TWO LETTERS FROM THE
MAHARAJA TO THE KHALIFAH A
STUDY IN THE EARLY HlSTORY OF ISLAE4 IN THE EAST S. Q. FATIMI
I
Al-Jahiz, 'Amr b. Bahr (1631783-2551869). has devoted a long and entertaining chapter on elephants in his
magnificent work, Kitab al-hayawan, in
which we come across the following quotation :-
("Al-Hayham b. 'Adi
has narrated from Aba Ya'qab al-mqafi,
he from 'Abd al-Malik b. 'Umayr that he (the last-mentioned) saw in the secretariat (diwan) of Muawiyah (after his death) a letter from
the king of al-Sin, (in
which it was written : "From the
King of al-sin), in whose stables
are a thousand elephants, (and) whose palace is built of bricks of gold and
silver, who is served by a thousand
daughters of the kings, and who possesses two rivers which irrigate aloes plants, to Mulawiyah . .
.").
Al-Haytham b.
'Adi (1141732-3-2071822-3), who has been
quoted by al-Jahiz, was one of the founders of
the science of historiography in
Islam. He is reported to have written as
many as fifty books on the history,
genealogies, biographies and folklore
of tbe Arabs, and on the topography of
their new settlements. One of the titles: Kitab
aL Tarikh ala al-Sinin (A Book of History
according to Years) seems to suggest that he was the first
annalist among the Muslims.
Unfortunately none of his works seems to have
sumived, but some of their
extracts have been preserved
in tbe
famous histories of al-Balaauri, al-Tabari and other (2).
Not much is known about Aba Ya'qilb (Ishaq b. Ibrahim) al Thaqafi (al-Kufi), the second link in the
chain of transmission ( al isnad) of the above story. But he is well-recognised as a reliable rawi (transmitter of traditions), whose
authority has been accepted by Abil
Dswiid, al-Tirmihi, and al-Nasa'i, compilers
of three out of the six Canonical Collecticns of tradition (3). The original
narrator of this report, 'Abd al-Malik
b. 'Umayr (33/653-4 – 136/753- 4). was one of the learned luminaries,
an imam, of the Umayyad reign and was envied for his prodigious
memory (4).
Thus, there appears to be no reason to doubt
the credentials of the narrators of this
interesting report. What a pity that al-Jahis?; has cut his quotation short at the crucial
point ! Of course, in the context of his
discussions the only relevant portion of this historic letter was the claim of its writer to be the
owner of stables of a thousand elephants.
But how much more important, from the
historical view-point, was the
main body of the epistle that was sent by the ruler of al-Sin (al-Hind ?) to the Arab Caliph at such an
early date in the history of Islam !
II
Before we try to identify this ruler
it should be borne in mind
that the
term 'al-Hind' as used by
the Arab writers of the early mediaeval period signified the region known to
Western writers as the Indian
Peninsula and Insular India (Insulinde)
and not the Indian mainland. Arabs knew their Indian neighbours from the earliest
times, but only through
their maritime trade.
The busy ports of
the fertile, fragrant
and rich peninsula
and the archipelago ascribed to India by ancient and mediaeval
writers. had in themselves great
attraction for the Arab sailors and
traders, and were at the same
time their ports
of call on the traditional eastern trade route extending
from the Mediterranean to the South China Sea.
After the advent of Islam and the
subsequent political expansion of
the Arabs the north-western area of this
sub-continent, which is now West Pakistan, came within the Arab vortex. but was distinguished by them from
the rest of India as 'al-Sind', Thus their traditional concept of
al-Hind. being the Peninsular and Insular India, was retained even after these early
conquests. The unique first-hand accounts of
the strange experiences of the
early Muslim sailors have been collected
by the captain-navigator Buzurg b shahriyar (fl.
3421953). Sailors' stories of Kawlam (Kollam) on the Malabar
coast ; Sarandib (Sinhdadvipa). i.e.
Ceylon ; Lanjab~lils (Nakkavaram).
i.e. Nicobar Islands;
Lamuri (Umbri), Fanstir,
Siribizah (Sri Vijaya), inSumatra, Kalah
(Kalang) on the western coast of
the Malapan Peninsula ; and of the legendary Arab El Dorado in the
southern seas, i.e. the islands of al-Waqwaq,-are all narrated under the title of
'Aja'ib al-Hind Barrihi wa Babrihi wa
Jaza `irihi. 'Marvels of al-Hind :
her land, sea. and island^.'^ Mutahhar
b. Tahir al- Maqdisi (died after 3551966) in his
Kitab al-Bad' wa il Ta'rikh gives the
farthest limits of al-Hind of the early Arab conception, as :
("To the
east of &Hind
are al-Sin (China) and Qahmir
(Chamorris) (i.e. modern Philippines),
to the north is al-Sind, to the
south are charred (volcanic ?) and
unknown lands and seas, and to the west
are al-Zanj (i.e. the Negro-land).
al-Ranij (lit. 'the Coconut
Islands') Ob and al-Yaman (Yemen)." He appears to be emphatic on extending the eastern limits of
al-Hind right up to the borders of China
for, in another place, he writes,
("As
for the torrid zone of al-Hind, it consists of
islands and coastal lands which
meet the territory of al-Sin"). But
all the
Arab writers are not agreed on this
point. Abu Dulaf
Mis'ar b. Muhalhal, who came to
the East in 942 A.C. as an emissary of the
Samanid ruler Nasr b. Ahmad to
the court of China and whose memoirs of
the voyage have been preserved
only in the excerpts
quoted by Yaqut (576/1178-626/1229)
and al-Qazwini (605/1208-
682/1283) would extend the
eastern limit of al-Hind only up to the Malayan
Peninsula for, according to him Kalah was the first of the cities of al-Hind. on the way from China,
whife Multan was the last (8). But most other writers. like
Ibn Khurraddhbih (d. circa 280/893),
Ibn al-Faqih (fl. 290/903), Ibn Rustah
(fl.III/Xth century), Yaqiit and Qazwini, include Qamiir. or Qimar, (Khmer, modem Cambodia)
in the region of al-Hind (9). Reinaud has perhaps best summed up this position when he says, "the Arabs extended
India as far as the Java
archipelago" (10).
The Gangetic Valley, which was the heart
of India and the historic centre of her civilization, was almost a terra incognita
for the Arabs of the period under discussion. They seem
to have hovered around the periphery of the vast Indian world far cen tnriei without
penetrating inland for fear of danger to
their lives and wealth. The
above-mentioned al-Qazwini. writing at the time when the Muslim arms had started sweeping
across the mainland of India, has expressed these fears which appear to
have persisted up to his day. Writing about the rich trade of al-Hind he
says,
("The traders reach only its coasts, or
borders (lit. 'the beginnings*). Rarely do the people of our country reach its
extremities. because the inhabitants are infidels who kill and
plunder.") The very name of the great river Ganga, after
which the valley is named, rarely occurs
in Arab literature before Mahmud
Ghaznawi's invasion of India in the eleventh century. Among those few who did not fail to mention it, is
al-Mas`udi, "a man of
the tenth century with a
fifteenth-century renaissance
mind", who himself had visited al-Hind in 303/915. and stayed there for some months. But it appears quite significant that the
name of the river in his writings takes its Greek form (Janjis)
i.e. Ganges, which fact is an
evident pointer to its origin (12). Even al-Idrisi, "the most distinguished geographer and cattogtapher of the Middle Ages", writing a century and a half after Mahmad's invasion, appears to be ignorant
about this river which he too calls by its Greek
name. On his map it flows down southwards
and passing through the peninsula
(nearer to the western coast) discharges itself into the
sea near Jirbbatan, not very far
from Cape Comorin (13).
Of coutse, after Mahmad's invasion and the
subsequent establishment of the Muslim
Empire on the Indian mainland, the situaation radically changed : the Gangetic Valley and its
extension, Northern India. monopolised
Muslims' attention and the Peninsular and
Insular Indias, especially the latter, fell into oblivion. Conse-
quently. the connotation of the term 'al-Hind' changed and became the soutce of much confused thinking on the
subject.
But that is not the only difficulty that we encounter in the course of our enquiries
on the subject. It is well known that the Arab historical writers do not take notice of
the happenings outside the confines of
the Muslim Empire. Even the activities of
their own co-religionists and compatriots, which, we know from
other sources. were very extensive
especially in the field of international commerce, are totally ignored by them. On the
other hand, the Indian, whether
he lived in his homeland or colonised in the islands overseas, cared little about recording history, for the world was to him an illusion (maya). But fortunately for these Indian islands, they
had the Chinese as their eastern neighburs. The great
Chinese dynastic histories
and Chinese travel accounts contain valuable bits of information
about the history of these islands
in spite of the general disdain of the Chinese for the foreign "barbarians". And in the official history of the T'ang
dynasty (618-907 A.C.) we get an
important clue.
Hsin T'ang Shu (The New T'ang Annals) records that in the Shang-yuan period, i.e. in 674-5 A.C.
Kha-lang (14) which was the leading state of Insular India of
those days, elected a lady Si-mo or Sira-maka as its ruler. The country, we are told. was so
peaceful and prosperous under
her rule that even things dropped
on the road were not lifted. The contemporary Arab ruler.
who was evidently no other than
Mu'awiyah I (411661-61/680), the founder
of not only the Umayyad dynasty but also of
the Muslim navy. heard of this and sent a bag of
gold to be laid within her
frontiers. It lay there for
three years untouched.
The passersby avoided it like an evil thing. But one day the young prince, the heir to the throne. accidentally stumbled on it. When this
was reported to the queen she was so angry that she wanted to kill the prince. Her ministers interceded and then the queen
said, "Your fault lies in your
feet, therefore. it will be enough punishment
if they are cut off." The ministers interceded again and she was finally
persuaded to have only the toes of the
Crown Prince cut off. According to the Chinese chronicler. when the ruler of the Arabs
heard this he "became afraid"
and dared not attack her country (15).
The above story, in spite of its anecdotal
character. adds a new dimension to our
conception of the history of Islam and,
for that reason, deserves our keen
attention. This writer has discussed it at some length elsewhere (16). For the purposes of the present investigation
the Chinese story raises a number of questions.
Was the letter of the ruler. presumably, of al-Hind in any way connected with the
event recorded in the
Chinese chronicles? Probably
yes. But most probably Queen Si-mo or
Sira-maka did not write that letter, because it was from a certain king.
Was the writer, then. in any way related to her? Was he the poor Crown Prince who lost
his toes, but must have gained
his throne after the death of his
mother? Or, was he a rival king of one of the neighbouring Malaysian states who incited the ambitious
Caliph to invade Khalang ? Did Mu'awiyah
send those gold-bearing emissaries to make
preliminary reconnaissance of the
country? Did he give up the
idea as he was favourably impressed by the justice of the Malaysian
Queen? We do not
have satisfactory answers
to these questions.
We are just left guessing on these and similar other points,
till the missing portions of the letter are found in some other writings of al-Jahiz, only a few of the
128 books from whose facile pen have so
far been published (17). And would that the writings of al-Haytham b.
'Adi himself could be retrieved !
However, the extract from al-Haytham's lost book, notwith-standing
its mutilation, and the
Chinese story, in spite of its anecdotal
style, both fit in the pattern of Muslim navigational activities which even in those early days of Islam extended from the
Mediterranean to the South China Sea.
III
At this stage of our enquiry it is worth
recalling that a letter with a very similar form of address was written by a
malik al-amlak ('the king
of kings'), i.e.
the Maharaja of al-Hind to
another Umayyad Caliph, 'Umar b.
'Abd al-'Aziz (991717-1021720). Foau-nately this letter has fared better.
Its main body, too, has been preserved by
Ibn 'Abd Rabbih
(2461860-3281940). the Spanish versatile genius, in his book
al-'lqd al-Farid ('The Unique Neck-lace'), which
"contains something on every subject (18). In the
chapter
on the Royal Epistles Ibn 'Abd Rabbih
quotes an earlier writer, Nu'aym b. Hammsd (d. 2881842-3).
as follows :-
("Nu'aym b. Hammad wrote, 'The King of
al-Hind sent a letter to 'Umar b. 'Abd
al-'Aziz, which ran as follows : From the King of Kings, who is the descendant of a thousand
kings, whose consort, too. is the
descendant of a thousand kings, in whose stables are a
thousand elephants, and in whose territories are two rivers which irrigate
plants of aloes, odoriferous herbs, nutmeg, and camphor, whose fragrance spreads to the distance of twelve miles,--to
the King of the Arabs, who does not associate
other gods with God. I have sent to you
a gift, which is not much of a gift but (just)
a greetings and I wish that you
may send to me someone who might teach me Islam and instruct me in its Laws [or as
in another version : 'might teach me Islam and explain
it to me.']" Peace)!
Nu'aym b. Hammid, who is quoted by Ibn 'Abd Rabbih, was
one of the founders of the hadith movement in Islamic literature. He is reputed to be the first scholar who
arranged the Traditions according to their
rawi (transmitters) and, thus, compiled the first al-Musnad.
He was one of the champions of orthodoxy and died in
prison for refusing to accept
the Mu'tazilite (Rationalist) doctrine that the Qur'an was not the Uncreated
Word of God but was only His created
work. The original writings of Nua`aym b.
Hammnd, too, have been lost. As far as
our present knowledge goes, only
one of his numerous works, viz, Kitab
al-Fitan wa `l Malahim ('On Civil
Disorders and Battles'), has been
preserved, and that, too, in an abridged
form (20).
The above letter has been quoted also by Ibn
Taghri-Berdi (813/14lO -8741
1470) in his excellent work al-Nujum
aZ-Zahirah fi Muluk Misr wa 'I-Qahirah, on the authority of a very reliable Traditionalist of comparatively later times.
Ibn 'As~kir (49911105- 571/1176).
In Ibn Tahri-Bzrdi's version there is the interesting addition of one more sentence in
the b3dy of the letter. which is as follows :-
("I have
sent you a present
of musk, amber, incense
and camphor. Please accept it. for I am your
brother in Islam." (21) )
This careful historian also helps us in ascertaining the date of this letter.
He records it under the events that took place in the year of the Hiirah 99, i.e. 717-8 A.C..
Now, 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Aziz acceded to the Caliphate
in $afar (the second month), 99
A.H., September-October
717. and. though he acted as the one in a hurry
and, as we shall see later.
met with extraordinary success in
a surprisingly short time, yet his
missionary activities must have taken at least
some time to become mature; we
can, therefore, safely assume that the
letter was written sometime in the later half of 716 A.C.
IV
The above document throws some new light on the history of the
propagation of Islam. To appreciate
its significance in this regard we must briefly recapitulate the well-known facts,
as well as the
widely-circulated fiction. concerning
this rather controversial subject.
The phenomenal growth of Muslims' political power in the first century of their era is generally equated with the spread of
Islam in those dominions. This fallacious presumption has further led
to the myth of Islam being spread by the sword.
But the facts of
history seem to tell us an altogether different story.
The Umayyads (41/661-133/750) to whom
after the great 'Umar
(131634-231644) goes the distinction of spreading the Muslim empire far and wide. were mainly interested
in the Arabianization rather than the Islamization
of their conquered peoples. Under their
rule acceptance of the faith was not sufficient for a non-Arab to enjoy the privileges of a Muslim citizen. He had to find for himself a place in the
Muslim society by becoming affiliated as
a client
{mawlci) to one of the Arab tribes.
Under strong viceroys like Hajjaj b. Yosuf the derogatory poll-tax (jizyah) was levied on
them, and they were asked to pay heavier land-revenue, kharaj . in place of the specified tithe. 'udr, that a
Muslim had to pay (22). The question of
the administrative necessity and the fiscal wisdom, or otherwise, of these measures is not relevant to the subject under discussion.
But we must admit that these measures were remark- ably efficient in achieving the objectives of
the Umayyad Caliphs. The Levant, which was the seat of the Umayyad
government and the source of their
support and strength, was fully Arabianized very early in their reign, but to this day among
its constituent states are Lebanon, with a
non-Muslim majority; Syria. Iraq. and
Egypt having powerful
non-Muslim minorities, and Palestine,
which had a strong Jewish nucleus
that was turned into the Zionist state of Israel (23).
It was only
during the short reign of 'Umar
b. 'Abd al-'Aziz (September-October 717-February 720) that those impediments to Islamization were removed and the pent-up
missionary zeal of the early
Muslims was released. The pious
Caliph seemed bent upon making amends for the shortcomings of
his dynasty in as short a time as possible.
The extent and speed of his proselytisation work is amazing. In the Far West. mass conversion to Islam
took place in the Magarib (Morocco,
Algeria and Tunis) among the Berbers. In the North-West, attempts were
made to convert the Byzantine Emperor
Leo III, himself. In the North-East,
missions were sent beyond the Oxus which achieved remarkable
success among the Turks. Remote
and isolated Tibztans themselves sent a
deputation asking for Muslim missionaries
for their country (24). South-East could not be neglected. The rulers of
al-Sind and al- Hind were invited
to accept Islam. The ruler of al-Sind.
Jay Siva (or Jay Sinha, according to
Chach Namah (25,) son of the famous
Dahir, who had valiantly fought Muhammad
b. Qasim, accepted this invitation and so did some other rulers of the
East. Reporting this last
incident al-Baladhuri (d. 2791892) writes as follows :-
[ He ('Umar
b. 'Abd al-'Aziz) wrote to the kings
inviting them to accept Islam and owe
allegiance (to the Muslim state), on the condition that they
would retain their kingship (over
their respective territories) and
would be entitled to all the
rights enjoyed by the Muslims and bound
by the obligations that are laid on them.
These kings had already received
reports of Caliph 'Umar's good disposition and of his religion. Jay Siva and other kings, therefore,
became Muslims and took Arab names." (26)]
Al-Baladhuri does not specify who were
"the other kings". and over
what countries they ruled. But as he
mentions this event in the context of the Sind campaigns, it has been przsumed that all "the other kings", too. balonged to
the Indus Valley. Five years before
'Umar's accession to the Caliphate, Sind was conquered by Muhammad b.
Qgsim, and Dzhir whose kingdom appears to have extended up to the borders of Kashmir
was killed fighting against the
young Arab general. Therefore, it may be presumed that after the conquest the
Arabs had parcelled out the vast territories among several local
chiefs, and had kept only the central control in their hands. However, as al-Sind (the Indus Valley,
in its broader sense, almost comprising the territory that is now
West Pakistan) and al- Hind (the rest of
the Indian continent including the "Indian" Archipelago) are geographically contiguous
and culturally close to each other (at
the period under discussion the Indian Archipelago was ruled by the Indian colonisers), they were
sometimes confused with each other in
Arabic writings. It may, therefore, be surmised that when al-Baladhuri talked of the "other
kings" he meant to include not only the chiefs of the Indus Valley but
als3 the remoter eastern monarchs
among whom must be our Malaysian
Maharaja, whose letter was quoted by
al-Balii&urils senior contemporary,
Nu'aym b. Hammad. But there is another hitch in such a surmise. Ibn al-
Athir (27) (555/1160—630/1233)
and Ibn Taghri-BerdiZ8 have recorded
this incident in the same words as those of al-Baladhuri, but with the important addition that they have placed
it in the year of the Hijrah 101, while
as we already know the Malaysian Maharajas had
accepted Islam in A.H. 99
However, the conversion of Jay Siva and other
eastern kings as reported by al-Baladhuri,
Ibn al-Athir, and Ibn Tagri-Berdi, and
of the Malaysian Maharaja as demonstrated by the document under discussion, emphasise the thoroughness with which the pious Caliph pursued
his policy of proselytization.
But how is it that the process of
Islamization that got started in South
and Southeast Asia so early as at the
turn of the first century of the Hijrah
seems to have petered out without leaving any
visible trace behind? It is a
complex problem and at the same time vital
for the clear understanding of the history of Islam in the
regions of the Indian Ocean,
i.e. Pakistan, India-Barat. Indonesia
and Malaya. At the moment we can only raise the question and at the
most give very broad hints on the lines
of which, we feel. further investigation can be pursued.
The immediate
reason for this setback must be
sought in the reversal of 'Umar's
policy by his successxs and their resumption of their old ways with renewed vigour.
In the case of Jay Siva al-Baladhuri
and Ibn al-Athir state that during the reign of Hidam (1051724-1251743). in the
year of the Hijrah 107, the local
Arab governor, al-Junayd b. 'Abd al-Rahmzn,
betrayed him and broke the solemn pledges
given by 'Umar 11. Jay Siva was disgusted, he denounced Islam,
fought against al-Junayd and was killed
in the. battle.29 The fate of the other faithful monarchs of the East is
not recorded by any Arab historian. However, their silence is itself
quite eloquent. Neglected and betrayed
by their disdainful co- religionists and
isolated and removed from the centres of
Islam by natural factors, they were lost
to Islam.
These events clearly show that the
propagation of the Faith cannot be the business of the State. for. it (State) is mainly a coercive force. it cannot convert the
people's mind. 'Umar's short reign was the exception that proved the
general rule.
It is also evident that proselytization is a hard job demanding the harnessing of specialised skills, supreme
determination, devotion and dedication to a single mission in life, that
of redeeming a "lost soul". To expect
all this from an average soldier or saiIor, statesman, or salesman, is asking too much
from him. It is the work of a missionary,
a muballigh. In the history of Islam
there were two powerful, efficiently
organised, and highly successful
missionary movements : the 'Alid da'wah
and the Sufi tariqah. For the mass
conversion to Islam al-Sind and al-Hind had to wait for the maturing of
these movements in their area. In due course of time first the 'Alid da`wah and then the Safi tariqah
played their proselytiziing role in the whole region of the Indian Ocean (80).
V
The form of address used in the two letters,
which appears to have evoked the special interest of the Arab
writers. is typical of the
epistolary style of the Malaysian monarchs. It reminds us of the
letters written by the powerful rulers of Acheh in North
Sumatra to Queen Elizabeth I and to King James II. As the power
of these Malaysian kings shrank,
the claims made by them in these introductory
parts of their letters grew, till by the
nineteenth century these used to run
into several pages ! The verbosity. bom- bast and pagan exaggeration of these
royal letters have been condemned by the English historian of Sumatra
in these, rather exaggerated,
terms, "It is difficult to conceive how any people so far advanced in
civilization as to be able to
mite. could display such evidence of barbarism." (31).
But in
the present case this rather
naive epistolary style is likely to prove helpful to the students of
history. Let us, therefore, have a
second look at these letters and try to analyse some of their characteristics.
(1) The first characteristic
that demands our attention is the
remarkable similarity that exists between the forms of address in
the two letters. The few apparent differences, too, can be
ascribed to the Arab copyists of the
manuscripts in question rather than to
the original writers of these
letters. It appears that some
expressions were left out by the
copyists, more so in the mutilated letter that
has reached us through al-Jahiz. There is only one structural difference: in place of ('who is served by a thousand
daughters of the kings")
of the first letter,
we find ('whose consort is the daughter of a thousand kings')
in the second letter. This difference. too. can be traced back to the copyist.
(2) The title 'malik al-amlak' (the king of kings) used in the second letter
is evidently the translation
of the Sanskrit title maharaja. which figures
prominently in the Ligor Inscription of North Malaya, dated A.C. 775, and which
was made famous by the Arab geographical writers who usually call the
Malaysian regions, Mamlakat
al-Mahraj or Jaza'ir al-Mahraj, i.e. the
territory or the islands of the Maharaja. They seem to know
the meaning of the Sanskrit term and
would like to show their knowledge of it.
For instance, Ibn Rustah says,-let
us quote him a little extensively, for this
statement of the tenth
century enyclopaedist throws some
light on the
subject under discussion-,
("And
al-Mahraj means 'the king of
kings'. None of the kings of al-Hind is
greater than he, because he
rules over (extensive) islands.
None of the kings is reputed to have greater prxperity or power. or more revenues than he. It is said that the revenues from the tax on cock-fighting reaches to fifty
maunds of gold per day!" (32) )
Malik (meaning 'the King') has two plural forms: amlak and muluk.
The former is used in Maharaja's letter, which reminds us of the following hadith :
("The
vilest and most abasing of names for man and the effectual
o bring him into a state of
humility and humiliation, in the
estimation of God, is malik al-amlak, "king of kings".)
Evidently
this hadith refers to sahanshah, the title of the Persian Emperors, which is synonymous with the Sanskrit
Maharaja.
(3) The Malaysian Maharajas took
special pride in their stables of a thousand
elephants. This reminds us of the
experience of a modern archaeologist,
Dr. F. M. Schnitger, who has done
extensive excavation on the Sumatran
sites of the early mediaeval period.
The spirit of al-Jahia tempts us to quote from Dr. Schnitger's
valuable report at some
length. He writes, "The temples of
Muara Takus are probably the graves of royal personages. Malays say the Hindoo ruler was transformed
into an elephant, and for this reason
great herds of elephants regularly visit the ruins to do homage to the spirit of their
departed ancestor. Close to the
temples is a shallow ford, which
these elephants cross whenever they
descend from Mount Suligi to the plains.
It is remarkable that since time
immemorial the stupa court has been
their favourite playground, where they walk about and disport themselves all
night long by the light of the
moon. During the excavations
of April, 1935, we were able to verify
this strange phenomenon from personal
experience (33).
(4) The island of Sumatra and the Malayan Peninsula have been
famous for their
gold and silver since antiquity.
Ptolemy and other Greek
geographers talk of the
Golden Chersonese in this region, and of Argyre ('the city of
silver') in the neighbouring Yava island. Ramiiyana, Mahabharata, and
Kathasaritsagara wax eloquent when they
describe the riches of these islands, which they call Suvarnadwipa (Island of G~ld).~
Arab writers of the tenth century, Abti Zayd al-Sirsfi (fl.303/916)
and al-Mas'adi tell us about the
"golden bricks", which the Maharaja of Zabaj used to throw every day in the ponds of his palace
(35).
In view of the above evidence we can say that
the Maharaja was perhaps not exaggerating too much when be boasted of a palace built of gold and silver bricks.
(5) Aloes, nutmeg, camphor, and
other odoriferous herbs and spices are
indigenous to Malaysia. Their fragrance spread as far as the Iberian Peninsula and attracted the Portuguese and Spanish adventurers to these distant islands.
(6) The two rivers mentioned
in these
letters must be the Jambi and the Musi rivers of Sumatra. On these
rivers stood the cities of Jambi and Sri
Vijaya (Palembang), which at different times served as the capitals of the
great empire known as Sri Vijaya. and
which are mentioned by the Arab
geographers under the names Jabah
and Siribizah, respectiely (36)
VI
References in
the Chinese dynastic histories, the travel accounts of the
Chinese pilgrims collected by
I-Ching. and the
stone inscriptions found
at different places in South
Sumatra. the neighbmring island of
Bangka and North Malaya-all this evidence
shows that the Sri Vijayan Empire of Sumatra and Malaya was at
the height of its glory and power
in the period extending from the second half of the seventh to the end
of the eighth century A.C." According to I-Ching, who visited this part
of the world in 671 A.C., and again in 685, when he stayed
here for four years, Sri Vijaya and
Kha-lang were not only great centres of maritime trade, but were also great
seats of learning. He recommended
that if a Chinese pilgrim wished to
go to Nalanda (Bihar) to
acquire knowledge, he should first
stay at Sri Vijaya for one or two years and learn the proper rules
before proceeding to India. From his memoirs. it appears that many
Chinese pilgrims were already acting
likewise (38).
Though the
high stage of civilization reached by
Sumatra and Malaya of the seventh and eighth
centuries has a bearing on
the composition of
the letters under discussion.
yet what is of particular interest to us in the context of our
subject, is their religious life.
The
archaeological evidence and the Chinese writings show that from the first or second
up to the beginning of the fifth century A.C.
Hinduism, especially of the
Saiva cult, was universally accepted in these islands, when Hinaygna
Buddhism was introduced here by Gunavarman. By the time I-Ching visited this
part of the world Hinayanism had become the dominant religion here. as is evidenced by I-Ching's own
statement and corroborated by the
inscriptions of the period. In I-Ching's
times, i.e. the close of the seventh
century A.C., there were only a few followers of the Mahayana. But the great change-over to
the Mahayana started early in the eighth
century. when Vajrabodhi, the great South Indian preacher of this faith, went
from Ceylon to China along with
his disciple. Amoghavajra, and on his
way stopped for five months at Sri Vijaya (39). Thus, Malaysia must be seething with religious controversy between the Hinayana and the Mahayana, when Islam appeared on the scene. The spirit of religious enquiry thus
germinated by this controversy is eloquently evident in the letter sent by the
Malaysian monarch to 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Aziz and at this stage of our
investigations we can safely conclude that
this monarch was no other than the ruler of Sri Vijaya.
This must be
the time of intenee activity in Sri
Vijaya, not only in the religious but also in the diplomatic
field. In 716 A.C. an embassy from She-li-fo-she
(Sri Vijaya) visited
China. We have seen above that in
718 a letter with gifts of amber. musk
and camphor was sent to the Arab Caliph.
In 724 and again in 728 embassies
were sent to the Chinese court. The
account of the embassy of 724 is significant for us in more than one way. We are told that among the presents sent to the Chinese Emperor was a
Ts'eng-ch'i (from Arabic Zanji,
meaning negro') slave-girl (40)."
Evidently the Sri Vijayan ruler got this African slave-girl through his newly found Arab relationship, and
the Arabic word used by the
Chinese chronicler is an unmistakable evidence
of this Arab link.
This Chinese
chronicler also records the name of the ruler of Sri Vijaya who sent these precious gifts. He is called She-li-t'o-lo- pa-mo (Srindravarman)
(41). Does it mean that in 724 A.C. the
Sri Vijayan Maharaja had already renounced Islam like
his contemporary RBja of Sind ?
This is not at all
improbable. It is well-known to the students of Southeast
Asian history that during the second half of the eighth century A.C. Mah~yZna Buddhism zzswept through the length
and breadth of Malaysia. It found
its most beautiful expression in
the blossoming-forth of the Javanese art during the period between 760 and 820
A.C., which culminated in the building of
the magnificent vihara of
Borobudur. Where Vajrabodhi,
Amoghavajra, and a host of other monks coming from Nalanda and other centres
of Mahayana Buddhism in India, succeeded. Islam's case went by
default.
VII
Al-Haytam b.
'Adi's report of a letter sent by a
monarch of Insular India to. Mu'awiyah (411661-611680). and Hsin
T'ang Shu's story of the Arab
ruler's intention (in
about 674 A.C.) of invading
Kha-lang. an important state in Nan-yang (South Seas), show
the farthest extent
of Muslim political ambitions and diplomatic
activities in the first century of the
Hijrah. They also demonstrate the
strength of their
newly formed navy.
The resounding victories won by
their Mediterranean-based western fleet
against the mightiest naval power of those times
is not unknown (42).The above two reports coming
from two opposite directions give us a
glimpse of their hitherto elusive eastern fleet, which must have been based in
their home-waters of the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf.
But the spread
of Islam was not at all concomitant with the expansion of Arabs' political power
and the growth of their armed strength.
The apostasy of Raja Jay Siva (or Jay Sinha) of Sind, in 10717%. and the
apparent failure of the attempt made by MahSrsljB Srindravarman. in 99/718. to
spread Islam in his fabulously rich dominions of Sri
Vijaya. show the weakness of Muslim missionary activities.
The two letters, in spite of their gross inadequacies. tell us quite a bit about
the early history of the Muslims-their victories as well as their failures. The present study of these two letters is still
more inadequate. But it is hoped that
these very shortcomings will arouse
enough interest among the
scholars of Islam, and of Southeast Asia, to pull the history of
Islam in the East out of the quagmire of
insolent indifference. Up till now
Islamic history has meant the history
of Muslim kings building empires over the territories west of the Bay of Bengal. The
meeker Muslims living east of this
tempestuous bay, numbering more than one-third of the total Muslim population of the
world. and having the proud possession of such
lands as the eastern wing of Pakistan, the Malayan Peninsula
and the Indonesian
Archipelago, which are destined to play increasingly important r61e in the
world of tomorrow, are up till now forgotten by the historian and sociologist
of Islam, and forsaken. This lop-sided view of
Islamic history (and sociologi) has lasted too long.
It has to come to an end.
The sooner it comes the better it
will be.
NOTES
1. Al-Jahis Kitab al-Hayawann. ed. 'Abd
al-Salam Muhammad Harun. VII:
113 (Cairo, 1344-1358 A.H.). The
text (al-Sin) instead of (al-Hind). which is obviously the copyist's mistake.
See Section V of this paper for further
arguments on the subject.
2. Ibn al-Nadim. Kitab al-Fihrist. 145. (Cairo. 1348
A.H ); Yaqiut. Irsyad al-Arab ilii
Ma'rifat al-Adab, ed. D. S. Margoliouth. VII ; 261-266 (Gibb Memorial Series, VII, 1926) : Ibn Qallikan. Wafayzt
al-A'yiin, ed. Muhammad Muhy al-Din 'Abd
al-Hamid. V : 357-165. (Cairo. 1948) :
Rosenthal. F.. A History of Muslim Historiography. 62-64. (Leyden. 1952) ; 'Abd al-'Aziz
al-Duri. Bahth fi Naaah 'Ilm al-Ta'rikh
'ind al-'Arab. 42. (Beirbt.
1960).
3. Al-Dulabi. Muhammad b. Ahmad. Kitab al.Kuna wa 'I-Asma'.
II. 158. (Hyderabad. 1322
A.H.) : Ibn Hajar. Tadhib al-Tadhib,
I : 221-222. (Hyderbad, 1325 A.H.).
4 Ibn Sa'd.
al-Tabaqat al-Kubra. V1: 315-316.
(Beirut. 1957) ; al-Dhahabi, Tadkhirat al- HuffaZ?;. I : 135. (Hyderabad.
1955).
5. Kitab 'Aja'ib
al-Hind. Livre des merveilles de 1 'Inde par le capitaine Bozorg
bin Sahriyar de Ramhormoz, trads. Marcel Devic.
Arabic text ed. P.A. van der Lith,
(Leyden. 1883-86).
6. Al-Maqdisi.
Kitab al-Bad' wa 'I-Ta'rikh, ed. M. C1. Huart, IV : 63, (Paris. 1907).
(a) Qashmir, or Quhmir, or Qishmir. should not be
confused with im homonym. Kashmir
(also written as Qashmir
in Arab geographical literature),
the famous valley in the Himalayas. In the present context it appears to be a metathesis of Chamorris or
Kamor~is. which was the title of the ancient
chiefs of the Philippine Islands.
(vide Pigafetta's Memoirs in A Htstory of the Discoveries in the South Sea or Pacific Ocean. by James Burney. III: 281. London.
1803). Hamd Allah
Mustawfi describing the wawaq
islands says is (The king of that country is known by the name of Kahmir). Nuzhat al-Qulub, ed. and trans. G. Le Strange. 222,
229. GMS XXIII. I and I& 1915 and 1919.
The identification of al-Waqwaq. the Arab El Dorado needs a thorough
research ; and the present writer will shortly publish the resuits of his own
investigations on this vexed question
However, it can be safely
surmised here that the Philippine Islands formed a part of this Arab El Dorado. In a long list of royal titles
Ibn Khurraddabih (op. cit.. 18) has
one Qashmiran shah which is probably the same Kamorris.
Al-Dimashqi has a statement in his valuable book on Cosmography. Kitab
Nukhbat al-Dahr fi 'A ja'ib al Bahr wa'l-Bahr. (ed. M. Fraehn and M. A. F. Mehren. Leipzig. 1923 ; French translation by M. A. F.
Mehren. Copenhagen. 1874), which can help us in identifying this toponym
with a certain degree of certitude.
Among "the remoter islands of
the Southern Encircling Ocean beyond the
equator, he includes "the island of
al-Qahmir" (p. 149). which puts it
quite unmistakably in the region of the modem Philippine Islands.
(b) AL Ranij is an Arabic loan-word meaning
'coconut', and the term probably refers to Coca Islands in the
Indian Ocean, vide al-Mas'udi. Muruj al-dhahab, les prairies d'or, ed. and
trads. C. Barbier de Meynard and Pavet de Courteille. I : 338. (Paris. 1861). also.
al-Jawaliqi. al-Mu'arab. 162.
Cairo. 1361 AH.. and Taj al-'Arus.
7. Al-Maqdisi. op. cit.. 62.
8. Yaqut. Mu'jam al-Buldan. ed. Muhammad Amin
al-Khanji, V : 415 and 418 (Cairo, 1906)
: al-Qazwini, athar al-Bilad wa Akhbar
al-'ibad, 105 and 121, (Beirut.
1960).
9. Ibn Kurraddhabih, Kitab al-Masalik wa '1-Mamalak,
ed. and trans. M.J. de Goeje. 67. (Bibliotheca geographorum
arabicorum. henceforth
B.G.A.. VI. Leyden, 1819) : Ibn al-Faqih, Mukhtasar Kitab
al-Buldan ed M.J. de Goeje. 15 and 16.
(B.G.A.. V. Leyden. 1885) ; Ibn Rustah, al-A'laq al-Naffisah, ed. M.J.
de Goeje, 132. (B.G.A.. VII. Leyden. 1892) ; Yaqat, Mu'jam. op.
cit., VII : 258 ; al-Qazwins. op. cit..
105. For more references on the Arab
Qimar (Khmer) see
Ferrand. G.. Relations de voyages et textes relatif
'Extrime Orient. 2 vols.. Index.
(Paris. 1913-14).
10. Reinaud. J.T..
La geographie d' Aboulfeda. Introduction. cccxxxi. (Paris. 1820).
11. 81-Qazwini, op. tit.. 127.
12. Al-Mas'udi, op. cit . I ; 204 and 214.
13. Al-Idrisi. wash al-Hind wa ma yujawiruha min
al-Bilad. extracts from Kitab Nuzhat
al-Mushtaq. ed. and trans. S.Maqbu1
Ahmad, 68 and 69 (Text). 65 and 66 (Trans.).
and 91 (Commentary). (Aligarh. 1954 and Leiden 1960).
14. This is the
Annamese pronunciation of the Chinese characters. Their Amoy
pronunciation is Ka-ling. while the Pekinese is Ho-ling. For the transcription of the earlier Southeast Asian toponyms the Annamese
pronunciation is more acceptable. vide Gerini. G.E.. Researches on Ptolemy's
Geography of Eastern Asia. 461. and 472.
note I. (London. 1909).
15. Hsin T'ang Shu, Chap. 222, folio 3b ; Groenveldt,
W.P,, Notes on the Malay Archipelago and
Malacca, in Miscellaneous Papers
Relating to Indo-China. ed. E. Rost. Second Series. I: 139-140. (London. 1887) ; Pelliot. P.. 'Deux
itineraires de chine en inde a la
fin du VIlIe siecle', in
Bullentin de I'Ecole Francaise d'
Extreme-Orient. Hanoi, (henceforth B.E.
F.E. 0.). Vol. IV, 1904. p. 297 ;
Ferrand. G., 'L' empire sumatranais de
Crivijaya'. in Journal Asiatique. Paris.
Series 11, Vol. XX, 1922. pp, 37-38.
I6 'Mu'awiyah's Attempt at the Invasion of Malaya'. a paper
read at the Twelfth Pakistan History
Conference. Dacca. East Pakistan.
February. 1962.
17. Yaqut. Irshad.
op. cit.. VI : 75-78 : Abu '1-Musaffar
Yusuf Qiz-Oghli alias Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi wrote in his Mir'at
al-Zaman that a1-Jahis compiled as many
as 370 books most of which Sibt
Ibn al-Jawzi himself read at
the mausoleum of Imam Abii Hanifah
(quoted by 'Abd al-Salam Muhammad
Haru in his Introduction to KitTib
al-Hayawan, op. tit.. pp. 5-6).
18. Ibn Khallikan, op. cit.. I : 92 ; Nicholson, R.A..
A Literary History of the Arabs, 347.
(London, 1923).
19. Ibn 'Abd
Rabbih. al-'Iqd al-Farid. ed. Ahmad Amin, Ahmad al-Zayn and Ibrahim al- Abyari. I1 : 202 ; I11 : 404-405.
which has a shortened version, (Cairo. 1940).
20. Ibn Hajar.
op. cit.. X : 458-63 Khatib al-Baghdadi. Ta'rikh
Baghdad. XI11 : 306-314. (Cairo.
1931) ; Hajji Khalifah. Kasf al-Zunun.
I1 : 1445, (Istambol. 1360-1361
A.H.) ; Brocklemann. C.. Geschichte der Arabischn Litteatur. Supplement. I1 : 929. (Leyden.
1938).
21. Ibn Taghri-Berdi. al-Nujam al-Zahirah fi Mullk Misr wa 'I-Qahirah. I: 240.
(Cairo. 1929).
22. Wellhausen's history of the
Umayyad reign has become a classic on
the subject (English translation
: The Arab Kingdom and Its Fall. by Margret
Graham Weir. Calcutta University Publication. 1927). The very title of the book speaks for this eminent
Onentalist's conclusions. On the impact
of this Arabist policy on the
Arabic literature and the
Muslim society Goldziher
made a pioneering study (Muhammedanische
Studien. 1 : 101-146, Halle. 1888). This study
has been brought
up-to-date by Muhammad al-Tayyib al-Najjar. al-Mawali fi 'I-'Asr al-Umawi, Cairo. 1949, and Ahmad Amin. Duha
'I-Islam. 1 : 18-80, (Cairo.
1956).
23. Hazard. H. W.. Atlas of Islamic History. (Princeton University Press. 1951).
has the following figures :- Lebanon : Sunni Muslims. 21% syi'ah
Muslims. 18% ; Syria: Sunni Muslims. 67%. syi'ah Muslims. 13%; Iraq : Sunni Muslims. 36%. syiah Muslims. 57% : Egypt :
Muslims. 92% : Jerusalem : Muslims. 40%,
Israel : Muslims, 7%. (Cf. Iran : Sunni
Muslims, 5%. &i'ah . Muslims. 93% : Turkey; Muslims. 98% : Afghanistan : Sunni Muslims,
90%. syi'ah Muslims. 9% ;
and Indonesia. Muslims. 9o%.) The
history of Islam in the Pakistan-India sub-continent does not present a very dissimilar picture. It appears that
the farther a region was removed from the
centre of Muslim imperial power the more chances Islam had to spread its message. Consequently, we now find that
after more than six centuriee of Muslim rule over Delhi and more than thirteen
centuries of Arab contacts with the
Indian Peninsula. Muslim homeland had to be found in the outer and far-flung wings of the sub-continent. These facts need a cool-headed and dispassionate analysis.
24. For the removal of impediments to Islamization: Ibn
Sa'd. op. cit.. V; 345, 350, and 384;
Ibn al-Jawzi. Sirat 'Umar Ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz.
99. (Maktabat al-Manure Cairo.
n.d.1; Abu Yusuf Kitab al khraj. 75,
(Bul~q. 1302 A.H.). For
Maghrib - : al-Baladhuri. Futuh al-Buldan. ed. M.J. de Goeje. 231. (Leyden,
1866). For Byzantine Emperor : Arnold, Sir Thomas, The Preaching of
Islarn.483, (Lahore.). For Transoxiana : al-Baladhuri, op. cit .
426. For Tibet ; al-Ya'qubi. Ta'rikh 11 :
306. (Beirut, 1960).
25. Ibn al-Athir.
Ta'rih aL Kamil. V: 54.
(Cairo. 1290 A.H.) ; al-Baladhuri. op.
cit., 441. In these Arabic texts the
Sindhi king's name reads as
Jayshibah which the present writer would like to read Jay Siva, for obvious reasons.
But the Persian text of Fatb Niimah-i Sindh, known as Chach Namah, which is a translation of an
Arabic history of the conquest of Sind written most probably in the early third century
Hijrah, has Jaysiyah (ed. U. M. Deudpota Delhi. 1939). which the present writer
would prefer to read Jay Siaha *. because on p. 234 of the book there is a
story how the king was
named after the lion, in
Sanskrit 'sinha', which was bmvcly killed by his father. Dahir.
26. Al-Baladhuri. op. cit.. 441.
27. Ibn al-Athir.
op. tit.. V : 32.
28. Ibn Taghri-Berdi, op. cit.. 1 : 243.
29. Al-Baladhuri.
op. cit.. 422 : Ibn a1 Athir, op. cit.. V : 54.
30. The question has been further discussed by the
present writer in his book. Coming of
Islam to Malaysia: A Historical Perspective (in
Press). Some aspects of the
problem have been discussed in his paper on China's Role in the Spread of Islam
in Southeast Asia, read at the First International Conference of Southeast Asian Historians. Singapore.
January. 1961.
31. Marsden. W.,
The History of Sumatra. 338. (London, 1811).
32. Ibn Rustah, op. cit.. 137-8. For Ligor Inscription : Coedes, G.. 'Le
royaume & Crivijaya'.
B.E.F.E.O.. Vol. XVIII, No. 6. 1918, pp.
29-32. For more references on the Arab
Mamlakat aL Mahraj see Ferrand, op. cit.. Index.
33. Schnitger. F.M.. The Archaeology of Hindoo
Sumatra. 12. (Leyden. 1937).
34. For a detailed bibliography on the subject:
Majumdar. R.C., Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East. Vol. 11.
Suvarnadvipa. Calcutta. 1937.
35. Abti Zayd al-Sirafi. Silsilah
al-Tawiiri&. Relations des voyage9
faits par les arabes et les persans dans Plnde et a la Chine, ed. & trads.
J. T. Reinaud. II: 91, (Paris, 1845) :
al-Mas'udi, op. cit. I. 175-77. It is
interesting to note that Abu Zayd uses the word
s" (taDj) for 'pond', which
is the Malay telaga, from the
Sanskrit, tatiika.
36. For Jabah and Siribizah: Ferrand, op. cit.. Index.
37. For the history of Sri Vijaya: Nilakanta Sastri,
K.A., A History of Sri Vijaya, Madras.
1949 : Majumdar. R.C.. Suvarnadvipa. op.
cit . Coedes. G.. Les dtats hindouisds
d'lndochine et d'lndonesia. Paris. 1948;
Schnitger. F. M.. Forgotten Kingdoms
of Sumatra. Leyden, 1939.
38. I-Ching (I-Tsing). A Record of the Buddhist Religion as Practised in lndia
and the Malay Archipelago (A .D. 671-695). trans. J. Takakusu. xxxiv.
(Oxford. 1896): Ibid.. Mdmoire
composd ci l'dpogue' de
grande dynastie T'ang sur les religieux eminents gui allirent chercher
la loi dans les pays d'omident, trads. E. Chavannes, 60.63. 159.182 and 187.
(Paris. 1894).
39. For Gunavarman
story: Pelliot, op. n't.. 274-75:
For I-Ching: see the preceding note. For Vajrabodhi: Pelliot, op. tit
,336. and Sylvain Levi. 'Les
missions de Wang Hiuen-ts'e dans I'Inde'. Journal
Asiatigue. Series IX. Vol. XV. 1900,
p. 421. For a general
discussion and bibliography:
Majumdar, op. dt.. 138-44. 40. Pelliot. op.. cit. 334-35.
41. Ibid.
42. Al-Baladhuri. op. cit. 235-36
: al-Tabari, Ta'rik al-Umam
wa'l-Muluik. V : 68-70, (Cairo, firat
edition, n.d.); Ibn al-Aeir, op. cit., 111: 48-49.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar