In my latest book, Countering the Western Canon: Another Way of Knowing about Journalism and Media (2023), released in May recently, I introduced the concepts of kaba and tambo as integral to Malay indigenous perspective on communication, media and journalism. As an extension of the chapter titled “Kaba, Tambo and Budi: Studying Media in the Malay world”, I am further clarifying its meaning with reference to the alam Minangkabau.

Kaba means news or message, from the Arabic, khabar. And in Bahasa Melayu it collectively means berita, khabar, warta, utusan. It is the story (cerita), sometimes contextualized as the narrative, a popular usage these days. In Minangkabau prose literature, kaba and tambo (annals, traditional historiography) are the two most important genres. Tambo refers to the alam Minangkabau (Minangkabau world) and its adat. In the tambo, one usually finds stories of Minangkabau kings, narrated as descendants of Iskandar Zulnarnain, that Minangkabau adat was first formulated by the two adat-givers in the name of Ketemanggungan and Datuk Perpatih nan Sabatang.

Minangkabau historian and social scientist Taufik Abdullah in his “Some Notes on the Kaba Tjindua Mato: An Example of Minangkabau Traditional Literature” (Indonesia, no.9, April 1970), explains that a kaba does not deal with the genesis of adat, but rather with the ideal conduct of life in accordance with adat. It recounts an orderly structured society, sometimes disturbed by the “villains” of the kaba. This is seen to similar to the news narrative. References to the origin of the ordered society serve to support the sacred character of adat ideals rather than provide the main focus for the narration. Compare this to the modern news narrative, in secular history and society.

Whereas a tambo relates the tradition of the emergence of the ideal world of the Minangkabau, a kaba is sometimes a mixture of the ideal universal conception and local traditions. It can be purely a work of literature or a legend about a local hero. Taufik gives the example of the Kaba Magek Djabang which narrates a local tradition about the adventures of a west coast aristocrat in Tiku-Pariaman.

Taufik clarifies that the kaba was narrated by a traveling storyteller, who, “after burning incense and murmuring mantras (incantations), would sing the story to the accompaniment of his rabab (two-stringed violin).” One familiar story in my engagement with Minangkabau society is the Kaba Tjindua Mato (or Kaba Cindua Mato. I am retaining Taufik’s spelling in the title). Unlike most kabas, the Kaba Tjindua Mato is not based on a local tradition, but relates to the tradition of Minangkabau royalty. It could also be considered as a tambo in the sense that the major figures in the Kaba also narrate the development of Minangkabau and its adat. It is a state myth par excellence and a standard reference work for Minangkabau adat theoreticians and guardians.

This would always be the case in my encounters with Minangkabau friends and colleagues in Malaysia and in West Sumatra. The kaba and tambo are most revered. The Minangkabaus would usually regard its contents as the description of their glorious days and thus an investigation into the historicity of the major figures would undoubtedly be very important. It essentializes the Minangkabau ethos and world view. The kaba gives us the concept of the world; and how the Minangkabaus view themselves. And in this case the story of the Tjindua Mato is central.

According to Taufik, in 1933, a prominent Minangkabau political figure said in a speech that if Indonesia were independent, the President would have to be a Dang Tuanku, a major figure of the Kaba Tjindua Mato. Similar to all other Minangkabau kaba, the Kaba Tjindua Mato begins with the ceremonial apology:

We ask for a thousand pardons Forgive us/

Bundo Kanduang Forgive us/

Dang Tuanku We are repeating other people’s stories/

Their lies are not our responsibility.

The story began, “sejak dulu lagi” (since time immemorial) in Pagarruyung. In the traditional Minangkabau capital, there sits a queen, Bundo Kanduang (literally Biological Mother), who stood by herself, created together with the universe (samo tadjadi djo alamko). Her son is Dang Tuanku. He was regarded as Raja Alam. Other institutions in the kaba are the Basa Ampek Balai (the four chief ministers). And places mentioned like Sungai Tarab, the usual route we would pass through from Bukittinggi to the Istana Basa in Pagaruyung, also to Pariangan, the origins of the Minangkabau story. The Bendahari, one of the four ministers, served as authority on adat matters for the Basa Ampek Balai. There is also the Raja Adat (Raja of customs) and Raja Ibadat (Raja of Religion). Also mentioned is Raja Rum, a reference to the Eastern Roman empire.

My experience with Minangkabau cultural historians tells an ambiguous sense of time, of spatial and temporal perspectives It was said that there is no exact date of the kaba. Like most traditional kabas, it has undergone continuous change over time. Interpolations made by the copyists are very common. The Kaba itself perhaps represents an oral tradition which was later formulated into a unified body of kaba in written form. It might have been first conceived by one, or more, of the adat formulators who belonged to one of the early mystic schools found in Minangkabau. Taufik suggests that despite the differing nuances which exist among the several earlier editions of the Kaba, on the whole they contain the same basic ideas.

The Kaba cannot be seen as empirical history; rather as a model for the Minangkabau state of the seventeenth or early eighteenth century. The Kaba also implies a tradition concerning the Islamization of Minangkabau. This relates to the encounter between the representatives of the Minangkabau palace and the Islamic “missionaries” at Bukit Marapalam, a hill between Pagarruyung and Lintau.

According to Taufik, the version of this tradition usually cited by Minangkabau adat theoreticians, as opposed to the tradition accepted by the religious leadership, states that these “missionaries” were the followers of a certain Sjech Pandjang Djanggut (long beard), “whose mosque leant to the West,” and who came from Siak, the eastern outlet.

But what is the Minangkabau World than? The Kaba says that Bundo Kanduang was “created together with her world.” Her world was Minangkabau, one of the four parts of the greater Universe (sapiah balahan ampek djurai) –“benua Ruhum,” “benua China” and the unknown world, the Kingdom of the Sea. The rulers of the three known areas were all descendants of Iskandar Zulkarnain. The Minangkabau World consisted of two parts–the center, called the luhaks, and the peripheries, the rantau regions, ruled by representatives of the royal family called raja. The Kaba distinguishes between the Koto-Piliang and Bodi-Chaniago political systems which divide the Minangkabau world into two laras (divisions). Each laras has its own adat center.

From available sources, Sungai Tarab, the seat of the Bendahara was the adat center for Koto-Piliang, and Lima Kaum for Bodi-Chaniago. The adat center for the whole Minangkabau world was Pariangan-Padang Panjang, the place that was said to be the genesis of the Minangkabau people and where their adat was formulated. This is at the foot of the active volcano, Gunung Marapi. I was there many times over visiting the burial sites of those mentioned in the Tambo, enjoying the vista, in a cool environment, with a hot cup of freshly brewed local coffee at Puncak Kawa (literally coffee summit), owned by a Malaysian from Tanjong Malim married to a Minangkabau padusi (lady).

Pariangan is a nagari. Bundo Kanduang divided the nagari population into eight kinds of people–penghulu (family chiefs), kadi (religious judges), manti (clerks), urang kajo (notables), urang saudagar (merchants), utusan dan pandito (messengers/sages and religious officials), hulubalang nan barani (brave warriors) and handiko dikampuang (kampung heads). Each had specific virtues and qualifications; for example, a penghulu should be knowledgeable, just, wealthy and honest; the hulubalang, brave and careful.

What is important in the kaba is the ideal mode of conduct, notions of appropriateness, and propriety (alur dan patuik/patut). The nagari is the lowest level of the socio-political order. Somone recently suggested that it is akin the Greek city-state. It is the microcosmic existence of the Minangkabau world view. Here is daily life and rituals – law, king, subjects, kampung, market, adat and limbago (custom). The law and adat are realized through akal (reasoning) in mitigating what is proper (patuik/patut), founded on budi. Hence the akal budi.

The akal budi is dynamic, as visualised as in “tarimpik nak di atas, takurung mahu diluar, jalan baduo mahu ditongah” (crushed while at the top, confined on the outside, walking in pairs while wanting to be in the middle). Such is Minangkabau logic, of overcoming contradictions, and the arrationality in the budi. There is a budiman (person of wisdom) expected from the kaba and tambo of the Minangkabau personality.