Pak Usman,
I have already pointed out that in common Javanese useage "jaman buda" refers to the pre-Islamic period.
A keris supposed to date from the pre-Islamic period is thus a "keris buda".
As Pak Ganja has already advised, " jaman buda" encapsulates the idea of long ago.
This terminology does not presume to be historically accurate, it is mere colloquial useage, moreover, it is not a useage that is unique to only the keris.
As long as some people continue to confuse colloquial useage with historically accurate fact an understanding of the keris will remain beyond us.
Of course, there is more than a single understanding of the keris, just as there is more than a single nature of the keris.
Keris understanding can accomodate the beliefs of the Javanese cultural sub-conscious, just as it can accomodate investigative analysis.
For those who subscribe to the school of popular belief, then of course the keris buda originated within the Buddhist culture of the Javanese Early Classical Period. The fact that there is no evidence of this matters not one whit. Who needs evidence when we have faith? Is not the name alone sufficient evidence? Why would it be called a keris buda if the Buddhists had not originated it? Obvious, is it not? Now we can all sleep well at night, knowing exactly where the keris came from. Why, we can even find a depiction of a keris on the Borobudur---well its almost a keris:- if you just close one eye, tilt your head slightly to the left, and eliminate a part of it by looking at it between the palms of your hands , you can plainly see that it is a keris. Yep---no doubt about that! The Buddhists were there first! Those damn Syailendras! In the place five minutes and they come up with something that was eventually to become the primary icon of Javanese culture.
Regretably I am a man of little faith. I do not believe most things I am told, I take pleasure in swimming against the current, and I can even see a conspiracy in the myth of the Easter Bunny.Most of all, I have a great deal of faith in what I can see and touch, and what I have seen and touched in the Borobudur reliefs does not in any way resemble any keris that I have ever seen.
This character defect does not prevent me from understanding that some people may wish to accept logically insupportable beliefs. The demands of society, peer group pressure, the wish to conform , all these things and more can create an environment where it is much more pleasant to go with the flow, than it is to take a stance that is at variance with popular, or community,beliefs.
However, as much as I may understand this attitude, I regret that I am unable to subscribe to it.
The earliest depiction of a keris-like dagger is to be found in the relief carvings of Candi Prambanan; this dagger is held by Laksmana and is a part of the Ramayana reliefs. It should be noted that even in his 2004 edition of Ensiklopedi, Bambang Harsrinuksmo still had not correctly identified this relief, as he seemed to be labouring under the misconception that Laksmana was a "raksasa" (Relief di Candi Prambanan juga memperhatikan raksasa memegang senjata tikam pendek---").
Candi Prambanan is a Hindu building.The Ramayana is a Hindu epic.Laksmana is a Hindu character.
Following the appearance of a keris-like dagger in the Prambanan reliefs, all further development of the keris in pre-Islamic Jawa is inextricably tied to societal structures where the dominant faith was Javanese-Hindu.Within these societies the Buddhist faith also had its place, as did Islam in the later days of Majapahit, but the overwhelming influence was that of the Hindu system of belief.
In light of these facts it is illogical to attempt to associate the keris with the Buddhist culture of the Javanese Early Classical Period, most especially so as there is currently no evidence to support such an association.
|