Tolerence and moderation: Key for racial unity

At the gathering of World Interfaith Harmony Week recently, Prime Minister Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak called on Malaysians to see the diversity as an asset to the nation.

It is indeed sad to note that certain quarters have disapproved his action and made an issue about his presence merely wearing a kurta at  Thaipusam’s celebration in Batu Caves recently. After all, kurta is just a tradisional attire for Indian men just like Malaysian Chinese and Indian women wear the kebaya.

As clarified by the Premier, we should not confuse between culture and religion. Religion is about faith, but culture is a social practice among people. Both should not be made to conflict with each other.

In Malaysia people from different cultural background adhering different religions, like the Bahá'is, Buddhists, Christians, Hindus, Jain and Muslims, still practising their own culture and customs, including their dress code. The dress code is just a social identity, not a religious identity.

We should not allow ignorance of other religious beliefs to become a barrier for unity and solidarity in our nation. Intolerance should not be allowed to obscure religious truth. A climate of religious tolerance, although challenging should be a priority in our multi-cultural and multi-religious societies in Malaysia.

All of us, including religious leaders, educators, media and the government should work towards establishing religious tolerance and mutual understanding among the citizens of this country. Steps of friendly mutual tolerance ought to be established between various religious adherents of the Malaysia to make haven for all.

As stressed by Najib, moderation is key word for religious tolerance in any country. I believe, as Malaysian we are just like flowers of one garden, living harmoniously and peacefully in this great nation of us.  We have learnt to accept our differences and accept each other as fellow Malaysians in a spirit of fellowship and comradeship.

 As demonstrated by the Prime Minister himself, all Malaysians should consort with peoples of all religions with joy and gladness. We are all waves of one sea, as echoed in 1Malaysia concept.

Muar: Royal Town

As a Muarian, I am extremely pleased with the announcement of Muar as Bandar Diraja or royal town by His Highness, Sultan Ibrahim Iskandar, Sultan of Johor. I am sure all the Muarians share the same joy and pride with the historic announcement.  Historical records show that Muar has a history which stretches more than 100 years. The Portuguese records show Muar existed as early as 1600. Muar was one of the earliest town established in the state.

 

It is interesting to note that Muar had its own railway known as Muar State Railway (M.S.R) in the years 1889-1925. It operated from Maharani town to Parit Jawa to provide transport for the residents in Parit Jawa and the neighbouring villages. The service was terminated in 1925 when a road named Jalan Abdul Rahman was opened from Parit Jawa to Muar town.  The engine of M.S.R is now displayed at Tanjung Emas Muar as local heritage.

 

The name Maharani was given to this town by Sultan Abu Bakar who was also known as Maharaja, when he officially named the town as Maharani, in honour his Queen in 1884. The city of Maharani was the capital city until the capital moved later to Tanjung Puteri (now known as Johor Bahru).

 

There are many etymologies for the origin of the name Muar. One of it is said Muar obtained its name from its geographical location at the mouth of Muar River. Muara means estuary in Malay.

 

Several historical buildings stand with grandeur and majesty until today to testify Muar town is architecturally rich and historical designs. Among them are Muar High Court building built in 1885 in a neo-classical architecture, the Royal Customs & Exercise built  built in 1909 and  High School Muar, built in 1914.  

 

Some years ago, in 1984 Muar celebrated its 100^th year celebrations with much pomp and grandeur many years ago. At this juncture, as urged by the Sultan of Johor, the residents of Muar should ensure that the cleanliness of the town is maintained. Perhaps, Muarians should make efforts to change the pensioner’s town image to a modern and developed town.

Origin of yee sang

I refer to the recent debate about the term Yee Sang. The term which literally means “raw fish” is a favourite dish served throughout Chinese New Year celebrations by the Chinese communities.  In fact, Yee Sang has become a tradition synonymous with abundance, prosperity and vigour.

 As a linguist fascinated by etymology, the study of history of words in language, I would like to share some views on this subject. Yee sang, according to Lim Mun Fah of the Sin Chew daily  is a Chinese word from the Cantonese dialect. This means the term originated from mainland China. One website said the dish originated as early as 220.  As the Chinese community dispersed to other parts of the world as emigrants, including to Malaysia and Singapore, yee sang being part of Chinese culture was tacked along with them. It is said the yee sang culture was brought to Malaysia and Singapore as early as 1920’s. 

So, the question that the word yee sang originated from the Chinese in Singapore cannot hold water.  Neither, can the Malaysian Chinese claim it originated from Malaysia. Probably, the content of the dish has changed from the original yee sang. Local flavour was added and the dish has now evolved into the modern version of yee sang.

I believe as an etymologist and linguist, this type of polemics can be solved, if we have an etymological dictionary. The dictionary will trace the history of all words used in languages. Therefore, I urge the Chinese community, especially the scholars to work on an etymological dictionary in the near future. Besides providing invaluable information of the origin of words, it could also serve as essential research tool for Chinese words.

On the controversy of the yee sang, I suggest we need not split hairs but rather accept the dish as a Chinese dish, a precious part of the Malaysia and Singapore’s Chinese culture. As Malaysians, we should be proud of yee sang, a cultural belonging of the Chinese, in particular the Cantonese community.

Work Ethics

Work ethics

Recently, there has been some dissatisfaction expressed by certain quarters about the exit policy included in the Public Service New Remuneration (SBPA).  They have expressed their reservation of the implementation of the policy. 

Firstly, I strongly concur with the exit policy that has been included in the SBPA. I think we should welcome the policy and it should not be withdrawn as urged by many quarters, especially by Cuepacs. 

For efficient and sound working of our public service, such a measure should be advocated. With the current extension of retirement to 60 years by the government recently, we are afraid that a sizeable number of civil servants will not be able to cope up with demands and needs of the civil service. As such, these civil servants will probably become dead wood. We cannot allow dead wood to be present in the civil service. If a civil servant is not able perform for three years consecutively, he or she should be prepared to leave the service and find employment elsewhere, as argued by the Public Service Commission. 

Every individual, no matter how handicapped and limited he or she may be, is under the obligation of engaging in his or her profession, for work, especially when performed in the spirit of service, is a form of worship. It has not only a utilitarian purpose, but has a value in itself, because it draws us nearer to God, and enables to better grasp His purpose for us in this world. It is obvious, therefore, that the inheritance of wealth cannot make anyone immune from daily work. If all civil servants hold to this principle of ‘Work is Worship’, I believe no civil servant will be asked to leave the service.

Therefore, I urge all quarters to support the move of the Public Service Division to go ahead with this exit policy in the SBPA. After all, such a move is to make our public service more competent and productive.

The ills of technology

The advent of technology has truly revolutionized human life. It has indeed made our living, hassle-free, easy, and above all, comfortable. All these have happened at the expense of the erosion of traditional human values practiced for years by our ancestors in our life, like taking time to talk to each other, paying a visit to homes of friends and relatives, and attending marriages or funerals in person.

Today, we ask about each other’s health, convey congratulatory messages, New Year greetings by SMS or emails. It has been accepted norm to send SMS and emails to do these activities.

In the past, we take time to meet friends and relatives to inquire about their health, attend family function and funerals in person. It was unacceptable for one at that time if a person doesn’t attend social events in person.

But today, it is the other way around. I remember a relative of mine said “Just SMS me for your son’s wedding. That suffices, and no need for wedding invitation card.”

Basic human values and requirements are slowly and assuredly are not being practiced nowadays with the coming of technology. I remember reading a newspaper report (NST, 16 Oct 2011) stating the technology has led to parents and children spending less quality time with each other.  Studies show parents spend about 8 minutes a day with their kids, mostly giving instructions and directives to carry out duties and daily chores.

Today, many spend more and more time or rather obsessed with technological gadgets like internet, hand-phones and the like, instead of communicating with family members. Family members are glued to television and spend hours together, but sadly not communicating with each other. 

It is even reported that many spend hours on the internet, chatting, browsing, up-dating face-book and twitting. Even parents send emails and SMS to their children although they stay under the same roof. It is mockery, but a fact of life today. All these happen as each and every one of us are busy in our own way.

At times, it is an irony that we call up friend staying away from us and chat for a long time, but our spouses and children who are just in our midst are not communicated. Our family members will value and appreciate the togetherness when we talk to each other and spend time with them.

The question that arises: Where are we heading? Once a renowned anthropologist said man is a social being. I wonder whether such a definition can be accepted today. Probably, socializing is taking a different form, through these technological gadgets and instruments. Maybe, it is for the better or worse, we are yet to know it.

Meritocracy: Key for development and progress

The Prime Minister, during a dialogue session at Khazanah Megatrends Forum 2011 recently, has announced that the quota system will have to go, and instead meritocracy will be put in place.   

The Premier has put a salient point across to the Malaysians. He has said quota system in the long-run will not benefit any community. 

I strongly support such a move – giving priority to meritocracy rather than quotas allocated to raise the standard of any community in the nation as I believe such a move also applies to the non-bumiputeras, too. 

Personally, I feel that we should do away terms like non-Malays and Malays, bumiputeras or non-bumiputeras to refer to the people of Malaysia. After all we are all Malaysians, born and bred here. All Malaysian, irrespective of race, colour, creed, religion or ethnic group consider this nation as their beautiful homeland. 

I hope meritocracy will become a key factor in developing our nation. We have many shining examples on how many Malaysians have excelled in many sectors based on meritocracy. The time has come to do away with quota system.  This is a long awaited cry among the Malaysians.

We need to employ the best minds in the country to develop our little nation. We should have the best brains to lead all sectors, be it aviation, education, finance, economy, or even the civil service. In promotion, as the Premier has said, the right kind of person should be preferred. The deserving ones should be favoured to hold significant position in all sectors. 

In making Malaysia a modern and vibrant democratic nation, I believe meritocracy is a key factor. Many nations have utilized the best brains to develop their nations. We should also adhere to such a practice to develop our nation. 

History is truth

Recently, statements about certain historical facts have given rise to controversies and polemics among readers. After all, what is history? History is a documentation of facts, events, and happenings in the past.

One on-line dictionary defines history as ‘A usually chronological record of events, as of the life or development of a people or institution, often including an explanation of or commentary on those events’.  Thus, history is documentation of events, people and institutions. This process of documentation is undertaken by historians, scholars in the field of history.

We should never dispute any facts of history. For example, Malacca fell to the Portuguese in 1511, subsequently to the Dutch in 1641. Finally, Malacca was ceded to the British, according to Anglo-Dutch Treaty in 1824.

Likewise, JWW Birch, the Resident of Perak was murdered by Maharaja Lela, a Malay chieftain in Perak. All these are historical facts.  Of course, history is always interpreted by many from their own perspective. From the Malay perspective, Maharaja Lela is a hero and Birch, a villain, but from the British point of view, it is otherwise. Points of view always differ from different perspective, but history is statement of truth, the actually happening of events.

The task of writing history lies in the shoulders of historians, without prejudice, bias or from his or her personal point of view. Historians should rely on historical records based on written records for evidence to support their claims. Sometimes, photographs, films, or other forms of artefacts can be used to substantiate their documentation. 

Trouble often brews when history is interpreted by many. Of course, everyone including a layman can interpret events and happenings. But, interpretation is not history. Normally, interpretation is considered as one’s point of view.

Disagreements raised today can be put to rest, if history is seen as truth. Therefore, I suggest let history be the concern of the learned in the field of history, i.e. the historians. History should not be distorted or misinterpreted and written in a biased and from the personal view-point.