Corruption of our history books

(Thanks S.L. for the following write-up by JA)

Knowledge of our roots will benefit us

IN very recent times, the starting date for the study of Malaysian history in the schools has been conveniently fixed around 1400 C.E. It probably coincides with the founding of the Sultanate of Malacca by Parameswara.

Today, Malaysian school children only learn a little bit about the early Proto Malays and then are conveniently taken on a historical quantum leap to the founding of Malacca.

Early Indian works speak of a fantastically wealthy place called Savarnadvipa, which meant “land of gold”. This mystical place was said to lie far away, and legend holds that this was probably the most valid reason why the first Indians ventured across the Bay of Bengal and arrived in Kedah around 100 B.C.

Apart from trade, the early Indians brought a pervasive culture, with Hinduism and Buddhism sweeping through the Indo-Chinese and Malay archipelago lands bringing temples and Indian cultural traditions. The local chiefs began to refer to themselves as “rajahs” and also integrated what they considered the best of Indian governmental traditions with the existing structure.

I learnt Malayan history in the 1950s and taught it in the 1960s and 1970s in secondary schools. All the history textbooks at the time had the early Indian connection specifically mentioned in them. Teachers of that period taught about the early Indianised kingdoms of Langkasuka, Sri Vijaya and Majapahit that existed from as early as 100 C.E.

Anyone can see that Parameswara, the founder of Malacca, has a clearly give-away name that points to the Indian/Hindu influence. No one can deny this, and all our children need to know about this. They have the fundamental right to learn about this aspect of our history too.

Why don’t our children learn about these early Indian connections today? It needs mention here that this early Indian connection has nothing to do with the much later cheap Indian “coolie” labour influx that the British brought over to man the railways and plantations of Malaya from the late 19th century onwards.

The Malay language as we know it today is already fully impregnated and enriched with many foreign words. This is good. Malay, therefore, has been a bahasa rojak from early times itself.

Rojak itself (and also cendul) is a Malaysian food developed by an Indian Malayalee Muslim community known as the Malabaris who hailed from Kerala. They were also referred to as kakas. We now wrongly credit the Penang mamaks for this great food.

The only other bahasa rojak that can beat the Malay language in the matter of foreign word assimilation is the English language because it has “polluted” itself with words from just about every civilisation that exists or existed in this world.

The very word “Melayu” itself is most probably of Indian origin from the words “Malai Ur”, which means land of mountains in Tamil. Singapur, Nagapur and Indrapur are very common Indian names that have similar backgrounds.

The early Indians were probably inspired by the main mountain range that looks like a backbone for the Malay peninsula and thus named it Malaiur. The word “malai” is undoubtedly Indian in origin as is the case with the word Himalayas and we all know where it is situated.

The English word “Malaya” is a further corruption of the word by the British who themselves are very good at corrupting the pronunciation and spelling of and changing the names of indigenous places worldwide to suit their tongue’s capability. The Malay word “Melayu” with the missing “r” is closer to the original name “Malaiur”.

To my knowledge, the hundreds of Malay words of Indian origin have not been catalogued by anyone except perhaps the noted Malay scholar Zaaba. Even if such an effort has been made, it is definitely not widely known or ever published.

Many Malay words, from describing Malay royalty (Raja, Putera, Puteri, Maha, Mulia, Seri, etc) and common everyday terms (bakti, suami, cuma, dunia, bumi, jendela, serpu, kerana), all have Indian connections. The undeniable Indian connection in the word “Indonesia” is also reflected in the name itself.

The Indian factor that influences even the prevailing Malay culture in terms of music, food, dress and certain other everyday practices like betel chewing and bersanding is another thing over which a loud hush prevails. Why?

Such knowledge of the roots of this great country, be they Indian, Chinese, Arab or whatever, can indeed very strongly facilitate the ongoing efforts of the Government to make our children think of themselves as Bangsa Malaysia more easily and more readily.

  1. #1 by kurakura on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 7:50 am

    This is almost inevitable as the “winners” gets to rewrite history that favours them.

    Japan also “tweaked” their history that resulted certain degree of uproar in neighbouring Asian countries.

    Guess Malaysia is too insignificant be bothered with by outsiders.

    Also, I heard Hang Tuah is actually Chinese? I’m no sure though….any historians here?

  2. #2 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 8:28 am

    If the first immigrants that settled in this (nameless as at that time) peninsula were the Indians;

    If the second wave of immigrants here were the Kampucheans (of Malay stock);

    If the third wave were a mixture of Chinese, Arabs, Indonesians in different parts of the country;

    then we are truly multi-ethnic & multi-cultural.

    Then it is historically misplaced and misleading to say that Malays of Indon stock are the aborigines of this land;

    Indeed, the white Americans never claimed to be the original landowners of America.

    The white Australians never claimed to be the original aborigines.

    Historically & truthfully, can Malays claim they are sons of the soil (or Bumiputras? or Orang Asli?), whatever that means? Because, if my parents fed from the produce of the soil in this land, then biollogically we are all sons of the soil.

    Truth is we are all immigrants. And if Islam says we are all descendants of Adam, then we are all immigrants from the Middle East!!!

    The greater truth is that a multi-ethnic and multicultural nation has strengths in diversity unknown to a single race country. Such hybrid vogour stems from the agglomeration of strengths from each community; harnessing and exploiting the competitive spirit and strengths in a positive and dynamic way which propels growth and fosters diverse strengths enmeshed in each other’s peculiar traditions.

    If Ahmadinejad has his way, Hitler never existed; neither did the extermination of 6 million Jews in WW II.
    If Robert Mugabe has his way, the British were all bastards; and Mugabe was the sole freedom fighter.
    If Bush has his way, he would like to re-write history and say Iraq had not just one but myriads of WMD!

    Hey, history is not your story or my story. Goddamn you. History is HIS-story.

    So historians that are true are but mere amanuenses! Professor Khoo, right or not?

  3. #3 by vesewe on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 8:44 am

    I am a 10th generation Chinese in Malaysia and my ancestors and I have known only Malaysia as our home.

    And yet everyday, I hear malays calling me ‘pendatang’ and unpatriotic. I find this totally unacceptable because I am a law-abiding citizen who pays my taxes diligently. Citizens should not be treated differently based on race.

    Similarly, if an ethnic Chinese student has performed well, he should be awarded scholarship just as an ethnic Malay student who has performed equally well is awarded one. Is it too difficult to understand that not all Chinese are rich and not all malays are poor?

    If a malay feels that he has the right to call me ‘pendatang’ and tell me to migrate because he feels his ancestors have been here long enough, by the same logic, I too have the same right to do that to him.

    Orang Asli is the general name given to different groups of indigenous people of this land. Take the Negrito, for instance. They are definitely not the same as the malays. The languages of the Negrito and Senoi are related to the indigenous languages of Burma, Indochina and Thailand.

    The only group of Orang Asli which shares similarities with those whom we know as the malays of today are the Proto Malays, who had arrived at this land much later than the Negrito and Senoi.

    Those whom we know as malays today are Deutro Malays who arrived even later. Thus, malays are also outsiders who migrated to this land just like the non-malays. The only difference is the malays migrated earlier.

    However, this sweeping statement that all malays and Orang Asli are one and the same cannot stand since only a minority of Orang Asli have become Muslims and there are even fewer who have fulfilled all three constitutional requirements.

  4. #4 by Jeffrey on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 8:59 am

    I mean, if corruption were pervasive in all facets of national life, is corruption of history books an expected shocker? Tribal hubris and desire for homogeneity of cultural identity denies the “indian connection” (political leaders deny and keep from public view their antecedent indian or any other material connection ( except – maybe to many, the Middle Eastern one)! :)

  5. #5 by Taiko on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 9:12 am

    The Thais who look very much like the Malays still keep Buddhism as their religion and their writings are very similar to Indian writings. Bali is 80% Hindu. These are proofs that Southeast Asia was once under great Indian influence. Any learned person knows that.

    But some years ago, our history books have become more Islamic. The authors of the books are obviously trying to associate themselves with the Arabs instead of telling the real account of history. They are not being truthful about their past.

    The change as I see it, is politically driven.

  6. #6 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 9:21 am

    CORRUPTION OF A DIFFERENT KIND – the hideous kind.

    Najib brushes off corruption claims
    Andrew Ong | Mar 29, 07 8:48pm (MALAYSIAKINI)
    “Najib plays cool even when accused of being involved in corruption scandals over arms procurement in an internationally televised interview by Anwar Ibrahim. ”

    Bravo, Saudara Anwar. Can we have some specifics please? I mean it is not fair to make wild accusations of this sort for a person of your standing without some sort of evidence, right? The same thing bloggers demanded of the current CJ who exposed that some judges are corrupt…that’s not fair to other judges. As head of the judiciary, the onus rests heavily on none other but himself to expose the culprits and restore the integrity and honour to the bench.

    Considering that Mindef’s purchases for the last 20 years or so during Najib’s tenure as Minister of Defence runs into tens (hundreds) of billions, your allegation taints righteous najib’s reputation and brings him into public scorn and odium. Surprisingly, he is not making any public castigation on you or giving you another black eye. But if there is any modicum of truth at all, then would that mean Najib has a huge war chest to bankroll his re-election in UMNO and the GE? WOw! Can anyone spill the beans on the deck?

    Saudara Anwar – maybe you may like to consider telling more on BBC or Bloomberg or CNN or Washington Post or New York Times or Associated Press or Wall Street Journal, so that the whole world can get to read it and not be suppressed by NST/STAR/BERITA HARIAN/UTUSAN MALAYSIA/TV1/TV2 etc…

  7. #7 by noelbynature on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 10:39 am

    Yes, it is sad and alarming that history is selectively revealed in Malaysian textbooks. If you look around the rest of Southeast Asia, there is a kind of “black hole” in academic literature situated in Malaysia – the archaeology of Mainland Southeast Asia (Thailand, Cambodia, even Burma) and Indonesia is well documented, but Malaysia is relatively obscure, despite it’s central geographic position. Even then, Malaysia seems to be actively filtering out any trace of Hindu-Buddhist influence from it’s history. At the Bujang Valley museum in Kedah, which is the site of Indian-Hindu habitation, I’ve heard of reports that many of the Indian-Hindu artefacts have been phased out while Islamic artefacts and exhibits have taken their place (see

    A couple of notes:
    Savarnadvipa more likely refers to the lands of Java and/or Sumatra – the Indian and Arab traders did not make the distinction clear.

    Hang Tuah’s “nationality” changes over time, depending on which version of the Sejarah Melayu you read. In earlier versions (c. 16 century) Hang Tuah is inferred to be from Tumasik (what is now known as Singapore), and in later versions of the Sejarah (c. 17C), Hang Tuah becomes Bugis! Goes to show that the Malay Annals are not-quite-historical in their accounts and often the details are changed to suit the prevailing ruling body – much like the case today.

  8. #8 by k1980 on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 11:25 am

    A couple of years ago a history book published here made an outlandish claim that the founder of the Ming Dynasty, Chu Yuanchang, was a Muslim because his wife’s surname was Ma. Now all the Mas or Behs in the world will have to go to court to verify that their religion to avoid the Rayappan episode.

    Should one of our umnoputras ever become president of the US(which thank heavens is next to impossible), American history would be rewritten so that American Indians loved to live in reservations and willingly gave up their land to the whites, American Negroes willingly sailed from America to become slaves in America, the A-bombs were dropped onto Hiroshima and Nagasaki by Japs and not by Americans and so on.

  9. #9 by k1980 on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 12:05 pm

    It is well-documented history that the Malays existed as mostly Hindus before the arrival of Islam to the Malay archipelago. Many customs, practices, dress code and the language all point to the Malays having been richly influenced by the Indian/Hindu culture. Even after conversion to Islam in the 14th century, the Malays today still do retain many of the Indian/Hindu influences on their culture. So who is trying to rewrite history in order to deny his heritage?

  10. #10 by sotong on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 12:44 pm

    That’s why many Malays are lost and confused. They are denied their real roots and history.

    Criminals are allowed to call fellow Malaysians ” pendatang ” or ” kafir ” with the intention to insult and hurt their feeling to make them feel unwanted and not belonging to their country of birth.

    No leaders came forward to strong express their outrage and disgust with the way the criminals treat fellow Malaysians.

  11. #11 by blueheeler on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 1:56 pm

    All govt’s ‘re-write’ history for their own gain lah… nothing to be surprised of. But good effort in pointing out the major denials in the official version of M’sian history

  12. #12 by lauwengsan on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 2:08 pm

    i used to study history in secondary school and found that the pre-Malacca Sultanate history is a fascinating history.

    some of the words that we use in modern malay today, like sengsara, bumi, raja, manusia etc are words originated from sanskrit.

  13. #13 by k1980 on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 3:01 pm

    A Form Four student at a religious school in Rembau will be scarred for life after his face was splashed with acid.Wan Mohamad Zulkarnain Wan Mohammad, 16, was sleeping in the hostel on Sunday and woke screaming when he felt his face burning. And the worst thing is that the religious school had asked the family to keep the incident a secret, instead of admitting responsibity for the incident which occured in its hostel.

  14. #14 by dawsheng on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 3:20 pm

    Why? why do they want to cover up history before islam arrived in south east asia? What is the objective and goal for such action that our history started only after Islam arrived in Malacca? I am sure there is not single logic explanation to answer the questions above, unless, to those who have succeeded in covering up history have an answer to their own secret agenda. What keep me guessing, is this just a part of a scheme or there is already other larger component in place to brainwash our future generations? This is not just lame education standard, there is something else neccessary for those rewriting our history is brewing, trust me, we don’t want that.

  15. #15 by Loh on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 3:28 pm

    Malays did not lead the way to rewrite history. It was an Indian who was less Malay than Indian, based on the classification according to the race of the father, who found it politically advantages to be Malay, who had caused the history of Malaya to be rewritten. Having chosen Malay as the race, and fasaken his ancestry, the person had to preclude any chance to regret by ensuring that his adopted race is the master, and that his ancesters along with others could go to hell. The rest is his-story.

  16. #16 by tsn on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 3:42 pm

    Now is not an appropriate time to question the “Malay Bumiputra Special Status” by questioning the history written by them in order to support theirs legitimacy as princes & princess.

    It is to nobody benefits if we start digging deep in this issue. This will only anger them and they will react unnecessarrily. In fact we are in no position to tell them what to do. The only way is: with education, there is enough Malay intellectuals come forward to say what the nation especially Malays suppose to do or not to do for the sake of theirs future generations.

    When a person possess every damn power to dictate the going of your life, please do not publicly finger pointing his legitimacy stupidity,weaknesses, you might land yourself in deep-deep shit. JALAN MATI.

  17. #17 by madmix on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 4:45 pm

    Why are the Balinese people so gentle, so polite, so hospitable? Why is there so little crime in Bali? Have you ever heard of snatch theft in Bali? You can leave your shop unattended and no one will steal your goods. If Hinduism South east Asian Style had prevailed…

  18. #18 by HJ Angus on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 5:02 pm

    No doubt Bali is a beautiful place.

    Perhaps the people there have not listened to the politicians.

    This new history emphasis seems like a feeble attempt at ethnic cleansing or to indicate that the NEP is part of our natural heritage.

  19. #19 by slashed on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 7:30 pm

    History is an extremely biased subject in Malaysia. One thing that really gets me worked up is Sarawak history. As a Sarawakian, I honestly do feel that the Brooke dynasty was a good one – with the exception of Charles Vyner – these ppl were genuine Sarawakians in the end of the day. Yet, in order to ‘fit in’ with the rest of Malaysia, the Brooke family is portrayed as the bad guys – I mean they have to be if you consider Rentap the hero. In fact, IMO Rentap is in the same position as a modern day terrorist. How is he a hero? He was a pirate who killed and robbed many, and was trying to defend that lifestyle. Alot of the other Ibans converted to a more peaceful lifestyle with the abolishment of piracy and in fact a large proportion of the force used to subdue Rentap were Iban and Malay. It is analogous to modern day Islamic extremists trying to defend their extreme ideals.

    Charles and James Brooke on the other hand strived to develop the country and developed a close knit relationship with the natives. They often stressed the importance of letting the ppl be invovled (they were reluctant to let foreigners come in to steal the wealth), and indeed Charles once spent a few years living with the natives, learning their language and was even made a leader – they would gladly fight under him! Most of the ppl also accepted the Rajahs. So don’t tell me that these ppl were not genuine Sarawakians! This is of course my view – and I respect differing opinions, however, I dont not like the fact that our history books do not even try to present an objective view of things. In fact, if you read the books, you ll find that they are unable to totally smear the Brooke family’s name – but they play up Rentap’s role as a Hero. This is of course illogical for if the Brookes arent bad, then how does Rentap’s image as the people’s hero fit in? This is not the same with west malaysian history or even Sabah’s historical heroes like Mat salleh who all fought against the oppression of the British! Sarawak wasnt being oppressed, it was being developed! Also note that Sarawak was an independent country at the time, (it was merely a British protectorate which is not the same as a colony. Sarawak only became colonized when the Japanese arrived) yet this differentiation was not emphasized in the books when talking about the rebellions.

    My next contention with our history books is a more frustrating one. The last time I checked (before leaving for college), the form 4-5 syllabus for history had been altered to fit in more islamic civ history. I find that utterly rubbish (No, I am not Islamaphobic). The reason is because there is a disproportionate focus on Islamic civ and no real consideration for Indian or/and Chinese history.

    Further, while I respect the greatness of the islamic civ of old, I think it rather prejudiced and stupid not to give a more detailed understanding of western history – esp that regarding the revolutions (what was studied was more like a dry description of events. I did not feel for these ppl. When I read Paine, I did.) The ideas of Locke, Mills, Rousseau and co should be studied in greater detail – not only because their ideas are still relevant but because understanding them may be the first step to understanding the ideals/tenets/fundamentals of modern democracy – of which we are. And taking into account the clash of civ in this cultural melting pot that is Malaysia, we are in a very good position to analyse all these ideas in relation to others. Political and philosophical awareness/awakening is, I feel, the first step to creating a more mature electorate and ultimately good governance. Most of the ppl in malaysia do not understand how democracy works. They only know how to vote.

    The other problem is the fact that bits of the Islamic history, ie, where Nabi Muhammad received the wahyu, is presented as fact. Well that’s what I remembered. The point is, religious ‘facts’ should not be presented as fact in history books. Even though I am Christian, I will also find it utterly too much if they began representing Christ’s ressurection as fact in history books. Of course I believe it to be fact (LOL), but truly this is wrong in a multi religious country like ours.

  20. #20 by slashed on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 7:37 pm

    History ought to spark our imagination, it ought to make us think; it should not be merely dry facts or description of events – these are not lessons, it merely catalogues the mistakes of ppl. When history inspires us and when we begin to understand what our fore fathers went through, there you have it – that feeling – that is the lesson, and that we will never forget.

  21. #21 by slashed on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 8:16 pm

    The whole issue of Malays-being-here-first-thus-they-are-the-true-owners-of-the-land is ultimately flawed. But their special status does not derive from that claim (even if they use it to justify it) but derives from our acceptance of it in the so-called malaysian Social Contract. Even during that time, i think that it never crossed our fore father’s minds that that argument was correct and so supplied no consideration for that which followed: recognition of their status. Political rights were the real bargain we sought after.

    It follows therefore that these rights are not inherent, and can be taken away. Our fore fathers gave up our rights in return for political rights which I must mention IS an inherent right (since by entering into democratic society we gave up our natural rights, but in return society must provide us with political rights to determine the exercise of our collective rights – therefore essentially, we gave up our rights to gain nothing that we would not have by being society members anyway). but one can clearly see that this argument is dependent upon the fact of citizenship – the other bargain we sought for – and one would be right.

    However, as Paine says ‘no man has property in man; nor does any generation has property in generations to follow: and so the mistakes that our fore fathers had commited cannot be perpetuated forever by binding us all to that ‘Social Contract’. Our fore fathers gave up their rights to enter society, and it follows that it was only THEIR RIGHTS that should be permanently disabled and it is only THAT GENERATION of bumiputras that should receive the extra rights PERMANENTLY.

    By the constitution, and by our laws, we are all citizens today by virtue of having malaysian parents and being born in malaysia. It is no longer conditional upon the fact of surrendering our rights. THAT is not written anywhere in our Constitution. Their rights are merely enshrined there, and can be taken down. I do not believe it to be convincing that the so called Social contract may still bind us because we tacitly agree to be in society – since our agreement to it is not free; where can we go? Away? Home is home and not so easily forgotten! Thus there is no longer any continuous consideration for that particular right.

    Strangely, the i-was-here-first argument MAY be un-islamic. Of course I have not read the Quran, but since they too are ppl of the Book as I, then the first on earth was Adam. By their logic, therefore, Adam should indeed be the proprietor of earth (but note that Muslims consider all of this world to belong to Allah, a contradiction with their own views in itself). As Adam is the father of all Man, then logically we as Man are the heirs of the world. There is no ‘I am here first’ rubbish – we must all have equal claims to the world. Therefore if one argues that being first to arrive creates an inherent right (perpetuating forever thru your generations), it would be useless to use it to exclude another fellow Man albeit a different race.

    The time will come for change, but now is not it. My arguments are only meant for discussionary purposes and I do not wish to incite any unnecessary malice. The People are not ready.

  22. #22 by slashed on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 8:26 pm

    Sorry for the looooong posts LOL Was rather frustrated! Also if I made any errors do tell me… nicely!

  23. #23 by Pengajar on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 9:59 pm

    Japan is trying to rewrite its’ world war II history much to the annoyance of China and other countries which were involved in the war. What is the saying that goes ” forget everything and move on ” ? One of the first people to study astronomy were the Middle Eastern people and the white men followed later. While more truths are uncovered, others have to be hidden. The Brunei Sultanate once owned Borneo. Look at how it is broken up today. Some people say Malays are from Southern China. One thing for sure is there was a source; the only source from where humans come from. So no matter how we distinguish ourselves, we are still related to one another. Though research is scientific, the same research subject has to be updated because there will be more findings and with each finding comes a new discovery. So we cannot just do one research and that’s it; that’s our answer. If you want your citizens to be intelligent, you cannot stop their search for more answers. Same with the usage of the internet. Used properly, the internet is a powerful tool to gain knowledge. You stand to be questioned whether you have done correctly or incorrectly, meaning you should not feel threatened to the extent of wanting to control the expressions of people’s thoughts. Are you saying that you have something to hide ? As the world progresses, people’s thoughts progress. They will not be like the citizens of decades ago. Those times, your citizens have very simple minds. These times, your citizens have more intelligence. Either you have to be wiser than them or you have to listen to what they have to say.

  24. #24 by Loh on Friday, 30 March 2007 - 10:48 pm

    ///I do not believe it to be convincing that the so called Social contract may still bind us because we tacitly agree to be in society – since our agreement to it is not free; where can we go? Away?///

    The social contract was that the special provisions to enable Malays to catch up with others should be reviewed after 15 years, from 1957. That contract should hold. But UMNO tore it. NEP was not a social contract. It is the might of UMNO which made it a right, and as might goes, issues like 30% and 20 years are just promises to tell non-Malays that they can carry on dreaming that there sufferings would end one day. Willy nilly, NEP hurts ordinary Malays as well as non-Malays, albeit in different ways. NEP is the invention of UMNOputras who have it as a licence to steal to their hearts content, and yet NEP also provided Malays the ‘feel good’ factors for having the right to be a citizen-class above non-Malays. Malays would never believe or understand that “goodies” available to them and non-Malays alike, taken together would be much more had the country not been plundered under the guise of NEP. But ordinary Malays believe that NEP serve their interest and they supported corrupt politicians to spend their lifetime on their posts.

    The NEP heros made manual jobs appear disgraceful to Malays so that all bumiputras are duty-bound to go through tertiary education, with 60,000 ending up unemployable. They face real dilemma; manual jobs are beneath their dignity, graduate level employment are hard to come by, and politicians would sooner or later absorb them into government service. They will make the incumbents pay for their presence since resources available for government services do have an upper bound.

    History has been rewritten to make Malays emotionally attached to NEP, so as to facilitate UMNOputras to achieve their objectives.

    Unless Malays use their head rather than their heart to think, UMNO will remain in control. Unless non-Malays also use their head to think rather than their heart to fear, UMNO would continue to have their slaves to do their bidding. We can curse the present BN government all we like, we can suggest what we wish for the country, but unless BN is voted out, or obtains much reduced majority comes next GE, nothing will change.

  25. #25 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 12:16 am

    “As Adam is the father of all Man, then logically we as Man are the heirs of the world. There is no ‘I am here first’ rubbish – we must all have equal claims to the world.” Slashed

    I would love to listen to you make your case in a U.S. immigration court on the issue. The Immigration Judge would have you put in a straight jacket in the blink of an eye and send you to a mental asylum instead of allowing your application for asylum under its refugee law.

  26. #26 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 12:28 am

    HORNBILL: Historically and truthfully, can Malays claim they are sons of the soil … whatever that means? Because, if my parents fed from the produce of the soil in this land, then biologically we are all sons of the soil.

    When I was in school my teacher said there is nobody more qualified to call himself the ‘son of the soil’ than the one who carries it away from the back of your house at about midnight every night. Many of the readers here may not know what I’m talking about but I think those living in smaller towns, rural areas and our East Malaysians know.

    Some people call him the ‘midnight soil carrier’ and it is time that his invaluable services to King and country be rewarded with some title.

  27. #27 by undergrad2 on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 12:30 am

    Whatever name you wish to call him, to me he gives real meaning to the phrase ‘son of the soil.’

  28. #28 by slashed on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 1:00 am


    I think you might have misunderstood me. I was approaching the whole issue by using their own logic and therefore it does not reflect my own argument, but is to emphasize the weakness of their own – i see you left out the other part of the quote ‘By their logic…’

  29. #29 by slashed on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 1:24 am

    Anyways, if the US courts think that ‘heir of Adam’ argument is crazy then they man they should cast into a cell is John Locke LOL

    However, I think that in applying this idea, we need to keep in mind that at least Locke used it as a starting point. He goes on to discuss his theory of labour-mixing which explains how society moved from communal ownership – ie equal claims – to individual exclusive ownership. This aspect is missing in the sons-of-soil argument with regards to proprietary interests to land and demonstrates another weakness in it. For, let’s ignore what I said earlier so that being first DOES exclude the rights of the rest of us Second-place losers – it is still incomplete as it fails to tell us of the relevant individual proprietary relationship as between the sons-of-soil. This is really problematic and faulty as a theory because by their own logic, everyone bumiputra shares the land equally. Thus they have TWO logical hurdles to overcome before they can justify their reasons LOL.

    Mind you I merely wish to point out that any such philosophical ideas are so flawed that to maintain ‘rights’ upon it is totally misguided.

    Also, even if Locke was right, this idea is still a starting point argument only, and as such cannot be used to argue in modern day Asylum (or any) cases ;)

  30. #31 by firstMalaysian on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 7:25 am

    Malaysians need to know the truth and the truth shall make us free.
    We cannot be free until the truth of our Historical heritage is revealed. Academic freedom must be restored and not dictated by deceptive politicians whose sole interest is to perpetuate lies, scandals and deception to re-write history and influence the academic mind in order to ensure the continuance and furtherance of their selfish interest.

    Those ‘powerful’ politicians owe every Malaysian the responsibility of the truth. Generation after generation of Malaysians will go to the grave being deceived and they owe us this great responsibility.

    I dread to say that all of us are living in delusions and deceptions in Malaysia because of these irresponsible people. Let us vote for God fearing politicians and not those who thought that they are so powerful that they can change history. God forbid!

  31. #32 by lakshy on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 10:24 am

    If you want to understand how the malays feel about citizenship given to the non-malays do read The Malay Dilemma, by TDM. He does go to great pains to “explain” and “justify” why the land belongs to the Malays even though they are pendatang. He equates it to what happens in America and Australia.

    By extension then, an illegal immigrant from Indonesia should have more rights than a malaysian born chinese or indian. Tough news to swallow, but we have got to accept it. Its happening already. That will explain why so many of them get blue IC’s fairly easily, while many of the chinese and indians have their applications pending for 30 odd years. What about the Khir Toyo’s and Sanusi Junids? What about the Mahathir Mohammads who are not true bumiputras as per their own definition of bumi because they have indian blood, but manage to benefit from bumi policies?0

    If you want to read more about how politicians misuse religion and misguide the malays, read Malaysia and the Club of Doom by Syed Akbar Ali.

    With regards to our history books, many of us would have read differing versions of the same events as we are from different generations. So those in their 60’s, 50’s, 40’s, 30’s, 20’s and teens will all have different understanding of our history. I wonder what this will achieve? Unity? or confusion?

  32. #33 by hanuman on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 1:21 pm

    Facts for thought.

    Iswara as in Proton Iswara has an Sanskrit origin which means lord, master. It is the Hinduism philosophical concept of God – Supreme Being (lord and ruler of all things). Hinduism uses the term Ishvara exclusively to refer to the Supreme God in a monotheistic sense.

    “… Ã…Å¡iva in the official IAST transliteration, pronounced as /É•iÊ‹É™/) is Ishvara or God according to Vedic scriptures of Hinduism.”

    Sources : Wikipedia

  33. #34 by bhuvan.govindasamy on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 1:29 pm

    What the malay does not realize is that continued practice of preferential treatment undermines their own capabilities and credibility. It lowers their own standing, in the eyes of the non-malay.


  34. #35 by dawsheng on Saturday, 31 March 2007 - 9:35 pm

    Students must be encourage to learn history but history lesson in Malaysia should not be telling different story, how can we be different from the rest of the world? Why 14th century? Make no sense, is rubbish! what is there to hide about history? what is this? Trying to change the course of history? For What? Because you are so special? How special can you be? Can you like fly? Superman?

  35. #36 by lakshy on Sunday, 1 April 2007 - 11:29 am

    Besides Iswara, other names such as Wira, Perdana, Satria all have roots in Indian Languages. Better have them all renamed too.

    Also better erase TDM’s ancestry to eliminate any reference to Indian genes.

  36. #37 by shasthraa on Sunday, 1 April 2007 - 2:21 pm

    I am so glad someone spoke about this…my first time on this site. I too read all that information in (past!!) histroty books and my grandfather, uncle and I used to talk about this about the country’s “true history” 20 years back. In fact the points made on cendul and rojak were made by them even then…It’s been a long time since I read something that they had spoken about so long ago, from the origins of the word “Malai-ur” to the history of Majapahit. Thanks!

  37. #38 by undergrad2 on Monday, 2 April 2007 - 2:33 am

    “…Malai-ur” to the history of Majapahit. Thanks!

    Yes, but Malai-keuy means Malay monkeys. What has that got to do with history?

  38. #39 by inaki on Friday, 11 May 2007 - 8:35 am

    Hmmm, duduk dekat tanah melayu lagi nak pertikai asal usul melayu, bangsat punya apek tua tak sedar diri. Sepatutnya kalau nak pertikai asal usul, ceritalah asal usul bangsa cina dgn india…. datang tanah melayu nak rampas semua hak land owner, macam bangsa penjajah. Dulu merempat, org melayu bagi tempat, dah dapat tempat nak kurang ajar pulak.

You must be logged in to post a comment.