by the minorities at one’s discarded heritage after they have assimilated into the first language and religion.

Ustaz Ann is also honorary secretary of the Malaysian Chinese Muslim Association (Macma) while Shah Kirit is a Macma “activist” by his own description.

Yet this being Bolehland, instead of censure, these provocative preachers who are popular in the speakers circuit have on the contrary been rewarded with state recognition. Ann was last year’s recipient of the Selangor Tokoh Maal Hijrah award and the national Excellent Saudara Muslim award a year prior.

NONE There doesn’t seem to be any disapproval for this type of behaviour from the communities receiving their messages, as evidenced by the snickers from the audience when the boorish speakers cracked their scornful jokes against other religions.

Malaysian Consultative Council on Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism president Rev Dr Thomas Philips ( left ) told a news portal on Oct 7 that MCCBCHST did not plan to raise the ‘King Kong’ video controversy at the meeting of the Committee to Promote Understanding and Harmony Among Religious Adherents recently revived by the cabinet.

Philips’ excuse was because “it’s been going on for some time now… and we can’t be dealing with every small matter like this that comes up”.

So there you have it, the many parties through their towering silence being complicit to the religious bigotry as much by the sin of omission as by the sin of commission.

HELEN ANG used to be a journalist. In future, she would like to be a practising cartoonist. But for the present, she is in the NGO circles and settling down to more serious writing and reading of social issues.