HISTORY ACCORDING TO WINNERS AND LOSERS • 169

a community, who have obligations to one another beyond immediate material interests. Thus, it is possible to appeal to their sense of responsibility. Mat Nasir, for example, could say that he had appealed (rayu) to his relative to rent to him by the season rather than to lease land to a stranger. When that relative ignored his appeal, it was entirely appropriate that he should feel a sense of betrayal. Appeal and betrayal are concepts that are, quite simply, inapplicable beyond the frontiers of an imagined community. It makes no sense to appeal to a Chinese combine owner to forgo his profits to save Malay jobs or to feel betrayed when he pays no heed. For the large Malay landowner who hires the combine or leases out his land to a Chinese shopkeeper, however, matters are different. Something more can be expected from him; he is seen to have obligations to friends, neighbors, and relatives that can be betrayed. It is largely for this reason that many of the changes associated with the green revolution in Kedah have had a more profound impact on class relations among Malays than on relations between races.

RITUALS OF COMPASSION AND SOCIAL CONTROL

In Sedaka, as in any peasant society, there is a large variety of ritual ties that lie beyond immediate relations of production and serve both to create and to signify the existence of a community-one that is more than just an aggregation of producers. The particular ritual ties that involve gifts and exchanges between rich and poor are sensitive barometers of the vicissitudes of class relations. While they are not, by any means, connected to production relations in some crude mechanical fashion, they are nonetheless sensitive to changes in the realm of production. Using these gifts and exchanges as a valuable window on the transformation of class relations, it will become apparent that, as the poor have become increasingly marginal to the growing of paddy, so have they become increasingly marginal to the ritual life of the village. There have traditionally been three major forms of ritual gift giving joining the rich and poor in Sedaka. They include what villagers call the zakat peribadi, or "private" Muslim tithe, sedekah, or derma gifts, and kenduri, or ritual feasts to which other villagers are invited. All are either required or at least sanctioned by Muslim law as it is understood in the village. After a brief explanation of each form, I will examine how each has changed and how these changed have been experienced by classes in the village.

The zakat peribadi is to be distinguished from what most peasants call the zakat raja, the sultan's or government's zakat. The latter is the "official" zakat, owed by all but the very smallest cultivators, collected in paddy by an appointed local official (the ami/, in this case Basir), and paid to Kedah's Department of Religious Affairs. Although the proceeds are devoted to specified works oflslamic charity, the tithe is generally resented-and widely evaded-by cultivators for

170 • HISTORY ACCORDING TO WINNERS AND LOSERS

its perceived inequities. 68 Zakat peribadi, which is actually a form of religious charity and not a tax as the term zakat implies, is viewed in a more favorable light because it is not compulsory and because the beneficiaries are local, often within Sedaka itself. A part of this zakat peribadi is actually collected by the ami/ at the same time the zakat raja is collected and is designated by the giver, according to his or her wishes, as a conJ;ribution to the mosque (zakat mesjid) in nearby Kepala Batas, to the village hall, which functions as prayer house, religious school room, and meeting place (zakat madrasah), and/or to the imam of the mosque. Private donations are also given personally to the mosque caretaker (Tok Siak) and to the popular religious teacher Lebai Sabrani, whose religious classes include many local children. Collectively, this portion of zakat peribadi might be termed gifts for religious services, and it comprises roughly two-thirds of all zakat peribadi. The remainder is given to other individuals, including especially poorer relatives, neighbors, friends, and wage workers who have helped with the planting and harvesting. 69

It is this last category alone that might be called redistributive. We are by no means, however, dealing with vast quantities of paddy; the total zakat peribadi given out by villagers amounts to something like one hundred and ten gunny sacks or less than 2. 5 percent of an average village harvest. 70 Of that amount, the potentially redistributive share is not more than forty gunny sacks, or less than 1 percent of the harvest. Even if we were to add the small voluntary

68. Evasion of the zakat raja merits a study in itself as an example of peasant resistance to the state. Here I can note only a few particulars. Of those seventeen small-scale cultivators whose harvest is sufficient to subject them to the zakat raja but is less than fifty gunny sacks, only three pay anything at all to the ami!. Among middle and well-to-do peasants, no one, not even the ami!, paid the full zakat due the state. For the entire village, the zakat raja actually paid is something on the order of 15 percent of what would be required if the regulations were adhered to strictly. Villagers complain that only paddy farmers are systematically taxed, whereas others who are richer (settlers on rubber and palm oil schemes, businessmen, noncultivating landlords) are rarely taxed. They observe that none of the proceeds has ever fOund its way back to the village, and they suspect that much of it is siphoned off along the way co Alor Setar.

69. These categories often overlap. Thus a cultivator may give zakat peribadi to a brother or nephew whom he has employed as a wage laborer and who may also be a neighbor.

70. Nor is all of this distributed within the village, since gifts are often given to relatives and wage laborers living outside Sedaka. By the same token, however, a certain amount of zakat peribadi is also received by the poor of Sedaka from relatives and employers residing elsewhere. The figures citedhere are necessarily approximate, as the amount of zakat given or received by any individual is frequently a matter of dispute, with the rich often exaggerating their generosity and the poor minimizing their receipts.

HISTORY ACCORDING TO WINNERS AND LOSERS • 171

donations of milled paddy made to needy villagers just before Ramadan (a kind of fitrab peribadi), the total would not be appreciably greater.

The zakat is, of course, one of the five pillars of Islam-a sacred obligation. The religious and social reasoning behind it is best illustrated by the pamphlet distributed by the State Religious Council of Kedah. 71 After noting that Islam does not discourage the faithful from becoming rich, it asserts that the rich have an obligation to share a portion of their wealth with those who are poor and without property, and it quotes an injunction from the Koran: "And those who store up gold and silver and do not follow the path of Allah, let them know with the sharpest torment. "72 The purpose of the zakat, it continues, is not only to discourage stinginess (si[at-sifat bakbil) but to promote social harmony among the rich and the poor: "To cleanse those who receive zakat of jealousy and hatred toward the owners of property (tuan-tuan barta). To harmonize (merapatkan) the social relation between the haves (golongan berada) and the have-nots." The zakat is accepted by villagers in much the same spirit. They typically say that they give zakat peribadi in order to "cleanse (from sin} (cuci) their property."

The degree to which property is cleansed by voluntary zakat gifts varies enormously in the village. A few substantial property owners are quite generous with zakat peribadi, while others give almost nothing. Thus, Abdul Rahman gives over eight gunny sacks ofpaddy to relatives, workers, and religious officials, while Haji Kadir gives less than one sack. A small number of quite modest peasants give prodigiously, considering their means. Bakri bin Haji Wahab, a modest tenant on 4 relong, gives six gunny sacks-one each-to the families of those who have transplanted or harvested for him, and Rosni, a wage worker and tenant herself, gives away six gunny sacks divided between religious officials, poorer relatives, and a villager who worked for her (Pak Yah). 73 Others give nothing. ·

The amount of grain that poor villagers receive as zakat depends on their reputation, how good the paddy crop has been, and how much they have worked in a particular season. Thus Pak Yah and Mansur each received three or four gunny sacks of paddy after the irrigated season harvest of 1979, during which there was more manual work available than usual, owing to flooding. In each case, they received zakat only from those for whom they had threshed but not from all of them. Hamzah, the "zakat champ," does somewhat better, but a portion of the grain he is given is in recognition of his services as caretaker of the village prayer house (surau). Impoverished villagers who do not enjoy a good reputation fare much worse, even when they thresh regularly; Taib and Dullah

71.Badan Dak:wah Islamiah, Pejabat Zakat Negeri Kedah, Panduan Zakat (Alor Setar: Majlis Ugama Negeri Kedah, n.d., probably about 1970).

72.Ibid., 5.

73.Zakat is essentially a transfer of grain among men. Thus, with rar\ exceptions, widows or divorced women who are poor wage workers receive no zakat.

172 • HISTORY ACCORDING TO WINNERS AND LOSERS

are lucky to get more than a single gunny sack of paddy. What is notable here is that when the poor receive zakat it is almost entirely from their employers and its payment is rather carefully calculated according to the respectability of the recipient. It functions not only to "cleanse property" but also to promote labor control and social conformity.

Sedekah and derma are almost interchangeable as forms ofalms or contributions. Unlike zakat, sedekah is not tied to the harvest, is not always paid in paddy, is as often requested by the needy as simply given unasked, and is almost exclusively given to the poor. Derma differs only in that it is more often a collection made house-to-house for a charitable purpose-commonly to help a poor family pay funefal expenses, as in the case of Razak's daughter. 74 Both sedekah and derma are seen as "good works" in the context of Islam for which the benefactor, if of pure heart, will be rewarded. In the village context, at least, such gifts are small-for example, enough milled rice (beras) for a few meals.

The third major form of what might be considered "charity" are the kenduri, or feasts that constitute the basis of much of the village's ritual life. Unlike zakat or sedekah, these are collective rituals marked by both prayer and a communal meal the sponsoring family provides to invited guests. 75 Kenduris may be held for a host of reasons, but the most common, roughly in order of frequency and importance, are: marriage feasts (kenduri perkhawinan, kenduri bersanding, kenduri emas khawin); feasts to pray for the dead, which often double as feasts to celebrate some good fortune such as a son passing his exams (kenduri kesyukuran, kenduri arwah); circumcision feasts (kenduri berkhatan, kenduri masukjawi); pregnancy feasts (kenduri mandi tian); cradle feasts (kenduri berendul, kenduri buaian); infant hair-cutting feasts (kenduri cukur rambut); house-moving feasts (kenduri usung rumah); new house feasts (kenduri naik rumah baru); and feasts for a fulfilled wish-often for a child of the sex desired (kenduri berniat). Both rich and poor sponsor kenduri, but the rich are naturally expected to sponsor them more often, more lavishly, and for a larger number of guests. Expenses, especially for. sponsors ofmodest means, are met partly by donations in kind or cash by guests, although

74.Occasionally house-to-house collections are made by older Muslims from outside the village, who hope thereby to raise funds fur the pilgrimage to Mecca. These donations are called derma as are donations to religious schools. Thus derma appears to have a more specifically religious connotation.

75.More rarely, as in a keduri kekah (haircutting ceremony, but in Sedaka, at least, seen as a religious feast in which three or seven families slaughter a larger animal and hold a feast to pray for the souls of their ancestors), kenduri masuk ]awi (circumcision ceremony), or kenduri to!ak ba!a (feast, held in a field to ward off misfortune such as drought), several families will collaborate (berpakat) in a single feast. This last feast, held to have disappeared by many authorities and frowned upon

by official Islam, was held twice in Sedaka during my stay, in each case because the rains were late.

HISTORY ACCORDING TO WINNERS AND LOSERS • 173

poorer guests may avoid this by helping with the food preparation. 76 For the village poor, kenduri are virtually the only occasions when meat is eaten and, as Mansur says, the poor are "led" to feasts by the smell of meat cooking. Ritual feasts of this kind are the traditional means by which the well-to-do validate their status by conspicuous consumption in which their friends, neighbors, relatives, and often the entire village are invited to share.

When any form of charity is discussed by villagers, there is virtual unanimity for the view that, as a species of social relations, it has declined precipitously. Even the well-to-do farmers are in accord on this point, although many of them hasten to exclude themselves individually from the charge while pointing their finger at those who are even better-off. The village headman, Haji Jaafar, says the decline in charity began with double-cropping. Abdul Rahman, a substantial landowner who is renowned for his generosity, notes that even zakat peribadi is rarely given today and that sedekah hardly exists at all. The rich would rather, he says, sell their paddy and invest the cash in buying or renting in more land. Mat lsa, a fairly well-off tenant, gives voice to the general consensus when he claims, "The rich are arrogant (sombong); they don't take {the plight of1 the poor seriously; {they're} cheap with sedekah, and {they're} reluctant to give it."77 The village poor often put the facts bluntly. In the words of Rokiah, "The rich don't give anything to the poor."

For kenduri, there is also a consensus, albeit one with a slight wrinkle. Initially, the new profits of double-cropping in 1972 unleashed a memorable burst of feast giving that was unprecedented in Sedaka. Pak Haji Kaclir, who then owned a battery-operated loudspeaker, can remember renting it out over seventy times in little over a year for kenduri. Nearly everyone, including small tenants and landless laborers, took advantage of their new-found prosperity to celebrate rituals they could not have afforded earlier. The kenduri of the poorer villagers were necessarily more modest, but even they were able, for a time at least, to emulate the ritual decencies that help to define citizenship in this small community.

After this short period of euphoria, both the frequency and scale of feasts has, by all accounts, been sharply reduced. Few villagers would find much to disagree with in Kamil's account of what has happened since then. "Before," he claims, "kenduri were big, even to the point of leasing out 10 relong for a few years {to cover expenses}." "Now," he says, "people are a bit more clever"; they figure

76.I have heard that in some villages kenduri, especially fur marriages (kenduri t;ersanding), can turn a profit when many guests are invited from town who will contribute M$10 or more toward expenses. A cursory examination of the gifts (which are generally noted down in writing fur later reciprocation when the guest in turn gives a feast) and expenses fur kenduri suggests that this is unlikely in Sedaka. Paid entertainment of varous kinds is also provided at large kenduri.

77.Orang kaya sombong,- tak ambit berat orang susah. Sedekah berkira,· susah bagi.

174 • HISTORY ACCORDING TO WINNERS AND LOSERS

out exactly how many people are coming, what they will contribute, and how much of the outlay will be recovered. "Then, people didn't look to make a profit; they didn't want a shabby kenduri, it had to be a cow, not chickens." In those days, people would ridicule a Haji who skimped on a feast, saying" 'Hey, Haji so-and-so is giving chicken kenduri,' and he would be shamed." "Today it happens all the time." Tok Kasim agrees, as he describes kenduri that lasted two nights and at which two cows were slaughtered. 78 Today, he says, they only last an afternoon and there is only chicken. The reason fur the curtailing of ritual feasts by poor peasants is obvious; since at least 1976, their income has become more precarious. For richer peasants, the decline in the quality and number of kenduri is more a question of attitude than of resources. Most villagers would agree with Dullah's explanation that "The rich cut corners; they don't want to waste money. "79

The affluent farmers in Sedaka are by no means tongue-tied when it comes to explaining why so little zakat peribadi or sedekah is given to the poor. They make, in effect, three arguments, any one of which would be sufficient to justify their position. The first is nearly a point oflaw, inasmuch as the nonhandicapped, working poor do not fall into any one of the eight categories of recipients who, according to Islamic regulations, are eligible to receive zakat gifts. Kamil takes the position that the government, since it established the state zakat system a decade or so ago, does not approve of zakat peribadi outside official channels. The implication is that private gifts of this kind are not only wrong but possibly illegal now.

A second argument, typically thrown in for good measure, is that there is virtually no one in the village who is truly in need of charity. Thus Haji Salim, the richest man in the immediate vicinity, asks rhetorically, "Why give zakat to those who are hard up? They have land, they grow paddy like us." Here, the appeal is to a'kind of conceptual equality between all those who cultivate rice. We are, he implies, all on basically the same fOoting here and hence there is no need fur zakat or sedekah. It is true, of course, that most of the poor in Sedaka do own or rent rice land, however lilliputian its size; that fact allows Haji Salim to make something of an abstraction of the difference between those who rent 1 relong and those who own 20. Another rich villager, Lebai Pendek, avails himself of the same argument and adds that, since those who thresh his

78. The shorthand ranking of kenduri, a nearly infallible guide to their sumptuousness, is by the kind and number of animals slaughtered for food. Thus, to say that the kenduri was an affair of twenty chickens is to describe what a modest feast it was. In order of declining prestige value, the meats in question are: water buffalo, cows, goats and sheep, chickens, and more rarely, fish, the everyday staple. The mythical granddaddy of kenduri in village lore is one held by the Sultan of Kedah at the marriage of his daughter; he is believed to have sold Penang and Province Wellesley to pay for it, and over two hundred water buffalo were eaten.

79. Orang kaya pakai nipis; tak mau membazir duit.

HISTORY ACCORDING TO WINNERS.AND LOSERS • 177

of a man who has decided to conduct himself according to the rules imposed by the rich-to be available, discreet, and deferential, unlike his brother Razak and unlike others of the poor who rarely ask for help.

Tok Mahmud, a semiretired widower living with his daughter, has experienced the same humiliations and is less reticent than Hamzah. 83 The only way these days to get rice from the rich, he claims, is to take money and pay fur it. "We are even embarrassed to ask now. They say 'you grow rice, too.' They say, 'If you don't have enough to eat, you're lazy.' They never help.'' Like Pak Yah and others, he knows what the rich say about the poor. The village poor are caught in a situation where the old assumptions are no longer valid. Befure, they could expect zakat from employers and ask for sedekah, or advance wages, with a reasonable expectation of receiving something. Now they may ask, but only at the potential price of a humiliating rebuff. A gift refused in this fashion is not simply grain fOregone but, above all, a stark social signal that the relationship between the rich and poor, which the request assumed to be in furce, has been unilaterally declared null and void. The rich have given notice that they are no longer responsible fur the pressing needs of the village poor.

In the decline of the feast-giving cycle in Sedaka, the poor see the same symptoms of social withdrawal and selfishness by the well-to-do. No longer, says Mat "halus," are there feasts that last the whole night and at which three or fuur cows are eaten. Instead, the rich "think about money; they just want to invest their money. " 84 "Before, rich people wanted to make a big name (buat besar). Now they do just a little bit; they're clever. Before they wanted to show off (tunjuk-menunjuk) and now they don't want to waste money." Where they might have spent M$2,000, he adds, they now spend only M$200. Sukur, putting himself in the shoes of the rich, perfOrms what he imagines to be their calculations. "If a kenduri will cost $500, they ask, 'How many things can we buy fur that?' " Instead of a kenduri, they decide to buy a television set. The rich, he concludes, "think only of this world." For others, like Taib, what is most grating is to be hired fur work but not invited to his employers' feast. As he puts it, "If it's a question of work, the well-off have to go looking fur the poor; if it's a feast they go look for a lebai or haji (someone who can lead chants and recite from the Koran}, not poor people."

In this last comment by Sukur, we can capture the religious tone of his accusation. To think beyond this world is to think of Allah's judgment (hukum Allah) and thus to be generous and sympathetic to those who are less fOrtunate.

83. Tok Mahmud's 4 relong, 3 of which he farms, are now more than adequate fur his modest household of two. Ten years ago, however, he was substantially poorer owing to his large family.

84. Kira duit, mau pusing duit saja. Pusing means literally "to turn or spin" and is used here in the sense of "turning over" money so that it is never idle, so that it is always multiplying.