The heart of Southeast Asia

Recently, I had the time to visit Thailand and engage in some cultural analysis. A couple of years ago, I also spent time in Cambodia while working on my master’s degree in Philippine studies. It was during that time that I noticed some extremely strong cultural affinities between Cambodia and Thailand (perhaps obvious to many), and the Philippines (maybe less obvious initially).

The heart of Southeast Asia is found in indelible cultural threads, and here we should think about the nature of Filipino history prior to the 1600s. The Philippines is an “Indianized” culture, the term used in the West regarding Southeast Asia. This refers to the general observation that the culture of India contributed significantly to the “base-level” culture of the Philippines and its neighbors in Southeast Asia. More specifically, this often refers to Hinduism, Buddhism, and the cultural exchange via trade.

Anyone who knows a decent bit of history about pre-colonial Philippines knows that many of its leaders took the title of “rajah,” the Sanskrit term for a ruler. The connections do not end there. All native writing systems in Southeast Asia except Vietnam are derived from Indian writing systems. As many scholars such as Anita Bose, Juan Francisco, and William Henry Scott have noted, words such as “balita” come from Sanskrit, as do “guro/guru,” “diwa/diwata,” “budhi,” and too many others to list here.

A common theme is that many terms borrowed from Sanskrit form the basis of vocabulary for things regarding cosmology and self-conceptualization. As Bose discussed in her book on the “Ramayana” in Southeast Asia, there is direct evidence of trade between India and the Philippines as early as the fourth or fifth century, and possibly even earlier. Early on, and as states took shape in the islands, the cultural influence would have been more foundational and deeper than the relatively surface level of later Spanish influence.

“Ramayana” itself is a great example of this. It is one of the two great Indian epics to spread through Southeast Asia and forms a very strong cultural foundation in each place. The Philippines is no exception, as the epic covered the entire archipelago in various indigenized forms. Three famous examples are the “Hudhud” of Ifugao, “Maharadia Lawana,” and possibly the “Darangen” of the Lake Lanao region in Maranao.

Related to this is the possibility that Filipino dances such as tinikling and singkil are related to “Ramayana.” They are, at least, obviously pre-colonial as very similar dances are seen in Indonesia, Thailand, and Cambodia, among other places in Southeast Asia. Similarly, in Maranao regions, the god Sarimanok is possibly derived from Vishnu’s Garuda, while Lam-Ang in Ilocos is a possible representation of Sri Rama from “Ramayana.”

Cambodia and Thailand as the heart of Southeast Asia historically make sense. The area that later became Angkor’s massive empire was introduced to Hinduism and Buddhism as early as the second century BCE (Before the Christian Era). From here, it spread all over Southeast Asia, an area called Suvarna Dweepa (Golden Land/Golden Isles) in Buddhist sources. Angkor/Cambodia and its precursors were the preeminent cultural and economic center of Southeast Asia for centuries, exerting enormous influence.

Recognizable clothing and food traditions seen throughout Southeast Asia are easily observed in Cambodia. Whether this is from the cultural exchange or similar environments is impossible to say (likely a mix of both!), but to see what Filipinos call clothing such as barong Tagalog, sarong, sablay; food like adobo sa dilaw, ginataan, kinilaw, and dances like tinikling and singkil in Cambodia and Thailand, is fascinating.

In Thailand, too, one can clearly see the clash of native Southeast Asian aesthetics with those of Buddhism, via the Ancient City museum in Bangkok, which presents a recreated city based on historical sources. This museum shows residential housing in nearly the exact same style as what is generally referred to in the Philippines as “bahay na bato” and “bahay kubo” (kubo is a proto-Malayo-Polynesian word referring to a one-room arrangement), alongside Buddhist temples.

In the Philippines wood architecture was dominant, so what would have been Buddhist and Hindu shrines were actively destroyed by Spanish colonizers, and the cultural elements were absorbed into what became the Philippines’ unique brand of Christianity. What remains are archaeological remnants, spiritual words, and inner psychologies.

Sterling V. Herrera Shaw received his master’s degree in Philippine studies from the University of the Philippines Diliman, where his focus was on sociocultural and development studies.