Gunungan

Gunungan adalah wayang berbentuk gambar gunung beserta isinya. Di bawahnya terdapat gambar pintu gerbang yang dijaga oleh dua raksasa yang memegang pedang dan perisai. Itu melambangkan pintu gerbang istana , dan pada waktu dimainkan gunungan dipergunakan sebagai istana. Di sebelah atas gunung terdapat pohon kayu yang dibelit oleh seekor ular naga.

Dalam gunungan tersebut terdapat juga gambar berbagai binatang hutan. Gambar secara keseluruhan menggambarkan keadaan di dalam hutan belantara. Gunungan melambangkan keadaan dunia beserta isinya. Sebelum wayang dimainkan, Gunungan ditancapkan di tengah-tengah layar, condong sedikit ke kanan yang berarti bahwa lakon wayang belum dimulai, bagaikan dunia yang belum beriwayat. Setelah dimainkan, Gunungan dicabut, dijajarkan di sebelah kanan.

Gunungan dipakai juga sebagai tanda akan bergantinya lakon/tahapan cerita. Untuk itu gunungan ditancapkan di tengah-tengah condong ke kiri. Selain itu Gunungan digunakan juga untuk melambangkan api atau angin. Dalam hal ini Gunungan dibalik, di sebaliknya hanya terdapat cat merah-merah, dan warna inilah yang melambangkan api.

Gunungan juga dipergunakan untuk melambangkan hutan rimba, dan dimainkan pada waktu adegan rampogan, tentara yang siap siaga dengan bermacam senjata. Dalam hal ini Gunungan bisa berperan sebagai tanah, hutan rimba, jalanan dan sebagainya, yakni mengikuti dialog dari dalang. Setelah lakon selesai, Gunungan ditancapkan lagi di tengah-tengah layar, melambangkan bahwa cerita sudah tamat.

Gunungan ada dua macam, yaitu Gunungan Gapuran dan Gunungan Blumbangan. Gunungan Blumbangan digubah oleh Sunan Kalijaga dalam zaman Kerajaan Demak. Kemudian pada zaman Kartasura digubah lagi dengan adanya Gunungan Gapuran. Gunungan dalam istilah pewayangan disebut Kayon. Kayon berasal dari kata Kayun. Gunungan mengandung ajaran filsafat yang tinggi, yaitu ajaran mengenai kebijaksanaan. Semua itu mengandung makna bahwa lakon dalam wayang berisikan pelajaran yang tinggi nilainya. Hal ini berarti bahwa pertunjukan wayang juga berisi pertunjukan wayang juga berisi ajaran filsafat yang tinggi.

Sumber: http://id.wikipedia.org

Runtuhnya Benteng Peradaban

Oleh Lusiana Indriasari

Indonesia memiliki sejumlah benteng yang menjadi saksi perjalanan sejarah bangsa ini sejak sebelum abad ke-16 hingga masa Perang Dunia II. Meski masih ada yang berdiri utuh, sebagian besar benteng-benteng tersebut kini tinggal reruntuhan.

"Selamat datang di benteng terbesar di dunia." Spanduk besar itu terpampang di gerbang masuk Benteng Keraton Wolio yang berlokasi di atas tebing Kota Bau-Bau, Pulau Buton, Provinsi Sulawesi Tenggara. Benteng seluas 22,4 hektar dengan panjang keliling 2.740 meter ini merupakan ikon pariwisata Kota Bau-bau.

Bagi masyarakat sekitar, Benteng Wolio bukan sekadar sisa sejarah, tetapi juga mendatangkan potensi ekonomi. Ketika kesadaran wisata di dalam negeri mulai terdongkrak, benteng yang dibangun tahun 1578-1615 pada masa Kesultanan Buton ini menjadi salah satu tujuan wisata favorit di Sultra, terutama di wilayah Kepulauan Buton, setelah Wakatobi.

”Banyak turis lokal dan asing mampir ke Pulau Buton untuk melihat Wolio sebelum terbang lagi ke Wakatobi,” kata Ali Arham, Kepala Bidang Nilai Budaya dan Pariwisata Kota Bau- Bau. Dengan pesawat kecil, penerbangan dari Buton ke Wakatobi memakan waktu 15 menit.

Potensi ekonomi itu setidaknya dirasakan Burhanudin, warga di sekitar benteng yang menjadi tukang ojek. Dalam sehari, ia bisa mendapat uang Rp 50.000 untuk mengantar tamu yang ingin menjelajah wilayah di dalam benteng. Bulan April lalu, kegiatan Arung Sejarah Bahari yang diadakan Direktorat Geografi dan Sejarah Kementerian Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata mengerahkan 150 mahasiswa untuk berkunjung ke Benteng Wolio.

Di dalam tembok Benteng Wolio terdapat 624 rumah yang masih mempertahankan gaya arsitektur khas Kerajaan Buton. Pada masa lalu, benteng yang konstruksinya terbuat dari batu karang ini dihuni oleh sultan, pejabat, serta para pegawai kesultanan. Sayangnya, sebagian pemilik rumah kini mulai menggantikan rumah kayu mereka dengan rumah tembok.

Benteng Keraton Wolio merupakan satu dari 100 benteng peninggalan Kerajaan Buton. Dibandingkan benteng lainnya, seperti Benteng Sorawolio, benteng besar ini relatif masih utuh sehingga masih bisa ”dijual” untuk wisatawan.

Terabaikan

Benteng Wolio merupakan benteng yang dibangun pada masa Kesultanan Buton. Benteng ini dibangun oleh para sultan di Buton dengan mengerahkan warga sekitar. Pusat Dokumentasi Arsitektur (PDA) memasukkan benteng yang dibangun oleh komunitas di nusantara itu dalam kategori benteng Nusantara.

Martinus Setyo, salah satu surveyor PDA, mengatakan, benteng Nusantara paling banyak terdapat di Indonesia. Namun, kondisinya sudah banyak yang hancur sehingga tidak dikenali lagi.

Selain benteng Nusantara, di penjuru tanah air juga berserakan benteng-benteng kolonial yang dibangun pada masa kolonialisme negara-negara barat di Indonesia dan benteng peninggalan masa Perang Dunia II.

Data survei PDA menemukan 442 benteng di seluruh Indonesia. Dari jumlah tadi, 351 benteng memiliki informasi sejarah, sedangkan 91 benteng lain sama sekali tidak diketahui informasi sejarahnya.

”Dari situ sebenarnya benteng memiliki potensi untuk dikembangkan menjadi tempat wisata sejarah,” kata Nadya Purwesti, Direktur Eksekutif Pusat Dokumentasi Arsitektur yang berkantor di Jakarta.

Persoalannya, sebagian besar benteng yang bisa menjadi sumber ilmu pengetahuan budaya dan sejarah ini dalam kondisi rusak. Kerusakan disebabkan kurangnya kepedulian pemerintah untuk melindungi dan merawat benteng-benteng tersebut.

Menurut Martinus, belum semua benteng masuk dalam daftar benda cagar budaya yang dilindungi pemerintah. Akibatnya, banyak tangan-tangan manusia yang sengaja merusak bagian-bagian benteng untuk kepentingan pribadi. Kerusakan semacam ini, katanya, paling banyak ditemui pada benteng-benteng di wilayah Indonesia bagian timur.

Di Maluku, misalnya, Benteng Dodinga yang berada di tengah permukiman warga diambil materialnya untuk pengerasan jalan atau memperbaiki rumah warga. Benteng Dodinga yang didirikan pada abad-17 ini pada masa lalu merupakan pos militer penting untuk mengontrol jalur perdagangan rempah- rempah Halmahera Timur ke Ternate. Masih di Maluku juga, warga bahkan menggunakan sisa-sisa benteng lain yang tinggal tapak fondasi untuk mendirikan rumah.

Nasib benteng peninggalan kolonial sama saja. Bekas-bekas persenjataan yang masih terdapat di benteng, seperti meriam, diambil warga setempat. Meriam tersebut dijual kiloan untuk dilebur menjadi bijih besi dan baja.

”Bahkan ada penduduk yang mata pencariannya khusus mengambil meriam, kendaraan sisa perang, dan material besi lain dari benteng,” kata Martinus.

Pemerintah daerah sebenarnya memiliki keinginan memanfaatkan benteng untuk menarik pengunjung datang ke daerah mereka. Keinginan itu diwujudkan dengan memperbaiki benteng-benteng yang rusak. Namun, pada saat memperbaiki, pemerintah setempat tidak memerhatikan kaidah rekonstruksi benda cagar budaya dengan benar.

Sebagian Benteng Wolio, misalnya, dindingnya runtuh karena metode perbaikan yang dilakukan tidak benar. Padahal, selama ini warga setempat menjadikan Benteng Wolio sebagai tempat berkumpul dan bercengkerama. Dengan demikian, sampai kini, benteng tetap menjadi bagian dari peradaban mereka.

Sumber: http://travel.kompas.com

Sastra untuk Kebangkitan Peradaban

Oleh A. Mujib El Shirazy

Mungkinkah sastra memiliki kemampuan dalam membentuk peradaban Islam yang penuh cinta? Tema ini oleh kalangan tertentu dianggap sebagai simplifikasi persoalan dan terkesan mengada-ada lantaran bagi kalangan tertentu, sastra tidak ada kaitannya dengan peradaban, apalagi masalah keislaman. Bagi kalangan ini, sastra seharusnya disunyikan dari kepentingan apapun, termasuk kepentingan peradaban. Cukuplah sastra untuk sastra.

Padahal antara sastra, peradaban, dan Islam memiliki kaitan cukup erat. Sastra dalam Bahasa Arab disebut pula dengan istilah adab yang artinya sopan, penuh dengan keindahan. Manusia yang beradab artinya manusia yang menampilkan cara hidup yang indah, hidup dengan keluhuran budi pekerti. Sebaliknya, manusia yang tidak beradab adalah manusia jauh dari cara-cara hidup yang indah, manusia bengis, yang diliputi kebencian. Peradaban sendiri bisa diartikan sebagai pandangan hidup, aktivitas, dan buah karya manusia yang di dalamnya mengandung nilai-nilai keindahan.

Islam menyebutkan bahwa misi utama diutusnya Rasulullah SAW di muka bumi ini adalah untuk menjadikan manusia beradab. Sementara, Alquran sebagai kitab panduan hidup umat muslim merupakan kitab suci yang mengandung kedahsyatan sastra menakjubkan. Alquran diturunkan dengan bahasa yang mengandung nilai sastra tinggi, yang membuat pujangga jahiliyah takjub terheran-heran. Kandungan sastranya menjadi legenda yang tidak bisa diungguli oleh sastrawan manapun hingga saat ini. Dari sini saja, bisa dilihat begitu terang hubungan antara sastra, peradaban, dan Islam. Ketiganya bermuara pada titik yang sama, yaitu keindahan.

Sebagai agama yang peduli pada keindahan, Islam menghendaki dakwah dengan cara-cara indah. Seorang ulama, selain dituntut hidup dengan keindahan budi pekerti, juga dituntut mampu mendakwahkan kebenaran agama dengan kata-kata yang menawan jiwa. Di sinilah sastra memiliki peran tak terpisahkan dalam Islam. Maka tidak perlu heran, bila kemudian dalam rentan sejarah peradaban Islam banyak sekali ulama besar yang juga sastrawan.

Pada masa Rasulullah ada kisah waktu itu Nabi SAW meminta Hasan ibn Tsabit, sahabat yang terkenal piawai mengarang puisi, untuk membuat puisi-puisi sebagai balasan atas orang-orang kafir yang menjelekkan orang Islam (Fethullah Gullen, 2011)

Penyemangat Perjuangan

Sahabat Ali Ra, salah satu khulafaurrasyidin, dikenal sebagai sahabat yang memiliki kepiawaiaan meramu kata dalam tiap pidatonya yang memikat jiwa. Pidato-pidato yang kini dapat kita nikmati bersama dalam buku sastra mengagumkan, Nahjul Balaghah.

Imam Syafi’i, yang hidup sesudahnya, salah satu dari empat imam mazhab fikih, penggagas ilmu ushul fikih, ternyata juga adalah seorang sastrawan yang terkenal piawai merangkai kata. Beliau meninggalkan banyak sekali petuah kehidupan yang tersusun dalam kalimat puitis yang abadi hingga saat ini. Tidak berlebihan, jika Dr Muhammad Ibrahim Al Fayyumi, dalam bukunya menjuluki Imam Syafi’i sebagai pelopor fikih dan sastra (Fayyumi, 2009).

Pada era dinasti Ayyubiah, Perang Salib III menjadi saksi bisu lahirnya Al-Barjanji, kitab sastra yang berisi Sirah Nabi. Waktu itu, di bawah komando Salahuddin al-Ayyubi, kitab karya Syaikh Ja’far al Barzanji ini sanggup menggerakkan pasukan muslim untuk membebaskan Baitul Maqdis. Begitu pula di Indonesia, sekitar 1880-an, lahir karya Hikayat Prang Sabi karya ulama Aceh, Teuku Cik Panti Kulu yang menjadi obor penyemangat perjuangan rakyat Aceh dalam mengusir kolonial Belanda.

Masih banyak ulama sastrawan yang tidak mungkin disebut dalam tulisan ini. Ulama yang telah meresapi betul hakikat jalan agama yang ia tempuh, jalan yang penuh dengan keindahan, yang semestinya didakwahkan dengan cara yang indah pula. Mereka begitu tulus mendedikasikan seluruh hidupnya dalam upaya membangun peradaban melalui jalan keindahan. Ulama yang melahirkan karya-karya sastra yang memikat jiwa, karya yang begitu berpengaruh dalam membentuk peradaban Islam.

Dari mereka, kita belajar bahwa membangun peradaban Islam tidak bisa tidak kecuali dengan menempuh jalan keindahan, salah satunya jalan sastra.

__________

A Mujib El Shirazy, dosen Peradaban Islam Fakultas Agama Islam Universitas Islam Sultan Agung (Unissula) Semarang.

Sumber: http://suaramerdeka.com

Puasa dalam Tradisi Melayu

Oleh UU. Hamidy

Orang Melayu telah memandang Agama Islam dengan rangkai kata “dapat dipakai untuk hidup serta dapat ditumpangi untuk mati”. Maknanya, Agama Islam dapat menjawab dua tantangan besar hidup manusia. Pertama tantangan hidup dunia, kedua tantangan hidup di akhirat.

Agama Islam dalam pandangan tradisi Melayu yang Islami, telah menjawab kedua tantangan itu dengan tuntas lagi memuaskan. Maka tampaklah dalam tradisi melayu, agama Islam mengatasi segala budaya umat manusia. Sebab budaya umat manusia hanya sebatas kepentingan dunia, tidak bisa terpakai menghadapi maut. Budaya manusia hanya sebatas hawa nafsunya, takkan pernah mampu menjawab kegelisahan batin menghadapi maut.

Maka, kematian dalam tradisi Melayu telah dipandang peristiwa besar yang mengubah jalan hidup manusia. Betapa tidak dikatakan demikian, dengan melalui pintu kematian terbukalah dua jalan: jalan ke surga yang penuh rahmat atau ke neraka yang penuh siksa.

Bersabit dengan itu orang Melayu memandang hidup dunia adalah bekal untuk hidup akhirat. Bekal atau persiapan itu yang utama ialah melaksanakan syariat Agama Islam, yang satu di antaranya ialah puasa atau siam.

Menghadapi Bulan Ramadan yang biasa disebut oleh orang Melayu dengan Bulan Puasa, tradisi Melayu di perkampungannya sepanjang aliran sungai 50 tahun yang silam, cukup menarik untuk dikenang, dalam rangka merenungkan makna hidup kita hari ini. Puasa Ramadan benar-benar dipandang kesempatan beribadah yang tiada tara. Maka, pada masa itu menghadapi Bulan Suci tersebut mereka menghadapinya dengan mempersiapkan berbagai perkara.

Pertama, kayu api sudah disiapkan dengan merambah belukar, yang kelak setelah kayunya mati akan dipakai sebagai kayu api. Kedua, menyiapkan beras dan sepulut, sebab ladang mereka telah dituai sebelum tiba Bulan Puasa. Ketiga, memelihara pisang, terutama pisang batu yang amat perlu untuk dibuat kolak. Keempat, surau dan masjid dibersihkan, dan kelima menyongsong Ramadan dengan hati gembira.

Ketika Ramadan tiba dan ibadah puasa atau siam sudah berlangsung, kita akan menyaksikan lagi tradisi Melayu yang amat kokoh memelihara silaturahmi. Mereka berbuka bersama dari rumah ke rumah, menjelang sanak familinya yang berada dalam kampung itu atau dengan kampung yang berdekatan. Mereka membawa rantang yang berisi nasi, lauk-pauk, gulai dan bermacam sambal sampai bermacam panganan dengan kolak sebagai kesukaan bersama. Biasanya juga diadakan dalam sajadah, yakni malam menanti lailatul qadar baik di surau maupun di masjid.

Selama bulan puasa anak-anak amat merasa senang dan bahagia, karena mereka dapat makan-minum selepas berbuka dengan makanan yang lezat dan mencukupi, yang dalam hari-hari di luar Ramadan hampir tak pernah mereka jumpai. Maka, orang Melayu mengakui betapa murahnya rizki dari Allah SWT dalam Bulan Ramadan. Memang benar Ramadan adalah berkah dari Allah yang maha pemurah.

Lalu hari berganti, bulan menjelang dan tahun berlalu. Sekarang apa yang terjadi dengan orang Melayu di perkampungannya sepanjang aliran sungai itu? Suasana tenteram dan bahagia dalam Bulan Ramadan pada masa lalu itu sudah tinggal kenangan. Hampir tak berkesan lagi hari ini. Apa pasal? Ini berlaku, karena kekayaan orang Melayu yang terdapat pada hutan, tanah, sungai-sungai serta ikan dan marga satwa di rimba belantara sudah rusak binasa oleh tangan-tangan pemerintah yang zalim, pemilik modal yang serakah, alat negara yang curang serta orang bagak yang kejam.

Sekarang orang Melayu di perkampungan itu menghadapi bulan puasa harus siap-siap jauh lebih tabah dan sabar, tahan menderita dalam Bulan Puasa, karena sumber-sumber kehidupan mereka telah habis dihisap, dirampok dan berkecai-kecai, oleh pihak yang hendak memuaskan hawa nafsunya dengan buih kehidupan dunia ini. Lantas, adakah nasib mereka, yang tinggal jauh dari kota yang gemerlapan, akan jadi renungan oleh para pejabat dan wakil rakyat, serta orang kaya-raya yang bergelimang harta dunia ini?***

UU Hamidy, adalah Budayawan Riau.

Sumber: www.riaupos.com (12 September 2008)

Political Functions and the Administration

The king who ruled Malacca was described as the source and centre of all secular power. With the exalted position of the king in the system of government, the source of power possessed by him and the sanction conveyed by the attributes of sovereignty was channelled towards initiating the administrative mechanism and power.

The concept of sovereign power and its attributes in the context of fifteenth century Malacca was of course different from the concept understood today. In modern terms, sovereign power primarily refers to the missing government and to the nation that is governed. The figure and personality of the reigning monarch only represents a symbol of that sovereignty. When the ‘supreme‘ laws that form the source which activate the government and its administration are written down and become a formal constitution, the monarch simply becomes a constitutional ruler.

During the early period in Malacca, sovereign power or sovereignty refers to or is related directly to the person and physical presence of the king on the throne. Wherever the ruler ruled (in a geo-political sense), sovereignty was not confined to the country or the place of authority where the ruler resided, but in the personality and the physical characteristics of the reigning ruler himself. A state was established only with the presence of a ruler. The Sejarah Melayu frequently uses such expressions as ‘Raja Raden was the State‘, or ‘Raja Husin was the State‘, while the declaration of loyalty became formally phrased as ‘Long Live the King‘, (daulat tuanku) and not ‘Long Live the Nation‘ (daulat negara) - incidentally making use of the word daulat or sovereignty. In war, a state would readily admit defeat if ‘the king was dead‘. This is made clear in the Sejarah Melayu by its reference to the words of Sultan Muhammad Shah - ‘...because of the tradition of royalty, the country is defeated (when) its king is dead‘.

Sovereignty was also linked to the charisma of the king and to the ‘good fortune‘ (tuah) that he possessed. When the country became peaceful, prosperous and rich, with traders and missionaries going about their affairs, with farmsteads and plantations flourishing and producing high yields, with an increase in livestock and human population, the king on his throne was held to be the fount of good fortune and the mystique of his sovereignty rode high. Similarly, if the situation was converse, the reverse would occur. The security, the prosperity and the peace and harmony in the state enjoyed by the people were not related to the skill or wisdom of the officials and administrators, and were not construed as the fruits of hard work and enterprise, or of the soil which was naturally fertile. They were regarded as the good fortune of the king who reigned so justly over them, even though this was not necesssarily the actual state of affairs.

Therefore, in terms of philosophy and theory, the ruler was described as being just and wise, the bearer of good fortune and endowed with the mystique of sovereignty. He was also regarded as being blessed, and this gave rise to the expression: ‘...by the blessings and power of His Majesty‘ not because of the blessings of the intelligence and intellectual qualities of the important state officials or of the practical efforts of the ordinary people who laboured without respite.

As a person who represented ‘the source of both order and prosperity in society‘ and who was regarded as ‘the centre of patterned or formulatic behaviour‘, to take the view of a Western scholar, the position of the ruler was truly lofty and exalted in his system of government to the extent that his word or command had the force of law, his mere gesture likely to be taken as an order to be carried out, and whose actions and character were beyond reproach. He could override laws that existed in his administration. In fact, the ruler was the law. Therefore, king and kingdom (or the State/government) were synonymous, for figuratively speaking, the ruler was perceived as a shady tree where his subjects could take shelter. The respect of the ordinary people for their ruler was so high that the Sejarah Melayu states that:

...it was the custom of the Malay subject that he would never seek to find fault with the wishes of his master (the king).

The personality and character of a reigning monarch were also linked to the elements of purity which he was supposed to possess. A person who went against the royal word and who refused to recognize his sovereignty would be considered ‘traitorous‘. It was believed that a traitor would be struck by calamity in two ways. Firstly, he would become the victim of disaster (probably in the form of a curse) as a result of having gone against the king. For example, Sang Rajuna Tapa, one of Raja Iskandar Shah‘s lords in Singapore, and his wife were reportedly turned into stone as a consequence of having incurred a royal curse for allowing the men of Majapahit to enter Singapore. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the people of the Johor-Riau sultanate, descendants from the Malay sultanate of Malacca, were warned that they would be visited by the curse of bisa kawi and would for ever be unsafe both in this world and the next if they attempted to betray the sovereignty of the reigning monarch.

The second affliction would emerge in the form of a physical reprisal taken by the state itself, that is to say that the person found guilty of treason would be ‘scourged‘ in various ways. The offender would not be the only person to receive the punishment. His family and kinsmen would undergo similar chastisement to the extent that no progeny is left behind. Perhaps due to the handing down of these traditional beliefs, they became so ingrained in the heart and mind of a person that he become truly fearful of the retaliation which he might incur, for no one would like to be turned into stone. Neither would anyone wish to undergo the suffering of those who had incurred the bisa kawi curse, and lived in penury and misery for the rest of their lives. And surely no one would be prepared to withstand the punishment administered in a collective manner at the command of the ruler, which could mean death or suffering physical injury, on account of not observing the rules of the state or for allegedly being shown disloyal to the ruler himself, which was regarded as the gravest of offences in Malacca.

Murder was regarded as another very serious offence. An order of execution was the exclusive prerogative of the ruler. Furthermore, in Malacca, according to the Sejarah Melayu, Sultan Alauddin Riayat Shah was quoted as saying that no Malay should be killed, no matter great the crime. Hdwever, an execution was permissible if the crime involved high treason. Clearly no one would like to lose their life so easily, if treason was not regarded as a major offence!

Before the introduction of a written constitution for a state and its government, the attempt to instil the concept of sovereignty in the minds of the people, handed down from one generation to another solely in the form of belief and tradition, was no doubt a primeval indigenous means which was not only unique and simple but also paramount and very practical, symbolized by the presence of a ruler with sovereign powers. The concept was absorbed unconsciously but with great effect into the beliefs and thinking of the ordinary people. This acceptance by consensus became one of the conventions and institutions of the traditional political forms in Malacca.

There were, no doubt, a number of legendary figures in local history who rebelled against this tradition of sovereignty, such Hang Jebat (Hang Kasturi?) in Malacca, the men of Kampar in Kedah, Sang Rajuna Tapa in Singapore, and the Laksamana Megat Sen Rama in Johor. However, generally, they all failed to leave their own mark in history and vanished from the face of the earth as a result of having incurred the consequences of lese-majeste!

Whatever the means by which the concept and institution of ‘sovereignty‘ came into being, its political purpose was to create an institution for the survival of the community and the state. It was also aimed at creating a normative way of life in a tolerant environment, but as far as possible with flexible conditions, although within circumstances where the administrative system was somewhat loose. The intention was to create, maintain and protect the safety of the members of society and to ensure a harmonious life under an organized system of government.

In an attempt to establish social standards, it was essential to have a small group of leaders to supervise the system and to administer the far greater number of people whom they led. Under these circumstances, it was also essential for this select leadership group to possess an element or nucleus of supreme secular power which was highly exalted, respected, in which full confidence and the mandate to rule could be reposed. It might also be feared (?) because the traditional belief handed down from the past which they came to symbolize (based on their origins, genealogy and personal leadership qualities). That element and nucleus was sovereignty. The holder of that sovereignty (which was difficult to perceive with the naked eye) was the reigning monarch. It was the ruler who provided the source of spiritual energy to initiate and maintain the working of the administrative machinery for the running of an organized community.

The process of the development of sovereignty ran concurrently with the political, cultural and historical development of the local society itself. Although there are very few sources which can throw light on the concept of sovereignty during the pre~Malacca sultanate period, some knowledge can be derived from the cultural and historical perspective of the pre-Islamic and islamic periods. The culture that was developed between these two perspectives was an indigenous one.

The concept of sovereignty began at the basic level of leadership, namely the ‘head-man‘ (ketua, or in Sanskrit katuha). During the Hindu-Buddhist era, probably during the time of Sri Vijaya, the concept of sovereignty evolved when the headman became a symbol and was linked, politically and culturally, to the various Hindu myths regarding the origins, descent and genealogy, as well as the physical and spiritual qualities which the particular headman or king possessed. The lineage and ancestors of the king were regarded to have been metamorphoses of gods in the purest, most chaste and ineffable traditions of Hinduism-Buddhism. The king was revered according to customs and traditions but without any religious connotations. As time went by, the customs and traditions became more firmly entrenched and began to be accepted as official practice, and ultimately became the political doctrine of kingship within the state. The person who was revered was regarded as pure, as pure as the gods. These pure, spiritual and mystical elements of leadership were then linked to the physical and biological faculties of the recipient of the person. The elements of purity and mystery were merged with the physical and the biological. From this, the concept of the god-king ultimately emerged. Each word, gesture, action and movement of the person was taken as a symbol of the words and actions of a superior being embodying purity. Therefore his commands must be respected and obeyed.

By way of tradition and Hindu cultural influences, some foreign elements were absorbed to form part of the foundation for local politics. The reigning monarch was recognized as the owner of the land and the water on and around it, and became the lord of all the surrounding environment.

The coming of Islam changed the way in which people think, but the political concept connected with the god-king was strongly entrenched in social beliefs and this traditional mentality could not be easily eradicated. Furthermore, based on the spiritual beliefs inherited from the past, this mentality ";,as highlighted‘ for rationalization with the Islamic doctrines of leadership. The traditional spiritual links of a Muslim ruler with the gods would disappear, but fresh links would be made with Allah and the Prophet together with the saintly band of spiritual leaders and practitioners. Whether they were deliberately created or otherwise,and whether they were true or false, today, we can still come across Malay manuscripts with the genealogies of the Malacca rulers which link them directly to the family and kin of the Prophet in Mecca.

When the editor of the Sejarah Melayu recorded the links between the rulers of Malacca and Allah and the Prophet in order to spread the doctrine of leadership in Islam, he quoted from the dying injunctions of the Bendahara Tun Perak as follows:

....and do not neglect to perform acts of service for your ruler. That is why the learned say, where there is a ruler who is as just as the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, he can be likened to a ring that has two precious stones set in it; such a ruler is like the surrogate of Allah in the world, for he is the Shadow of God on earth; to serve the ruler is to serve Allah, the Immaculate and Almighty. Therefore, perform good deeds for Allah and His Prophet and for the ruler... Do not forget this, so that the excellence of the world to come will he yours.

The excerpt above is taken from extracts, translations and free interpretations of a number of quotations from the Koran, but in certain places the concept of leadership has been adapted to circumstances.

There are three main issues which arise from these excerpts:

(a) concerning a just ruler

(b) the relationship between the ruler on his throne and Allah. The king is described as ‘the surrogate of Allah in the world‘, and

(c) mankind must perform good deeds for Allah, the Prophet and the ruler.

If our supposition that this excerpt is a free interpretation of the concept and doctrine of leadership in Islam based on the lines laid down in the Koran is correct, then they are relevant to Chapter Four (Women) of the Koran, verses 58 and 59. Verse 59 explains the concepts of rights and justice in the laws of men:

Allah commands you to fulfill the trust of those who believed in you, and to pass judgement upon men with fairness. Noble is that to which Allah exhorts you. He hears all and observes all.

Verse 59 of the same Chapter explains the responsibility of all the faithful to be obedient to Allah, to the Prophet and to the leadership:

Believers, obey Allah and the Apostle and those in authority among you. Should you disagree about anything, refer it to Allah and the Apostle,if you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day. This will in the end be better and more just.

This verse also states that should any disagreement occur amongst the believers, they should refer to the laws of Islam and the judgement of Allah. This is obviously directed at Islamic states and governments.

According to the accounts in the Sejarah Melayu, when Malacca was under Islamic rule, several practices in its administrative institutions were based on Islam. Many of its laws (at least in theory) as laid down in the Undang-undang Melaka Cibe Laws of Malacca) and the Undang-undang Laut Melaka (the Maritime Laws of Malacca) were based on Islam. Therefore, Malacca might fulfilled the Islamic doctrines on leadership at that time.

Nevertheless, there was also quite a lot of ‘substitution‘ and liberal adaptation. Leadership or ‘those in authority among you‘ (al imam) in Islam comprises the ruler and the administrators around him. This concept was apparently a rationalization of local tradition. For the ruler who was selected to rule might not necessarily have the ability to lead or the justness to administer the law amongst his subjects, whereas a just and able leader as demanded by Islam need not necessarily have to be chosen from those of royal or ‘blue‘ blood.

However, the political and cultural tradition of the Malacca Malays inherited from the Palembang era had become the norm and basis for leadership, where a king was selected by descent from the male line. The only change that took place was in terms of religious belief and practices and of the substitution of the Hindu doctrine of leadership for the Islamic one based on local custom and tradition. This transformation seemed to have worked very successfully and effectively for several centuries. Justice could not be achieved merely by depending on the character of the reigning monarch. Therefore, the officials, especially the Bendahara, would assist the ruler to ensure a just administration and control of the state. Collective decisions were regarded more superior to individual ones. Hence the concept of consultation and discussion became established through practice. The existence of these links of mutual authority demonstrated a balance in the control and administration of the government.

The concept of consultation, discussion and agreement by consensus between the ruler, his lords and officials formed the basis for achieving justice and fairness. In fact when this practice was mentioned in written records, it became a standard convention in the relations between the two parties. The Sejarah Melayu made reference to this when it quoted Sultan Mansor Shah:

...and you should come to an understanding with all your ministers and great lords, for however wise and knowledgeable the ruler may be, how will that wisdom and knowledge be made use of,if he does not consult with all his officials?

This could be linked directly to the heriditary traditions and political culture of Malay society itself, where cooperation and a sense of tolerance between the king and administrators on the one hand, and their subjects, the ordinary people, on the other, had been established since the early days. The Sejarah Melayu records the solemn pledge (waadah) made between Sang Sapurba Taram Sen Tn Buana (the ruler) and Demang Labar Daun (his subject) following the primordial tradition of Malay political leadership:

That is why Allah, the Immaculate and the Almighty, has accorded that all Malay rulers should never bring shame upon their subjects; however great their offences may be. They should not be scrutinized, held responsible or execrated with foul words. Should a ruler bring shame to a Malay subject, his realm will face ruin; and Allah, the Immaculate and the Almighty, has accorded that all Malays should never be disloyal to their rulers or shun them no matter how evil and cruel they may be.

These mutual ties came into being between the ruler as protector on the one side and the people as supporters of their protector on the other. The customs and traditions in governing which was probably practised during the period of Sri Vijaya continued to be preserved. Within the context of political culture, another element of mutuality founded on the close and systematic cooperation and interdependence between ruler and subject may be seen in the adaptation of a Persian maxim which was absorbed into the philosophy of leadership and the system of governing in Malacca. Based on the Malay-Islamic culture and political thought which probably took firm root in Malacea during the reign of Sultan Mansor Shah, the compiler of the Sejarah Melayu emphasised this point by citing yet again the words of Sultan Mansor Shah, as follows:

In the words of the Persian saying, ‘Ar‘ayat juna bakhsanat sultan Khasad‘, which means that the people are like the roots, and the ruler like the tree; just as there would be no tree if there were no roots, so there would be no ruler if there were no subjects.

The link and the interdependence between a tree and its roots became a fundamental analogy in the tradition and philosophy of Malay leadership in Malacca. It is a very simple philosophy but indeed practical - a tree cannot stand without its roots, and the roots cannot survive without a tree! It is through this interdependence can a society survive and a kingdom be established.

Nevertheless, it was the strength of the traditional foundations, the heritage of cultural processes, and the history of the indigenous culture itself which enabled the elements of purity, excellence and virtue to continue to become the crux upon which the attributes of sovereignty could be established and reinforced so that the status of the ruler would transcend secular laws. The analogy of the king and the Prophet being like ‘two jewels set in a single ring‘, both of them hand in hand contributing to its splendour and ultimate beauty, no doubt fitted well into the local ethos of leadership. A king was likened to ‘the substitute‘ of Allah on earth - or His shadow (zulillahi fi‘l‘alam or zulillahi fil‘l ardh). It is at once understood that if we worship Allah and are faithful to the ways of the Prophet, then we must also serve and be loyal to the ruler. If we are disobedient and refuse to follow the commands of Allah or the ways of the Prophet, we will also be considered disloyal to the ruler. This is the primary interpretation.

Such arguments probably provided the most refined and highly effective political means used by the Malays to indoctrinate the ordinary people in order to command their respect and the belief in the sovereignty of their ruler.

The person who strongly supported, exalted and defended the sovereignty of the ruler was the Bendahara. This was appropriately so because the Bendahara was an experienced, elderly man who invariably was either the father-in-law or the uncle of the reigning monarch. Whatever may be the interpretations and opinions of researchers regarding the leadership qualities and characteristics of the Bendaharas as portrayed in the Sejarah Melayu, there are a number of accounts and episodes which shed light on several Bendaharas who frequently defended this ‘custom‘ and political philosophy, even at the cost of their own lives, as in the case of Bendahara Sen Maharaja Tun Mutahir. The basis for upholding sovereignty was the maxim ‘no Malay may be disloyal to his ruler‘.

In short, the concept of ruling and the prerogative to rule which belonged to the ruler were primarily spiritual and represented a traditional heritage in the form of an accepted belief handed down through the ages. This tradition was influenced by changes in culture and in the perspectives of creed and religion.

This concept of ruling and prerogative to rule became established and, were channeled and put into practice through the physical authority and actions of the state officials and other administrators who supported and became part of the general institution of kingship. The physical authority and actions mentioned above were intended to emphasize amongst other things the establishment, supervision and perpetuation of the practice of state rites based on traditional usage and custom to ensure that they would be rigorously preserved; to prescribe and implement governmental as well as administrative rules and regulations; to define and establish an administrative system; to supervise, maintain and ensure the implementation of the law (which included customs and traditions as well as foreign elements - Hindu and Islamic); to supervise and enhance the social system and the supervision of state protocol on the whole; to ensure peace and harmony of society.

Since the state officials were the pillars that supported and ensured the stability of the institution of kingship and administration, they were provided with certain powers within the sphere of their respective authority based on certain social, political and administrative functions at court, on land, in the home waters of Malacca and in her dependencies.

The cooperation and the ties which existed between the reigning ruler and his state officials who formed the administrative machinery supporting the system of kingship and government could also be seen as one fundamental aspect of political culture. Indeed, following the traditional political philosophy of Malacca, the cooperation and the ties mentioned above were essential for ensuring the success of the whole governmental system.

The smoothness, harmony and success of the system were all dependent on the attitude of mutual support between both sides. Therefore, in order to secure the success of this, system, a political philosophy regarding this type of cooperation was instilled in Malacca, as reflected in the analogy of the ruler as ‘the fire‘ and the state officials ‘the firewood‘. The Sejarah Melayu discusses this point, and quotes the Bendahara Tun Perak as follows:

And there was no harmony in the state, because a ruler is like fire and all his ministers are like firewood; if there is no firewood, how can the fire give its flame?

The overall concept of the close cooperation between ruler and his subject is likened to the relationship between a tree and its roots, while the concept of the mutual dependence between the ruler and his state officials is likened to the relationship between fire and fuel. These formed the basic philosophy and theory of the political, governmental and the administrative system of Malacca as a whole.

According to one scholar, the most interesting example of this concept of mutual dependence which is indispensable between the two sides in this kind of political machinery can be seen in the concept and viewpoint expressed in the Hikayat Hang Tuah, ‘a historical novel utilizing symbols‘. At the functional level, the book highlights the relations between the ruler of Malacca and Hang Tuah. This symbolizes the relationship between those in authority, in power and given the mandate to rule on the one hand, and those who accept, support and recognize that authority and mandate, on the other. The acceptance and recognition of this system was usually effected in a totally submissive way, with unquestioned and undivided loyalty to avoid any conflict or disturbance in implementing the authority in the administration. This is a unique example of how a Malay sultanate functions, and symbolizes the sublime link between the ruler (in this context the sultan of Malacca) and his subjects (Hang Tuah).

This may have been a concept and an opinion formed by the author of this famous manuscript. The word, summons and cornmand of the ruler emanated from his authority, and that command (through the acceptance and readiness to carry it out shown and manifested by the character, actions and deeds of Hang Tuah) must be obeyed, without any question or argument even to the extent of sacrificing a life. A ruler‘s command which was carried out and fulfilled traditionally would earn him a fine reward and recognition. The reward could take several forms, material and symbolic, which would be described as a bestowal of a royal favour.

Hence, the legal implication which arose from the use of this term, whether in the form of speech or in the act of bestowing an award, was that only the reigning ruler was permitted to name the award or to confer it upon someone. In other words, the bestowal of awards was the prerogative of the ruler. The Hukum Kanun Melaka (Clause 2:1) states that whosoever took upon himself the role (by speech or action) of bestowing an award, along with the usage of such words reserved for royalty such as Utah, patik, murka and kurnia, would incur the death penalty. Among the awards or honours which were generally conferred were official titles of honour and titles of ranks for offices of the Laksamana, Sen Bija Diraja and others, which served to contribute to and define the position and social and political status of an individual to the point of enabling him to achieve a level of social distinction and be called an ‘orang kaya‘ (for although he had left office, he had attained a superior economic position); grants of land for the cultivation of rice or general farming; and grants of populated land (orchards, inlets, or streams). According to Clause 44:11 of the Hukum Kanun Melaka, to be made raja (i.e. chief or headman) in such places would mean becoming the local administrator, and collector of produce and taxes, and being allocated human beings (male or female) as followers and slaves. The smallest awards given were in the form of a suit of clothes (complete ceremonial dress) as a token of appreciation from those in authority, and whose political sovereignty was acknowledged by the people.

Therefore a two-way link was established between the ruler (who issued commands) and his subjects (who carried them out), and between the giver and the receiver so that all was effected with cooperation and harmony. This was the basis and foundation of the Malacca government. In the context and concept conveyed by the phrase primus inter pares, the spirit of cooperation, reciprocation, tolerance, of commanding and obeying manifested by the dramatis personae of the Malacca ruler and Rang Tuah, was what the Sejarah Melayu described in philosophical terms as the cooperation ‘between tree and root‘. If the root provides strong support and sustenance, the tree will be sturdy and firm. The same applies to the establishment of a state. On the other hand, if the roots are feeble and fail to provide support and sustenance, the tree will wither and die. In order to support and strengthen the tree, the roots are in turn trained to give their support and sustenance to the tree.

It is this positive spirit that is emphasized by the Hikayat Hang Tuah through the portrayal of Hang Tuah as a man who stands for the principle that ‘no Malay may ever be disloyal to his ruler‘! At a deeper level, the harnessing of manpower on a collective basis for various civil and military purposes (such as for war, building a palace, and repairing a fort) is an old concept and institution for ‘the services or needs of the country‘ at that time. The involvement of manpower on such a large scale raises the problems concerning rewards (unless the ruler happens to be particularly wealthy and generous), and this is also closely related to individual responsibility, moral obligation (a moralist will not expect material reward) and status. The task of maintaining and preserving the state comprised amongst other things, the support of the rulers ambitions and ideals, the defence of the security of the society, the contribution to the development and improvement of the city for the benefit of all, the construction of ditches and drains to meet the needs of the people, the attendance of official festivals and royal ceremonies in order to fulfill the concept of sovereignty and the state.

These were included in the duties and collective responsiblity (in the spirit of cooperation or gotong-myong) for the kingdom. The willingness and readiness to answer the call for public work (which free us from any prejudice about elements of compulsion) was a sign of moral and physical support for the kingdom. It was a symbol of the people‘s recognition of the reigning ruler‘s sovereignty. If the kingdom was in trouble, the people would be in difficulty too. If the kingdom was in distress, the people would suffer equally. And if the kingdom was prosperous, the people would prosper too. Thousands of loyal soldiers participated in the series of military campaigns led by Hang Tuah. They were always loyal to the ruler and were very obedient to the orders of Hang Tuah. Sovereignty was developed and linked to the concept and the symbolic role of kingship. This symbolism was created in order to provide certain exclusive prerogatives and status to the ruler which were superior to those enjoyed by his subjects. Included amongst these symbols were:

(a) the traditional insignia

(b) the language

(c) the law

(d) the colour

(e) the protocol as well as customs and traditions

The traditional insignia consisted of objects that were displayed and served to ‘uphold‘ the charisma of the reigning monarch. The display of these insignia at every official ceremony attended by the ruler demonstrated symbolically the exaltation of the royal office. For this reason these objects were called the insignia of royalty or regalia.

Ordinary people were forbidden from using such insignia except as an award from the ruler. Among these insignia were the cuspidor, the cruse (kendi), the fans, the banners, the betel caddy, the pawai, several kinds of weapons such as the keris, the sword, the spear, and the javelin, and various kinds of of porcelain dishes, the yellow sash (tetampan), and the umbrella. Collectively they were known as ‘the royal articles‘.

The royal regalia also included traditional musical instruments which were played at official court functions and ceremonies and according to the traditions of the kingdom. These instruments were used as ‘Instruments of State‘ . Included amongst these musical instruments were the drum, the gong, the flute, the trumpet, the negara and the fife. Together they made up the royal orchestra or nobat. Only the ruler was permitted to own and use these instruments on all occasions privy to his person and which were connected with court and state ceremonies.

Insignia of secondary importance included the litter used by the ruler during his outings. The symbolic role of this item was not so prominent since it was also ‘bestowed‘ to be used by the Bendahara and the Laksamana. The only difference was that when the ruler was borne by litter, he was accompanied by all the officials whose position in the procession was according to the order of their heirarchy. This would enable the people to distinguish that the litter borne in procession with all the officials in attendance was that of the reigning king or sultan of Malacca.

The elephant which was used as a form of land transport and the perahu as a form of water transport were also accorded symbols of royalty. Whenever the ruler mounted the elephant, the Iaksamana and the Temenggung would accompany him to ensure his safety. The royal ride would include the accompaniment of the beat of the drum of the royal orchestra (nobat). The royal perahu was also different from ordinary vessels. Only the perahu used by the ruler was allowed to have a foesle. Some of the royal regalia and insignia of state still form part of the royal heritage today and are used by the Malay rulers in the present system of monarchy.

There were also other items connected with the establishment of secular state ‘laws‘ or conventions. Their purpose was to distinguish between the prerogatives of the ruler and the rights enjoyed and practised by the common people.

Certain items were classified as ‘prohibited‘ (larangan) for use by ordinary people since those items were reserved for the use of the king and members of his family. For example, yellow was a royal colour, and the ruler‘s subjects were prohibited from using this colour for the embroidery on kerchiefs, for the borders of draperies, for cushion covers and mattresses, or for any form of household decoration. They were only allowed to Lse the colour in the making of ordinary cloth, tunics, and headeloths. White umbrellas were restricted for the use of the ruler alone, while the yellow umbrella was for the use of the ruler‘s sons. Only the ruler was allowed to live in a building with verandahs and tiang gantung, and to own resort homes.

In order to demonstrate the exclusiveness and elitism of the ruler and his family, the common people were not allowed to use sheaths of gold or silver for their weapons, including the keris, because these were also reserved for the use of the ruler and his family. The same was applied to golden anklets. The common people could only use these things if they were bestowed upon them and were approved by the ruler.

Language was also included under the royal symbol. For instance, according to Article 2.1 of the Hukum Kanun Melaka, there were five words which could only be used to connote royalty, namely titah (royal speech or command), patik (the personal pronoun in the first person used by a subject when addressing the ruler), murka (the royal expression for wrath or anger), and kurnia and anugerah (royal gifts or awards). A commoner who made fun of or who even uttered these five words or used patik out of context would incur the death penalty, or at the very least, would have his mouth ‘pummelled‘. Clause 2.2 of the same laws made it clear that only rulers could accept tokens of obeisance.

As for funeral ceremonies, no one was permitted to shade the deceased with an umbrella, or to provide a mat or to scatter coins near the grave except for the ruler. The basic purpose behind these special rights and marks of distinction was to ‘exalt the ruler according to convention...‘ and to distinguish clearly between the ruler and his subjects, including the officials in his entourage.

None of this, however, included the order and practice of court ceremonies or state protocol designed to emphasize the concept and the institution of kingship within the sphere of sovereignty. A ruler had to follow certain standards of protocol when he went out to meet his people. It was not easy for a commoner to meet the ruler. When a subject came into the royal presence, he had to conform to and follow certain forms of etiquette, ceremony and ritual which had been laid down, and use the court language (with words like patik (when referring to himself), gering (sick), pacal (slave of the ruler), bersiram (wash or bathe) and santap (eat). This also included the manner and etiquette for sitting when making obeisance, the dress code when in audience with the ruler in the audience hall, and the regulations, formalities and etiquette prescribed when presenting his services to the ruler at court. These were devised, arranged, determined, and formalized to infuse charisma into the concept of sovereignty which had been created and reinforced in the person of the reigning ruler.

The determination and the actual pattern of settlement of the Malacca people, in the context of the establishment of the city‘s demographic layout, consciously or unconsciously, also played a direct part in supporting the concept of sovereignty. According to Portuguese and Chinese reports, the most exclusive district was Malacca Hill (now Bukit Seri Melaka).

The royal palace was built on the top of this hill. Various types of halls were found in the palace (such as the audience hall, conference hall and the orchestral chamber.) The royal palace and its precincts were probably built during the reigns of the early rulers of Malacca, for the presence of the ruler was essential for carrying out the administration and the organization of the government (that is, by the process of consultation, discussion,debate and consensus). The great lords and high ranking state officials would have their official audiences with the ruler there, though not according to any fixed schedule. According to Tome Pires, the nearest royal residence for the ruler and his family was at Bertam, located upstream in the Malacca hinterland.

On the slopes of the hill surrounding the royal precincts were the houses of the great lords and high ranking State officials. At the foot of the hill, especially facing the sea front and the Straits of Malacca were found the dwelling places of the captains, soldiers and the Orang Laut. This pattern of settlement was both of strategic importance and very practical for the conditions prevailing then. The ruler and the great lords was always protected from the threat of frontal assaults from the Straits of Malacca. Should an attack occur, the ruler and his followers could always withdraw upstream into the hinterland.

Source: planet.time.net.my

The Malay Language In Malaysia And Indonesia: From Lingua Franca To National Language

By Asmah Haji Omar

Historical Background

The Malay language is indigenous to Peninsular Malaysia, Singapore, Sumatera, and the group of islands south of Singapore, better known as the Riau- Lingga archipelago. In historical times, Peninsular Malaysia was known as the Malay Peninsula, which as a non-political entity also consisted of southern Thailand where Malay is still spoken as a first language by the Malay population. Transmigration, interinsular barter trading, and family as well as institutional relationships between the royal houses of various Malay sultanates in the Malay archipelago, before the coming of the Western powers, had contributed to the spread of the Malay language among the peoples of insular Southeast Asia .This spread took wing towards the second half of the 20th century when national policies, particularly in Indonesia and Malaysia, instituted a single national language.

The term "Malay archipelago" (the Malay nomenclature being Gugusan Pulau-Pulau Melayu) refers to the region comprising Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore, Indonesia (excepting West Irian), and the Philippines. The claim of this region to being a Malay linguistic area (witness the French global term: Monde Malais, referring to the entire "East Indies"), although Malay is not indigenous to all the islands, may have had its origins in various premises. One such premise can be attributed to the autochthones whose physical morphology generally conforms to that of the Malays, that is, brown skin, noses which are not too flat nor too sharp, straight black hair, and, when compared to Caucasians, medium height stature. The physical characteristics factor then rules out the peoples of Eastern Indonesia, particularly those of West Irian whose languages belong to the Melanesian subfamily of the Austronesian stock, whereas Malay and the languages of the Malay archipelago belong to the Indonesian subfamily of the same stock.

Flowering of the Malay Language in the Classical Era

The people of the Malay archipelago in the old days could have already been aware that linguistically they were of one group, even if their mother tongues were not identical with one another. Similarities in certain words, and these are usually words that appear in everyday usage, could have acted as an indicator to this effect. But a more powerful indicator than this was the fact that the Malay language became their vehicle of communication, be it in the trading ports as the lingua franca, on in the royal courts and in the communication between the various royal courts, and between these and the foreign powers, such as, the English and the Dutch. From historical records of people visiting the archipelago, e.g., the Chinese and the Arabs, we gather information that Malay was already in use as the language of the Buddhist Srivijaya empire which flourished from the 7th to the 14th century A.D. and which had its centres of influence in Sumatera and the Malay Peninsula.

From the beginnings of time to the 14th century, the role of Malay was not confined to being a language of the market place. It was already a high language (H-language), functioning as the language of governance and diplomacy, and acting as a vehicle in the spread of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam. The beginning of its stupendous development which I would like to refer to as the “flowering of the Malay language”, came about with the rise of the Melaka (Malacca) empire in the 14th century, and this empire lasted until 1511 with its conquest by the Portuguese. However, the tradition of maintaining the Malay language as an H-language was continued during the time of the Johor-Riau empire which rose with the demise of Melaka as a powerful Malay sultanate. This latter day empire consisted of Johor (now a part of Malaysia), Singapore, and territories which now belong to Indonesia, i.e., the Riau-Lingga archipelago and the Riau mainland which is situated on the eastern coast of Sumatera facing Malaysia and Singapore. At the same time, the Brunei Malay empire (which covered the present Brunei, the present Malaysian territories of Sabah and Sarawak, and a large part of Indonesian Borneo, and the Sulu archipelago which now belongs to the Philippines) also played an important role in the flowering of the Malay language.

The peak of this “language flowering” phenomenon was the period between the 16th - 17th centuries, as evidenced by the great number of literary products of the era, and these products are now generally referred to as classical Malay texts. It was during the period of the rule of the Malay empires mentioned above that Malay epistolary reached its height of sophistication in language form as well as in visual representation or format; hence the term “flowering”. A collection of letters of this period is to be found in Annabel the Gallop, 1994.

We do not have records of the flowering of Malay during the Srivijaya period, although it was the language of the rulers, as attested by the 7th century stone inscriptions found in Southern Sumatera and the Bangka Island off its coast. The Indian influence in the Srivijaya period had brought into the region the Pallava script used on these stone inscriptions; other than that there is no evidence of the existence of the script . This leads us to surmise that the script never reached the common people. Furthermore, there is no record of whatever literature that was in the possession of the Malay people of the period. The stories from the Hindu Ramayana and Mahabharata as well as those from the Buddhist Jataka were transmitted orally from generation to generation, but they were not put into written form until the Malays became Muslims and adopted the Arabic writing system which they indigenised and re-named the “Jawi” script. The possession of a writing system, the Jawi script, can be said to be the main factor in making the flowering of the Malay language possible.

Present Situation

Today Malay is still a common medium of interaction in the Malay archipelago. It is still possible to get by in the various ports, towns and villages by using Malay in interacting with the local people. The lingua franca acquires the flavour of the locality in which it is spoken. The lingua variety in peninsular Malaysia is an identity in itself compared to the one in Sarawak and Sabah. This is due to the racial or ethnic mix of the speakers. The one in use in Kuala Lumpur shows an overlay of Chinese and Tamil influence in structure and the semantic renderings of Malay words, while in Kuching and Kota Kinabalu, elements which contribute to the building of the identity of the lingua franca come from the other local languages as well. In Jakarta, a Malay speaker from Malaysia can still understand the local or “original” dialect of the Jakartans , also referred to as Jakarta Malay or Batavian Malay (Melayu Betawi), after Batavia, the name by which Jakarta was known prior to 1945.

Like any other natural language, Malay shows that it is characterised by a great number of native-speaker varieties. In Malaysia, these varieties are generally identified according to the states, and they are referred to as the Kedah dialect, the Kelantan dialect etc. However, the state boundaries are not strictly synonymous with dialect boundaries, because normally one finds that the dialect of one state may spill over into the territory of its neighbour. For example, what is generally known as the Kedah dialect is the variety that flows into Perlis in the north, and covers the state of Penang, and extends south as far as Taiping in Perak. The reason for this can be found in the history of the states involved: Perlis and Penang were once part of the larger kingdom of Kedah, while Perak‘s contiguity with Kedah is the most natural explanation for the spread of the Kedah dialect to her southern neighbour.

On the other hand, a particular state may be home to more than a single dialect. Perak, as has been shown above, is an area of the Kedah dialect. At the same time it also provides an area of spread in its southern region, i.e., southwards from Ipoh, for the Selangor dialect. The term “Perak dialect” refers specifically to the dialect spoken in the Parit region.

The description of the spread of dialects in Kedah and Perak is also applicable to the other states of Malaysia. Migration form outside Malaysia as well as major migratory movements between states have created pockets of “other states‘s dialects” within particular states. For example, one finds a community of Patani Malay speakers in Larut and Matang in Perak, and in Baling in Kedah. The Endau-Rompin region of Pahang is characterised not only by its native dialect, but also by the Kedah dialect spoken by a small community of people who were originally from Kedah but who went to the area to start padi [rice] farming there.

Although Indonesia has its own national language, Indonesian or bahasa Indonesia, this variety in its standard form is used in certain situations, i.e., in administration, official ceremonies, and as the medium of instruction in educational institutions. Outside these situations, speakers precipitate towards their conversational varieties which are characterised by local features as well as those of their mother tongues. Hence, in Java the more common spoken variety of Indonesian would be the one showing a heavy influence from Javanese, the language of the majority of the island‘s population. The same goes for the other islands.

In Sumatera and the Riau-Lingga archipelago where Malay is a native language, one hears a great number of native varieties spoken. A general impression one gets is that these native varieties are very much akin to those spoken in various parts of Peninsular Malaysia. The variety spoken in the Riau-Lingga Islands and the Riau mainland as well as in Medan, in North Sumatera, bears a close similarity to the dialect spoken in Johor in Peninsular Malaysia. In the Lingga Island (with a population of about 200) which is a 6-hour boat ride away from the Bentan Island (immediately south of Singapore), refined Malay as used in the Malay royal courts still exists, despite the fact that the institution of the royal family had ceased to exist in the island and in the whole of Indonesia since the beginning of the 20th century. The population of this island consists mainly of the descendants of the last Sultan of the Lingga group of islands, who in turn were the descendants of the sultans of the Johor-Riau empire, and their one-time followers. Relics of their past greatness can still be seen in mausoleums and ruins of palaces. Although the people now live like ordinary kampong folk eking out a living in sago industry and fishing, pride in their glorious past is reflected in their use of language even when they talk among themselves. In terms of their food and the manner in which they dress themselves, they seem to be culturally closer to Johor than they are to Jakarta. The same can be said of the other islands in the Riau-Lingga archipelago, particularly the Bentan and the Penyengat islands.

The passage of time and social developments in the Malay region have given the Malay language a vast expansion of its domains of use. The domains have increased from those of literature, religion, and native/local laws, to those that belong to the world of the sciences. This has been made possible by the role Malay plays as the national language of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei. A planned development of the language undertaken by these three countries in co-operation with one another, specifically for a common spelling system and a scientific vocabulary for the various academic disciplines, has helped in the production of texts of all varieties of the academic and professional genres. This has given impetus to the policy of making Malay a language of academia.

It has been mentioned that in the classical era the writing system which can be interpreted as the lifeline of Malay as an H-language was the Jawi script. From the middle of the 20th century, this role has been taken over by the Latin or Romanised script, known in Indonesia as tulisan Latin, and in Malaysia and Brunei as tulisan Rumi. This writing system was introduced to the Malay people by the Western powers: the Dutch in Indonesia and the British in Malaysia. Although the Portuguese were the first Western power to arrive in the Malay archipelago, they cannot be accredited with the introduction of this cultural norm over the people they colonised. Portuguese travellers-cum-scholars, the most noted being Pigafetta, might have used the Romanised script to write the Malay words they heard, but there has been no record of any attempt by them to give a system of spelling to the language. It was the Dutch and the British who provided systems of spelling the language to the Indonesians and the Malaysians respectively. More of this will be said later.

The Rise of Malay as National Language

The term “national language” came into being towards the second half of the 20th century, when former colonies of foreign powers were striving for independence from their colonial masters. With colonial rule came the suppression of the native language. Independence required a national identity, and the search for symbols to reflect this identity became a necessity. An important symbol, besides the national anthem and the national flag, was the national language.

In the long history of the Malay language, there has not been an indication of the role of politics as we know it today in the choice of its use. If the Buginese rulers in Sulawesi used Malay in their communication with other rulers of the region instead of their own language, the situation arose out of practicality. And the choice was made voluntarily. A similar assumption can be applied when explaining the choice of Malay made by the foreign powers when they communicated with the rulers of the region.

Politics entered language use when the region was colonised. The displacement of the local language in important domains in the governance of the country in which the language was used was the result of a conscious act on the part of the colonial masters. As a result, Malay which was once the dominant language in the archipelago was depleted of all its functions except as a lingua franca in the market places in inter-ethnic communication, and in the social life of native speakers.

The Indonesian Chapter

The idea of re-elevating the Malay language to its former position of importance in the life of the people of the Malay archipelago was something new, and it came with the struggle for independence from the colonial rule. It first came into light in Indonesia in the first two decades of the 20th century. Life under the Dutch colonial government had turned out to be quite unbearable for the people of the islands which we now know as Indonesia. The handful of Indonesian intellectuals, some of whom studied in Holland and had had access to ideas of self-rule and independence, helped to establish movements which were politically motivated. The most famous of these movements was the Boedi Oetomo in Java, but there were also such movements working independently in the other islands. The struggle of these political “parties” was complemented by the youth movements, i.e., associations formed by students for the betterment of their education. Like the movements run by the elders, the youth movements were also localised. As such there were Jong Java, Jong Batak, Jong Celebes, Jong Ambon, Jong Sumatranen Bond, Sekar Rukun, Pemuda Kaum Betawi, and Jong Islamieten Bond. In 1928, these movements drew together in a landmark decision, known as Sumpah Pemuda (Youth Pledge), which was taken on 28th October of that year in Jakarta. The following is a translation of the famous pledge:-

We the young men and women of Indonesia affirm that we have one birth place, and that is Indonesia.

We the young men and women of Indonesia affirm that we belong to one nation, that of Indonesia.

We the young men and women of Indonesia revere one language of unity, and that is the Indonesian language.

[ Trimurti 1983: 111 – 134; Bachtiar 1983: 94 – 110]

It is the third part of the pledge that concerns language. This pledge from the point of view of language choice is important because this was the first time the term bahasa Indonesia was used “officially”, official not in the sense of a recognition given by the Dutch colonial government, but by the people themselves as a consolidated group. Hence, the language of unity, not the national language. Undoubtedly, what was meant by bahasa Indonesia was Malay as used by the people in intergroup communication. The term “national language” (bahasa kebangsaan) had not surfaced, most probably due to the fact that what was uppermost in the minds of the progenitors was the unity or rather the unification of people who until that moment were looking at themselves as belonging to their original provinces rather than as members of a bigger group. At the proclamation of the independence of Indonesia on 17th August 1945, the term bahasa persatuan was replaced by bahasa negara (state language). Bahasa kebangsaan as a label for the language came into use much later, most probably as a translation of the English term “national language” that was being used all over the world by countries seeking independence during the period, such as India, Pakistan, the Philippines, to name a few.

There is no documented evidence that in their choice of Malay to be the language of unity, the freedom fighters of Indonesia sat down and discussed the merits and demerits of the language, vis-à-vis the other languages of Indonesia, many of which were already in possession of high literature and had had a long tradition of being a language of the provincial rulers. The most notable among these was Javanese, the language of the most populous group of Indonesia even to this day. The choice was made in the face of reality, that Malay was the language shared by everybody, regardless of which ethnic group they belonged to. It was a practical choice which fitted in with the political ideology of the time. In other words, Malay was able to fulfill the political needs of the people.

Students of sociolinguistics and language planning can in hindsight debate and provide justifications for the choice. The question that always arises is : Why not Javanese? It had the largest number of speakers, and a wealth of high literature which was most probably much more than what Malay had, while a majority of the freedom fighters were Javanese. Indonesia has shown that in the choice of the language of unity, the majority rule does not apply, nor does history. What mattered at the time when they made their choice was unity in the real sense of the word. A group of people cannot be unified if they speak different languages and cannot comprehend one another.

Why did Malay appeal to the people of the archipelago and not Javanese? The answer for this can be found in the sociolinguistic and microlinguistic features of the two languages concerned. Relatively speaking, Malay has less sociolinguistic rules differentiating the social levels of the speakers, compared to Javanese. In Malay, one has to remember the differences between the language of the royal court and that of the commoners. Even then, the differences are confined to certain lexical items and phraseologies. In the commoners‘s language one has to remember the different honorifics to be used when speaking to or of people holding certain ranks. [Omar 1987: 83 – 97; Omar 1988].

Javanese on the other hand has four main social levels of speech, and each level may again be subdivided to show a more refined differentiation. Differences between the levels and the sublevels are not confined to the use of different lexical items but extend to the choice of the appropriate affixes. Javanese is also heavily loaded with honorifics which have to be used correctly in the right situation. All this makes Javanese a more cumbersome language to learn.

Another microlinguistic feature which could have made Javanese less appealing compared to Malay lies in its phonetics. The sounds of Javanese are said to be “heavy” compared to the “light” sounds of Malay. When I was a student in the University of Indonesia, and learning Javanese as a prerequisite to getting my degree, my non-Javanese friends used to say to me, “Now you are learning to explode like a machine-gun.”

Although Malay was accepted without any problem as bahasa Indonesia, a reference to Malay being another nomenclature for the Indonesian national language is another story. From the time of the Youth Pledge, Indonesians have been debating over this, and the majority voice says that bahasa Indonesia is a language different from Malay although it was based on the latter language. The argument has always been the same : since its inception as the language of unity of Indonesia, bahasa Indonesia has charted a different path of development from Malay. There is this general opinion that bahasa Indonesia is more modern and dynamic than bahasa Melayu of Malaysia.

The name Malay or Melayu appears to bring out a particular perception among Indonesians, specifically the educated ones. It gives them the pejorative idea of non-progress, old-fashioned, backward, and coming from the upstream region (udik as the term is in their parlance). Such a perception emerges not only in informal conversations but also in conferences. As an example, in 1987 when I was a Fullbright scholar in a university in the US giving instruction on Malay and Malay linguistics, there was at the same time an Indonesian professor teaching Indonesian culture. In a discussion, an American professor asked us the difference between Malay and Indonesian; my Indonesian colleague was quick to respond by saying that the Malaysian variety was old-fashioned (kolot), conservative, and had not developed much, while bahasa Indonesia was modern, dynamic, and had undergone tremendous development. When he was asked to justify his statement, he said that the Malaysians took a lot of loanwords from Arabic, while the Indonesians resorted to Sanskrit, Dutch, and English! Any language user of Malay is able to spot the flaw of the judgement made.

The different socio-political milieu that the Malaysians and the Indonesians have been in especially from the time of their colonisation by the Western powers had undoubtedly affected the language spoken within their different environments in dissimilar ways. However, whether the two are separate languages or varieties of a single language is something that has to be looked at carefully. More of this will be said later on.

The Malaysian Chapter

The rise of nationalism and the fight for independence in Indonesia had awakened the Malays in Peninsular Malaysia from their erstwhile stupor. They started to follow the developments going on in the south very closely. Two main factors had spurred the Malays to work for a united Malay nation which spoke the Malay language and professed the religion of Islam. The first was the threat of being overpowered by the Chinese and the Indians who were becoming increasingly involved in the economic progress of the Malay states. The second was the weakening power of the traditional Malay government with a more pronounced intrusion of the British. [Omar 1979: 1]

Nationalism in Malaysia began with the Malays, with the idea of uniting all the Malays in the peninsula, and subsequently in the hope of uniting with Indonesia. The first political parties to exist legally in the Malay Peninsula were formed in 1937. These were Persatuan Melayu Perak (Perak Malay Association), followed by Kesatuan Melayu Selangor (Selangor Malay Association). Soon similar associations were formed, all based on the states they were in. [Yaacob 1951: 59]. Just like in Indonesia, political thinking at the beginning had not reached a wider level covering the whole of the peninsula. But nationalism in and for a wider geographical context came in the name of Kesatuan Melayu Muda (Malay Youth Organisation) or KMM, in 1938. KMM was fighting for a greater Malay nation, the Melayu-Raya, comprising the Malay Peninsula (or Malaya) and all the islands of the Malay-Indonesian archipelago. To the KMM, Malaya and Indonesia were essentially one nation which was separated by the British and the Dutch . [Yaacob 1951: 60]. History has shown that KMM failed in their attempt.

It was another political party that succeeded in uniting the Malays. This was UMNO (United Malays National Organisation), which with its partners the MCA (Malaysian Chinese Association) and the MIC (Malaysian Indian Congress), in the bigger Alliance Party, managed to unite the three main races of Malays, Chinese and Indians, in their struggle for independence, which was achieved in 1957, the official date being 31st August 1957.

The Reid Commission, i.e., the committee which drafted the Constitution of independent Malaya recommended in Article 152 of the Constitution that Malay be the national language. The status of the language as the sole official language was to be attained ten years after independence, i.e., after the use of English in official situations had been phased out. This recommendation fulfilled the wishes of the Malays. However, there were dissensions from other sectors. The Associated Chinese Chamber of Commerce of Malaya, for instance, wanted Malay, English, Chinese, and Tamil to be on a par with one another. The status and the use of Chinese and Tamil became the subject of lengthy debates in and outside the Federal Legislative Council prior to independence. (For a more detailed discussion on this, see Omar 1979, Chapter 1). To solve the problem of acceptance among the non-Malays, the leaders resorted to “barter trading”, by granting citizenship based on the principle of jus soli to non-Malays, if they accepted Malay as the national language (together with the special rights of the Malays). This meant that non-Malays automatically became citizens of Malaya if they were born in the country. [Ed.: Non-Malays born in the Federation of Malaya before Independence were required to furnish prove of residence “for periods amounting in the aggregate to not less than five years” in the seven years immediately preceding their applications (Art.16 of the Federal Constitution); in the case of the latter having left the country for further studies, proof of their bona fide studentship had also to be adduced.] In a nutshell, Malay in Malaysia had to tread a thorny path when its sister variety in Indonesia had taken a smooth ride some years earlier to become the national language.

Unlike the situation in Indonesia, the Malay language in Malaysia had been given the label “national language” from the very beginning. The Constitution was written in English, and the Malay term bahasa kebangsaan appears to be an accurate translation. Although the underlying objective was to make the language a unifying factor, the term bahasa persatuan was never used, as the ethnic mix was not similar to that of Indonesia. The national language was seen to be a symbol of sovereignty, with which the citizens could identify themselves in the way they react to the flag and the national anthem. Unlike Indonesia, Malaysia in her Constitution had also defined what was meant by “official language” as opposed to “national language”. While the latter denoted the feeling of nationalism, the former related to situations in which the language was to be used, i.e., official ceremonies, government administration, the law courts, and for communication between the government and the people.

The main reason for the choice of Malay above English, Chinese, and Tamil was the endoglossic nature of Malay. That is to say, Malay is indigenous to the Malaysian soil, while the others are not. In Indonesia, this kind of reasoning never came to the fore, because they did not have any exoglossic rival to contend with.

Language Flow

The institution of bahasa Indonesia as the dominant language in Indonesia since 1928 was immediately supported by activities which enhanced the development and the use of the language. Schools started to use it as their only medium of instruction, and this function of the language was extended to the universities. Scholars and educationists embarked on the production of books, teaching manuals, and the creation of technical terms to meet with the needs of the sciences.

As early as the 1920‘s, writers began to produce literary works which conformed to the genres imported from the West, such as novels, short stories, and the modern form of poetry. Prior to this, literary works written in the Malay language were those of the genres existing in classical Malay literature, such as, the romance (hikayat) and various traditional forms of poetry, like the pantun, and the shair. Indonesians do not accept the classical works as Indonesian, because to them these belonged to a different world and a different age. They are Malay, and what is Malay is not Indonesian. An Indonesian inventory should only reflect modern thinking. As such, of the literary works that were written before 1928, the only one that is accepted is Hikayat Abdullah, written by Abdullah Munshi, who was the Malay scribe of Stamford Raffles, the founder of Singapore, in early 19th century. This is because Abdullah shows individualism in his writing. Again, there are dissensions to this opinion mainly because Abdullah hailed from Melaka in Malaysia. [ Rosidi 1964: Ch. 1].

Indonesian pride in what is Indonesian, and hence modern, had rendered a positive effect on the growth of their literature. Malaysia had benefited from this development, because when the national language policy was implemented in the schools in Malaysia after 1957, there was a lack of modern literary writings to be used in teaching Malay literature. Indonesian works were used in the Malay literature classes in the schools as well as in the universities. This went on until the end of the 1970‘s when Malaysia was well equipped with her home production. Even after this period, and during the period when the two countries were at war with one another (1963 – 1966), interest in Indonesian literature had not faded from the Malaysian scene. This interest extends to works of other genres, such as academic and journalistic writings. There has always been a free flow of Indonesian publications coming into Malaysia.

The flow mentioned above can be seen as a one-way traffic of the passing of knowledge and experience between the two countries. Malaysian works of any kind do not reach Indonesia easily. First and foremost, until recently there was a law in Indonesia which prohibited the importation of publications written in Indonesian produced in other countries. For the law to be effective, Malay in Malaysia was deemed to be bahasa Indonesia. This bone of contention had been taken up by successive Ministers of Education of Malaysia with their counterparts in Indonesia since the early 1980‘s, but it was only a couple of years ago that a ban on Malaysian books was lifted by the Indonesian government.

The second factor which could have been responsible for the one-way traffic under discussion is the lack of interest among Indonesians for Malay literature. Ajip Rosidi, a well-known Indonesian writer, had observed this phenomenon, and had expressed his disappointment over this. [Rosidi 1964: 9]. The situation today has not changed much from the time Ajip Rosidi made his comment.

Regional Co-operation and the Language Council

Despite the one-way language flow between Malaysia and Indonesia, there had always been the intention between the two parties to unite (menyatukan) their two varieties of language. The first realization of this intention came in the form of a Cultural Agreement agreed upon between the two countries. It was signed in Jakarta in 1959. An important item in this Agreement was the unification of the spelling systems used in Indonesia and Malaysia. Arising from this, experts in both countries worked together on a common spelling system, and the result was the Malindo spelling which had never been implemented; Malindo being an acronym of Malaya and Indonesia. The non-implementation of the system was partly due to the Indonesia-Malaysia war, better known as Konfrontasi (1963 – 1966) which was waged on Malaysia by Indonesia in the wake of the latter‘s opposition to the formation of Malaysia, consisting of Malaya, Singapore, Sabah, and Sarawak, in September 1963.

When the war was over, one of the first peace commissions from Indonesia to visit Malaysia was a spelling team, known as Team Ejaan Koti (Koti Spelling Team); Koti being the abbreviation of Korps Tentera Indonesia (Indonesian Military Corps). This team was established by the military corps which took over the government of Indonesia after the bloody coup d‘etat of September 1965. The visit which took place in the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Malaysia‘s Language Planning and Development Agency, in 1967, was the beginning of a cordial linguistic and cultural relationship that was to last to this day. It was through the effort of this team and its counterpart in Malaysia that a common spelling system to be used in both countries was born. The system was announced to the public simultaneously on 16th August 1972, the eve of the anniversary of the Indonesian independence, by the then Prime Minister of Malaysia, Tun Abdul Razak, and President Soeharto of Indonesia.

Following the success of the spelling program, the linguistic co-operation between the two countries was formalised in December 1972, in the form of an organization known as Majlis Bahasa Indonesia- Malaysia (Language Council of Indonesia and Malaysia) or MBIM for short. The first task of the Council was to refine the spelling system giving a guideline to the spelling of words, inclusive of loan words. The second was to work on another major program, and that was to prepare a set of rules for the coining of technical terms. In 1975, this second program was completed , and it was announced to the public simultaneously by the respective Ministers of Education, on 30th August 1975, the eve of the anniversary of the Malaysian independence. [Omar 1979: 70 – 100].

With the two major achievements mentioned above, the Council proceeded to work on technical terms in specialised subjects, based on the subdivisions of the academic disciplines. Among its products are dictionaries and glossaries of the scientific terminology in various academic disciplines and subdisciplines. It has also produced its own journal, Rampak Serantau (Voice of the Region), where the member countries take turns to bring out an issue.

In 1985, MBIM added another member into its fold, and this was Brunei Darussalam. With this addition, the name of the Council had to be changed to Majlis Bahasa Brunei Darussalam – Indonesia – Malaysia, but it is better known by its acronym, MABBIM.

The purpose of having a common spelling system was to make reading each other‘s publications in Indonesia and Malaysia easier than it used to be. Previously, reading Indonesian books for Malaysians was a slower process than it is now, and the same applied to Indonesians reading Malaysian publications. The Indonesian spelling system that was in use prior to 1972 was based on the Dutch spelling system, adopting Dutch graphemes like oe for u, tj and dj for c and j respectively, and so on. On the other hand, the Malay spelling systems in Malaysia were based on English orthography.

The common spelling system has adopted the English graphemes , which appeared to the Indonesian public of that time as an act of “surrender” to Malaysia. However, there were other rules in the system which Malaysia happily agreed to adopt from Indonesia. In the process, the Indonesia-Malaysia language team created a new grapheme, and that is c to stand for ch. This was a compromise after a long drawn-out debate on the opposition between tj and ch.

Prior to 1972, Indonesia was using one standard system, but there were several in Malaysia. This was because the one used in the schools was considered cumbersome in its rules and less learner friendly. It was also considered to be less adaptable to the spelling of scientific words, which was a most crucial point since Malaysia was taking a serious step in implementing the national language policy in the schools and the universities, starting with the schools in 1970. As changing the situation in the school appeared to be a slow process, the media, the universities, and certain publishers took their own separate initiatives to modify certain cumbersome rules. This writer was given the task of formulating a more forward-looking and simpler spelling system for the University of Malaya. The University of Malaya Spelling System was in use for two years before the acceptance of the Indonesia-Malaysia common spelling system.

As can be seen from the discussion above, the orthographic situation in Malaysia was a bit chaotic, and it was Malaysia rather than Indonesia that needed a standardisation of its spelling. Indonesia‘s willingness to modify her existing spelling system and to work on a common spelling system with Malaysia, when she least required the modification, was an act of amicability, specifically when we take into consideration the sociopolitical situation that the region was in at the time. With the benefit of hindsight, one can say that the common spelling system has been as advantageous not just to the growth and development of bahasa Indonesia, as it is to bahasa Melayu, but also to the learning process that Indonesian students have to go through. This point is made in the context of Indonesia‘s present-day policy of making English the most important foreign language in the country.

The common spelling system has greatly facilitated the coining of scientific terms in the language that the two countries are co-operating in. Scientific terms are taken from books and journals written in English, and the common spelling has made possible the adapting of those terms while retaining at the same time the phonological features of the Malay language. For example, oxygen is now oksigen, and not oksijan (formerly in Malaysia), and zat asam (formerly in Indonesia).

Brunei was admitted into the Council on a cultural and regional consideration. The Indonesia-Malaysia spelling system had already been adopted by Brunei even before she joined the Council. Brunei‘s bilingual policy which requires that all subjects, excepting the Malay language, Islam, Civics, and Art and Craft, be taught in English makes the linguistic détente in MABBIM less urgent for her .

Language Wall

In general there are two types of belief in the relationship between the language used in Indonesia and that used in Malaysia, namely bahasa Melayu (Malaysia) and bahasa Indonesia. According to the first type, these two are varieties of a single language. The second type maintains that bahasa Indonesia is a language in its own right although it had its foundation in the Malay language. Malaysians in general seem to support the first type, while in Indonesia there is a mixed reaction, as has already been mentioned earlier.

The fact that there is the MBIM/MABBIM seems to support the Malaysian belief, and the Malaysian stand could have arisen from the ability of Malaysians to read Indonesian texts and to enjoy Indonesian films shown on the local television networks as well as in the local cinema halls. They may not be able to understand certain words and phraseologies, but this is also the situation that they are faced with when they communicate with people from a different dialect area in their own country. And this is also the situation when members of MBIM/MABBIM and their various subcommittees meet and confer on language and terminology issues. One can also surmise that a similar situation occurs when leaders of the two countries meet in bilateral talks.

The second type of belief which is held by a great many Indonesians, especially the non-Sumaterans and the non-Riau-Lingga people, could have arisen due to an underlying need for an identity that is specifically Indonesian. Malay or bahasa Melayu to the supporters of this type of belief belongs to another world, either to another political entity or to a world before bahasa Indonesia was born.

In the absence of hard data on the intelligibility of bahasa Indonesia to the Malaysians, I carried out an intelligibility test on my students of Malay linguistics of 1998. There were 81 of them, comprising Malays, Chinese and Indians. Of the total, 73 were in the final year for the Bachelor of Arts degree, and 8 were in the first year of their Master of Arts course. I used two texts, each of the length of about 300 words, taken from two different Indonesian newspapers. For each text, the respondents were asked to mark the items that appeared to them as odd, unintelligible or unusual in terms of spelling, meaning, word-form, and style. The result showed that the odd, unintelligible and unusual items made up 30% of the totality of the two texts. The items can be broken down into the following categories:-

Use of a different type of spelling.

Free use of acronyms and abbreviations.

Presence of words and phrases totally unfamiliar to Malaysians.

Presence of words and phrases which are familiar to Malaysians but which bear different meanings.

Presence of a number of loan words, mostly from English, which at times are given new meanings.

Categories (1) and (2) are not internal to the language, and if they are taken off, the percentage is much less. Categories (4) and (5) are subject to interpretation. So that leaves us with Category (3) which is less than 10%. Nevertheless, this test shows that the process of reading is not smooth when Malaysians are faced with Indonesian texts.

For the sake of a comparison, I used a Brunei text on the same group of students. The items that appeared odd, unintelligible and unusual to them only made up 0.7% of the whole text of 830 odd words. This means that Brunei texts are more reader friendly to Malaysians. An explanation for this is found in the very close historical relationship between Brunei and Malaysia, in particular in the education system. The education systems in the two countries were based on the same model during the British rule. It was then normal for Brunei children to be schooled in Malaysia, and for their teachers to be trained in Malaysian institutions. Even when Brunei had established her own training colleges and university, Malaysians have been among those recruited to work in those institutions.

Remarks have been made quite freely that the relationship between bahasa Indonesia and bahasa Melayu is akin to that of British and American English. In order to get a picture of this, I conducted a test on teachers of English at the Faculty of Languages and Linguistics, University of Malaya. Of the 10 teachers, one is a native speaker of British English, while the others are Malaysians who had been trained in teaching English and who speak the language in their day-to-day life. I also included 2 others who have been speaking English all their life, but who teach French at the Faculty. I chose three texts on world economics, from Britain, USA, and the Philippines, but the respondents were not informed of the origins of the texts. They were asked to mark the unintelligible items, as well as to determine the variety of English in each text.

The result shows that there is no question of unintelligibility. As for the variety, the spelling was a give-away, but then the differences were few and far between. The only examples cited were labor and clamor in the American variety (inclusive of the Philippines text). However, more importantly, the respondents were able to spot the differences in the style and idiomatic expressions, which in actual fact do not hamper communication, e.g.

American English British English

Government agencies Government bodies

Government employees Public/civil servants

Bosses Heads

If this experiment is anything to go by, its finding can be supported by a general observation of Malaysians reading books written in English or watching films in English aired by the local TV stations. Most of them are not even aware of the existence of the two varieties.

A detailed discussion of the whole experiment for Malay and English are found in my forthcoming paper: Wujudkah Tembok Bahasa Antara Malaysia dan Indonesia? ( Is There a Language Wall Between Malaysia Indonesia ?)

Conclusion

There is an optimistic as well as a pessimistic view of the routes taken by bahasa Melayu and bahasa Indonesia in their continual growth and development. As one who has been involved in the MBIM/MABBIM since the time of its inception, I am optimistic that the varieties will remain as varieties. And varieties are usually marked by their individual features due to the different social and cultural milieu they are in. The gap between these varieties is bigger than that between the American and the British varieties of English. It will take a much longer time for Malaysia and Indonesia to narrow the gap to match that of English. The latter has been able to do that because of its free flow in a two-way traffic across the Atlantic. Apart from that , British and American language products are spread throughout the world, without one having to fear a threat from the other.

The pessimistic view is that the two Malay varieties will go further and further apart, despite the efforts of the MABBIM. However, this view will not last for a much longer time if attitude changes and if language users across the narrow seas between Malaysia and Indonesia are able to tolerate one another.

References - Bibliography

Bachtiar, Harsja W. 1978. Bahasa Indonesia dan Perkembangan Masyarakat (= Bahasa Indonesia and Social Development, Kongres Bahasa Indonesia III, Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa, Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, pp. 94 – 110.

Omar, Asmah Haji. 1979. Language Planning for Unity and Efficiency: A Study of the Language Status and Corpus Planning of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Omar, Asmah Haji. 1987. Malay in its Sociocultural Context, Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Omar, Asmah Haji. 1988. Bahasa DiRaja (=Royal Language), Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Omar, Asmah Haji. 1992. The Linguistic Scenery in Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Omar, Asmah Haji. forthcoming. Wujudkah Tembok Bahasa Antara Malaysia dan Indonesia, Sarjana: Journal of the Faculty of Arts and the Social Sciences, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, No. 15.

Rosidi, Ajip. 1964. Kapankah Kesusastraan Indonesia Lahir? (= When did Indonesian Literature Come into Being?), Jakarta: Bhratara.

Trimurti, S.K. 1978. Peranan Bahasa Indonesia dalam Peningkatan Kesadaran Politik di Kalangan Masyarakat di Indonesia, (=The Role of Bahasa Indonesia in Elevating Political Awareness of the Indonesian People), Kongres Bahasa Indonesia III, Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa, Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, pp. 111 - 134.

Yaacob, Ibrahim. 1951. Nusa dan Bangsa Melayu (=The Malay Race and Their Birth Place), Jakarta: N.V. Alma‘arif.

__________

Asmah Haji Omar, Professor Emerita of Malay Linguistics,University of Malaya,Kuala Lumpur

Source: hometown.aol.com