Hindu-Buddhist Indonesia-Malaysia

This scenario discusses present-day Indonesia and Malaysia still being majority Hindu-Buddhist or a syncretic belief system in the present-day. Think Hindu Balinese culture across most of the Indonesian archipelago and Malay peninsula. I would argue that if the Buddhist Sri Vijaya Empire on Sumatra withstood or at least recovered quickly from the Indian Chola invasion of 1025, a power vacuum would not have allowed the first Muslim sultanates such as the Samudera Pasai Sultanate to take establish a strong foothold by the 13th century. Muslim traders from India or the Middle East might have settled in the region, but they wouldn't make up the majority of the population. Let me know if this scenario sounds plausible and what other factors would have caused this outcome.
 
I think it would definitely have made medieval India much more outward looking- it’s hard to justify the kala pani taboo when you know there are lots of Hindus outside the subcontinent.
 
Syncretism is very easy even with a late POD. I could certainly imagine some dictator declaring that something like Kejawen to be the national religion of the Indonesian people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kejawèn

You kick out the Imams trying to force more orthodox versions of Islam and this syncretism will naturally expand.
 
I think it would definitely have made medieval India much more outward looking- it’s hard to justify the kala pani taboo when you know there are lots of Hindus outside the subcontinent.

It's interesting that the Cholas apparently didn't observe that taboo when they used their navy to invade Sri Vijaya. If Sri Vijaya was able to withstand the invasion, what would have been the subsequent relationship between Sri Vijaya and the Cholas or other Indian states. Just wondering if it would be more amicable such as an alliance or at least neutrality or more contentious like the Cholas treat Sri Vijaya as their "backyard" or as rivals to colonize other parts of the Indian Ocean e.g. Australia or East Africa.
 
Syncretism is very easy even with a late POD. I could certainly imagine some dictator declaring that something like Kejawen to be the national religion of the Indonesian people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kejawèn

You kick out the Imams trying to force more orthodox versions of Islam and this syncretism will naturally expand.

Hey Socrates

That's an interesting point, both of the first presidents of Indonesia OTL, Suharto and Sukarno dealt with orthodox Islam forcefully and tried to enforce religious tolerance in Indonesia. If a strong leader was able to enforce tolerance or promote religious syncreticism as described in your link, I think their job would been easier if Muslim Malay states with Islam as their state religion did not occupy the Straits of Malacca where they would not have the advantage of using existing trade routes where merchants and missionaries could continue to promote Islam throughout the archipelago. I do agree with your point that syncreticsm was more of the norm until recently as young Indonesians and Malays traveled to Saudi Arabia or Egypt to receive more orthodox or "pure" versions of Islam. Ironically, many present-day Indonesians promote Buddhist Sri Vijaya and Hindu Majapahit as the golden age for their culture or civilization not the Muslim states such as the Sultanate of Malacca.
 
Actually the only plausible one is to prevent the conversion of Majapahit core lands.

Unfortunately, the Sultanate of Malacca established around 1400, occupying the strategic Malacca straits would continue to promote Muslim conversion because of their control of trade routes. Also, Majapahit like many kingdoms and empires encountered succession crises that Malacca would have taken advantage of. I think not having a strong Muslim state on the straits would have made the effort easier for Majapahit leaders of maintaining Majapahit as a Hindu empire. It would seem much harder for them to maintain a smooth succession process over the course of several centuries while the Sultanate of Malacca would take advantage of any mistakes regarding succession.
 
This is a really interesting topic and given I’ve just returned from a holiday in Indonesia I wish I had something more to add but AngelDeJesus seems to have said all that I could argue. Maybe a more settled and agrarian Sulawesi, influenced by Majapahit or Srivijaya might remain Buddhist or Hindu?

It's interesting that the Cholas apparently didn't observe that taboo when they used their navy to invade Sri Vijaya. If Sri Vijaya was able to withstand the invasion, what would have been the subsequent relationship between Sri Vijaya and the Cholas or other Indian states. Just wondering if it would be more amicable such as an alliance or at least neutrality or more contentious like the Cholas treat Sri Vijaya as their "backyard" or as rivals to colonize other parts of the Indian Ocean e.g. Australia or East Africa.

The kāla pāni taboo has been proven to be a small tradition amongst post-17th century North Indian elites that was blown into a full-fledged myth by British historians. Even before the Chola Empire’s invasions of Sri Vijaya there were plenty of fleeing Indian princelings who used to flee to Southeast-Asia alongside their retinues and marry into local elites to give them legitimacy.

Also archaeological digs have found prior to the Pandyas and Cholas slowly trying to gain influence in the Indonesian archipelago, a near millennium and a half before sailors from the Kalinga mahajanapada (modern day Orissa) were the ones who initiated the Indianisation of the region when Sadhába traders began to sail out to these places. The Hathigumpha inscriptions alongside large amounts of Mahameghavana coinage found in Kedah suggest that the area was under King Kharavela’s direct control c. 1st century BCE.

So much so that Rajendra Chola I conquered the region explicitly to for the great ports it housed to stage naval expeditions into the Bay of Bengal and beyond.
 
Last edited:
This is a really interesting topic and given I’ve just returned from a holiday in Indonesia I wish I had something more to add but AngelDeJesus seems to have said all that I could argue. Maybe a more settled and agrarian Sulawesi, influenced by Majapahit or Srivijaya might remain Buddhist or Hindu?



The kāla pāni taboo has been proven to be a small tradition amongst post-17th century North Indian elites that was blown into a full-fledged myth by British historians. Even before the Chola Empire’s invasions of Sri Vijaya there were plenty of fleeing Indian princelings who used to flee to Southeast-Asia alongside their retinues and marry into local elites to give them legitimacy.

Also archaeological digs have found prior to the Pandyas and Cholas slowly trying to gain influence in the Indonesian archipelago, a near millennium and a half before sailors from the Kalinga mahajanapada (modern day Orissa) were the ones who initiated the Indianisation of the region when Sadhába traders began to sail out to these places. The Hathigumpha inscriptions alongside large amounts of Mahameghavana coinage found in Kedah suggest that the area was under King Kharavela’s direct control c. 1st century BCE.

So much so that Rajendra Chola I conquered the region explicitly to for the great ports it housed to stage naval expeditions into the Bay of Bengal and beyond.

Concerning Sulawesi, I'm not as familiar with a Hindu or Buddhist influence, but it's certainly plausible Sri Vijaya or Majaphait could have spread their influence as well. To the north of Sulawesi in Philippines are group of islands called the Visayas and there's a local legend there concerning a rebel prince from Sri Vijaya settling there, hence the name of the islands as Visayas. If Sri Vijaya or Majapahit continued to exist or expand, there's definitely a chance a Hindu or Buddhist influence could have established a firmer presence in Sulawesi and other outer islands of Indonesia maybe even all the way to New Guinea or northern Australia.
 
Northern Australia is unlikely. There's a reason that Indonesians never colonised it. It's not a particularly welcoming climate, with not particularly welcoming locals, and there is little to no obvious resources to make it worth the while. Even the British only built Darwin for strategic reasons, after they had colonised basically all the rest of the continent.
 
Top