A Change of Guard

សូមស្តាប់វិទ្យុសង្គ្រោះជាតិ Please read more Khmer news and listen to CNRP Radio at National Rescue Party. សូមស្តាប់វីទ្យុខ្មែរប៉ុស្តិ៍/Khmer Post Radio.
Follow Khmerization on Facebook/តាមដានខ្មែរូបនីយកម្មតាម Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/khmerization.khmerican

Monday 6 September 2010

ขอม คือ ใคร Who are the Khom ? โดย ชาญวิทย์ เกษตรศิริ

Dear Readers,

Below are the discussions about the word "Khom" and "who are the Khom?" that have been used by the Thais to refer to a group of people living in the former Khmer Empire that stretched from Malaysia to the south and China to the north. The Thai people always held the views that the "Khom" was a human race that was separate from the Khmer race. The Thai are of the views that the "Khom", not the Khmers, were the ones who built Angkor Wat and other ancient temples across Cambodia and Thailand. However, the Khmers believe that the word Khom is a mispronunciation or a derivative of the word "Khmer". Please enjoy the discussion below:

From Mr. Bora Touch To Lok Michel

Lok Michel,

Thank you very much for your comments. Very informative and helpful.(PDF document attached)

A few quick comments/questions back from me and I write more later. I have two law papers overdue.

The term "Kamarrani" of (Pliny 70 AD) refers to the Khmer of the Mekong river and has nothing to do with Kashmir. The Chinese also had known or used the term “Kih-mieh” (Khmer) since the Fu-nan era (D. Michel, Annals of Imperials de l’Anam). On a different note, Chinese envoys from the Tsin and Liang dynasties (265-556 A.D) suggest that the native people of Chih-tú/Siam were the same race as those of Funan, “men are small, ugly, black”): see translation of Man Tuan-lin reports, J.R.A.S. Bengal (1837)

Interestingly, “srok khmer” Rsukexµr was used on the Khmer language side of the Sab Bak inscription and Kamvuj kmVúeTs on the Sanskrit side of the inscription (1066 AD). “Kampuja” was a formal translation of “Srok khmaer” which still in use these days.

Khom

My suggestion is that khom ខម was a distortion of Kho-mien ខeមន being Kho ខ and not Kha ខៈ) You still can hear Kha or kho-maen these days. The Vietnamese pronounced “Khmaer” as ko-mien or ka-mien. Later on, the “ko” was dropped and “mien” has been retained until this day. But you still hear ko-mein occasionally.

ខម “Khom” was used at least since the Angkor period, probably earlier, when the first Thai came in touch with the Khmer in Younan, (where Khmer boundary was, according to the Chinese chronicle Man-chu written in 863 and King Yasovarman I inscription of 10th(?) century) and then in the north of what is now Thailand, Sukhoday including, and Lao since before Angkor. Interestingly, the Cheing-sen chronicle stated that the “khom” occupied the region/thailand since 675 B.C. Presumably, there was no Khmer krom of now Cambodia or Khmer leu at the stage. If the Thai have retained the Khmer word, why would not have retained Khmerkrom or khmerkhlom?.

Thai

Thai or T’ai ét or the variant éT (or “Tai” in unaspirated form), or Dai éd in Chinese pinyin, is only an epithet of Chinese deviation. The word Thai was given a classic air by adding a final “y”, thus was/is written “Thaiy” éfy or your éfü (not “Thai” éf) in order to make it look like a transliteration of the Sanskrit or Pali “daya”, a corruption of “jaya” (victory). I think the spelling of “Thaiy” éfy was created by the Prince Mongkut, who I believe, was also the author of the so-called Ramkamhaeng Inscription, inspired I think by the western (Roman-letter) printing press introduced into Thailand in the 1700s and in the earlier 1820s by the early Protestant missionaries who in their reports advised that Prince Mongkut and the Rama III were trying to invent a Thai printing press where all diacritics and subscripts were on the same line (like the English writing).

True “Tai” ét , or spelled “Tay” tay in pre-angkor inscriptions (K 78), was a title of a lady OR a proper noun, but I would not rule out “Tai” of Angkor being a Thai appellation.

kénS or Kansai has no relation with Angkor ét Tai. Kansai in Khmer meaning the “tail” or the back of a boat, a house. It should be just that. kénSsarBiC£ kansai (sarpich) of Chuon Nath, p. 22 is a mistake for kénþ b¤ kénÞ which was use in since in pre-angkor (see inscription k. k.561A, k.600, k.137 et. The word meant/means a noble lady or a religious woman.

Chuon Nath also mistook “thanay” Nay as being a Thai word. Thnay or tñay is in fact a pure Khmer in use since pre-angkor meaning a representative or a “lawyer”. (see 155B, K521)

esom nig sYüam That Siam is of the Sanskrit Syam should have been laid to rest long ago. Fr. Pallegoix and others in the 1850s suggested that Syam was the Sanskrit Syam. This was correct, although it was conjectured at the time. “Syam” appears as a proper noun on pre-angkor inscription k 149, k 79, k137. Syam (kut) and Syam (kak), a proper noun or name of a state, appear on Angkor period (two) bassorelievo in the south-western gallery of Angkor. “Syam slaves” in a Sanskrit inscription of Champa (409 B.2), the word Syam was engraved on one of Po Nargar temple’s pillars (Aymonier, J.A. (1891).

Touch Bora

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Michel Antelme <>Date: 2010/9/3

Dear លោក​ បូរ៉ា,


What you say is very interesting especially the mention about
"Kamarrani" (Pliny 70 AD), a close sound of the Sanskrit "Kamarri"(sp?).

Thanks a lot about the article by ชาญวิทย์ เกษตรศิริ (ជាញ​វិទ្យ ក្សេត្រសិរិ, ឆានវិត ក្សេតស៊ិរិ) which I didn't know but shall read as soon as possible.

At the time I wrote my article we hadn't discovered yet those new pre-Angkorian inscriptions with the word "khmer" clearly appearing as an ethnonym (it only appeared as an ethnonym in an Angkorian inscription). In my opinion, "Khmer" (ក្មេរ៑ in pre-Angkorian Khmer, ខ្មេរ in Angkorian Khmer and ខ្មែរ in modern Khmer) is indeed an indigenous term, and has nothing to do with Kashmir (កឝ្មីរ) as the late ឆ័ត្រា ប្រេម​ឬឌី postulated or with កម្ពុមេរ as said George Cœdès (this was probably a later construct by the Khmers to have mythological origins). Those who postulate an indigenous origin are Keng Vannsak, though his hypothesis saying that it comes from the word ម៉ែ "mother" doesn't work as it doesn't explain the final "r" which is still clearly pronounced in Surin in the word Khmer, but never in the word for mother.
There are also the interpretations by Michel Ferlus and by Gérard Diffloth who are both linguists in historical phonetics. Ferlus' tends to relate it to a root having something to do with "agriculture" and so is mine (though we don't find the same roots, as he sees it as an infixed form whereas I postulated a prefixed form or a compound), whereas Diffloth's has something to do with trade. So we won't have any final definite answer before very long.

As for the word ខម​ being a distortion of the word ខ្មែរ when borrowed by the Thais, I'm not sure at all and am reluctant with this hypothesis. Indeed, Thai is a monosyllabic language, however they have borrowed loads of dissyllabic words from Khmer and have retained many of them as such. Even many monosyllabic Khmer words with initial consonant clusters have become dissyllabics. The word Khmer itself is a good example, Angkorian /khmeer/ has become /khaměen/ (ខៈម៉េន) in Thai, as it's impossible for them to pronounce the /khm-/ cluster, they need to insert an /a/ -- the final /n/ is a good evidence of the pronunciation of a final /r/ in Khmer, which can't be pronounced as such in Thai and became a final /n/, and is written เขมร (ខេមរ). The Thai spelling closely respects the Khmer spelling but as the Thai script doesn't have any subscript consonants (ជើង), they wrote ม (ម) instead of ្ម, as the latter doesn't exist in the Thai script. What is funny and has been explained since Tandard's Cambodian-French dictionary published in 1935 (but compiled at the end of the 19th century, beginning of the 20th century), and later on explained exactly the same by អ្នក​គ្រូ ពៅ សាវរស, is that the word ខេមរៈ, doesn't come from Pāli ខេមរោ as the វចនានុក្រម​ខ្មែរ thinks, but from the word เขมร (ខេមរ) which was retranslitterated from Thai by some Khmers and then misunderstood.

I just would like to make a digression and say that the compilers of this dictionary and especially សម្តេច ជួន ណាត, have done a tremendous job as they didn't have any training as "modern linguists", nevertheless they have produced what I would call a master work (a chef-d'œuvre). However as pionneers they've made some mistakes (ដំរី​ជើង​បួន​គង់​មាន​ភ្លាត់​ អ្នក​ប្រាជ្ញ​ចេះ​ស្ទាត់​គង់​មាន​ភ្លេច), for instance in the etymology of some words but also in the spelling of some (very few) words with the ending or non-ending in រ (រ ប្រកប). The pronunciation of Khmers from Surin should help us. For instance, the word បែរ is in fact បែ. ជូរ should be ជូ. But ខ្ទេច​ខ្ទី should be ខ្ទេច​ខ្ទីរ and ថ្ម​ដា should be ថ្ម​ដារ (the Vietnamese etymology đá "stone" given for it is to be seen as an error, though the Khmer and Vietnamese words are probably cognates not a borrowing from one language into the other). ដំប should be written ដំបរ (see Angkorian Khmer តំបរ, and the pronunciation in the Surin dialect), and អង្ករ should be written អង្ក (see Old Khmer រង្កោ, and the pronunciation in the Surin dialect). However, as we're so much used to the spelling of the វចនានុក្រម​ខ្មែរ, perhaps we can keep the current spelling and at the same time accept a spelling more based on the etymology and the pronunciation of conservative dialects. It should be nonetheless indicated in a future upgraded edition of the វចនានុក្រម​ខ្មែរ, though the Buddhist Institute was absolutely right to give an electronic version of the វចនានុក្រម​ខ្មែរ without changing a single word.
An upgraded version should be the result of a commission of real scholars including people knowing perfectly Khmer, knowing Old Khmer, Middle Khmer, Pāli, Sanskrit, Thai, Lao, Chinese dialects, Vietnamese, and also people able to read Thai in Khmer script (the អក្សរ​ខម we've been talking of). We don't have so many people like សម្តេច​ ជួន ណាត who knew very well Khmer, Thai; Lao, Sanskrit and Pāli, so it should be a collective work (which was also the case of វចនានុក្រម​ខ្មែរ a the beginning, up to the time សម្តេច​ ជួន ណាត was the only one willing to deal with such a gigantic work). Moreover, the Khmer Unicode alphabet is still lacking characters and diacritics and should be updated and upgraded to write down all these signs that were used in Old Khmer, Middle Khmer, and are still used in Thai (when written in Khmer script) and Sanskrit, as Khmer Unicode is just good enough for Pāli, a few letters for Sanskrit and modern Khmer (though it can't even be used to write down some characters that were used in កម្ពុជសុរិយា in 1929 or even in the book ភាសា​ខ្មែរ of លោក អៀវ កើស published in the 1950s or 1960s.

Now, I come back to the word ខម​. As the word ខ្មេរ in Angkorian Khmer, once borrowed in Thai, became /khaměen/ (ខៈម៉េន), I don't see how the first syllable ខៈ in pronunciation was then reconstructed as ខម. In Thai, the stress on the second syllable of dissyllabic words is not as paramount as it is in Khmer. Tones are much more important. And it doesn't explain why in some ancient Thai dialects it was pronounced ក្លម. The hypothesis ខម < ​ ក្រោម is more seducing, as in some Thai languages, /r/ (រ) and /l/ (ល) were confused in pronunciation, and in other Thai languages /r/ (រ) has become /h/ (ហ). I give you an example, the word for "we, us" in Thai is เรา /រ៉ៅ/. In central Thai (Siamese Thai), it's now most often pronounced /ឡៅ/, but is still pronounced /រ៉ៅ/ in Southern Thai dialects. In many Lao dialects, it's also pronounced ឡៅ, but in other Lao dialects it has become ហៅ, and the official spelling is ເຮົາ, (actually the consonant sign ຮ (រ៍)which is pronounced /h/ in Lao is a graphic modification of ຣ​(រ)). However, as I'm not a specialist of historical phonetics, I can't be totally sure and you should ask reliable scholars such as Michel Ferlus (jrmferlus@orange.fr) and Gérard Diffloth (gdiffloth@gmail.com) who are the most known specialists of Mon-Khmer linguistics. About the word for Siamese (សៀម), you're right, the Siamese people didn't call themselves សៀម. However this name was used by nearly all the other ethnic groups in Mainland Southeast Asia to call Thai groups, and mostly the Central Thais. Where does it come from? I don't know yet, but at a time it came to designate the Central Thais. Perhaps it was used before to call some other ethnic group. The word "Thai" itself simply means "human being". You can find the same pattern in many other languages. The Inuit people (Eskimos) call themselves "Inuit" which means "human being". The word កួយ in Kuoy means "human being". And so is the primary meaning of ថៃ. In Modern Lao, ໄທ (ទៃ which is pronounced ថៃ in Modern Lao and Thai, តៃ in Chiang Mai Thai, and ដៃ in nothern Thai langguages) is now the equivalent of អ្នក in Khmer. For instance, ໄທບ້ານ (ទៃ​បា້ន pronunciation: ថៃ​បាន) with បាន = ភូមិ means អ្នក​ភូមិ. A Vietnamese linguist, Ðặng Nghiêm Vặn, said something that is quite worth meditating upon. He said that the Thai populations who called themselves dai, when they arrived in the Peninsula came in contact with Mon-Khmer populations who called themselves ខា, meaning "human beings" in their language. With time, these Thai populations became feudal masters and the Kha populations became their vassals, so gradually the word ថៃ came to mean "free men" where as the word ខា took the meaning of ខ្ញុំ​(គេ) in Thai and Lao. In 19th-century Thai, the word ข้า (ខា້)​ was used to mean both "slave" and one of the words meaning "I, me" in polite speech. Central Thais (សៀម) are called "Smaller Thais" (ไทยน้อย = ថៃ​តូច, ថៃ​តិច) in Shan ("Shan" come from the Burmese pronunciation for សៀម, as in Burmese, final /n/ and /m/ have very similar pronunciations; the Shan people call themselves ไทยใหญ่ = ថៃ​ធំ), and they are called ថៃ​សៈញ៉ាម (ថៃ​ស្យាម) or simply ថៃ in Lao (but the latter also means "people" in Lao as I've said). Saying this, the relationship between សៀម and ស្យាម (Sanskrit ឝ្យាម) is very dubious, though I won't put forward any engaged hypothesis. However, it must not be forgotten that there was a very strong tendency among Southeat Asian scholars up to the 19th century or even 20th century to find Sanskrit and Pāli etymologies to indigenous words as these two languages were perceived as sacred and high-cultured. Now for the word តៃ, which appears in Old Khmer inscriptions, I think that it should not be confused with ដៃ, តៃ ឬ ថៃ which are different pronunciations of a Tai-Kadai word meaning "human beings" and which was originally pronounced /daj/ /ដៃ/. When Thai populations borrowed their script from the Khmers (this is the case of Siamese Thai) and from the Mons (this is the case of Northern Thai populations), they wrote this word meaning "human being": ទៃ (in Thai script: ไท, in Lao script: ໄທ). Later on, in Siamese Thai, the word was written ទៃ្យ = ไทย, which is nothing but a graphic convention. See also in Khmer manuscripts, before the វចនានុក្រម​ខ្មែរ​របស់​ពុទ្ធសាសនបណ្ឌិត្យ, words such as ដី or ដៃ were written ដី្យ and ដៃ្យ. This doubling of consonants was very common, for instance ធំ was written ធំម or ទ្ធំម. This was very common in Middle Khmer inscriptions and សាស្ត្រា​ស្លឹក​រឹត. Historical phonetics is crucial to understand all this. Please read my article "Note on the Transliteration of Khmer ", Udaya 3, Siem Reap (Cambodge) : 1-16, published in 2002, and ask scholars like Gérard Diffloth (who lives in Siem Reap) or Michel Ferlus. In Sanskrit and OId Khmer, and also when Siamese Thais and other Thai groups borrowed their alphabets from the Mons and the Khmers, the letter ទ was pronounced /d/. Then, after the Angkorian period, there was a consonant shift in many languages spoken througout the Peninsula (Thai and Mon-Khmer languages alike). Voiced consonants (ព្យញ្ជនៈ​ឃោសៈ) such គ /g/, ជ /j/ and ទ /d/ came to be pronounced as voiceless consonants (ព្យញ្ជនៈ​អឃោសៈ): /k/, /c/ and /t/ in Khmer and Chiang Mai Thai, so were pronounced exactly the same as ក, ច និង ត; and became /kh/, /ch/ and /th/ in Lao and Siamese Thai. What happened then was a bipartition in two voice registers in Khmer (which were called in Khmer សំឡេង​ស្រាល ឬ សំឡេង​តូច for the voiceless consonants, and សំឡេង​ធ្ងន់ ឬ សំឡេង​ធំ for the former voiced consonants). These registers still exist in Chantaburi Khmer (ភាសា​ខ្មែរ នៅ​ខេត្ត​ចន្ទបុរី នា​ប្រទេស​ថៃ​សព្វ​ថ្ងៃ), and then in many Khmer dialects in two groups of vowels depending on the consonants (see for instance the pronunciation of ស្រៈ ា with ក and គ, or of ី with ក and គ). That is why Sanskrit rājā which is very correctly written រាជា in Khmer and ราชา in Thai is nowadays pronounced /riəciə/ in Modern Khmer and /raachaa/ in Thai, and Sanskrit devatā, written ទេវតា and เทวดา, is pronounced /teevədaa/ in Khmer and /theewadaa/ in Thai. I won't explain here the reason why ត is pronounced /d/ in some words and /t/ in other words, though it can be explained. So the word តៃ, found in Angkorian inscriptions and which was used as a title for women (roughly equivalent to នាង ឬ អុ្នក​ស្រី in modern Khmer), and the word ទៃ (= ថៃ) have no relationship whatsoever. In modern Khmer, the only words which can probably be related to Angkorian Khmer តៃ, are កន្សៃ in កន្សៃ​សារពេជ្ញ (ស្រី ​ជា​អគ្គ​មហេសី​របស់​ព្រះ​បរម​ពោធិសត្វ​ជា​បច្ឆិម​ជាតិ ក្នុង​កាល​ដែល​នៅ​ជា​គ្រហស្ថ ឬ​ដែល​បាន​ត្រាស់​ហើយ ក៏​គង់​នៅ​ហៅ​ស្រី​នោះ​ថា កន្សៃសារពេជ្ញ ), and in the word ម្តាយ. I won't explain here why in one case ត became ស, and in the other case is pronounced as /d/, and why in one case it is ៃ and in the other case ាយ, and you should refer to these two scholars I've already mentioned or to អ្នក​គ្រូ ពៅ​ សាវរស. All these are hypothesis, but they must rely upon historical evidence and historical phonetics. All the best, Michel. P.S. In case you can't read Unicode characters in Khmer, Thai and Lao, I attach a PDF file. ----- Original Message ----- From: Bora Touch To: chanroeunkh@gmail.com ; premchap2004@yahoo.com ; meng_ifl@yahoo.com ; Vong SOtheara ; zyxpuce@aol.com ; Michel Antelme ; charnvitkasetsiri@yahoo.com ; im sokrithy Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 5:06 AM Subject: Re : ขอม คือ ใคร Who are the Khom ? โดย ชาญวิทย์ เกษตรศิริ I meant Malup Inscription Ka 64 (7th century), which so far the only PRE-ANGKOR inscription that contains the word "Kmaer". Bora -------------------------------------------- From: Bora Touch
Date: 2010/9/2
Subject: Re: Re : ขอม คือ ใคร Who are the Khom ? โดย ชาญวิทย์ เกษตรศิริ
To: im sokrithy

My pleasure, Lok Rithy.

Still on the "Khmer". I donot agree with those who are of the thought that the word derives from "Kapvu Mera". "Kmaer" appears on the relatively newly discovered Malup Inscription Ka 64 (7th century), which so far the only inscription that contains the word "Kmaer". "Khmaer" has been around for a long time as by 1st century, the Romans already had known/called the Khmaer as "Kamarrani" (Pliny 70 AD), a close sound of the Sanskrit "Kamarri"(sp?), an ethnic group of the ancient times.

regards Bora'
----------------------------------------------
From: Bora Touch
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010
Subject: Re : ขอม คือ ใคร Who are the Khom ? โดย ชาญวิทย์ เกษตรศิริ


All,

Michel's theory of "Khom" etymology is the same as most noted Thai scholars', Prof. Charnvit Kasetsiri is one in particular, see his article "who are the khom"below.

But I think "Khom" is a Thai pronunciation or a short form of "Khmaer". Khmaer is for the monosyllabic Tai/Thai, was/is of two syllables= Kho maen (Lyndyn 1804) (remember that Thai have NO/"N" for RO/"R". After having gone through the monosyllabization process, "kho maen" became "khom", a short form of "kho mean" so to speak .

Siamese (Sanskrit Syam) were never Tai/Thai. The Thai never called themselves "Syam/Siem". Syam was a name given by the Khmer for the mountain range of Thai-Burmese (Northern Thailand) (see also Visnu puranna) . Those who lived around or on the mountain were called Syam or Syam kuk, probably the Rmaonh/Mon (Rmoanh was used by the khmer since the begining of time). (The Khmer also called the Viets "Yvana", the Chinese "Cina", Sanskrit meaning "barbarian". The Chinese never ever called themselves, "Cina/Chinese".

The Khmer called the Thai "Tai" or "Tai ku" . Tai is a proper name. You would have seen sees, in amny Khmer inscriptions, "tai kampet" or "Tai, the pussy"

Bora

----------------------------------------------------------

Chanroeun Pa , Prem Chap , Meng Vong , Sotheara Vong , im sokrithy , Thiounn Mumm ; Michel Antelme


------------------------------------------
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 1:01 AM, Michel Antelme wrote:

Dear all,

The word ខម is an interesting one indeed, and is used in Siamese Thai and Lao to call the Khmers of the Angkorian period. But this word is itself a loan from a Mon-Khmer language, perhaps Mon, as the Mons used to call the Khmers: ေြကာမ် krom, which is most probably related to the word ក្រោម krom in Khmer (below, beneath, under), i.e. people living below or downstream, exactly as Khmers from Surin call themselves ខ្មែរ​លើ, Khmer loe when they need to distinguish themselves from the Cambodian Khmers whom they called then ខ្មែរ​ក្រោម Khmer krom, and also the way Cambodian Khmers call the Khmers from the Delta: ខ្មែរ​ក្រោម Khmer krom. This word krom was then borrowed by the Thai populations when they arrived in mainland Southeast-Asia and became กล๋อม klom or ขอม khom. This was very brightly explained in a work in Thai by the late Jit Phumisak (ចិត្រ ភូមិស័ក្តិ៍), one of the most brilliant Thai intellectuals who had read all of George Cœdès at that time and was killed in the jungle as he was a leftist.
This word ขอม khom has remained in Thai to call the Khmer characters who were used until the twentieth century A.D. to write down Pali and Siamese Thai in religious manuscripts. This style of characters came back to Cambodia (អក្សរ​ខម aksar kham) and is very similar to អក្សរ​មូល aksar mūl. Actually the round script we use nowadays in Cambodia (e.g. for sign streets, book titles) is អក្សរ​ខម aksar kham. The real អក្សរ​មូល aksar mūl, is the font that was recently designed by Danh Hong for Unicode Khmer (which he called "Khmer Os Muol Pali).

Please see my two articles, one on an hypothesis of the origin of the word Khmer in Péninsule, in which I briefly mention the word Khom:

Antelme, Michel, "Quelques hypothèses sur l’étymologie du terme "khmer" ", Péninsule 37. 1998 (2) : 157-192.
and the other one on the Khmer script (downloadable in PDF format):

" Inventaire provisoire des caractères et divers signes des écritures khmères pré-modernes et modernes employés pour la notation du khmer, du siamois, des dialectes thaïs méridionaux, du sanskrit et du pāli ", Bulletin en ligne de l'AEFEK, n°12, juin 2007, 81 p. [ + "Avant-propos" de l'auteur, 4 p] : http://aefek.free.fr/pageLibre000107dd.html

Unfortunately for those who don't read this language, both are in French.

All the best,

Michel.
---------------------------------------------

To whom can read Thai.

http://www.prachatai.com/journal/2009/07/25138

--- On Sun, 7/19/09, Charnvit Kasetsiri wrote:


From: Charnvit Kasetsiri
Subject: ขอม คือ ใคร Who are the Khom ? โดย ชาญวิทย์ เกษตรศิริ
To: "Prachatai Prachatai"
Date: Sunday, July 19, 2009, 5:25 AM

ขอม คือ ใคร Who are the Khom ? โดย ชาญวิทย์ เกษตรศิริ

(1)

คำในภาษาเขียนและภาษาพูดของไทยและลาว คือ “ขอม-ขะแมร์-ขะเหมน-เขมร-กัมพูชา” (Khom, Khmer, Khamen, Cambodia) นั้นมีความยุ่งยาก สลับซับซ้อนมาก ทั้งในแง่ของความหมายว่าหมายถึงเรื่องของ “ชาติพันธุ์” หรือ “เชื้อชาติ” (คือหมายถึง “คน” ethnic/race) หรือหมายถึง “วัฒนธรรม” (“ภาษา” “อักษร” “ปราสาท-เทวรูป-พุทธรูป-ศิลปะ” culture/language/scripts/prasat/images) หรือว่าหมายถึง “นาม/ชื่อ” ของดินแดน อาณาจักร ประเทศชาติ ฯลฯ (place-names: land-kingdom-country-nation) หรือไม่และอย่างไร

คำชุดนี้ มีความยุ่งยาก สลับซับซ้อนไม่แพ้คำว่า “ไทย-ไท-ไต-ลาว-ฉาน-ชาน-ซำ-ซัม-สยาม-เสียม-เซียม-เสียน ฯลฯ” (Thai-Tai-Lao-Shan-Sam-Siam-Siem-Sien, etc.)

สำหรับคำว่า “ขอม” เป็นคำไทยและลาว และก็ไม่มีอยู่ในภาษาพูดหรือภาษาเขียนของกัมพูชาแต่อย่างใด คนกัมพูชา/เขมร ไม่รู้จักและไม่น่าจะสนใจคำว่า “ขอม” แต่คำๆนี้ ก็มีรากศัพท์มาจากภาษาของกัมพูชา กล่าวคือ ทั้งไทยและลาวนำเอาจากคำว่า “ขะแมร์-กรอม” (Khmer Krom) หรือ “เนี๊ยกอีกรอม” (คนใต้/ขะแมร์ใต้)

คำว่า “ขอม” นี้เราจะยังพบได้ใน “ภาษาเขียน” ของพระราชพงศาวดาร หรือไม่ก็ในตำนานไทย/ลาว เช่น “ขอมดำดิน” สมัยสุโขทัย หรือ “ขอมแปรพักตร์” สมัยต้นอยุธยา และเราก็ยังพบใน “ภาษาพูด” ของชาวบ้านทั่วๆไปในประเทศลาวและประเทศไทย เช่นคำว่า ปราสาทขอม ตัวขอม ยันตร์ขอม เทวรูปขอม พุทธรูปขอม หลวงพ่อขอม เป็นต้น

(2)

นักวิชาการด้านภาษาศาสตร์ (รวมทั้งจิตร ภูมิศักดิ์ และอุไรศรี วระศริน ซึ่งรู้ภาษาเขมรสมัยใหม่และสมัยโบราณ) ต่างก็ลงมติเห็นพ้องต้องกันว่า คำว่า “กรอม” นั้น แปลว่า “ต่ำ ใต้ ล่าง” ลิ้นไทย/ลิ้นลาว จะออกเสียงคำนี้กร่อนและเพี้ยนเป็น “กะหล๋อม” เป็น “กล๋อม” หรือเป็น “ก๋อม” ในที่สุดก็กลายเป็น “ขอม” นั่นเอง

ดังนั้น คำว่า “ขอม” นี้ ทั้งคนไทย/ทั้งคนลาวก็ใช้เรียก “ผู้คน ชนชาติ ปราสาท ตัวหนังสือ ภาษา ศาสนา วัฒนธรรม” ที่พบทั้งในดินแดนกัมพูชา และทั้งที่พบในสยามประเทศ(ไทย) กับใน สปป. ลาว และก็ใช้กันแพร่หลายทั่วไปตั้งแต่สมัยสุโขทัยกับสมัยต้นอยุธยา (รวมทั้งในล้านนาและล้านช้าง)

อนึ่ง ขอแทรกเพิ่มเติมว่า คำว่า Khmer Krom หรือ “ขอม” นี้ ก็ยังใช้กันอยู่และพบทั่วไปในเวียดนามในปัจจุบัน ทางแถบใกล้ปากแม่น้ำโขง ติดกับพรมแดนกัมพูชาใกล้เมือง “ออกแก้ว” และฮาเตียน (บันทายมาศ) ซึ่งกำลังมีปัญหาเรื่อง “การละเมิดสิทธิมนุษยชน” ว่าด้วยเชื้อชาติ ศาสนา และวัฒนธรรมของกลุ่มชาติพันธุ์ขะแมร์/เขมรในเวียดนาม ทำนองคล้ายกันกับ “ชาติพันธุ์มลายู” ในสามสี่จังหวัดภาคใต้ของไทย ทำนองเดียวกันกับธิเบตหรืออุยกูร์ในจีน

(3)

สำหรับคำว่า “เขมร” นั้นเป็นคำไทยที่สะกดตามตัวอักษรเดิม (และเพื่อความชัดเจน ขอถอดออกมาตามแบบอักษรละติน คือ Khmer) หากจะออกเสียงให้ถูกตามต้นตำหรับของเดิม ต้องรัวลิ้นมีตัว “ร.เรือ” อยู่ข้างท้ายด้วย เป็น “ขเมร” หรือ “ขะแมร”

แต่ลิ้นไทยลิ้นลาว ออกเสียงพยัญชนะตัวท้ายด้วยการทำให้ ร.เรือ กลายเป็น น.หนู ดังนั้น ก็เลยกลายเป็นคำในภาษาพูดว่า “ขะ-เหมน” (เหมือนคำว่า “นคร” ที่กลายเป็น “นะ-คอน” หรือ “คอน” หรือคำว่า “ละคร” กลายเป็น “ละคอน” แล้วก็กลายเป็น “โขน” ในที่สุด)

(4)

คำว่า “ขอม” เป็นคำที่ยุ่งยาก สลับซับซ้อนมาก และด้วยทัศนคติที่มี “อคติ/มายาคติ” ของ “ลัทธิอำมาตยาเสนาชาตินิยม” ก็ทำให้มีการตีความเลยเถิดไปว่า “ขอมไม่ใช่เขมร” หรือ “เขมรไม่ใช่ขอม” หรือแม้กระทั่งเลยเถิดไปไกลถึงขนาดว่า “ขอมคือไทย/สยาม” หรือไม่ก็ “ไทย/สยามคือขอม” เป็นต้น

นี่เป็นมรดกตกทอดจากช่วงการเมืองทศวรรษ 2470 ที่เราจะพบได้ในงานของนักคิดนักเขียน และข้าราชการกรมศิลปากร อย่างหลวงวิจิตรวาทการ (กิมเหลียง วัฒนปฤดา) หรือนายธนิต (กี) อยู่โพธิ์ ที่ตกทอดมายังคนรุ่นต่อๆมา เช่น น. ประภาสถิตย์ หรือ “นายหนหวย” และ/หรือสำนักประวัติศาสตร์กับโบราณคดีของบางมหาวิทยาลัย เช่น มศว. หรือ ศิลปากร ในทางกลับกันกลุ่ม “ชาตินิยม” ดังกล่าว ก็จะกล่าวหาว่าสำนักที่เชื่อว่า “ขอมคือเขมร” หรือ “เขมรคือขอม” ก็จะถูกตราหน้าว่า “ตามก้นฝรั่ง” หรือ “สำนักฝรั่งเศส” อย่าง ม.จ. สุภัทรดิศ ดิศกุล และศิษย์

เราต้องไม่ลืมว่าในช่วงของทศวรรษ 2470 นั้น จะจบลงด้วยการ/ปฏิวัติ-รัฐประหาร 24 มิถุนายน 2475 ที่ทำให้กระแสของ “อำมาตยาเสนาชาตินิยม” ผงาดขึ้นมาแทนที่แทน “ราชาชาตินิยม” (ที่ศูนย์กลางของชาติย้ายจาก “กษัตริย์” มาเป็น “เชื้อชาติไทย” ดังที่ปรากฏในเนื้อร้องเพลงชาติใหม่ ที่ว่า “ประเทศไทย รวมเลือดเนื้อชาติเชื้อไทย”) เปลี่ยนจุดศูนย์กลางจาก “สีน้ำเงิน” มาเป็น “สีแดง” และนำไปสู่การเปลี่ยนนามประเทศ/เพลงชาติโดย “ปีกขวา” ของคณะราษฎร จาก “สยาม” เป็น “ไทย” จาก Siam เป็น Thailand

แม้แต่ “พระสยามเทวาธิราช” ก็ยังถูกเปลี่ยนนามเรียกไประยะหนึ่งว่าเป็น “พระไทยเทวาธิราช” ทั้งนี้ทั้งนั้น แม้จะได้รับการทัดทานจาก “ปีกซ้าย” ของคณะราษฎร เช่น นายปรีดี พนมยงค์ หรือหลวงธำรงนาวาสวัสดิ์ ก็ตาม และมรดกของลัทธิชาตินิยม (Nationalism) ที่แปรเปลี่ยนรูปไปเป็น “เชื้อชาตินิยม” (Racism) เช่นนี้ ก็ยังอยู่กับเราจนถึงปัจจุบัน เหมือนๆกับ “วาทกรรม-ขอมไม่ใช่เขมร” นั่นเอง

จำได้ว่าครั้งหนึ่งสำนักศิลปวัฒนธรรม สมัยสุจิตต์ วงษ์เทศ ยังเป็น บก. อยู่นั้น ได้จัดอภิปรายเรื่อง “ขอม คือ ใคร” ณ หอศิลป์ ธนาคารกรุงเทพ สะพานผ่านฟ้า โดยเชิญนักวิชาการทั้ง 4 มาร่วมอภิปราย คือ ดร.ประเสริฐ ณ นคร, ศรีศักร วัลลิโภดม, ไมเคิล ไรท์, และชาญวิทย์ เกษตรศิริ

ในตอนท้ายของรายการ มีการยิงคำถามตรงว่า “ท่านคิดว่า ขอมคือเขมร ใช่หรือไม่” ดร. ประเสริฐ ตอบอย่างเนิบนาบและเชื่องช้าตามแบบของท่านว่า “อือ... ใช่” ส่วนไมเคิล ไรท์ และชาญวิทย์ ตอบตรงว่า “ใช่” เช่นกัน มีเพียงท่านเดียว คือ ศรีศักรที่ตอบปฏิเสธ

(5)

กล่าวโดยย่อ อันว่าเทือกเขาพนมดงรัก พรมแดนของสยามประเทศ(ไทย)-ลาว-กัมพูชานี้

ที่ด้านหนึ่งทางเหนือ คือ “ขะแมร์เลอ” หรือ “เนี๊ยกอีเลอ” กับอีกด้านหนึ่งทางใต้ คือ “ขะแมร์กรอม” หรือ “เนี๊ยกอีกรอม” เป็นดินแดนของชนชาติ “ขอม-ขะแมร์-ขะเหมน-เขมร-กัมพูชา” ที่อาศัยอยู่ร่วมกับชาติพันธ์ุอื่น ๆอันหลากหลายของอุษาคเนย์

ชนชาตินี้ประสบความสำเร็จในการสร้างอารยธรรมอันยิ่งใหญ่และสูงส่งของ Angkor หรือ “อาณาจักรเมืองพระนคร” (Angkorian Kingdom ที่ภาษาชาวบ้านเรียกว่า “นครวัดนครธม”) อันเป็นมรดกวัฒนธรรม “ร่วม” ตกทอดมามาสู่ “รัฐ-ชาติ” (nation-state) สมัยใหม่ อย่าง กัมพูชา-ลาว-ไทย

ทั้ง Thailand ทั้ง Laos ทั้ง Cambodia เป็นหนี้ทางวัฒนธรรมต่อ Angkorian Kingdom แน่นอนผู้ที่สืบมรดกโดยตรง ก็คือ ประชาชนและประเทศชาติกัมพูชาในปัจจุบัน นั่นเอง

กล่าวอีกนัยหนึ่ง “ขอม-ขะแมร์-ขะเหมน-เขมร-กัมพูชาโบราณ” นั้น ดูประหนึ่งน่าจะเป็น “กรีก-โรมัน” แห่งอุษาคเนย์ แน่นอนขอม/เขมรโบราณ ก็เรียนรู้และลอกเลียนมาจากอินเดีย มาจากทมิฬ อีกทอดหนึ่ง วัฒนธรรมเป็นเรื่องของการไหลทอดถ่ายเท หยิบยืม ส่งออกและนำเข้าอยู่ตลอดเวลา หาได้จำกัดอยู่ในโลกแคบๆ ตามจินตนาการของผุ้คนของ “รัฐ-ชาติ” สมัยใหม่ไม่

ผู้คนกัมพูชาปัจจุบันบางกลุ่ม รังเกียจเสียงและสำเนียงของคำพูดว่า “ขะเหมน” ของไทยและลาว เพราะตีความว่าเป็นการดูถูกเหยียดหยามทางชาติพันธุ์/เชื้อชาติ ดังนั้นเพื่อ “สมานฉันท์” กับเพื่อนบ้านในสุวรรณภูมิ/อุษาคเนย์/อาเซียน เพื่อการสร้าง “สปิริตอาเซียน” ขึ้นมาให้จงได้ เราต้องยกเลิก “นโยบายอสมานฉันท์” กับเพื่อนบ้าน เราต้องขจัดซึ่ง “อคติ” และ “มายาคติ” ที่เป็นมรดกตกทอดที่เป็น “อประวัติศาสตร์” และ “วาทกรรม” ประเภท “ขอมไม่ใช่เขมร” และ/หรือ “การเสียดินแดน” ประเภท “เสียแล้วเสียอีก” แต่ไม่เคย “ได้ดินแดน” เอาเสียเลย

และหากจะเลี่ยงในภาษาพูด ไม่ใช้คำว่า “ขะ-เหมน” หันไปใช้คำว่า “กัมพูชา” หรือคำว่า “ขะแมร์” ก็จะดีกว่า เหมือน ๆ กับที่เราควรเลี่ยงไม่ใช้คำว่า “เจ๊ก” สำหรับเรียกคนไทยเชื้อสายจีนแต้จิ๋ว จีนฮกเกี้ยน จีนกวางตุ้ง จีนแคะ จีนไหหลำ นั่นเอง

Charnvit Kasetsiri, Ph.D.
chuy-kan-ku-sayam-prathet-
Help Rescuing Siam- click:
www.petitiononline.com/SIAM2008
www.petitiononline.com/siam2007
Thammasat University
Bangkok 10200, Siam (not Thailand)

Web: charnvitkasetsiri.com;

http://textbooksproject.com/HOME.html,

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm sure most modern day Thai know where their roots are. Since gaining independence from Khmer, Siem(Thai) kings were hell-bent on twisting the truth. Everything about the Thai from religion, culture, custom, and language are almost identical to Khmer, yet they are in denial.
Originally, Siyam(Siam) migrated from southern region of Yunnan province of China. It's also possible that Siyam(Siam) migrated from India and settled in Yunnan. At the same time, there were Tai(Thai?) ethnic inhabited that area. During the Mongols invasion of China, many Siyam/Thai took refuge with Khmer kingdom at the south.
Many resided in what is now southwest of Thailand. They have adopted the way of the Khmer. After Khmer becoming weaker, Siam/Tai rebelled from Khmer. Siam/Tai first
founding kingdom was Sokhuthai and was later invaded by Ayottaya(another Siam/Tai kingdom?) Afterward Siam
began the process of expansionism by attacking and
invading Khmer. The populations of Khmer of those invaded territories were converted to become Siam. Siam became Thailand in 1939.
Thai populations had been brainwashed to think
otherwise. Most Thai are confused about their true history and identity. The proven facts are overwhelm, yet Thai and Thai historians and certain political hardliners stubbornly attempted to ignore and twist this facts for nationalism
purposes.

Anonymous said...

The "Khom" are the Khmers, even though the Thais don't think so. The Thais believe that the "Khom" was the race who built Angkor Wat and the many splendid ancient temples around Cambodia from the 8-13th century. They don't think the Khom are the Khmers because they don't want to acknowledge the superiority of the Khmer race over the Thai race who built nothing.

Anonymous said...

1) Chinese Ambassador, Zhou Daguan had recorded clearly that there were 2 groups of people in Nakorn Wat, each group spoke different languages.

2) We had both Sanskrit and Khmer languages (for upper class and lower class people) inscripted on the wall of Nakorn Wat.

3) 1336 was the last year of Varman dynasty in Nakorn Wat, Trasok Paem killed Jayararman IX and made himself the fist Khmer speaking King of Nakorn Wat.

4) No more king in Nakorn Wat with Varman prefix.

5) No more stone templese built.

6) According to the first "Chronicle of Cambodia" by King Nak Ong Eng (written around the end of Ayudhaya period), Trasok Paem (or Ta Sweet Cucumber) was the first king of Khmer. He never regards Varaman dynasty has his king.

7) Thai people called those stone temples "Prasat Khom" not "Praset Khamane"

8) Just until recently that these 2 words started to mix up (after the French came to Indochina and started to rewrite the history of Khmer to cover the Varaman dynasty and beyond)

Anonymous said...

You can rest your case now Khom is Khmer.

Anonymous said...

It sure is Khom being the ancient name for Khmer and the present-day Cambodia, including the lands lost to the then siams, laos, and Vietnam. The historical Great Khmer Empire dominated the present-day Thailand, most parts in Laos, and the south VN. Khom is the Khmer race. Most current thai language, scripts and numerical numbers all were influenced by the Khmer dominance, and the then Siams even stole countless other cultural identities, royal organization and politics from the Khmer=Khom. Most inscriptions at various temples in Cambodia, Thailand, and Laos are written in both Sanskrit and ancient Khmer language, which Thai called Khom. It is undeniably that it is Khmer scripts. The ordinary Khmer/Cambodians (who can read and write) can somehow read and understand some of the parts on those inscriptions. The scripts that the Thai call it Khom scripts are Khmer scripts.

Justice,
Builders of Khmer Empire

Anonymous said...

It sure is Khom being the ancient name for Khmer and the present-day Cambodia, including the lands lost to the then siams, laos, and Vietnam. The historical Great Khmer Empire dominated the present-day Thailand, most parts in Laos, and the south VN. Khom is the Khmer race. Most current thai language, scripts and numerical numbers all were influenced by the Khmer dominance, and the then Siams even stole countless other cultural identities, royal organization and politics from the Khmer=Khom. Most inscriptions at various temples in Cambodia, Thailand, and Laos are written in both Sanskrit and ancient Khmer language, which Thai called Khom. It is undeniably that it is Khmer scripts. The ordinary Khmer/Cambodians (who can read and write) can somehow read and understand some of the parts on those inscriptions. The scripts that the Thai call it Khom scripts are Khmer scripts.

Justice,
Builders of Khmer Empire

Anonymous said...

Nothing is true.