A few years ago, supreme Taliban leader of Afghanistan, Mullah Mohamad Omar, issued an edict against un-Islamic graven images, which meant all idolatrous images of humans and animals.

As a result, explosives, tanks, and anti-aircraft weapons were used to blow apart two colossal images of the Buddha in Bumiyan province, 230 kilometres from Kabul. The two awesome statues, standing well over 130 feet, could be dated back to the third century AD.

The destruction of the Bumiyan Buddhas drew world-wide expressions of horror, including that from many Mullahs in other Islamic countries, who condemned Mullah Omar's interpretation as wrong-headed and damaging to the image of Islam.

Fortunately, there was no holy war waged by the Buddhist fundamentalists, and no blood was shed over the incident. I shudder to think what would happen if any country decided to destroy all religious symbols of Christianity, Islam or Judaism today. What would happen if it happened in Jerusalem?

Puzzled, I asked a Buddhist friend how he felt, during a gathering of people from various faiths. He simply shrugged his shoulder and replied that the stone statues were simply not Buddha. Then, he announced to the assembly that Buddha is not a god in the sense of the monotheistic religions, and that Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion.

I am sure I know next to nothing about the teaching of Buddhism. I am also convinced that there are different sects in Buddhism, like all other major religions of the world, that have different interpretations of their original holy books.

Nevertheless, a little digging did unearth some interesting information about the historical Buddha or Sakyamuni, whose lifetime crossed the fifth and fourth centuries BC.

Apparently, the Buddha only allowed his image to be recorded as 'a reflection in rippling water.' Images of Buddha himself did not appear for at least 400 years after his death, and even then, they were created only as a reminder to the followers of the faith of their innate 'Buddha-nature'.

My account here is not to encourage people of any other faith to go around smashing the Buddha statues all over the place. Neither would I agree with some Buddhist friends, who declare triumphantly that Buddhism is a religion of peace, unlike other religions.

A few years ago, a young man in Penang published a little book in Chinese, expressing his joy in finding Christ as his saviour. A few injudicious remarks about idolatrous religious beliefs were included.

The little book caused quite a stir in the Chinese press. There were Buddhist groups who were obviously offended, and they openly mumbled about having the book banned. The storm in a religious tea-cup ended with an apology from the author.

I did read the book out of curiosity, and found it pretty harmless. After all, Christianity in its many forms is still monotheism, and shares with other monotheistic faiths like Judaism and Islam many similarities in its dogmas and doctrines. They all hold the strong belief that there is only one deity and their views on any form of idolatry are well known.

Monotheism and idolatry

In fact, the debate over what constituted idolatry caused a great schism within the community of Christian believers in the early history of the church. During the Byzantine empire, two waves of "iconoclasts" railed against and smashed all kinds of material symbols of religious representation, including the cross, and material images of Jesus and Mary, as well as those of other saints.

Today, theologians and clerics in the many Christian denominations have no problem explaining away the use of religious symbols, without contradicting their belief in the first commandment that God delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai: there is only one God.

As to why the one godhead has three manifestations in the mystery of the Holy Trinity, is again a matter for Christian theologians.

Ironically, when Christian evangelists tried to spread their gospel to many pagan lands, they encountered many problems of adapting their message of monotheism in communities with long traditions of polytheistic, animistic or pantheistic beliefs.

This is especially so in China, where ancestor worship has continued to this day. The relationship between Beijing and Rome has always been a terse one, through many centuries.

During the more modern period under communist rule, Christian clergy and laymen in China have always been persecuted to varying extents, for more complex reasons than the mere excuse that religion is the opiate of the oppressed.

There is more than a grain of unspoken prejudice against Christianity among some nationalistic Chinese all over the world, including those in Malaysia. After all, in the collective memory of the Chinese diaspora, Christianity had always followed closely on the heels of the gun boats of western imperialism that had invaded and pillaged China for over a century.

Malaysian tolerance

Nevertheless, Malaysians live in a multi-religious society. We are bombarded daily by the practices and professions of people of other faiths. I have seen in Penang how mosques are situated in very close proximity to Chinese and Hindu temples, as well as Christian churches.

It is almost inevitable that the activities related to religious beliefs intrude upon our daily life, the long procession of a Chinese deity through the streets that block city traffic for miles, the calls to prayer broadcast over the air by the mosques five times a day, and the various celebrations organised by other religious communities are bound to make themselves very publicly seen and heard.

There have been scant instances of religious clashes, and they tend to be isolated exceptions, that prove the rule that ordinary Malaysians have displayed incredible tolerance towards other people's religious faiths.

In this respect, I think ordinary Malaysians are a civilised lot.

There are always the odd religious bigots, who bad-mouth other people's religion, but they do it in private, among like-minded friends and family members. They would not do it in public, not only because the law does not look upon this dastardly behaviour with disdain, but also because they know other people present would not regard such juvenile tomfoolery too kindly.

In general, it seems that Malaysians accept the differences in the religious expression of the various faiths.

Traces of old prejudices and new tensions will always lie latent in the undercurrents of our common social life, I suppose. However, by and large, we tend to accept the sights and sounds of other people's religious practices as part of our environment, just like our mountains and our rivers.

It is too early to describe our religious tolerance as a celebration of our religious differences. Tolerance means merely keeping the 'other' at bay with patience, and sometimes condescension. We have yet to conduct meaningful inter-faith dialogues, and most people do not make a conscious attempt to understand other faiths outside their own, beyond mere platitudes and clichs.

Nevertheless, we can conclude that Malaysians all have healthy sensitivities that arise from genuine respect for other people's religious beliefs. There is a basic unspoken consensus that you must not do unto others what you do not want them to do unto you. I suppose you can find that message in the teachings of all religions as well.

Over-reaction

So why are some of these Umno people so easily riled by an 'insult to Islam', to the extent of brandishing the ISA against bloggers and internet users, whom they find offensive?

There, as in the case of the Bumiyan incident, we find power speaking - seeking domination through religious posturing - and not seeking truth of the religious kind. It is not about religion, but about politics and power.

As the great Mullah of the Taliban in Afghanistan can be very wrong on their religious posturing, so can Umno hotheads. Even the hotness of their heads is posturing.

At the end of the day, the absence of a single Muslim rallying to their call for the defence of the dignity of Islam least of all from PAS is ample proof of our Muslim friends' mature sensitivity throughout the country.

To err is human, and to forgive, divine. Those Malaysians who are prone to breathe the brimstone and fire of religious fervour, or at least those who want to appear as doing so, must beware of their innate fallibility.

Even if some people have made mistakes in their utterances about our religion, it is better for us to engage them in a dialogue, to show their mistakes and to try to persuade them to see the light. For believers to jump on the war-path on the flimsy excuse of religious sensitivities being hurt does not do justice to the great religion of Islam, or any great religion for that matter.