I refer to the letter Bumiputera - who is, who isn't .

It is indeed a very pleasant surprise to know that there is at least someone who seemingly knows so much about the anthropological dimension of Malay ethnicity and also to politically defend bumiputra-ism. The writer's 'altruism' is truly admirable.

The practical and moral questions are, however, not of smart academic anthropology. They are about Islamic theology as well as the modern notion of common and equal citizenship in a country that is supposed to be modern.

First, it is well known that one of the fundamental tenets of Islam is equality of all Muslims, irrespective of race, culture, language and ethnic origin. Muslims discriminating against Muslims on the grounds of race, culture language and place of birth is condemned in Islam as ' asabiyah '.

It follows then that the 'ummah' is made up of all Muslims, never mind that they are Arabs, Malays, Chinese, Indians, Turks, Iranians, Egyptians, Japanese, Australians, Britons, Americans, Mongolians, Africans, etc.

The problem that arises now is that while Malay Muslims are categorised as bumiputera and given preferential treatment for university entrances , scholarships, business contracts and employments in public sector, Chinese and Indian Muslims are left out and treated as if they are non-Muslims.

Is this 'asabiyah' by Islamic standards? This is the question raised by Gopal and has not been answered by ES Chua.

Second, the Islamic injunction against 'asabiyah' - although truly novel and noble in medieval times - has been transcended by the modern notion of common and equal citizenship within a territorial state, irrespective of religious affiliation.

True, there are programmes of affirmative actions in other modern countries but these programmes are not based on racial or religious exclusivity. They are, rather, premised on social-economic backgrounds or social classes, or on the principle of mercy and compassion.

Under the bumiputra-ism defended by Chua, while a Malay Muslim millionaire or his sons and daughters (usually Umno members) can purchase a bungalow with a five percent discount (sometimes more) because they are bumiputera, a poor Indian or Chinese Muslim has to pay the full market price for even a flat.

The even poorer Orang Asli who is a Christian, Hindu or animist probably dares not even dream of buying a small house or modern shelter at all. This injustice applies to other areas like admission into universities, scholarships, business contracts and employment in the public sector.

So, while academic anthropology may be entertaining for leisurely conservation and neighbourly debate in European-style cafes in Kenny Hills, Bukit Damansara, Bangsar Heights or Bukit Gasing, it cannot address the pressing practical problems of how to forge a united and modern nation based on common-sense justice and fair-play or the modern notion of common and equal citizenship within a territorial state.