Follow by email

Thursday, December 07, 2006

96] Nationalism and Tribalism

Nationalism and tribalism
Azly Rahman
Nov 21, 06 11:32am

Umno Perlis delegate Hashim Suboh was quoted in a New Straits Times report as saying at the end of the debate on economy and education issues that "Datuk Hisham (Umno Youth chief Hishammuddin Hussein) has unsheathed his keris, waved his keris, kissed his keris. We want to ask Datuk Hisham when is he going to use it?"

The Perlis delegate made the remark while saying "force must be used against those who refused to abide by the social contract" in relation to Hishammuddin's alleged weakness in dealing with demands from the Chinese schools. - malaysiakini report, Nov18, 2006.

That delegate's remark is an embarrassment to the peace-loving people of Perlis, let alone represents what the Malay is, intellectually. The Malays of Perlis elect their representative not to misrepresent them with a false image of myopia and paranoia, or amuk and latah. It shows how ill-prepared one is in dealing with sensitive issues. It is telling the people of Perlis that they need better leaders with better command of the vocabulary of peace and better understanding of what 'social contract' means. A close reading of the Enlightenment thinker Jean Jacques Rousseau would help the delegate write sensible speeches.

This bring us to the following questions:

What is a Malay? What is a Malaysian? What is a nationalist? What is a 'nation'? How are we becoming "re-tribalised" in this world of increasing restlessness over a range of issues that are not being resolved by the current regime. These are burning questions as we become more mature in discussing race relations in Malaysia – almost 40 years after the May 13, 1969 incident.

Ernest Renan, Anthony Smith, Benedict Anderson, Harry Benda, and John Funston – major scholars of nationalism -- would agree that Umno does not have an ideology except to sustain its elusive political superiority via the production of post-industrial materials and human beings.

Elusive word

Even the word "National Front" (Barisan Nasional) is elusive. It is surviving as long as means to cling on to power – by all means necessary – becomes more efficient and sophisticated. Its survival lies in the way people are divided, conquered, and mutated into 'post-industrial tribes'; market-segmented-differentiatedly-sophisticated enclaves that are produced out of the need for the free market economy to transform Malays and Malaysians into consumers of useless goods and ideology.

Post-industrial tribalism is a natural social reproduction of the power of the media to shape consciousness, and to create newer forms of consumerist human beings. Nationalism, including Malay nationalism of the Mahathirst era, is an artificial construct that needs the power of "othering" and "production of enemies" and "boogeymen and boogeywomen" for ideological sustainability.

But what is "nationalism" and does "Malay nationalism" actually exist in this century? Does the idea of 'natio' or "nation" or "a people" survives merely on linguistic, territorial, religious homogeneity when these are also subject to the sociological interrogations of subjectivity and relativity?

Nationalism is a psychological and cultural construct useful and effective when deployed under certain economic conditions. It is now ineffective as a tool of mass mobilisation when nations have gained "independence" from the colonisers and when the "enemy" is no longer visible. All that exist in this post-industrial, globalised, borderless, and mediated age of cybernetic capitalism is the idea of "post-industrial tribes" that live and thrive on chaos and complexity and on materials and goods produced by local and international capitalists.

Revise the old formula

We are in the 21st. century. About three years from now, we will arrive at the year 2010. The non-Malays and non-bumiputeras have come a long way into being accepted as full-fledged Malaysians, by virtue of the ethics, rights and responsibilities of citizenship. They ought to be given equal opportunity in the name of social justice, racial tolerance and the alleviation of poverty.

Bright and hard-working Malaysians regardless of racial origin who now call themselves Malaysians must be given all the opportunities that have been given to Malays since 40 years back.

Islam and other religions require this form of social justice to be applied to the lives of human beings. Islam does not discriminate one on the basis of race, ethnicity, color, creed nor national origin. It is race-based politics, borne out of the elusiveness of nationalism, that creates post-industrial tribalistic leaders; leaders that will design post-industrial tribalistic policies. It is the philosophy of greed, facilitated by free enterprise runamuck that will evolvingly force leaders of each race to threaten each other over the control of the economic pie.

The claim of 'civilisational Islam' or "Islam Hadhari" must be backed with a philosophy of development that restructure society no longer on the basis of newer forms of post-industrial tribalism that accords the political elites with the best opportunity to amass more wealth, but to redesign the economic system based on an efficient and sound socialistic economic system. It might even require political will to curb human enthusiasm of acquiring more and more of the things they do not need. In short, it should curb temptations to out-consume each other in the name of greed.

To be civilised means to wake up to the possibilities of humanism and not plunge into a world of more sophisticated racism. The universal principle of humanism requires the privileged few to re-examine the policies of national development that prioritise the creation of more real estate projects than the construction of programmes that meet basic needs of all races and classes of peoples. To civilise a nation means to de-tribalise the citizens into a polity that will learn to share the wealth of this nation by accepting this land as the "earth of mankind" (bumi manusia) rather that a land belonging to this or that race.

In a multi-racial, multi-religious, country such as Malaysia, nationalism is a complex yet withering concept. In a globalised world of globally- and government-linked companies this concept of "fatherland" or "motherland" is a powerful weapon of the wealthy to mount arguments that hide the real intention of empire-building. The lifestyle of the country's rich and famous require nationalist sentiments to be played up so that the more the rights are "protected" the more the political-economically rich few will have their sustained control over the people, territories, natural resources and information.

This, I think is the picture of post-industrial tribalism we are seeing as a mutation of the development, appropriation and imitation of the Malay feudalistic mentality. The clear and present danger in our post-industrial tribalistic world lies in old formula we are wrongly using.
The essential question now is – as a 'Malaysian nation'/Bangsa Malaysia haven't we agreed upon a common history and a common destiny?

6 comments:

Michael said...

It's been interesting to read such free-flowing comments on the subject of the Origins of the Malays. While we are on the subject, how many of you have read the book entitled "Contesting Malayness - Malay Identity Across Boundaries" Edited by Timothy P. Barnard published by Singapore University Press?

Written by a Professor of National University of Singapore. It reflects the Anthropologists views that there is no such race as the "Malays" to begin with. If we follow the original migration of the Southern Chinese of 6,000yrs ago, they moved into Taiwan, (now the Alisan), then into the Phillipines (now the Aeta) and moved into Borneo (4,500yrs ago) (Dayak). They also split into Sulawesi and progressed into Jawa, and Sumatera. The final migration was to the Malayan Peninsular 3,000yrs ago. A sub-group from Borneo also moved to Champa in Vietnam at 4,500yrs ago.

Interestingly, the Champa deviant group moved back to present day Kelantan. There are also traces of the Dong Song and HoaBinh migration from Vietnam and Cambodia. To confuse the issue, there was also the Southern Thai migration, from what we know as Pattani today. (see also "Early Kingdoms of the Indonesian Archipelago and the Malay Peninsular")

Of course, we also have the Minangkabau's which come from the descendants of Alexander the Great and a West Indian Princess. (Sejarah Melayu page 1-3)


So the million Dollar Question... Is there really a race called the "Malays"? All anthropologists DO NOT SEEM TO THINK SO. (strangely, this includes all Malay Malaysian Anthropologists who are of the same opinion.)


Neither do the "Malays" who live on the West Coast of Johor. They'd rather be called Javanese. What about the west coast Kedah inhabitants who prefer to be known as "Achenese"? or the Ibans who simply want to be known as IBANS. Try calling a Kelabit a "Malay" and see what response you get... you’ll be so glad that their Head-Hunting days are over.

In an article in the Star, dated: Dec 3rd 2006

available for on-line viewing at:
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/12/3/focus/16212814&sec=focus

An excerp is reproduced here below:

"The Malays – taken as an aggregation of people of different ethnic backgrounds but who speak the same language or family of languages and share common cultural and traditional ties – are essentially a new race, compared to the Chinese, Indians and the Arabs with their long histories of quests and conquests.

The Malay nation, therefore, covers people of various ethnic stock, including Javanese, Bugis, Bawean, Achehnese, Thai, Orang Asli, the indigenous people of Sabah and Sarawak and descendants of Indian Muslims who had married local women.

Beneath these variations, however, there is a common steely core that is bent on changing the Malay persona from its perceived lethargic character to one that is brave, bold and ready to take on the world. "


The definition of “Malay” is therefore simply a collection of people's who speak a similar type language. With what is meant by a similar type language does not mean that the words are similar. (A native Kelantanese native speaker has no clue whatsoever what his Iban native brother is talking about; if both speak their own dialect) Linguists however, call this the "Lego-Type" language, where words are added on to the root word to make meaning and give tenses and such. Somehow, the Indonesians disagree with this "Malay" classification and insist instead on being called "Indonesians" even though the majority of "Malays" have their roots in parts of Indonesia. They refuse to be called "Malay"…. Anyhow you may define it.

The writer failed to identify (probably didn't know), that the "Malay" definition also includes, the Champa, Dong Song, HoabinHian, The Taiwanese Alisan and the Philippino Aetas. He also did not identify that the "Orang Asli" are (for lack of a better term) ex-Africans. If you try to call any one of our East Malaysian brothers an "Orang Asli", they WILL BEAT YOU UP! I had to repeat this because almost all West Malaysians make the same mistake when we cross the South China Sea. Worse, somehow, they feel even more insulted when you call them “Malay”. Somehow, “kurang ajar” is uttered below their breath as if “Malay” was a really bad word for them. I’m still trying to figure this one out.

Watch “Malays in Africa”; a Museum Negara produced DVD. Also, the “Champa Malays” by the same.

With this classification, they MUST also include the Phillipinos, the Papua New Guineans, the Australian Aboroginies, as well as the Polynesian Aboroginies. These are of the Australo Melanesians who migrated out of Africa 60,000yrs ago.

Getting interesting? Read on...

"Malay" should also include the Taiwanese singer "Ah Mei" who is Alisan as her tribe are the anscestors of the "Malays". And finally, you will need to define the Southern Chinese (Southern Province) as Malay also, since they are from the same stock 6,000yrs ago.

Try calling the Bugis a "Malay". Interestingly, the Bugis, who predominantly live on Sulawesi are not even Indonesians. Neither do they fall into the same group as the migrating Southern Chinese of 6,000yrs ago nor the Australo Melanesian group from Africa.

Ready for this?

The Bugis are the cross-breed between the Mongolian Chinese and the marauding Arab Pirates. (FYI, a runaway Ming Dynasty official whom Cheng Ho was sent to hunt down) Interestingly, the Bugis, (just like their Arabic ancestors) were career Pirates in the Johor-Riau Island areas. Now the nephew of Daeng Kemboja was appointed as the First Sultan of Selangor. That makes the entire Selangor Sultanate part Arab, part Chinese! Try talking to the Bugis Museum curator near Kukup in Johor. Kukup is located near the most south-western tip of Johor. (Due south of Pontian Kechil) He is more than willing to expound on the Bugis heritage. Buy him lunch and he can talk for days on end.

Let's not even get into the Hang Tuah, Hang Jebat, Hang Kasturi, Hang Lekiu, and Hang Lekir, who shared the same family last name as the other super famous "Hang" family member... Hang Li Poh. And who was she? Legend tells us that she is the Princess of a Ming Dynasty Emperor who was sent to marry the Sultan of Malacca. Won't that make the entire Malacca Sultanate downline "Baba" ? Since the older son of the collapsed Malaccan Sultanate got killed in Johor, (the current Sultanate is the downline of the then, Bendahara) the only other son became the Sultan of Perak. Do we see any Chinese-ness in Raja Azlan? Is he the descendant of Hang Li Poh? But wait a minute....

That's what legend says. Let's look at the proof. The solid evidence. There is a well next to the Zheng He Temple in Malacca which is supposed to be the well built by the Sultan of Malacca for Hang Li Poh. According to legend, anyone who drinks of it shall re-visit Malacca before they die. Hmmm smells like a romantic fairy tale already. But let's look at who Hang Li Poh actually is. Which Ming Emperor was she a daughter to? So I got into researching the entire list of Ming Emperors. Guess what? Not a single Ming Emperor's last name begins with Hang. In fact, all their last names begin with Tzu (pronounced Choo). So who is Hang Li Poh? An Extra Concubine? A Spare Handmaiden? Who knows? But one thing for certain, is that she was no daughter of any of the Ming Emperors. Gone is the romantic notion of the Sultan of Malacca marrying an exotic Chinese Princess. Sorry guys, the Sultan married an unidentified Chinese commoner.

Next question. If the Baba’s are part Malay, why have they been marginalized by NOT BEING BUMIPUTERA? Which part of “Malay” are they not? Whatever the answer, why then are the Portugese of Malacca BUMIPUTERA? Did they not come 100yrs AFTER the arrival of the first Baba’s? Parameswara founded Malacca in 1411. The Portugese came in 1511, and the Dutch in the 1600’s. Strangely, the Baba’s were in fact once classified a Bumiputera, but some Prime Minister decreed that they were to be strangely “declassified” in the 1960’s. WHY? How can a "native son of the soil" degenerate into an "un-son"? The new classification is "pendatang" meaning a migrant to describe the Baba's and Nyonyas. Wait a minute, isn't EVERYONE on the Peninsular a migrant to begin with? How can the government discriminate? Does the Malaysian Government have amnesia?

The Sultan of Kelantan had similar roots to the Pattani Kingdom making him of Thai origin. And what is this "coffee table book" by the Sultan of Perlis claiming to be the direct descendant of the prophet Muhammed? Somehow we see Prof Khoo Khay Khim’s signature name on the book. I’ll pay good money to own a copy of it myself. Anyone has a spare?

In persuing this thread, and having looked at the history of Prophet Muhammed (BTW, real name Ahmad) we couldn't figure out which descendant line The Sultan of Perlis was. Perhaps it was by the name Syed, which transcended. Then we tried to locate which downline did the Sultan descend from of the 13 Official Wives of Prophet Muhammad named in the Holy Koran? Or was the Sultan of Perlis a descendant from the other 23 non-wives? Of the 13 Official Wives were (at least known) 3 Israeli women. Then you should come to this instant revelation, isn't Prophet Muhammad an Israeli himself? Yes, the answer is clear. All descendants of Moses are Israeli. In fact, the Holy Koran teaches that Moses was the First Muslim. Thus confirming all the descendants of Moses to be Israeli, including Jesus and Prophet Muhammad. It is also found in Sura 2:58&59 which specifically mentions that the Torah/ Talmud (Jewish) and the Kitab (Bible) are Holy Words of Allah. But since this is not a Religious or a Theological discussion, let's move on to a more anthropological approach.

So, how many of you have met with the Orang Asli’s (Malaysian Natives)? The more northern you go, the more African they look. Why are they called Negrito’s? It is a Spanish word, from which directly transalates “mini Negros”. The more southern you go, the more “Indonesian” they look. And the ones who live at Cameron Highlands kinda look 50-50. You can see the Batek at Taman Negara, who really look like Eddie Murphy to a certain degree. Or the Negritos who live at the Thai border near Temenggor Lake (north Perak). The Mah Meri in Carrie Island look almost like the Jakuns in Endau Rompin. Half African, half Indonesian.

Stangely the natives in Borneo all look rather Chinese in terms of features and facial characteristics especially the Kelabits in Bario.

By definition, (this is super eye-opening) there was a Hindu-Malay Empire in Kedah. Yes, I said right… The Malays were Hindu (just like the gentle Balinese of today). It was known by it's old name, Langkasuka. Today known as Lembah Bujang. This Hindu-Malay Empire was 2,000yrs old. Pre-dating Borrobudor AND Angkor Watt. Who came about around 500-600yrs later. Lembah Bujang was THE mighty trading Empire, and its biggest influence was by the Indians who were here to help start it. By definition, this should make the Indians BUMIPUTERAS too since they were here 2,000yrs ago! Why are they marginalized?


The Malaysian Government now has a serious case of Alzheimer's. Why? Simply because, they would accord the next Indonesian who tomorrow swims accross the Straits of Malacca and bestow upon him with the apparently "prestigious title" of the Bumiputra status alongside others who imply have inhabited this land for hundreds of centuries. (prestigious, at least perceived by Malays) They also have a strange saying called "Ketuanan Melayu" which literally transalates into "The Lordship of Malays" The Malays still cannot identify till this day "who" or "what" the Malays have "Lordship" over. And they celebrate it galantly and triumphantly by waving the Keris (wavy knife which has Hindu origins in Borrobudor. Ganesan is seen brandishing the Keris in a bass-relief sculpture.) during public meetings over National TV much like a Pagan Wicca Ceremony on Steroids. Let's all wait for that official press release to see who the "Malays" have Lorship over, shall we?


Of the 3 books listed, "Contesting Malayness" (about S$32 for soft cover) is "banned” in Malaysia; you will need to "smuggle" it into Malaysia; for very obvious reasons.... :( or read it in Singapore if you don’t feel like breaking the law. Incidentally, the Professor (Author) was invited to speak on this very subject circa 2 yrs ago, in KL, invited by the MBRAS. You can imagine the "chaos" this seminar created...... :( Fortunately the FRU was not called in.


The other, "Kingdoms of the Indonesian Archipelago, and the Malay Peninsular" (about RM84) are openly sold at all leading bookshops; Kinokuniya, MPH, Borders, Popular, Times, etc. You should be able to find a fair bit of what I’ve been quoting in this book too, but mind you, it is extremely heavy reading material, and you will find yourself struggling through the initial 200+ pages. It is extremely technical in nature. Maybe that’s why it hasn’t been banned (yet)…coz our authorities couldn’t make head or tail of it? (FYI, if I wasn’t doing research for my film, I wouldn’t have read it in its entirety)


The "Sejarah Melayu" (about RM 50) however, is freely available at the University Malaya bookshop. I have both the English and Royal Malay version published by MBRAS. Alternatively, you could try reading the Jawi (Arabic Script) version if you are truly a sucker for unimaginable pain...... (may feel like circumcision)


There are actually many sources for these Origins of Malays findings. Any older Philippino Museum Journal also carries these migration stories. This migration is also on display at the Philippines National Museum in Luzon. However, they end with the Aeta, and only briefly mention that the migration continued to Indonesia and Malaysia, but fully acknowledge that all Philippinos came from Taiwan. And before Taiwan, China. There is another book (part of a series) called the "Archipelago Series" endorsed by Tun Mahatir and Marina Mohammad, which states the very same thing right at the introduction on page one. “… that the Malays migrated out of Southern China some 6,000yrs ago…”. I believe it is called the “Pre-History of Malaysia” Hard Cover, about RM99 found in (mostly) MPH. They also carry “Pre-History of Indonesia” by the same authors for the same price.


It is most interesting to note that the Malaysian Museum officials gallantly invented brand new unheard-of terms such as "Proto-Malay" and "Deutero-Malay", to replace the accepted Scientific Term, Australo-Melanesians (African descent) and Austronesians (Chinese Descent, or Mongoloid to be precise) in keeping in line with creating this new “Malay” term.. They also created the new term called the Melayu-Polynesian. (Which Melayu exists in the Polynesian Islands?) Maybe they were just trying to be “Patriotic” and “Nationalistic”… who knows…? After all, we also invented the term, “Malaysian Time”. While the rest of the world calls it “Tardy” and “Late”. It’s quite an embarrassment actually…. Singaporeans crossing the border are asked to set their watches back by about a 100yrs, to adjust to “Malaysian Time”…

In a nutshell, the British Colonial Masters, who, for lack of a better description, needed a “blanket” category for ease of classification, used the term “Malay”.

The only other logical explanation, which I have heard, was that “Malaya” came as a derivative of “Himalaya”, where at Langkasuka, or Lembah Bujang today was where the Indians were describing the locals as “Malai” which means “Hill People” in Tamil. This made perfect sense as the focal point at that time was at Gunung Jerai, and the entire Peninsular had a “Mountain Range” “Banjaran Titiwangsa”, as we call it.

The Mandarin and Cantonese accurately maintain the accurate pronunciation of “Malai Ren” and “Malai Yun” respectively till this very day. Where “ren” and “yun” both mean “peoples”.

Interestingly, “Kadar” and “Kidara”, Hindi and Sanskrit words accurately describe “Kedah” of today. They both mean “fertile Land for Rice cultivation. Again, a name given by the Indians 2,000yrs ago during the “Golden Hindu Era” for a duration of 1,500yrs.

It was during this “Golden Hindu Era” that the new term which the Hindu Malay leaders also adopted the titles, “Sultan” and “Raja”. The Malay Royalty were Hindu at that time, as all of Southeast Asia was under strong Indian influence, including Borrobudor, and Angkor Watt. Bali today still practices devout Hindu Beliefs. The snake amulet worn by the Sultans of today, The Royal Dias, and even the “Pelamin” for weddings are tell-tale signs of these strong Indian influences. So, it was NOT Parameswara who was the first Sultan in Malaya. Sultanage existed approximately 1,500yrs in Kedah before he set foot on the Peninsular during the "Golden Hindu Era" of Malaysia. And they were all Hindu.

“PreHistory of Malaysia” also talks about the “Lost Kingdom” of the “Chi-Tu” where the local Malay Kingdom were Buddhists. The rest of the “Malays” were Animistic Pagans.

But you may say, "Sejarah Melayu" calls it "Melayu"? Yes, it does. Read it again; is it trying to describe the 200-odd population hamlet near Palembang by the name "Melayu"?(Google Earth will show this village).

By that same definition, then, the Achehnese should be considered a “race”. So should the Bugis and the Bataks, to be fair. Orang Acheh, Orang Bugis, Orang Laut, Orang Melayu now mean the same… descriptions of ethnic tribes, at best. So some apparently Patriotic peron decided to upgrade the Malays from Orang Melayu (Malay People) to Bangsa Melayu (Malay Race) Good job in helping perpetuate the confusion. And since the “Malays” of today are not all descendants of the “Melayu” kampung in Jambi (if I remember correctly), the term Melayu has been wrongly termed. From Day One. Maybe this is why the Johoreans still insist on calling themselves either Bugis, or Javanese til today (except when it comes to receiving Government Handouts). So do the Achehnese on the West coast of Kedah & Perlis and the Kelantanese insist that they came from Champa, Vietnam.

Morover, the fact that the first 3 pages of "Sejarah Melayu" claim that "Melayu" comes from Alexander the Great and the West Indian Princess doesn't help. More importantly, it was written in 1623. By then, the Indians had been calling the locals “Malai” for 1,500 yrs already. So the name stuck….

And with the Sejarah Melayu (The Malay Annals in page 1-3) naming the grandson of Iskandar Zulkarnain, and the West Indian Princess forming the Minangkabau. Whenever a Malay is asked about it, he usually says it is "Karut" (bullshit), but all Malayan based historians insist on using Sejarah Melayu as THE main reference book for which "Malay" history is based upon. The only other books are “Misa Melayu”, "Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa", "Hikayat Pasai", "Hikayat Raja-Raja Siak" and “Hikayat Hang Tuah” among others; which sometimes brings up long and “heated” discussions.

Interesting to note is one of the great "Malay" writers is called Munsyi Abdullah; who penned "Hikayat Abdullah" He was an Indian Muslim. Let's re-read that little bit. He was an Indian Muslim. How can an Indian change his race to be a Malay? He can change his shirt, his car, his religion and even his underwear, but how can anyone change his race? This must be The New Trick of the Century, which even David Copperfield will pay lots of money to watch (and perhaps learn).

"Mysterious Race Changing Trick"- created by The Malaysian Government.

Still, Malaysians are still only second to the Jews (who by the way, are the only other people in the world who are defined by a religion) So perhaps David Copperfield has yet to learn a few tricks on the mass deception skills of the Malaysian Government?

Malaysia Boleh...

I find this strange.

I also find, that it is strange that the "Chitti's" (Indian+Malay) of Malacca are categorized as Bumiputera, while their Baba brothers are not. Why? Both existed during the Parameswara days. Which part of the “Malay” side of the Baba’s is not good enough for Bumiputera classification? Re-instate them. They used to be Bumiputera pre 1960’s anyway.

Instead of "Malay", I believe that "Maphilindo" (circa 1963) would have been the closest in accurately trying to describe the Malays. However, going by that definition, it should most accurately be "MaphilindoThaiChinDiaVietWanGreekCamfrica". And it is because of this; even our University Malaya Anthropology professors cannot look at you in the eye and truthfully say that the word "Malay" technically and accurately defines a race.

This is most unfortunate.

So, in a nutshell, the “Malays” (anthropologists will disagree with this “race” definition) are TRULY ASIA !!! For once the Tourism Ministry got it right….

We should stop calling this country “Tanah Melayu” instead call it, “Tanah Truly Asia”

You must understand now, why I was "tickled pink" when I found out that the Visit Malaysia slogan for 2007 was "Truly Asia". They are so correct... (even though they missed out Greece, and Africa)

BTW, the name UMNO should be changed to UTANO the new official acronym for “United Truly Asia National Organization” . After all, they started out as a Bugis club in Johor anyway….

I told you all that I hate race classifications…. This is so depressing. Even more depressing is that the "malays" are not even a race; not since day one.


“Truly Asia Boleh”

Goimaalik said...

In persuing this thread, and having looked at the history of Prophet Muhammed (BTW, real name Ahmad) we couldn't figure out which descendant line The Sultan of Perlis was. Perhaps it was by the name Syed, which transcended. Then we tried to locate which downline did the Sultan descend from of the 13 Official Wives of Prophet Muhammad named in the Holy Koran? Or was the Sultan of Perlis a descendant from the other 23 non-wives? Of the 13 Official Wives were (at least known) 3 Israeli women. Then you should come to this instant revelation, isn't Prophet Muhammad an Israeli himself? Yes, the answer is clear. All descendants of Moses are Israeli. In fact, the Holy Koran teaches that Moses was the First Muslim. Thus confirming all the descendants of Moses to be Israeli, including Jesus and Prophet Muhammad. It is also found in Sura 2:58&59 which specifically mentions that the Torah/ Talmud (Jewish) and the Kitab (Bible) are Holy Words of Allah. But since this is not a Religious or a Theological discussion, let's move on to a more anthropological approach.

Bodoh! Go re-learn you history lessons.

What Mu'hammad ibn 'Abdu-(a)llah is an Israa^iyl? Mu'hammad is from the line of Ismaa^iyl not Is'haaq. Israa^iyl originated from Ya'gkuwb ibn Is'haaq who according to Tawraa[t] was renamed Israa^iyl by Allah. Ya'gni Israa^iyl is the descendents of Ya'gkuwb and not Muwsa(y).

Further ^Ibraa'hiym ibn 'Azar is from Ur Chaldea whose tribe migrated north into A(l)-rrafidayn (the land of two rivers) from THE 'ARABIAN PENINSULAR in the south.

Ismaa^iyl grew up with desert 'arabs of Yamaan of whom his forefathers originated from.

That makes Mu'hammad A PURE 'ARAB.

Israa^iyl is the descendent of Muwsa(y)? Really? Then why their priests called themselves Quhaan (cohen)? Why not called themselves Mosites or Aaronites or even Amraanites? Why after the grandfather? So why link to the grandfather rather than the noble House of 'Imraan?

In Al-Qur^aan Allah told us that Muwsa(y) asked Allah to separate him and his brother with his own faasiqiyn trash for followers (first they kowtow to a calf like a bunch of hindu idiots, then the rest chickened out against a Divine Command to assault The Enemies of Allah in Jerusalem except two of his followers Yushaa^ (Joshua) and Kilaab (Caleb)) and that he wanted nothing to do with them (your precious Israa^iylites). And this would include Miriam who is under Muwsa(y) direct guardianship.

It is known Muwsa(y) ibn 'Imraan ibn Quhaan ibn Lahwiy ibn Ya'gkuwb ibn Is'haaq ibn Ibraa'hiym had only a brother, Haruwn and a sister Miriam. While 'Imraan ibn Quhaan had only two sons and a daughter, Quhaan ibn Lahwi had other sons though. So why they linked to Quhaan and not the noble House of 'Imraan?

Maybe perhaps they have no direct link to the noble House of 'Imraan?

If Israa^iyl is suppose to be the descendant of Muwsa(y), why then Allah elected Daawud ibn Isayy of House Yahuwda ibn Ya'gkuwb as the King of Israa^iyl and not from the bloodline of the noble House of 'Imraan? Could it because there is no direct Muwsa(y) ibn 'Imraan bloodline among the israa^iylite to be elected as king perhaps?

Subsequently Muwsa(y)'s grave is not in Israa^iyl, rather in 'Urdaan (Jordan) on the way to Israa^iyl; where he and his family resides until he died after Baniy Israa^iyl chicken out against Kana'an of Jerusalem.

Damn zionazis lap-poodles. Stop spreading fitna[t] against Al-'haqq!


As for Maalayuwn, try looking it up with our 'Arab brothers in the jaziyra[t]. You will find that Maalayaa^ is a PURE 'arabic word! By your own writing, its clearly indicated that The Maalayuwn has only genetic link to the Oranglaut of Mudalu. But culturally they can't be traced to East Asia. So try going west... to our 'arabs cousins in Yamaan to be more specific.

That's why we been telling people: YOU CAN'T BE A MAALAY UNLESS YOU ARE A MUSLIM

...coz Maalayaa^ is an Islaamic alliance of Muslim-ified tribes!

Here's some fact: The word "Alamak!" is a PURE DESERT 'ARAB SLANG, only found used by those among those in Yamaan/Hadramawt. So is the mother of all words: "Emak". its a corruption of "Ummuk". 'Arabic for "your mother"

Subsequently Jawa is a corruption of "Jawhaar", before that, before Al-Islaam, they were known as Majapahit and Sunda, and Borneo is english corruption of "Biruni" so is Manila which is from "Amani-(a)llah".

How funnily 'Arabish of us Maalayuwn eh?


Stop trying to rubbish our origins and history yaa kuffaar!

Goimaalik said...

Missed some points:

It was during this “Golden Hindu Era” that the new term which the Hindu Malay leaders also adopted the titles, “Sultan” and “Raja”. The Malay Royalty were Hindu at that time, as all of Southeast Asia was under strong Indian influence, including Borrobudor, and Angkor Watt. Bali today still practices devout Hindu Beliefs. The snake amulet worn by the Sultans of today, The Royal Dias, and even the “Pelamin” for weddings are tell-tale signs of these strong Indian influences. So, it was NOT Parameswara who was the first Sultan in Malaya. Sultanage existed approximately 1,500yrs in Kedah before he set foot on the Peninsular during the "Golden Hindu Era" of Malaysia. And they were all Hindu.

"Sul'taan" is an 'arabic word laa bodoh! It means "He who is in power". Since when The 'Arabiyiyn are ever hindus?


The "Sejarah Melayu" (about RM 50) however, is freely available at the University Malaya bookshop. I have both the English and Royal Malay version published by MBRAS. Alternatively, you could try reading the Jawi (Arabic Script) version if you are truly a sucker for unimaginable pain...... (may feel like circumcision)

Rubbish written by that Jawa/Johor-riau-an propagandist trash the la'iyn mukazd-zdib Tun Sri Lanang Al-Kazd-zdab to lift the status of his disgraced homeland (Aceh assaulted Johor for a reason, cheifly because Johor were cohorting with the kuffaar 'harbiyiyn... as in the case of nowdays, unfortunately. Ingrained tradition?).

Nearly almost all he wrote in there won't survive a "jar'h wa ta'gdil" process. Makes one wonder what's all those dumb historians & professors in our local universities are being paid for?

But then, these are the same morons who claimed to be "anaa Muslim!" then expound the theory that Nabiy Adam, who Allah said was the perfect human in terms of physicallity ('Suwra[t] A(l)-ttiyn) was an apeman. Na'zdubi-(a)llah. Bloody lying zanaadiq liars against Allah and RasuwluHU.

But you may say, "Sejarah Melayu" calls it "Melayu"? Yes, it does. Read it again; is it trying to describe the 200-odd population hamlet near Palembang by the name "Melayu"?(Google Earth will show this village).

Proof of the lying tongue of that snake Tun Sri Lanang of Jawhar-Riau trying to hijack "Maalayuwn" authority. Jambi was Maalayuwn southern borderlands. Infact records shows the Maalayuwn at Jambi were clashing with the buddhist Palembang.

Infact, it is now known that the northern states, the remnants of Langkasuka embraced Al-Islaam first and not that usurper trash called Melaka. And mind you, unlike the southerners, Al-Islaam spread first among the commoners followed by the royals which is the opposite with the southerners.

Thus why the northern states are considered Maalayan heartlands. Because the islaamic alliance of Muslim-ified tribes known as Maalayaa^ begun there.

Michael is right about one thing tho, Maalayuwn is not a race in the traditional sense.

ah mok said...

Sometimes I wonder whether you are a Malay born in Malaysia.
Or is it because you have been away too long, living in that ivory tower, and have totally lost touch with your culture.

First I would like to say that there is no need to resort to Rousseau to understand Malay nationalism.

Malay nationalism is a product of a very specific circumstance and environment.

It is the acknowledgement of one's identity as the prince of this land.
This acknowledgement and awareness arose from their confrontation with the others occupying the same land and territory.
And since the others are minorities, they have no right to claim that they too are prince of the land.
So they must be 'pendatang', who have come to settle down in Malay land.
As pendatang they to pay their dues for occupying Malay territory.
Fair is fair right.
You stay in someone's house you have to pay the owner for the room and board.
So Umno is set up to protect the rights and privileges of the Malays and ensure that the pendatang pay their dues.

Now what is so difficult to understand about Malay nationalism.
Furthermore, the pendatang also brought with them alien lifestyles and religious beliefs that the Tuan Rumah has to tolerate.
So what is so wrong for the Tuan Rumah to ask the pendatang pay their dues?

So what that Perlis Umno delegate said is perfectly natural and understandable.

If the pendatang don't want to pay their dues and want to challenge the rights of the Tuan Rumah then of course the keris has to be used.

This consciousness existed before the advent of modern media and will continue to exist even if you were to remove modern media.

Raja Petra, Syed Akbar Ali (author of To Digress A Little and Malaysia & The Club of Doom) and Mahathir display far more acute understanding of the Malays then you will ever do.

To follow your style, which is to name drop a little to sound impressive and to show off abit.
This whole confrontation between the lord of the land and the others is described as the 'Master & Slave Dialectic' in Hegel's 'Phenomenology of Spirit'.

You study under government scholarship, so you should be grateful to the government of the day.
You should also be thankful that there is UNMNO for defending your rights.

DR. AZLY RAHMAN said...

Dear "ah mok",

Thank you for visiting this site and contributing your excellent point on nationalism.

Is Malay nationalism still relevant in the age of globalization and free enterprise? Who benefits from Malay nationalism? Is Malaysian cosmopolitanism as a new way of thinking a better alternative?

What do you think?

Anonymous said...

ha, I will try out my thought, your post give me some good ideas, it's truly awesome, thanks.

- Norman

Lecture: Edward Said

Loading...

Lecture: Noam Chomsky

Loading...

Lecture: Jacques Derrida

Loading...

Lecture: Jean Paul Sartre

Loading...

Movie: 1984

Loading...

Movie: Animal Farm

Loading...

Movie: Chicken Run

Loading...

Poems: Rumi

Loading...

Dialogue on Religion: Karen Armstrong

Loading...

Dailogue on Religion: Huston Smith

Loading...

Islam

Loading...

Humanism

Loading...

Jainism

Loading...

Sikkhism

Loading...

Hinduism

Loading...

Bahai

Loading...

Confucianism

Loading...

Taoism

Loading...

The Bhagavad Gita

Loading...

Jesus of Nazareth

Loading...

Siddharta Gautama

Loading...

Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh)

Loading...