I refer to the Malaysiakini report I feel for you: Nik Aziz to DAP leader .

Perak DAP Secretary Nga Kor Ming has recently courted trouble by controversially reciting Quranic verses during a political campaign.

Critics were quick to point out that as a non-Muslim, he should not have the audacity of uttering the holy verses in public; especially in a manner that has been deemed to be phonologically incorrect.

I am not a religious scholar, so I approach this incident in the manner that most members of society would ie, by recognising that the incident can be interpreted in one of two ways:

1. Nga is a politician seeking political capital

2. Nga is an enlightened individual who is able to bridge the ethnic divide with an appreciation of another man's beliefs

It is arguably quite difficult to prove that the former is true, as this would involve either the ability to telepathically scan Nga's thoughts or to have rather intimate knowledge of his ‘nawaitu' or intentions (without which a Muslim could quite easily commit the sin of ‘fitnah').

It is also intuitively difficult to accept the fact that the Quran is only to be read by Muslims - being the Holy Book, surely it plays the role of being the main source of information for non-adherents.

After all, Malay Muslims in Malaysia are regularly taught to recite the Quran as the verses are beautiful, and we are told that we should make every effort to understand the verses in its original form as linguistic barriers make interpretations fallible.

Why should it be different for an individual seeking to gain a greater understanding of Islam? If the same individual has thoughts on converting into Islam, when is it ‘officially' acceptable for him to haltingly voice out his first phrases?

Having said that, people tend to be cynical in nature, especially when it comes to the political process. We assume that politicians are self-serving, especially when they hold an ideology that is different from our own.

Perhaps more dangerously, light-hearted attempts to mix religion with politics has the potential to light the fire of religious fanaticism, providing fodder for the individuals who happily use such instances in order to propagate their own narrow interpretation of it.

The French writer Blaise Pascal once said that men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. One only has to look at incidents throughout history (from the Spanish inquisition to the more recent civil war in Algeria) to show us that religion has as much power to unite as it has to divide.

It is easy to argue that politicians from both the BN and PR sides of the fence have been guilty of utilising religion for populist purposes. Such moves are inherently dangerous in a multi-cultural society such as Malaysia and it is pertinent that politicians be savvy enough and tread carefully when dealing with matters of religion.

The time has come for us to move away from the gutter politics that has plagued our nation and left us in a woefully divided society, and move towards one that is more ideology-based as opposed to one based on ethnic or religious differences.

Only then will the politicians be able to provide the long-term stability that our country so desperately needs.