Scoring a win-win in the liquor debate
MALAYSIANS are fond of bringing race, politics, or religion into the debate over just any contentious issue. An old favourite is, of course, alcohol.
Kuala Lumpur City Hall’s ban on the sale of hard liquor in grocery and convenience stores, sundry shops, and Chinese medicine halls to take effect from Oct 1, 2021 has led to an outcry from business owners, regular drinkers, and social activists who oppose the ban on grounds that Malaysia is a multiracial and multireligious country.
Some influential personalities including politicians have claimed that the ban infringes on the rights of non-Muslims and hence undermines national unity, cultural harmony and religious diversity.
This is old-school mindset that puts a racial or religious colouring on liquor. Restriction on the sale of liquor is a health, safety, and moral issue. Let’s keep it that way for a sober discussion.
For it to be a religious issue would imply there is disagreement among religions whether to allow drunkenness. There is no disagreement. The first religion to unequivocally and clearly forbid intoxication was Buddhism 2,500 years ago. Buddhism has deep historical influence over the Indian people, and it is one of the three great religions holding sway over the Chinese people.
The Buddha ruled sternly: “You shall drink no maddening drink” (Cakkavatti-Sihanada Sutta). He went on to list the six dangers of being addicted to intoxicating liquors such as quarrelsomeness, loss of good character, and impaired intelligence.
In Sutta-Nipata, the Buddha said: “Through intoxication the stupid commit sins and make other people intoxicated; let him avoid this seat of sin, this madness, this folly, delightful to the stupid.” And in Anguttara-Nikaya he warned against living “in the idleness of liquor and strong drink indulgence”.
There are countless incidents of drunk customers molesting women in bars, and worse are the predators who rape women after serving them several rounds of intoxicating liquor.
Confucius, who lived around the same time as Buddha, said in the Analects (Book 6, Ch21): “The wise find pleasure in water.” Mencius, the closest disciple of Confucius, said: “Yu hated the pleasant liquor, and loved good words.” (The Works of Mencius Book 4, Ch20). Yu was a sage king.
The Hindu religion is also clear on this point as one of its many scriptures, the Srimad Bhagavata, states: “What is ordained is only smelling of liquor, not its drinking.”
However, the prohibition on liquor must be seen in a wider context. All the indigenous religions of India and China – six in total – not only discourage liquor consumption, meat eating is also discouraged as it is cruel to animals. In our present era, the growing world consumption of meat over the past 50 years is one of the precipitating factors in climate change.
Both the Indian and Chinese civilisations take a broader approach in handling alcohol consumption and meat eating. Srimad Bhagavata notes that, as people have a strong desire to consume alcohol and eat meat, the practical approach is “gradual abstinence through restricted indulgence” (Sermon of the Navayogis IV in Skandha XI chapter 5). The goal is “to regulate and control these desires with a view to eliminating them gradually”.
However, the sacred texts of India and China recognise that it is the intoxicating effect and not the mere presence of alcohol that carries danger. The stronger the drink, and the more you drink, the greater the danger.
Australia has done a good job in confining liquor sales to BWS stores that exclusively sell beer, wine and spirits (such as brandy and whiskey) and only to adults. If you’re underaged, you won’t be allowed inside a BWS store. Unlike Malaysia, supermarkets and convenience stores in Australia don’t sell liquor.
The Australian solution is very easy to adopt. Convenience store chains and supermarkets can open BWS stores in vacant shoplots, paying low rental as they are helping to reduce the property overhang. BWS stores operating under strict licensing conditions will greatly reduce the frequency of drunkenness.
Will our supermarkets, grocery and convenience stores, sundry shops, and Chinese medicine halls suffer business losses if hard liquor were to disappear from their shelves? It won’t happen if they are smart.
Remember that it is not alcohol that presents the danger, but intoxication. A diabetic person suffers from high blood sugar levels. Doctors have found rare cases in which the body converts excess sugar into alcohol and expels it through urine, thus saving the diabetic’s life.
Alcohol is a natural product that may cause no harm if drunk in small quantities. Many cardiologists recommend one glass of wellness red wine with below 10% alcohol content as a blood thinner.
A brewer recently placed fullpage advertisements to inform drinkers to get happy with 0.0 beer. Its alcohol content is only 0.05% volume. It has the same great taste, as drinkers who have tried it can testify. In Europe, there are several varieties of popular 0.0 beer, proving that it is capable of being a moneyspinner.
Switch to selling 0.0 beer as it is not hard liquor. Other substitutes for hard liquor include the eco-health drinks with low sugar content and no added sugar. Why not create a rejuvenation corner for health products in your grocery or medicine store?