COMMENT Some while ago when still a student I read often enough about Gunung Kinabalu at 4,095 metres above sea level being slated as the highest mountain in Southeast Asia.

Then I remember one day reading a letter written by person with a western-sounding name in a magazine that this isn’t so, that the highest mountain in this region is the Hkakabo Razi in Myanmar at 5,881 metres. The writer then added that perhaps the authorities had made the Gunung Kinabalu claim to suit some governmental public relations or propaganda purposes.

Today after checking with Wikipedia, Gunung Kinabalu has gone down to 13th placing.But this writer insisted, and on this I am in total agreement with him, that so far as truth is concerned, the claim should not be entertained on the principle that what is not right should not be made right, what is not true should not be made true.

It’s a matter of intellectual integrity. Truth is paramount. Lies, or untruths, should not be made willingly to suit propaganda or any purpose.

Today I face probably a similar case when I read Malaysiakini’s report (May 26) that "Malay intellectualism can be traced back to the 13th century, when the Jawi writing system was introduced to replace Pallava or Kawi.” According to the report this claim had been made by Education Minister Muhyiddin Yassin when speaking at the launch of an exhibition of some of these original manuscripts written in Jawi before the advent of printing. 

I am no expert or scholar but have made some reading on this subject. I take this claim on Malay intellectualism being vibrant in the 13th century with a grain of salt, on the following basis:

The first centres on the question of the Malay race. There has been no such thing as a Malay race or civilisation in history.

The background has been that peninsula Malaya (take that to mean the land bordering the Straits of Malacca) had long been inhabited by many different people coming from many parts of Europe and Asia: Portuguese, Dutch, British and French from Europe, Arabs from the Middle East, Indians from India, Javanese from Java, Minangkabau from Sumatra, Bugis from Celebes, Chinese from China, to name a few.

Malaya then had been a melting pot of many different ethnicity and culture.  

Indeed apparently Aceh, the city at the northern tip of Sumatra (i.e. the land on the western side of the Straits of Malacca) also had the same people mix, so much so this city’s name is an acronym for Arab, Chinese, European and Hindu.  

No Malay race?

To my understanding the term Malay race had been coined by some British historians to label the locals or ‘natives’ of peninsula Malaya. When the Chinese and Indians came later in fairly large numbers in the later 18th and 19th centuries, these historians wanted to distinguish them from the natives, thus calling the latter Malay, purely because they speak Malay. So how can there be a Malay civilisation when there is no Malay race?

Secondly, the ‘native’ civilisation active in the region in the time frame had been that of Srivijaya and later succeeded by Majapahit. The remnants of Majapahit civilisation can be found in today’s Bali.

Thirdly, Malay in actual fact refers to the language to which these multi-cultured people had developed as a common language for social and commercial interaction. It has not been referred to as a civilisation in history as suggested by Muhyiddin; for a civilisation refers to a group or society, while language is the language the civilisation use in communication.

Fourthly, it is true though that Malay is part of the Malayo-Polynesian group of languages, covering the vast expense of land (and sea) from Madagascar to South India, Myanmar, the Isthmus of Kra, the entire Indonesian or Malay Archipelago, Cambodia, the Philippines, Macronesia, Micronesia, all the way down to New Zealand.

But this fact emphasises the point that there has been no Malay civilisation in history, but there has always been the Malay language commonly used by the people in the generic region.

I have to repeat that I am not an expert on this subject. My knowledge has been based on my reading of scholarly works of experts like Leonard S Andaya. I therefore would not wish to claim total authority on my contentions. But I do hope that the minister can perhaps direct his experts do further research and to determine whether or not my contention is verifiable; or is utter nonsense.

What I do wish to see is that we as a society desperately wish to become a developed and advanced nation. One way of achieving this goal is for us all to practise intellectual integrity and uphold the dignity of the people of this country at any and all times. Seeking the truth of my contention as expressed here should be one small step in going forward towards achieving this noble goal.   

AB SULAIMAN is an observer of human foibles, and has written and recently published a book ‘Sensitive Truths in Malaysia’.