Malay history: What’s missing from the textbooks


by John Doe | CPIASIA

Brunei has always been known to be one of the earliest Muslim Kingdoms in Southeast Asia. They pride themselves in this fact. All their neighbors pride themselves in this too, and of course, since it is fact, it is irrefutable. Right?

Good. Let’s quickly look at some FACTS then:

It is taught in school textbooks that Pateh Berbai, the brother of Awang Semaun and Awang Alak Betatar, discovered Brunei. Awang Alak Betatar subsequently became Brunei’s first Sultan and was known as Sultan Muhammad Shah. Awang Semaun and Awang Alak Betatar were the famous heroes in Brunei during that time.

Sultan Muhammad Shah was the first Sultan of Brunei. He ruled Brunei from 1363 to 1402. He was the first Muslim ruler of Brunei as a result of his conversion to Islam in 1363 for his marriage to a Johorean-Temasik princess. Prior to conversion to Islam, he was known as Awang Alak Betatar.

He sent a mission to China in 1371 by which his name is recorded in Ming historical record as Mo-ha-mo-sha. Sultan Muhammad Shah died in 1402. Sultan Muhammad Shah was the first Sultan of Brunei. He ruled Brunei from 1363 to 1402. He married the daughter of Iskander, a Johorean-Temasik princess introduced by Bal-Paki, her brother-in-law to be.

So far so good… Oh Really?
Read the above again very carefully !! Sultan Muhammad Shah married a Johorean-Temasik princess in 1363. Now, for all those products of Biro Tata Negara (BTN) out there, what year was Malacca formed? 1403. So, there was a Johor king already in 1363? Are you going to argue with Ketuanan Brunei on this? (By the way, he’s more Melayu than YOU!) Also for those who insist that Penang be handed over to Kedah, read the following again and again …

The Johor ruler was under the Thais. The entire Peninsular belonged to the Thais! The ‘king’ of Singapore (Temasik), whom Parameswara of the Malaccan Sultanate murdered in cold blood was in fact the brother-in-Law of the ‘King’ of Pattani, who was under Ayodthaya rule. For those who do not know, Ayodthaya is in Thailand. And that, my friend was already well established before 1363.

Next, Kota Gelanggi was also another Thai City, (yet to be publicized). And why not? Because it is a Thai Buddhist kingdom. Yes, it’s along the Johor River. All I’m allowed to say at this point is that Kota Gelanggi is REALLY along the Johor River. Expose Kota Gelanggi, and you will find its 30ft Buddha statues and its many Buddhist Temples, in all it’s glory.
So, for Penang to go back to Kedah, ALL of the peninsula needs to go back to the Thais. Sarawak needs to go back to Brunei, Brunei needs to go back to Majapahit, Sabah needs to go back to the Philippines, and Parameswara needs to go back to Palembang, leaving the Orang Asli in charge all over again. (I find it ludicrous that the Orang Asli are disqualified as ‘Bumiputera’ although they have been here since 60,000 years ago)

Next, the year 1363 is of great significance. Why? That was the year that the first Sultan of Brunei converted to Islam. And he immediately became the Ruler of Brunei? What was he before that? A fisherman? A carpenter? A farmer? What was Awang Alak Betatar in 1362? And what happened the following year when he became a Sultan? Is becoming a Muslim enough to justify becoming a Sultan? Was he the first person in Brunei to convert to Islam?

Let’s scroll back time by 100 years; the year is now 1264. A full hundred years BEFORE Awang Alak Betatar converted to Islam, and declared himself a Sultan. A trip to Bandar Seri Begawan is not complete unless one visits the Muslim graves at Rangas. Chuck your ‘pantang’ out the window if you want to enjoy this first-hand, and in real life. Amongst these tombstones is the one of a Chinese Muslim by the name of Pu Kung Chih-mu. He was buried there in 1264. He was a Muslim, buried in a Muslim grave! This is more than a hundred years earlier, before the ascension of Awang Alak Betatar as the ‘first’ Sultan of Brunei. Not only that, he is not the only Chinese Muslim there. I cross-checked against the Brunei Museum Journal of 1993, and found that this has been so well documented!! In fact, this grave had already been found since 1973. Whole communities of Chinese Muslims had already been living in Kampong Batu well before the 12th Century. It is clearly recorded in the 1973 Brunei Museum Journal, and was visited by professors from Japan and China. Pictures are on page 3, 4, 6, 8 and 12. Some are even in colour.

So, here’s another nugget for BTN un-educators. The Chinese brought Islam to this region in 1264. Wait! That’s not even correct. It was even earlier, because, this Muslim Chinese died in 1264. He had lived a full life in Brunei before he died. And before anyone even thinks of contesting this, let me draw your attention to yet another well-established fact, and let’s see how early the Chinese arrived.

According to records – as in the ‘Notes on the Malay Archipelago and Malacca Compiled from Chinese Sources’ by WP Groeneveldt in 1880 – a Chinese Islamic trader arrived in Brunei in the 10th century. His name was P’u-lu-shieh. He was both a trader and a diplomat. SQ Fatimi writing in the Sociological Research Institute in Singapore in 1963 under an article entitled ‘Islam Comes to Malaysia’, P’u-lu-shieh name is akin to Abu al-Layth.

The Brunei King at that time was named ‘Hiang-ta’. The arrival of the diplomat-trader from China was greeted with great ceremony. If this is so, Islam actually arrived in Brunei in the year of 977.

If this is the year 977, and the Sultan’s name in the year 977 is Hiang-Ta, then how can Awang Alak Betatar be the ‘first’ Sultan of Brunei in 1363? For those with very bad logic (or timeline problems), the year 977 is 406 years older than 1363. And in the year 977, the Chinese were already sending Muslim ambassadors to Brunei. The real question should be, thus, who exactly was that ‘Hiang Ta’ who ruled Brunei in the year 977? An Iban? A Kadazan or a Chinese?

It gets even better. The MOST interesting thing was that the Brunei king’s delegation to China to return the emperor’s greetings was also headed by another Muslim official by the name of P’u A-li (Abu Ali).

Based on this fact alone, Abu Ali must have held an important position in the Brunei government if he was tasked to be Brunei’s ambassador in those days. This is again, irrefutable proof that there was already a government, with a King, and some members of his royal court were Muslims. Again, this is proof that Islam had already reached Brunei before the year 977. This is 75 years into the beginning of the Soong Dynasty, and only severely retarded people will say that Abu Ali was an Arab because of his name.

And by the way, Malacca was not to have been discovered for another 400 years. Is there a prawn under the stone? You can bet your bottom dollar (because Ringgit is worthless toilet paper) that whenever John Doe writes, there is.

A number of European historians claimed that Brunei was still not a Muslim nation until the 15th century. However, the Ming Shih, Book 325, a Chinese reference book noted that the King of Brunei in 1370 was Ma-ho-mo-sa. Some say that this should be read as Mahmud Shah. In fact, local Brunei historians prefer to take this to refer to Muhammad Shah, the first Sultan of Brunei.

Robert Nicholl, a former Brunei Museum curator argued in another paper entitled ‘Notes on Some Controversial Issues in Brunei History’ in 1980 that the name Ma-ho-mo-sa could be pronounced as Maha Moksha which means ‘Great Eternity’. ‘Maha Mokhsa’ would make it a Buddhist name. Nicholl goes on to argue that even the Brunei Sultan who died in Nanjing in 1408 was not a Muslim. (History books always detail that the Sultan of Brunei went to China, but few will state that he died there),

Another historian Paul Pelliot said Ma-na-jo-kia-nai-nai was reconstituted as Maharajah Gyana (nai). But the closest title would have been Maharaja Karna. However Brunei historians have insisted that the King was Sultan Abdul Majid Hassan, who would have been the second Sultan of Brunei.

Nicholl further argued that Sultan Muhammad Shah converted to Islam as late as the 16th century and not during the 14th century as is widely known. However according to Brunei historians, Sultan Muhammad Shah converted to Islam in 1363 and that he ruled until 1402. After which time, it was Sultan Abdul Majid Hassan, who died in China who ascended the throne. That was when Sultan Ahmad reigned in Brunei beginning 1406.

And why did I bring up this detail? Simple !! Read the top all over again:

  • Sultan Muhammad Shah married a Johorean-Temasik Princess in 1363.

  • And that Kota Gelanggi and the entire peninsular Malaya belonged to the Thais. And if this is true and correct, then both the Sultan of Brunei and his wife, would have been Buddhists.

  • In fact, the entire peninsular Malaya had been Buddhist and/or Hindu ever since the second century when Lembah Bujang was built. And since this is the year 1363, all of Brunei and Borneo was also under the rule of King Hayam Wuruk, who was King of the Majapahit empire. And what religion did they have? (I’ll give you a hint… they built the Borobudor. And for those who claim that Borobudor is a mosque in disguise, please learn to recognize temple architecture.)


Borrobudor in all its splendour.

Oh, and even more important is this:

“Sultan Abdul Majid Hassan whose proper name is Zein Ul-Abidin, frequented the near distant islands, that He called ‘Solook’ (Sulu) from 1402 to 1424. Marrying the daughter (Parmursuli) of the Sulu Tomaoi (chief) Baginda” – it means he had a Filipino wife.

Also important to note, that since this is 1363, Parameswara had not yet swum across Pirate-Bay to reach Temasik yet. Hence, the need to locate the earlier kingdoms which pre-date ‘His Royal Pendatangness’.

During the reign of Wikramawardhana, the series of Ming armada naval expeditions led by Admiral Hajji Mahmud Shams (aka Zheng He), a Muslim Chinese admiral, arrived in Java for several times, spanning the period from 1405 to 1433. By 1430, Zheng He’s expeditions has established Muslim Chinese and Arab communities in northern ports of Java, and thus Islam began to gain foothold on Java’s northern coast. “Admiral Hajji Mahmud Shams (aka Zheng He) was so frustrated when he first arrived in Java, because he could not find a single halal restaurant there”, so wrote Mah Huan, his scribe, thus deciding to spread Islam to the “barbarians” as Chinese records would write.

Also interesting to note is the following:

“In late Yuan Dynasty, China became chaotic, people who lived along the coastal area of Fujian, under the leadership of Ong Sum Ping’s siblings, escaped to eastern Kalimantan — they landed at the river mouth. When they were exhausted, facing a shipping crisis, someone lost their arms. After that, the Kadazans named it as Sungai Kinabatangan — the place where the Chinese lost their arms.

Ong Sum Ping and his sister, and the Chinese people developed the area of Sungai Kinabatangan, and they increased their influences there. With the increase of his prosperity, the natives named him Raja, or King. The Chinese named him as ‘Chung Ping’ – meaning the General. We can clearly see that Ong Sum Ping controlled Eastern Kalimantan.

This is Ong Sum Ping Rd in Brunei.

(Part 2 will appear tomorrow)

Bibligraphy
Kenneth Hall, Maritime trade and state development in early Southeast Asia, citing Wang Gungwu, ‘The Nanhai trade: a study of the early history of Chinese trade in the South China Sea’, JMBRAS 31, 2 (1958): 33, citing Paul Wheatley, The Golden Khersonese, studies in the historical geography of the Malay peninsula before 1500, Kuala Lumpur, 1961, and other secondary sources;
Yoshiaki Ishizawa, ‘Chinese chronicles of C1st-5th century AD Funan’,
Yoshiaki Ishizawa, ‘Chinese chronicles of C1st-5th century AD Funan’, citing Wan Zhen, Nanzhou yuwuzhi.
Louise Levathes, When China Ruled the seas, citing the Liang Shu (History of the Liang dynasty) and (i) Paul Shao, Asiatic Influence in Precolumbian art, Ames, Iowa State Univ 1976, and (ii) David H.Kelley, ‘Nine lords of the night’, Studies in the Archaeology of Mexico and Guatemala, 16, Berkeley, Univ of California Dept of Anthropology, Oct 1972 & ‘Calendar animals and deities’, Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 16, Albuqerque, Univ of New Mexico, 1960.
Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). Encyclopædia Britannica (Eleventh ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Ongkili, James P. “Ancient Chinese Trading Links.” East Malaysia and Brunei. Ed. Wendy Hutton. Tuttle Publishing, 2001.
Saunders, Graham. A History of Brunei. London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2002.
Wright, Leigh. “Brunei: An Historical Relic.” Journal of the Hong Kong Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. Vol. 17 (1977).
“Background Note: Brunei Darussalam”. U.S. State Department. Retrieved 2008-12-16.
http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/m/v/mvp111/karin.htm, citing vol.231 of The Great Chinese Encyclopedia, compiled by court historians of the Wang emperors from 502 to 556 AD (other refs give the editor’s name as Ma Tuan-Lin);
Prof V.G.Nair, Buddhist mission visits America before Columbus,
http://www.saigon.com/~hoasen/mission.htm;
http://www.1s.com/hkmission/history/chinese.htm, citing hearsay of an 1100 page diary in the Chinese imperial archives of which only 75 pages of partial excerpts seen;
http://users.wi.net/~maracon/; http://www.ventanawild.org/news/se01/fusang.html;
Kenneth L. Feder, Frauds, Myths and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology, p113-4, citing Frost, F, 1982,
The Palos Verdes Chinese anchor mystery, Archaeology, Jan/Feb 23-27,
quoted on www.kenspy.com/Menzies/Ships.html regarding irrelevance of these anchors.
J.V.G.Mills, introduction, to Ma Huan, Ying-yai Sheng Lan; John Carswell, Blue & White, p.87; Louise Levathes, When China ruled the seas; Ma Huan, Ying-yai Sheng Lan. Inscription in Galle

  1. #1 by Godfather on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:50 am

    I’ve lost touch with the shenanigans of these UMNO elite as they relate to revisions of history to try to “prove” their ketuanan, but what happened to the furore regarding the history of Hang Tuah, Hang Jebat, Hang Lekiu and Hang Lekir ? Aren’t they all of Chinese origin with the same surname ?

  2. #2 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:52 am

    So Islam was brought by Chinese to this region and before that Buddhism/Hinduism prevailed???

    Like that – how to make History a compulsory subject?

    Of course our curriculum will be based on history text books that give the “right” version for BTN instructors to “educate”.

    But what is the “right” version ?

    Traditionally History – the story of the past- has to be reconstructed from archaeological findings eg Kota Gelanggi’s 30ft Buddha statues and its Buddhist Temples, tombstones like that of Chinese Muslim Pu Kung Chih-mu, notes and records of those who lived in historical times, research books by academic historians etc.

    But what if these point to the inconvenient truth – ie Islam was brought by Chinese to this region and before that Buddhism/Hinduism prevailed???

    Well, like what William L. Burton famously said, “If you do not like the past, change it.”

    In this case since the unpleasant truth comes or will come later, deny its validity even in the face of compelling archaeological evidence or learned research otherwise.

    At the end of the day it is what one holds the purpose of History is.

    Ideally history is to tell the story of the past with as much factual accuracy as possible. This is because for us to know who we are and have become we have to know who we were and what happened; it is also to avoid the mistakes of the past which we are destined to repeat if we know not of them.

    That’s how civilization progresses with help of History. For this purpose, no one who is intellectually honest and true to scholarly ideals will be interested in hypotheses, which no matter how brilliantly told, are basically skewed and deceptive.

    When our policy makers make History compulsory are they interested in our students knowing the historical truth, all the historical truth, nothing but the historical truth???

    Unfortunately no. They are likely more interested in raison d’é tat – the overriding concern being usually their political interests camouflaging as nation’s interest that justifies such skewing of History that might otherwise be considered reprehensible.

    So what is feared is that we will be compulsorily required to read and score ‘A’s in the kind of adulterated ‘bastardised’ History based on already debunked outdated stories or unsubstantiated conjectures that serve more the kind of political moralities that those in power want our young minds to imbibe than any semblance of the truth.

  3. #3 by Godfather on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:54 am

    Would I be surprised if the entire Kota Gelanggang site in Johor is wiped off the face of this earth by these modern day pirates ? Nope. I think Pakatan should send a delegation there to record for posterity the true historical significance of this archeological find.

  4. #4 by k1980 on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:54 am

    The point is that history can and is being manipulated to suit the ulterior motives of the people in power. Look at Japanese textbooks— the Japs today claim they did not commit atrocities in WW2

  5. #5 by Godfather on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 12:01 pm

    With these modern day pirates, they will just lie and cheat, and when caught, they will just feign ignorance and quietly eliminate 500 years of history in the textbooks. Yes, China and Japan relations have been soured partly because of Japan’s erasure of the rape of Nanjing and every year, the Chinese people publish the black and white pictures of the atrocities perpetrated by the Japanese.

    Can we now say that Chinese-Malay relations cannot never be put on an even keel until and unless these clowns rectify the deliberate “omissions” in our history textbooks ?

  6. #6 by Godfather on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 12:12 pm

    Khoo Kay Kim and Chan Chai Hock were mentioned as being on the DBP panel of history experts to vet the history textbooks. What on earth did they do ? Just do the usual Bolehland style of “glance and lulus” ?

    • #7 by cemerlang on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:18 pm

      Nothing like special treatments mah…This Prof from Malaya University , isn’t it ?

  7. #8 by wanderer on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 12:18 pm

    Mana ada Melayu?…only faked bumiputra! Now Malaysians are convinced why these pretenders of the so called malay race are so eager to change history to deceive. Facts do not lie…..

  8. #9 by yhsiew on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 12:22 pm

    After the race, religion and royal cards, now BN is trying to play the “history card”. They know full well that controlling the syllabus of the SPM history subject is a simple and effective way to indoctrinate young Malaysian minds.

  9. #10 by tak tahan on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 12:43 pm

    Japan government did admit they started the ww2 around 1993-1994 when the journal appeared in the paper.All the young japs demanded to know the truth from then on.That’s the opening that brought those compensation aunties aunties(forced raped labours)from China and Korea to Japan to claim compensation and demanded apology from japanese government.These is what recalled.

    • #11 by cemerlang on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:16 pm

      And they too want to wipe out this bitter part of their past.

  10. #12 by tak tahan on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 12:44 pm

    Typo silap.This is what i recalled.

  11. #13 by ahmad_sirhind on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 1:51 pm

    According to historian, islam came to china a thousand year before SEA, a troops was sent to China where when it reached China only a few of man survived. 1 of them was called Abu Waqas..

    • #14 by cemerlang on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:15 pm

      Jewish traders carrying their religion reached China using the old silk road and that was way before Islam came and that is why the Chinese temple bears resemblance to the Jewish temple then. Chinese mosques in China look like temples.

  12. #15 by donplaypuks on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 2:03 pm

    Here are some more little known FACTS about Brunei and East Malaysian history:

    The earliest contact between China and Borneo or Kalimantan as it has always been known to the natives, goes as far back as 600 BC.

    Chinese coins of that era have been found at the mouth of the Sarawak River. The Dayaks have vast collections of Chinese jars passed down from generation to generation. Gold and diamond mines scattered in Sarawak have all the signs of having been worked well before European times.

    The Kinabatangan River, the second longest river in Malaysia, and Mt. Kinabalu, the highest mountain in South East Asia, are both possibly derived from the word ‘China.’

    Kinabatangan literally means Chinese River and Kina Balu, Chinese Widow. Both are located in Sabah (‘Land Below The Wind’) whose capital is Kota Kinabalu or Fort (Sanskrit) Chinese Widow. Local Aborigines however ascribe ‘Kinabatangan’ to a long wooden scraper used in caves to scoop birds-nest, a centuries old export to China!!

    Strangely, the Sanskrit word for China is ‘Kina’!

    Kublai Khan sent an expedition to Borneo in 1292 AD and this is the most probable explanation for the origin of the Chinese colonies and influences along the Kinabatangan River.

    Until the 19th century Sabah and large tracts of South West Philippines as well were under the rule of the Brunei Sultans. Brunei, known to the Chinese as Po-li, Po-lo or Pu-ni, and locally as Bruni, was under the protection of China from as far back as the Sui Dynasty of 600 AD till the 13th century. But much of Brunei’s pre-history and early history still lies locked in the mists of time.

    Ming records show that in 1370 AD a Chinese envoy who arrived in Brunei received gifts on behalf of the Ming emperor with whom the King wished to re-establish relations. King Manaregarna (Maharaja Karna?) was the first to convert to Islam. He was later referred to in Ming records as Ma-ha-mo-sha or Muhammad Shah.

    In the Salasilah Raja-Raja Brunei his pre-Islamic name is stated as Awang Alak Ber Tatar. Prior to this, Brunei is described as Kaffir (gentile) and had been conquered by the Majapahit invaders from Java. But the influences before this period are likely to have been Hindu as evidenced by elements in local customs and Sanskrit words in the local languages. 400 A.D. Pallava-Grantha Sanskrit inscriptions found at Koetei in E. Borneo describe the reign of the Brahmin King Mulavarman and of his father and grandfather as Asvavarman and Kundunga (Kaundinya?) from S.India.

    What is really intriguing though is the Chinese connection to the Brunei Sultanate. The official State approved version of events is that Sultan Muhammad died heirless and was succeeded by his younger brother Sultan Ahmad who married Puteri Kinabatangan or Chinese Princess, a sister of one Ong Sum Peng. Ong had married a daughter of Sultan Muhammad.

    Ong Sum Peng is variously described as Chinese Raja, Chinese Minister, Head of a Chinese community, Envoy of the China Emperor etc. But the legend associated with Ong is that he and a group of Chinese had set sail for Borneo from China and wrested by cunning a fabled diamond from a dragon residing on top of Mount China Balu!

    Other versions of manuscripts found in the library of the School of Oriental and African Studies in London tell differing stories giving other possibilities, viz:-

    1. Ong converted to Islam, married Sultan Muhammad’s daughter and ruled as Sultan Ahmad, 2nd King of Brunei.
    2. Ong’s daughter, and not sister, Chinese Princess, married Sultan Ahmad.

    Matters are thrown into confusion with Chinese records describing the visit in 1408 of King Ma-na-je-na-ka, 2nd King of Brunei, accompanied by his 4 year old son Hsia-wang (Little King). Unfortunately 28 year old Ma-na-je-na-ka died of a sudden illness and was buried in Nanking. This King’s Mausoleum was re-discovered in modern times and visited by former Malaysian Chief Justice Tun Suffian in 1983. But, there is no record of this in Brunei.

    dpp
    we are all of 1 Race, the Human Race

  13. #16 by donplaypuks on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 2:17 pm

    For more information you can refer to ‘Papers Relating To Brunei’ by Prof Cheah Boon Kheng (Penang U) published by MBRAS (The Malaysian Branch Of The Royal Asiatic Society.”

    dpp
    we are all of 1 Race, the HUman Race

  14. #17 by dagen on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 2:23 pm

    Malay is not a race. It was created constitutionally as a recognition of a group of people who has something in common like (1) they are believers of islam; (2) they practice the malay culture; and (3) speak the malay language. Of course what amounts “malay”, “malay” language and “malay” culture in this constitutional definition are clearly circular in character. You see, an “ant” is an “ant” with legs is a definition that does not explain or clarify things very much. Lets put this in another way. Consider this question. Who is “dagen”? And consider the stupidity of this answer: “Dagen” is “dagen with a head full of hair”.

    What is malay culture? Err what is malay? He is someone who inter alia practices the malay culture. Meaningless isnt it? Nevermind this. Lets be practical and ignore legality for a moment. In practical terms, is there in existence a culture which is recognisable or identifiable as malay culture? Yes certainly, today. But what about a hundred years ago? Two hundred years ago? Three hundred years ago? Dont forget, archese, filipinos, thais, indians, arabs, etc etc came to this land in those days with their own peculiar cultures.

    Does anyone of them qualify as the malay culture? I doubt so. Perhaps a combination of those cultures eventually became recognised and adopted as representing the malay culture. The question then is: When did that happen? Surely during merdeka the malay culture has already taken a definite form. Hence the framers of the constitution did not realise or see the circularity in the definition of the word “malay” for the meaning of “malay culture” is clear and identifiable.

    But the meaning of “malay culture” will get progressily hazy the moment one cast the time further back by say another 50 yrs, 100yrs, 200yrs and so on. Then I am sure arabs muslims, indian muslims, thai muslims, filipino muslims, chinese muslims all practice their own culture.

    This issue is important for it will then determine the time when the malay culture came into existence. For that will then determine the birth of the so call “malay” race (as defined by the constitution – assuming that the constitution has retrospective effect which in ridiculous).

    Now if the malay culture came into existence only say 150yrs or 200 yrs ago then clearly, malay (bearing the meaning in the constitution) is certainly a new “race” on the land. Indians, chinese an others were already here a long time before the malays (as defined constitutionally) came into existence.

    What is the purpose of my argument? Umnoputras always maintain that malays were the first people here in this land we now call malaysia. Archenese, indians, filipinos, arabs, thais, chinese etc then (even if they were muslims) were not malays until the time when the malay culture came about and was adopted and practised by them.

    • #18 by cemerlang on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:11 pm

      If you say you believe in Allah, then you know we all come from Adam and Hawa. Whether we are kafir or not. So we all come from 1 set of parent and that is Adam and Hawa and so we are all related. Malay is Chinese. Chinese is Malay. Why are we so scared then ?

  15. #19 by sotong on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 2:24 pm

    Until our people are told the REAL history…..our country and her people will be in a terrible mess – confuse and lost their TRUE self and identity.

    I suppose the oil rich Arab countries do play a part in ” influencing ” our history.

  16. #20 by Godfather on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 2:26 pm

    Just for the information of cintanegara, the word “rambutan” was discovered by the earliest Chinese settlers in the S E Asia around 900 AD, who called it “Lan bo tan” which literally means “something without [email protected]”.

    Can you get this fact into our history books ?

  17. #21 by raven77 on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 3:31 pm

    The earliest of all Brookes were Chinese??!!??

    Putrajaya will now go even all out to wipe out Kota Gelinggi…

    I hope the PR find it fast……

    We were all Buddhists before….maybe we still are….

  18. #22 by k1980 on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 3:31 pm

    The next revamped history textbook will start with something like this—

    In the beginning umno created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of umno was hovering over the waters. And umno said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. umno saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.

  19. #23 by k1980 on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 3:35 pm

    Whatever happened to Ganga Nagara discovered near Beruas in the 1980s? Rumours were circulating that the ruins were Hindu or Buddhist in origin, predating that of the Bujang Valley in Kedah.

  20. #24 by katdog on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 4:27 pm

    Lets not even talk about history of SEA relating to chinese.

    The Malays don’t even know their own history. They only point to Melaka as an example of a Malay empire.

    They don’t know that the greatest Malay empire was Srivijaya not Melaka. And Srivijaya was centred around Palembang/Jambi (believed to be the origins of Malays) and it conquered peninsular Malaya and south Thailand. And that the Malays where Buddhist and Hindu worshippers. Many remains of Malay Buddhist/Hindu temples can still be found today in Sumatera.

    The Malays are a sub ethnic group different from the Bugis (Najib’s ancestors) who came from Sulawesi only around the 17th century.

    The UMNOputras have completely eradicated and obscured Malay history so that they (the migrant muslims like the indian muslims) can pass themselves off as Malay as well.

    • #25 by cemerlang on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 11:06 pm

      Malays come from the Malayo Polynesian who came from the Austronesian with links to Formosan language which is Taiwan and this means that Malay is Chinese sort of. Religion wise, it will be paganism first, then Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity. Knowledge is power sort of. The more you read, the more you wonder who you are really.

  21. #26 by boh-liao on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 4:51 pm

    UmnoB/BN not interested in old n past history
    UmnoB/BN want 2 create new history 4 school history textbooks
    Now d getRidofTuan Tea chap is re-writing history 4 UmnoB
    In 2020, a question in our school history textbook will be:
    Name d first FEMALE PM of 1M’sia

  22. #27 by tak tahan on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 5:20 pm

    I know i know.Siau chah boh

  23. #28 by AhPek on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 6:12 pm

    Godfather I think you are terrible.Cintanegara
    Cintanegara who is essentially BTN indoctrinated is now been properly educated about his country’s history with this revelation
    He has now been told how his country throughout the centuries has been influenced
    by the Hindus,the Bhuddists,the Thais and the Chinese but what I think most shock him is that his religion which he has always thought came to him from the Arabs is no longer true.It came to him from the Chinese.Beh tahan.
    Now you have come to him to say his rambutan is originated from the Chinese word ‘Lan bo tan’.Cintanegara might just crack up and run amok!

  24. #29 by sotong on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 6:34 pm

    The spread of Islam was peaceful in Asia until troubles in the Middle East advocating militant extremism.

    • #30 by cemerlang on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 10:55 pm

      Islam was not only peaceful but was as open as any other religion until some wise guy came along and said thou shalt do this and thou shalt do that , if not, thou shalt sin. When did Islamic extremism come about ? As far as history goes, the Middle East crisis has always been in crisis and so it is not they who started Islamic extremism.

  25. #31 by boh-liao on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 8:04 pm

    Now RidofTuan Tea is writing history: PR-led Penang bcomes 2nd or 3rd Singapore
    He wished dat our 1st PM TAR had arrested LeeKY n ordered a curfew b4 d 2 countries parted ways in 1965, then d island would still belong to Malaysia
    Ah Tea suggested we spend RM50 billion of profits fr Petronas 4 defence: “I am certain dat in 5 years, Malaysia will emerge as a great nation in Asia n maybe globally.”
    http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/ridhuan-tee-singapores-might-will-eat-us-up/
    Wooooah, such great tots fr d senior lecturer at d National Defence Univ of Malaysia

  26. #32 by tak tahan on Thursday, 20 January 2011 - 10:39 pm

    Idiot,i finally found you man.Serious stuff here man..wake up from your usual slumber attitude

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWG-FMRILaY&feature=related

  27. #33 by tak tahan on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 12:00 am

    My head is pening la.I’m counting stars in my own imagination right now.Anway i’m only a history of 30′ so i let guys tell the true..one ah history.

  28. #34 by tak tahan on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 12:03 am

    Typo silap
    should be..let you guys..tell the true.

  29. #35 by boh-liao on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 1:52 am

    Now RidofTuan Tea is writing history: PR-led Penang bcomes 2nd or 3rd Singapore
    He wished dat our 1st PM TAR had arrested LeeKY n ordered a curfew b4 d 2 countries parted ways in 1965, then d island would still belong to Malaysia

  30. #36 by tak tahan on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 2:46 am

    boh-iau,kau liau la.That one ah..i no more can digest already la.Don’t play play la you all.Nanti gua punya story from grandfather and the grandfather’s story, man.. you know?True one!i mean true one!Betul betul punya sejarah la..Jangan la kelentong lagi makin pusing kepala gua..Besok MC yo!!Tolong seroius di akta tattertib Internation punya standard tapi bukan blolehland punya class o.k.The real truth but not the falsified truth.

  31. #37 by Taxidriver on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 2:53 am

    Lau Lee had the wisdom and foresight to take Singapore out of Malaysia. Singapore would have been the poorest state if it had not parted ways with Malaysia. Singaporeans are very fortunate people. Malaysians leaders like Mahathir are envious and jealous of its success.

  32. #38 by tak tahan on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 3:12 am

    A confession to make before i slept it over.My dad knows much better than me as a wise experienced buddy even he doesn’t use cyber war or internet.He will always blame mamak tetek and aau ban(actrocity) government,i did not bother to ask him when i first heard it.Now i clearly see the real life.

  33. #39 by undertaker888 on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 8:35 am

    our history was putar belit by umno and its scholar prostitutes. anyway this is the real history.

    in the beginning there was maha mamak. Maha said let’s create those rambutan tree huggers in our likeness so that they will always worship us. So umno baru was created. maha mamak saw that it was good. Then maha said to them, make this land ketuanan and multiply yourself to 40 million.

    The multiple effect machinery was immediately turnon full steam. Ali son of ahmad son of zul son of Ibrahim son of mat son of rempit and so on. But maha eyes were full of lust when he saw the wealth and beauty of the land flowing with oil and natural resources…..to be continued by anyone

  34. #40 by lkt-56 on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 10:31 am

    Interesting history lesson and comments indeed! Our official historians if they are TRUE SCHOLARS should take the pain to investigate these facts/claims before writing the history for our students to learn as a compulsory subject. If they do not (investigate and present the facts as they are) then they will carry to their graves the heavy burden of having lied to an entire generation. DO NOT SELL YOUR SOULS to earn a living.

  35. #41 by k1980 on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 11:27 am

    Are the above facts stated in Bruneian school textbooks? Or have they been erased from human memeory, such as that Yap Ah Loy of KL?

  36. #42 by boh-liao on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 1:49 pm

  37. #43 by boh-liao on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 1:55 pm

    AhTea wants d nation 2 spend big $$$ 2 buy planes without engines n submarines dat can float but not sink in order 2 bcome a great nation

  38. #44 by tak tahan on Friday, 21 January 2011 - 3:31 pm

    What war are Ah tee suggesting?Kamikaze or something like jihad.Holy cow!Retarded Pok Su Tee!!With you and perkosa side by side occasionally blasting aloud with your trumpet in preparation to go on war at no particular reason,foreign investor will never think for a second to pour in money into your big stupid mouth.Go and take first flight plane with your bunch of jihadist to afghanistan to go to hell,please…That’s the easy way out for you instead of wasting your time here..mata sepet.you will never be grouped in the same rank with them..cause of your origin had been tainted with pig..too bak kuteh running in your blood according to them.Asalam mulaikom Ah Tee?Are you there..la ila ha ilal la… masha..allah..kau ni .Ya allah ya tuhan ku.Sembayang la kau sebelum anda disembayangkan.Jangan asyik main batu api aja sedangkan kau menganggap diri sebagai ustaz yang beriman tetapi sebenarnya kau adalah makluk yang terhina.Maaf ya tapi ini semua pertuturan adalah bekaitan dengan facts.Budak semua pun tahu.

  39. #45 by remorer on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 - 10:56 am

    Melayu adalah bangsa
    Cina juga adalah bangsa

    ISLAM DAN BUDDHA adalah agama.

    Nampak perbezaannya atau tidak?

    Sejarah berkenaan Bangsa dan Agama tidak perlu di Campur aduk.

    SELAT MELAKA adalah bukti Kerajaan MELAKA adalah kerajaan yang HEBAT ketika dahulu.

    Bangsa Melayu menerima AGAMA ISLAM secara Meluas setelah menilai kebenaran AGAMA ISLAM.

    Terima Kasih..

    Allah Maha Besar

You must be logged in to post a comment.