飲酒與禁忌協商：以馬來西亞都市中產階級穆斯林為例

Drinking and Haram Negotiation: A Case Study of Urban Middle-Class Muslims in Malaysia

本文探討在馬來西亞這個多元文化的穆斯林國家裡，如何面對、調適並協商有關飲酒與haram（宗教禁忌）所引發的問題。馬來西亞的酒精消費受嚴格的規範，其形塑力量來自國家法律、地方政策、宗教教義與文化實踐的交織。然而，馬來西亞採行雙軌制的法律體系，民事法與sharia（伊斯蘭教法）並行，使得公共與私人領域的界線趨於模糊。本文聚焦於禁酒規範與實際飲酒行為之間的張力，旨在揭示酒精消費如何逐漸演化為一種複雜、多元、既具有排他性、亦展現包容性的社會過程。為了理解馬來西亞穆斯林飲酒的社會意涵，本文聚焦以下問題：人們為何飲酒？他們如何飲酒？飲酒對飲者產生何種影響與後果？飲酒又如何關聯於身分建構與族群政治？本文以吉隆坡的城市中產階級穆斯林為研究對象，於2022年至2024年間進行主要的民族誌田野調查，結合參與式觀察、深度訪談、多語媒體報導與官方文件，探討馬來西亞在飲酒規範及其爭議上的回應方式。透過「飲酒協商」的案例，本文主張穆斯林倫理生活的研究必須立基於日常實踐，藉此揭示信徒如何在制度縫隙中靈活調動宗教資源與世俗策略。唯有如此，才能避免將伊斯蘭規訓簡化為僵硬的法律條文，而是將其理解為一種兼具彈性與創造力的「活的倫理實踐」。

This paper explores how people deal with, adapt, and negotiate with drinking issues and haram (religious taboo) in Malaysia, a Muslim multicultural country. Alcohol consumption is highly regulated in Malaysia, shaped by the intersection of national laws, local policies, religious doctrines, and cultural practices. Malaysia operates under a dual legal system, with civil law and Islamic law (sharia), and the boundary is blurred between the public and private spheres. This article focuses on the tension between Malaysia’s prohibition norms and actual drinking practices, aiming to show how alcohol consumption has evolved into a complex, plural, exclusive or inclusive social process. To grasp the social meanings of Muslim drinking in Malaysia, we must ask: Why do people drink? How do they drink? What effects and consequences does drinking have for the drinkers? How does drinking relate to identity construction and ethnic politics? This paper centers on urban middle-class Muslims in Kuala Lumpur. Major ethnographic fieldwork was conducted between 2022 and 2024, combining participant observations with in-depth interviews, media reports, and official documents to reveal how the regulations and tensions regarding drinking in Malaysia have been addressed. Using the case of“alcohol negotiation,”this article argues that the study of Muslim ethical life must be grounded in everyday practices, to capture how believers flexibly navigate religious restrictions and secular strategies within an institutional context which has gaps. Only by doing so can we avoid reducing Islamic injunctions to rigid legal rules and instead recognize their flexibility and creativity as a form of“living ethical practice.”