A transition from glorious Hindu Malay Kingdoms to crumbling Hindu temples:
The past and present of Hinduism in Malaysia.
Part I of II
“Emotions can often so easily cloud judgement and deprive even the highest intellect of his rationale. But emotion makes us human, and we can never wholly separate emotion from our thoughts…
The demolishment of numerous Hindu temples in Malaysia has provoked both emotion and thought, and it is a struggle to approach this issue with rationale. I attempt this arduous task in hope to explore the various perspectives of the people involved in this issue, whilst trying to maintain an unbiased opinion on the matter, with a view of the historical roots of Hinduism in Malaysia.
The origin of Hinduism itself in Malaysia (or rather Malaya) is deep stemmed in our rich history, but like many other things in the past, the exact details remain elusive to us due to missing links in historical evidence of civilizations in the Malay peninsula, between the pre-historic periods and the Malacca Sultanate. Numerous texts attempt to fill in these missing pieces, but have failed to provide reliable citations which make this task not only difficult, but lacking credibility.
Nevertheless, The Malay Annals (Sejarah Melayu), Kedah Annals (Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa), Chinese chronicles and King Rajendren Chola’s historical writings have all described ancient Hindu Malay kingdoms that predate the Malacca Sultanate.
Gangga Negara (meaning ‘a city on the Ganges’ in Sanskrit) is an example of one of the Hindu Malay kingdoms that was described in the Malay Annals (believed to be first compiled by Tun Seri Lanang, the bendahara of the Royal Court of Johor in 1612). It was believed to be founded by Hindu traders in the 2nd century originating from Ganganagar. The Gangga Negara period also coincided with Langkasuka (another another Hindu Malay kingdom that had also adapted elements of Buddhism) and the Kedah Sultanate (where Sultan Mudzafar Shah is believed to be the first Islam convert in the Malay Peninsula). However, these civilizations were severely weakened or collapsed after a series of attacks by King Rajendra Chola I (a king from the great Cholan dynasty).
Here I believe that is worthy of note to mention that Kedah, was formerly known as Kadaram was founded too by a Hindu king, known as Merong Mahawangsa. The influence of Hindu-Buddhism in ancient Kedah is undeniable as numerous archielogical evidence (e.g. inscriptions from the Cholan Empire some dating as early as 1030 A.D.) have been recovered and extensively researched by Col. Low and Dr. Quaritch Wales. For the more enthusiastic historians, further evidence of Hindu Malay kingdoms in ancient Malaya can be found in a number of museums in Malaysia, such as the Beruas Museum and the Bujang Valley Archaeological Museum which displays artefacts recovered from ancient Hindu-Buddhist Malay kingdoms, some believed to be as early as 300 A.D.
It was following this period that kingdoms such as Srivijaya and Majapahit (both Hindu-Buddhist Malay kingdoms) rose to power in Southeast Asia, in the Malay Archipelago. Srivijaya, like the Hindu Malay kingdoms that preceded it suffered a similar fate as Srivijaya was subjected to a series of raids of King Rajendra Chola which although ultimately unsuccessful, left the kingdom severely weakened and eventually became a part of the Majapahit empire. It was shortly after this when Parameswara, a Hindu Srivijayan prince who was a descendent of Raden Vijaya (the first king of the Majapahit empire), founded the Malacca Sultanate in Malaya.
Parameswara later converted into Islam and assumed the title Sultan Iskandar Shah which sparked a remarkable turnaround in the fate of Hinduism in Southeast Asia. Upon his conversion, he encouraged his followers to also convert into Islam. However, it was under Sultan Mansur Shah that the Malacca Sultanate prospered as the centre of Islam in Southeast Asia. Using marriage alliances, he managed to convert the rulers of his conquered state into Islam and strengthen ties. He invited holy man (imams and ustazes) to discuss religion and often sent missionaries to spread Islam to Java, Borneo and the Philippines, at a time when most of Southeast Asia was predominantly Hindu. Whilst Hindus never proselytized, Islam swept over Southeast Asia by various means of active conversion (a topic which largely remains controversial till today in both scholarly and public opinion). Nevertheless Islam managed to grab a stronghold in Malaya, under which the influence of Hinduism in Southeast Asia gradually weaned.
The resurgence of Hinduism in Malaya began with the immigration of Indians (who were predominantly Tamil Hindus) as coolies under the British rule in the early 1900’s. The majority of the Malaysian Indians today can trace their ancestry to these immigrant families, and as dictated by evolutionary changes in the structures of our society, exists as the brand of Malaysian Indians that we recognize today.
N.B I remind readers that since the majority of Hindus in Malaysia are Malaysian Indians, and vice versa, from hereon I use these two terms interchangeably (and perhaps even wrongly so). Therefore I advice readers to explore the context in which these terms are used carefully to prevent any misunderstanding.
The second coming of Hinduism following the influx of Indians in Malaya never reached the heights achieved by the ancient Hindu Malay kingdoms, but was nevertheless significant.
Under the cleverly employed divide et impera (divide and rule), the British managed to isolate the various ethnic groups in Malaya to prevent any form of uprising, a similar tactic which was successfully employed in India (although the implementations itself were hugely dissimilar). Simply put the majority of immigrant Indians were employed as estate workers and therefore geographically concentrated in estates. Needless to say, that there were various factors which ensured this geographic distribution persisted, such as lack of social mobility and poor transportation system. However, this could only be achieved as long as the Indians were satisfied – meaning their needs including their religious ones were adequately addressed. Thus, many Hindu temples were constructed to meet the religious demands of the local Hindu population.
(to be continued)
