In reply to Ken's Little Blog, which was a reply to a Malaysiakini article by Azly Rahman's After the apology over the keris , I think there should be some correction...
Hundreds of years ago.. being a hindu in Nusantara (no Malaysia or Indonesia yet) is not being an Indian... it's same as in Bali now, where those Hindus in Bali are not Indian..... Therefore, Parameswara, a Hindu prince is not necessary an Indian Prince... he was a prince from Palembang. If we argue that his predecessors, Raja Suran originate from India coming down from under the sea to Bukit Saguntang (refer "Sejarah Melayu" book), then we must said that his grand grand grand father was Alexander the Great too as being told in the same story....
About the lost city mentioned, the city was not belongs to Raja Chola Rajendra from India, but it was invaded by him after taken over Bruas's Ganga Negara.
BTW... nothing was mentioned about Kedah and Lembah Bujang...??? it was established hundreds of years before Melaka was founded...
BTW.. the problem of us now, especially, most non Malays is, we are looking at the history hundreds years ago in the boundary of today's ie.. with Indonesia and Malaysia... where both was non existence name at that time... What we have at that time was only "Alam Melayu" or "Nusantara"... which consists of many states...
BTW... Orang Asli is known as "Melayu Proto"... and this "Melayu Proto includes Semai, Jakun, Temiar etc... and Orang Laut... and this Orang Laut is now called Malays... They establish Melaka with Parameswara... Of course now with blood mixing with Indians, Chinese, Arabs, Burmese, Europeans... etc...over the ages, Malay looks different that Orang Asli. And now, UMNO arrogantly on purpose overlooks/neglects their cousins, Orang Asli...
BTW.. we all coming from the same parents.. Adam and Eve - Adam dan Hawa...
Monday, May 5, 2008
A Hindu must not be an Indian
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hai Saudara,
Apa sumber-sumber rujukan saudara dalam membuat kenyataan-kenyataan mengenai Parameswara dan Raja Chola dalam tulisan saudara?
Seringkala para penulis menulis tanpa memberi rujukan definitif. Pendapat sendiri atau fahaman yang dibentuk interpretasi sendiri tidak harus digunakan dalam merujuk kepada fakta-fakta sejarah.
Harap saudara lakukan kajian sebaiknya dan menyatakan sumber-sumber bagi kenyataan yang diberi. Saya khuatir pemahaman para pembaca terpesong. Kita harus menerima fakta sejarah seperti adanya, bukan mengikut interpretasi kita dengan niat mengangkat bangsa atau agama sendiri. Sekiranya orang Bali atau Melayu dahulu orang Hindu, ini harus diterima, dan sekiranya benar gugusan Tanah Melayu dahulunya diperintah Maharaja India sebagai sebahagian empayarnya, maka kita terima.
Dalam zaman pemerintahan UMNO ini fakta sejarah sering dan kian diubahsuai atau dipesong ('revisionism', kata orang Barat) untuk kepentingan perjuangannya.
Ini kita tidak mahu. Mari kita berjuang demi kebenaran, bukan untuk kepentingan diri.
Sekian.
Nota: Komen kecil sahaja: tajuk artikel saudara seharusnya berbunyi 'A Hindu Need Not Be An Indian' (Seorang Hindu Tidak Semestinya India). 'A Hindu Must Not Be An Indian' maksudnya Seorang Hindu Tidak Harus (Menjadi) Orang India.
People should read this.
Post a Comment