Illuminating Chinese role in history of Indonesian Islam<\/p>\n
Tasyriq Hifzhillah
\nContributor\/Yogyakarta<\/p>\n
Runtuhnya Kerajaan Hindu-Jawa
\ndan Timbulnya Negara-Negara Islam di Nusantara
\n(Collapse of Hindu-Javanese Kingdoms
\nand Emergence of Islamic States in Indonesia)
\nProf. Dr. Slamet Muljana
\nLKiS Yogyakarta
\nviii + 303pp<\/p>\n
Historical reality is often too bitter to swallow or too hot
\nto stand.<\/p>\n
History is a large mirror that reflects the facts of the past,
\nand all that has been etched into the glass of history can never
\nbe erased.<\/p>\n
If you don't like a particular historical fact, you may try to
\ncover it up or forget it, but you can never remove it. An
\nhistorical fact can be interpreted in a variety of ways, but
\nregardless of the interpretation, the fact will never change.<\/p>\n
In this light, the history of the collapse of the Majapahit
\nkingdom, followed by the emergence of Islamic states in
\nIndonesia, contains many interesting facts of note. As the oldest
\nkingdom on Java, the Majapahit not only represented the
\nhistorical romanticism of the apex of Hindu-Javanese
\ncivilization, but also served as evidence of its political
\nstruggle during its wane and amid the Islamization of Java.<\/p>\n
Runtuhnya Kerajaan Hindu-Jawa dan Timbulnya Negara-Negara
\nIslam di Nusantara (Collapse of Hindu-Javanese Kingdoms
\nand Emergence of Islamic States in Indonesia), written by Slamet
\nMuljana, an historian and philologist at the University of
\nIndonesia, not only traces the origin of the fall of the
\nMajapahit kingdom, but also focuses on the role played by the
\nChinese in bringing Islam to the country.<\/p>\n
Muljana's findings counter and, at the same time, criticize
\nthe thesis generally accepted by many historians that Islam in
\nIndonesia is another branch of Islam that developed on the
\nArabian Peninsula.<\/p>\n
Muljana believes that Islam in Indonesia, and in Java in
\nparticular, was not the \"pure\" Islam that originated in Arab
\ncountries, but a hybrid Islam with many variants, and that
\nvarious elements contributed to its development.<\/p>\n
In his book, Muljana refers considerably to unofficial
\nhistorical documents like Babad Tanah Jawi (The Chronicle of
\nJava) and Serat Kanda, both written during the 17th-century
\nperiod of the Mataram kingdom.<\/p>\n
Several historians have questioned the validity of these two
\nbooks, because they contain a mixture of history and tales in
\nsuch a way that it is difficult to separate fact from fiction.
\nMoreover, neither book refers to any reliable historical sources,
\nsuch as the ancient inscriptions and historical works on the
\nMajapahit in the authoritative Pararaton and Negarakertagama.<\/p>\n
Muljana's book, divided into nine chapters, also draws upon a
\nnumber of archival documents summarizing the Preambule Prasaran,
\nChinese documents from Talang Temple, Portuguese sources and
\ndocuments from Sam Po Kong Temple in Semarang, written by
\nPoortman and quoted by Mangaraja Onggang (M.O.) Parlindungan.<\/p>\n
Poortman, a neighborhood head during the Dutch colonial era,
\nwas originally assigned in 1928 by the colonial administration to
\nfind out whether Raden Fatah was of Chinese ethnicity. As events
\ndeveloped, this fact was later politicized when the Chinese were
\nlinked with the 1926-1927 uprising staged by the Indonesian
\nCommunist Party (PKI). Poortman searched Sam Po Kong Temple in
\nSemarang and confiscated three cartloads of documents written in
\nChinese, some of which were 400 to 500 years old. M.O.
\nParlindungan, author of the controversial book Tuanku Rao,
\nreferred to Poortman's archives.<\/p>\n
Muljana writes, from the basis of these sources, that Raden
\nRahmad, or Sunan Ampel -- a Javanese ruler and nobleman -- who
\nlived in the mid-15th century, was a migrant from Yunnan
\nprovince, China. His real name was Bong Swi Hoo and he was the
\ngrandson of Bong Tak Keng, the highest ruler of Campa.<\/p>\n
In 1447, Sunan Ampel apparently married a woman of Chinese
\norigin called Ni Gede Manila. Her Chinese father, Gan Eng Cu, was
\nformerly a captain in Manila and was transferred to Tuban in
\n1423. From this marriage, Sunan Bonang was born, \"Bonang\" being a
\nderivative of the Chinese name \"Bong Ang\".<\/p>\n
Another of Gan Eng Cu's sons was Gan Si Cang, who became a
\ncaptain in Semarang. In 1481, Gan Si Cang headed the construction
\nof Demak mosque, employing carpenters from the Semarang
\ndockyards.<\/p>\n
Muljana believes that Sunan Kalijaga, who was known in his
\nyouth as Raden Said, was none other than Gan Si Cang. Meanwhile,
\nSunan Gunung Jati, or Syarif Hidayatullah, said Muljana, was Toh
\nBo, the son of Tung Ka Lo, aka Sultan Trenggana.<\/p>\n
Not only these four sunan -- a title given to the wiseman who
\nfirst brought Islam to Java -- but also others were, according to
\nMuljana, of Chinese origin. For example, Sunan Giri, a student of
\nSunan Ampel, also came from China. His father, Sayid Ishak, was
\nnone other than Sunan Ampel's uncle, Bong Swi Hoo. Meanwhile,
\nSunan Kudus, or Jafar Sidik, was also believed to be Chinese,
\nwith the birth name Ja Tik Su.<\/p>\n
The book concludes that at least six sunan were of Chinese
\norigin. However, Muljana's weakness, as Asvi Warman Adam writes
\nin the preface, is that he based his research solely on M.O.
\nParlindungan's book, and did not himself check Sa Pok Kong's
\ndocuments from Sam Po Kong Temple.<\/p>\n
Regardless of this weakness, in using these sources, Muljana
\nhas undeniably produced \"another\" historical perspective,
\nsomething quite different from the history interpretation that
\narises from heavy reliance on official literature.<\/p>\n
This type of reconstruction provides many benefits: We can
\nenjoy an \"unofficial\" version of history and additional stories,
\ntapes and interesting tidbits that have escaped the attention of
\nmany.<\/p>\n
Runtuhnya Kerajaan Hindu-Jawa was originally published in 1968
\nby Bhratara in Jakarta.<\/p>\n
The New Order regime, in line with its policy of
\ndevelopmentalism and systematic removal of all things Chinese,
\nbanned the book in 1971 for its controversial claim that the six
\nsunan were of Chinese origin.<\/p>\n
The New Order fanned anti-Chinese sentiment in many respects,
\nincluding historical research and interpretive history. However,
\nnow seven years into the reform era, Muljana's version of the
\nhistory of Islam in Indonesia deserves to be reviewed in a more
\nobjective frame of mind.<\/p>\n
The reviewer is a researcher at the Liberation Studies Institute
\n(LSP), Yogyakarta.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/illuminating-chinese-role-in-history-of-indonesian-islam-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}