A Malay perspective on the White Paper

Credit: Remember Singapore

I have been busy lately but had a strong itch to write on the PAP's glaring 6.9 million figure. And it doesn't make it better with WP proposing the 5.9 million either. Singapore is a small country and growing bigger will metaphorically and maybe literally 'sink' us. If there is any country where anyone wants to meet any nationality in the atlas, do come to Singapore as we are opening our gates to anyone that is willing to be Singaporean and help boost the economy. Selamat Datang!

You turn left, right, bottom, or top, you will see a human being. As you take the public transport, don’t be mistaken that you are sitting beside a pinoy although they look like Malay. Where I am staying, I have counted there are 4 pinoys staying at my block. I am not xenophobic, but I’m just perplexed that they are everyhwhere and the person sitting next to you may not be a Singaporean native, but an imported citizen.

The White Paper is full of contradictions. As a Malay-Muslim, I was aghast in disbelief when the government proposed that there will 6.9 million people in 2030. Being a minority in this country I cannot help but feel threatened, insecure and helpless because I know the Malays are not producing enough and the government are importing ‘Malays’ from other regional countries. You mean there is no alternative measure to help Singaporeans? 

So overcrowding in Singapore is inevitable. But how far does the government want to stretch the problem of overcrowding? I beginning to feel claustrophobic in town areas and heartlands.

Artificial city, heritage lost

I remember reading something about Singapore morphing into an artificial city. I missed the good old days where I used to hang out at Lorong Fatimah and play with my cousins there. It was fun, carefree and memorable. Don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to revive the kampong life but I missed that feeling of originality that Singapore used to have and we were super proud of it. Yes, time has changed so Singapore has to move forward. But moving forward doesn’t mean that we must sacrifice our cultural heritage by chopping the Mango Tree at Gedung Kuning or demolish a cultural heritage that symbolise the essence of Singapore's multiculturalism, all in the name of redevelopment. Think about the future generation who have little to associate themselves as Singaporeans. In order to revisit the past, our children have to visit the museum or Google it up. How can we learn from history when history has been wiped out from our Singaporean lives? There is no personal touch and it's unnatural. What’s left in the present are grey buildings with high-tech gadgets. Sad isn’t it?

Mixed-marriages, mixed-breed, but what’s your race?

As Singapore government open up the gates wider to welcome the foreigners into our country, we also welcome the notion of mixed-marriages among Singaporeans. I remember it was such a rare sight to spot an ang moh in neighbourhoods a decade ago, but now we see ang mohs jogging or eating at hawker centres along with their mixed-breed children staying in the condos or landed properties even in obscure areas such as Woodlands, Choa Chu Kang and Jurong West. These are signs that they are integrating into our society. Okay that’s good, but what about their children who are born here? Are they really integrating well and making the effort to understand our intricate local culture? What about the future generation of Singaporeans who are mixed-breed? Do they still retain the native Singaporean blood (Indian, Malay, Chinese), or by that time it will be more upbeat to label their race as ‘Eurasian’ or ‘Caucasian’?

Dilute race and language

Dilute race and language

I chided in disgust as I recalled how Dr Yaacob Ibrahim proposed reducing the status of Malay language to be taught as foreign language. So this is the revelation and this is where we are heading, as the government is gearing up towards the increase in population, and therefore by simplifying the already simplified Malay to something unthinkable such as foreign language. All because we are preparing our future citizens to come to Singapore so that they can easily integrate into our society, easier for them to pick up the simplified language and everything is fuss free for these foreigners at the expense of our national identity. The government is bargaining our Singapore identity and there is nothing we can do about it because we are not decision-makers. We have become political scapegoats.

With the increase number of new citizens who are non-native speakers of our ethnic languages, it will pose a problem of diluting the Malay language just like the dilution of race and cultural heritage. Because there are so many inter-racial and mixed-marriages, there will be a problem of communication and code-swtiching. Naturally, one language will dominate the other, and parents will face challenges speaking their native languages. Given the context now where our mother tongues are not as frequently used and English language is a seen as the lingua franca, the future generation may have to resort to simplified version of the mother tongues so as they could get by with the grades in major exams such as PSLE, GCE O and A levels. Already there isn’t enough effort to emphasize on the Malay language except for a small number of activists who painstakingly champion this issue. The use of ‘rojak Malay’ is widespread. If left unchecked, it will corrode the language. Thus globalisation had seen the correct use of Malay grammar slipping away in front of our eyes.

I must admit that I belong to the generation where Malay language is diminishing at the speed of lightning. Although I had done well in Malay during my earlier school years, but after university there is little opportunity available to interact in Malay. Thankfully, my parents still converse in Malay and our family religiously subscribe to Berita Harian. As I have observed, Malay parents now speak more in English than Malay, and sometimes they code-swtich or mix English-Malay in their daily interaction. Already this is a form of dilution and imagine what it will be in year 2030.

Ethnic competition

The PAP government must be careful with its new, perhaps riskier  approach of encouraging ethnic identities and promoting Chinese-educated, Mandarin and English-speaking elite. If it stimulates ethnic competition that disadvantages the minorities or leads to perceptions that the majority is acting to further its own interests and dominance, especially if the economy slips, it could generate all kinds of ethnic issues and tensions.

Also on Facebook 

Singaporeans are smarter than PRC bus drivers

This topic is emotional to me because I love Singapore as a country I shed my first blood, laughter and tears. 

Like a good spanking, the government deserves this lesson. Malay have a saying 'padan muka' (serve you right) and that was the first thing that came out from my mouth when I read the news. All those talks about needing foreigners to sustain our economy came back slapping the government hard because beloved PRCs started their antics and showed their true colours. Surprised? Nope, it is expected because that's how the history of Chinese revolution starts. PRCs bring along Mao Zedong’s legacy into Singapore, just like how they bring along their mother, brother sister, cousins, distant cousins, and cousin's friends into Singapore. 

But seriously, communism is so unfashionable in this century.

Monday’s strike by the PRC bus drivers who were unhappy with SMRT’s income inequality towards foreigners and locals was an awakening for the government. It threatens our peace and security, poses a problem to our economy and creates social and political unrests in the long run. If this happens again, I foresee a Greek-style Singapore plagued with unemployment, inflation, increase crime rate, etc. The list goes on…

Sit-in or peaceful gathering whatchamacallit, the PRCs had organised a strike: a work stoppage for a preannounced short period (a minute, an hour, a day or even a week) to express views of workers on economic, political and other issues. The aim of protest strike is to demonstrate that the workers feel strongly about a particular issue, and that they possess the strength to act more strongly if necessary. This method may be used to spark the imagination of the workers and to promote the idea of striking on that particular issue.

By walking off the job, PRC bus drivers try to restrict the revenue going to SMRT, thereby pressuring SMRT for better terms and conditions of their work. In this sense, the strike is an economic act. However, walking off the job has other implications. In doing so, bus drivers or service leaders implicitly or explicitly challenge SMRT’s unfettered control over their property. A strike can also be more for some workers, who feel that their participation in a strike can be transformative because it involves them in a collective project that changes the way they understand society and their position on it. In this sense, strikes can be mechanisms for the creation of class consciousness, a moment when workers come to see themselves not only as individuals but members of a working class in opposition to SMRT and its government allies. Or strikes can do the opposite of convincing the workers and the public on the futility of their actions. In this case, it's the latter.

There are two theories to this event:

i) Strikes are coercive, trample employers’ property rights, disrupt the economy and reward lawlessness.

ii) Potential to educate workers about their exploitation, challenge the foundations oof capitalist labour relations, or aspire to nascent arrangements of socialise economy.

As seen in the world today, strike is futile. The first time you organise a strike, it will capture everyone’s attention. Second time you organise a strike, everyone will come down hard on you because you disrupt the economy and risk other people’s lives. You will also cause great financial problems to your family. If you are foreigner, you will be sacked. If you are a Singaporean, you will stay in Changi studio apartment for a couple of years.

As much as we want to stage a protest, rally, strike or protest in the hope to overcome the problem of the ‘powerless’ and create negative inducements, touch our hearts and ask ourselves who and what is more important? Our parents, wife and children who are citizens of Singapore? Or our complete self-serving, noble urge to help the people who over-sensationalise issues when the choice had been completely theirs.

I’m glad that Singaporeans are toying with the idea of socio-political change and we are doing it via online and slowly translating into real life action. This is a smart national effort from Singapore citizens because we observe how the world react to such social movements but KIV first before we creatively tweak the form of change to suit our social and political climate.  Singapore is not a saturated society but we are not hasty, silly and impulsive like the PRCs. Unlike other countries like Greece and Russia where the income inequality are at opposite ends, Singapore government doesn’t treat the citizens great nor place foreigners at the pedestal. Foreign workers such as Pinoys and PRCs should stop comparing themselves to Singaporeans. We are a small country, Singaporeans are top priority. Get that in your heads.

It is high time that SMRT relook into their corporate strike strategy, if they have one. Strikebreaking, like striking, is a fundamentally a political act. Also, service leader is a noble profession and SMRT should consider a revamp on its career advertising.

Culture of Impatience

A Man who is a master of patience is a master of everything – George Savile

Pile of bulky items belonging to Samat Kidam left at the lift landing of Marsiling rental flat was set ablaze because Samat ignored residents' complaints and refused to removed them. Fight outside Tan tock Seng Hospital. One swings golf club and the other trade punches. Singapore PR Amy Cheong got terminated from her job at NTUC after posting seditious remarks on her Facebook wall.

In the past 6 months, we have witnessed so many events that demonstrated how impatient Singaporeans have become. Violence have been use to solve heated arguments or disagreements. Verbal abuse have been used as self-defence. Many of which led to ugly and messy settlements. Many regretted their actions. And the impact is greatly felt not just to the families and close friends, but also Singaporeans in general.

Culture is the expression of a population that successfully manages generational change through a series of techniques except we live in a fast-paced environment; the modern human is impatient. How many times have we been frustrated when the bus or MRT was delayed? How many times do we honk at the cars in front when they were 3 seconds late after the light turned green? How many times we snared at the person who was hogging the ATM machine? Now we tell our microwave oven to hurry up, and we can’t function until our handphone recharges. 

We are not destined to be the impatient society. But until we lend more patience to the understanding of our most complex problems and to the nurturing of the civil relationships that allow us to act with consensus on them, we may stay the captives of our current frustration. 

Technology didn’t create impatience. Instead, impatience created new technologies. Indeed, one of the byproducts of an increasingly democratized society in which more and more people have the vote and other opportunities to voice their concerns is a sense of entitlement, and one of the things to which we believe we are entitled is action so that we won’t be wasting our time. So much of our technology — from smartphones to Ipads — is a response to our desire for instant gratification in a society that encourages us to feel that way. We want what we want and we want it now.

No one waits anymore, except maybe at Starbucks. We have instant messaging, instant digital images, instant news, and literally thousands of other apps that put the entire world on demand. But what has largely gone unnoticed is that speed has also changed our political psychology. It isn’t just that folks register instant opinions or receive instant information or form instant groups of like-minded individuals or make instant contributions. There is a deeper impact with potentially a much greater consequence — namely, that we have become profoundly impatient with the pace of political change.

The point isn’t that our system of government isn’t nimble enough for an age of rapid response, though that is unfortunately true. The point is that there is a major disconnect between a new political psychology of instant gratification and the stubborn intransigence of life, between an increasingly impatient society and a government that can’t deliver results quickly enough.

In the short run, this has erupted in understandable frustration and anger and a desire to turn out the party in power. In the long run, it may lead to something much more dramatic because when the popular culture promises what the political culture cannot produce, the temptation is to try to change the political culture into the popular culture. We want a hero who gives us instant results — an Iron Man. And there is likely to be a good deal of turbulence unless we find one — not the turbulence of populism or Tea Baggerism or left-wing disappointment, but the turbulence that comes from our newfound impatience.

Singaporeans can withhold judgments, step back from posting updates on Facebook or Twitter that generate more heat than light, and seek to find common ground instead of battleground.  At the initial level, we will have to address the fundamentalism and intolerance from the society if we want to move forward as human being.

NTUC has a drama queen Amy Cheong

Our diva Amy Cheong who is an Assistant Director at NTUC Partnership and Alliance, and a person who manages a group of people under her, and has to deal with deadlines and projects, simply cannot put up with Malay weddings on weekends? Oh, c’mon…

Dear Amy Cheong, I really hate to say this but really you are not smart. If you are smart, you wouldn’t have posted that ill-fated, silly Facebook posting. It is really sad to see reputable NTUC thinks so highly of an immature staff like Amy Cheong and give her a comfortable seat in office. Imagine what kind of skewed values Amy imparts to her fellow subordinates and colleagues. Are these the kind of people that NTUC wants to breed in future? Amy was unable to exercise tact, control and rationale when making her judgments. As a staff of NTUC, she brings a bad reputation to the brand name.

Dear Amy I would like to think you read newspapers but obviously you didn’t keep up with current affairs despite being a manager. FYI, most Malays are middle-incomers. Malays cannot afford expensive weddings without risking financial burden. Malays want to get married and invite as many people as possible to share the joy of the occasion. Void decks are accessible for the hosts to ferry goods from their homes to the reception area. Void decks are also convenient for those who are driving because they don’t have to pay for parking on Sundays. Even if you have to pay, there are ample parking lots for the guests. Also void decks are cost friendly with good space to feed the guests who can stream in at any time they fancy within the stipulated reception period.

If Amy is complaining about the noise level between 11am to 5pm on Saturdays and Sundays, we also have to deal with Chinese one-month long paper burning which affected our clean laundry and also cause environmental pollution. We also have to put up with mahjong sessions that can go on up to 12 hours long and into wee hours in the morning. It’s a fair game, vice-versa. Malays put up with mahjong and 7th month just like the Chinese put up with our Malay weddings. Give and take; tolerance and acceptance. Is that difficult?

For the majority of Singaporeans, we have grown accustomed to the religious/cultural traditions that uniquely represent each race. Living in harmony and respecting each other’s customs and traditions is important so that we avoid engaging in silly racial/religious slamming just like what we are doing now on diva Amy and many others who have made it o the list of cyber motor-mouths.

It’s high time that Singaporeans do some reflection and think about why we are so edgy and easily tick off at the smallest issue. Our increasing intolerance towards each other disintegrated our long-standing peaceful relations that our fathers have developed and preserved all these years. We should revive the old spirits of cordial ties with neighbours and fellow Singaporeans. 

Journalists and politics

While I was waiting to fetch my mom from her cooking class, I flipped through a magazine found at nearby CC and saw a familiar name. Nazri Hadi Saparin, a journalist in Berita Harian is also a contributor in Petir magazine - a PAP bi-monthly publication.

This finding made me question the credibility of information in Berita Harian. Nazri did not specifically proclaim and publicise his political leanings, but we do know that Berita Harian is a government mouthpiece. Despite the fact that I had to flip through Petir and stumbled upon his name, I still think that Nazri is being rather discreet since Petir magazine is only circulated to PAP-related organisations and personnels.

I pity the old folks who have been constantly fed with weighted views from the government. To these old folks like my parents, Berita Harian is their staple and they have nowhere to seek for other alternative information. They have always depended on the Malay paper for views and news. Just look at the ongoing BE2012, Berita Harian gives more coverage to PAP news. Occasionally you will be surprised with a bland, FYI piece on opposition.

In another example, ever since Kumaran Pillai has been the new Chief Editor, we have seen stark changes in The Online Citizen (TOC). TOC is an online source for socio-political news and views in Singapore. Of recent, the social media slowly and deliberately hum an SDP tune. Yet another political party has made use a media channel to forward their agenda.

So journalists’ claims of being neutral are disingenuous. Even the daily selection of which stories were published and which to exclude is not a neutral act. Choice – unless based on a flip of a coin – has an intellectual basis. Journalists should remain free of associations that may compromise integrity and damage credibility. Impartiality should be reporter’s goal. Skeptics of journalistic objectivity are quick to point out that some publishers and owners of news media outlets may not follow the rules they lay down for their employees. A few may get deeply involved and may contribute to political candidates. Is this ethical?

News media should promote thoughtful debate on candidates and politics by highlighting which candidate share the publication's vision. Journalists who want to be perceived as impartial must avoid any display of partisanship. Having said this, should Singaporean writers openly state their political affiliation?

As writers, they have a huge responsibility of providing news and information to the public. We consumers highly depend on these media outlets for news. It is good that writers state their political affiliation so that readers will have a choice of which perspective to take. So that readers can be thinking consumers and not merely take news for granted. This applies to the older and younger generations who have little experience in political affairs. We may not want to sway them to the wrong direction. We want them to be critical thinkers so that the society will continue to breed thinking youths that shape the future of Singapore. Exercising political clout is an integral part of journalism. 

The ethical responsibility of journalists is clear: allegiance must be to the news consumer, not to the news sources and their news agency. In many instances, we have seen loyalties became muddled. Journalists should realize that they have considerable influence on public’s attitudes.

Hysterical sensationalism as seen in Temasek Times is not effective in the long run to stimulate form. Reasoned argument works better. Balancing aggressiveness and thoughtfulness, keeping fairness and accuracy is paramount.

Apa Cerita lagi MOE? What telah happen?

Asyik-asyik MOE. Kebelakangan ni Kementerian Pelajaran kita ni semakin ‘popular’. Yelah, kelmarin pengetua sekolah mengunjungi ‘gedung’ sex di Internet. Sekarang pulak pasal madrasah tak diberikan edusave. Kenapa sekolah-sekolah-sekolah madrasah dianak-tirikan? Apalah nak jadi dengan MOE ni. Madrasah juga adalah institusi yang telah mendapat pengikhtirafan di Singapura. Anak-anak muda ini telah memilih cara pembelajaran dari sudut agama Islam. Adakah pilihan mereka salah ataupun pemerintah mengambil sikap tak endah kerana agama Islam dipandang dunia sebagai agama yang berkaitan dengan radicalisma? Sampai bila tangapan serong seperti ini akan luput?

These Muslim families feel victimised just because they have chosen a non-conventional, non-mainstream path in their children’s education. I can’t help but think about those students who are in missionary schools but still get government funding. How does MOE justify which school gets edusave funding and which schools do not? Maybe MOE should be more transparent to clear the air and to avoid further misunderstanding in future.

In my opinion, one of the factors that led to the stringent rules imposed on madrasahs is the growing Islamophobia that is infecting the globe like a pandemic. After 9/11, many countries such France, Switzerland, israel, and the US have imposed stricter regulations on Muslims. Many Muslims in these countries are being discriminated. Anyone who dons the hijab or recites the Quran is negatively seen as a ‘terrorist’. Even children who took school bus from an Islamic kindergarten were labeled as ‘terrorists’. Melampau! (too much).

I agree with Yang Razali Kassim who had expressed his concern about the fate of madrasah education in Singapore in the early 2000s. In the early 1990s, there was a perception that madrasah would close down because they were producing more graduates than the economy could support. Many felt that the fate of madrasahs were doomed to fail because these graduates were trained in only religious knowledge and many eneded up being unemployed.

In the early 1960s, the government had faced similar problem with the Chinese-stream education. Graduates from the Chinese-stream schools were not getting jobs because they were increasingly favouring English-stream schools. The declining of popularity of Chinese school amidst the widespread of student radicalism and communism was one of the key reasons that led to the eventual closure of Nanyang University, and later Chinese-stream schools. The emergence of Christians and Catholic schools also had received little success when it had initially started.

But after more than 50 years, the Chinese-stream and mission schools have become more prestigious. How come the madrasahs received very little success and popularity as compared to the Chinese and mission schools? I supposed the government (all along) sees very little potential in the madrasahs.

Yes, I must admit the introduction of the Joint Madrasah System (JMS) by MUIS is a positive effort to boost the status of madarasahs, but sadly after 4 years of its implementation, our madrasah have suffered greatly from the strict benchmarks. And duration of 4 years is not long enough for the madrasahs to improve given their hopes were dampened for decades.

MOE and MUIS should discuss this issue and try to work out a balanced and fair approach towards the betterment of the Muslim education. I propose the Madrasah education should be given a facelift with a modern and creative way in learning so as to move away from the stigma of radicalism and closed-door, rigid approach of Islam. Take examples from Turkey and Saudi Arabia where people from around the world have traveled to these countries and study at the universities. Singapore should emulate the system and see how modernity can be incorporated into the madrasah education system without compromising the quality and essence of Islam. Adaptability is what the madrasah system should start to embrace. Change is what MOE and MUIS should welcome.

Further good readings on Madrasah systems:

- PM Lee on Education http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20100830-234707/2.html

- Madrasah students should also benefit from Edusave Scheme http://www.asiaone.com/News/Mailbox/Story/A1Story20110216-263731.html

- AMP http://www.amp.org.sg/edisi/data/Publications/Karyawan%20-%20Vol%209%20Issue%201/Vol9%20Iss1%20-%20ME%20Crossroads%20-%20Remodelling.pdf

The Halal Brand: A Symbol of Exclusiveness for Singapore Muslims

I was looking at some snapshots of food that I took when I went for overseas trips, and began to think about the food that Muslims eat in Singapore. Aren’t we too preoccupied with these exclusiveness of Halal food products? I understand the modern and new age Singapore Muslims are more cautious about what goes into our body. But my question is - must there be a Halal logo to ensure what we eat is good for us?  Halal logo merely officiates that the food is Halal but it doesn’t tell if it’s good for consumers. If we were to read the ingredients and maybe do a little research on the food companies, it will do us a lot of good rather than being overly-dependent on the Halal logo. Why? Because not all Halal food is good for our body. If these non-Halal certified companies don’t produce pork related products or non-meat products, does that mean we can’t eat their food products too? E.g organic vegetables or soy sauce or organic milk?

I remember when I was young, I simply can’t recall any of those tidbits that I ate bore any Halal logos. For daily my school breakfast, my mom would buy an unbranded plain white bread and spread her homemade kaya or on some days she will buy a sugar donut from our neighbourhood bakery ran by a Chinese neighbour. During Hari Raya, my mom baked cookies using butter that has no Halal label, and the unbranded flour was bought from a provision shop. And my then favourite gold coin chocolates or the whiterabbit candies also had no Halal logos. It seems our lives back then were simpler and less complicated.

I often travel overseas for business trips with a couple of non-Muslim colleagues. Many a times, I had a hard time locating Halal eateries in some countries like Russia and US, given the unfamiliarv territories. I usually go to the ginormous supermarkets and look for Kosher and organic food products. I scanned through the ingredients and did a quick check on the internet, and voila! I had a healthy organic meal. Aside from the lunch meetings and arranged dinners that was specified with Halal or vegetarian labels, it wasn’t difficult to find good healthy meal. It takes a little more effort to read up more and we can actually eat consciously too. In other countries, Muslims don’t have the privilege of having Halal labels in food products. In fact, some of the food products in Singapore were written in Arabic but they are not even Halal. What I’m trying to say here is - are Singapore Muslims too dependent on this Halal stamp, and are we becoming lazy?

Halal food also doesn’t mean healthy food. In fact majority of the Halal food that we have at local eateries are mostly unhealthy. High MSG content, high in sugar, high in transfat, high in cholesterol, high in adverse food colourings, etc. Maybe Halal Yong Tau Fu is not too bad but the soup is still high in MSG. So, are Muslims eating healthily?

Besides, Halal food are ultra over-priced. Ridiculously! I am extremely displeased to pay a bowl of Halal mee rebus that doesn’t have any traces of meat except a quarter of an egg had cost me $3.50, while my Chinese friend who had a bowl of Lor Mee with slices of meat had only cost $2.50? Aper ni?! As long there is a Halal logo, stall vendors leap to mark up their food prices just because it is Halal? Malays always like to compare to the Chinese, but can I compare the Muslim food prices to the Chinese too? Macam gini boleh terkopak la duit. Please don’t take advantage of these Halal branding and do price ur food reasonably.

What Muslims should be concern is about eating healthy food with a conscious effort to search and find food products that can be consumed and does not contain any non-halal food stuff. If Halal food are overly-priced, Muslims should source out alternative healthy but affordable food that are reasonably priced. Having said that we should also care about the well-being of our loved ones and make sure that they eat healthy food. Not necessarily only vegetables or fruits diet or organic food because these can be expensive. But instead use less oil less, fats, less salt and no MSG.

Islam’s holistic approach to health include treating our bodies with respect and nourishing them not only with faith but also with lawful and nutritious food. According to the Quran, a major part of living is implementing a suitable diet that comprised of wholesome food that benefits both physical and spiritual health.

MUIS should make a conscious effort to encourage Muslims to eat healthily and not merely eating Halal food only. From what I see, most of the asatizahs on the streets nowadays are obscenely growing sideways. And they don’t look like they exercise at all.  If we want to be a better Muslim community, let’s start from the leaders as role models, what say you?

“Eat of the good things which We have provided for you” (Quran 2:173)

“Eat of what is lawful and wholesome on the earth” (Quran 2:168)