Petara, or Sea Dyak gods
J. Perham, a British civil servant in the Sarawak service, published this ethnographic study of Sea Dyak religious practice in 1882 as a continuation of his earlier paper on Petara (JSBRAS Vol. 8, pp. 133–152). The article examines the lived religion of the Sea Dyaks of Sarawak—spirit worship, sacrificial ritual, and the elaborate omen system—arguing that their belief constitutes a compound of nature-worship, demonolatry, and practical superstition rather than a coherent theological system. Perham’s overarching thesis is that Dyak religion, while rich in its number of objects of veneration, is fundamentally external and transactional, oriented toward material ends (crops, victory, health) rather than moral or spiritual improvement.
Summary
Perham opens by addressing the question of whether certain terms in Dyak invocations—Petara, Ini Inda, Raja Jewata, buja—indicate an organic connection with Hindu religion or are merely accretions borrowed from Malay. He identifies Petara with the Sanskrit Avatar (incarnations of Vishnu), noting the Dyak substitution of p for v, but argues that the other terms are Malay borrowings (Indra, dewata, puja) that the Dyaks themselves do not understand, treating them as mere titles appended to their own deity Pulang Gana. The Dyaks, Perham observes, have a habitual tendency to incorporate new names into their ancient forms, a tendency he notes is continuing with the adoption of Christian terms like Allah Taala into heathen rites.
The bulk of the article is devoted to three interlocking domains of practice. First, the world of antus (spirits): Perham describes their manifestations as giant, shaggy human figures, their activities (hunting, building, farming), their association with specific trees and hilltops, and their dual character as both benevolent givers of magic (ubat) and malevolent agents of disease. He draws a parallel between the Dyak practice of nampok—sleeping alone on mountain tops to receive spiritual visitation—and the incubation rites at Canopus and the temples of Esculapius. Second, the system of sacrifice: Perham details the composition of offerings, the construction of altars (para piring, langkau piring), the use of blood-sprinkling (ginselan) over persons and paddy fields, and the divination from livers. He emphasises that no priesthood exists and that the worship is a purely mechanical opus operatum, unconnected to the moral condition of the worshipper. Third, and most extensively, the omen system (beburong): Perham provides a detailed account of the specific birds (Katupong, Beragai, Kutok, Mbuas, Nendak, Papan, Bejampong) and subordinate creatures whose calls and appearances govern every aspect of Dyak life from rice-farming to house-building to war. He quotes at length the Sampi Umai, an invocation to the omen birds, and narrates the founding legend of Siu and Seragunting, in which Singalang Burong—chief of the spirit-birds—teaches the omen system to the first Dyaks before their return to the lower world.
Throughout, Perham’s method is that of a careful field observer recording oral testimony, dream narratives, and personal encounters with Dyak informants. He is candid about the limits of his knowledge, noting that a complete account of the omen system “would require a volume,” and he is equally frank in his assessments, describing the Dyak as living in “absolute subservience to augury” and characterising the religion as “the offspring of the earthly as well as the higher side of his nature.”
Key Findings
- The term Petara is etymologically identical to the Hindu Avatar; the invocation terms Ini Inda and Raja Jewata are identified as corruptions of Malay Indra and dewata, and the worship function buja corresponds to Indian puja (p. 213–214).
- Antus manifest visually as human figures approximately three times the size of a normal man, with shaggy hair, saucer-sized eyes, and glittering teeth; they build houses in waringin trees and farm like Dyaks (p. 215–217).
- The highest sacrificial victim is the pig; two fowls may substitute for one pig on the grounds that “the legs of two fowls are equal to those of a pig” (p. 226).
- The omen system requires, for the inauguration of rice-farming, that the nendak, katupong, burong malam, and beragai be heard in that specific order on the left side; a single incorrect omen can delay the commencement by up to a month (p. 229).
- The Sampi Umai invocation addresses the omen birds individually by name, each associated with a named ancestor (e.g., “Katupong of the late Menggong,” “Papan of the late Dunggan”), and petitions them for success in war, farming, and trade (p. 234–236).
- The legend of Siu and Seragunting explains that the omen birds are the sons-in-law of Singalang Burong and serve as his deputies in the lower world; the system was given to the Dyaks as a substitute for a lost book of knowledge (p. 236–240).
Conclusion
Perham’s definitive historical takeaway is that Sea Dyak religion is best understood as a “compound of law, religion and superstition in inextricable confusion” (p. 242). While it contains elements that recall the primitive religion of the Vedic age—veneration of natural phenomena, a sense of hidden living influence behind the material world—its dominant character is that of a practical, fear-driven, and transactional system in which the worshipper seeks only visible, present-tense benefits. The Dyak, Perham concludes, “has gods for worship, spirits for helpers, omens for guides, sacrifices for propitiation, and the traditions of his ancestors for authority,” and lives in submission to every stronger power, good or evil, without rising to the conception of an omnipresent deity or a moral purpose behind the ritual (p. 242–243).
Context
- Perham was serving in the Sarawak civil service at the time of writing; the article reflects the administrative-ethnographic perspective of a colonial official documenting indigenous belief for a learned society audience, with an implicit framing of Dyak religion as a lower stage in the evolution of religious thought.
- The study draws entirely on Perham’s personal field observation and oral testimony from Dyak informants in the Sarawak coast district; no archival or textual sources beyond comparative references (Marsden, B. Gould, Maclear) are employed.