MIGRATION AND RELIGIOUS BELIEFS IN SOUTH EAST ASIA

MIGRATION INTO THE MALAYAN PENINSULA – A PROFESSOR OUTLINES the DEVOLUTION OF TRIBES FROM THE YUNNAN AREA

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.

Of course, we also have the Minangkabau's which come from the descendants of Alexander the Great and a West Indian Princess.

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.

"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.

"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.

The Bugis are the cross-breed between the Mongolian Chinese and the marauding Arab Pirates. 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?

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.

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 pursuing 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. 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.

Strangely 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 its’ 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 across 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 gallantly 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 Lordship over, shall we?

The other, "Kingdoms of the Indonesian Archipelago, and the Malay Peninsular" 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?

The "Sejarah Melayu" 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.

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”.

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 till 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.

Moreover, 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 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?

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)

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.

SIR ANANDA K. COOMARASWAMY - SRI LANKA's PHILOSOPHER AND SCHOLAR

The Primordial Tradition: A Tribute to Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy

by Ranjit Fernando


Read by Manik Sandrasagra at the 112th birth Anniversary Commemorative Meeting of Ananda Coomaraswamy sponsored by the Cultural Survival Trust in association with the Taj Samudra, Colombo on Sunday lOth August 1989.

Ananda Coomaraswamy once suggested that Buddhism has been so much admired in the West mainly for what it is not; and he said of Hinduism, that although it had been examined by European scholars for more than a century, a faithful account of it might well be given in the form of a categorical denial of most of the statements that have been made about it, alike by European scholars and by Indians trained in modern modes of thought.

In the same way, it could perhaps be said of Coomaraswamy himself, that he is admired in Lanka, as in India, almost entirely for what he was not, and that a true account of his ideas might well take the form of a denial of most of the statements made about him in the land of his birth.

Coomaraswamy has long been presented, both in India and in Lanka, as a patriot, a famous indologist and art historian, an eminent scholar and orientalist; it would be as well to examine the validity of these widely-held beliefs about a man who was undoubtedly one of the greatest figures of our time.

The subject matter of all Coomaraswamy's mature writings can be placed under one heading, namely, Tradition. The Tradition that he writes about has little to do with the current usage of this term to mean customs or social patterns that have prevailed for some time. Coomaraswamy's theme is the unchanging Primordial and Universal Tradition which, as he shows, was the source from which all the true religions of the present as well as the past came forth, and likewise the forms of all those societies which were molded by religion.

The particular aspect of Tradition which Coomaraswamy chose as his own specialty -- the one best suited to his own talents -- was, of course, the traditional view of art, now mainly associated with the East, but once universally accepted by East and West alike, as also by the civilizations of antiquity and, indeed, by those societies which we are pleased to call primitive. Coomaraswamy never tired of demonstrating that the traditional view of life and of art was always the universal and normal view until the Greeks of the so-called classical period first introduced a view of life and of art fundamentally at variance with the hitherto accepted view.

In his aversion to what has been called 'the Greek miracle', Coomaraswamy is at one with Plato whose attitude to the changes that were taking place in his time was, to say the least, one of the strongest disapproval. Coomaraswamy shows, as Plato did, that the view of life and of art invented and glorified by the Greeks, and subsequently adopted by the Romans was, in the context of the long history of mankind, an abnormal view, an aberration; and that although this view lost its hold on men's minds with the rise of Christendom in the Middle Ages, it was to re-establish itself with greater force at the Renaissance thus becoming responsible for the fundamental ills of the modem world.

In all traditional societies, quite apart from his ability to reason, man was always considered capable of going further and achieving direct, intuitive knowledge of absolute truth which, as the traditionalist writer, Gal Baton says, "carries with it an immediate certainty provided by no other kind of knowledge."

"In the modem world," he continues, "we think in terms of "intellectual progress", by which we mean a progress in the ideas which men formulate with regard to the nature of things; but, from the point of view of traditional knowledge, there can be no progress, except in so far as particular individuals advance from ignorance to reflected or rational know ledge, and from reason to direct intuitive knowledge which, we might add, by its nature cannot be defined, but which, nevertheless stands over and above all other forms of knowledge being nothing less than knowledge itself.

From a traditional point of view, the fault of the Greeks lay in their substitution of the rational faculty for the supra-rational as the highest faculty of man, and in the words of Coomaraswamy's distinguished colleague, Rene Guenon, "it almost seems as if the Greeks, at a moment when they were about to disappear from history, wished to avenge themselves for their incomprehension by imposing on a whole section of mankind the limitations of their own mental horizon." Since the Renaissance, as Baton points out, the modem world has, of course, gone much further than did the Greeks in the denial even of the possibility of a real knowledge which transcends the narrow limits of the individual mentality." Moreover, as we are all aware, that which, from a traditional point of view, appears to be a serious narrowing of horizons, is seen from our modem point of view as an unprecedented intellectual breakthrough!

While it is hardly possible in a brief summary, such as this, to further discuss the issues involved, we might usefully ponder on Plato's story of the subterranean cave where some men have been confined since childhood. These men are familiar only with the shadows cast by a fire upon the dark walls of the cave, which they have all the time to study, and about which they are most knowledgeable. They know nothing of the outside world and therefore do not believe in its existence.

Coomaraswamy, like Plato, would have us realize that we, too, are in darkness like these men, and that we would do well to seek the light of another world above by concerning ourselves with those things, which our ancestors knew and understood so well. He constantly points out, that modem or anti-traditional societies are shaped by the ideas men develop by their own powers of reasoning, there finally being as many sets of ideas as there are men; he also tries to show that traditional societies, on the other hand, were based on perennial ideas of quite another order -ideas of divine origin and revealed -- whereby all the aspects of a society were determined.

A recurrent theme in Coomaraswamy's writings was the traditional view of art. When referring to European art, he repeatedly stressed that Graeco-Roman art and Renaissance art, like all the more modern schools of European art, were of earthly inspiration and therefore of human origin like the philosophies that went with them, whereas traditional art, like traditional philosophy, was related to the metaphysical order and therefore religious in character and divine in origin.

We now see that in his earliest works such as the monumental Medieval Sinhalese Art, Coomaraswamy did not as yet fully understand the difference between these two contrasting points of view which were to form the basis of his later and more significant work; in his early writings, his profound understanding of the traditional arts of Greater India, as indeed his already considerable grasp of the true meaning of religion, was a little clouded with modernistic prejudice, the outcome, no doubt, of his early academic training in England which was of a kind that he had, even then, begun to despise.

But later, following his association with the French metaphysician, Rene Guenon, Coomaraswamy's writings assumed the complete correctness of exposition and the great authority, which we associate with his most mature work.

Insofar as we are able to see that a universalist approach to the study of the world's religions, coupled with an understanding of the true meaning of Tradition, have, at the present time, a special importance for the modern world, we shall also see that two men, the Frenchman, Rene Guenon, and Sri Lanka's Ananda Coomaraswamy, stand out as the greatest thinkers of the first half of this century.

A great gulf separates their thought from the thought of nearly all their contemporaries. The second half of this century has witnessed the emergence of a whole school founded on their pioneering work and on the Perennial Philosophy, a movement which has found acceptance in many parts of a confused and bewildered world.

It will now be apparent that, if we are to regard Coomaraswamy as an eminent orientalist and art historian, it must first be clearly understood that he stands apart from almost all those other scholars who can be similarly described, in that while they approach the life and art of traditional societies from a modern standpoint {which is both "skeptical and evolutionary", to use his own words), Coomaraswamy, like his few true colleagues and collaborators, takes the view that takes the view that Tradition can only be understood by a careful consideration of its own point of view however inconvenient this may be.

Once this is realized, it would certainly be true, not only to say that Coomaraswamy was an eminent scholar but, as Marco Pallis has said, a prince among scholars.

Coomaraswamy saw that a feudal or hierarchical society based on metaphysical principles is essentially superior to the supposedly egalitarian systems held in such high esteem today. Like Plato, he maintained that democracy was one of the worst forms of government, nor did he view any other materialistic system with more favour.

His enthusiasm for such institutions as caste and kingship was based, not on sentiment, but on a profound understanding of the vital relationship between spiritual authority and temporal power in society and government. He would hardly have approved of the road which India and Lanka have taken since achieving their so-called independence, although he would have regarded it as inevitable.

It is well known that, from the very beginning, Coomaraswamy deplored the influence of the West on Eastern peoples, and especially the consequences of British rule in Greater India. He has therefore been placed alongside those who in India and Lanka have been regarded as national leaders in the struggle for independence.

But here again, a complete difference of approach separates Coomaraswamy from his contemporaries, for it was not imperialism or the domination of one people by another that he was concerned about, but rather the destruction of traditional societies by peoples who had abandoned sacred forms.

It was what the British stood for and not the British that he detested; on the contrary, there is no doubt that he loved England because he knew another, older England which in form as well as spirit was so much like the oriental world he understood so well.

It would, in conclusion, be appropriate to quote the words of that highly respected English artist-philosopher, Eric Gill, who in his autobiography paid Coomaraswamy this great tribute:

"There was one person, to whose influence I am deeply grateful; I mean the philosopher and theologian, Ananda Coomaraswamy. Others have written the truth about life and religion and man's work. Others have written good clear English.

Others have had the gift of witty exposition. Others have understood the metaphysics of Christianity and others have understood the metaphysics of Hinduism and Buddhism. Others have understood the true significance of erotic drawings and sculptures. Others have seen the relationships of the true and the good and the beautiful. Others have had apparently unlimited learning. Others have loved; others have been kind and generous.

But I know of no one else in whom all these gifts and all these powers have been combined. I dare not confess myself his disciple; that would only embarrass him. I can only say that I believe that no other living writer has written the truth in matters of art and life and religion and piety with such wisdom and understanding."

MELTING POT OF MANY CULTURES IN MALAYSIA

THE INDIAN INFLUENCE IN THE CULTURAL HABITS OF MALAYSIANS

To those who still live in a world not far from Nagapattinam in South India and have wives who have dropped their saries and children who have forgotten Tamil – the following information may probably be of some intelligent use.

It is tue that Islam is a large component of Malay culture - but Malay culture is a richmelting pot of many other cultures - Indian, Chinese, Thai, Javanese,Minangkabau, Portuguese, even a pagan past when we were most closest to our roots in nature.

Historians tell us much about the political greatness and fame of theHindunized Malay Empires of Sri Vijaya and Majapahit. These two empirescontrolled the destiny of the greater part of Malaysia. But how deep andwidespread was `Indian' influence in Malaysia?

To begin with, Hindu influence was synonymous with Indian trade. This trade was maritime and riverine, that is, confined to the coastal andriverine areas of Malaysia. The centres of Indian trade were places such as Pasai, Indragiri, Melayu and Jambi in Sumatra; Malacca; Kuala Muda inKedah; and Surabaya in Java. The bulk of the people living inland ofthese areas remained untouched by the religious by the religious, economic and political influence of India.

The Jakuns, Semangs and Sakais of the Peninsular Malaysia, most of the original inhabitants of the Borneo territories, of the Celebes, of Sumatra and the other bigger islands of the Malay Archipelago were never converted to Hinduism. Itwas only later, when communications inland were improved, that they wereconverted to either Islam or Christianity. Smaller islands with centralzones never too far away from the coast were more thoroughly covered byIndian traders.

One such island was Bali, which has retained its Hinduheritage up to the present day, despite the later onslaughts of Islam and the West.

Then there was the next stage in the spread of Hinduism. Initially, itcame from traders from India, particularly South India. Later, thecentres of trade became powerful centres of political influence and expansion. First, there was the great Empire of Srivijaya in Sumatra, followed inthe 14th century A.D. by its conqueror and successor, the Empire of Majapahit in Java.

The political expansion of these two Empires meant also the theological expansion of Hinduism in Malaysia but even then,Hinduism did not spread to all parts of Malaysia. Sri Vijaya and Majapahit were essentially maritime powers, and their sphere ofpolitical, military and social influence was generally limited to the coastal and riverine areas.

The Hindu influence was limited more or less rigidly to the upper classof old Malay society - the royalty. Malay royalty was essentially Hindu royalty descended, according to the Malay Annals, "Sejarah Melayu", from a legendary half-Indian and half-Greek monarch, Raja Suran, whose sons all bearing Indian proper names, Sang Nila Utama, Krishna Pandita, NilaPahlawan, then descended on Bukit Siguntang in Sumatra from whence Malay royalty spread.

Malay royalty was essentially Hindu royalty because thespread of Hinduism was not the result of any organised missionarymovement. Indian merchants by virtue merely of their financial and cultural superiority drew converts from the ruling and trading classesof the races with which they traded. If Hinduism was accepted, it was because of a desire for a better standard of living rather than because of an understanding and appreciation of a superior religious system. Hinduism spread also through marriage.

The petty princes of the Malaysian coastal trading centres were glad to marry off their sons and daughters to the financially superior Indian merchants or their children. As for those who lived on the outskirts of the trading centre: as money was not the basis of their economy, there was no incentive to accepts Hinduism. Among them, the Hindu influence was to come much later and in gradual stages. It is true that the common people followed the religious faith of their rulers, for they were used in such matters to take directions from above.

But there was always an undercurrent of fear, lest they should evoke the wrath of their animistic deities. So, at best among the common people Hinduism was assimilated only with a lot of local theological "spice" retained (the same happened with the later adoption of Islam).

If such was the case, how do we explain the fact that old Malay literature is almost completely derived from Hindu epics, from the Ramayana and the Mahabaratha; and the fact that at least 30% of Malay vocabulary is made up of Sanskrit words? Does not this prove that Hindu influence was very much more intensive than I have suggested? But it is often misleading to draw evidence solely from old Malay literature to assess the relative position of Hinduism in the religious beliefs and practices of the people at large.

Old Malay literature, it must be remembered, was exclusively Court literature. This literature was made up of stories and legends of kings and princes, queens and princesses, and of people connected with royalty. As Malay royalty was basically Hindu royalty, Malay court literature had to be Hindu literature. It is plain, then, that the Hindu element in old Malay literature cannot be taken to represent the general pattern of life of the common Malay people. But the influence of India has been marked on the Malay language and also in the sphere of religion.

Today, when a Malay speaks a sentence of ten words, at least three or four of them will be Sanskrit words, three Arabic and the remaining either of English, Chinese, Persian or of some other origin. One expert has even suggested that there are only four words in the Malay vocabulary which are genuinely Malay. The are "api" or fire, "besi" or iron. "padi" or rice, and "nasi" or cooked rice.

This is rather a sweeping claim, but no one will deny that AT LEAST a third of Malay vocabulary has originated from Indian tongues. Words such as putera, puteri, asmara, samudra, belantra, kenchana,sukma, and literally thousands of other words are all Sanscrit words, either in original or in modified form.

What of the influence of India on the religious developments of theMalaysian peoples? Malay folk-lore and Malay literature show thatduring the period before the coming of Islam, about the 14th century A.D., the greater gods of the Malay pantheon were really borrowed Hindu divinities. They were, in some respect, modified by Malay ideas, but only the lesser gods and spirits were actually native to the Malay religious system.

It is true these native gods and spirits can be identified with the great powers of nature, such as the spirit of the Wind (Mambang Angin), the spirit of the Waters (Hantu Ayer) and the spirit of the Sun (Mambang Kuning). But none of them appears to have the status of the chief gods of the Hindu system. Both by land and water, the terrible Shiva and Batara Guru or Kala, are supreme. In Malay folk-lore we find Vishnu, the preserver, Brahma the creator, Batara Guru (Kala) and S'ri all invoked by Malays, especially by Malay magicians.

Of all the greater deities of the Hindu system, Batara Guru is unquestionably the greatest. In Hikayat Sang Sembah , Batara Guru appears as a supreme god with Brahma and Vishnu and some subordinate deities. It is Batara Guru who alone has the "water of life", the elixir of life, which can restore life to dead humans and animals. To the Malays of old, then, and to the Malay bomohs even of the present day in whom are preserved these notions, "tok Batara Guru" or any one of the corruptions which his name now bears, was the all-powerful god who held the place of Allah before the advent of Islam, and was a spirit sopowerful that he could restore the dead to life. All prayers were addressed to him.

Of the lesser deities of Hinduism, the most notable who have remained in Malay superstition and folklore are the "gergasi", half-human forest spirits of Hindu mythology represented in Malay folk-lore as tusked orgres that feed on human flesh. Then there is the raksaksa, a race of cannibal giants ruled, according to the Indian Puranas, by Ravana.

A tribe of raksaksa is mentioned in the Kedah annals, HIKAYAT MARONG MAHAWANGSA, which tell of a giant king, Maroung Maha Wangsa, who led a tribe of giants and founded the present state of Kedah which they called LANGKASUKA (as I had mentioned in an earlier posting, the real Langasuka was more probably in Pattani, Thailand) All in all, that a form of Hinduism was the accepted religion of the Malays prior to the advent of Islam is certain, and it is a fact amply proved by Malay folk-lore and superstition, Malay literature, Malay customs and various archaeological inscriptions.

Muslim religious teachers in Malaysia today still preach the Islamic concept of heaven in a terminology which is neither Malay nor Arabic, but Hindu. The sanskrit word "syurga" is always used in connection with the Islamic concept of paradise. The proper Arabic word for this is actually "al-jannah". In the same way, the Hindu religious term "neraka" or hell is used by Muslim Malays to explain the Islamic concept of hell. The Arabic word for hell is "al-nar: or the place of fire.

Then the Muslim fast, the annual religious abstention from food and drink, is known by the Sanskrit term "puasa". A Muslim religious teacher is oftencalled "guru, another Hindu religious term , in fact the name of a Hindu deity, Batara Guru. The Muslim prayer is among the Malays, called "sembahyang". "Sembah" in Sanskrit means to pray, and "yang" is a Sanskrit term meaning divinity or conjuring respect, as in Sang Yang Tunggal", the most divine one, and "Yang Dipertuan ".

There are many other Hindu religious terms that have lost their original meaning and are being freely and unconsciously used by Muslim Malays in connection with the religion of Islam. This shows that Hinduism exerted a profound influence on Malay culture before the coming of Islam to Malaysia.

And this influence has survived, despite the strict monotheistic restrictions of the Islamic faith, to the present day. So, in religion as well as in other aspects of Malaysian culture, we cannot treat the influence of India as something belonging to the past.

The political influence of old India which was climaxed by the great Empires of "Sri Vijaya" and "Majapahit" is today at an end, but the cultural influence of India which began at the beginning of the Christian era is still very much alive, and it will be alive for many, many centuries to come because it has become part of the life of the Nation. So what are the Indian Muslims crying out for? More 'crutches' to be given to them vis-a-vis the other races.

THE CHAMPA KINGDOM AND KELANTAN IN MALAYSIA

THE ORIGINS OF THE KELANTANESE

by Michael Chick

Posted by Dreadnought Malaysia-Today; Sunday, 26 October 2008 19:59

Following the search for the origins of the Malaysian constitutional 'malays', my journey brings me to Vietnam.

There, I meet up with the Cham people. After all, every Kelantanese I've met claim to be descendants of the Mighty Champa Kingdom.

Just who are the Cham? I met up with Dr. Hang, an Anthropologist at Saigon University, Ho Chi Minh City. According to him, the Champa Kingdom is a 2nd Century Kingdom in Central Vietnam. From 1487, they were continously driven by the Kinh (read as Mongoloid Vietnamese) from Hanoi till Phan Thiet today.

Proof of this lies in the fact that there were hundreds of Cham Towers from Hanoi till Phan Thiet (near Mui Ne Beach). If you'd observe very carefully, you might notice how similar the Cham are to the Kelantanese. The Austronesian Cham of Vietnam look extremely similar, and wear identical headgear to almost everyone in Kelantan. Both male as well as female. Not surprising. The Champa Kingdom had long established trading ties with both the present-day Malaya, Pattani, Aceh as well as Java since the 4th Century. Multiple wars also broke out between the Kingdom of Champa with Java. Migration was simply inevitable.

The Chams were Hindus. They still are today.

In fact, all the towers of the Champa Kingdom are of Hindu Origin. One may visit any Museum, from Saigon to Danang till Hanoi. They all have on display, hundreds, if not thousands of Artefacts of this mighty Ancient Hindu Kingdom. It is however, so sad to see the Chams today, getting the short-end of the stick. Since they were driven by the Kinhs (Hanoi) down south, they live in the most hostile parts of the country. Barely getting rain, the land is almost Savannah-like in nature. Large cacti live in abundance on non-cultivated land.

Visiting the Cham produced mixed feelings. On the one hand, one comes face-to-face with the remnants of a mighty empire. On the other hand, one wonders why the Vietnamese government does little to improve the living conditions of these 'bumiputras'. I proposed new theories; that the Cham were in fact the actual people of the Dong Song, Hoabinhian and Sa Hyunh Culture, much to the surprise, but delight of these Saigon Anthropologists. Previously, they only assumed that those cultures belonged to 'someone else', and that Cham History only started in the 2nd Century. Proof being the Temples and Towers.

I also highlighted that the Champa Kingdom would have been the second Kingdom of the Hindunization of South East Asia. The first, being Malaya, in the site near Penang called Lembah Bujang, of the 2nd Century. Upon further scrutiny, there seems to be a lot more than just distant historical similarities between the Cham people, and the Kelantanese. My translator informed me that there were twin towers located in Qui Nhon.

'Much like that in Malaysia'. I was dumbfounded !! I immediately made the 300km journey. In total, I travelled over 2,000 km by road, boat, and every other imaginable transport available, visiting over 30 major Cham Tower sites along the entire coast of Vietnam.

Furiously making notes, I also found that the similarities did not stop at the fact that there were just twin towers. Cross-examining schematic diagrams of the Cham Towers and KLCC was astounding! For example, the top and side view schematics, when overlayed, was an identical match.The similarities did not end there, even a side profile view of the Cham towers and KLCC was a match. I could barely contain my excitement when I made these cross-comparisons.

Even the Saigon Anthropologist Professors were dumbstruck. No one had ever imagined that there was any correlation between an apparently 'Muslim-built Design' with that of an Ancient Hindu one. Add to that, it was located in isolated Vietnam. For those who have visited these sites before, pull out your private photo boxes, and confirm for yourself that the pictures I have displayed here have not been doctored in any way.

Considering that Mahathir was of Indian Origin, it does not completely surprise one that he took inspiration from his ancestry in Kerala. However, one might think that it is strange that he took inspiration from 2 apparently incompatible religions to build his monumental icon. It is even stranger that despite using a Hindu-derived icon to symbolize Malaysia, the Hindraf are swept aside and marginalized.

Of course, it is even stranger that Najib takes the trouble to fly in from India, Hindu Priests into his home and office to perform covert rites, as per ascertained by the Driver's Sworn Affidavits.

Can seemingly incompatible religions be jointly practised? No? Read on. This might change your mind. Think for a moment of Sai Baba's concept of 'All religions lead to God' Concept. The clue lies in Vietnam. There is a Religion called CaoDai-ism. It is very widely practised.

CaoDai is a merger of Confusianism, Taosim, Buddhism, Catholism, and Islam. This is a unifying and endemic religion. So is the Cham-Bani religion, which is a merger of Hinduism & Islam. Then, there are The Balinese, practising a merger religion of Animism & Hinduism. Of course, most of Java practices Kejawen which is a combination religion of Animism & Islam.

So in reality, Najib's merger of Hinduism & Islam would be merely a copycat version of the Cham-Bani-type of religion of Vietnam. To add to it, he is Bugis, which makes him part Mongolian, part Arab. (No reference intended of his involvement with Altantuya). Hence his pale Mongoloid-type appearance! .

Surprisingly, UMNO today has turned to worshipping a Chinese God. And that God, is called the God of Money. So, the combination religion which unites worshiping Corruption and Allah, is called BN (Blatant Narcisism). Since inter-faith combination-worship is now a known Asian trait, is it not strange that UMNO was so quick to dispense with The Sky Kingdom in Terengganu? Perhaps Sky Kingdom Worshippers were not into worshipping Corruption as UMNO fervently does.

I wonder what went on in UMNO's minds. I also wonder what Hadhari actually is. (or not...)Take heart, my Hindraf friends. You now have an World Famous Icon, built by an Indian, who took direct inspiration from Hinduism.

Not just one building, but a pair of twins, financed with Malaysian Petroleum money. Be proud. This is the best Hindu Representation of Malaysia, the world has ever seen; something which even 'Semi Value' did not anticipate.

Hence, his Political Demise. (or should I have said Allaryahum Semi Value??) I can imagine him going 'Aiyo yoyoyo..' while smacking his forehead.

Michael Chick

GREEK EMPIRE OF BACTRIA WAS LOCATED IN PRESENT DAY AFGHANISTAN

THE AFHGANS WERE AT ONE TIME HINDUS OR BUDDHISTS .

It is hard to believe that the capital city of the Hellenistic Greek empire of Bactria was located in what is now Afghanistan. It is also difficult to believe that Afghans at one time were either Hindus or Buddhists -- peaceful people.

But Islam advanced from the west and with it came a wave of destruction even worse than that which had vanquished much of Christendom. While Islam allows "people of the book" to pay protection money to their Muslim masters that is not true for idolators and polytheists who must, according to the Koran, be slain one and all.

The Voice of Dharma ( a Web Site) offers a number of free online books, pamphlets and monographs on India affairs. Amongst them you will find The Story of Islamic Imperialism in India by Sita Ram Goel. It does a good job of providing a chronological history of the rape, murder, enslavement, pillage, plunder, desecration and despoliation Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists suffered at the hands of barbarous Muslim invaders.

Satyameva Jayate, an Indian site, also does a superb job of documenting the Hindu Holocaust in a somewhat more digestable format.

Francois Gautier sums it up this way, "In other parts of Asia and Europe, the conquered nations quickly opted for conversion to Islam rather than death.

But in India, because of the staunch resistance of the 4000 year old Hindu faith, the Muslim conquests were for the Hindus a pure struggle between life and death.”

Entire cities were burnt down and their populations massacred. Each successive campaign brought hundreds of thousands of victims and similar numbers were deported as slaves. Every new invader made often literally his hill of Hindu skulls.

Thus the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000, was followed by the annihilation of the entire Hindu population there; indeed, the region is still called Hindu Kush, 'Hindu slaughter'. The Bahmani sultans in central India, made it a rule to kill 100.000 Hindus a year.

In 1399, Teimur killed 100.000 Hindus IN A SINGLE DAY, and many more on other occasions.
Koenraad Elst quotes Professor K.S. Lal's "Growth of Muslim population in India", who writes that according to his calculations, the Hindu population decreased by 8O MILLION between the year 1000 and 1525. INDEED PROBABLY THE BIGGEST HOLOCAUST IN THE WHOLE WORLD HISTORY.

But the "pagans" were far too numerous to kill them all; and Hinduism too well entrenched in her people's soul, never really gave up, but quietly retreated in the hearts of the pious and was preserved by the Brahmins' amazing oral powers. Thus, realising that they would never be able to annihilate the entire Indian population and that they could not convert all the people, the Muslims rulers, particularly under the Hanifite law, allowed the pagans to become "zimmis" (protected ones) under 20 humiliating conditions, with the heavy "jizya", the toleration tax, collected from them."

You may read all of Gautier's article here.

Historian Will Durant wrote in his book The Story of Civilization:

"The Mohammadan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within."

BUDDHISM AND QUANTUM PHYSICS

By Christian Thomas Kohl on August 08,2008

What is reality?

The mindsets of the modern world provide four answers to that question and oscillate between these answers:

1. The traditional Jewish, Islamic and Christian religions speak about a creator that holds the world together. He represents the fundamental reality. If He were separated only for one moment from the world, the world would disappear immediately. The world can only exist because He is maintaining and guarding it.

This mindset is so fundamental that even many modern scientists cannot deviate from it. The laws of nature and elementary particles now supersede the role of the creator.

2. René Descartes takes into considering a second mindset, where the subject or the subjective model of thought is fundamental. Everything else is nothing but derived from it.

3. According to a third holistic mindset, the fundamental reality should consist of both, subject and object. Everything should be one. Everything should be connected with everything.

4. A fourth and very modern mindset neglects reality. We could call it instrumentalism. According to this way of thinking, our concepts do not reflect a single reality in any one way. Our concepts have nothing to do with reality but only with information.Buddhism refuses these four concepts of reality. Therefore it was confronted with the reproach of nihilism.

If you don’t believe in a creator, nor in the laws of nature, nor in a permanent object, nor in an absolute subject, nor in both, nor in none of it, in what do you believe then? What remains that you can consider a fundamental reality?

The answer is simple: it is so simple that we barely consider it being a philosophical statement: things depend on other things. For instance: a thing is dependent on its cause. There is no effect without a cause and no cause without an effect. There is no fire without a fuel, no action without an actor and vice versa. Things are dependent on other things; they are not identical with each other, nor do they break up into objective and subjective parts.

This Buddhist concept of reality is often met with disapproval and considered incomprehensible. But there are modern modes of thought with points of contact. For instance: there is a discussion in quantum physics about fundamental reality.

What is fundamental in quantum physics: particles, waves, field of force, law of nature, mindsets or information?

Quantum physics came to a result that is expressed by the key words of complementarity, interaction and entanglement. According to these concepts there are no independent but complementary quantum objects; they are at the same time waves and particles.

Quantum objects interact with others, and they are even entangled when they are separated in a far distance.

Without being observed philosophically, quantum physics has created a physical concept of reality. According to that concept the fundamental reality is an interaction of systems that interact with other systems and with their own components. This physical concept of reality does not agree upon the four approaches mentioned before. If the fundamental reality consists of dependent systems, then its basics can neither be independent and objective laws of nature nor independent subjective models of thought. The fundamental reality cannot be a mystic entity nor it can it consist of information only.

The concepts of reality in Buddhism surprisingly parallel quantum physics.

BALI - HINDUISM IN PARADISE ON EARTH

Hinduism in Bali & Indonesia

Hinduism is generally associated with India, but around the world there are several ancient Hindu communities which do not have their origins in the Indian subcontinent. Foremost amongst these are the Hindus of Bali.

Bali is a famous island of Indonesia. It is renowned for its beauty and is regularly referred to as “paradise on Earth”. It is one of the most sought after holiday destinations in the world, a reputation which stems from both its immense natural beauty and rich culture.

Unknown to most Hindus in the rest of the world, Bali is the place with the highest proportion of Hindus, even more so then Nepal. Over 93% of the Island’s 3.1 million people are Hindus. Therefore they make up a very significant community of non-Indian origin Hindus. Bali can be said to be the most Hindu place in the world, being the only place in which the government offices close daily to observe Hindu prayers. In the past, a far greater proportion of Indonesians were Hindu, a fact which is still reflected in the mainstream culture of the country. So how exactly did Hinduism reach these distant lands?

Throughout history, whenever a new people have adopted Hinduism, it didn’t mark a break with their past. Hindu sages analyzed the cultures and practices of other lands, and tried to see them in the same light as their own. For example, if a new country was discovered, and the people there worshipped in a new way never seen before in Hinduism, and worshipped unknown deities, the Hindu spirit would not be to try and make them worship in traditional Hindu ways and break away from their own way of life. The Hindu spirit is one of religious sharing and actively looking for common ground between the philosophy and customs of different people.

When this is done sincerely, it is often found that the same spiritual outlook underlies both the religion of another people and one’s own religion, albeit with different names and forms. For example, if a deity is worshipped who has functions and attributes similar to Lord Shiva, Hindus will say “Your deity is another form of Shiva, and we have no problem worshipping your deity and sharing in your festivals. You are also welcome to our festivals and to worship with us if you like.”

Gradually many new regions became Hindu through this assimilative process. Each new region developed a style of Hinduism which was unique to that region’s own culture and history. This is the reason why Hinduism contains so much diversity. This diversity is part of the richness of the traditions, and stems from the fact that Hinduism has a spirit which does not wish to impose a uniform monoculture upon its adherents.

It should be noted that although Hinduism fostered a great diversity, it also fostered a great unity. There was and is a deep underlying unity which developed in the consciousness of all the regions and peoples who came under the organic influence of Hindu civilization. In particular, there is a universal respect for the Vedas, the Mahabharata and Ramayana and the major Hindu deities.

After Hinduism spread fully through the Indian subcontinent, it also spread to several other lands. These included Thailand, Malaysia, parts of China, Cambodia, West Asia and of course Indonesia.

Indonesia is now a Muslim majority country, but retains many aspects of its Hindu past. For example, one of the country’s official symbols, the Indonesian coat of arms, is called the “Garuda Pancasila”, after the eagle Garuda who in Hinduism is the vehicle of Lord Vishnu. The Ramayana is a national epic in the country. Hinduism was the major religion of Indonesia until the 15th Century.

It is not known exactly at what period in history Indonesia became Hindu. But what is known is that the last great Hindu kingdom in the country was the Majapahit Empire (1293–1520 AD). At its peak, under a king named Hayam Wuruk, the empire covered most of the modern day geographical boundaries of Indonesia, and therefore modern day Indonesian nationalists speak highly of the empire as laying the foundations of the modern Indonesian nation state. The Majapahit Empire founded a Balinese colony in 1343. Later on, with the rise of Islam, Hinduism was forced into retreat, and there was an exodus of Hindu intellectuals, artists, priests and musicians from Java to Bali in the 15th century.

There are still Hindus in the rest of Indonesia, but not so much as in Bali. There are reports of a large number of people in the rest of Indonesia declaring themselves to be Hindu in recent years. These are individuals and families who have been nominal Muslims, but in actual religious beliefs have been closer to Hinduism.

Hindus in Bali officially call their religion “Agama Hindu Dharma”. An examination of the beliefs of Agama Hindu Dharma show it to be in accordance with mainstream Hinduism except for slight differences in names:

• A belief in one Supreme Being called 'Ida Sanghyang Widi Wasa', 'Sang Hyang Tunggal', or 'Sang Hyang Cintya'.

• A belief that all of the gods are manifestations of this Supreme Being. This belief holds that the different Deities are different aspects of the same Supreme Being. Lord Shiva is also worshipped in other forms such as "Batara Guru" and "Maharaja Dewa" (Mahadeva).

• A belief in the Trimurti, consisting of: - Brahma, the creator - Wisnu (Vishnu), the preserver - Ciwa (Shiva), the destroyer • A belief in all of the other Hindu gods and goddesses.

The sacred texts found in Agama Hindu Dharma are the Vedas. Only two of the Vedas reached Bali in the past, and they are the basis of Balinese Hinduism. Other sources of religious information include the Puranas and the Itihasas (Ramayana and Mahabharata). One thing that Hindus in other parts of the world may find very surprising about Hindus in Bali relates to their diet. The majority eat beef.

The Balinese are fierce and territorial in their love of their land. They have a custom known as Puputan, referring to a fight to the death which the Balinese Hindus undertake when they feel collectively threatened or violated.

It was last practiced when Bali was a Dutch colony, when Balinese royalty—men, women and children—marched into battle with only ceremonial daggers against heavily armed Dutch forces.

Several thousand Hindus died in these futile attacks, but they served their purpose.

Demoralized and shaken, the Dutch withdrew from Bali and allowed Balinese self-governance for the remaining years of their reign in the Dutch East Indies, thus securing religious and cultural autonomy.

In recent years Hindus in Bali have increasingly tried to build links with Hindus in the rest of the world. They have become increasingly conscious of their position as a tiny Hindu minority in the most populous Muslim country in the world. With a large number of Muslims moving to Bali to live and work, Balinese Hindus have become afraid that this last stronghold of Hinduism in Indonesia may gradually lose its status as a Hindu majority land. These fears were made worse by the terrorist attacks in Bali in 2002 and 2005 which killed over 250 people.

This article gives just a glimpse into the rich history and culture of a great branch of the Hindu people. It is hoped that such articles pave the way for a greater understanding and unity between the diverse Hindu peoples in the coming global age, in which it is imperative that all Hindus achieve a greater level of unity and coordination for the continued wellbeing of our great heritage.