过去几周，位于吉隆坡市中心“小印度”的斯里帕特拉卡利亚曼兴都庙搬迁风波占据了社交和印刷媒体的主导地位。
如今，随著首相拿督斯里安华宣布的“双赢方案”终于解决了这场风波。在当局、寺庙委员会和庙地拥有者达成协议后，这座拥有百年历史的兴都庙将搬迁到附近的新地点。
在我看来，我们似乎从印度拆除位于阿约提要一座16世纪巴布里清真寺的经历中吸取了教训，该清真寺拆毁引发了印度独立以来最严重的宗教骚乱。超过2000人在这场印度教徒和穆斯林冲突中丧生。
幸运的是，我国能够避免让吉隆坡兴都庙搬迁争议进一步延烧和演变成暴力冲突。
首相安华强调，迁庙解决方案不应被误认为是软弱退让，而是反映了其2022年11月上任首相后，向国人推介的昌明伊斯兰政策和治理框架下的包容和原则性做法。
安华于2025年3月27日在昌明清真寺奠基仪式上表示：“正如我提醒穆斯林同胞，这项（停滞近十年计划取得）胜利，是因为我们展现了伊斯兰的智慧、力量与高尚，而非傲慢。”
他还指出，以文明、道德与和平方式解决这一风波反映了其政府所倡导的昌明价值观。“这就是昌明大马的价值观——同情和仁慈的原则，不仅对穆斯林，而且对整个多元族群社会。”
重点和经验教训
政府对兴都庙委员会接受献议，搬迁到了面积等同一所房屋大小的新地点，并拥有迟来的合法所有权，而松了一口气，这是可以理解的。
首先，这不是一般的宗教或种族争议。为了兴建清真寺，将拥有历史并仍然有庞大信徒的兴都庙搬移是前所未有的。因此不要惊讶，这事件在社交媒体上引起热烈议论，并成为全国关注的话题。
其次，这似乎是一场强弱悬殊的较量，一个小庙的委员会与一个似乎得到官僚和政治领袖支持的贸易和房地产巨头之间的较量。输家很可能是兴都庙，而Jakel贸易公司 即庙址拥有者──纺织和房地产公司将获胜。
尽管事件最终达成了和解，但怀疑论者对达成公平公正解决方案的说法提出质疑。社交媒体上的一些人暗示庙方的屈服、逃避甚至出卖了原则。然而，没有任何证据支持这些质疑。
依据该兴都庙委员会主席K巴迪班指出，“我们很高兴事情最终得到了解决。他（首相）说我们应该像一家人一样团结在一起，和谐地生活，政府会照顾所有人的利益”。
一位了解当地民情的社运朋友告诉我，该委员会成员都是正派和诚实的。显而易见的是，庙方在极其困难的局面下取得了良好结果，并化解了紧张的局势，如果这事件沿著印度阿约提亚巴布里清真寺的轨迹发展，可能会给这国家带来灾难性后果。
至于从此事件中学到的教训，首先想到的是需积极应对任何种族或宗教争议，并迅速解决。政治和官僚领袖尤其需要这种快速反应，他们是此类争端的主要利害关系人和决策者。
此外，对于兴都庙原址合法性的争议可以追溯到独立初期——这情况如何发生以及为何至今未解决，我们需要查明并立即纠正。
是因为庙方拖延吗？外部利益团体和势力是否参与其中，导致决议复杂化？
是什么阻碍了地方政府和城市发展决策过程的改革？进而导致庙方以及其他陷入类似土地相关纠纷的受害方陷入同样的困境。是否因为地方政府倒退、异化，进而成为政治领袖和公众的问题和困难的根源，特别是在土地、房屋和发展方面？
政治领袖不仅可以汲取教训，尽量减少或防止利用类似课题捞取经济、宗教和政治利益，而且他们还需要确保——正如首相声明所指那样——政党和其他人不应利用宗教情绪来获取选举利益，这种情况越来越频繁地发生。
其他地方的类似争议也突显了强有力的政治领导重要性，以及采取积极主动和及时行动克服不满，并确保此类争议不会进一步恶化引发冲突和破坏社会凝聚力。
官僚体制和政治领袖可以采取多方面的手法，严谨执法、历史责任、政治克制态度和社会同理心来解决类似的争议。透过优先考虑证据、中立和社区对话，可以让宗教和种族冲突局势非政治化。
就马来西亚而言，这也可以定义和实现将伊斯兰文明价值与现代民主原则融为一体的“昌明大马”政府所蕴含的正义和包容的承诺。
林德宜《迁庙风波：我们逃过了一劫？》原文：Dewi Sri Pathrakali Amman Temple Controversy: Did We Dodge A Bullet?
The Dewi Sri Pathrakali Amman temple saga in the heart of our “Little India” has dominated social and print media during the last several weeks.
It is now finally settled by Prime Minister Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s announcement of a “win-win outcome”. This settlement will see the more than century old temple moved to a nearby new site following agreement between the authorities, the temple committee and the purchaser of the temple land.
To me, it appears that we have learned from the Indian experience of the demolition of the 16th-century Adodhya Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid that triggered the nation's worst religious riots since independence. More than 2,000 people were killed over the site disputed by Hindus and Muslims.
Fortunately, our country was able to dodge a potentially prolonged and violent outcome to this temple relocation controversy in Kuala Lumpur.
The Prime Minister has emphasized that the settlement should not be mistaken for weakness but reflects the inclusive and principled approach under the Madani Islam policy and governance framework which he introduced to the nation’s electorate after he took office in November 2022.
“This victory, as I remind my fellow Muslims, is not borne of sheer arrogance but our willingness to display wisdom and strength of Islam” Anwar said at the groundbreaking ceremony for the Madani Mosque on 27 March 2025.
He also noted that addressing the issue in a civilised, ethical and peaceful manner reflected the Madani values championed by his administration. “These are Madani values - principles of compassion and kindness, not just for Muslims but for a multiracial society as a whole.”
Takeaways and Lessons Learned
The Government’s relief with the acceptance by the temple committee of an equivalent-sized home with a long overdue legal title is understandable.
Firstly, this was no ordinary or usual religious or racial controversy. The displacement of the heritage but still widely patronized temple to make way for the expansion of a mosque would have been unprecedented. Not surprisingly, it set off a response from social media commentators and became the main talk in households and group chats all around the country.
Secondly, it appeared to be a David vs Goliath tussle pitting a small temple committee against a trading and property giant that appeared to have support from the bureaucracy and political leadership. The likelihood was that Dewi Sri Pathrakaliamman temple would be the loser and Jakel Trading Sdn. Bhd.,the textile and property purchaser of the temple site, was going to win.
Despite its settlement, skeptics have contested the claim that a fair and just solution was attained. Some in the social media have alluded to a cave-in, cop-out and even sell-out by the temple authorities. However there is no evidence whatsoever to support these suspicions.
According to the temple committee chairman, K. Barthiban, “we are glad things worked out in the end. He (the Prime Minister) said we should all come together as a family by living harmoniously and that the government looks after the interest of all”.
An activist friend who was close to the action of the ground informed me that the committee is a decent and honest one. What appears clear is that the temple committee got a good outcome in extremely difficult circumstances and helped to defuse a situation which, if it had followed the trajectory of what happened in the Ayodhya case, could have been disastrous for the nation.
As to the lessons learned, the first that comes to mind is the need for a proactive response to any racial or religious controversy so as to bring about quick resolution. This rapid response is especially needed from political and bureaucratic leaders who are the main stake players and decision makers in such disputes.
Also how and why this failed to take place - controversies over the legality of Hindu temple sites go all the way back to early independence days - needs identification and immediate rectification for Malaysia.
Was it on account of foot dragging by the temple committee? Were outside interest groups and forces involved to complicate its resolution?
What stands in the way of reforming local government and the decision making process in urban development seen as responsible for prolongation of the temple’s plight as well as that of other aggrieved parties caught in similar land related disputes? Is it because the local government authorities have regressed and mutated to become a source of problems and difficulties for our political leaders and public, especially in land, housing and development matters?
Not only can political leaders learn lessons to minimise or prevent economic, religious and political exploitation of such issues but they need to ensure - as implied by the Prime Minister’s statements - that political parties and others should not exploit religious sentiments for electoral gains as is taking place with increasing frequency.
Similar controversies elsewhere have emphasised the importance of strong political leadership and will in taking proactive and timely action to overcome grievances and ensure that conflict and the undermining of social cohesion can be avoided in such controversies.
Civil service and political leaders can employ a multifaceted approach drawing on legal rigour, historical accountability, political restraint, and social empathy to navigate similar controversies. By prioritizing evidence, neutrality and community dialogue, they can help to depoliticize religious and racial conflict situations.
In the case of Malaysia this can also define and actualise the promise of justice and inclusion embedded in a “Madani” government that blends Islamic civilizational values with modern democratic principles.
要看最快最熱資訊，請來Follow我們 《東方日報》WhatsApp Channel.
