Selected Historical Facets of The Presence of Shiism in Southeast Asia PDF

Selected Historical Facets of the Presence of Shi‘ism in Southeast Asia
ORIGINAL
Blackwell
Oxford,
The
MUWO
©
1478-1913
0027-4909
XXX
2009
Muslim ARTICLE
Hartford
UKPublishing
WorldSeminary
Ltd
Selected Historical Facets

Selected Historical Facets of the Presence of Shi[*002]ism in Southeast Asia
of the Presence of Shi‘ism

in Southeast Asia
Christoph Marcinkowski*
International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies (IAIS)
and University of Malaya
Malaysia
S
ince the early 1980s, Shi‘ite seminaries in Iran have seen steadily
increasing numbers of Shi‘ite students from Malaysia, Indonesia,
Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines. As they are a minority among
the local Muslims, Southeast Asian Shi‘ites generally tend to be more open and
receptive to their respective social (often non-Muslim) environment. A better,
deeper understanding of Shi‘ite Islam might thus be beneficial in order to
arrive at a more differentiated picture of contemporary Southeast Asian Islam
at large. The events in mainly Shi‘ite Iraq and Iran are also relevant to
Southeast Asia, and this is not only because of the possibility of the occurrence
of certain “solidarity effects” among Muslims of the region, in general, in case
of a major showdown between the United States and Iran. Thus, the recent
phenomenon of a Shi‘ite revival and “conversion” from Sunnism to Shi‘ism
among Southeast Asian Muslims appears to warrant particular attention.
Perhaps this issue should not solely be approached by the “inmates” of the
“ivory towers” of academia. Nevertheless, solid knowledge of the basic
concepts of Shi‘ism (as distinguished from Sunnism), as well as on the
nature of Islamic civilization as manifested in this part of the world are still
indispensable in order to arrive at a fact-oriented, less sensational evaluation
of current events. Such an approach must not necessarily mean a tension
between sound historical and academic work, on the one hand, and the
requirements of the interested public or a think-tank, for instance, that has
to assist politicians in their decision-making on a daily basis, on the other.
© 2009 Hartford Seminary.
Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden,
MA 02148 USA.
381
The Muslim World • Volume 99 • April 2009
This article is intended to highlight selected episodes of the historical

and cultural presence of Shi‘ism in the Southeast Asian region. It should be
emphasized that this presence, however, is not a result of post-1979 events
in Iran, but has rather been deeply entrenched for centuries in the historical
course of Southeast Asian Islam, especially in Islamic mysticism (Sufism).
The enigmatic 16th-century Sufi Hamzah Fansuri, for instance, a major figure of
Malay-Indonesian Sufism and literary heritage and still one of those Muslim
writers dearest to Malay-reading Muslims today, appears to have displayed
certain Shi’ite tendencies in his writings, as well as in the story of his life. In
this particular context, reference shall be made to Persian cultural influences
in the Southeast Asian region, Thailand, in particular. As will be shown, these
influences are in no way marginal, as the Bunnag family, descendants from
17th-century Persian Muslim immigrants to the Siamese Ayutthaya kingdom,
continues to play a significant role in contemporary Thai politics and society.
In the understanding of this author, pre-19th-century Southeast Asian
(especially Malay-Indonesian) Islam had been rather mystically inclined,
displaying Shi‘ite and Sufi elements, although maintaining outwardly an
“orthodox” Sunnite coloring. As will be pointed out, in spite of certain
indications for the increase of somewhat more scripture-based tendencies from
the 17th century onward, it rather was one of the paradoxical results of Dutch
and British colonialism in the region that Southeast Asian Islam took a
different, more legalistic, course since the early 1800s. Improved means of
communication, for instance, with and travel to the Sunnite centers of learning
in the Middle East (in particular, Egypt and Arabia) accelerated the already
ongoing purge of Malay Muslim literature of its more heterodox elements.
This purge should perhaps not be termed a “renewal” or “revival” but rather
an “intellectual retrogression.” One of its side-effects today is the increase of
radical and, at times, extremist tendencies among certain sectors of Southeast
Asian Islam. Thus, it should be re-emphasized here that in order to avoid
out-of-context dealing with and evaluating of contemporary issues (such as the
current (re-)emergence of Shi‘ism among parts of the Southeast Asian Muslim
community), we must also be constantly aware of the historical and cultural
particularities of Islamic civilization in this part of the world.
In practice, it is not so much the issue of leadership (imamah. khilafah)
of the Islamic community as it presented itself in history — the question of the
“merits” of either ‘Ali or Abu Bakr — which appears to trouble governments
and religious establishments of Sunnite-dominated countries, such as Malaysia.
Rather, suspicions with regard to the “fealty” and “trustworthiness” of the local
Shi’ite community seem to come to the forefront. President Hosni Mubarak of
Egypt — a country that is with about $US2 billion a year the largest recipient
of U.S. foreign aid after Israel and Iraq — aroused the anger of Shi’ites
382 © 2009 Hartford Seminary.
worldwide when he questioned the loyalty of Shi’ites to their respective

home countries. Speaking in early April 2006 on the satellite news channel
Al-Arabiya, he stated that “[t]here are Shi’ites in all these countries (of the
Middle Eastern region), significant percentages, and Shi’ites are mostly always
loyal to Iran and not the countries where they live.”1 It should be added that
Tehran cut diplomatic ties with Cairo after then Egyptian president Anwar
Sadat made peace with Israel in 1979. During the same interview, he also said
that Iran exerted a “huge influence” over Iraq’s majority Shi’ite population
and Shi’ites living in Arab countries, a statement which clearly reveals the
insufficient degree of his knowledge of Sunnite-Shi’ite affairs in general
and the multifaceted character of contemporary Shi’ism, in particular.
Nevertheless, matters of theology and creed (“aqidah) do play a
considerable part in the often strained relations between Sunnites and Shi’ites
— even if they are in overall devotional practice often closer to each other
than the four “orthodox” Sunnite legal schools among themselves. In the first
part, we have already referred to the Twelver Shi’ite “core beliefs,” the “roots.”
In the following, we shall try to shed a bit more light on the subject of
theological differences by also referring to selected aspects from the
perspective of “orthodox” Ash‘arite Sunnite thought, which is predominant
also in Southeast Asia, before proceeding to the historical arrival of Shi’ism to
Southeast Asia.
On “Schools” and “Rites”

The vast majority of Muslims in Southeast Asia today are Sunnites. In their
theological outlook they are overwhelmingly Ash‘arites,2 a circumstance that is
crucial in order to put the emergence of Shi’ism in the region into perspective.
Ash‘arism can well be considered “mainstream Sunnite theology.” It is named
after its originator, Abu ’l-Hasan al-Ash‘ari (d. 935), the 10th-century
systematizer of Sunnite theology. It can be seen as a reaction against the
extreme rationalism of medieval Mu‘tazilite theology.3 According to al-Ash‘ari,
human reason is second to divine revelation, as it is supposed to be unable to
distinguish independently between good and evil. It is up to God alone to
decide on the goodness or evil of a particular action. For mankind, the only
way to receive authentic information on religious truths is through revelation.
With regard to the issue of the divine attributes, Ash‘arism affirmed them —
although rejecting anthropomorphism outright. This is in sharp contrast to the
views held by the Mu‘tazilites (and Twelver Shi‘ites, one must add), who saw
in Qur’anic references to a “Hand of God” and in other physical attributes
purely metaphorical expressions. Very famous within the history of Islamic
theology is the Ash‘arite notion that the Qur’an — being the “Word of God” —
is eternal and thus uncreated. This, too, is contrary to the views of the
© 2009 Hartford Seminary. 383
Mu‘tazilites and Twelver Shi‘ites. Apparently, al-Ash‘ari’s main intention was

to preserve the notion of God’s omnipotence. However, the continuing tight
grip of Ash‘arism over Sunnite theology until this very day is often held
responsible for the prevailing determinism in that denomination.
With regard to Islamic law and devotional matters, most of Southeast Asia’s
Sunnite Muslims adhere to the Shafi‘ite “school.”4 Perhaps “legal rite” would be
more appropriate than “school,”5 an expression which is unfortunately still
dominating the pertinent literature, in the West, in particular. The term “school”
is rather misleading, as it would also include matters of theology, which is not
what the Arabic technical term madhhab (plural: madhahib) conveys. Today,
aside from the Shafi‘ites, only three of those “legal rites” are extant among
the Sunnites: the Hanafite madhhab, usually seen as the most moderate one
among the Sunnite rites, is predominant today in Central Asia, Turkey, the
Balkans and on the Indian Subcontinent (it had been the official rite in the
Ottoman Empire, Mughal India, and other Muslim dynasties of Turkic origin);
the Malikites, almost exclusively in North and Northwest Africa; and the
Hanbalites (commonly considered the most conservative and strict Sunnite
madhhab), mostly on the Arabian Peninsula. Wahhabism, today dominating
Saudi Arabia and certain strata of Sunnite extremism elsewhere, is not a legal
rite but a purist political movement that originated on the Arabian Peninsula
in the mid-18th century.6
In terms of geographical distribution, Shafi‘ites dominate the Malay-
Indonesian world (including Singapore, southern Thailand, and the southern
Philippines), Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Palestine, and Iraq (as far as the Sunnites
there are concerned). Southern India, too, contains Shafi‘ite pockets. As a
matter of fact, the majority of Muslims there are Shafi‘ites, a circumstance
which is highly relevant when discussing the course of the Islamization
process of Southeast Asia in history. Moreover, it is often forgotten in
contemporary discourse that Iran, too, had been one of the centers of Shafi‘ite
Sunnite scholarship — prior to the establishment there of Twelver Shi‘ism as
“religion of state” in Iran in 1501 under the Safavid dynasty.
However, when discussing the basic concepts of Twelver Shi‘ite Islam, it
is not so much the question of “legal matters” or “rites” that sets Sunnites and
Shi‘ites apart.7 As a matter of fact, as stated above, the Shafi‘ite and Ja‘fari
“schools” are perhaps closer to each other than the Sunnite “schools” among
themselves. They differ, however, in their approach towards the issue of
religious and political authority, and, above all, to the mind of the present
author, toward the essential meaning and place of religion and spirituality
in general.
Throughout Islamic history, Ash‘arite theology, which now permeates and
dominates Sunnite Islam in Southeast Asia, tended to be more acquiescent
towards the respective political system, that is to say, to the one or other
dynasty of the day whose main argument had been military power. The further
implications of this circumstance are beyond the scope of this article, which
focuses on Shi‘ite Islam. Nevertheless, it should be noted here in passing that
the recent activities of the Al Qaeda (al-Qa“idah) terrorist network and its
off-shoots throughout the Sunnite Muslim arena are also highly significant
within the context of Islamic theology, as they explicitly target Sunnite regimes
which are branded by them as “un-Islamic” or “not Islamic enough.” From the
perspective of the history of classical Sunnite theology and orthodox Sunnite
political thought, however, this kind of “rebellious” attitude towards
established political power constitutes an “innovation.”
I should like to close this brief excursion into the issue of “legal schools”
by referring to Mahmud Shaltut (1893–1963), a leading Sunnite Egyptian
scholar. From 1958 to 1963, Shaltut had been the Shaykh or Grand Imam
(i.e., the leader) of Al-Azhar University, one of the main centers of Sunnite
scholarship in the world, but actually founded in the 10th century by the
Fatimids — the earlier referred to Shi’ite Isma‘ili dynasty. Shaltut, as head
of Al-Azhar is one of the most respected authorities in Sunnite Islam, and
is particularly remembered for introducing the teaching of Zaydite and
Twelver Shi‘ite fiqh to the university alongside the jurisprudence of the four
“recognized” Sunnite madhahib.8 He was also involved in a dialogue
movement with Shi’ite Islam, known as taqrib al-madhahib or
“rapprochement of the Islamic legal schools.” The leading Iraqi Shi‘ite scholar
of that time, Shaykh Muhammad Husayn Al Kashif al-Ghita (1877–1954) of
Najaf, was part of that movement as well. Concern for social aspects, a deeply
felt conviction that sectarian conflicts are essentially a sociological
phenomenon, as well as an appreciation of the value of comparative
jurisprudence in the study of law, might have moved Shaltut into the direction
of the Sunnite-Shi‘ite reconciliation, which resulted in the famous religious
verdict (fatwa) that was issued by him in July 1959 and announced on July 6
of that year.9
Early Arrivals: Champa

In the following, we shall turn to some facets of the early historical
manifestations of Shi’ite cultural influences in Southeast Asia. According to the
French scholar Pierre Yves Manguin,10 early or “proto-Shi’ism” is said to have
been present among the Cham people (a minority of Malay ethnic stock in
what is now Cambodia and Vietnam) as early as the 7th century CE, that is to
say, during the formative period of Islam. This rather surprising feature might
have to be considered within the context of Southeast Asia’s favorable
geographical location along the major maritime trade routes between East Asia,
China in particular, on the one hand, and the wider Indian Ocean/Middle
Eastern region, on the other.
Manguin based his assertion on a note by the medieval Syrian author
Shams al-Din Muhammad al-Ansari al-Dimashqi (1256–1327), who compiled
his Arabic cosmography Nukhbat al-dahr fi “aja”ib al-barr wa ”l-bahr
(The Choice of the Age on the Marvels of Land and Sea) around 1325.
According to al-Dimashqi — an eminent Sunnite scholar — the Islam of the
people of Champa was of the “Shi‘ite persuasion,” without specifying
which particular denomination. It is said to have been brought there by
partisans of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (the first Shi‘ite Imam), who escaped persecution
by the Umayyad regime.11 To the mind of Manguin, it is very well possible
that some of the peculiar “heterodox features” preserved in the religion of
most Vietnamese Chams (the Cham Bani) and some Cambodian Chams
(the Jahed) derive from this contact with very early Islam. In the view of
E. M. Durand, another French scholar who wrote at the beginning of the
20th century, the Cham Bani “practised the minority form of Shi‘ite Islam
like that of Persia and India, in contrast to the Sunni Islam of the majority
of Muslims.”12 Whether this refers to ‘mainstream’ Twelver Shi’ism and its
theological and legal fabric is left unclear and is, perhaps, to the mind
of this writer, rather doubtful.
William Collins, an American anthropologist who has worked with
the Cham people, too, refers to certain features that make it likely that the
Muslims who brought Islam to Champa might indeed have been Shi‘ites
(perhaps mostly Persians). Among other evidence, he draws attention
to salutations upon the Prophet Muhammad and his Household, the
Ahl al-Bayt (as opposed to his Companions, who are not mentioned),
on an early Muslim tombstone. According to Collins, the Muslim arrivals
“were mainly Persian Shi‘is.” In support of this assertion, Collins too refers
to al-Dimashqi and his remark that “the country of Champa [. . .] is inhabited
by Muslims, Christians and idolaters. The Muslim religion came there
during the time of the second [sic!] Sunnite caliph ‘Uthman b. ‘Affan [i.e., in
the 7th century] [. . .], and the Alids, expelled by the Umayyads and by Hajjaj,13
fled there.”14 Collins, who has carried out extensive field research in Cambodia,
pointed out that further evidence for an early Shi’ite connection might
be gleaned from certain Cham rituals, which put special attention on the
names of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib and his wife Fatimah in wedding ceremonies
and cosmology, and on those of al-Hasan and al-Husayn in cosmology.15
A conversation with an elderly Muslim Cham recorded by Collins during
a visit to a Cham village in Cambodia’s Kompong Cham province is worth
being quoted here in full, as it sheds some light on how Chams themselves
perceive their origins:
The story that seemed to come immediately to his mind was how
Islam came to the Chams from Ali Hanafiah [i.e., Muhammad Ibn
al-Hanafiyyah], son of Mohammed’s son-in-law Ali, but not by
Mohammed’s daughter, Fatimah. The storyteller was certainly influenced
in this choice of story by the fact that my guide to the village was a
strong-minded Muslim teacher, whose teaching and preaching career
in the area had consistently opposed non-Islamic elements in Cham
belief. So the story reflects the general tendency of the Cham to see
their origins in Islamic terms, which entails an accommodation to
requirements of Islamic correctness. On the other hand, the story, as far
as I can tell, is non-canonical and I suspect it may reflect Shi‘ite influence
rather than the predominant Sunni Islam that most Muslims follow. If so,
it would support the findings of earlier scholars that the Cham Bani of
Phanrang had been exposed in early times to the Shia branch of Islam
from Persia or India. The story of the origin of Islam in Champa
probably reflects very early Islamic influences Cambodian Chams
brought with them from Champa.16
The circumstance of “Ali Hanafiah” (Muhammad Ibn al-Hanafiyyah —

d. 700 CE) being the focal point of reference for early Islam among the Cham
people is very fascinating and, indeed, revealing. In 685– 87, the Umayyads
had faced a very serious pro-Shi’ite revolt organized in Kufah, in southern Iraq,
by al-Mukhtar, who is said to have acted on behalf of Muhammad Ibn
al-Hanafiyyah. The uprising tapped the support of the mawali, or non-Arab
(mostly Persian) converts to Islam — many of them Shi’ites — who were
emerging as an important social group with grievances against the regime
for being treated as second-class Muslims and still having to pay the poll-tax
demanded of non-Muslims, despite their conversion. Al-Mukhtar proclaimed
Ibn al-Hanafiyyah as the Mahdi, or the “Righly Guided One.” Apparently, this
was the first appearance of this idea, which became common, particularly
in Shi‘ite Islam. Al-Mukhtar’s uprising was subsequently suppressed bloodily
in 687. As we shall see later, the enigmatic figure of Muhammad Ibn
al-Hanafiyyah also features prominently in the hikayat genre of classical
Malay literature.
The “Spice Islands”: Remnants of Shi{ite Folk Culture

on the Moluccas
As in the case of the Cham people, on the eastern Indonesian Maluku
(Moloccas) islands too we still encounter several other remnants of surviving
“Shi‘ite customs,” such as the above-mentioned explicit reference to ‘Ali b.
Abi Talib and his wife Fatimah in wedding ceremonies. The anthropologist
Dieter Bartels, a contemporary expert on the Moluccas and their ethnic groups
who has been involved in interfaith relationships, states that in one village,

. . . [a]ccording to local tradition, Islam was [. . .] brought by [a] wali

[i.e., wali, a Sufi saint] from Arabia, Malacca and Gujarat — probably in
successive waves. The Gujarat claim finds support in that at least one
clan, Tuankota, claims to be of Indian-Arab origin and also through
certain Islamic customs that seemingly are of Shi‘ite origin. For example,
the month Muharram during which the Sunni Moslems in 680 at Kerbala
devastatingly defeated the Shi‘ites is still considered an unlucky
month for that very reason. Therefore, people embarking on a large
undertaking, e.g., the building of a new house, will avoid to start the
project during this month. Also, before the imam, the Moslem religious
leader, marries a couple, the groom has to report to him to undergo a
special ordeal. He must bring a bale of white cloth for the official and
then bent over a spread out mat to be beaten twelve times, each time
with a different rattan stick. This is done in memory of the Twelve Imam
[sic!] recognized by Shi‘ites. During the marriage ceremony, the groom
and bride are not addressed by their actual first names, as it is usually
done in Islam, but temporarily are called, and identified, with Ali and
Fatima, the son-in-law and daughter of Mohammed who are next to
Mohammed the central figures in Shiitism [sic!] since Ali is considered
the First Imam and Fatima, as the daughter of the Prophet, legitimizes
the claim that only the offspring of Ali can be caliphs.
Furthermore, according to the history of Rohomoni, Islam was brought

to this village by a certain Datuk Maulana who is considered so holy that
the villagers do not dare to speak his real name, being afraid that
misfortune would befall them. This saint, originating from the Shi‘ite
center [sic!] of Baghdad has not only great supernatural powers but also
is invisible under normal circumstances, i.e., a figure not unlike the
disappeared Twelfth Imam of the Shi‘ites. Maulana converted the son of
the ruler of Rohomoni, called Mahdun, whose descendants, the Sangadji
clan, are still the legitimate rulers of Rohomoni. Mahdun is considered a
saint and his grave is just as highly revered than those of Maulana.”17
Bartels continues his observations with regard to another village:

[T]he village of Mamala (Hitu) holds on the lesser Islamic holiday seven
days after Idul Fitri, a ceremony called Perang Sapu Lidi, the ‘Broom
War.’ It is the day when people visit the sacred graves of the ancestors.
The men of the village perform a dance in which they castigate
themselves with palm leaf rib brooms which is probably another Shi‘ite
custom. Afterwards, special oil prepared with the help of the ancestors
is poured on their bleeding wounds making them disappear
momentarily. Only girls who have not yet menstruated can prepare
this oil, otherwise it would be ineffective.18
Bartels19 also mentions that R. F. Ellen,20 another scholar, has reported on

other supposedly “Shi‘ite customs” practiced in the villages of Sepa (Seram),

Tulehu (Ambon) and “other Central Moluccan villages.” In the village of Sepa,
it is said to be called hadrad or hadarat and “performed on Idul Korban21
(Indonesian: Idul Adha; Arab. “id al-Adha),” the “festival of sacrifice,”
the highest Islamic festival. Bartels considers this to be a derivation
from the Shi‘ite ceremony of rawzah-khwani, already referred to briefly
and erroneously called “randah-khani” by Bartels. Bartels refers to
“randah-khani” as “a ritual drama which in its original version depicts the
tragic lives of the different imam [sic!], particularly Imam Husain’s, son of Ali
and grandson of the Prophet.”22 It appears that Bartels had rather ta“ziyyah,
the Shi‘ite “passion play” discussed earlier in mind. Based on Ellen, Bartels
states also that in Sepa “the re-enactment is restricted to the funeral procession
of Husain [al-Husayn] in which soberly dressed males link arms and move at
a slow pace, swaying and chanting mournfully, urged on by stewards wielding
flimsy canes.”23 He adds that these theatrical performances seem to also be
celebrated in other parts of Indonesia, however, not a week after Idul Fitri,
as in the above-mentioned case, but rather on the 10th of Muharram, which
marks the day of the death of the Prophet’s grandson al-Husayn at the
battle of Karbala’.24
Wali Songo: Traces of Shi{ism on Java

Moving on to Java, half-legendary Sufi teachers known as “Nine Saints” or
wali songo in Javanese, are traditionally credited with the spread of Islam on
that island during the 15th and 16th centuries. The historical identities of those
teachers are often shrouded in mystery. However, already during the early
years of the 20th century, the Dutch Orientalist-cum-administrator Rinkes25 has
drawn the attention of Western academia to the significance of local legends
and folk traditions for research on the historical course of Southeast Asia’s
Islamization process.
Of particular interest to our subject is a figure traditionally known as
“Sunan Kudus.” Sunan Kudus is also known as “Ja‘far Shadiq,” or Ja‘far al-Sadiq,
which is also the name of the sixth Imam of the Twelver Shi’ites. The tomb of
Sunan Kudus is believed to be preserved in the northeastern Central Javanese
city of Kudus, which is thought to have been founded by him. Kudus, the
name of which is said to be derived from Arabic quds (sacred, holy), might
have been the site of a sanctuary even in the pre-Islamic period, when it was
known as Tajug. The name “Kudus”/quds has another connotation as well —
Al-Quds is also the Arabic name for Jerusalem. Moreover, Masjid Menara, or
“Minaret Mosque,” the mosque which houses Sunan Kudus’ tomb, is also
known as “Al-Aqsa Mosque,” apparently in reminiscence of Masjid al-Aqsa,
“the Farthest Mosque,” in Jerusalem, which is mentioned in the Qur’an and
which is, after Mecca and Medina, the most sacred city of Islam.
Inside the “Al-Aqsa Mosque”26 of Kudus, an inscription above the

prayer-niche (mihrab) states that the original building was erected in 956 A.H.
(1549 CE) and named “Al-Aqsa” by “Ja‘far Shadiq,” who is usually identified
with Sunan Kudus. The mosque itself, apparently dating from the first half of
the 16th century, is a good example of the history of Islamization in the
Archipelago as it contained many “Islamized” features of local Hindu-Javanese
architecture.
The relations between the choice of “Kudus”/quds for the name of the
city and its namesake in Palestine, as well as the reason behind the fact that
Sunan Kudus is also known by a particularly “Shi‘ite” name — “Ja‘far Shadiq”/
Ja‘far al-Sadiq — appear to be lost in history. However, Kudus still hosts an
annual festival involving the ceremonial change of the curtains that surround
the tomb of Sunan Kudus. The festival is known as Buka Luwur and appears
to feature certain Shi‘ite elements.27 Significantly, Buka Luwur is celebrated on
the tenth day of Muharram, the day which marks the day of the killing of
al-Husayn at Karbala’. The reasons for conducting these ceremonies are
unknown, but they may perhaps be sought in the influence exercised by
frequent visitors from Iran or the “Persianized” Shi‘ite kingdoms of Southern
India. In light of what has been said above in terms of early “Shi’ite influences”
among the Cham people, for instance, the rather late case of the wali songo
should be a “second wave” — even if the final answer to the question of their
actual belonging to a particular denomination has to remain unsettled.
The Spread of Persian as lingua franca

When considering the history of Islam in the eastern Indian Ocean region
and the eastern archipelago, as well as the place of Shi’ism within this context,
the role played by linguas franca will become apparent. In the course of
Islamic history, Arabic, Persian, Turkish and Malay (not to speak of several
other linguas franca in Africa) had been major tools in communicating the
message of Islam to multi-ethnic and multi-lingual audiences.
Due to several historical developments, Persian obtained a major position
in Central Asia and on the Indian Subcontinent, and Persian was also to have
a say in the Malay-Indonesian archipelago. From the establishment of the
Ghaznavids (a dynasty of Turkic origin which ruled over much of what is
today northern India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan) in the 10th century onward
but especially after the establishment of the Delhi Sultanate in the 13th century,
Persian, rather than Arabic, the language of the Qur’an and of Islamic
jurisprudence, served as a means of the dissemination of Islam and as the
lingua franca among the educated Muslims of India.28 This particular
circumstance cannot be emphasized enough, as Persian had thus become the
transmitter for a less legalistic-minded, mystically and philosophically inclined
form of Islamic religiosity in the eastern, non-Arab lands of 12th and 13th-
century pre-Mongol Iran and Central Asia, as well as in India and further east.
The devastating Mongol invasions of the Middle East (including in Iran and
Central Asia) and the subsequent establishment of kingdoms of Mongol and
Turkic ethnic and cultural background even strengthened this trend of a
distinct development of Islamic culture in the East. Due to their geographical
location, this trend was continued in India and Southeast Asia, as well. As we
shall see later with regard to Southeast Asian Islam, this development was only
to be reversed in the course of the 19th century.
Persian also became the lingua franca in the Indian Ocean trading world,
and a Persian-speaking merchant community was present in Malacca, the
Malay Muslim sultanate and trade emporium, a state which lasted from the
early 15th century to 1511, when it was conquered by the Portuguese.29
Although Malacca was at least nominally a vassal of Siam, which also claimed
the suzerainty over the entire Malay Peninsula,30 it was able to establish itself
as the foremost power in the Archipelago, giving the propagation of Islam in
the region a vigorous new impetus.31 At that time, the office with the Persian
title of shahbandar, a kind of “harbour master,” known in many of the Indian
Ocean trade ports as well as in several parts of the Ottoman Empire, was also
established in Malacca. It has attracted the attention of several Western
scholars.32
Features of “Persianized Sufism” and Persian

Influences in Malay Language and Culture
In Southeast Asia, the spread of Islam happened predominantly by way
of the southern and western Indian trade emporia, that is to say, by sea.33
Muslims had certainly visited Southeast Asia much earlier as traders coming
from the Middle East and India.34 The large-scale Islamization of the
Malay-Indonesian Archipelago (Sumatra and parts of Java, in particular) during
the 13th and 14th centuries, however, was further advanced by Arab traders
from the Hadhramaut in Yemen (southern Arabia), as well as by merchants
from southern India, areas in which Shafi’ite Sunnism was prevalent. Many of
the arriving Muslim merchants and preachers of Islam were affiliated with one
or more of the leading mystical orders (plur.: tariqat, turuq, sing.: tariqah)
then en vogue in the Middle East and India.35 In the Archipelago, Islam was
often propagated in the garb of a mysticism imbued with the ideals of
sainthood (Arab.: wilayah, Pers.: velayat) as expounded by classical Persian
Sufism. These tendencies met and blended with local folk beliefs and even
shamanistic elements from the region’s pre-Islamic period.36
The issue of “Persian cultural influences” in Southeast Asia is also closely
related to the ongoing debate in academia on the historical course of the
Islamization of that region.37 At times ideologically over-weighted, the dispute

has focused so far on the issue of the geographical origin of Southeast Asian
Islam, that is to say, whether Arabia, India, or Iran were the main protagonists
in “spreading the message,” and what would be the chronological framework
for this scenario.38 As we have seen earlier, the overwhelming majority of
Southeast Asia’s Muslims are Sunnites, following the Shafi‘ite “school” of law.
The same is the case with the Muslims of southern India, contrary to northern
India, where the Hanafite “school” is dominant among the faithful. Later on,
we shall also have to say something about the circumstance that the southern
part of the Subcontinent was also the seat of the Twelver Shi‘ite Qutb-Shahi
kingdom, which was only overcome by the Mughals in the early 1680s.
Persian influences in the Malay-Indonesian world were not only restricted
to conceptual aspects of Islamic spirituality. Some aspects of cultural influences
have already been dealt with in the past.39 However, Persian influences also
manifested themselves in the Malay language, whether classical or modern.
Loanwords from Arabic and Sanskrit in classical as well as contemporary
Malay/Indonesian are doubtlessly more numerous than those of definitely
Persian origin. However, loanwords of doubtlessly Persian origin are
nevertheless still frequent in contemporary Malay. The following examples
might suffice: shah (“king,” only when added as a kind of “suffix” to the names
of the Malay rulers, as it was practice among Muslim Iranian and “Persianized”
Indian rulers, otherwise raja), gandom (“wheat”); anggur (“grape”);
dewan (“assembly-hall,” e.g., Dewan Rakyat, the Malaysian Parliament);
bandar (today meaning “town” in Malay, but originally signifying “harbor”
or “coastal city” in Persian, from where it entered Malay); pahlawan (“fighter”,
“war hero”). The case of bandar is a good example for the ways in which a
Persian loanword was “adapted” to an early Malay setting, when “cities” were
mostly coastal settlements and maritime emporia, such as Malacca and later on
Banda(r) Acheh. Very interesting is the case of the loanword nobat, which
follows Persian patterns even in its pronunciation. As in the case of the Persian
“original” naubat, where it signifies “nine kinds of instruments,” nobat in
Malay refers to the traditional royal orchestras of Malay courts, similar to those
known in Iran and the other “Persianized” kingdoms throughout Islamic
history. In the Malay context, the nobat appears predominantly during
installation ceremonies.40
The frequent occurrence of such loanwords even in daily usage may serve
as an indicator that the Persian lexical presence in the Malay language is by
no means marginal. This circumstance has also attracted the attention of
modern authors. The results of these inquiries, however, differ somewhat:
Beg’s small work Persian and Turkish Loan-Words in Malay41 is mostly based
on guesswork with regard to the etymology of words of supposedly Persian
origin. The work by the Iranian scholar Khush-Haykal Azad,42 who has access
to Malay-Indonesian, is somewhat more encouraging. Unfortunately, this work
has yet not been translated into English. On the academic level, the late Italian
Iranologist Alessandro Bausani published during the 1960s and 70s a series of
pioneering studies that address not only the issue of Persian vocabulary in
Malay, but also that of the hikayat genre (from Arab. hikayah and Pers.
hekayat) in classical Malay literature.43 Bausani made the interesting
observation that about 90% of the Persian loanwords in Malay indicate
concrete objects and less than 10% abstract or adjectival concepts. We shall
return to the hikayat genre soon.
The advice- or nasihat genre of classical Persian literature, too, is well
represented in classical Malay-Indonesian literature.44 A very famous example
is the Taj al-Salatin (Arab. title, meaning The Crown of Kings, but Malay text)
by Bukhari al-Jauhari from the 17th century, which was translated into Malay
from an apparently unknown Persian source for the rulers of the Acheh
sultanate of Sumatra.45 The presentation of its topics gives evidence to a close
relation to earlier Persian patterns. For instance, he translates generous
selections from Nizam al-Mulk’s celebrated work on statecraft, known as
Siyasatnamah (Pers., The Book of Government). It consists of 50 chapters
concerning religion, politics, and various other issues of the day. Nizam
al-Mulk was a Persian scholar and is particularly remembered as the powerful
vizier of the Seljuk Turks. Aside from this, Jauhari uses the Persian expression
nowruz when referring to the beginning of a new year.46 Similar in character,
although more encyclopedic, is Bustan al-Salatin (Arab. title, meaning Garden
of the Kings, but Malay text) by Nur-al-Din al-Raniri (d. 1656), the fierce
legalistic adversary of the ideas slightly earlier propounded by the Malay Sufi
Hamzah Fansuri, to whom we shall return later. Bustan al-Salatin, too, was
composed at perhaps the middle of the 17th century.47 Close adherence to
their Persian models makes both works appear to be faithful translations from
Persian language and thought into a Malay setting. It should be noted that
Raniri, who was well read in the Persian scholarly tradition, was born in
India.48 Moreover, both works refer extensively to the topic of the “Just King,”
as exemplified by Khosrow I (r. 531–79), also known as Anushirvan “the Just,”
the archetypal ruler of pre-Islamic Sasanid Iran. Recently, the concept of the
“Just King” and its correlation to topics in several Islamic and pre-Islamic
literatures of Southeast Asia has been studied extensively by the Iranian
scholar Setudeh-Nejad.49
Facets of “Shi{ite Elements”

Along with Persianate Sufism, Shi‘ite elements too entered
Malay-Indonesian Islam, certainly by way of southern India, where it was
well represented.50 However, we should bear in mind that the connotation

“Persian Islam = Shi‘ism” that might come to one’s mind when thinking of Iran
today was not apparent in the 13th and 14th centuries, although Shi‘ite
undercurrents in Sufi literature have always existed, as we shall see soon.
Moreover, Shi‘ism encompassed at that time a rather wide spectrum of
branches, such as those belonging to the Isma’ilis. The situation at that time
was thus different from today, where Twelver Shi‘ism is the dominant form of
Shi‘ite Islam. At any rate, based on the present state of our knowledge, we are
unable to say anything with regard to the issue of whether the activities of the
Isma’ilis in India at that time had any bearing on Southeast Asia. Within the
context of Islamic history in India, however, it is interesting to note that
Isma‘ilis often used analogies to which Hindus, the potential targets of
Isma‘ili missionary activities, could connect, such as the epic struggle of
Lord Rama, a “wronged hero,” likening it to that of the first Shi‘ite Imam ‘Ali
or that of his son al-Husayn at Karbala’. At any rate, by the end of the 13th
century, still the “formative period of Islam in Southeast Asia,” Shi‘ites had still
not managed to establish a political entity of their own in the region, although
at that time Shi‘ism is said to have caused a split in the ruling family of Perlak,
apparently the earliest Muslim sultanate on Sumatra’s northeastern coast.51
From the cultural point of view, however, Shi‘ite influences are
nevertheless manifest in the Muslim literature of the Malay-Indonesian
Archipelago and have been studied in depth by several Western and
Indonesian scholars, most importantly by Baried and Wieringa.52 These
influences are particularly evident in what is known in Malay as the
hikayat-genre (from Arab.: hikayah; Pers.: hekayat, meaning “tale,” “story”).
The anonymous Hikayat Muhammad Hanafiyyah, for instance, of which we
have an excellent study and English translation by the Dutch scholar Brakel,53
seems to be the oldest Malay work of this kind of literature that is still popular
among the Muslim peoples of Southeast Asia. It appears that the Hikayat
Muhammad Hanafiyyah was translated (at times literally) in the middle of the
15th century and possibly at Pasai in northeastern Sumatra, from a Persian
original.54 Basing his conclusions on internal evidence in the Malay translation,
Brakel places the (unknown) Persian original in the 14th century and
advocates a date “not much later” (perhaps 2nd half of 14th century) for the
Malay translation, the oldest manuscript of which dates from 1632. He also
provides a detailed list of other versions or translations of the Hikayat
Muhammad Hanafiyyah into several Indonesian languages, such as Javanese,
and refers also to versions in Turkish, Urdu, Dakhni and Punjabi.55 The
Hikayat Muhammad Hanafiyyah, “part of the common literary heritage of the
Muslim peoples of Asia,”56 recounts the epic struggle between the Umayyad
regime and Muhammad Ibn al-Hanafiyyah, an enigmatic, archetypal heroic
figure of early Shi‘ism and a son of the first Shi’ite Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib.
Significantly, Brakel also noticed in the Hikayat Muhammad Hanafiyyah
certain affinities with the genre of Abu-Muslim-namahs 57 of the Turco-Iranian
world.58 In the view of this scholar, later manuscript versions of the Hikayat
Muhammad Hanafiyyah have been “purged” of some of their too inimical
statements concerning Mu’awiyah, the first ruler of the anti-Shi‘ite Umayyad
dynasty, and pro-Umayyad transmitters of Hadith from the Prophet
Muhammad, such as Abu Hurayrah.59 Earlier on, we saw that at least some of
the Cham people seem to refer to Muhammad Ibn al-Hanafiyyah as their point
of reference for the beginning of their Islamization in history.
Acheh and the Case of Hamzah Fansuri

Although the period between the 15th and 17th centuries in Southeast Asia
was marked by vigorous Islamization activities on the part of the sultanates of
Malacca and Acheh, respectively, the spread of Islam was still in its initial
stages at that time in other parts of Southeast Asia, i.e., the rest of what
now constitutes Indonesia and the Philippines.60 Even the low degree of
Islamization on the Peninsula and in Sumatra itself is telling: after the fall of
Malacca to the Portuguese in 1511, for instance, Kedah on the Malay Peninsula
had to be “re-Islamized” by Acheh after the people there had “relapsed”
into animism.
Shi‘ite influences on Islamic religious thought in Southeast Asia are
substantial with regard to the Acheh sultanate, which was able to proceed to
a dominant position in the Straits after the fall of Malacca to the Portuguese in
1511 had caused the latter’s peninsular Malay successor states to lapse into a
period of isolation. According to the Dutch Orientalist Hurgronje, who wrote
at the beginning of the 20th century, Muharram, the first month of the Islamic
lunar calendar, used to be called “Asan-Usén” by the Achenese, obviously in
commemoration of the Prophet’s two grandchildren, al-Hasan and al-Husayn,
whereas they referred to the 10th of that month as “Achura.”61 He adds that
some of the Achenese, although being Sunnites, used to perform mourning
ceremonies reminiscent of those in Shi‘ite countries, although on smaller scale.
According to Hurgronje, the Achenese used to consider the first ten days of
Muharram as “unlucky,” but opts for a southern Indian connection rather than
a direct link to Iran.62 It should be noted here only in passing that a festival
with a particularly Shi‘ite flavor persists to this day in the coastal village of
Pariaman in West Sumatra. It is celebrated during the first ten days of
Muharram and involves certain dramatic performances reminiscent of
ta“ziyyah. In recent years, these performances have also become a major
tourist attraction in the region. It seems that these ceremonies are a legacy
dating back to the early 19th century when, West Sumatra was temporarily
occupied by the British under Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles. His troops included
Shi‘ite sepoys from India, some of whom decided to remain on Sumatra upon
having been de-commissioned and after the island was returned to Dutch
control in 1824.63
Returning to 16th-century Acheh, the enlightened and tolerant rule of the
Achenese sultan ‘Ala’ al-Din Ri’ayat Shah Sayyid al-Mukammil (r. 1589–1604)
was propitious for a flourishing of Islamic mysticism based on the thought
of Ibn ‘Arabi.64 Muhy al-Din Ibn ‘Arabi (b. 1165, Murcia, Spain, d. 1240,
Damascus), one of the most influential and original thinkers of the Islamic
intellectual tradition, also known as “the greatest master” (Arab.: al-shaykh
al-akbar), is often referred to as a mystical philosopher. He is generally
thought of as the originator of the idea of “Unity of Being” (Arab.: wahdat
al-wujud), which is usually, but erroneously and misleadingly, to my mind,
interpreted in the West as “pantheism,” although “panentheism” would
perhaps be more correct. Already during his lifetime he was acknowledged to
be one of the most important spiritual teachers within Sufism. Ibn ‘Arabi was
considered a heretic by some of the legalistic Sunnite scholars who
misinterpreted some of his statements, such as “The slave (i.e., Man) is the
Lord/God and the Lord/God is the slave (Man)” (Arab.: “Al-“abdu rabbun wa
’l-rabbu “abdun”). His emphasis lay on the true potential of the human being
and the path to realizing that potential, which reaches its completion in the
Perfect or Complete Man (Arab.: al-insan al-kamil ). Ibn ‘Arabi wrote at least
300 works, from minor treatises to the 37-volume Meccan Illuminations
(al-Futuhat al-makkiyyah) and the quintessence of his teachings, The Bezels
of Wisdom (Fusus al-hikam). He exerted an unparalleled influence not only
upon his immediate circle of friends and disciples, many of whom were
considered spiritual masters in their own right, but also on succeeding
generations, affecting the whole course of subsequent Islamic spiritual thought
and practice in the Arabic, Turkish, Persian and Malay-speaking lands. In the
Malay-Indonesian world, Ibn ‘Arabi’s idea of wahdat al-wujud was
propounded mainly (but not entirely) by the Malay Sufi poet Hamzah
Fansuri,65 who flourished in the second half of the 16th century.
It has been alleged that the Achenese Sultan Ibrahim II, who ascended to
the throne in 1636, had been a Shi‘ite, or was at least sympathetic towards
Shi’ites.66 Regardless of whether or not this is in accordance with historical
facts, it should also be noted that in this period, contemporary with the rule
of the Mughal emperor Akbar (r. 1556 –1603) in India, appears a general
flourishing of speculative philosophy and mysticism in the Indian Ocean
region.67 The rise to favor with the succeeding Achenese rulers of the staunch
Shafi’ite Sunnite scholar Nur-al-Din Raniri, who was born in India,68 however,
is sometimes seen as the beginning of a period of legalism, resulting in the
persecution and repression of the heterodox, non-conformist Sufism

associated with Fansuri and his followers. However, it should also be noted
here that Raniri himself was deeply versed and well-read in classical Persian
mystical literature.
In the past, this conflict between supposed heterodoxy and orthodoxy69 in
th
17 -century Acheh, personified by Fansuri and Raniri (although they had not
been exactly contemporaneous to each other), has usually been studied within
the context of Islamic mysticism alone,70 whereas the issue of Shi‘ite
tendencies in the writings of those branded with “heterodoxy” has not yet
received sufficient attention. However, according to the Malaysian scholar Syed
Muhammad Naquib al-Attas,71 perhaps the most proficient and erudite living
student of both Fansuri and Raniri, the circulation of Malay translations of
treatises on the orthodox Sunnite creed, such as the “Aqa”id, a standard work
on Islamic doctrine by Abu Hafs ‘Umar al-Nasafi (d. 1142), in order to counter
this trend is a clear indicator of this latent conflict. Moreover, the prevalence
of Shi’ite thought among “heterodox” Sufis in Acheh should also be taken into
consideration.72 Fansuri himself referred affectionately to the first Imam of
the Shi‘ites in several of his poems. Besides his native Malay, Fansuri was also
fluent in Arabic and Persian. Apparently, he also went to Iraq during his travels
to the Middle East. What he did in Iraq, the traditional destination of Shi‘ ite
pilgrimage, can only be a matter of conjecture. Several modern scholars,
among them Anthony Reid and the present author,73 consider it plausible that
Fansuri himself was a Shi’ite. In the course of the 16th and 17th centuries,
Twelver Shi‘ism also had a strong foothold in nearby Siam, present-day
Thailand, as we shall see.
Besides his native Malay, Fansuri had a thorough knowledge of Arabic and
Persian. In some of his works, he quotes — either in Persian or in Malay
translation — from the masters of classical Persian mysticism, such as from
Shabistari’s famous poem Gulshan-i Raz (Pers., The Secret Rose Garden),
basically an exposition of Ibn ‘Arabi’s ideas.74 From references in Hamzah’s
work, it appears that he had visited Mecca, Medina, and probably also Iraq
(including, perhaps, the Shi‘ite holy shrines Najaf and Karbala’). Hamzah
flourished during the rule of the Achnese Sultan ‘Ala’ al-Din Ri’ayat Shah, to
whom he refers in his poems.75 This ruler encouraged Sufis and was known
for his liberal interpretation of Islam, which set him apart from his successors,
who were under the influence of legalistic scholars, often from India, such as
Raniri. The conflict between the thought of Raniri and that of Hamzah
exemplifies the issue of “orthodox” or “sober” Sufism, as promoted about the
same time in India by Sirhindi (d. 1624), and “heterodox,” “pantheistic” Sufism,
and “transferred” the conflict from India to Southeast Asia. The “purifying”
activities of Raniri and his royal patrons, however, might have had a reverse
effect, because “popular” mysticism among the Malays since then has been
characterized by a relapse into superstition and even animism.76 The conflict
between the thought of Raniri, who served as head of the Muslim
administration to subsequent rulers of the Acheh sultanate, and Fansuri, whose
followers had been persecuted by the former, thus gives evidence of two
underlying peculiarities, or better, a constant tension that persisted in
Malay/Indonesian Islam: namely, a profound “heterodox” mystical tradition
with, at times, strong Shi’ite undercurrents dating back to the time of the arrival
of Islam in the region, hidden under a thin veneer of Sunnite legalism. It is
telling that the “purge” of Classical Malay Muslim literature of its earlier
“heterodox” (i.e., Sufi and Shi’ite) tendencies, as exemplified above with
reference to the manuscripts of the Hikayat Muhammad Hanafiyyah, did
not prevent these texts from remaining popular among local Muslims.
A Persian Name for a Thai City: Ayutthaya —

Shahr-i Nav — “City of Boats and Canals”
To our present knowledge, Hamzah Fansuri was born in Siamese
Ayutthaya. This circumstance leads us to another very fascinating facet of the
historical presence of Shi’ism in Southeast Asia that might be surprising to
some on first glance: the existence of a vibrant Twelver Shi’ite community
of Persian or “Persianized” merchants in the Theravada Buddhist kingdom
of Siam during the 17th century.77
The majority of modern scholars now seem to hold that Hamzah Fansuri
was born in the Siamese capital Ayutthaya, although his family background
stems from Barus (Fansur) in northwest Sumatra.78 In one of his Malay poems,
Fansuri even applies a philosophical-mystical metaphor, “existence” (Arab.:
wujud ), when referring to his birthplace, “Shahr Nawi,” Ayutthaya, then the
thriving capital of the kingdom of Siam. Wujud, “existence,” should not
necessarily be considered a philosophical metaphor here or as the place where
he found a new spiritual identity that led him towards the mystical path. 79
It is significant that since the 15th century Ayutthaya itself has been known
by a Persian epithet, i.e., Shahr-i Nav (“City of Boats and Canals”), among
Persian and other Muslim merchants and mariners around the Indian Ocean
rim. Already in 1442, the Persian author ‘Abd al-Razzaq Samarqandi, in his
Matla” al-sa”dayn wa majma” al-bahrayn,80 refers explicitly to close trade
connections between the Persian Gulf emporium of Hormuz and Shahr-i Nav,
a synonym for Ayutthaya. Arabic sources of the 15th century, too, such as Ibn
Majid, refer to the same Shahr-i Nav, corrupting it to Shahr Nawa, rather than
employing any Arabic equivalent expression.81 I have elaborated elsewhere82
on the circumstance of Ayutthaya being referred to by a Persian name among
foreigners (non-Thais), as well as on the existence of a variety of different
spellings for it. Here it shall only be mentioned in passing that Shahr-i Nav
— “City of Boats and Canals” — appears to be the appropriate form and
spelling.83 Moreover, it should be noted that several corruptions of that Persian
expression were also current among Western mariners and other visitors to
Southeast Asia in the 17th and 18th centuries.84
Persians and Shi}ites in the Siamese Kingdom of

Ayutthaya
In contrast to the case of Persian cultural influences in the Malay world
and the spread of Islam there, contacts between Persians (whether via the
“Persianized” Muslim states and trade emporia of the Indian Subcontinent or
from Iran proper) and the Thai people became possible only after the latter’s
gradual settlement and domination of the central plains of present-day
Thailand. This process of Thai migrations culminated in the foundation of
Ayutthaya in 1351 by King U Thong (r. 1351– 69, under the throne name
Ramathibodi) as the capital of a Thai kingdom later known as Siam.85
Moreover, direct and official diplomatic relations between Siam and Iran,
exemplified by the exchange of non-permanent missions rather than by
permanent extraterritorial embassies, become traceable only from Iran’s
Safavid period onward.
Ayutthaya is situated about 80 km to the north of modern Bangkok. It is
strategically located on the navigable Chao Phraya river system, which leads
to the Gulf of Thailand and was destined to become one of the region’s most
important trade emporia, situated equidistant from East Asia, China and India.
In order to understand the historical background of the arrival and permanent
presence of Persians and Shi’ites in Siam, it is important to consider the wider
setting. During the 15th century, the rebellious status — from the Siamese
perspective — of the Malay principality of Malacca (a vassal of Ayutthaya on
the Malay Peninsula), and especially its final extinction by the Portuguese in
1511, had forced its Siamese overlords to look for other gateways for trade
with the western Indian Ocean region. During the 1460s Siam took control
of Tenasserim, followed in 1480 by Mergui, both important ports on the
northwestern coast of the Malay Peninsula.86 In this manner, Siam was able to
gain direct access to the trade emporia of the Gulf of Bengal and the eastern
coast of India. Further west (in India itself), the first half of 16th century saw
major political changes with the gradual establishment of the Mughals in the
northern part of the Subcontinent. Towards the beginning of the 17th century
the Mughals had gained full control over Bengal and Orissa, by which they
obtained access to the Bay of Bengal.
A formidable power in the southern Indian region that evolved only
slightly earlier than that of the Sunnite Mughals was the Qutb-Shahi kingdom
(1512–1687) on the Deccan.87 More relevant in our context is that the

Qutb-Shahi rulers were ardent Twelver Shi‘ites with political links to Iran.
The name of the ruling Safavid shah of Iran of the day was even mentioned
alongside with the names of the Twelve Imams in the sermon during Friday
prayers. The Qutb-Shahi kingdom could be considered “highly Persianized”
with a large number of Persian-speaking merchants, scholars, and artisans
present at the royal capital. It was not only a major trading power but also was
to become a haven for Twelver Shi‘ites. Most of them were Iranians from Iran.
However, Iranians from northern India (where they had been, at times,
subjected to persecution under the Sunnite Mughals) were to be found at
Golconda. In his study of the migration of Iranians from Iran to India and
Southeast Asia, Sanjay Subrahmanyam88 has provided abundant evidence for
their massive economic, political and literary presence in the Qutb-Shahi
kingdom.
By the 2nd half of the 16th century, intensive trade links existed between
Golconda’s main port Masulipatam (or Matchlibandar) and Siamese
Tenasserim.89 The Qutb-Shahi state thus also served as an important gateway
to Southeast Asia, and the Siamese Ayutthaya kingdom in particular.
Merchant-ships bound for the east used its harbors as stopover ports. By the
16th and 17th century, a trade-network of Iranian merchants virtually controlled
the eastern Indian Ocean maritime trade and operated from southern India.90
In light of the dominating role of Persianized Muslim states on the
Subcontinent, it is not surprising that the Siamese trading emporium of
Ayutthaya should have been known to the mainly Muslim merchants under a
Persian name — Shahr-i Nav. Subrahmanyam’s study also contains rich
material on the biographies of eminent Iranian merchants of southern
India, the most successful of them being Mir Muhammad Sayyid Ardistani
(1591–1663), who grew up in Isfahan and went to the Golconda kingdom
during the 1620s. In spite of the existence of Bengali, Gujarati, and Hadhrami
Arab trade networks in the Indian Ocean region, the role of the Persians
should be seen as beyond that of pure merchants. This last aspect, i.e., the
various additional educational and cultural activities of the Persians, however,
still needs further investigation and clarification since similar activities are due
also to the Hadramis with regard to their role in spreading Sufism in Southeast
Asia. To the knowledge of the present writer, Indo-Persian historiographical
literature (especially from the Deccan) has not yet been thoroughly
investigated with regard to Siamese-Deccan relations from the 15th century
onward.91
With regard to Siam, the first Persians in the Ayutthaya kingdom might thus
have settled in Tenasserim and Mergui. There is evidence, at least, for Persians
in Siam’s Burmese neighboring state Pegu and in Malacca for the early 16th
century,92 whereas the number of Persians in the Siamese capital Ayutthaya

seems to have remained low by the beginning of the 17th century.93 Several
factors appear to have contributed to an emigration of Persians (mainly from
southern India, but perhaps also directly from Iran) to Siam, in particular,
during the 17th century. These include political instability in the Deccan, the
extension of international Safavid trade under Shah ‘Abbas II (r. 1642–66) and
the expansion of Siamese trade with East Asia, Japan, in particular.94 This latter
resulted in Ayutthaya becoming an important entrepôt of its own for trade with
that region, and thus attracted foreign immigration. Up to the end of the
17th century, Shi’ite Persians, whether immigrants from India (in particular
the Shi’ite kingdoms of the Deccan) or from Iran proper, might have even
have constituted the majority of Muslims residents in Ayutthaya.
The researcher working today on the history of the Persian and Twelver
Shi‘ite community in the Ayutthaya kingdom faces various difficulties with
regard to available sources. One of them is the extreme scarcity of surviving
Thai sources, a circumstance which might be attributed to the conquest and
total destruction of the Ayutthaya and its monuments by Burmese invaders
in 1767, resulting in the almost complete annihilation of Thai literary
and historiographical heritage. This catastrophe also affected its foreign
communities, among them the Persians. Surviving Thai fragments of what is
usually referred to as the “Royal Chronicles of Ayutthaya” refer to non-Siamese
individuals of Middle Eastern or Indian ethnic origin — subjects, as well as
foreign residents and visitors — merely as khaek. Non-Muslims are also
included in this category.95 Moreover, in most cases, khaeks are “hidden”
under titles and designations of official Siamese nomenclature.
Other fragments of Thai chronicles to which the present author has
had no access, too, have survived and Thai historians of the 19th and early
20th centuries have based their works on them.96 They have been studied
by Professor Wyatt of Cornell University97 and Oudaya Bhanuwongse, who
himself is a descendant of 17th-century Persian immigrants, who have utilized
them when researching the very fascinating account of his family history.98
I have elaborated elsewhere99 on the arrival of the first Iranians and other
Persian-speaking Muslims in the Ayutthaya kingdom. Here, I just would like to
reiterate briefly that these records refer to a certain “Shaykh Ahmad Qumi”100
or “Kuni,” a merchant who is said to have arrived in Siam with his brother at
the onset of the 17th century as a merchant “from the West,” perhaps via the
“Persianized” Shi’ite kingdoms of Southern India.101 However, as we have seen
above, “Shaykh Ahmad” was not the first Iranian in Siam, and it is remarkable
that Ibn Muhammad Ibrahim, the author of our main Persian source that will
be discussed soon, never mentioned “Shaykh Ahmad” by name or as the
alleged ancestor of the colony of Iranians residing in the Ayutthaya kingdom.
“Shaykh Ahmad” is said to have risen to favor with the Siamese king Song
Tham (r. 1610/11–1628). He and his followers were granted a village site for
their houses, a mosque and a cemetery, which is still known today as Ban
Khaek Kuti Chao Sen.102 Song Tham, a contemporary of Shah ‘Abbas I the
Great (r. 1588 –1629) under whom Safavid Iran experienced the peak of its
power, appointed him to the highest administrative positions and put him in
charge of Siam’s entire trade with the Middle East and Muslim India.103
Kennon Breazeale has edited a very important volume on Ayutthaya’s
contacts with the outside world.104 He has also studied in some detail the
crucial role played by Shi‘ite Iranians and Persian-speaking Muslims residents
in the Siamese capital in reforming Siam’s administrative system — in
particular, in terms of the kingdom’s maritime relations — in order to enable
it to interact more effectively with the outside world.105 Moreover, under the
Siamese title chualarajmontri, the Islamic office of Shaykh al-Islam was
introduced to Siam by “Shaykh Ahmad,” who was appointed to this position
by the king as its first holder. The office of Shaykh al-Islam is of Central Asian
origin and is featured subsequently at the top of the Islamic administrative
framework in many Middle Eastern Muslim states, such as the Ottoman
Empire.106 The rationale behind this may be seen in the increase of Ayutthaya’s
Muslim population, as the kingdoms trade with Islamic states in India and in
the Malay-Indonesian Archipelago, too, was steadily increasing from the 16th
century onward. The office of chularajmontri was held by the descendants
of “Shaykh Ahmad,” all Twelver Shi’ites, until 1945. From the middle of the
18th century onward, the descendants of Muhammad Sa‘id, “Shaykh Ahmad’s”
brother, converted to Therevada Buddhism, whereas the descendants of
“Shaykh Ahmad” stayed Twelver Shi’ites.107 From the 19th century onward, both
branches achieved the highest positions in state and society under the Chakri
dynasty. In Thai history, they became known and prominent as “Bunnag”
family.
Siam’s king Narai the Great (r. 1656–88) pursued an even more active
foreign policy towards the Muslim world and followed an economic
“open-door” approach. Moreover, although being a devout Therevada
Buddhist, he too surrounded himself mainly with Iranians or “Persianized”
Shi‘ites from India. What is perhaps more intriguing is that he was also
promoting cultural contacts, displaying a deep personal interest in civilizations
other than his own. He is said to have been engrossed by Iranian cultural
influences in terms of his daily food, dress and apparel.108 These influences
even extended to 17th-century Siamese architecture and mural painting and,
above all, to Siamese royal etiquette and court customs.109
Iranians or Persian-speaking Shi‘ites from India holding sensitive
administrative posts were among King Narai’s closest advisers, especially as
commercial counterweights to the more dangerous European trading

companies, the Dutch East India Company, in particular.110 Engelbert
Kaempfer, a German traveler in the service of the Dutch East India Company
and usually a reliable source, visited Ayutthaya in 1690 (and prior to that the
Iranian capital Isfahan). He stated that Persian served even as a lingua franca
among Muslims in Siam.111 Perhaps this refers to matters concerning the trade
with the Muslim states in India, as Malay appears to have been employed in
dealing with the Archipelago. As a matter of fact, King Narai utilized the
services of some of “his” Iranian and Persian-speaking Shi‘ites by sending them
as ambassadors to various “Persianized” Muslim courts.112 It is worthwhile to
emphasize that the initiative for sending these embassies came from Siam. In
1664, what may have been the first Siamese embassy to a Shi’ite court was
received by the court of Golconda.113 In 1669, another Siamese embassy
arrived at the court of the Safavid Shah Sulayman (r. 1666–94).114 Another
Siamese mission was in Iran in 1680/81.115 Apparently, a third embassy was in
Isfahan in 1683.116 Kaempfer, too, who visited Iran prior to his sojourns in Siam
and subsequently Japan, reports in July 1684 of another embassy present at
Isfahan, referring to a “native-born Persian” as the leader of the Siamese
delegation.117
Finally in 1685 an official Iranian embassy sent by Shah Sulayman arrived
in Ayutthaya. We are particularly well informed about this Iranian embassy,
as we have the Persian travel account Safinah-yi- sulaymani, The Ship of
Sulayman, from the pen of its secretary Muhammad Rabi’ b. Muhammad
Ibrahim, known as Ibn Muhammad Ibrahim.118 This account seems to be the
only surviving document in the Persian language for Iran’s diplomatic and
cultural contacts with Siam. In spite of its frequent bias with regard to
Buddhism and Thai culture,119 this report constitutes a source of prime
importance.
King Narai’s open-mindedness towards the outside world was also
reflected in his religious tolerance. Shi‘ites residing at the royal capital
benefited from the circumstance that ‘Ayutthaya was becoming increasingly
cosmopolitan. Aside from the “The Ship of Sulayman,” the French traveler and
diplomat Guy Tachard too has left us a very detailed and vivid eyewitness-
account of Twelver Shi‘ite ta“ziyyah processions during the 1680s in
Ayutthaya. These observations, made by a devout Catholic, deserve to be
quoted here in full as they are telling in terms of the climate of tolerance and
mutual respect then prevailing in Siam under the rule of King Narai:
[. . .T]he Moors [i.e., the Twelver Shi‘ite Muslim residents of the Siamese
capital Ayutthaya] made great Illuminations for eight days together, in
Honour of their Prophet Mahomet [i.e., Muhammad] and his Son [sic!120],
whose Funerals they celebrated. They began to solemnize the Festival

the Evening before about four of the Clock at Night, by a kind of

Procession, wherein they were above two thousand Souls [!]. There they
carried the Figure of the Tombs of those two Impostors, with many
Symbols of a pretty neat Representation, amongst others, certain great
Cages covered with painted Cloth, and carried by Men that marched and
continually turned in cadence to the Sound of Drums and Timbrels. The
quick and regular Motion of these huge Machines which we saw at a
distance, without perceiving those that carried them, occasioned an
agreeable Surprise.
At the Head of this great Confluence of People, some Grooms led three
or four Horses in rich Trappings, and a great many People carrying
several Lanthorns at the end of long Poles, lighted all the Procession and
sung in divers Quires after a very odd manner. With the same Zeal they
continued this Festival for several Nights together till five of the Clock in
the Morning. It is hardly to be conceived how these Porters of Machines,
that incessantly turned, could perform that Exercise for fifteen or sixteen
Hours together, nor how the Singers that raised their Voices as high as
was possible for them, could sing so long. The rest of the Procession
looked modest enough, some marched before the Singers, who
surrounded Coffins carried upon eight Mens’ Shoulders, and the rest
were mingled in the Croud with them. There were a great many Siamese
Men and Women, Young and Old there, who have embraced the
Mahometan Religion [i.e., Islam]. For since the Moors have got footing in
the Kingdom, they have drawn over a great many People to their
Religion, which is an Argument that they are not so addicted to their
Superstitions [obviously a derogative remark referring to Theravada
Buddhism], but that they can forsake them, when our Missionaries have
had Patience and Zeal enough to instruct them in our Mysteries. It is
true, that Nation is a great Lover of Shows and Ceremonies, and by that
means it is that the Moors, who celebrate their Festivals with a great deal
of Magnificence, have perverted many of them to the Sect of
Mahomet.121
Apparently, these ceremonies were not only tolerated but also sponsored
by King Narai, Siam’s devout Theravada Buddhist monarch. From these
accounts we can infer that the majority of the Muslims residing in the
Ayutthaya kingdom were in all probability Twelver Shi‘ ites. However, it is
remarkable that given the religious freedom enjoyed by Ayutthaya’s
Persian-speaking Twelver Shi‘ite community, we have no information today
(whether in Persian or Thai historical writing or from archeological remains)
on their intellectual activity there: we do not know the names of religious
scholars, whether there existed religious institutions beyond those connected
with the above-mentioned mourning ceremonies, whether there were
connections with Shi‘ite scholars in the Southern Indian Deccan kingdoms or
Safavid Iran, or whether Shi’ite culture in Siam was dominated by Sufism and
philosophy or by traditional legal thought. These matters would be important
to know, particularly in light of Isfahan’s intellectual tradition during the 17th
century (in particular, the ishraqi “School of Isfahan”). We would like to know
whether there was an antagonism between what is generally known as “high
Sufism” and philosophy, on the one side, and a more legalistic tradition, on
the other. Thus, we can only assume that the presence of Islam in the
Ayutthaya kingdom might have been marked by Iranian cultural influences on
Islamic scholarship, as well. Such influences appear to have affected the
mystical thought of Hamzah Fansuri, as we have seen earlier. To conclude,
although we do have some knowledge of diplomatic contacts between Siam
and Safavid Iran in the 17th century and of the stages of the immigration of
Persian-speaking Shi‘ites to Ayutthaya, we know nothing about their
intellectual contribution.
Ibn Muhammad Ibrahim’s account is of crucial importance not only in
terms of its character as the only surviving Persian source, but also because he
witnessed a turning point in the fortunes of the Persian-speaking Twelver
Shi‘ ite community: Constantine Phaulkon, an immigrant of Greek origin, rose
to favor with King Narai, who appointed him to some high offices. Especially
during the later part of his career at the court of Ayutthaya, Phaulkon appears
to have been heavily under the influence of the French, who had their own
colonial ambitions in the region. In the 1680s, Phaulkon, who features
extremely negatively in Ibn Muhammad Ibrahim’s account, managed to
outmaneuver his Shi‘ite opponent at court. Aside from this, the annexation
of Golconda in 1687 by the Mughals — also witnessed by Ibn Muhammad
Ibrahim — might have slowed or stopped the steady influx of
Persian-speaking Shi’ites to Siam. The death of King Narai in 1688 and what is
known as the “Revolution of Siam,” which resulted in a temporary period
of “closed-doors” policy, contributed to the further decline of the local Shi’ite
community. The nadir was reached in 1767 when Ayutthaya was destroyed by
Burmese invaders with thousands of casualties and prisoners led off to Burma.
Earlier than that, in 1722, Iran’s capital Isfahan, too, was conquered by the
Afghans, leading to the end of Safavid rule and a severing of Iran’s trade, and
cultural and religious relations with the rest of the Persian-speaking Shi‘ite
world and with Siam. Siam’s Shi‘ ite community never recovered from this
disaster. However, as we have seen earlier, the “Buddhist branch” of the
Bunnag family rose to favor with the new Chakri dynasty from the late 18th
century onward.122
The end of the Ayutthaya kingdom in 1767 also resulted in the end of
Persian cultural as well as Shi‘ite dominance among its Muslims. However, the
descendants of some of the original Iranian and Persian-speaking merchants,
members of the Bunnag, Siphen and Singhseni families, continued to be in

positions close to the throne into the 20th century.
Persian Influences in the Thai Language

The presence of a Twelver Shi‘ite Persian-speaking community in the
Ayutthaya kingdom also had several long-term effects on Siamese culture.
I would like to mention here only in passing that Persian loanwords are
discernible in the vocabulary of the Thai or Siamese language, into which they
might have entered from the 16th century and the Ayutthaya period onward.
To my knowledge, there is still no comprehensive study of the Persian
elements in that language. Modern Thai does, however, contain several words
of Persian origin which are in current use: for example, the Thai words dork
kulaap or kulaap (meaning “rose,” from Pers. gulab, “rosewater”), or angun
(“grape,” from Pers. angur). The Thai words for “cabbage,” kalam plii, and
“cauliflower,” kalam dork, contain the Persian loanword kalam, “cabbage.”
The Persian word for “cauliflower” is gul-i kalam, literally “the flower of the
cabbage,” which is the exact meaning of the Thai equivalent kalam dork.
However, the most widely used Persian loanword is the Thai expression
farang (meaning “European” or “Westerner”), which will become familiar to
any tourist entering Thailand today. Its origins date to the medieval conflict
between the early Arab Muslims and their “Frankish” adversaries. From Arabic
entered, slightly “Persianized,” the Persian language, before it became also part
of Thai. The guava fruit, for instance, brought to Siam by the Portuguese, is
still called in Thai ton farang (“Frankish tree”).123 Recently, several issues
surrounding the loanword farang and their deeper implications in the context
of Thai society and culture have been the subject of a very detailed and
fascinating study by Pattana Kitiarsa of the National University of Singapore.124
Interestingly, the earlier referred to “Royal Chronicles of Ayutthaya” too apply
the term farang for “Westerners” when referring to events from the 16th century
onward.125
Concluding Remarks
The presence of Shi‘ism in Southeast Asian history has to be considered a
constituent part of the course and circumstances of the region’s process of
Islamization in general, both of which are still the subject of heated debate
among scholars.126 The main intention of this contribution has been to shed
some light on selected aspects of the Shi‘ite contribution. A more holistic
approach to the study of Islamic civilization in the Malay-Indonesian
archipelago is still needed in order to avoid the serious dangers of
misinterpreting and dealing out of context with the recent phenomenon of
renewed interest in Shi‘ism among Muslims in contemporary Southeast Asia. It
goes without saying that this article cannot be the “last word” on the issue of
the historical presence of Shi‘ism among Southeast Asia’s Muslims, but is rather
a first step that hopefully will encourage other scholars to pursue a somewhat
more coherent and comprehensive approach.
Endnotes
* This paper has its origin in a research project that was sponsored between March
2006 to April 2007 by the Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies, IDSS (now the S.
Rajaratnam School of International Studies, RSIS), at Nanyang Technological University,
Singapore, under the auspices of the Singapore Ministry of Home Affairs. It involved a
multifaceted approach towards the phenomenon of political assertiveness among Shi’ite
Muslims, in particular since the Anglo-US invasion of Iraq and the Iranian nuclear issue. As
this article is addressed to a somewhat wider audience, transliteration of technical Arabic
terms and personal names has been simplified throughout.
1. ABC NewsOnline, “Iraqi Civil War Threatens Region, Mubarak Says,” April 9,
2006, available online at http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200604/s1611881.htm
(accessed on April 12, 2007).
2. For a comprehensive study see R. J. McCarthy, ed., The Theology of al-Ash”ari
(Beirut, 1953). A more recent treatment of Ash‘arite theology is D. Gimaret, La doctrine
d”Ash”ari (Paris, 1990).
3. For an introduction see R. C. Martin, M. R. Woodward, and D. S. Atmaja,
Defenders of Reason in Islam: Mu”tazilism from Medieval School to Modern Symbol
(Oxford, 1997).
4. For the key text of Shafi‘ite jurisprudence see Majid Khadduri, Islamic
Jurisprudence: Shafi”i’s Risala (Cambridge, 1987).
5. For an authoritative history of those “legal rites” in Islam see Muhammad Abu
Zahra, Ta”rikh al-madhahib al-fiqhiyyah [History of the Islamic legal rites] (Cairo, n.d.)
(in Arabic). See now also P. Bearman, R. Peters, and F. E. Vogel, eds., The Islamic School of
Law. Evolution, Devolution, and Progress (Cambridge MA, 2006).
6. For recent comprehensive treatments of Wahhabism with evaluations that differ
widely from each other see Hamid Algar, Wahhabism: A Critical Essay (Oneonta NY, 2002),
and Natana J. Delong-Bas, Wahhabi Islam: From Revival and Reform to Global Jihad (New
York, 2004).
7. For a good comparative study see Muhammad Jawad Mughniyyah, Al-Fiqh
“ala “l-madhahib al-khamsah [Islamic law according to the five legal rites] (Beirut,
1402 AH/1960) (in Arabic), which is, to my knowledge, still not available in English translation.
8. On the issue of Shaltut and Sunnite-Shi‘ite rapprochement during the 1950s, see
also F. R. C. Bagley, “The Azhar and Shiism,” Muslim World 50 (1960), 122–29,
and K. Zebiri, “Shaykh Mahmud Shaltut: Between Tradition and Modernity,” Journal
of Islamic Studies 2, no. 2 (1991), 210–24.
9. Perhaps, in the light of the currently prevailing inter-sectarian violence between
Muslims of different sects (as well as between major religions in general, for that matter),
the text of the fatwa is worth being quoted here in full. It is self-explanatory and runs as
follows: “His Excellency [Shaltut] was asked: ‘Some believe that, for a Muslim to have
religiously correct worship and dealing, it is necessary to follow one of the four known
[Sunnite] legal schools, whereas the Twelver Shi‘ite (al-Shi“ah al-Imamiyyah) school is not

one of them nor the Zaydite (al-Shi“ah al-Zaydiyyah). Does your Excellency agree with this
opinion, and prohibit following the Twelver Shi‘ite (al-Shi“ah al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna
“Ashariyyah) school of thought, for example?’ His Excellency replied: ‘(1) Islam does not
require a Muslim to follow a particular legal school (madhhab). Rather, we say: every
Muslim has the right to follow one of the schools of thought which has been correctly
narrated and its verdicts have been compiled in its books. And, everyone who is following
such madhahib [legal schools] can transfer to another school, and there shall be no crime
on him for doing so. (2) The Ja“fari legal school, which is also known as the Twelver Shi‘ite
(al-Shi“ah al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna “Ashariyyah) school is a school that is religiously correct
to follow in worship as are other Sunnite schools. Muslims must know this and ought to
refrain from unjust prejudice to any particular school, since the religion of Allah and His
Divine Law (shari“ah) were never restricted to a particular legal school. Their jurists
(mujtahidun) are accepted by Almighty Allah, and it is permissible to the “non-mujtahid”
to follow them and to accord with their teaching whether in acts of worship (“ibadat) or
[social] transactions (mu“amalat). [“Al-Azhar Verdict (Fatwa) on the Shia,” available online
at http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Spa/7220/azhar.html (accessed on July 3, 2006,
transliteration and spellings of technical terms corrected and adjusted and translation
upgraded by the present writer)].
10. P. Y. Manguin, “Etudes cam II; l’introduction de l’Islam au Campa,” Bulletin de
l’Ecole Française d”Extrême-Orient 66 (1979), 257.
11. Manguin, “Etudes cam II; l’introduction de l’Islam au Campa,” 257.
12. E. M. Durand, “Les Chams Banis,” Bulletin de l’Ecole Française d’Extrême-Orient
3 (1903), 54.
13. Al-Hajjaj b. Yusuf (d. 714), a kind of early version of Saddam Husayn, is
particularly remembered throughout Muslim historiography (Sunnite as well as Shi‘ite) for
his refined cruelty. He was Umayyad governor of Kufah in Iraq, the center of Shi ‘ism and
hotbed of anti-Umayyad resistance in the early Islamic period.
14. W. Collins, “The Chams of Cambodia,” available online at http://
www.cascambodia.org/chams.htm (accessed on April 24, 2006), unfortunately without
reference. For a standard edition of Al-Dimashqi’s work see Shams al-Din Muhammad
al-Ansari al-Dimashqi, Nukhbat al-dahr fi “aja”ib al-barr wa ”l-bahr (The Choice of the Age
on the Marvels of Land and Sea), ed. M. A. F. Mehren (Leipzig, 1923) [in Arabic].
15. Collins, “The Chams of Cambodia.”
16. Ibid. (emphasis mine).
17. D. Bartels, “The Evolution of God in the Spice Islands: The Converging and
Diverging of Protestant Christianity and Islam in the Colonial and Post-Colonial Periods,”
available online at http://www.nunusaku.com/03_publications/articles/evolution.html
(accessed on April 28, 2006).
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid.
20. R. F., Ellen, “Ritual, Identity, and Interethnic Relations on Seram,” in: Time Past,
Time Present, Time Future, ed. D. S. Moyer and J. M. Claessen, Dordrecht, 1988, 125 and
133.
21. Although based on the Arabic form “id-al-Qurban, the variant Idul Korban
appears to be derived from the Arabic-Persian construction “Id-i Qurban. Interestingly, the
latter is more common in Iran than in other parts of the Muslim world where the variant
“Id al-Adha might be more frequent.
22. Bartels, “The Evolution of God in the Spice Islands: The Converging and
Diverging of Protestant Christianity and Islam in the Colonial and Post-Colonial Periods.”
23. Ibid.

24. Ibid.
25. D. A. Rinkes, Nine Saints of Java, tr. H. M. Froger, ed. A. Gordon, intro. G. W. J.
Drewes (Kuala Lumpur, 1996, repr.).
26. For descriptions of the mosque see M. Frishman and Hasan-Uddin Khan (ed.),
The Mosque: History, Architectural Development and Regional Diversity (London, 1994),
234–36, D. Bill, Indonesia Handbook (Chico, CA, 1983), 104, J. Prijotomo, Ideas and Forms
of Javanese Architecture (Yogyakarta, 1984), 45–65, and Gunawan Tjahjono (ed.),
Indonesian Heritage: Architecture (Singapore, 1998), 86–89.
27. Another festival, known as Dandangan, is held for about one week on the
occasion of “Id al-Adha, the “festival of sacrifice,” in Kudus Kulon. For another example of
the survival of Shi‘ite traces in the folk culture of West Jawa see E. Wieringa, “Die Rückkehr
des verborgenen Imams: Schiitisches in westjavanischen Erzählungen über Hadschi
Mansgur,” unpublished paper presented at the 28. Deutscher Orientalistentag, Bamberg,
Germany, March 26–30, 2001.
28. C. Marcinkowski, Persian Historiography and Geography: Bertold Spuler on Major
Works Produced in Iran, the Caucasus, Central Asia, India and Early Ottoman Turkey, with a
foreword by Professor Clifford Edmund Bosworth, F.B.A. (Singapore, 2003), 64 ff.
29. For useful introductions to the history of Malacca see B. W. Andaya, “Malacca,”
in: The Encyclopedia of Islam, new ed., vol. 6, 207–14, and Muhammad Yusoff Hashim,
The Malay Sultanate of Malacca, tr. D. J. Muzaffar Tate (Kuala Lumpur, 1992).
30. D. K. Wyatt, “The Thai ‘Palatine Law’ and Malacca,” Journal of the Siam Society
55 (1967), 279–86.
31. For a convenient introduction see Al-Attas, “Indonesia. iv-History: (a) Islamic
period.”
32. See B. W. Andaya, “The Indian ‘Saudagar Raja’ (The King’s Merchants) in
Traditional Malay Courts,” Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 51
(1978), 13–55; W. H. Moreland, “The Shahbandar in the Eastern Seas,” Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society n.s. 52 (1920), 517–33; A. Raymond, “Shahbandar: In the Arab world,”
in: The Encyclopedia of Islam, new ed., vol. 9, 193–94; H. Yule and A. C. Burnell,
Hobson-Jobson. The Anglo-Indian Dictionary (Ware [United Kingdom], 1996, reprint),
816–17. s.v. “Shabunder,” with detailed references, and ibid, 914, s.v. “Tenasserim”).
The office appears to have been known in the Indian Ocean region as early as about 1350
(Yule and Burnell, Hobson-Jobson, 816, s.v. “Shabunder”, referring to a visit to India’s
Malabar Coast by the celebrated 14th-century Arab traveler Ibn Battutah. In modern Malaysia,
the office is apparently still extant or at least known (spelled syahbandar).
33. G. E. Hall, A History of South-East Asia (Houndmills and London, 1994, 4th ed.), 221 ff.
34. Perhaps the most comprehensive study to date of Southeast Asia’s early maritime
contacts with its regional neighbors, as well as with East Asia and the Middle East,
is M. Jacq-Hergoualc’h, M., The Malay Peninsula. Crossroads of the Maritime Silk Road
(100 BC-1300 AD), tr. V. Hobson (Leiden, Boston and Cologne, 2002, Handbuch der
Orientalistik, section 3, vol. 13: South-East Asia). Still relevant is P. Wheatley,
The Golden Khersonese (Kuala. Lumpur, 1961, repr.).
35. For the most popular orders on the Malay Peninsula see Syed Muhammad
Naquib al-Attas, Some Aspects of Sufism, as Understood and Practised Among the Malays,
ed. Shirle Gordon (Singapore, 1963). See also A. H. Johns, “Malay Sufism as Illustrated
in an Anonymous Collection of 17th Century Tracts,” Journal of the Malaysian Branch
of the Royal Asiatic Society 30 (1957), 3–111. For a general overview, listing and
description of most of the tariqat in the Islamic world see Trimingham, The Sufi Orders
in Islam.
36. For still telling examples refer to Rinkes, Nine Saints of Java.

37. I have elaborated further on this issue in C. Marcinkowski, “Features of the

Persian Presence in Southeast Asia,” in Measuring the Effects of Iranian Mysticism in
Southeast Asia, , ed. Imtiyaz Yusuf , (Bangkok, 2004), 24–44; “Persian Religious and Cultural
Influences in Siam/Thailand and Maritime Southeast Asia: A Plea for a Concerted
Interdisciplinary Approach,” Journal of the Siam Society 88, pt. 1–2 (2000), 186–94;
idem, “Persian Presence in Islamic Communities of Southeast Asia,” Encyclopaedia Iranica,
New York, Columbia University, forthcoming in print, available online at
http://www.iranica.com/newsite/ (accessed on May 3, 2006).
38. See, for instance, Al-Attas, Preliminary Statement on a General Theory of the
Islamization of the Malay-Indonesian Archipelago, and Drewes, “New Light on the Coming
of Islam to Indonesia?” For a detailed bibliographical covering of that dispute see Gordon,
ed., The Propagation of Islam in the Indonesian-Malay Archipelago.
39. See, for instance, L. F. Brakel, “Persian Influence on Malay Literature,” Abr
Nahrain 9 (1969–70), 1–16, and G. E. Marrison, “Persian Influences in Malay Life
(1280–1650),” Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 28 (1955), 54–69.
40. Among the musical instruments of the nobat are the gendang (drum), nafiri
(long clarinet), serunai (flute) and a gong. The Malay States which still have a nobat are:
Perak, Kedah, Selangor, and Terengganu (see Yang di-Pertuan Agong, “Royal Regalia: Nobat
(The Royal Orchestra),” available online at http://www.malaysianmonarchy.org.my/
portal_bi/rk4/rk4a.php?id=rk4_14 (accessed on May 2, 2006).
41. Muhammad Abdul Jabbar Beg, Persian and Turkish Loan-Words in Malay
(Kuala Lumpur, 1982).
42. Muhammad Khush-Haykal Azad, Vazheha-ye farsi-ye dhakhil dar zaban-e
malayu (Tehran, 1378 AH solar/1999 C.E., in Persian).
43. A. Bausani, “Note sulla struttura della hikayat classica malese,” Annali del
Instituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli [henceforth AIUON] n.s. 12 (1962), 153–92; idem,
“Note sui vocaboli persiani in malese-indonesiano,” AIUON n.s. 14 (1964), 1–32; idem,
“Note su una antologia inedita di versi mistici persiani con versione interlineare malese,”
AIUON n.s. 18 (1968), 39–66; idem, “Un manoscritto persiano-malese di grammatica araba
del xvi secolo,” AIUON n.s. 19 (1969), 69–98, “Is Classical Malay a ‘Muslim Language’,”
Boletin de la Asociacion Española de Orientalistas 11 (1975), 111–21.
44. For a concise overview see R. Roolvink, “Indonesia. vi-Literatures,” in:
The Encyclopedia of Islam, new ed., vol. 2, 1230–35.
45. Romanized Malay ed.: Bukhari al-Jauhari, Taj Us-Salatin [Taj al-Salatin], ed.
Khalid M. Hussain (Kuala Lumpur, 1992, 2nd ed.).
46. Winstedt, A History of Classical Malay Literature, 96; idem, “Taju’s-salatin,”
Journal of the Singapore Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 81 (1920), 37–38; Ph. S. van
Ronkel, “De Kroon der Koningen,” Tijdschrift voor Indische Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde
van het Koninklijk Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschapen, Batavia 41
(1899), 55–69.
47. Winstedt, A History of Classical Malay Literature, 100–01; Romanized Malay ed.:
Nur-al-Din al-Raniri, Bustan al-Salatin, ed. Siti Hawa Haji Salleh (Kuala Lumpur, 1992).
48. On Raniri see Al-Attas, A Commentary on the Hujjat al-Siddiq of Nur al-Din
al-Raniri, 3–48.
49. S. Setudeh-Nejad, “Islamicised Manifestations of Persian Cosmology in the
Javanese Notion of Ratu Adil, and Other Aspects of Statecraft in Southeast Asia,” Islamic
Culture 75 (2001), 13–25.
50. Omar Khalidi, “The Shi ‘is of the Deccan: A Historical Outline,” Al-Tawhid 9
(November 1991–January 1992), 163–75 (an important article with an excellent
bibliography).

51. Zakaria Ali, Islamic Art in Southeast Asia, 830 A.D.–1570 A.D. (Kuala Lumpur,
1994), 214.
52. B. Baried, “Shi’a Elements in Malay Literature,” in: Profiles of Malay Culture.
Historiography, Religion and Politics, ed. Sartono Kartodirdjo (Jakarta, 1976), 59–65; idem,
“Le Shi’isme en Indonesie,” Archipel 15 (1978), 65–84, idem, “La fête du grand Maulid a
Cikoang, regard sur une tarekat dite ‘Shi’ite’ en pays Makasar,” Archipel 29 (1985), 175–91;
E. Wieringa, “Does Traditional Islamic Malay Literature Contain Shi’itic Elements? ‘Alî and
Fâtimah in Malay Hikayat Literature,” Studia Islamika [Jakarta] 3 (1996), 93–111.
53. L. F. Brakel, The Hikayat Muhammad Hanafiyyah. A Medieval Muslim-Malay
Romance, 2 vols., vol. 1 (The Hague, 1975) [introd. and romanized Malay ed.]; idem,
The Hikayat Muhammad Hanafiyyah. A Medieval Muslim-Malay Romance, 2 vols.,
vol. 2 (The Hague, 1977) [Engl. transl.].
54. Brakel, op. cit., vol. 1, 56; R. Winstedt, A History of Classical Malay Literature
(Kuala Lumpur, 1996, repr.), 8, 12. See also P. Riddell, Islam and the Malay-Indonesian
World. Transmission and Responses (Singapore, 2001), 102.
55. Brakel, op. cit., vol. 1, 102 ff.
56. Ibid., 108.
57. Hagiographical accounts of the life and death of Abu Muslim, a partisan and
military leader of the early Abbasids, Islam’s second dynasty, who contributed to the
destruction of the Umayyads.
58. Brakel, op. cit., vol. 1, 26–27; see also I. Mélikoff, Abû Muslim, le “Porte-Hache”
du Khorassan dans la tradition épique turco-iranienne (Paris, 1962).
59. Brakel, op. cit., vol. 1, 58.
60. Al-Attas, “Indonesia. iv-History: (a) Islamic period.”
61. C. S. Hurgronje, tr. A. W. S. O’Sullivan, The Achenese, vol. 2 (Leiden, 1906), 202–06.
62. Ibid., 206.
63. Syofiardi Bachul, “‘Tabuik’ Festival: From a Religious Event to Tourism,” The
Jakarta Post, February 27, 2006, available online at http://www.thejakartapost.com/
yesterdaydetail.asp?fileid=20060227.R01 (accessed on May 4, 2006). See also J. M. Kartomi,
“Tabut: A Shi’a Ritual Transplanted from India to Sumatra,” in: Nineteenth and Twentieth
Century Indonesia: Essays in Honour of Professor J. D. Legge, ed. D. P. Chandler and
M. C. Ricklefs (Melbourne, 1986), 141–62.
64. For an excellent anthology of wujudiyyah texts see Muhammad Bukhari Lubis,
The Ocean of Unity, Wahdat al-wujud in Persian, Turkish and Malay Poetry (Kuala
Lumpur, 1994), 266–309 on Malay mystical poetry.
65. Still the most comprehensive as well as competent study of Hamzah is Syed
Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, The Mysticism of Hamzah Fansuri (Kuala Lumpur, 1970). See
also idem, Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Raniri and the Wujudiyyah of 17th Century
Acheh (Singapore, 1966). See also Riddell, Islam and the Malay-Indonesian World.
Transmission and Responses, 104–10.
66. Azyumardi Azra, The Origins of Islamic Reformism in Southeast Asia. Networks of
Malay-Indonesian ‘ulama” in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Honolulu, 2004), 63.
67. A. H. Johns, “Aspects of Sufi Thought in India and Indonesia in the First Half
of the 17th Century,” Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 28,
pt. 1 (1955), 70–77.
68. Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, A Commentary on the Hujjat al-Siddiq of Nur
al-Din al-Raniri (Kuala Lumpur, 1986), intro. See on Raniri also Riddell, Islam and the
Malay-Indonesian World. Transmission and Responses, 116–25.
69. Two terms that should perhaps be avoided when referring to the Islamic context,
as Islam as a whole does not ascribe to something tantamount to “papal teaching authority.”

70. Such as by Al-Attas, Raniri and the Wujudiyyah of 17th Century Acheh. For a
more recent study see A. Vakily, “Sufism, Power, Politics, and Reform: Al-Rânîrî’s Opposition
to Hamzah al-Fansûrî’s Teachings Reconsidered,” Studia Islamika [Jakarta] 4, 1997, 117–35.
See also Riddell, Islam and the Malay-Indonesian World. Transmission and Responses,
132–33.
71. Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, The Oldest Known Malay Manuscript:
A 16th-Century Malay Translation of the ‘Aqa”id of Al-Nasafi (Kuala Lumpur, 1988), 34.
72. See also P. Riddell, “Breaking the Hamzah Fansuri Barrier: Other Literary
Windows into Sumatran Islam in the Late Sixteenth Century CE,” Indonesia and the Malay
World 32, no. 93 (July 2004), 137.
73. A. Reid., Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, 1450–1680. Volume II:
Expansion and Crisis (New Haven and London, 1993), 190; C. Marcinkowski,
“The Iranian-Siamese Connection: An Iranian Community in the Thai Kingdom of
Ayutthaya,” Iranian Studies 35 (2002), 29.
74. Osman bin Bakar, “Sufism in the Malay-Indonesian World,” in: Islamic
Spirituality: Manifestations, ed. Seyyed Hossein Nasr (New York, 1997), 284 ff. Mahmud
Shabistari was one of the most celebrated Persian Sufi poets of the 14th century.
75. Recently, the scholarly debate over Hamzah’s biography (especially the question
of the date and place of his death) was rekindled by an exchange of arguments between
Professor Braginsky of the School of Oriental and African Studies in London and his
colleagues Claude Guillot and Ludvik Kalus. Guillot and Kalus appear to advocate a date
for the death of Hamzah that is about a century earlier than what is usually thought.
Moreover, they consider a tombstone found in Mecca as sufficient evidence that he actually
died in that city. Siding with Braginsky, however, I am inclined to believe that internal
evidence from Hamzah’s work, such as dedications to Sultan ‘Ala’ al-Din Ri’ayat Shah, seems
to suggest otherwise. Confer V. I. Braginsky, “Towards the Biography of Hamzah Fansuri:
When did Hamzah live? Data from his Poems and early European accounts,” Archipel 57
(1999), 135–75, idem, “On the Copy of Hamzah Fansuri’s Epitaph Published by C. Guillot
and L. Kalus,” Archipel 62 (2001), 21–33, C. Guillot and L. Kalus, “La stèle funéraire de
Hamzah Fansuri,” Archipel 60 (2000), 3–24, idem, “En réponse à Vladimir I. Braginsky,”
Archipel 62 (2001), 34–38.
76. Al-Attas, Some Aspects of Sufism, as Understood and Practised Among the
Malays, 97–102.
77. For more detailed account of the Persian presence in Siam see C. Marcinkowski,
From Isfahan to Ayutthaya. Contacts between Iran and Siam in the 17 th Century, with a
foreword by Professor Ehsan Yarshater, Columbia University (Singapore, 2005).
78. Marcinkowski, “The Iranian-Siamese Connection,” 27–28; Syed Muhammad
Naquib Al-Attas, “New Light on the Life of Hamzah Fansuri,” Journal of the Malaysian
Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 40 (1967), 42–51; idem, The Mysticism of Hamzah
Fansuri [intro.]. For a different view see L. F. Brakel, “The Birth Place of Hamza Pansuri,”
Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 42 (1969), 206–12.
79. Al-Attas, The Mysticism of Hamzah Fansuri, 7.
80. English tr. in E. G. Browne, A Literary History of Persia. Volume III: The Tartar
Dominion (1265 –1502) (Cambridge et al., 1984, repr.), 397–98.
81. G. R. Tibbetts, Arab Navigation in the Indian Ocean before the Coming of the
Portuguese (London, 1981), “index of place names” and “Arabic index.”
82. Marcinkowski, “The Iranian Siamese Connection,” 25–29.
83. Confer Al-Attas, The Mysticism of Hamzah Fansuri, 3 ff.; Abdul Rahman Haji
Ismail (ed.), Sejarah Melayu. The Malay Annals. MS. Raffles No. 18. New Romanized
Edition (Kuala Lumpur, 1998), 110 ff. [Engl. tr. in C. C. Brown (tr.), “The Malay Annals,”

Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 25, pt. 2–3 (1952), 45 ff.];
Hobson-Jobson, 795–96, entry “Sarnau, Sornau”).
84. Yule and Burnell, Hobson-Jobson, 795–96, s.v. “Sarnau, Sornau.”
85. For a classical study of Ayutthaya’s early history see Charnvit Kasetsiri, The Rise
of Ayutthaya: A History of Siam in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries (Kuala Lumpur,
1976). For a recent account of Ayutthaya’s history see D. Garnier, Ayutthaya. Venice
of the East (Bangkok, 2004).
86. Sunait Chutintaranond, “Mergui and Tenasserim as Leading Port Cities in the
Context of Autonomous History,” in: Kennon Breazeale (ed.), From Japan to Arabia:
Ayutthaya’s Maritime Relations with Asia (Bangkok, 1999), 104–18.
87. For a comprehensive study see the history of the Qutb-Shahis see H. K.
Sherwani, History of the Qutb Shahi Dynasty (New Delhi, 1974), which, nevertheless, has
not much to say about the Shi‘ite character of that kingdom.
88. S. Subrahmanyam, “Iranians Abroad: Intra-Asian Elite Migration and Early
Modern State Formation,” Journal of Asian Studies 51 (1992), 340–63. Of related interest is
also Subrahmanyam’s latest book, written in collaboration with Muzaffar Alam, Indo-Persian
Travels in the Age of Discoveries, 1400–1800 (Cambridge UK, 2007).
89. See Manzur Alam, “Masulipatam: A Metropolitan Port in the Seventeenth Century,”
Islamic Culture 33, no. 3 (1959), 169–87. See also Ashin Das Gupta, The World of the Indian
Ocean Merchant 1500–1800: Collected Essays of Ashin Das Gupta (Oxford, 2001).
90. J. Aubin, “Les Persans au Siam sous le regne de Narai (1656–1688),”
Mare Luso-Indicum 4 (1980), 95–126.
91. For an overview of Persian literary activities on the Deccan see T. N. Devare, A
Short History of Persian Literature at the Bahmani, the Adilshahi and the Qutbshahi Courts
(Deccan) (Poona, 1960).
92. R. Ferrier, “Trade from the Mid-14th Century to the End of the Safavid Period,”
in: The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 6: The Timurid and Safavid Periods, Cambridge,
1986), 423, based on assertions by the early 16th-century travelers Ludovico de Varthema
and Tome Pires.
93. F. Caron and J. Schouten, A True Description of the Mighty Kingdoms of Japan
and Siam. A Facsimile of the 1671 London Edition in a Contemporary Translation from
the Dutch by Roger Manley (Bangkok, 1986), 134; Ibn Muhammad Ibrahim [Muhammad
Rabi’ b. Muhammad Ibrahim], The Ship of Sulayman, tr. John O’Kane (New York, 1972), 94.
94. See the studies by Yoko Nagazumi, “Ayutthaya and Japan: Embassies and Trade
in the Seventeenth Century,” in: Kennon Breazeale, ed., From Japan to Arabia: Ayutthaya’s
Maritime Relations with Asia, Bangkok, 1999, 89–103, and Hiromu Nagashima, “Persian
Muslim Merchants in Thailand and their Activities in the 17th Century: Especially on their
Visits to Japan,” Nagasaki Prefectural University Review 30, no. 3, (30 January 1997),
387–99.
95. See R. D. Cushman (tr.), The Royal Chronicles of Ayutthaya. A Synoptic
Translation, ed. D. K. Wyatt (Bangkok, 2000), “index of proper names,” s. v. khaek.
96. Phraya Thiphakorawong Maha Kosa Thibodi, Chotmaihet prathom wong sakun
bunnak riapriang doi than phraya chula ratchamontri (sen) than phraya worathep
(thuan) than chao phraya thiphakorawong maha kosa thibodi (kham bunnak) [Records
of the beginning of the Bunnag lineage, compiled by Phraya Chula Ratchamontri (Sen),
Phraya Worathep (Thuan) and Chao Phraya Thiphakorawong Maha Kosa Thibodi (Kham
Bunnag)] (Bangkok, 1939) [in Thai].
97. See D. K. Wyatt, “Family Politics in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Siam,”
and “Family Politics in Nineteenth-Century Thailand,” in: idem, Studies in Thai History.
Collected Articles (Chiang Mai, 1999, 2nd reprint), 96–105 and 106–30, respectively.

98. Oudaya Bhanuwongse, A Genealogical Narrative of Sheikh Ahmad Qomi Chao

Phya Boworn Rajnayok the Persian (Bangkok, 2530 Buddhist Era [1987 C.E.]) [text in
English and Thai].
99. Marcinkowski, “The Iranian-Siamese Connection: An Iranian Community in the
Thai Kingdom of Ayutthaya.”
100. I.e., “of Qum,” a town and major Shi’ite pilgrimage destination in Central Iran.
Whether this is really his place of origin, however, is still a matter of controversy among
scholars.
101. Leonard Andaya refers to “Shaykh Ahmad” and his brother), as originating “from
southern India,” unfortunately without mentioning a source; see L. Y. Andaya, “Ayutthaya
and the Persian and Indian Muslim Connection,” in: K. Breazeale (ed.), From Japan to
Arabia: Ayutthaya’s Maritime Relations with Asia (Bangkok, 1999), 125. David K. Wyatt
offers somewhat more detailed information. According to him, “Shaykh Ahmad” arrived
together with his younger brother, Muhammad Sa‘id, at Ayutthaya in 1602 “from the
Persian Gulf” (again without giving evidence), where they took Thai wives. Wyatt
also supplies a genealogical table of “Shaykh Ahmad’s” descendents. See D. K. Wyatt,
“Family Politics in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Siam,” 96, and idem, Thailand.
A Short History (Chiang Mai, 1999), 108. Oudaya Bhanuwongse, A Genealogical Narrative
[. . .], to face pp. 1 (in English) and 61 (in Thai), too, has a very detailed table.
102. Chao Phraya Thiphakorawong Maha Kosa Thibodi, loc. cit.
103. Farouk Omar, “Shaykh Ahmad: Muslims in the Kingdom of Ayutthaya,”
JEBAT Journal of the History Department Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 10 (1980–81),
206–14.
104. K. Breazeale (ed.), From Japan to Arabia: Ayutthaya’s Maritime Relations with
Asia, Bangkok, 1999).
105. Idem, “Thai Maritime Trade and the Ministry Responsible,” in idem (ed.), From
Japan to Arabia, 1–54.
106. C. Marcinkowski, “Iranians, Shaykh al-Islams and Chularajmontris: Genesis and
Development of an Institution and its Introduction to Siam,” Journal of Asian History 37,
(2003), 59–76. On the Central Asian origins of the office of Shaykh al-Islam see idem, Mirza
Rafi“a’s Dastur al-Muluk: A Manual of Later Safavid Administration. Annotated English
Translation, Comments on the Offices and Services, and Facsimile of the Unique Persian
Manuscript, 86–87 and 268–78. On the history of that office in the context of Thai history
and its present status see Imtiyaz Yusuf, “Islam and Democracy in Thailand: Reforming
the Office of Chularajmontri/Shaykh al-Islam,” Journal of Islamic Studies 9 (1998),
277–98.
107. Oudaya Bhanuwongse, A Genealogical Narrative [. . .], 8–9.
108. Subrahmanyam, “Iranians Abroad: Intra-Asian Elite Migration and Early Modern
State Formation,” 349.
109. R. Ringis, Thai Temples and Temple Murals (Kuala Lumpur, 1993), and C. Aasen,
Architecture of Siam. A Cultural History Interpretation (Kuala Lumpur, 1998), see index,
s.v. “Persian,” in both works.
110. Reid, Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, 1450–1680. Volume II: Expansion
and Crisis, 190; Dhiravat na Pombejra, Siamese Court Life in the Seventeenth Century as
Depicted in European Sources (Bangkok, 2001), 176–83.
111. E. Kaempfer, Am Hofe des persischen Großkönigs (1684–85). Das erste
Buch der Amoenitates Exoticae, German intr. and tr. Walther Hinz (Leipzig, 1940), 135.
112. This was also noticed by Kaempfer, Am Hofe des persischen Großkönigs
(1684–85). Das erste Buch der Amoenitates Exoticae, 199. See also Aubin, “Les Persans au
Siam sous le règne de Narai (1656–1688),” 121–22.

113. Alam, “Masulipatam: A Metropolitan Port in the Seventeenth Century,” 178.

114. Vajirana National Library (ed.), Records of the Relations Between Siam and
Foreign Countries in the Seventeenth Century. Copied from Papers Preserved at the India
Office, 5 vols. (Bangkok, 1915–17), vol. 2, 92–98.
115. E. W. Hutchinson, 1688 Revolution in Siam. The Memoir of Father de Beàze
(Hong Kong and Bangkok, 1990, 2nd impression), 11 n. 2, and 127–28.
116. According to a letter by the Apostolic Vicar and titular bishop François “of
Caesaropolis,” a French missionary based in Isfahan, to his sovereign Louis XIV, dated
January 20, 1683, contained in R. Du Mans, Estat de la Perse en 1660, ed. C. Schefer
(Paris, 1890), 339.
117. Kaempfer, Am Hofe des persischen Großkönigs (1684 –85). Das erste Buch der
Amoenitates Exoticae, 199.
118. Ibn Muhammad Ibrahim [Muhammad Rabi’ b. Muhammad Ibrahim], The Ship of
Sulayman, tr. John O’Kane (New York, 1972). For the edition of the Persian text see idem,
Safinah-yi- sulaymani (Safarnamah-yi safir-i Iran bih Siyam, 1094–98), [Travel account
of the ambassador of Iran to Siam, 1094–98 {A.H./1682–86 C.E.}], ed. ‘Abbas Faruqi, Tehran,
1977 C.E. See also D. K. Wyatt, “A Persian Mission to Siam in the Reign of King Narai,”
in: idem, Studies in Thai History. Collected Articles, Chiang Mai, 1999 (2nd reprint) [review
article of Ibn Muhammad Ibrahim [Muhammad Rabi’ b. Muhammad Ibrahim], The Ship of
Sulayman, tr. John O’Kane, New York, 1972; first published in Journal of the Siam Society
62, no. 1 (Jan. 1974), 151–57], C. Marcinkowski, “Safine-ye Solaymani,” Encyclopaedia
Iranica (New York, Columbia University, forthcoming in print), available online at
http://www.iranica.com/newsite/ (accessed on May 3, 2006), and M. Suhayli-Khwansari,
“Rawabit-i dusti-yi Siyam bih Iran dar ‘ahd-i Shah Sulayman-e Safawi” [Siam’s friendly
relations with Iran during the time of the Safavid Shah Sulayman], Salnamah-yi
kishwar-i Iran [Yearbook of the country of Iran] 18 (n.d.), 99–105 (in Persian)18 (n.d.),
99–105 (in Persian).
119. See C. Marcinkowski, “‘Holier than Thou’: Buddhism and the Thai People in Ibn
Muhammad Ibrahim’s 17th-Century Travel Account Safineh-yi Sulaymani,” Zeitschrift der
Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 156, no. 2 (2006, in press).
120. He had no surviving son. Apparently, referring to his cousin and son-n-law
‘Ali?
121. G. Tachard, A Relation of the Voyage to Siam, Performed by six Jesuits,
sent by the French King, to the Indies and China, in the Year, 1685 (Bangkok, 1999, repr.),
214–15.
122. Oudaya Bhanuwongse, A Genealogical Narrative [. . .], 11ff.
123. J. Harris, “The Persian Connection: Four Loanwords in Siamese,” Pasaa
[Bangkok, Chulalongkorn University Language Institute] 16 (1986), 9–12.
124. Pattana Kitiarsa, “Farang as Siamese Occidentalism,” ARI Working Paper, No. 1,
September 2005, available online at http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/pub/wps.htm (accessed on
April 7, 2006).
125. Cushman (tr.), The Royal Chronicles of Ayutthaya. A Synoptic Translation,
“index of proper names,” s. v. farang.
126. For a good summary of the prevailing (and at times conflicting) theories see
Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Preliminary Statement on a General Theory of the
Islamization of the Malay-Indonesian Archipelago (Kuala Lumpur, 1969); idem,
“Indonesia. iv-History: (a) Islamic period,” in: The Encyclopedia of Islam, new ed.,
vol. 2, 1218–21; G. W. J. Drewes, “New Light on the Coming of Islam to Indonesia?” in:
Readings on Islam in Southeast Asia, ed. Ahmad Ibrahim, Sharon Siddique, and Yasmin
Hussain (Singapore, 1990), 7–19; A. Gordon, ed., The Propagation of Islam in the

Indonesian-Malay Archipelago (Kuala Lumpur, 2001). I have dealt with the issue of
historical Shi‘ism in the region in an earlier, somewhat more preliminary study, of which
what follows is an extension; see C. Marcinkowski, “Shi‘ites in South-East Asia,”
Encyclopaedia Iranica, New York, Columbia University, forthcoming in print, available
online at http://www.iranica.com/newsite/ (accessed on May 3, 2006).

Selected Historical Facets of The Presence of Shiism in Southeast Asia PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Selected Historical Facets of The Presence of Shiism in Southeast Asia PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Selected Historical Facets of the Presence of Shi‘ism in Southeast Asia

Selected Historical Facets

of the Presence of Shi‘ism

This article is intended to highlight selected episodes of the historical

worldwide when he questioned the loyalty of Shi’ites to their respective

On “Schools” and “Rites”

Mu‘tazilites and Twelver Shi‘ites. Apparently, al-Ash‘ari’s main intention was

Early Arrivals: Champa

The circumstance of “Ali Hanafiah” (Muhammad Ibn al-Hanafiyyah —

The “Spice Islands”: Remnants of Shi{ite Folk Culture

© 2009 Hartford Seminary. 387

. . . [a]ccording to local tradition, Islam was [. . .] brought by [a] wali

Furthermore, according to the history of Rohomoni, Islam was brought

Bartels continues his observations with regard to another village:

Bartels19 also mentions that R. F. Ellen,20 another scholar, has reported on

388 © 2009 Hartford Seminary.

Wali Songo: Traces of Shi{ism on Java

Inside the “Al-Aqsa Mosque”26 of Kudus, an inscription above the

The Spread of Persian as lingua franca

Features of “Persianized Sufism” and Persian

Islamization of that region.37 At times ideologically over-weighted, the dispute

Facets of “Shi{ite Elements”

well represented.50 However, we should bear in mind that the connotation

Acheh and the Case of Hamzah Fansuri

persecution and repression of the heterodox, non-conformist Sufism

A Persian Name for a Thai City: Ayutthaya —

Persians and Shi}ites in the Siamese Kingdom of

(1512–1687) on the Deccan.87 More relevant in our context is that the

century,92 whereas the number of Persians in the Siamese capital Ayutthaya

commercial counterweights to the more dangerous European trading

© 2009 Hartford Seminary. 403

the Evening before about four of the Clock at Night, by a kind of

members of the Bunnag, Siphen and Singhseni families, continued to be in

Persian Influences in the Thai Language

© 2009 Hartford Seminary. 407

408 © 2009 Hartford Seminary.

© 2009 Hartford Seminary. 409

37. I have elaborated further on this issue in C. Marcinkowski, “Features of the

410 © 2009 Hartford Seminary.

© 2009 Hartford Seminary. 411

412 © 2009 Hartford Seminary.

© 2009 Hartford Seminary. 413

98. Oudaya Bhanuwongse, A Genealogical Narrative of Sheikh Ahmad Qomi Chao

414 © 2009 Hartford Seminary.

113. Alam, “Masulipatam: A Metropolitan Port in the Seventeenth Century,” 178.

© 2009 Hartford Seminary. 415

416 © 2009 Hartford Seminary.

Potrebbero piacerti anche