The Spiritual Significance of Mount Kinabalu

Written by Shireen Ali | Published for the Komuhakan Movement

Mount Kinabalu bears an invaluable relationship with Sabah’s indigenous tribes as the abode of the dead where souls of the deceased would reside on its summit. The divinity of Kinabalu as the ancestral resting grounds has become a pillar in Sabah’s cultural heritage, shaping the way natives view and interact with the mountain as well as the customs they practice- namely those surrounding death and spiritual harmony.

‘For the jagged heights of Kinabalu are the mysterious retreat of the Dusun dead, where mortal man does not care to intrude upon that cold and bitter sanctuary of ghosts.’
(Enriquez, 1927, p. 23).

Arguably the earliest documentation of the mountain’s role in death appears in the notes of Alexander Dalrymple (1769, p. 44), saying ‘paradise is generally supposed to be on top of [Kinabalu].’ As the sanctity of the mountain stretches back far in history- before it was ever even discovered by foreigners- the single origin of its cultural ties are nearly impossible to retrace (as happens with most aboriginal customs).

We can, however, take a look back at some of the early lore. Nearly a century after Dalrmyple, de Crespigny (1857) wrote of how the Dusuns believed the mountain to be inhabited by the great ancestor Kina, who ascended the mountain Kinabalu once the natives had all comfortably settled. Hence, here arose the tradition that the Dusuns would also have to ascend Kinabalu after death (Roth, 1896, p. 220).

Mount Kinabalu’s spiritual significance was repeated over the years by multiple explorers in the region, with many such as Evans (1922) referring to the mountain instead by its native name, Nabalu, which is suggested by some to literally mean ‘home of the departed spirits.’ The etymology behind the names Nabalu and Kinabalu has been widely discussed, and interested readers may refer to another article I’ve written on the subject.

Summit of Kina-Balu [Kinabalu] from 8,000 ft. (Whitehead, 1893, p. 166).

The idea of the soul’s journey to Kinabalu (sometimes cited as the afterlife itself) has extensively informed indigenous lore, moulding traditional Dusun burial rites as if to ‘aid’ the spirit on its travels. While the scope of these pagan burial customs are far too wide to totally cover here, a few stand out in how they relate to Kinabalu:

• When a Dusun native feels the end approaching, they leave their fingernails to grow long to help in the perilous climb up the steep sides of the mountain later on in death (de Crespigny, as cited in Roth, 1896, p. 220).
• Before the burial, the deceased is repeatedly advised by friends and family ‘not to go to the right or the left, as they were the wrong roads, but to keep straight ahead and that is the way to Kinabalu’ (Roth, 1896, p. 143).
• As traditional Dusuns customarily buried the dead in jars (gusi), the bottom of the jar would be slightly broken before finally interred in the ground to allow the soul to escape and go towards Kinabalu (Rutter, 1922, p. 303).
• The coastal Dusuns (Papar, Tambunan) would build shelters above the grave, with an open umbrella placed on top of the structure to keep the spirit of the deceased dry on its journey (Rutter, 1929, p. 216).
• The Dusuns of Marudu, Banggi Island, as well as the Rungus bury the dead with purposefully fragmented articles-such as knives- for the spirit to find whole when he arrives at the summit of Kinabalu (Rutter, 1929, p. 217).

Geographical aspects of the mountain itself are instilled with mythology, painting a picture of the transcendental world behind the apparent rock faces. Wandering spirits are thought to pass through a small river on the mountain called Koraput, of which many large stones lie in the middle.

‘If the ghost of an old man is passing the sound of his walking-stick is heard tapping on the stones, if of a young bachelor the sound of his sendatang (a kind of native banjo), if of a young unmarried woman the sound of the toreding (a kind of wooden or bone Jews’ harp), and if of a child the sound of weeping.’
(Sirinam, a local of Tempassuk, as cited in Evans, 1922, p. 126).

The Dusuns guiding St. John (1862, p. 273) up the mountain talked of a kind of moss, growing in between the cracks and crevices of rocks, which is eaten by the spirits residing on Kinabalu. A specific type of grass was also identified as food for the ‘ghostly buffaloes’ accompanying the dead into the afterlife. Plateaus, such as the flat area of Panalaban (meaning ‘to stop’ in Dusun), are thought of as places of rest for journeying souls. Here, some believe the guardian spirit Aki Nabalu descends to greet and welcome the passing spirits (Down Below Adventures, 2018).

The mythos of the mountain is no less fascinating than it is unique. Naturally, the spiritual significance of Kinabalu to indigenous tribes has translated into how these groups conceptualise and interact with the mountain itself- namely in the form of what should be done, and what should not.

‘“To what Gods,” I asked, “are these sacrifices offered?” And they replied: “To the Hantu — to the ghosts, to the Spirits of the Dead.”’
(Enriquez, 1927, p. 78).

Previous explorers of the old days would account for how local natives would not care to climb the sacred mountain, not wishing to encroach on the sanctuary of spirits. Captain Francis (1924) recalls how no native would ascend the mountain from the Sugut (eastern) side, as ‘a party of Sugut Dusuns had once climbed to the top from that side; they had arrived [by] evening and looking over the square edge of rock had found a lake with thousands of boats floating about, lighted up. They descended hastily and never went up again.’ (as cited in Rutter, 1929, p. 226).

If an ascent was to be made, however, the correct rites must be performed to request the spirits’ sanction and good will. At the time, religious observances were generally all referred to as ‘menghaji’ (Evans, 1912; Enriquez, 1927) or ‘memurinait’ as said by the Dusuns of Tempassuk (Evans, 1922).

The first recorded ascent of Mount Kinabalu by a non-native was made by Sir Hugh Low in 1851 (Sadka, 1954)- Low’s peak, the highest peak on the mountain, as well as Low’s gully on the north side are named after the explorer. Low’s journal provides us with the first idea of the rituals by the Dusuns when going up Kinabalu: one of the tribesmen who served as his guide had carried a ‘bundle of charms consisting of curious knots of wood, pieces of crystal, human and other teeth’ (Low, 1852, p. 9).

Nevertheless, Sir Low never made it to the top. The highest point on the mountain was only successfully scaled by the naturalist John Whitehead in 1888, whose name he lends to a number of different species of animals. Whitehead (1893) recounts the rites performed by the guide Kuro- a native Dusun- in preparation of going to the peak of Kinabalu. He recounts Kuro kneeling on the ground in prayer, and later that night, spraying droplets of water onto Whitehead’s face as if in ‘baptism’ (p. 171).

Whitehead also narrates how, before the company would ascend to the summit, Kuro would chant prayers while plucking out feathers from a chicken’s tail, planting the tail-feathers ‘upright in a row in a small crevice in the rock at his feet’ (p. 174). (The chicken was then slaughtered and made into a meal.)

The ceremony carried out by Kuro, like the prayers he incanted before, were intended to tell the spirits of the mountain that they have only come to visit, and do not intend on doing any harm. These customs performed before summiting the mountain to appease the dwelling spirits and ensure safe passage are called monolob.

Monolob is usually carried out by the high priestess or elder known as the Bobolian/Bobohizan (Bidder et. al, 2016). The ritual entails presenting offerings to the spirits of Kinabalu, customarily involving the sacrifice of chickens, eggs, and other paraphernalia.

‘Dusun Priestess of Tambatuan in Ceremonial Dress. Among the Dusuns, initiated women play a prominent part in religious rites, which they conduct in a language which is not supposed to be understood by the men, The woman in the picture is holding a divination-stick in her hand.’ (Evans, 1922, p. 160).

At the time of the old adventurers, performing monolob before every journey to the summit of Kinabalu was considered essential. Enriquez (1927) noted how none of the natives dared to continue if monolob hadn’t been done, for those who ventured up the mountain without it would never find the way back home. The howl of a spirit is often said to be heard during the ceremony (Evans, 1922 and 1923).

The monolob rites are widely preserved in the journals of adventurers who embarked to Kinabalu over the years. Interestingly, the number and type of items proffered to the mountain’s spirits seemed to have evolved over time. The monolob witnessed by Little (1887) required only one white chicken and a few small brass ornaments; years later, as seen by Hanitsch (1900) and Maxwell (1910, as cited in Rutter, 1922), the ritual needed one fowl and seven eggs, and then two hens and seven eggs (Evans, 1923). Eventually, it became seven chicken and seven eggs (Enriquez, 1927)- the same number observed in monolob carried out in modern times.

By the early-to-mid 1900s, the monolob practice also expanded to incorporate gunshots to warn the spirits of humans approaching (Evans, 1922). It was said how one foreigner ‘who undertook the climb refused to fire a gun before starting [the journey], and the continual wet weather which was met with put down the cause’ (ibid, p. 126). During Enriquez’s (1927) expedition, two shots were to be fired off at the beginning of the final climb to the peak, and two more once the party had reached the summit. Nevertheless, the inclusion of gunshots in monolob has since appeared to have become obsolete.

Today, monolob is customarily performed once a year to ensure the safety and wellbeing of all those who visit Kinabalu Park, and uses an assortment of articles such as pinang, betel and tobacco leaves, rice and salt, limestone powder, as well as sireh leaves.’ The ceremony is headed by the Bobolian/Bobohizan who leads the rinait (chant), and the slaughtered chicken will be cooked and shared amongst those present (ibid).

The Monolob ritual performed in our time. (Photo courtesy of folksofdayak.wordpress.com.)

Monolob was one of the cleansing rituals carried out in the aftermath of the 2015 Kinabalu Earthquake to appease the guardian spirits of the mountain who local spiritualists believed were angered by the indecent behaviour of foreigners who stripped and urinated on the summit.

In accordance with the worldview of the Lotud Dusuns, the mountain had gotten ‘hot’ (alasu) and a great sogit (ritual ceremony done as compensation) was needed to have it ‘cool’ (osogit) (Yunci and Baptist, 2016, p. 62; 65). While specifics may vary amongst the different localities, the same sentiment was generally shared amongst all Kadazandusuns.

The monolob ritual performed by the Dusuns of Timpohon entailed the sacrifice of one buffalo (Daily Express, 2015), while the monolob observed in Mamut, Ranau called for seven buffaloes (Topin, 2015). At the same time, the native communities in other districts were carrying out ceremonies in kind: the Bobolian of Mesilau sacrificed one goat and seven white fowls as part of the cleansing rites (Borneo Post, 2015), while the Lotud Dusuns carried out the elaborate monolibabou and tumabur where offerings were presented and rinait invoked to make peace with the spirits of the mountain (Yunci and Baptist, 2016).

Mount Kinabalu and the forest enveloping it, as we’ve seen, are invariably sacred to the indigenous people of Sabah. The actions of the tourists on the summit, as well as obscenities and coarseness in general, were (and still are) considered sacrilegious. These behaviours violate the established taboos of the mountain, and if the supernatural stories told by guides are true, should not be taken lightly.

Taboos and certain codes of conduct organically arose out of respect for the sanctity of the mountain and its surrounding forests. In the past, explorers like Evans (1922; 1923) and Enriquez (1927) were told not to use the names Kinabalu or Nabalu, only referring to the mountain as Agayoh Ngaran- literally ‘big name.’ The names of rivers/streams or designated places in the jungle were also not to be mentioned.

Today, maintaining etiquette when visiting Kinabalu Park is often an unspoken rule, as someone- or somethings- are ‘watching and listening.’ Good manners are to be expected as second nature: do not be vulgar, do not desecrate the surroundings, and respect the land as well as its people’s culture. Here’s a compilation of taboos and forewarnings to bear in mind when touring the mountain and forest:

• Ask for permission and say ‘excuse me’ before taking a number one. Termite nests, big trees and boulders are off-limits, as these are believed to be the home of spirits.
• If you see, hear, or smell anything strange, keep quiet and continue onwards. Do not go off-trail to investigate, and do not speak of it. These are thought to be check-ins on visitors by the spirits, who will follow behind if the oddities are responded to.
• Do not mock or insult the forest, and do not harm the floral and animal inhabitants.
• Do not be loud or noisy on the climb to the summit so as to not bother the spirits.
• Do not swear or whine, as a negative attitude will attract negative energy in kind.
• Do not bring raw meat (namely pork) into the jungle, lest an ‘undesirable’ entity appears.
• Be mindful of where you choose to spend the night: the bambangan, banana, banyan and bamboo trees are considered the most haunted in Borneo. Evans (1922, p. 165) recounts how the banyan trees were believed to be the residence of spirits who keep hold of gusi (jars where the dead are interred). He recalls a group of natives who had witnessed these gusi mysteriously arranged in a row underneath banyan trees, only for the image to vanish at second glance. The gusi were said to be reclaimed by the spirit back up into the tree branches.
• Campers are advised not to sleep parallel to rivers, or they would find themselves in another place when they wake up the next morning. Rivers should be ‘cleansed’ with lime or a pinch of salt before the water may be entered.
• Take nothing of the forest but photographs and memories, and leave nothing but footprints.

The customs and rituals outlined above have for the most part stood the test of time, and will undoubtedly continue to do so for as long as Kinabalu and its culture carry on as well. Other practices, however, have become obsolete namely due to attributes we now find highly controversial and unacceptable- namely that of human sacrifice.

Arguably the first record of human sacrifice practiced by the Dusuns is contained within the writings of Alexander Dalrymple (1769, p. 45) who described how some natives of the time believed the ‘passage to paradise was over a long tree.’ Travelling over the tree would be too difficult to do alone, so another man (apparently prisoners of war) would be sacrificed to provide assistance to the deceased.

Nearly a century later, W. B. Pryer (1881, as cited in Roth, 1896, p. 159; 1887) reported the act of surmunggup amongst some communities. Surmunggup was a human sacrifice ritual performed by a handful of indigenous tribes with the aim of communicating with the dead- the man killed (usually a slave) was thought to carry messages of the living to the spirits residing atop Kinabalu.

An example of one of these communities was the Tambunwa people (written in Pryer’s work as Tunbumohas) who inhabited the interior of Northern Borneo around Kinabatangan (Rutter, 1929, p. 38). Pryer details the event:

‘[They] tied him up with his arms outstretched (crucified in fact), and they danced round him. At last the head man approached, and wishing him a pleasant journey to Kina Balu, stuck his spear about an inch deep, and no more, in the man’s body; and another then said, ‘Bear my kind remembrances to my brother at Kina Balu,’ and did the same, and in this way, with messages to deceased relatives at Kina Balu, all those present slightly wounded the man.’
(Pryer, 1881, as cited in Roth,1896, p. 159).

At the same time, Pryer also reports how the Tambunwas have begun to substitute the human sacrifice with a pig following encounters with white people. Nevertheless, surmunggup apparently still existed years later in the Tidong region (which was presumably along the coast of Tawau to Lahad Datu) and its neighbouring areas (Pryer, 1887). The last account of surmunggup was seemingly reported amongst the Tambunwas by Ada Pryer (1893). The ritual has since fallen out of practice.

In most older texts, Kinabalu is described as the resting place of the dead, the abode of spirits, and the like, with little specificity beyond such titles. While it is nearly consensus amongst aboriginal tribes how the souls of the deceased do indeed dwell on the peak of the mountain, questions arise as to what comes next, if anything happens at all.

In some older texts, the Dusuns were said to distinguish between the ‘good and bad’ who could summit Mount Kinabalu. The good ones are able to ascend the mountain with ease, while the wicked ‘scramble up its cold and rugged sides’ to the top (Pryer, 1893, p. 83). Though, such distinction is scarcely mentioned in more modern resources, with some exceptions.

The separation of ‘good and bad’ souls is also made by the Lotud people, who believe only the spirits of good individuals reside on Mount Kinabalu (referred to as Pongoluan), while rogon and the spirits of ‘very evil humans’ occupy Rondom, a dominion ‘below the sea far across the ocean’ (Pugh-Kitingan, 2015, p. 277). The Rungus people, on the other hand, have a concept unlike what some would call retribution: the souls of thieves or those who had been deceitful would have to endure up to seven days of thirst, food deprivation, and heavy rain before they can enter Nabalu (Appell and Appell, 2013).

Nevertheless, the initial question still stands: is there anything after? Williams (1975, p. 44) observed how the Dusuns of Sensuron believed the summit of Mount Kinabalu was only where travelling spirits could rest and communicate with other spirits who were also journeying to the land of the dead. The land of the dead- the afterworld- they thought, lies somewhere beyond Mount Kinabalu. As said by Dr. Benedict Topin, the peak of the mountain is seen as the realm between the earth and heaven where spirits of the departed await emancipation and reunion with the Creator in the sky (cited in Wong, 2015).

Dr. Topin’s account is similar to how the afterlife is conceived in Murut culture. Like how Mount Kinabalu is revered as the home of the dead to the Dusuns, Rutter (1929, p. 220) notes how the same can be said for the mountains Mulundayoh and Antulai (also known as Aru), located in the far interior. These peaks are thought of as a ‘stepping stone’ for the souls of the dead to venture into the next life in the sky.

Pugh-Kitingan (2014; 2015) and the Kadazandusun Cultural Association (KDCA, n.d.) lay out Kadazandusun creed pertaining to the concept of the afterworld. The universe is made up of three domains: the underworld (Karaganan) where the malevolent rogon (demons) reside, the earth, and the upper-world (called Hibabou or Libabou), which is further divided into seven realms.

View from Kina-Balu [Kinabalu]. (Whitehead, 1893, p. 166).

Nabalu, the ethereal home of the dead, represents the eighth realm (Pugh-Kitingan, 2015, p. 277). These spiritual realms all have ‘counterparts’ or reflections mirrored in the physical world, and Mount Kinabalu is the earthly reflection of Nabalu.

Likewise, Appell and Appell (2003) describe how the Rungus people refer to the mountaintop as Nabalu, as if they were one and the same. To these groups, the peak of Mount Kinabalu is the afterworld itself. Nabalu does not represent heaven, rather a part of the physical world distinct from the divine dimension of the gods.

A person’s hatod (soul) is divided into two kinds: the hatod do inan (soul of the body; the main soul) and the smaller hatod do pi’uhalan (souls of the joints). At the same time, each individual possesses a ‘transcendental counterpart’, called the divato for women and lugu for men. These counterparts are thought to reunite with the Creator in the upper world, while the other hatod venture on to Nabalu (Pugh-Kitingan, 2014; Appell and Appell, 2003).

Regardless, all interpretations of Nabalu and the afterlife agree on how the souls of our loved ones are settled on the summit of Mount Kinabalu. So, what does such settlement look like? Life- or the afterlife- on Nabalu is envisioned as a paradise by all portrayals provided to us by native villagers.

The chief of Kiau village, Kabong, once said the peak of Kinabalu ‘was like Dusun country with houses, cattle, and pigs’ (as cited in Rutter, 1929, p. 220). The Rungus conception is no different: Appell and Appell (2013) document how the Rungus believe Nabalu ‘mirrors everyday life’ as the hatod (soul) retain the same characteristics as they once had when alive. Illness, hunger, exhaustion, and other ailments do not exist, allowing the hatod great health and strength to cultivate crops and yield abundant harvests. However, the hatod does not remain on Nabalu forever: as the memory of the departed wanes from surviving friends and family, so too does the hatod begin to fade

Equally, Dao of Sensuron (as cited in Williams, 1965, p. 44) tells of how ‘[n]o one fights, or says unkind words and all are happy and content. No one worries about bad luck or omens, and no one fears starvation. All the people are young and beautiful again, and with their families, as in other times.’

A wonder of nature and a marvel of cultural richness, Mount Kinabalu has become an inseparable- if not defining- part of Sabah and its indigenous peoples. Nevertheless, much like how the longevity of the Rungus hatod is dependent on the memories others still have of it, the eminence of Kinabalu will only live on if we are here to commemorate it.

As cultural heritage is said by some to be on a decline, we can all contribute to preservation efforts by reading and learning about traditions (like what you’re doing now!) or even just by chatting around to see what tidbits of our history can be uncovered- and, if our series on Kinabalu is any indication, it seems we’ve got a lot more to discover.

References

1. Appell, G. N. and Appell, L. W. R. (2003). ‘Death Among the Rungus of Sabah, Malaysia: The Dissolution of Personhood and Dispersion of Multiple Souls and Spiritual Counterparts’ in Wilder, W. D. (ed.) Journeys of the Soul: Anthropological Studies of Death, Burial, and Reburial Practices in Borneo, Phillips, Maine: Borneo Research Council.
2. Bidder. C., Kibat, S. A., and Fatt, B. S. (2016). ‘Cultural Interpretation toward Sustainability: A Case of Mount Kinabalu.’ Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 224, pp. 632–639.
3. Borneo Post. (2015). ‘3-day ritual to appease mountain spirits.’ Borneo Post, 5 July. Available at: [https://www.theborneopost.com/2015/07/05/3-day-ritual-to-appease-mountain-spirits/] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
4. de Crespigny, C. A. C. (1857). ‘Notes on Borneo.’ Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society of London, 2(6), pp. 342–350.
5. Daily Express. (2015). ‘All set for the biggest sacrifice.’ Daily Express, 20 June. Available at: [http://www.dailyexpress.com.my/news.cfm?NewsID=100786] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
6. Dalrymple, A. (1769). A Plan for Extending the Commerce of this Kingdom and of the East-India-Company. London: J. Nourse.
7. Down Below Adventures (2018). ‘The Mystics of Aki Nabalu.’ Available at: [https://www.downbelowadventures.com/the-mystics-of-aki-nabalu/] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
8. Enriquez, C. M. (1927). Kinabalu, the Haunted Mountain of Borneo: An Account of Its Ascent, Its People, Flora and Fauna. London: H. F. & G. Witherby.
9. Evans, I. H. N. (1912). ‘Notes on the Religious Beliefs, Superstitions, Ceremonies and Tabus of the Dusuns of the Tuaran and Tempassuk Districts, British North Borneo.’ The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 42, pp. 380–396.
10. Evans, I. H. N. (1922). Among Primitive Peoples in Borneo : a Description of the Lives, Habits & Customs of the Piratical Head-Hunters of North Borneo, With an Account of Interesting Objects of Prehistoric Antiquity Discovered in the Island. London: Seeley.
11. Evans, I. H. N. (1923). Studies in Religion, Folk-Lore, & Custom in British North Borneo and the Malay Peninsula. Cambridge: The University Press.
12. Hanitsch, R. (1900). ‘An Expedition to Mount Kina Balu, British North Borneo.’ Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, (34), pp. 49–88
13. KDCA (n. d.) Kadazandusun Genesis. Available at: [https://kdca.org.my/about/kadazandusun/genesis] (Accessed: 24 January 2021)
14. Little, R. M. (1887). ‘Report on a Journey from Tuaran to Kiau and Ascent of Kinabalu.’ Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, (19), pp. 1–25.
15. Low, Hugh. (1852). ‘Notes of an ascent of the Mountain Kinabalow.’ Journal of the Indian Archipelago, 6, pp. 1–17
16. Miwil, O. (2020). ‘’Monolob’ ritual held for safety of Mount Kinabalu climbers.’ New Straits Times, 2 December. Available at: [https://www.nst.com.my/news/nation/2020/12/646078/monolob-ritual-held-safety-mount-kinabalu-climbers] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
17. Mount Kinabalu Preparation (2017). Available at: [https://www.mountkinabalu.com/tips/important-tips] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
18. Murphy. (2012). ’10 Taboos in Borneo Forest.’ Wordpress, 1 September. Available at: [https://www.mysabah.com/wordpress/10-taboos-in-borneo-forest/] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
19. Pryer, A. (1893). A Decade in Borneo. London: Hutchinson.
20. Pryer, W. B. (1887). ‘On the Native of British North Borneo.’ The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 16, pp. 229–236.
21. Pugh-Kitingan, J. (2014). ‘Balancing The Human And Spiritual Worlds: Ritual, Music, And Dance Among Dusunic Societies In Sabah.’ Yearbook for Traditional Music, 46, pp. 170–190.
22. Pugh-Kitingan, J. (2015). ‘Cultural and Religious Diversity in Sabah and Relationships with Surrounding Areas.’ Islam and Cultural Diversity in Southeast Asia, pp. 269–294.
23. Roth, H. L. (1896). Natives Of Sarawak And British North Borneo, Volume 1. London: Truslove and Hanson.
24. Rutter, O. (1922). British North Borneo: An Account of Its History, Resources, and Native Tribes. London: Constable Limited.
25. Rutter, O. (1929). The Pagans of North Borneo. London: Hutchinson.
26. Sadka, E. (1954). ‘The Journal of Sir Hugh Low, Perak, 1877.’ Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 27(4 (168)), pp. 5–108.
27. Said, H. (2015). ‘The rituals of Kinabalu.’ New Straits Times, 7 June. Available at: [https://www.nst.com.my/news/2015/09/rituals-kinabalu] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
28. Sia, A. (2015). ‘Forest spirits: Don’t break these taboos.’ The Star, 13 June. Available at: [https://www.thestar.com.my/lifestyle/travel/2015/06/13/forest-spirits-dont-break-these-taboos] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
29. St John, Spenser. (1862). Life in the Forests of the Far East, Volume I. London: Smith, Elder and Co.
30. Whitehead, John. (1893). Exploration of Mount Kina Balu, North Borneo. London: Gurney and Jackson, London.
31. Williams, T. R. (1965). The Dusun: A North Borneo Society. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
32. Wong, T. (2015). ‘Mount Kinabalu is ‘our temple and purgatory’.’ BBC News, 12 June. Available at: [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33105624] (Accessed: 24 January 2021).
33. Yunci, C. and Baptist, J. J. (2016). ‘Cleansing the Sacred Mountain in the Aftermath of the 2015 Mount Kinabalu Earthquake.’ Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 89(1(310)), pp. 61–78.