Examining Overlooked Living Traditions: An Analysis of the Conservation of Sacred Places in the Cham Culture of Vietnam

Abstract

This chapter constitutes a profound examination of the conservation of Cham living heritage sites and the Cham community’s perceptions in Vietnam. It lays bare an unfortunate reality that heritage preservation in Vietnam has predominantly centred on tangible forms of heritage, while the local cultural significance of tangible aspects of Cham temples has been woefully neglected.

The Cham community’s conviction that the construction of a new pathway at their sacred site constitutes a grave offense to their worldview regarding cardinality and spiritual practice exemplifies this issue. Notwithstanding the addition’s intended purpose of facilitating visitor access to the temple, the Cham people construe it as a menace to their temple’s sacred character and a hindrance to their religious views and beliefs.

The study’s findings underscore the pressing need to recognize Indigenous living heritage and its pivotal role in local communities in safeguarding heritage. In this regard, heritage conservation practices must heed the Cham community’s perceptions and beliefs, and accord equal weight to tangible and intangible cultural heritage. The chapter serves as a poignant reminder of the consequences of neglecting cultural meaning in heritage conservation efforts and highlights the criticality of preserving cultural identity and heritage for posterity.

Introduction

In the year that followed, my grandmother and I embarked on a journey to Klaong Girai temple to participate in the Yuen Yang ritual, one of the most significant public ceremonies in the Cham culture. As we hiked up the hill, we were taken aback by a newly constructed walkway to the east that many young Indigenous Cham people were using to approach the temple. This was unexpected as Cham people had always followed the southeast route to the temple.

However, my grandmother refused to take the new path as it approached the temple from the direction of god Po Yang, and violating this sacred place would result in severe punishment by Yang. We continued to follow the traditional route to the temple, witnessing dignitaries conducting a small ritual in each direction before the main ceremony began.

This experience was a powerful reminder of the importance of cardinal directions in Cham culture and the significance of preserving traditional customs and practices. It highlighted the role of cultural heritage in shaping the identity of a community and the need to honor and respect their beliefs and traditions.

As we approached the temple, we noticed a generational divide in the Cham community, with younger members embracing change and innovation while older members remained steadfast in their adherence to traditional practices. It was a poignant reminder of the importance of striking a balance between modernization and preservation, ensuring that cultural heritage is not lost in the pursuit of progress.

Our visit to Klaong Girai temple left a lasting impression on us, underscoring the deep-seated cultural traditions and practices that have been passed down through generations of the Cham people. It reinforced the criticality of preserving these traditions and recognizing and respecting the cultural identity of Indigenous communities.

Furthermore, this story highlights the tension between traditional beliefs and the construction of a new path that conflicts with Cham philosophy regarding cardinal directions. It serves as a microcosm for the challenges facing the preservation and promotion of Cham heritage in Vietnam today. In light of this incident, I  aimed to explore the reactions of the Cham community to the construction of the new path and to better understand the conflicts arising between tradition and modernization in sacred sites. This study will delve into the intricacies of the situation, examining the impact of the new path on the Cham community from their perspective.

The annual rituals performed by the Cham in their sacred temples, along with their religious management system, reflect the importance placed on the conservation and development of their sacred places (Tuyen & Anh, 2018). In 2011, the construction of a new pathway to the Po Klaong Girai temple from the east direction, which is considered sacred by the Cham, elicited strong reactions from the members of the Cham community. This reaction highlights the complexities surrounding the conservation and promotion of Cham heritage in the context of Vietnam’s tourism industry.

The shift towards “market socialism” and increasing global economic connections, particularly with Japan and the United States, have resulted in the commodification of Indigenous culture to serve the growing tourism industry. Indigenous culture is seen as an exotic experience by tourists and is perceived as authentic only if it reflects change. As a result, the Vietnamese professional management class (Kinh) has played a role in the promotion of Indigenous culture as a tourist commodity. However, this commodification often conflicts with the traditional beliefs and values of the Cham community, as seen in the reaction to the construction of the new pathway to the Po Klaong Girai temple. Thus, the tension between preserving cultural heritage and promoting tourism is a complex issue that requires careful consideration and dialogue between various stakeholders.

In the Ninh Thuan Province of Vietnam, the priority of economic development is evident in legislative planning, often at the expense of cultural preservation initiatives. The tourism industry plays a crucial role in the province’s economic growth and the preservation and promotion of Cham cultural heritage is seen as a key tourist attraction (Dop et al., 2014; Phan, 2015). Despite efforts by local authorities to preserve Cham heritage, tensions between government authorities and members of the Cham community have arisen.

This chapter will examine a particular case study in which a seemingly small event caused significant controversy within the Cham community and sheds light on the importance of respecting traditional views and meanings of Indigenous cultures and their built heritage, such as the Po Klaong Girai temple. The study will argue that the preservation of living heritage should be the primary focus in both heritage conservation and tourism development, in order to promote harmonious coexistence and enhance the effectiveness of tourism in ethnic minority sacred sites.

The Significance of Living Heritage in Heritage Conservation

The concept of living heritage has long been recognized as a crucial aspect in the definition of heritage. In fact, international organizations have acknowledged the living dimensions of heritage sites since the 1990s. In 1994, the Nara Document on Authenticity released by ICOMOS emphasized the significance of taking into account the spiritual and social values embodied in a heritage site. The document emphasized that all these values must be respected and that the tangible and intangible factors that make up a heritage site should be understood. This means that a heritage site can still be considered “authentic” even if its physical appearance has changed, as long as it retains its intangible qualities.

The protection of living heritage has been given due recognition by the international community only in recent times. While the World Heritage Convention, which was adopted in 1972, encompasses cultural and natural forms of heritage, the protection of intangible cultural heritage was not explicitly mentioned. This gap was addressed with the adoption of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage (CSICH), which recognizes the need for conserving “living heritage” as a crucial component of maintaining cultural diversity. According to UNESCO (2003), living heritage includes traditions, practices, and skills that are passed down through generations, and it provides a sense of identity and continuity to the local people. This includes oral traditions, the performing arts, social practices, rituals and festive events, knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe, and traditional craftsmanship. The preservation of living heritage not only showcases human creativity and diversity but also plays a crucial role in the preservation of cultural identity. By ensuring that the knowledge and skills embodied in the intangible cultural heritage are passed down from one generation to the next, living heritage contributes to the continuation of cultural heritage and its evolution.

The understanding and definition of heritage has long been a subject of debate among scholars and researchers. According to Smith (2006), heritage cannot be defined simply as objects or “things.” Instead, she argues that heritage is created through various cultural and social activities, and it is only through these activities that value and meaning are assigned to the objects, turning them into heritage. This view challenges the conventional understanding of heritage as being solely focused on material fabric and instead emphasizes the importance of values and meanings.

Similarly, Harrington (2004) sees heritage as something that is not just about the past, but it also connects people to a distant time or place in the present. This definition highlights the central role of intangible components of heritage in the management paradigm. In line with earlier work by Byrne (1991) and others, Smith (2006) stresses the significance of values and meanings over materiality. She argues that there is no single understanding of heritage, and it should be seen as a system of values rather than just physical objects. This perspective is also reflected in the work of Harrison (2013), who views heritage as a set of values rather than a concern with materiality. The study, therefore, draws on the frameworks that emphasize the importance of understanding the meaning of heritage, as highlighted by Smith and Waterton (2009).

According to recent research by several scholars, the Asian region is distinct from the west in its material, cultural, and historical makeup (Byrne, 2012; Daly & Winter, 2012; Karlström, 2013; Silva & Chapagain, 2013; Winter, 2012). Winter (2012) suggests that there are varying historical and philosophical views on authenticity, spirituality, and historical significance, and that the ways in which cultural heritage is valued and interpreted should be considered in a culturally specific context. Chapagain (2013b) notes that Asian countries place greater emphasis on the “living heritage” aspect of cultural heritage, where the intangible aspects such as worldviews, traditions, beliefs, and everyday experiences are intertwined with the tangible elements, rather than being solely focused on physical structures.

The preservation of heritage sites in Zimbabwe often highlights the tension between external and community-based approaches to heritage conservation. This can be seen in the case of the Domboshava rock shelter, where experts focused on the tangible elements of the site such as its aesthetic and scientific value (Chirikure et al., 2010; Chirikure & Pwiti, 2008), while ignoring the perspectives and practices of the traditional owners, who valued the site for its intangible dimensions, including spiritual rituals (Chirikure et al., 2010; Chirikure & Pwiti, 2008). This disregard for the community’s perspectives and practices created conflict in the management and interpretation of the site, highlighting the need for a more inclusive and culturally sensitive approach to heritage conservation.

The assessment of the value of heritage sites is never a neutral process, as it reflects the ideologies and epistemological views of those making the assessment (Byrne, 1991, p. 274). In the case of Domboshava, the focus on tangible elements of the site disregarded the spiritual significance it held for the local community, emphasizing the need to consider both the tangible and intangible dimensions of heritage in conservation efforts (Byrne, 1991, p. 274). The preservation of heritage must involve community participation and respect for the spiritual practices of Indigenous peoples to truly reflect the significance of the site for all those involved.

This emphasis on intangible cultural heritage reflects a broader trend in heritage conservation, which recognizes the significance of both tangible and intangible forms of heritage. This shift towards a more inclusive approach is necessary because intangible cultural heritage provides the context and understanding that enhances the richness of tangible heritage (Smith, 2006, p. 56). Wain (2014, p. 56) highlights the importance of conserving both tangible and intangible heritages, as intangible heritage is essential to the survival of tangible heritage. Focusing solely on tangible heritage sites may overlook the lived heritage practices of local communities, which are an integral part of heritage preservation (Weise, 2013).

In Vietnam, the Law on Cultural Heritage reflects a growing recognition of the value of cultural heritage to national development and preservation. The law has been updated to include effective management of intangible cultural heritage, reflecting the importance of considering both tangible and intangible forms of heritage. The government recognizes the role of cultural carriers as essential to the preservation of cultural heritage, and the law focuses on preserving cultural practices embraced by individuals, groups, or communities of people. By focusing on the cultural carriers, Vietnam’s cultural preservation efforts are aimed at ensuring the survival and vitality of both tangible and intangible forms of heritage for future generations.

Since the 1990s, there has been an increasing interest in using tourism development as a way to mitigate the negative impacts of development and enhance the positive effects of tourism activities on society, traditional culture, and regulation and development management (Bramwell & Lane, 2012; Buckley, 2012; Sharpley, 2000). Heritage resources are viewed as valuable assets for economic development in Vietnam, leading the government to take a keen interest in preserving and promoting cultural heritage (Thien, 2017). Although heritage authorities and practitioners recognize the importance of community involvement in theory, local communities are often not given opportunities to participate in heritage management, either due to the limitations imposed by heritage management legislation or their community’s traditional customs (Larsen, 2017).

In recent years, Western-style heritage management has dominated the industry, giving priority to the role of experts and relegating the role of local communities to secondary status (Byrne, 2012; Karlström, 2005; Kong, 2008; Poulios, 2014). This approach primarily focuses on the physical value of objects, buildings, and sites, rather than the beliefs and actions of people (Byrne, 2004; Giang, 2015; Silva & Chapagain, 2013; Sullivan, 2004; Wharton, 2005). This perspective has been codified in various charters and legislation, such as the Athens Charter (1931), Venice Charter (1964), and the World Heritage Convention (1972). However, there is an increasing recognition of the importance of intangible heritage elements in both local and international heritage management systems. Policies and principles that are more inclusive of intangible heritage and local communities, such as the Nara Document (1994), the updated Australian Burra Charter (2013), the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003), and the Hoi An Protocols (2009), acknowledge the role of intangible heritage elements in local beliefs and values (Sully, 2007; Wain, 2014; Weise, 2013; Wijesuriya, 2008). The inclusion of intangible heritage elements is essential to maintain the meaning and significance of heritage sites, as living heritage elements are necessary to give materiality to heritage (Saar & Palang, 2009; Smith, 2012; Weise, 2013).

Challenges in Balancing Heritage Conservation and Tourism Development in Ninh Thuan Province

The Vietnamese government’s efforts to develop tourism in Ninh Thuan Province, utilizing the rich Cham cultural heritage as a key resource, has led to the creation of many Cham cultural products for tourists. However, these products may not accurately reflect the Indigenous Cham culture, potentially misleading both Vietnamese and foreign tourists. Despite implementing policies to protect and preserve Cham temples, some negative impacts have arisen from tourism development in the region.

Some of the key issues include performances at the temple that disturb its sacred character, opening the temple’s doors on taboo days, allowing inappropriate behavior that goes against Cham cultural and religious practices, intervening in traditional Cham festivals, and tolerating graffiti and billboards in the temple area. Additionally, the economic benefits from tourism are not shared with the Cham community, and the community is often neglected in decision-making processes regarding their heritage.

In this chapter, I will use the construction of new eastern pathways at the temple by state authorities as a case study to illustrate the ongoing challenges in balancing the development of tourism with the preservation of cultural heritage in Ninh Thuan Province. I will begin by providing a comprehensive overview of the heritage conservation efforts at the Cham temples in the area. Then, I will delve into how the construction of the new pathway impacted the cultural significance of the temple and created a disconnection with the living heritage.

Furthermore, I will examine why the government and other stakeholders failed to properly incorporate the perspectives and traditions of the Cham community in their decision-making processes, despite their crucial role in preserving their heritage. To conclude, I will propose practical solutions and best practices for promoting the harmonious development of tourism and cultural heritage preservation, particularly for the Cham community. This will include suggestions for involving the Cham community in decision-making, raising awareness about the significance of their cultural heritage, and implementing culturally sensitive conservation practices. The objective is to emphasize the need for preserving the cultural authenticity and significance of heritage sites, while making them accessible and appealing to tourists without compromising the traditions and well-being of local communities.

The Conservation of Cham Heritage Sites in Vietnam

Despite its cultural significance, the preservation of this temple has been largely neglected, with only individual measures taken by Vietnamese archaeologists and architects (Phuong, 2006). This is in stark contrast to the well-maintained and protected UNESCO World Heritage Site of My Son, which has received significant attention from conservation specialists.

Over three periods of restoration and conservation of Cham architecture (the French Colonial [1902–1954], the Polish-Vietnamese conservation [1975–1998], and the contemporary period [from 1999 to today]), efforts have primarily focused on preserving tangible forms of heritage by reinforcing the structure of the temples. Unfortunately, this material-oriented approach has often neglected the intangible forms of heritage that are equally important to preserving the cultural significance of these sites.

In the French colonial period, scholar Henri Parmentier was the first to conduct significant research on the architecture and sculpture of Po Klaong Girai temple. During this time, the main conservation works were limited to relocating some broken parts of the temple. In subsequent periods, the temple underwent numerous preservation and restoration efforts, particularly during the period between 1982 and 1987 under the direction of Polish experts (as outlined in Table 6.1).

Table 6.1 Overview of major conservation efforts at Po Klaong Girai Temple throughout history

While these efforts have helped to preserve the physical fabric of the temple, more comprehensive approaches are needed to ensure that both tangible and intangible forms of heritage are preserved for future generations.

In general, the conservation work at Po Klaong Girai temple has aimed to restore damaged decorative elements and bring original features back into place in a harmonious manner. Upon completion of the conservation work, the Ninh Thuan Department of Sports, Culture, and Tourism took over the maintenance and protection of the temple, attempting to prevent damage from the environment, human activity, and previous conservation efforts.

In 2005, the local government allocated 15 billion VND (US$715,000) to construct a 7.8 ha tourism area at Po Klaong Girai temple, which included a Cham exhibition, an art performance and traditional game space, and a traditional Cham house located behind the temple. The project was beneficial in terms of presenting Cham culture to tourists. Later, between 2012 and 2017, conservation and tourism development projects were implemented, with a focus on expanding the ground’s site for ritual practices, consolidating the foundations, and reconstructing the exhibition area and new pathway model. However, these projects continued to neglect the cultural and spiritual significance of the tangible heritage forms. The construction of new eastern pathways at the temple by state authorities in 2012, aimed at improving accessibility for visitors, exemplifies this ongoing problem.

Understanding the Significance of Cardinal Directions in Cham Culture

According to Cham beliefs, the earth is considered a divine entity with a soul and is worshipped as Po Tanâh Raya, the earth god. Before conducting any ceremony, spiritual leaders typically perform a ritual known as Ew Tanâh Raya to invite the earth god. (Fig. 6.1 illustrates this practice.)

Fig. 6.1

Cham Ahier priests perform a ritual invoking the earth god before the main ceremony (Courtesy by author in 2016)

When performing a land worship ceremony, the Cham Ahier tradition involves paying homage to the Guardians of the Directions, also known as Yang Dar Dih/Dik. These deities are said to rule over the different directions of space. Similar to Hindu culture, directions in Cham Ahier tradition are referred to as Dih/Dik, and there are four main directions and a total of eight directions (Figs. 6.2 and 6.3).

Fig. 6.2

Cardinal directions of the Cham worldview (Author, 2017)

Fig. 6.3

Cardinal directions of the Cham worldview (Author, 2017)

The Cham Ahier tradition of worshiping the guardians of directions is greatly influenced by Hinduism. The east is considered the most sacred and is seen as the starting point of cosmic movement and the direction of the gods. Ahier priests, before conducting any worship, turn to the east and offer prayers to the god Suriya. The east is considered exclusively for the gods in the divine realm, and the Cham people avoid building doorways or walking from the east side of the temple to avoid being captured by the gods. On the other hand, the west is considered less auspicious and is considered the divine direction of Islam’s holy city of Mecca for Cham Awal who are influenced by Islam. The south represents the world and life, and Cham houses are often constructed facing this direction. The north, associated with demons and death, is avoided by the Cham people, and they ensure that their houses never face this direction (Table 6.2).

Table 6.2 Comparison of the cardinal directions in the Cham language to Hinduism

In Cham culture, the cardinal directions are not just a matter of orientation, but are believed to carry spiritual significance and power. Each direction has its own meaning, and this significance is reflected in the design and construction of various structures. For example, the north direction is associated with death and the afterlife, and is therefore the preferred direction for cemeteries. On the other hand, the northeast direction is associated with the mosque and the Islamic faith, while the northwest direction is associated with the common people. The east direction is considered the most sacred, as it is believed to be the realm of the gods, and therefore, it is the preferred direction for temples and shrines.

The significance of the east direction can be seen in the fact that most Cham temples are built on high hills and face east. The east direction is believed to be the realm of the yang gods, and therefore, it is considered sacred and holy. According to Cham beliefs, the east direction is not meant for human habitation and is reserved for the gods. This is why there are strict cultural norms that must be followed concerning the east direction, such as avoiding building doorways or walking from the east side of the temple. Temples that face west or south are considered special cases in Cham architecture and are believed to have unique spiritual significance (Doanh, 2002).

The importance of cardinal directions in Cham culture reflects the belief in the power and influence of the gods over daily life. These beliefs have been passed down through generations and are still deeply ingrained in Cham society today. The significance of cardinal directions in Cham culture is a testament to the enduring influence of religion and spirituality in shaping the beliefs, practices, and traditions of a community.

Cham Views on the Newly Built Pathway

The construction of a pathway to allow visitors to access a Cham temple has been met with significant opposition from the Cham community. They believe that the pathway does not align with their cultural and religious values, as it goes against the traditional beliefs about sacred sites. Physical objects and places around the temple are considered sacred and have special meanings, and the construction of a pathway facing east is viewed as a breach of these beliefs (Figs. 6.4 and 6.5).

Fig. 6.4

Comparison between the traditional (top image) and the newly created (bottom image) pedestrian pathways at the Po Klaong Girai temple (Ninh Thuan Museum, 2017)

Fig. 6.5

Comparison between the traditional (top image) and the newly created (bottom image) pedestrian pathways at the Po Klaong Girai temple (Ninh Thuan Museum, 2017)

According to the reports from many Cham interviewees, the conservation activities at the Po Klaong Girai temple have had a negative impact on their traditional spiritual beliefs and religious philosophy. They feel that the construction of an east-facing pathway for tourists goes against their traditional beliefs and practices, as the east is viewed as the starting point of the cosmic movement, the direction of time, and the divine and is reserved only for gods in the divine realm. As a result, building east-facing doorways in homes and approaching the temple from the east side are considered unacceptable and are avoided due to fear of captivity (Orang_Ka001).

Similarly, Ahier priests also shared their views, stating that the Cham philosophy about direction is highly significant to the community, both in the past and today, and that temples and homes have always been built in traditional directions. The ancestors built the temple to worship and preserve the spirituality of the gods, who come from the direction of the sun (Orang_Gu002).

These beliefs and practices highlight the importance of cardinality in Cham culture, religion, and community, and how it influences their everyday practices at sacred sites. The creation of a new pathway to serve tourists has caused a strong reaction among the community, as it violates their traditional spiritual practices. The Cham elders have traditionally followed the southeast direction, as their ancestors did, to access and worship at the temple. This new pathway, while meant to make the site more accessible to visitors, is seen as a significant violation of Cham spirituality.

My interviews with Cham elders further highlight the issue at hand. They reported that the government had plans to build a new pathway for tourists at the temple, which was met with resistance from the community due to its contravention of Cham tradition. Meetings with heritage authorities also reflected this concern. According to one of my interviewees, the entrance from the east is referred to as “the road of gods” and is considered the road of spirits, not meant for the profane community (Orang_Ta002).

Another elder stated that although the pathway was already built and financial support was provided to preserve it, they recognized that the construction was a mistake in the conservation effort. However, they acknowledged that they did not have enough power to change what had already occurred (Orang_Ta001).

This highlights the struggle faced by the Cham community, who felt that their voices were not heard or respected during the construction of the new pathway. Despite their objections, the work continued and many Cham people now recognize that they did not have enough influence to prevent it. The situation serves as an example of how the elders’ interpretation of the sacredness of Cham culture was disregarded in the face of modern development and tourism efforts. This situation highlights the issue of cultural preservation and the importance of considering local beliefs and practices when planning conservation activities at sacred sites. It also sheds light on the need for better communication and consultation with local communities to ensure that the preservation efforts are culturally appropriate and respectful.

According to the views of Cham scholars, the conservation work at the temple has been marred by frequent mistakes due to a lack of cultural understanding and inadequate involvement of the Cham community in the process. One of my interviewees expressed disappointment and stressed the importance of preserving the intangible aspects of the temple before focusing on the physical aspects. They stated, “I was disheartened by this issue. The government did not return the right to open the temple, which created a sensitive issue for our Cham society. The first step should be preserving the spiritual aspects, and only then, we can think about preserving the physical aspects” (Orang_Gu003).

It is evident that the Cham community needs support from the government to preserve their temples, but heritage professionals must understand and prioritize the spiritual values associated with these sites. This ensures that their conservation efforts align with Cham traditions and beliefs. The larger history of Cham cultural conservation has mostly concentrated on the physical forms of the temples, neglecting the spiritual views and practices associated with the temple (Fig. 6.6). This highlights the importance of incorporating the spiritual attitudes of the Cham community in conservation efforts. The government’s support is essential in preserving the temple, but heritage professionals must prioritize the spiritual aspects of the site to ensure that their efforts align with Cham traditions. Without this understanding, the preservation of living heritage sites like Po Klaong Girai temple may fall short of its intended goals.

Fig. 6.6

Construction of a new eastern pathway in many Cham temples to accommodate tourist needs

According to the author’s experience and observations, the Cham community has raised concerns about the negative impacts of preserving the Po Klaong Girai temple. However, when mistakes are made, the high-level authorities often avoid taking responsibility and instead blame subordinates and heritage officers. In interviews, the researcher noted that some responses to negative issues were vague and failed to address the root causes and find appropriate solutions. The Cham community’s concerns have therefore not been adequately addressed.

It appears that the main goal of conservation at Po Klaong Girai temple is to cater to tourists rather than supporting the spiritual practices of the Cham community. Despite this, tourism at the temple has had positive effects on the local economy and has helped promote the cultural heritage of the region. However, as tourism growth can lead to significant changes in local cultures, it is important to find a way to preserve traditional rituals and cultural practices without sacrificing the authenticity of the cultural heritage. This is a common challenge not just in Vietnam but around the world.

The government, represented by the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism, acknowledges this challenge and is working to find a solution that balances tourism and cultural preservation. The goal is to maintain the original scale of festivals while still allowing the local community to be proud of their cultural heritage (Orang_Gov001).

My interviews with Cham elders help illustrate the point further: According to Orang_Ta002, the government planned to build a new pathway of the temple for tourism, but the Cham community did not agree with this decision as it went against their traditional beliefs. Despite the concern being raised in meetings with the Department of Culture, Sports, and Tourism, the government still went ahead with the construction of the pathway, ignoring the voice of the Cham community.

Orang_Ta001 also reflected on this issue during an interview with the researcher, stating that the authorities told them “the pathway was already built and costed a pretty penny so how can we remove it? And we [the state authorities] provided the Cham financial support to preserve it so this issue should not be talked again. Let’s skip and ignore it.” This statement shows the frustration of the Cham community, who feel that they do not have the power or voice to alter or prevent the construction of the pathway, despite acknowledging that it is a mistake in the conservation work.

These interviews help highlight the difficulties faced by the Cham community in their efforts to preserve their cultural heritage and the lack of agency they have in the decision-making process. It is clear that the government’s actions in this case went against the traditional beliefs and practices of the Cham community, highlighting the importance of involving the community in the conservation efforts to ensure that the spiritual values and traditions of these sites are preserved.

It is evident from the statements made by the Cham elders (Orang_Ta002 and Orang_Ta001) that the government did not take their views into consideration when making decisions about the preservation of the Po Klaong Girai temple. Despite their objections to the construction of the new pathway, the work continued, and the government chose to ignore their criticisms. This is a prime example of the lack of agency and power that the Cham community has in decisions regarding their own cultural heritage. This raises several important questions about the role of the government in preserving cultural heritage sites. Should the state have the final say in how these sites are preserved, or should the local communities have a greater voice in the decision-making process? This highlights the tension between preserving cultural heritage sites for tourism purposes and preserving them for their spiritual and cultural significance to the local community.

In order to preserve cultural heritage sites in a manner that aligns with local traditions and beliefs, it is crucial for the government to listen to and engage with the communities who are most invested in these sites. This requires a shift in the way heritage preservation is approached, moving away from top-down decision-making and towards a more participatory approach that prioritizes local perspectives and values. In the case of the Po Klaong Girai temple, the disregard for the views of the Cham community highlights the need for more robust mechanisms to protect the cultural heritage of minority communities. Without adequate support and agency, these communities risk losing the connection to their ancestral heritage and cultural practices. The case of the Po Klaong Girai temple serves as a warning of what can happen when cultural heritage sites are not preserved in a manner that prioritizes the perspectives and values of the local community.

The construction of a new pathway in Cham temples has become a matter of concern among the Cham community and authorities. According to the authorities, Po Klaong Girai temple has become a national heritage site, and therefore, the Cham community should accept some changes to accommodate non-Cham communities. However, the Cham community has responded negatively to these changes, stating that the construction of the pathway goes against their traditions and spirituality.

In interviews with the Cham religious committee, the author discovered that there is potential for conflict between the Cham community and the government if a solution is not found that is acceptable within the Cham spiritual tradition. The new pathway does not align with Cham people’s traditions and spirituality, and it was created by the government authorities who imposed their own perspective on the Cham spiritual space, contrary to the practice of Cham spirituality.

The construction of the pathway was intended to attract visitors to the temple, but it has led to tensions because of the way it violates Cham culture and spirituality. The Cham community feels that their voice has not been heard, and they were forced to accept the construction of the pathway. The custodians of the temple who the author spoke to expressed their concern that if this issue is not resolved soon, it could lead to further conflict and tensions between the Cham community and the authorities.

Discussion

Throughout the management of Po Klaong Girai temple, research has shown that conservation and tourism development projects have primarily focused on preserving the material fabric and its values. Experts have a significant influence on the conservation and management of heritage sites in Vietnam due to their institutional positionality, as noted by Smith and Waterton (2009, p. 29), who emphasize the crucial role that heritage experts play in the design, decision-making, and management of heritage. This research supports the idea that heritage experts lead the conservation efforts, while community participation remains overlooked and unrecognized.

The 2009 Vietnam Heritage Law does not explicitly mention the involvement of local communities in the definitions of intangible cultural heritage, nor does it recognize the rights of individuals and communities to participate in discussions and decisions concerning their cultural heritage (Giang, 2018). Instead, the law acknowledges only the administrative role of the state in all conservation and management activities, similar to the 2009 Hoi An Protocols, which are based on an expert-led conservation approach. As a result, it is clear that the management of Cham living heritage sites in Vietnam is primarily driven by experts, leading to limited community participation. This lack of community involvement in the conservation and management of these heritage sites may result in a misalignment with the cultural and spiritual practices of the Cham people, potentially causing tension and conflict.

The management of cultural heritage in many countries and international organizations has recently placed a greater emphasis on local cultural beliefs and practices. This shift has been reflected in the development of important heritage management documents such as the Nara Document (1994), the updated Burra Charter (2013), the CSICH (2003), and the Hoi An Protocols (2009). The Burra Charter (2013) recognizes the existence of both tangible and intangible dimensions of heritage places, where the concept of “meaning” is defined as “what a place signifies, indicates, evokes or expresses to people” (ICOMOS, 2013, p. 12) and is linked to intangible aspects such as memories and symbolic qualities. However, this trend is not being reflected in the conservation efforts at Po Klaong Girai temple. Here, conservation activities focus primarily on the preservation of the material fabric and its values, without considering the inherent meanings associated with each object at the temple. New additions to the temple are designed to cater to tourism development, rather than reflecting the cultural message of the site's creators and current users. The Vietnamese Heritage Law also fails to acknowledge the intangible meaning of relics as a basis for conservation, despite recognizing intangible cultural heritage. This supports the conclusion of Carter and Bramley (2002, p. 175) that “the values and significance of heritage resources are often acknowledged but not integrated into the management process.” These findings highlight the importance of recognizing heritage as a set of values and meanings (Smith, 2006). The significance and worth of heritage are retained in the objects or places and serve as a representation of what people hold to be important and believe about their heritage (Hodder, 2014; Suprapti & Iskandar, 2020).

The presence of spiritual philosophies in the daily life of the Cham people is reflected in various aspects of their culture, including offerings, ritual spaces, directions, dress, house structures, monuments, and other elements of daily life. These philosophical meanings help to preserve Cham culture and are of great significance to the community (Sullivan, 2005). This highlights the need for heritage preservation efforts to take into consideration the cultural and spiritual beliefs of the local community, rather than relying solely on conventional approaches. The importance of recognizing and respecting each culture's particular ontologies, worldviews, and cosmologies has been emphasized in the growing body of literature on heritage management (Chapagain, 2013a; Silva & Chapagain, 2013; Winter, 2012).

Indigenous knowledge is increasingly becoming a central focus in heritage management projects around the world, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region (Andrews & Buggey, 2008; McGregor, 2004; Ross et al., 2011). Documents such as the Nara Charter (ICOMOS, 1994) and the Hoi An protocols (Engelhardt & Rogers, 2009) provide guidance for heritage management projects, taking into account the particular context and authenticity in the Asian context. The study argues that heritage experts and authorities should pay closer attention to the spiritual and cultural connections to place and space that are present across different socio-cultural contexts in Asia (Byrne, 2012; Daly & Winter, 2012; Karlström, 2005; Silva & Chapagain, 2013; Suprapti & Iskandar, 2020; Wijesuriya, 2008). Therefore, the conservation of Cham sites should be approached in a manner that takes into account Cham culture and spirituality. Further investigation into the Cham traditional philosophies and Indigenous knowledge is needed to understand how such worldviews can shape and improve conservation practices based on Cham traditions.

The growing popularity of Po Klaong Girai temple has led to a rise in tourist numbers, requiring modifications to the physical environment to accommodate the visitors. However, these modifications, such as the construction of the eastern pathway, have violated the spiritual beliefs of the Cham community, which constitutes a violation of the heritage law as outlined in Article 32[3] of the heritage law. This article states that new construction in Protection Zone I of a “special national heritage site” must not alter the authenticity of the site without considering the intangible values of the community, including their religious beliefs. Furthermore, the Hoi An Protocols, as stated in Engelhardt and Rogers (2009, p. 14), stress the importance of minimal intervention to preserve the heritage values and authenticity of the site. This study suggests that any new additions to the temple should not only be distinguishable as new but also align with the cultural and religious views of the community, and be approved only after consultation with them. The failure to consider the intangible values of the Cham community in their religious beliefs has reduced the significance and authenticity of the temple's use. A more effective conservation approach would take into account both the community's belief systems and the needs of visitors (Bui et al., 2020; Katapidi, 2021; Suntikul, 2013). This would preserve the spiritual and cultural importance of the temple while also catering to the needs of visitors.

The recognition of cultural significance and values by Indigenous communities, such as the Cham, often differs from that of heritage professionals, who tend to focus solely on the value of objects. The importance of defining the relationship between the present and the past, cultural significance, tradition, and spiritual philosophy is paramount for the Cham community, as it is for many other Indigenous groups (Settimini, 2020; Silva & Chapagain, 2013; Suprapti & Iskandar, 2020).

Heritage management should not only engage with Indigenous sites and communities but also the Indigenous knowledge and philosophies that emerge from their thoughtscapes and landscapes (Bruchac et al., 2010, p. 51). As such, the concept of authenticity in living heritage needs to be redefined according to the rationale of the Cham community, who bear and maintain their cultural heritage.

Conclusion

The Po Klaong Girai temple provides a vivid illustration of the difficulties inherent in heritage management, which must balance the needs of various stakeholders. On the one hand, the increasing popularity of the temple has generated a demand for physical modifications to accommodate an increasing number of visitors. On the other hand, it is crucial to preserve the cultural and spiritual values of the Cham community. The construction of the eastern pathway and other facilities violated the spiritual philosophy of the Cham and contravened heritage law, which calls for minimizing intervention in order to maintain the authenticity and heritage values of the site.

Scholars argue that heritage management must engage not only Indigenous sites and communities, but also the Indigenous knowledge and philosophies that underpin cultural heritage. This necessitates a reassessment of authenticity in living heritage and a redefinition of cultural significance based on the perspectives of the Cham community. The disregard of the intangible values of the community and their religious beliefs has resulted in a reduction in the significance and authenticity of the temple's use, underscoring the importance of taking into account both the community's belief systems and the external needs of visitors in heritage conservation efforts.

In conclusion, the Po Klaong Girai temple serves as a telling case study of the ongoing debates in heritage management, which seek to reconcile the interests of different groups and recognize cultural and spiritual values. Effective heritage conservation requires an appreciation of the beliefs, values, and philosophies of Indigenous communities and a willingness to work with them in preserving their cultural heritage.