The way we handle things
If we prefer to do things the emotional, confrontational and punitive way, I am afraid our country may not survive the repeated torments. Over the past one month alone, we have seen one after another religiously sensitive incidents taking place in our country, where people resort to abusive language to vent their anger and dissatisfaction while the authorities punish the perpetrators with arrests and court charges.
Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew
The “surau dijadikan tokong” incident could have given different results if we had handled it differently. Unfortunately, things don’t always move the ideal way.
Since the very beginning, the video clip of Buddhists meditating in the surau was posted on YouTube and the clip soon spread like wildfire within the Muslim community, thanks to a little help from sensationalising comments.
People only see one side of the story, and receive only fragmented information.
After that, the mainstream Malay media and web users quickly followed suit, and a conclusion was reached before long, that it was an act of instigation trying to blaspheme the Islamic faith and Muslims.
The subjective and unitary impression has taken shape, and is hard to reverse.
Malay groups and individuals protested boisterously. The emotions of the country’s Muslims ran wild just as non-Muslims felt alarmed.
Both the government and police were under tremendous pressure to hand down stringent actions.
But the biased views in our society remained unresolved because of this. Instead, the feelings gained in intensity and people got polarised.
The subsequent developments moved almost in one similar direction, trying to fix the problem through heightened emotions and penalties in the absence of amicable communication and understanding.
I was thinking, what would happen if we dealt with this from a different approach?
Some people found out what actually took place at the surau, but he made it into a malicious video. He should have notified the religious clerics or local leaders. Such a sensitive matter should be laid in the hands of people who are more knowledgeable and responsible.
Upon the arrival of the clerics and local leaders, they would have told the Buddhists this surau is a place of worship for Muslims and it is not right to hold a Buddhist meditation there. The participants should have been advised to hold their activity at more appropriate venues.
And when the police came, they should act as mediators to keep things in order.
Further understanding revealed that the resort’s manager, along with the meditators, were all Singaporeans who might not be as sensitive as we are in religious matters, while the priest chairing the session could have come from somewhere else and had little knowledge of Islam.
As such, we can deduce that the incident was not a blatant act of religious instigation but just an isolated unintentional incident.
As for the other spectators, perhaps the clerics and local leaders could explain to them and appease their frustration.
After that, the clerics could conduct a religious class for the resort management, informing them of the religious teachings and taboos in Malaysian society in an attempt to evade any similar incident in the future.
Things could have come to an end by now.
Which do you think is the better way of handling this matter?
If we prefer to do things the emotional, confrontational and punitive way, I am afraid our country may not survive the repeated torments. Over the past one month alone, we have seen one after another religiously sensitive incidents taking place in our country, where people resort to abusive language to vent their anger and dissatisfaction while the authorities punish the perpetrators with arrests and court charges.
In the end, we consume the residual tolerance in our society as negative sentiments infiltrate every part of our life.
If we have allowed more communication and moderation to come in, people from different religious backgrounds would also learn to be more accommodating and our society more progressive.
