I refer to the Malaysiakini report Fatwa Council under fire for banning yoga .

In all honesty, when I first read about the ban on yoga, my natural reaction was that of sheer amusement. I laughed. Sure, I felt a twinge of sorrow for the Muslim practicioners of yoga, for the popularity of yoga as a healthy exercise programme (which had reached an all time high), and for the integrity and image of the country as a whole which was surely to take a beating by our neighbours and so-called 'outsiders' following the announcement (the term 'laughing stock' came to mind). But my first reaction was to laugh.

I then thought about how they could implement such a ban. Group classes at Fitness First may not be too hard to monitor or screen out - I guess the government could employ some religious officer to stand outside the classes to check one's IC upon entry. But what about those that practice yoga in the privacy of their own homes? I laughed again.

Why did I laugh? Because I could see where this was going. As yoga-related material (videos, books, mats, etc) are currently available in abundance to everyone (including the private practitioner), the most the government could really do to enforce the ban would be to stop the distribution/sale of such materials. Logically, if I wanted to ban yoga, that would be my next step.

At first, the ban may include a statement we find on Malay-translated bibles or Christian publications: ‘For non-Muslims only’. If the authorities were still serious about stamping out the practice of yoga, though, the ban would become a 'blanket' one eventually - all yoga-related material would be banned for everyone, through confiscation and destruction.

It's inevitable - given that 60% of the population are Muslims, not having such a ban would just mean that non-Muslims (the other 40%) could continue distributing such material to their friends /colleagues, or they would start meeting in the privacy of people's homes.

I write this here now not to put ideas in the heads of the authorities (for they clearly have none). I write this to share a small insight of mine - if the government were to be serious about the ban on yoga for Muslims, they would eventually and inevitably have to ban or discourage the practice for others too. Failure to do so would mean that the ban would simply not be enforced thoroughly. And if we couldn't enforce it, why make a ban in the first place?

This ban on yoga illustrates how the religious authorities continue the adult-child dynamic between themselves and the Muslims of Malaysia. While the dynamic is not necessarily a bad thing, I can see it as problematic if a few conditions are met. The most glaring is, of course, when a large proportion of Muslims don't want to be treated like children anymore. Others may be when the rulings of the religious authorities promote narrow-mindedness and indirectly discourage debate or open dialogue, or when these rulings begin to affect non-Muslims in some way.

What I usually perceive as the most problematic though, is when the adult-child dynamic is powered by paranoia - the adult being paranoid about the child leaving or wanting to leave the adult's faith. To me, it seems that this dynamic between the Islamic religious authorities/National Fatwa Council and the Muslims of Malaysia seems more fueled by paranoia than it should be.

I come to this conclusion through the observation that the ban on yoga is justified by the 'worst- case-scenario' of practicing yoga - that one would be influenced to convert to Hinduism. You would think that if the practice was deemed morally dubious, then the justification would involve fears that the person might start treating people unfairly, or begin engaging in morally-wrong behaviors.

Instead, the worst-case scenario that the National Fatwa Council have painted for the practice of yoga is conversion. If this is not paranoia, I do not know what is.

Psychology teaches us of a defence mechanism called 'projection', which can be understood basically as when one attributes unwanted thoughts/impulses on another, when they, in fact, have these unwanted thoughts/impulses themselves - this attributing or 'projecting' on another serves to alleviate their anxiety about their own thoughts/impulses.

This, of course, underlies almost all forms of paranoia. Seriously, a psychoanalytic- or psychodyamic-oriented psychotherapist could, and likely would, deliberate on whether the members of the National Fatwa Council are projecting their own fears of conversion for themselves unto others. It would be quite a 'textbook example' of projection.

And so I put it to the National Fatwa Council - could it be that you are insecure about your own faith? Is this your motivation for banning something with the fear that it would cause insecurity in others' faith? If there is no insecurity there, then that is fine. But if there is, I would ask that you sort out and work through your own fears, as they are your own - there is little value (for others) in projecting them unto others.

You know, their case might look a little stronger if they had some statistics or data on the matter. Are there any documented evidence/research papers to show the relationship between practicing yoga and converting to Hinduism? If there is no evidence, then their thoughts on the matter are probably fueled by paranoia.

One would not even need to begin from scratch and conduct studies on the matter - one could actually go and research the statistics on the demographics of yoga that have surely been conducted all over the world. A basic question should be: ‘Do more Hindus practice yoga than individuals from different faiths in the first place?’

While I have not done the research (which I would task as a challenge for those who are in favour of the ban), I would point out anecdotally that the majority of the people I know of who practice yoga are not even Indian - I tend to observe more Chinese and Malay individuals in yoga classes in Malaysia. A further question would be, ‘Are individuals who practice yoga more likely to convert to Hinduism?’ These are simple research questions that have surely already been answered in some way or another - all it takes is for one to find the research and use it to back up their stand.

But this has not happened. Instead, we are not given any concrete reason for the ban - I see the rationale/fear that 'yoga can weaken a Muslim's faith' as unfounded and driven by paranoia. If the government is going to make changes or mobilise to enforce the ban (with taxpayers' ringgit), they should do so on concrete and real reasons - not empty ones.

As a non-Muslim, I do not expect the National Fatwa Council's rulings to apply to me, or that their explanations make sense to me personally. However, I do think that they owe Malaysian Muslims an explanation. And if these rulings are going to affect other non-Muslims (and they would, in some way or another, eventually), then I would challenge the council to deliberate on the reality of their fears - are your fears of conversion realistic, and do you have evidence to support them?

From a health perspective, the National Fatwa Council must surely realise that their ban on yoga is somewhat contradictory to the aims and efforts of our health department. Perhaps a priority check is in order: which is more important - people's health or fears of conversion? Given that the health benefits of yoga are very much real, and that the fears of conversion are mostly unfounded, you would think that the former would be higher on their list.

Though, you know, I do not fault the council in the sense that they are doing what it is they have been tasked with doing - making judgments on moral matters of the Islamic faith. I suppose that it is only inevitable that every now and then, they would come up with a decision that would be unpopular.

When that happens, people will, of course, voice their grievances - those who claim that the council's rulings are infallible and undebatable are ignoring the simple fact that people don't like being treated like children most of the time (especially if there is no good or real reason to follow these demands in the first place).

Now if the council, by its very definition and mission statement, includes this element of infallibility or the impossibility to question it, then I would ask the council to point this out. But if they did, I wonder whether they would sound more like a totalitarianism-oriented organisation, rather than a branch of a democratically-elected government.

This announced 'ban' is an interesting development in Malaysia. It makes me wonder what our prime minister and prime minister-in-waiting think on the matter (my guess is something along the lines of ‘Oh no.. not another thing to worry about’!).

And I wonder that in the larger scheme of things, how this ban will affect the quality of life in Malaysia. After all, some would argue that ‘When one door closes, another opens’. These same people could argue that if people can't practice yoga, they can easily just find some other form of exercise to engage in - ‘What's the big deal, then?".

In the larger scheme of things, though, I think there can be repercussions, because bans of this sort are symptomatic of a paranoid orientation. Where there is paranoia, there is fear. And when there is fear, the human responds with either two responses - anger or anxiety (the flight or fight response). Both can lead to unwanted consequences.

I think that it is not yoga that should be targeted - instead, the source of this paranoia should be focused upon. The question should shift from ‘Is yoga un-Islamic?’ towards ‘Why am I afraid of others embracing other religions?’ There is no reason to keep this culture of fear going. Let's stamp it out, through rational dialogue and affirmation, while we can.