[I am interrupting this serialization of Kasim Ahmad's Characterisation... to publish this important speech that he gave recently in Penang. The serialization will resume on October 2, 2005. MBM]

KE MANA KITA?

UCAPAN KEPADA KUMPULAN MELAYU

PULAU PINANG PADA 30 SEPTEMBER, 2005

Saya bersyukur ke hadrat Ilahi, kerana kita dapat berjumpa dalam perjumpaan ini pada malam ini. Tujuan kita pada malam ini sederhana saja. Ini suatu sesi percambahan fikiran, atau ‘brain storming’ di antara sesetangah kita yang prihatin, yang agak bebas fikiran mereka dan tidak terikat kepada mana-mana parti, bukan saja tentang nasib orang Melayu di Pulau Pinang, tetapi juga nasib orang Melayu di seluruh tanah air kita. Malaysia. Keadaan orang Melayu di Pualu Pinang, saya rasa, sudah banyak diperkatakan. Malah pada malam ini pun, ada suatu forum di Dewan Sri Pinang tentang perkara ini. Jadi pada malam ini kita ada dua perjumpaan yang sama tujuannya.

Tetapi saya harap tujuan kita agak berbeza sedikit. Tujuan kita bukan semata-mata hendak berbincang dan kemudian habis hingga satu perjumpaan lain pula. Dari perjumpaan ke perjumpaan tanpa sesuatu hasil!

Negara kita sudah berusia 48 tahun. Kita baru saja merayakan Ulangtahun Kemerdekaan yang ke-48. Kemerdekaan kita ialah hasil pemupukan kesedaran kebangsaan di kalangan rakyat kita yang pada awal abad ke-19 masih belum ada kesedaran kebangsaan pada masa itu. Pemupukan kessedaran ini dilakukan oleh pelbagai golongan – oleh golongan wartawan dan akhbar-akhbar mereka, oleh golongan guru, oleh pelbagai pertubuhan-pertubuhan awal, seperti Sahabat Pena, Kesatuan Melayu Muda, SABERKAS[1], dan akhirnya oleh parti-parti politik, termasuk Parti Kebangsaan Melayu dan UMNO. Jangan kita lupa bahawa pertubuhan-pertubuhan ini semua merupakan sebagian daripada suatu gerakan besar rakyat Asia untuk mencapai kemerdekaan nasional dari bangsa-bangsa penjajah Inggeris, Belanda, Perancis dan Jepun.

Hari ini semua negara Asia sudah merdeka, tetapi masih ramai rakyat Asia hidup dalam kemiskinan dan kemunduran, termasuk di negara kita, yang kita anggap lebih maju daripada sesetengah negara Asia. Mengapakah keadaan ini begini? Tidakkah empat puluh tahun lebih tidak cukup bagi kita untuk membangunkan sebuah ekonomi yang baik yang boleh menampung suatu kehidupan yang bahagia untuk dua puluh enam juta rakyat kita? Biasanya suatu generasi – 30 tahun – sudah cukup untuk membawa perubahan dalam kehidupan sesuatu bangsa.

Apabila kita mengukur kemajuan bangsa kita, kita mesti mengukur secara keseluruhan, bukan dari segi material dan ekonomi semata-mata, tetapi juga dari segi-segi sosial, intelektual dan moral. Apa yang kita untung dari segi material dan ekonomi, kita mungkin rugi dari segi sosial, intelektual dan moral. Umpamnya, ramai anak muda kita terlibat dalam penyakit katagihan dadah dan penyakit kita sudah berada di tengah-tengah kita lebih daripada 20 tahun. Jika kita hitung ini dari segi wang ringgit, mungkin kerugiannya mencapai angka berbilion ringgit! Demikian juga dengan penyakit-penyakit sosial yang lain, termasuk rasuah dan penyelewengan kuasa.

Satu lagi penyakit yang mungkin tidak ramai kita sedar ialah penjajahan fikiran atau penjajahan intelektual. Saya fikir ramai cerdik pandai kita, yang lulus dari universiti, khasnya universiti-universiti Britain dan A.S., dalam masa dua puluh, tiga puluh tahun ini – fikiran mereka tidak ubah dari fikiran Mat Salleh. Jadi, negara kita tidak memerlukan Orang Putih untuk menjajah kita; kita dijajah oleh bangsa kita sendiri!

Masalah yang kita hadapi bukan kerana kelemahan bangsa kita, tetapi kerana kita hidup dalam sistem ekonomi-politik-budaya penjajahan baru. Kita telah merdeka dari penjajahan lama, tetapi kita masuk pula ke dalam penjara penjajahan baru. Kita perlu membebaskan bangsa kita dari penjajahan ini.

Sesetengah orang Melayu merintih keadaan mereka di Pulau Pinang, bukan kerana keadaan mereka jauh lebih buruk dari keadaan mereka di negeri-negeri lain, seperti di Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan atau Terengganu. Ramai orang Melayu Pulau Pinang sudah mendapat pelajaran tinggi, sesetengah sehingga ke Universiti, ramai yang menjadi golongan professional, seperti doktor, jurutera dan peguam, ramai yang menjalan perniagaan makanan di gerai-gerai dan kedai-kedai makaman yang elok dan bersih di banyak Bandar kecil dan ramai yang duduk di rumah-rumah pangsa yang elok-elok. Tetapi, oleh kerana mereka golongan minoriti dibanding dengan kaum Cina dan pengaruh politik mereka tidak sekuat di negeri-negeri lain, maka mereka berasa terancam. Sebenarnya, masalah orang Melayu tidak terletak pada soal kaum atau bangsa. Ia terletak pada soal falsafah politik dan dasar Kerajaan kita.

Kita tidak harus lupa bahawa Malaysia, walaupun asalnya terdri dari Empayar Melayu Melaka, melalui proses penjajahan dan perjuangan anti-kolonial rakyat kita, sekarang sudah berubah menjadi sebuah negara demokratik moden yang majmuk. Apabila kita mencapai kemerdekaan pada 31 Ogos, 1957, kita sudah bersetuju untuk menerima kaum-kaum pendatang dulu (Cina dan India) sebagai rakyat dengan hak dan tanggungjawab yang sama dengan kita kaum peribumi yang asal. Tugas kita sejak itu ialah membangunkan negara Malaysia Baru menjadi sebuah negara yang maju tempat kita semua boleh hidup dalam aman dan bahagia. Semenjak 1957 kita memasuki tahap apa yang dipanggil tahap ‘mengisi kemerdekaan’, atau lebih tepat mempertahankan kemerdekaan kita serta mencapai kebebasan total, bebas dari segi ekonomi, bebas dari segi intelektual dan bebas dari segi budaya. Inilah tugas kita yang sebenar sekarang. Inilah juga yang menjadi masalah besar kita.

Saya fikir pada malam ini kita patut menumpu fikiran kita kepada masalah ini, iaitu membangunkan sebuah kehidupan yang benar-benar bebas dari semua segi bagi rakyat Malaysia.

Kebanyakan pemimpin yang mengendalikan negara kita sejak kita merdeka terdidik di Barat. Mereka menganggap sistem ekonomi politik yang kita warisi dari Barat itulah sistem yang paling baik – sistem politik demokrasi berparlimen dan sistem ekonomi liberal atau kapitalis yang memberi keutamaan kepada suatu golongan elit kaya. Kebetulan sistem sosialis pula runtuh di Rusia dan China pada akhir dekad kesembilan dalam abad ke-20, kerana keemahan asas sistem itu dan tidak bleh menjadi pilihan kita lagi. Kebanykan pemimpin dan cerdik-pandai di negara kita berfikir sistem ekonomi politik yang kita amalkan ini sudah cukup baik dan tidak perlu diubah. Fikira ini nyata tidak betul dan harus kita ubah.

Namun demikian, kita semua tahu bahawa jika parti UMNO yang menjadi harapan orang Melayu dan tulang belakang Barisan Nasional tidak dapat mengatasi masalah kemerosotan dalamannya (iaitu kehilangan idealisme perjuangan yang diganti dengan korapsi politik dan rebutan kuasa) dalam masa terdekat, UMNO akan hancur. Apabila UMNO hancur, parti manakah yang boleh menggantinya? Tidak ada parti lain dengan falsafah politik dan dasar yang mereka bawa sekarang boleh menggantikan UMNO. Inilah soalan yang harus kita dan rakyat Malaysia yang cintakan bangsa fikir. Saya ajak saudara-saudari memikirkan soalan ini dengan serious pada malam ini, atau mulai malam ini.

Saya ada jawapan saya sendiri dan saya akan berkongsi jawapan ini dengan saudara-saudari sekarang. Saya harap saudara-saudari akan bersetuju dengan saya. Jawapan saya bukan supaya UMNO dan PAS bersatu dan semua parti-parti Melayu bersatu. Soalan yang kita hadapi bukan soal parti mana yang memerintah, tetapi falsafah politih dan dasar mana yang boleh mendatangkan kemajuan kepada 26 juta rakyat Malaysia. Seperti yang saya katakan tadi, Malaysia sebuah negara dan masyarakat berbilang kaum. Politik berdasarkan kaum sudah tidak sesuai lagi dan tidak boleh menylesaikan masalah kita. Kita perlu berfikir melampaui atasan kaum masing-masing sebagai anak Bangsa Malaysia. Kita mahu kebebasan, persamaan dan keadilan bagi semua rakyat kita. Tujuan ini hanya dapat kita capai dengan mewujudkan sebuah sistem ekonomi-politik yang adil, bukan sistem neoliberal yang kita amalkan sekarang, yang sebenarnya tidak lain daripada sistem penjajahan baru.

Kata pepatah, sesat di hujung jalan, balik ke pangkal jalan. Pangkal jalan kita ialah Tuhan Yang Esa. Tuhan mengajar kita supaya ikut “jalan yang lurus, jalan mereka yang Engkau restui, bukan mereka yang dimurkai atau mereka yang menyeleweng. (Quran, 1: 1-7). Jalan ini diterangi oleh cahaya, “yang bukan dari Timur, bukan dari Barat.” (Quran, 24: 35) Apakah jalan ini dari segi politik, ekonomi dan sosial? Inilah soalan yang harus dijawab oleh cerdik-pandai kita sekarang. Kita harus menjadi tenaga yang menggerakkan proses mencari dan mendapatkan jawapan ini. Kita akan bekerjasama dengan pemimpin-pemimpin dan cerdik pandai UMNO dan PAS dan semua parti dan dengan semua institusi akademik dan penyelidikan untuk mencapai tujuan ini.

Seperti yang kita tahu, Islam itu suatu cara hidup, yang merangkumi aspek-aspek politik, ekonomi dan sosial. Sejak merdeka, kita mengamalkan Islam sebagai satu cara beribadah saja. Dari aspek-aspek politik, ekonomi dan sosial, kita ikut sistem liberal yang kita pinjam dari Barat. Jika kita terus ikut sistem ini, penghujungnya ialah seperti Britain dan Amerika Syarikat sekarang. Di A.S., kononnya negara yang terkaya di dunia, 13% daripada rakyatnya miskin. Ia tidak berlaku adil terhadap ralyatnya yang berkulit hitam. A.S. mempunyai kadar jenayah yang tertinggi di dunia. A.S dan Britain melindungi negara Israel yang merampas tanah rakyat Palestin and gabungan A.S. dan Britain telah menjadi kuasa imperialis yang terbesar yang paling angkuh di dunia sekarang. Ini sama sekali tidak boleh menjadi contoh bagi kita dalam usaha kita membangun sebuah negara Malaysia yang maju.

Jadi, sistem ekonomi-politik Eropah dan Amerika Syarikat, atau sistem kapitalis liberal bukan sistem yang adil atau sistem “jalan yang lurus” yang Tuhan perintahkan kita ikut. Tuhan juga telah mengingat kita dalam Quran tentang strategi kaum Yahudi dan Kristen terhadap Islam dalam ayat yang yang berbunyi: “Orang Yahudi mahu Kriten tidak akan menerima kamu sehingga kamu mengikut agama mereka. Katakanlah, ‘Bimbingan Tuhan itulah bimbingan yang sebenarnya. Jika kamu mengikut kehendak mereka walaupun pengetahuan telah datang kepada kamu, kamu tidak akan mendapat sekutu atau pertolongan melawan Allah.” (Quran, 2: 120). Perhatikan ayat ini menyebut agama orang Yahudi atau Kristen. Kita mungkin berfikir bahawa kita orang Islam memang tidak mengikut agama-agama orang Yahudi atau Kristen. Kita harus ingat bahawa liberalisme itu satu cara hidup atau satu agama yang telah diciptakan oleh bangsa Eropah.

Oleh yang demikian, kita umat Islam di Malysia mestilah mencari jalan balik ke jalan yang lurus yang diajar oleh Tuhan kepada kita. Hanya jalan ini akan membawa kita keada kejayaan dan keselamatan pada masa depan. Dalam istilah politik moden, apa yang kita mahu ialah sebuah sistem yang demokratik, republikan, humanis dan adil. Yang kita maksudkan dengan demokratik ialah sebuah pemerintahan yang berdasarkan penyertaan rakyat, republikan bermakna tidak bersifat feudal atau elitis tetapi berjiwa rakyat, humanis bermakan mengutamakan kemanusiaan dan adil bermakna saksama dan tidak berat sebelah kepada mana-mana golongan tertentu. Sebenarnya, ini merupakan impian rakyat jelata di semua zaman.Tetapi sekarang ia merupakan tuntutan rakyat di seluruh dunia. Memang kita boleh capai matlamat yang murni ini sekarang dengan syarat rakyat sedar akan hak mereka, tahu apa dia jalan lurus itu dan sanggup berjuang untuk mencapai matlamat itu.

Apa yang harus kita buat? Pertama, kita harus ingat kita tidak boleh mencapai matlamat besar ini dengan cepat. Ia akan memakan sedikit masa. Tetapi seperti kata pepatah, perjalan seribu batu mesti bermula dengan langkah pertama. Langkah yang kita ambil pada malam ini boleh kita katakan sebagai langkah pertama. Kita tubuhkan suatu badan yang boleh kita namakan Persatuan atau lebih baik Gerakan Pencinta Tanah Air Malaysia. Kita tidak boleh menubuhkan pertubuhan ini sekarang tetapi kita boleh ambil keputusan untuk menubuhkannya dan melantik sebuah Jawatankuasa Penaja untuk memanggil suatu perjumpaan lain untuk menubuhkannya. Gerakan ini terbuka kepada semua rakyat Malaysia. Tujuannya ialah untuk menimbulkan kesedaran di kalangan rakyat Malaysia tentang sistem sosio-ekonomi “jalan lurus” yang kita sebutkan tadi untuk mengganti sistem liberal yang bobrok yang kita anuti sekarang. Ini bermakna kita mesti menggembelingkan tenaga cerdik-pandai kita untuk meneroka “jalan lurus” ini dari pelbagai aspek serta menyiarkan hasil-hasil kajian mereka untuk dibaca dan difahami oleh rakyat.

Seperti yang saya katakan dari awal, kita tidak boleh mengambil pendekatan sempit sesuatu kaum lagi. Kita mesti mengambil pendekatan republikan dan humanis rakyat Malaysia. Tetapi kita bertitik-tolak dari kecintaan kita kepada negara dan bangsa Malaysia, mencari jalan yang lurus di antara jalan-jalan yang menyeleweng berdasarkan kebenaran dan keadilan untuk membangunkan sebuah Malaysia yang adil dalam sebuah dunia baru yang adil.

Inilah fikiran saya tentang apa yang patut kita buat. Saya harap saudara-saudari akan memberi pendapat secara bebas, tetapi biarlah pendapat-pendapat itu menasabah dan membina. Saya tidak mahu kita menghabiskan masa dengan becakap saja tanpa sesuatu kesimpulan yang kongkrit dan berguna keada bangsa kita.

Mungkin sesetengah saudara-saudari bertanya adakah saya hendak mencadangkan penubuhkan sebuah parti politik. Saudara semua tahu saya seorang ahli politik dulu. Sejak kira-kita tahun 1990 saya tidak aktif lagi, walaupun saya seorang anggota UMNO. Saya tidak aktif kerana saya fikir UMNO perlu suatu pembedahan yang besar untuk melayakkan dirinya memainkan peranan yang telah saya sebutkan. Pada malam ini bukan tujuan saya untuk mencadangkan penubuhan sebuah parti politik baru dengan falsafah politik yang saya sebutkan, kerana masanya belum sampai untuk itu. Kita mesti meletakkan asas-asas untuk sebuah gerakan politik seperti itu. Inipun terpulang kepada kita, sama ada kita mahu atau tidak. Pada pendapat saya, kita mesti memulakan perjalanan kea arah itu. Kalau saudara-saudari bersetuju dengan saya, barulah kita ambil langkah pertama dalam perjalan kita yang masih jauh.

KASSIM AHMAD
Bandaraya Tanjung, Pulau Pinang,
30 September, 2005.

---

[1] Singkatan daripada Syarikat Bekerjasama Am Saiburi (1944-1956), dipimpin oleh Mohd. Khir Johari, Senu Abd. Rahman dan Kasim Muar. Mempunyai 14 tujuan, termasuk mendirikan sebuah kerajaan pemerintahan sendiri, demokratik dan sosialis. (Lihat Ahmad Kamar, “The Formation of Saberkas” dalam Darulaman, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpu, 1979; hlm. 179-184.

Installment #8

Characterisation in Hikayat Hang Tuah

CHAPTER II

GENERAL CHARACTERISATION

The Major Characters (excepting Hang Jebat and Hang Tuah)

Patih Karma Wijaya

Patih Karma Wijaya, as the name implies, is a Javanese. Before entering the service of the Melaka Sultan he was a senior minister to a certain ruler of Lasem.[i] When he was away on state business, the ruler snatched away his beautiful daughter. This so shamed him that he decided to migrate with all his followers to Melaka. He is therefore an alien and a bitter man when he enters the Malay service.

His character is not clearly depicted. Like Patih Gajah Mada, he is a villain, though on a smaller scale. His villainy seems to stem from a purely personal consideration: a grudge against and jealousy for Hang Tuah. He does not, with Patih Gajah Mada, conspire against the Melaka Sultanate; as a Javanese we would expect him to do so. The Bendahara does not trust him,[ii] but there is no evidence that he is disloyal to the Sultan of Melaka. In fact he serves him well. It is he who suggests that the Sultan ask for the hand of Raden Mas Ayu, the daughter of Seri Batara, after the failure to get Tun Teja. And it is he again who leads the subsequently successful mission for Majapahit.

His villainy can have meaning only in terms of his personal relationship with Tuah. And it is on this point that his character is not clear. Why is he so jealous of Tuah that he leads two similar and highly dangerous conspiracies against him? There is no evidence that he is ambitious. Of course, Hang Tuah has snubbed him once.[iii] This, however, is too flimsy a ground to embark on such adventurous risks. Yet the reader cannot help feeling that this was the beginning. It is conceivable that the showers of honour and privileges upon Tuah made by the Sultan would breed jealousy among the senior but less influential officials;[iv] even then one feels that not enough of this is shown to render the argument of jealousy substantial.

He is a cowardly, selfish and shameful fellow. There is no balance between his seeming sense of responsibility[v] and his physical ability to stand by his action. Hang Jebat knows that he was one of the culprits. He waits for him and his accomplices to come to the palace. But he does not come. When the Sultan orders him to remove Jebat, he only sends his men in while he himself waits at some distance.[vi] Even when the Sultan refers to him directly as the conspirator against Tuah and challenges him to redeem himself, he remains unprovoked.[vii] This, it will be noticed is the exact opposite of the heroic character.

Conclusion

The foregoing discussion has, it is hoped, shown that the characters so far examined are largely real. Judged against modern standards, they may be found to be inadequately depicted: there is a tendency to standardize and simplify character. But if it is recognised that we cannot so judge a piece of characterization which is definitely the product of a dissimilar set of circumstances, then we may perceive something more genuine. These characters are by no means puppets. They lead independent lives and so portray the social traits of their times. The ‘writer’ has in no way used them as a means to project his own subjective and artificial ideas.

Next: Installment #9: Chapter III: Hang Jebat

---

[i] Lasem at about the time of Majapahit was an independent kingdom on the northern coast of the eastern half of Java.

[ii] Cf. p. 124.

[iii] While in Majapahit negotiating the royal marriage, Tuah mentioned to him that he would like to visit the famous Javanese ascetic, Sang Pertala, who was living on Mt. Merta Pura. The Patih said that he would like to go too. Hang Tuah, however, retorted that a big official like him would not be able to master such a rigorous discipline (p. 110).

[iv] See the conspirators’ arguments on both occasions, pp. 178 & 303-304.

[v] The second plot against Tuah did not directly originate from him. It was hatched among the jealous officers themselves and when they reported Tuah’s alleged misbehaviour to him, he became indignant with anger. He immediately led the group to see the Sultan himself (Cf. pp. 332-333).

[vi] Cf. p. 335

[vii] Cf. p. 320.

Installment #7

Characterisation in Hikayat Hang Tuah

CHAPTER II

GENERAL CHARACTERISATION

The Major Characters (excepting Hang Jebat and Hang Tuah)

Patih Gajah Muda

Patih Gajah Muda dominates the court of Majapahit. He seems to be the villain in the story. But he does not come out so well as such. The pattern of his scheming is so uniform that it bores. His dogged persistence to kill Hang Tuah withers all of a sudden after the death of Seri Batara; it looks as though he has undergone a drastic change. But the change, if it occurs at all, is not shown.

He is ambitious, ruthless and jealous of his power. The image of ambition and ruthlessness in his character is effectively built up before the reader actually comes in direct contact with him. The reader first gets a glimpse of his scheming through the report of the pirates taken prisoners by Hang Tuah and his four comrades.[i] Then the Bendahara makes a reference to it in a conversation with the headman (batin) of Singapura.[ii] Then before the royal mission to ask for the hand of Sri Batara’s daughter departs for Majapahit, the Bendahara warns the officers about the character of Patih Gajah Mada.[iii] Again before the subsequent departure of the Sultan for Majapahit in order to marry Raden Mas Ayu, the Bendahara gives the royal escorts another piece of his mind about him.[iv] The reader is thus prepared to meet this ruthless and ambitious man.

There seems to be no doubt that he dominates his king. A very respectable and honest Javanese courier, Radin Aria, twice testifies to this.[v] The king must therefore be in league with him because it is he who first suggests to the Patih the idea of molesting the Malay envoys as they proceed to the court.[vi] When Hang Tuah comes again with the Sultan on the second visit, it is he who also brings up the question of killing the Laksamana.[vii] It looks as though both of them are working together. Nevertheless, their power relationship is none too clear. On the one hand we find the Seri Batara completely identifying himself with the Putih’s policy toward Melaka; on the other, we find him putting his first minister to shame before Hang Tuah and the other members of the Malay party and indeed before the whole court of Majapahit.[viii]

It is difficult to explain the situation. That Patih Gajah Mada dominates Seri Batara is, in my opinion, a fact. The irregular behavior of the latter is to be attributed to his stupidity and simple-mindedness.[ix]

His character is blurred by the similar pattern of his techniques to trap Hang Tuah. He appears to be inhumanly dogged in his efforts. Amidst this, however, comes a new convincing trait: jealousy. He resents the Temenggung because it is he who hits upon the brilliant idea of attacking the Malay party as it comes from Tuban.[x] He must have recognized the soundness of the idea although he does not acknowledge it. Seri Batara is in favour of it and the fact that it is not carried out further shows the extent of his power.

The motivating force in his character is ambition. But the end of his days is shown to be quiet and pious. After so much evidence of tenacity and optimism in works of sabotage and conspiracy, he turns out to be a comparatively good man.[xi] What has taken place? We are told that his master has died and that his grandson Raden Bahar, has been installed the new Seri Batara.[xii] These are happenings too inconsequential to have wrought such a change in a character like Path Gajah Mada.

Tun Teja

Tun Teja, the daughter of Bendahara Seri Buana of Inderapura, is a very interesting,[xiii] though a rather puzzling personality. She might pass for the heroine of the story. Possessed of a strong character, she has decided views on marriage. These views, however, are not quite clearly resolved in her mind. She has the characteristic aloofness of a princess, but can be a very passionate lover. As a woman she displays well the feminine contradictions in her character. She is intelligent and makes a wise counselor.

We are first introduced to her as a beautiful princess whose hand is being sought everywhere, but who refuses to marry.[xiv] When the Sultan of Melaka asks for her hand, she refuses him too, against the wishes and advice of her father and the Sultan of Inderapura. Her reasons would appear to be social.[xv] But later on in the book, a conversation among her attendants on the subject of her undoubtedly forced engagement to Megat Panji Alam gives the impression that she had refused Raja Melaka because she thought him not good enough for her.[xvi] This impression is confirmed by what she says herself to Mak Inang in a flood of rage.[xvii] These incidents make it difficult for the reader to get a clear idea of what she thinks of marriage. It may be that the ‘writer’ is right in stating that she does not want to marry.[xviii] If so, she protests to her father and the Sultan were mere excuses and her violent outburst to Mak Inang was just an extreme expression of her feminine pride and contradiction.[xix]

The change comes when Tuah applies his love-charm to her.[xx] This is not an impossible development in a society where belief in magico-ascetic power holds sway. She falls passionately for him and thus – it is interesting to note—she becomes Hang Tuah’s first and ultimate deliverer, the instrument by which he regains favour from the Sultan, the first sacrifice of his feudal loyalty, and indeed, the first stated sacrifice of the Hikayat Hang-Tuah feudalism itself.[xxi]

Forthright and unorthodox though she is, she does not like Jebat’s behaviour in court when he assumes the office of Laksamana. Most probably she, like the Bendahara (and also Hang Tuah) does not realize, much less appreciate, Jebat’s motives. At first she does not seem to object very much to the presence of Jebat in court in place of Hang Tuah.[xxii] Later when her husband-sultan complains, she mildly rebukes him for not having listened to the advice of his senior minister.[xxiii]

There is a characteristic feminine touch in the way she obtains what she wants. She appeals to her natural weakness. The incident of her father’s death illustrates this clearly.[xxiv] She is thus not only an interesting character but realistically depicted.

Next: Installment #8: Patih Karma Wijaya

---

[i] While still I Bintan and not yet in the royal service, Hang Tuah and his four associates one day went out on a boating expedition. On the way they were attacked by a group of pirates. In the ensuing flight they managed to outwit the pirates and took ten wounded prisoners. It was these prisoners who gave out that they had been induced by Patih Gajah Mada to go on a campaign of brigandage (Cf. pp. 22-27).

[ii] Cf. p.28.

[iii] Cf. p. 104.

[iv] Cf. p. 124.

[v] Cf. pp 140 & 253.

[vi] Cf. p. 106.

[vii] Cf. p. 133

[viii] We refer to two similar incidents when it was contrived to steal Hang Tuah’s keris while he was in attendance at the Majapahit court. On both occasions when the Laksamana realised that his keris was gone from his waist he, in turn, by some mysterious power, got hold of the Patih’s keris (the Patih was sitting beside him). As soon as Hang Tuah’s keris was handed over to Seri Batara by the paid stealer, Seri Batara (on the first occasion) asked to see the Patih’s keris, with the intention probably of asking to see the Laksamana’s after that, thereby making him realise that his keris was lost. In this way the Patih was put to shame (Cf. p. 156). On the second occasion the Batara asked to see the Laksamana’s first. When the latter produce it, he foolishly went to ask for the poor Patih’s thus putting the old man to shame again (Cf. 255).

[ix] This quality of his has been referred to in our discussion of his character.

[x] Cf. pp. 278-279.

[xi] There was no attempt at treachery when Hang Tuah came again ro escort Raden Bahar (Cf. pp. 394-395).

[xii] Cf. pp. 393-395.

[xiii] It is worth noting that the most interesting character in the minor category is also a woman.

[xiv] Cf. p. 97.

[xv] She suffers from a class-inferiority complex; the Sultan of Melaka belonged to a higher stratum She argued that only “birds of a feather flock together” (yang enggang itu sama enggang juga; yang pipit itu sama pipit juga – p. 99).

[xvi] That is, when Tuah sends his salaam to her (Cf. pp. 200-201).

[xvii] Cf. p. 97.

[xviii] Cf. p. 97.

[xix] The fact that she said she would drink poison if forced to marry the Megat tends to substantiate this view (Cf. p. 191) because of the Sultan of Melaka is too high for her, then the Megat is surely her match.

[xx] Cf. p. 203.

[xxi] The Bendahara, of course, delivers him temporarily in this first occasion as he also does on the second. On the latter occasion it is Jebat who ultimately saves him and who is the second stated but more tragic sacrifice of that same feudal world.

[xxii] Cf. p. 309. Here she reflects that if Jebat persists in behaving in such a presumptuous manner, he would not last long either, indicating that she accepts the Sultan’s judgement of Hang Tuah.

[xxiii] Cf. p. 313.

[xxiv] She had sent Jebat’s son, Hang Madim, to see her father at Inderaputera. It happened that this time the country was being harassed by sword-fish (todak). Hang Madim suggested a bright idea which consequently saved the lives of many people. For this the Sultan awarded him the title of Orang Kaya Sang Si-Tuah. The other ministers and officials became jealous and conspired to bring disgrace eon him. But so long as Teja’s father, the Bendahara, was alive they dared not carry out their evil plan. Soon, however, the Bendahara died. Immediately the Temenggung who wanted the Bendaharaship led the conspirators into the Sultan’s presence and informed him that Snag Si-Tuah had been flirting with a certain court-lady. Thus Hang Madim, Teja’s messenger, was executed. The news of his execution and of her father’s death reached Melaka and Tun Teja complained to her husband , saying that if she were a man, she would know how to act. Thereupon the Sultan ordered a force under Laksamana to subjugate Inderapura (Cf. 436-439).

Installment #6

Characterisation in Hikayat Hang Tuah

CHAPTER II

GENERAL CHARACTERISATION

The Major Characters (excepting Hang Jebat and Hang Tuah)

The Sultan of Melaka

In terms of historical perspective the Sultan is an impossible character. He is Sang Maniaka, the first son of the fabled Sang Purba, the King of Bukit Seguntang. He becomes the ruler of Bintan, emigrates with his whole court and subjects to found the kingdom of Melaka, lives practically throughout the whole book till the eve of the fall of Melaka and then disappears somewhat mysteriously.[i] However, as we have stated earlier, our interest is rather on the human plane than on the historical one.

Form the point of view of his position he is, of course, the most important figure I the book. But as a character he is of no great consequence. He comes out virtually flat and presents a blurred personality. Apparently he is the person most immersed in official matters as he is the head of state, but because of this he is also above the law. As such he should have shown evidence of freer expression of his personality.

He possesses many characteristics of a good leader. He is able, kind, generous and, to a large extent, just.[ii] He depends very much, of course, on his wise bendahara and also on the Laksamana but he does not seem to be dominated by either of them. H e is very sensitive about his authority and reacts quickly and violently to an attempt at insubordination.[iii] This is his weakest point and it neatly becomes the cause of his ruin.[iv]

He falls in love with Tun Teja after the fashion of those days. He has not seen Tun Teja himself; he only hears of widely acclaimed beauty.[v] But when he fails to get her and is told by Patih Karma Wijaya, a senior minister of his Javanese origin, that he would undertake to get for him a more beautiful princess in the person of the daughter of Seri Batara, he immediately forgets and orders plans to be made for the dispatch of a mission to Majapahit.[vi]

This weakness in his portraiture lies in his reactions to Patih Karma Wijaya’s accusations to Hang Tuah. It is conceivable that for the first time he should, without prior investigation, order the execution of his most trusted servant when thus accused. But when he repeats the same pattern of reaction at a second similar accusation brought up by the same man whom he knows has lied on that first instance, the whole matter looks incredible. At least he should have investigated the case first. Even granted that the matter touches the softest spot in his heart and that at such moments the possibility of his forgetting what has gone before is great, one thing he can still do. He can dismiss or disgrace the Patih for slander. This he does not do.[vii]

The main motivation of his character seems to be self-interest. His own brother, the Raja Muda, is sacrificed. Hang Tuah is, on many occasions, held out to death.[viii] Only towards the end of his reign when he has grown quite old does he appear to undergo some change. This change must have been brought about, in some degree, by the loss of his ancestral crown.[ix] The first manifestation of the new development is seen in his desire to know the life beyond the grave.[x] The effect of this dubious discovery on his attitude towards life is great. He decides to give up the world. Distributing his wealth among all his subjects, he abdicates and goes wandering in mystic style.

Bendahara Paduka Raja

The Bendahara is quite an interesting character, convincingly portrayed, although he does not appear as intense as Jebat or Tuah. He is a wise, brave and devoted minister., we; beloved by the Sultan and those below him. He becomes especially exciting when faced with crucial issues. There are three such occasions. On the first, the sultan orders him to execute the Raja Muda for alleged disloyalty.[xi] He refuses as he has pledged absolute loyalty to the royal descendent s of Bukit Seguntang.[xii] The other two occasions involve the fate of Hang Tuah. At both times he refuses to carry out the royal death sentence even though Tuah himself insists that he should d so.[xiii] He even makes passionate appeals for Tuah’s life on the second occasion.[xiv] These are difficult acts indeed to do; that he does them shows his strength and individuality of character.

His relationship with Patih Karma Wijaya and his attitude towards Jebat’s rebellious behaviour also afford interesting insight into his character. He distrusts the Patih even before the latter shows his untrustworthy nature.[xv] He never expresses it to the Sultan and he is very diplomatic on this point.[xvi]

Although quite forthright in his advice to the Sultan, he is very loyal servant. He does not agree with Jebat’s actions. It would seem that he does not realize Jebat’s real motive for rebellion.[xvii] Even f he does, it is doubtful whether he would appreciate it. He thinks the Sultan is wrong, of course, for not having decreed rashly against Hang Tuah, but it does not enter his head to rebel against his authority. The idea is simply incredible. Logical though his mind is, it still operates within the feudal scheme.

Next: Installment #7: Patih Gajah Mada

---

[i] At first (p.305) it is told inhte middle of his wanderings as a darwish, he simply disappeared “never to be heard again.” The (p.308) it is said that he had retired to a life of hermitage on Mt. Jugara together with the bendahara, Temenggong and Laksama.

[ii] Throughout the whole book there are only three occasions when he acted unjustly (see footnote 1 p.21).

[iii] No sooner had he installed his younger brother as Raja Muda, than the jealous officials begin to frame a case of treason against the latter. When the Sultanheard of it he flew into a rage and immediately ordered his execution (Cf. p. 74). The same pattern of reaction is repeated twice when Tuah was alleged to have encroached upon the royal prerogatives by entering into illicit relations with his ‘gundik’ (cf. pp. 179 & 303-304).

[iv] We refer to the “menderhaka” episode of Jebat which came about as a result of his inability to bring sober judgment to bear on a case of alleged disloyalty.

[v] Various princes had sought her hand, but failed. Her beauty is described thus: “Maka rupu-nya terlalu elok, saperti bulan purnama, empat belas haribulan kilau-kilauan, tiada dapat di-tentang nyata.” (p. 97).

[vi] Cf. p.101.

[vii] He did indeed chide the Patih and his accomplices when their doings had led Jebat to rebel against his authority. He even threatened them with death if they could not remove Jebat (Cf. p. 320) but it seems that the threat was not carried out.

[viii] Apart from the duels and fights Hang Tuah has to undertake on his account, there are the “Coconut-climbing” incident (p. 340), the “horse-riding” incident (pp. 243-4), the “horse-saving” incident (p. 245), the “getting-into-the-garve” incident (pp. 500-2).

[ix] The crown fell intothe sea when he was traveling on a pleasure trip to Singapura. The loss seems to have affected his health. Since then, he is said to be constantly “gila-gila saki keala dan tuboh-nya demam” (p. 447). This loss seems also to be symbolically linked into the fate of Melaka because it was from this point onwards that Melaka began to decline.

[x] Cf. pp. 500-2.

[xi] He was accused by some jealous courtiers of planning to overthrow the Sultan.

[xii] Cf. p. 74. See also p. 67.

[xiii] Cf. pp 179 & 305.

[xiv] Cf. pp. 304 & 305.

[xv] Cf. p. 124.

[xvi] When the Sultan was preparing to visit Majapahit the second time, the question of who was to accompany him came up. The Temenggung suggested that the senior officers should also go because the Laksamana was young and inexperienced man. This would include Patih Karma Wijaya. The Bendahara retorted by asking who the officers were besides the Laksamana. At this juncture the Patih offered himself. The answer the Bendahara here gave is characteristic of his diplomacy (Cf. p.273).

[xvii] He said that Jebat acted thus because Tuah was no longer alive (p. 310). This would imply that Jebat was a coward.

Installment #5

Characterisation in Hikayat Hang Tuah

CHAPTER II

GENERAL CHARACTERISATION

The Minor Characters

The minor characters are those whose role in the story are not vital. There are many of them. It is pointless to treat them all because they can be considered under a few broad types. There is the ruler-type which may be represented by Seri Batara or the Raja Muda of Melaka. There is the prince-type like Megat Panji Alam. Tun Bijaya Sura can be taken to stand for the court-official type; Petala Bumi for the warrior-ascetic type. Then there are the ladies-in-waiting (dayang) characterized by Dang Ratna, better known as Mak Inang. There is the simpleton Pak Si Molong who is both pathetic and comic at the same time. And there is the little spirited loyalist son of Hang Tuah, Tun Kadim.

None of them emerge as convincingly as Hang Tuah or Hang Jebat. They are not altogether flat characters, although among them Seri Batara and Tun Bijaya Sura come nearest to being so. These also are personalities most involved in officialdom. Seri Batara is a little confusingly drawn.[i] He is stupid,[ii] succumbs to flattery[iii] and spends his time agreeing to whatever suggestions his powerful Prime Minister, Patih Gajah Mada, makes. He does no t surprise the reader; rather he bores.[iv] Tun Bijaya Sura is the orthodox, respectable court official who goes about unnoticed doing the bidding of his master.[v]

The most interesting character in this category is Dang Ratna, better known as Mak Inang. She is Tun Teja’s chief lady-in-waiting. She appears only on a few pages, but she is entirely free from the trappings of officialdom. Her character comes out very well both as an individual and as a typical Malay woman. She displays the talkativeness and soft heartedness[vi] of women in general and possesses the politeness[vii] and modesty[viii] characteristic of Malays.

She was quite taken in by Hang Tuah’s good manners and humility, adopted him as her own son and soon grew very fond of him. When, therefore, Tuah asked her to convey his love to Tun Teja, she faced the crisis of her life. To comply was to court disaster; but to refuse was to disappoint someone whom, as she herself said, she would even venture into “a sea of fire”.[ix] Out of sheer love for Hang Tuah she had to comply and the description of her indecision, confusion and fear while trying to accomplish this hazardous undertaking is very realistic and superbly done.[x]

The warrior-ascetic characters[xi] also come out well. Their non-involvement in officialdom explains this fact. But because all of them follow generally the same pattern, their portraiture becomes a little blurred. Their characteristic trait is haughtiness.[xii] However, Petala Bumi, whom we have chosen to characterise this type shows something more. He is not only boastful, but also a bully.[xiii] Nevertheless, he is honest enough to admit that Tuah is a much better warrior than he is. He knows that he cannot cause any harm to him; rather, he would be destroyed at his hands. Still, he has the integrity and courage to go and fight the man because he has given his word to Seri Betara.[xiv]

Megat Panji Alam , the son of Terenggano Raja, is princely type of character. Only one side of him comes up and no doubt it is the dominant side of this social type: extreme haughtiness and arrogance.[xv] Because of this he loses the reader’s sympathy even the cause for which he goes to fight the Sultan of Melaka and his Laksamana is valid and reasonable.[xvi] Being the son of a king, he naturally leads a protected and pampered life. Whatever he asks for would not be objected by his royal father. This makes him arrogant and boastful. There is no wonder he meets his end with not much of a fight[xvii] to match his early boasts.

A character that draws pity from the reader is Pak Si Molong, the fighting-cock trainer (juara ayam) of the Terenggano Raja. He is the simple and straightforward common-man type. He possesses the characteristic resignation of the Malay peasant. In his simplicity and straightforwardness he suffers[xviii] but his suffering does not embitter him:[xix] it causes him to resign to his fate. It is this situation in which he gets caught, and to which he is sacrificed, that makes him to a tragic and lovable character.

Another minor character that ought to be mentioned is Tun Kadim, the son of Hang Tuah. He seems typical of a child brought up in the heroine tradition. At about nine years or so[xx] he is already well acquainted with court manners and etiquette. He also has acquired that feudal mentality and sense of heroism[xxi] that is so much the mark of his father. As such he serves to show and explain in the deeper terms of social environment the dominant heroic traits of the age.

Next: Installment #6: The Major Characters (excepting Hang Tuah and Hang Tuah)

---

[i] Sometimes he appears to be in complete agreement with the aggressive policy of Gajah Muda; sometimes he appears to be just a puppet; yet at other times he is quite capable of acting on his own.

[ii] The two incidents when Hang Tuah’s keris was stolen illustrates this quality (Cf. pp. 156 & 255, and also footnote 3, p. 26). Furthermore , in most quarters his thinking is done for him by Patih Gajah Mada.

[iii] Tuah knows this weakness and often exploits it. Once he was so pleased because Hang Tuah said he was the descendent of a great king sent down by Allah to rule Majapahit that he ordered the Patih to make his presents of gold, clots, keris, buffaloes and rice (Cf. p114).

[iv] His tenacious persistence in conspiring with the Patih against Hang Tuah has the effect of flattening his character.

[v] At one point he shows some signs of character. He was reporting to the Sultan on his unsuccessful mission to Inderapura to get the hand of Tun Teja. Hang Tuah, who felt that the refusal of the royal offer of marriage was mud thrown at his master’s face, made a deadly remark (p. 101). Bijaya Sura felt slighted. Later when he was passing through Inderapura on his return voyage from Siam, he refused to take Tuah with him on learning that the latter was bringing along Tun Teja (p. 212). However he acquiesced whenthreaned. He does not seem to have takenpart in the subsequent plot against Tuah.

[vi] 1. 181.

[vii] P. 181.

[viii] P. 189

[ix] “….jikalau tuan suroh ka-laut apa sa-kali pun bonda pergi….” (p. 197).

[x] Cf. pp. 198-200.

[xi] Examples are Petala Bumi, Tamang Sari, Sang Wirana Semantara, Merga Pakai, kerlala Sari, Sang Tangso, Sehirang.

[xii] Cf. pp 155, 159, 254, 258,. Incidentally, the boasting of warriors is another characteristic of heroic poetry or saga (Cf. Chadwick, H. A., p. 326).

[xiii] He threatened to knife Barit Ketika should the later refuse to accompany him into Hang Tuah’s compound (Cf. p. 288).

[xiv] Cf. pp. 289, 291.

[xv] Cf. pp 223, 230, 234.

[xvi] The Sultan of Melaka, through Laksamana, had taken away and carried Tun Teja who was then his fiancée.

[xvii] Cf. p.235.

[xviii] With the consent of his master, he exchanged cocks with their opponent because he was impressed by the looks of the latter’s bird. However, his eyes had deceived him and the Terenggano’s cock lost to Raja Jolan. For this the master ordered his eyes to be taken out (Cf. p. 422).

[xix] When his master asked him to look for a new fighting cock that could match that of his opponent and promised him four concubines if he could find one, he undertook to do so but he said that ‘gundiks’ would be useless to him as he would not be able to see them (Cf. p. 423).

[xx] At this time he is said to be a little smarter than his father when he entered the royal service (p. 320), that is, when he was at the age of ten (p. 24).

[xxi] Already at this young age he was asking to be allowed to fight the ‘traitor’ Jebat (Cf. p. 322).