Archive for the ‘Religion’ category

deputy minister johari on use of Allah word

December 21st, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I'm not an expert on Islam, but since Internet is around, I googled around for the word "Allah". These are some of the interesting things I found:

1. From http://emuslim.com/WhoIsAllah.asp

First of all, it is important to note that "Allah" is the same word that Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews use for God. If you pick up an Arabic Bible, you will see the word "Allah" being used where "God" is used in English. This is because "Allah" is the only word in the Arabic language equivalent to the English word "God" with a capital "G". Additionally, the word "Allah" cannot be made plural or given gender (i.e. masculine or feminine), which goes hand-in-hand with the Islamic concept of God. Because of this, and also because the Qur'an, which is the holy scripture of Muslims, was revealed in the Arabic language, some Muslims use the word "Allah" for "God", even when they are speaking other languages. This is not unique to the word "Allah", since many Muslims tend to use Arabic words when discussing Islamic issues, regardless of the language that they speak. This is because the universal teachings of Islam – even though they have been translated in every major language – have been preserved in the Arabic language.

 

It is interesting to note that the Aramaic word "El", which is the word for God in the language that Jesus spoke, is certainly more similar in sound to the word "Allah" than the English word "God". This also holds true for the various Hebrew words for God, which are "El" and "Elah", and the plural form "Elohim". The reason for these similarities is that Aramaic, Hebrew and Arabic are all Semitic languages with common origins. It should also be noted that in translating the Bible into English, the Hebrew word "El" is translated variously as "God", "God" and "angel"! This imprecise language allows different translators, based on their preconceived notions, to translate the word to fit their own views. The Arabic word "Allah" presents no such difficulty or ambiguity, since it is only used for Almighty God alone. Additionally, in English, the only difference between "God", meaning a false God, and "God", meaning the One True God, is the capital "G". In the Arabic alphabet, since it does not have capital letters, the word for God (i.e. Allah) is formed by adding the equivalent to the English word "the" (Al-) to the Arabic word for "God/God" (ilah). So the Arabic word "Allah" literally it means "The God" – the "Al-" in Arabic basically serving the same function as the capital "G" in English. Due to the above mentioned facts, a more accurate translation of the word "Allah" into English might be "The One -and-Only God" or "The One True God".

More importantly, it should also be noted that the Arabic word "Allah" contains a deep religious message due to its root meaning and origin. This is because it stems from the Arabic verb ta'Allaha (or alaha), which means "to be worshipped".

 

…This brings us to a more important point: It should be clearly understood that what Islam is primarily concerned with is correcting mankind's concept of Almighty God. What we are ultimately going to be held accountable at the end of our life is not whether we prefer the word "Allah" to the word "God", but what our concept of God is. Language is only a side issue. A person can have an incorrect concept of God while using the word "Allah", and likewise a person can have a correct concept of God while using the word "God". This is because both of these words are equally capable of being misused and being improperly defined. As we've already mentioned, using the word "Allah" no more insinuates belief in the Unity of God than the use of the word "God" insinuates belief in the Trinity – or any other theological opinion. Naturally, when God sends a revelation to mankind through a prophet, He is going to send it in a language that the people who receive it can understand and relate to.

 

Some of the biggest misconceptions that many non-Muslims have about Islam have to do with the word "Allah". For various reasons, many people have come to believe that Muslims worship a different God than Christians and Jews. This is totally false, since "Allah" is simply the Arabic word for "God" – and there is only One God. Let there be no doubt – Muslims worship the God of Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus – peace be upon them all. However, it is certainly true that Jews, Christians and Muslims all have different concepts of Almighty God. For example, Muslims – like Jews – reject the Christian beliefs of the Trinity and the Divine Incarnation. This, however, doesn't mean that each of these three religions worships a different God – because, as we have already said, there is only One True God. Judaism, Christianity and Islam all claim to be "Abrahamic Faiths", and all of them are also classified as "monotheistic". However, Islam teaches that other religions have, in one way or another, distorted and nullified a pure and proper belief in Almighty God by neglecting His true teachings and mixing them with man-made ideas

 

As Muslims, we think that it is unfortunate that we have to go into details on such seemingly minor issues, but so many falsehoods have been heaped upon our religion, that we feel that it is our duty to try to break down the barriers of falsehood. This isn't always easy, since there is a lot of anti-Islamic literature in existence, which tries to make Islam look like something strange and foreign to Westerners. There are some people out there, who are obviously not on the side of truth, that want to get people to believe that "Allah" is just some Arabian "God", and that Islam is completely "other" – meaning that it has no common roots with the other Abrahamic religions (i.e. Christianity and Judaism). To say that Muslims worship a different "God" because they say "Allah" is just as illogical as saying that French people worship another God because they use the word "Dieu", that Spanish-speaking people worship a different God because they say "Dios" or that the Hebrews worshipped a different God because they sometimes call Him "Yahweh". Certainly, reasoning like this is quite ridiculous! It should also be mentioned, that claiming that any one language uses the only correct word for God is tantamount to denying the universality of God's message to mankind, which was to all nations, tribes and people through various prophets who spoke different languages."

2. From http://understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=question&qid=69&sscatid=8

Question:

What is the derivation of the word "Allah"? Some scholars say it derives from al+ illah ("the God"), but many Muslim Ulema and translators of the Qur'an (such as Maulana Muhammad Ali) disagree with this, and say that "Allah" is whole in itself, as a proper name for the Supreme Creator. But is there any philological relationship between Allah and other Semitic terms for "God" such as Eloah (Hebrew) and Alaha (Aramaic/Syriac)?

Thank you.

Peace and blessings of Allah be with you.

Answer:

Although a lot has been said about the philology of the word 'Allah', however, in my opinion, the former of the two opinions noted by you seems to be closer to the correct one. A detailed discussion compiling the opinions of various scholars of the Arabic language regarding the origin of the word can be seen in "Lisaan al-Arab" under the word "Aaliha" (a-l-h). In my opinion, 'Allah' is an Arabic word meaning 'the God'. According to the general principle of making proper nouns from common nouns in the Arabic language, the word "ilah" (common noun) has been converted to "al-ilah", which became "Allah" due to the turgidity and the slight difficulty of pronouncing the word "al-ilah".

The Qur'an, because its prime and first addressees were the Arabs, used the word "Allah" for the Supreme Being, as that had traditionally been the word used for the Supreme Being in that language. The same had been the case in the older scriptures. Those scriptures, like the Qur'an, used the particular words for the Supreme Being, which were already in vogue in those languages, to refer to the Supreme Being.

However, there have been scholars of the Arabic language who ascribe to the opinion that "Allah" is the actual name of the Supreme Being. It is indeed important to analyze the evidence that they have provided to support their opinion. Nevertheless, I feel that to give God a name is a requirement of us, humans. God, being the absolute being is in no need for a name.

3. From http://www.islam-info.ch/en/Who_is_Allah.htm

In the technical vocabulary of linguistics, the word Allâh is Jâmid, that is, it is not derived from any other word. In the pronunciation of Allâh, the letter ‘L’ is stressed. The word Allâh is not a construction of al-ilâh as some people think, but a different and an independent word. The first two letters Al in the word Allâh are an integral, inseparable part of the word. They do not denote the definite article Al of Arabic, which is equivalent to the English ‘the’. In Arabic, the prefix Al is added before the noun to emphasize the word in the sense of 'most' or 'all', for example al-Rahmân – the Most Gracious. Sîbwaih, the great grammarian, and Khalîl, the great linguistic, say, “Since Al in the beginning of the word Allâh is inseparable from it, so it is a simple substantive, not derived from any other word.”

If Al in Allâh were an additional prefix, the common exclamation yâ Allâh, (O Allâh!), would not be permitted according to the rules of Arabic grammar, as the form yâ al-ilâh or yâ al-Rahmân are not permissible in Arabic. Moreover, this supposition would mean that there were different gods – âlihah (plural of ilâh), one of which became gradually known as al-ilâh and was then contracted into Allâh. This supposition is not correct. Allâh has always been the name of the Eternal Being (Hughes: Dictionary of Islam), nor has the word Allâh ever been applied to anyone else but the Divine Being. The pagan Arabs had numerous ilâhs or gods, but none of them was ever called Allâh.

This being the proper name of the Supreme Being has therefore no parallel or equivalent in any other language of the world. The English word ‘god’ is applied to any religious object of worship. Most probably it is related to ‘good’ and origins from heathen mythologies. Jehovah, which is the Aramaic or Hebrew expression Ya Howâ, literally means most closely ‘O! That’ or ‘O! Thou’ used to address a Deity, the emphasis is on Huwa which is to emphasize an Existence, therefore it can hardly be a proper name. The Hindus give their senior deity the name of Par-Mâtma (the Super Soul), Par-Barham (the Super and the Great), Par-Mishwar (the Great King or Owner), The Parsis give their supreme God the name of Yazdan and Hermes. In the Sikh religion, their great Deity is called Satt which means the Truth. The use of Jehova in the New Testament by the Witnesses of Jehova is a new invention. In the original Greek version and older versions of the New Testament this name was never used and Jesus never employed the name "Jehova". Although most Christians are unaware of it, the Aramaic speaking Jesus also used the word Allâh (or ‘Allaha’). Christians speaking the Semitic languages still use it. In the Greek and Latin writings this was then rendered to theos or deos, the generic words for ‘god’ in these languages. These words are derived from Dyeus, the name of a heathen god. The French ‘dieu’ or the English ‘deity’ are also etymologically based on that word.

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah

The term Allāh is most likely derived from a contraction of the Arabic article al- and ʾilāh "deity, god" to al-lāh meaning "the [sole] deity, God" ( ho theos monos), L. Gardet states.[2] Another theory traces the etymology of the word to the Aramaic Alāhā.[2]. Cognates of the name "Allāh" exist in other Semitic languages, including Hebrew and Aramaic. [4] The corresponding Aramaic form is אֱלָהָא ˀĔlāhā in Biblical Aramaic and ܐܰܠܳܗܳܐ ˀAlâhâ or ˀĀlōho in Syriac. [9].

According to Gerhard Böwering, the contraction of al- and ʾilāh in forming the term Allāh (“the deity” in the masculine form) parallels the contraction of al- and ʾilāha in forming the term al-Lāt (“the deity” in the feminine form). [10]

Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, use the word "Allah" to mean "God". [4] The Christian Arabs of today have no other word for 'God' than 'Allah'.[6] Arab Christians for example use terms Allāh al-ab (الله الآب) meaning God the father, Allāh al-ibn (الله الابن) mean God the son, and Allāh al-ruh al ghodus (الله الروح القدس) meaning God the Holy Spirit (See God in Christianity for the Christian concept of God).

Deputy Minister Johari says the word is from Arabic language, so I suppose all those who speak Arabic can use it. Religion is a sensitive issue, so I hope this issue is not misinterpreted and offend those people of Arabic descent who may not be Muslims. Again, I'm not an expert, so my apologies if there's any mistake here.

Johari: Only Muslims can use 'Allah'
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/76302
Soon Li Tsin | Dec 21, 07 5:31pm

The word 'Allah' can only be used in the context of Islam and not any other religion, said the Deputy Internal Security Minister Johari Baharum.

Asked why a new condition will be imposed on Catholic weekly newspaper Herald when its annual publishing permit is next renewed, the deputy minister said this is to prevent confusion. 

"Only Muslims can use 'Allah'. It's a Muslim word, you see. It's from (the Arabic (language). We cannot let other religions use it because it will confuse people," he said when contacted today.

"We cannot allow this use of 'Allah' in non-Muslim publications, nobody except Muslims. The word 'Allah' is published by the Catholics. It's not right."

The Herald, the organ of the Catholic Church in Malaysia, had been facing problems in renewing its publishing permit allegedly because of the word 'Allah' was used in referring to 'God' in its Bahasa Malaysia section. 

The ministry has also allegedly told the publisher to remove the entire Bahasa Malaysia section or the permit will not be renewed when it expires in two weeks.

The Herald, which is published in four languages – English, Bahasa Malaysia, Chinese and Tamil – has a circulation of 12,000.

Johari noted that other publications, such as Buddhist magazines, do not use the word 'Allah' when referring to God.

"The Herald can use other words but not 'Allah'. That will confuse people," he claimed.

Basis of decision

He said the decision was made based on a report submitted by the publications department of the ministry.

"Previously no one knew (about this). I made the decision based on a report submitted to me that was prepared by an officer," he explained.

However, when asked why the Herald is being told to remove its Bahasa Malaysia section – rather than use of the word 'Allah' – Johari was unable to comment.

"I'm not sure about it, I have to check again. As far as I know they used the word 'Allah' and we cannot allow that," he reiterated.

He further pointed out that the word 'Allah' cannot be printed on t-shirts or other garments and those who have done so have been warned by his ministry.

The use of 'Allah' outside of Islam has stirred controversy in Malaysia previously. Four years ago, the Bible in the Iban language was banned because it translated the word 'God' as Allah Taala, which resembles Islam's name for God. 

The ban was, however, lifted after protests from the Christian community.

Learning camp for Bahai kids

December 5th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Learning camp for Baha’i kids. Read about Baha’ism in Wikipedia.

source

Story and photos by ELAN PERUMAL

PARTICIPANTS of a children’s camp held at the Institut Kemahiran Yayasan Negeri Selangor in Kuala Selangor recently had a lot of fun besides learning a lot of new things.

The three-day camp organised by the Baha’i Community of Klang was part of the community’s annual year-end camp for children.

The camp, which attracted some 60 participants between the age of seven and 15, included moral classes and Junior Youth Spiritual Empowerment Progra-mme.

Twenty of the participants who were below 12 years old attended the children’s session while the rest were in the junior youth category.

The theme for this year’s camp was Torch Bearers of The Society.

Camp organiser S. Retnamary said, the presence of the more than 10 volunteers and facilitators made the event a success.

“The participants were taught moral and social values via book learning, art and craft and music.

“There were also a lot of colouring, singing, dancing, story telling and other interesting sessions for the children.

“The junior youths were divided into three categories according to their age groups and they went through lessons from three books.

“The 12-year-olds did the Breezes of Confirmation while the 13 and 14-year-old went through the Walking The Straight Path and Spirit of Faith books,” she said, adding that these three different books taught moral values in the form of stories.

Retnamary said participants were required to be disciplined throughout the camp.

“A lot of emphasis was given to their moral conduct,” she added.

Besides classroom activity, she said, the participants also had a lot of fun playing outdoor games during the evening.

She said they were fully occupied with various activities including training in performing arts such as role play and drama acting.

Permatang assemblyman Datuk Aziz Mohd Noh presented the certificate of attendance to the participants at the end of the camp.

settlement by amanah raya over convert son’s insurance

November 28th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Break for mum denied convert son’s bequest

source

PENANG: The Amanah Raya Berhad has offered to settle a suit by a Hindu woman who could not inherit the insurance monies left by her son who died a Muslim. High Court judge Justice John Louis O’Hara fixed Jan 29 for mention pending the settlement between Amanah Raya and 61-year-old cleaner M. Rukumony. 

The woman had also named the Koperasi Angkatan Tentera Malaysia Berhad in her claim dated April 15, 2005. She claimed that her son E. Ragu, 23, who was an army ranger, was found in a coma at Kem Wardieburn Setapak Kuala Lumpur, and died at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital on Aug 2, 2000. 

In her claim, Rukumony said the co-operative had taken out a policy on her son but refused to pay her the RM56,300 and instead had deposited it with Amanah Raya. Ragu, a bachelor, had made a trust deed on Sept 6, 1999, and an assignment under Section 23 of the Civil Law Act 1956 on Feb 1, 2000, making Rukumony the beneficiary. 

The co-operative said Ragu converted to Islam on Dec 31, 1999, and his Muslim name was Mohamed Redzuan Abdullah Ellaiappan. It claimed that under the Syariah Law, Rukumony could not inherit the property of her deceased son because she is a non-Muslim.  The Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council has intervened in the case. 

Counsel Darshan Singh Khaira represented Rukumony while Rosmaidar Mustafa represented Amanah Raya. Abdul Muiz Samsuri appeared for the council. Rukumony was not present in court yesterday. 

demonstation at Giant Shah Alam over assault on customer

November 20th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Update:Received this from a two friends. Thanks to Punita and Regina. Allow me to provide summary for benefit to international readers:

The complainant (Sashidaran) made a police report after he was accused of stealing at Giant, Shah Alam (one of the popular hypermarket chains). Not only he was accused, he claims that the security guards planted items in his bag, assaulted him, insulted his religion, and forced him to write a false confession. He was turned over to the police and taken to Seksyen 11 police station where he was subject to more assault and threats, and forced to sign another confession. He was denied access to his parents for three hours. His father later came and he was released. He found that some of his belongings were missing. He was to attend court hearing on 19 november 2007. He made the police report to protect himself and claim his innocence.

giantdemo06.jpggiantdemo07.jpggiantdemo08.jpggiantdemo09.jpggiantdemo01.jpggiantdemo02.jpggiantdemo03.jpggiantdemo10.jpggiantdemo11.jpggiantdemo12.jpggiantdemo13.jpggiantdemo04.jpggiantdemo05.jpg

Nama : Sashindran
Bangsa : India
Agama : Hindu
Umur : 22 tahun
Pekerjaan : Technical Supporting

Laporan Kejadian

Pada hari 16 hb November 2007, lebih kurang pukul 11.20 pagi, saya telah pergi ke “Giant” di Seksyen 13, Shah Alam untuk membeli barang. Setelah saya beli barang itu berjumlah RM23 dan selepas membayarnya saya meletakkan diatas kaunter “ Giant “ untuk beli satu lagi barang.

Selepas saya mendapatkan barang Ambipure dan letakkan diatas kaunter. Semasa itu saya menerima pangilan telefon daripada pakcik saya. Semasa saya bercakap dan meletakkan telefon saya dalam “ sling beg “ saya ditegur oleh 2 pegawai sekuriti “Giant “ dan dibawa ke bilik mereka.

Sejurus sahaja saya sampai dibilik itu, saya dipukul dari belakang dengan tangan oleh salah seorang pegawai sekuriti dengan memberitahu berikut :-

“ kamu apa 08 punya orangkah, you tahu saya siapa, saya pun 08 punya orang besar “

Sejurus selepas itu, saya yang merupakan seorang penganut hindu yag memakai symbol keagamaan saya “ kum kum “ di dahi saya dan rantai yang ada wajah gambar tuhan (Krishna ). Pegawai itu terus memukul saya dan paksa saya untuk duduk dibawah dan seterusnya memadamkan “kum kum “ yang merupakan kesucian agama saya serta mencabut rantai keagamaaan saya daripada saya dan lalu dicampak dalam bilik tersebut.

Selepas itu, pegawai sekuriti itu ambil gambar tuhan Krishna saya yang berada dalam bentuk “pendant “ dan meletakkan semula di atas dahi saya dan beritahu perkara berikut sebelum dia menendang saya dibahagian belakang :-

“ Sekarang kamu nampak macam syaitan “

Selepas itu pegawai sekuriti menyuruh saya untuk menulis surat akuan bahawa saya telah mencuri “ silicon , bostik, polish kereta dan perfume aroma therapy “ . Saya memberitahu bahawa saya tidak boleh menulis kerana saya tidak buat salah atau mencuri barang-barang tersebut. Selepas saya beritahu ini, saya dipukul dengan kerusi plastic berwarna biru sampai kerusi tersebut pecah. Saya yang dalam ketakutan dan kesakitan, terpaksa akur dengan ugutan mereka untuk menulis surat akuan tersebut.

Selepas saya menulis surat tersebut, mereka suruh saya tandatangan diatas surat itu, tetapi saya menolak permintaan mereka.Disebabkan itu, mereka pukul lagi dengan kerusi plastic yang pecah tadi. Mereka juga mengambil selipar saya dan diikat dengan tali dan menggantungkannya di leher saya dan beritahu sekali lagi berikut :-

“ Kamu sekarang macam anak syaitan, selapes itu dipukul sekali lagi dan dimarahi lagi “ keling, bodoh ………. “

Dengan paksaan itu saya terpaksa menandatangani surat itu dan pada masa itu sekali lagi, saya dipukul di tangan kanan dengan menggunakan kerusi tersebut. Selepas itu sekuriti itu minta saya mengaku dan bayar RM30 agar saya boleh dibebaskan tetapi saya tidak bayar. Saya tidak ingin bayar kerana saya tidak mencuri barangan tersebut .

Dalam masa yang sama, saya perhatikan mereka memasukkan barangan tersebut, “ silicon, bostik, polish kereta dan perfume aroma terapi kedalam beg saya.

Selepas itu, mereka mengambil gambar saya memegang beg dan seterusnya mereka suruh saya buka beg, satu lagi gambar diambil, kemudian mereka suruh saya mengeluarkan semua barangan yang sekuriti tadi masukkan dan diambil satu lagi gambar diambil. Akhirnya saya disuruh pegang semua barang itu dan diambil satu lagi gambar. Mereka mengambil 4 gambar.

Selepas itu, saya dipukul oleh kedua-dua sekuriti dikepala saya dan mengugut saya bunuh sekiranya beritahu sesiapa.

Selepas itu pegawai sekuriti itu memanggil polis untuk menyerahkan saya dan dalam masa menunggu mereka terus pukul saya. Sejurus sahaja, polis sampai, salah seorang polis tamper saya dari belakang dibahu saya. Selepas itu, seorang polis menggunakan bat senapang dan memukul saya dibahu belakang.

Saya digari dan dibawa kedalam kereta peronda polis dan diberitahu akan dibawa ke Balai Polis Sekysen 11, Shah Alam. Semasa berada dalam kereta peronda, salah seorang polis memaki saya seperti berikut : –

1. “ India keling you apa 08 punya orangkah “

2. “ Saya boleh lepaskan awak dan tembak dan membuang saya dimana-mana sahaja.

Kemudian dia mengambil ID pekerja saya dari dompet saya dan campakkan keluar dari kereta. Masa itu, saya meminta jangan campak tetapi dia terus memaki saya seperti berikut :-

“ You India keling pasti masuk lokap, kamu akan hilang kerja, tak payah ada ID, Ini negara Islam, apasal you ada sini, kalau mau curi balik India “

Selepas itu, saya terus dibawa ke Balai Seksyen 11, Shah Alam. Sarjan Azami meminta saya terus mengaku bahawa saya mencuri padahal saya kata saya tidak mencuri.

Seterusnya, sarjan Azami mengugut saya untuk menandatangani laporan yang disediakan oleh Sarjan Azami sendiri tanpa mengambil keterangan saya.

Apabila saya kata tak boleh, dia mengugut seperti berikut, “ kamu akan dimasukkan kedalam lokap 14 hari dan dipukul”. Masa itu, saya minta mereka menghubungi bapa saya tetapi tidak dibenarkan.

Akhirnya, saya terpaksa mengalah dengan desakkan mereka, saya tandatangani laporan Sarjan Azami tersebut.

Selepas lebih kurang 3 jam kemudian, saya dibenarkan untuk menelefon bapa saya. Mereka hanya berikan telefon bimbit dan dompet. Barangan dibawah telah hilang semasa saya menerima “ sling bag “ saya:-

1. Castrol Multipurpose tool.

2. Duit berjumlah RM150

3. Pen drive

4. Proskit Precision Tools

Saya juga mendapati kredit ditelefon saya telah kurang sebanyak RM7.00. Selepas itu bapa saya dating ke Balai dan saya keluar dengan jaminan polis dan diminta untuk hadir ke mahkamah Seksyen 6 pada hari Isnin ( 19-11-07 ) 9.15 pagi.

Saya membuat laporan ini untuk membuktikan bahawa saya tidak bersalah, saya dianiaya dan sekuriti tersebut telah dengan sengaja mereka cerita palsu tentang kecurian tersebut. Saya juga ingin membuat laporan ini untuk melindungi diri dan keselamatan saya daripada dua sekuriti Giant Seksyen 18 dan pegawai polis yang mengugut untuk membunuh saya. Kalau apa-apa berlaku pada saya, pegawai sekuriti dan polis tersebut adalah bertanggungjawab.

Yang benar,

………………………………..

( Sashindran a/l Ravichandran )

Nod for temple in Sg Udang

November 19th, 2007
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


source

By A. LETCHUMANAN
newsdesk@thestar.com.my

MALACCA: The 34-year-old Sri Vanathandavar Temple has been given approval to operate in Sungai Udang.

The temple has been serving more than 10,000 Hindus in Sungai Udang and surrounding areas. However, the temple committee has to raise RM228,000 before Dec 5 to pay the premium for the temple’s land.

The committee had been organising several fund-raising activities, including a dinner on Nov 21, and MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu has consented to be the guest of honour at the function in Dewan Hang Tuah.

The land purchase sub-committee chairman Major (QM) G. Segar said the proceeds of the dinner would be used to pay the premium to the state and any excess would be used to furnish the temple.

Seeking contributions: Segar (right) and a priest standing outside the 34-year-old Sri Vanathandavar Temple in Sungai Udang recently.
The temple, set up by members of the Gurkha army deployed in Sungai Udang during the British colonial period, is the largest in Sungai Udang.

Segar said the temple nearest to Sungai Udang was the Throbathai Amman Temple in Gajah Berang which was 17km away. He said the temple management committee was made up of people from the armed forces and civilians.

Those wishing to contribute can contact the temple management at Batu 12, Sungai Udang, 76300 Malacca, or Segar at 019-681 7607 or Major (R) M.P. Indran at 012-661 5091 or 06-315 1684.