Candi Sukuh

A. G. Maisey · 4th February 2016, 09:18 PM

In post #6 I have given the reading of the chronogram for 9531 as :-

gapura buta abara wong

this is incorrect, a product of my rather messy notes, it should be:-

gapura buta aban wong

sorry for the sloppy work.

Bjorn · 5th February 2016, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

In post #6 I have given the reading of the chronogram for 9531 as :-

gapura buta abara wong

this is incorrect, a product of my rather messy notes, it should be:-

gapura buta aban wong

sorry for the sloppy work.

Alan, could the Javanese phrase gapura buta aban wong be rendered into Bahasa as gapura raksasa makan orang-orang?

A. G. Maisey · 5th February 2016, 12:06 PM

Yes, but not "orang-orang", just one person, so "orang".

Personally I'd prefer "manusia" rather than "orang".

Bear this in mind:-

we're dealing with a translation of a chronogram, Martha Muusses read it as "gapura buta aban wong", W.F. Stutterheim read it with the same meaning but used "raksasa makan orang", then K.C. Crucq again gave it the same meaning but used "gapura buta mangan wong"

I don't know where the word "aban" came from, because it is not found in Old Javanese, nor Modern Javanese. Maybe a Javanese dialect of the time? I don't know. I've asked numerous native speakers of Javanese and either they did not know, or went of on a tangent of word analysis that led nowhere. One person I asked thought it was really "abara", or "ngabara", but "abara" is not a word either as far as I can see. In any case, whatever the word is, it needs to have a numerical equivalent of the number 3; in the Candra Sangkala there are words that have a similar spoken sound to "abara":- "anala", "dahana", in fact most of the words that have a numeric value of 3 are words related to fire, none relate to eating or swallowing.

The meaning given depends upon the reading of the chronogram, and it depends upon the identification of the object held in the giant's hand as a human being. I'm not qualified to argue with Martha Muusses or W.F. Stutterheim, but I'd need a real good dose of imagination to see a human being in that giant's hand.

The giant has something in his hand that he might intend to eat. Maybe. But anyway, the Greats Spake, and nobody has yet seen fit to argue with them, it sure won't be me --- but I'd like to see a bright young Phd with the appropriate academic background take another crack at some of these chronograms that we find at Candi Sukuh.

The chronogram we're talking about is the one everybody knows and quotes as the date fixer, maybe its 100%, maybe not, but all the other chronograms have been read to place Sukuh within a window of time that is more or less in agreement with the chronogram that gets consistently quoted.

There's another thing too:- what does the date indicate? when Sukuh was finished? when it was made holy? when it was begun? what the date really means is an educated guess at best.

There has not been an enormous amount of academic work done on Sukuh, and it seems that there is more than a little variation in opinion. A thesis presented by Jo Grimmond, an Australian, takes a fresh look at what Sukuh might really have been about. It does seem a little imaginative, but it deserves consideration. Then somebody else --- I forget who --- wants to paint Sukuh as a political statement.

Anyway, Candi Sukuh is a truly wonderful and sacred place. Nobody with a soul could visit there are fail to be moved.

4th February 2016, 09:18 PM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,990	correction In post #6 I have given the reading of the chronogram for 9531 as :- gapura buta abara wong this is incorrect, a product of my rather messy notes, it should be:- gapura buta aban wong sorry for the sloppy work.

5th February 2016, 12:06 PM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,990	Yes, but not "orang-orang", just one person, so "orang". Personally I'd prefer "manusia" rather than "orang". Bear this in mind:- we're dealing with a translation of a chronogram, Martha Muusses read it as "gapura buta aban wong", W.F. Stutterheim read it with the same meaning but used "raksasa makan orang", then K.C. Crucq again gave it the same meaning but used "gapura buta mangan wong" I don't know where the word "aban" came from, because it is not found in Old Javanese, nor Modern Javanese. Maybe a Javanese dialect of the time? I don't know. I've asked numerous native speakers of Javanese and either they did not know, or went of on a tangent of word analysis that led nowhere. One person I asked thought it was really "abara", or "ngabara", but "abara" is not a word either as far as I can see. In any case, whatever the word is, it needs to have a numerical equivalent of the number 3; in the Candra Sangkala there are words that have a similar spoken sound to "abara":- "anala", "dahana", in fact most of the words that have a numeric value of 3 are words related to fire, none relate to eating or swallowing. The meaning given depends upon the reading of the chronogram, and it depends upon the identification of the object held in the giant's hand as a human being. I'm not qualified to argue with Martha Muusses or W.F. Stutterheim, but I'd need a real good dose of imagination to see a human being in that giant's hand. The giant has something in his hand that he might intend to eat. Maybe. But anyway, the Greats Spake, and nobody has yet seen fit to argue with them, it sure won't be me --- but I'd like to see a bright young Phd with the appropriate academic background take another crack at some of these chronograms that we find at Candi Sukuh. The chronogram we're talking about is the one everybody knows and quotes as the date fixer, maybe its 100%, maybe not, but all the other chronograms have been read to place Sukuh within a window of time that is more or less in agreement with the chronogram that gets consistently quoted. There's another thing too:- what does the date indicate? when Sukuh was finished? when it was made holy? when it was begun? what the date really means is an educated guess at best. There has not been an enormous amount of academic work done on Sukuh, and it seems that there is more than a little variation in opinion. A thesis presented by Jo Grimmond, an Australian, takes a fresh look at what Sukuh might really have been about. It does seem a little imaginative, but it deserves consideration. Then somebody else --- I forget who --- wants to paint Sukuh as a political statement. Anyway, Candi Sukuh is a truly wonderful and sacred place. Nobody with a soul could visit there are fail to be moved.