Interfaith harmony: To understand is to sacrifice

There is bound to be severe ripples of disappointment surrounding the outcome of the Bar Council forum on the 'Conversion to Islam'.

Before we harden ourselves into the same battle lines that have been drawn time and again, let us see if we can traverse difficult roads to reach whatever middle ground may be left.

Proponents of religious freedom and non-Muslims in particular are likely to view the incident as a blow towards inter-religious harmony, the rights of non-Muslims, and mature dialogue.

I confess that to an extent, I share the disappointment of those who feel that an opportunity to engage carefully and rationally in a meaningful exchange of perspectives from the entire spectrum of opinions over these contentious and impassioned issues has been lost.

Nonetheless, I would also invite those who see this as a black and white battle between those who would seek to encourage inter-religious understanding and harmony and those who seek to quash it to pause for thought. It is simply not that straightforward.

To understand, sacrifice

A considered survey of history will likely demonstrate that mutual understanding between parties that have different interests is seldom built without stepping outside one's ideological comfort zones. In other words, unless we intend to impose it by force, we cannot expect a sustainable peace on purely our own terms.

I think this applies to both sides of the fence dividing current sentiments on the forum.

The question that I think is most important for Malaysians concerned about this issue is: how much are we willing to sacrifice to truly understand one another?

That such an understanding is lacking seems fairly obvious; Saturday morning clearly attests to that.

The Bar Council should be lauded for attempting to further such an understanding through their forum. However, the backlash they unfortunately suffered suggests that this attempt was made on their own terms; an attempt to appreciate the feelings of others was definitely present, but sadly it may not have proved to have been enough.

True understanding cannot be achieved unless all parties feel comfortable being part of the process.

It is unfortunately not at the end of the day relevant, that the discomfort of certain parties may arise from things that do not seem rational to the rest.

In hindsight, the mutual understanding that the Bar Council attempted to further was a doomed project. Is this their fault for not reaching out in the right way? Or does the fault lay in the protesters for not being open-minded enough to the process?

Once again, the stark truth is that your feeling or mine on these questions are not what truly matters.

What truly matters is that we continue to think of a successful way for us to reach that mutual understanding, even though it may require painful compromises on both sides.

Walking before running

The primary sacrifice that needs to be made is ideological; we simply cannot assume others to have the same ideological framework that we do. If we truly want to achieve understanding, we must understand the passions of others, no matter how illogical or irrational they may seem to us, and respond to them accordingly and effectively.

Once we can start planning strategies to achieve understanding that are based firmly on an appreciation for the true feelings of others, a glimmer of hope for success will show itself.

As a non-Muslim myself, perhaps I can articulate this better for fellow non-Muslims. We must understand that what seems to us on paper and in reality as a harmless forum, that is not only entirely sincere in its attempt to further interreligious harmony, but also a forum that is concerned primarily with technical issues of law (and thus in essence neutral), is simply not understood that way by others.

This is a sentiment that would be foolhardy to judge too harshly.

Attempting to force those made uncomfortable by the forum to see the said forum in the neutral light by exercising the mighty hammers of logic and reason is likely to be futile. These are not the bricks on which understanding is built.

Politics teaches us that perception, tragically, must sometimes come first.

We must instead understand and fully appreciate the gap that already exists between those who feel strongly on these issues. We must know where and how to begin; we must walk before we can run.

I stand firm in my commitment to the need for dialogue and remain unconvinced that sweeping things under the carpet is any foundation for lasting harmony. However, while many may share goals, our tactics sometimes need refinement.

Instead of running with our passions, let us consider again how we should walk. What are the paths we can take to reach a place where the more moderate from both sides of the fence (and there are more than you think) feel comfortable coming together?

Finding these paths require great effort; finding the right venue, the right topic, the right convener - all these speak of negotiations, compromise, and most of all, headaches. Nonetheless, they remain the crucial elements for finding the exact spot in which the smallest seeds of true understanding and dialogue can be planted and grown.

Patience in finding that right meeting ground or the right aegis for a discussion, I feel, will be met with marvelous results.

Hope

As with every word I have ever written, I invite Malaysians not to despair, but to hope.

Some may be disillusioned with Pakatan leaders who appeared on the 'wrong' side of the divide that Saturday morning. I call to mind the manner in which older democracies do not have such things as a singular party policy on any one issue, but consist of leaders each with their own conscience.

Plurality of opinion is the hallmark of any mature society, and if we can persevere, we too will reap the best fruits of diversity.

Yes, it is a long hard road; and yes, we will continue to be frustrated repeatedly along the way.

Still, as with all those religious, have faith. Malaysians, experience suggests, are not given to intentionally offending others. Once we have the courage to step outside our convictions for but a moment in order to understand those of others, we may see how and why we continually offend one another - and thus take the first step towards healing.

---

NATHANIEL TAN is co-editor of the book, Religion Under Siege: Lina Joy, the Islamic State and Freedom of Faith.