Between Solo and Yogya

[Raden Usman Djogja]

original was "dear"

revised is " dear Alan [and kerislovers]"

[A. G. Maisey]

No Pak Ganja, the book to which I refer is credited to KGPH Hadiwijaya.

The title of the original work is as I have given it, and noted thus in the introduction, but when Damartaji copied it and released it in 1998, they titled it as:- "DHAPUR, buku gambar bentuk keris dan tombak".

The original was dated 24 April 1920, and the date of the introduction to the Damartaji edition is 12 Februari 1998.

If we go to page 17 of this book, we will find dhapur pasopati (pasupati), illustration number 32.

The attribution for dhapur pasopati as shown on page 17 is:-

mitos/dongeng:-
Pemrakarsa---Sri Paduka Maharaja Budda;Empu---Ramadi; Tahun Jawa---152.

Regretably we cannot say that "---dhapur pasopati was actually created in the early era of the 3rd. century---"

We can only say that legend tells us that dhapur pasopati was created in the 3rd century.

There is a vast difference between the attribution given by legend, and when dhapur pasopati may have actually been created.

Pak Ganja, is there a possibility that you have been provided with slightly inaccurate information?

I'm quite certain of my information, as I have the book in question in front of me as I write.

[A. G. Maisey]

Pak Usman, I cannot disagree with what you have written.

All of life is simply an illusion, and a few fairy stories can make that illusion more comfortable to live in.

But sometimes some of us need to step outside the illusion and try to come to an understanding of what really happened, and when, and why. Those of us who choose to step outside the bubble---or are pushed--- pay dearly for this lack of wisdom.

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

mitos/dongeng:-
Pemrakarsa---Sri Paduka Maharaja Budda;Empu---Ramadi; Tahun Jawa---152.

Regretably we cannot say that "---dhapur pasopati was actually created in the early era of the 3rd. century---"

We can only say that legend tells us that dhapur pasopati was created in the 3rd century.

There is a vast difference between the attribution given by legend, and when dhapur pasopati may have actually been created.

Pak Ganja, is there a possibility that you have been provided with slightly inaccurate information?

I'm quite certain of my information, as I have the book in question in front of me as I write.

You are right, Alan,

The book of Kanjeng Gusti Pangeran Haryo (KGPH) Hadiwijoyo you mentioned in previous posts, did say about Empu Ramadi and the dhapur pasopati. While the book I referred, was the "Dhapur" book which was published by Damartaji (written by Waluyo Wijayatno -- the secretary of Damartaji) but used the source of Mr Hadiwijoyo book. This book contains pictures only (the similar ilustration as Mr Hadiwijoyo book) but with captions only.

Yesterday, I met Mr Haryono Haryoguritno at his home in Rawamangun Jakarta for a certain project on keris. In our side conversation, we talked also on this matter. How could happen, such complicated dhapur as pasopati was created by Empu Ramadi in the Jawa year or 152? Raden Ngabehi Ronggowarsito -- in a different era -- even mentioned in his Book on Dhapur Keris and Tombak (spear) that Empu Ramadi made the dhapurs of pasopati, lar ngatap (straight keris with two sogokan until almost the tip of keris blade) and cundrik in the Jawanese year of 152...

Yes, it is only legend. Logically, according to Mr Haryono Haryoguritno, the dhapur of older keris might be as simple as dhapur betok, or brojol which has not too complicated details. But, figure like Raden Ngabehi Ronggowarsito in his days, had vast authority to say on many thing -- not only literature matters, but also on kerises, on other javanese traditions. He might be regarded as Mpu (Master) in almost everything including keris, although actually Ronggowarsito was not an expert in keris, for instance. So no wonder, if it could happened, he made mistake too...

So many things in keris knowledge, that need to be argued if we talk about "kerisology". On tangguh for instance. Why we regarded this keris as a keris made in Majapahit period, or Mataram period. Or even, made by Ki Nom, or Empu Singawijaya for instance. So many things in this keris world still need more precise information...

Ganjawulung

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks Pak Ganja, but its not really a matter of being right, or wrong.

This was just a matter of slight confusion:- you were talking about one Damartaji publication, I was talking about another, and we both did not know of the other publication.

No big deal, we're back on track now.

Yes, I agree that there are great holes in our supposed knowledge of keris. Perhaps the principal reason for this is the propensity of keris fanciers to take myth, legend, and popular belief as fact. Virtually all our so-called "knowledge" comes from later than the beginning of the 19th. century, yet early in the 19th. century Raffles observed the keris in Jawa at that time fulfilled a similar function to the small sword in Europe fifty years previously. That is, almost exclusively as an item of dress.The day of the origin of the keris was already 500 years or more back in history when people began to record the "knowledge". Go back 5 months in time and try to get a truly accurate fix on something, that can be supported with evidence.The only way to understand the keris in Jawa is to understand Jawa at the time during which we wish to understand the keris. For instance, to understand the position of the keris in Jawa in the year 2007, we need to understand Javanese culture and society in the year 2007. Take the parrallel:- to understand the keris in Jawa in , say, 1407, we need to understand Jawa in the year 1407.Not an easy thing.

The simple fact of the matter is that the keris is a Javanese icon, and as such is subject to a system of belief that accepts certain legend and myth as fact. Nothing wrong with that, it gives a lot of people comfort.In fact, even though logically I know that certain things to do with the keris are the product of belief, emotionally I am quite prepared to accept those things as true. But logically I am obliged to doubt them. It all depends what thought mode I am in.

You mention tangguh, and we know that an understanding of tangguh is essential for us to be able to gain a (Javanese) understanding of the keris, however, nobody ever speaks of how, when, and why this system of classification that we know as "tangguh" arose.Go back to the roots of tangguh, and many people might find a distasteful truth that they cannot accept.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

You mention tangguh, and we know that an understanding of tangguh is essential for us to be able to gain a (Javanese) understanding of the keris, however, nobody ever speaks of how, when, and why this system of classification that we know as "tangguh" arose.Go back to the roots of tangguh, and many people might find a distasteful truth that they cannot accept.

My curiousity has been piqued .
I am all eyes and ears Gentlemen .

This has been a very enlightening discussion for me and I thank you all for participating; if we ever wind up this thread I believe it will be going to the 'Classics' file .