Jalak Budo

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by VVV

On the term budo/buda I have of course seen it before and knew the meaning.
But I have had the impression that it originated in referring to the old time customs of the Hindu-Buddhist times?
Similar to that you often find many Sanskrit words in Indonesian or Javanese that over the years somehow has slightly deviated from the Indian meaning.
I am sorry if I have got it all wrong as my interest on comparing these languages is higher than my kindergarten-level speaking abilities.

Michael

Dear Michael,

I hope your impression is right. According to Mr Bambang Harsrinuksmo, "zaman kabudan" (buda period) is a periodisation in keris in Java. He wrote in his Ensiklopedi, that this period was about from 6 to 9 or 10th century, or the same period of the building of Candi Borobudur (in central Java) to the era of Kahuripan kingdom. Bambang referred to some relief in the buddhist candi which pictured people were bringing weapons that ressemble keris that people called as buda keris. Not only in Borobudur, but according to Bambang, also in Prambanan temple (in Yogyakarta).

But according to Mr Haryono Guritno -- the writer of Keris Jawa antara Mistik dan Nalar -- the term "kabudan" is like "once upon a time" term. Old time, but not exactly when...

Beside "zaman kabudan", there is also another term of "zaman kadewatan". This term is more uncertain. Bambang wrote, that this period was before "zaman kabudan". Some people thought that this period was quite imaginary.

Serat Centini -- which was written by Javanese litterature writer Rongowarsito -- mentioned the name of empus, kings and keris dapur such as Empu Ramadi (empu), Prabu Destarata (king in wayang legend), and dapurs of Sempana, Carubuk, Kalamisani etc. Quite imaginary, although such dapurs still exist until now.

Ganjawulung

[Raden Usman Djogja]

In my opinion, the terminology of "budo/budho" in keris refers to some reliefs in Budhist temples including Borobudur (surrounding Merapi mountain in central Java before "pralaya", there were bigger budhist temples than Borobudur). We still can imagine the similiarity between keris budo (including Jalak Budo) and keris images in temples reliefs. However, lots of dhapur jalak budo were made later (not in the era of kabudan). The original Keris Kabudan should have no pesi (see the image of relief).

According to history books, the golden era of budhist in Java was around 9-11 C during dynasties of Sanjaya v Syailendra.

warm salam,
Usman

[A. G. Maisey]

There are no representations of the keris, nor of any keris-like weapons nor blades , to be found in the relief carvings of Borobudur.

To be keris-like the blade must possess some recognisable features that can be associated specifically with the keris. No such representations exist at Borobudur, however representations of keris-like blades can be found at Prambanan.

The keris is a blossom of Javanese Hindu culture; its roots are not to be found within the cultural framework of the Javanese Early Classical period, under the Syailendras.

The term "jaman buda" seems to be accepted by lexicographers as referring to the pre-Islamic period in Jawa.

[Raden Usman Djogja]

Pak Alan,

if I am not mistaken, in ensiklopedi keris by bambang h, either in pg 25 or 26 there is a picture of part of Borobudur relief. it should be related to the topic of the ensiklopedi.

according to the shape of blade, in my opinion, there must be an evolution process.

warm salam,
Usman

[A. G. Maisey]

Pak Usman,

No, you are not mistaken, a portion of a Borobudur relief is shown on page 27 of the second edition of Ensiklopedi.However, the dagger that is identified as resembling a keris buda bears absolutely no resemblance at all to a keris buda. None at all. Yes, it is a short, double edged dagger, but it lacks the assymetry of the keris blade, the blade shown carries no features that could be considered as keris-like, moreover this dagger has a substantial pommel and guard.
The dagger from the Borobudur relief is still identifiable as a distinctly Indian style.However, although it does display the common heritage of the keris, that of a leaf shaped blade, it has not yet begun the development which would ultimately result in the keris buda and then the modern keris. This Borobudur representation cannot in any way be considered a keris, nor to be keris-like.
Yes, of course there was an evolutionary process, and daggers such as the one shown in the Borobudur relief were possibly a part of that process, but to point to this Borobudur dagger and claim that it resembles a keris buda is an absolute nonsense.

Pak Usman, do you know the progression of this farce?

Please allow me to enlighten you.

In the 1988 edition of Ensiklopedi, Bambang Harsrinuksmo published a photo of a relief to be found at Candi Prambanan which does indeed show the first monumental depictation of a keris-like dagger. He erroneously captioned this photo as being a relief from Borobudur.Thus the error was planted that grew into the belief that a keris buda was shown in the Borobudur reliefs.

In the second edition of Ensiklopedi, Pak Bambang tried to smooth this error over.

On page 26 of the second edition of Ensiklopedi the photo of the Prambanan relief was published again, this time correctly captioned, however, the published photograph when compared with the earlier published photograph, and with my own photographs of the same relief, gives the appearance of having been retouched to emphasise the pommel and guard of the Prambanan dagger, thus providing a stronger resemblance to the Borobudur dagger.


It would be better for the study of the keris if we could put behind us this nonsense of trying to link the keris to the Borobudur reliefs.

The keris has its roots in Javanese-Hindu culture, and its development to the point of its absorption into Javanese-Islamic culture can be shown to reflect the Javanese-Hindu world view.

There is no evidence available at the present time that can in any way link the keris to the Syailendras.

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Pak Usman, do you know the progression of this farce?

Please allow me to enlighten you.

In the 1988 edition of Ensiklopedi, Bambang Harsrinuksmo published a photo of a relief to be found at Candi Prambanan which does indeed show the first monumental depictation of a keris-like dagger. He erroneously captioned this photo as being a relief from Borobudur.Thus the error was planted that grew into the belief that a keris buda was shown in the Borobudur reliefs.

In the second edition of Ensiklopedi, Pak Bambang tried to smooth this error over.

On page 26 of the second edition of Ensiklopedi the photo of the Prambanan relief was published again, this time correctly captioned, however, the published photograph when compared with the earlier published photograph, and with my own photographs of the same relief, gives the appearance of having been retouched to emphasise the pommel and guard of the Prambanan dagger, thus providing a stronger resemblance to the Borobudur dagger.


It would be better for the study of the keris if we could put behind us this nonsense of trying to link the keris to the Borobudur reliefs.

The keris has its roots in Javanese-Hindu culture, and its development to the point of its absorption into Javanese-Islamic culture can be shown to reflect the Javanese-Hindu world view.

There is no evidence available at the present time that can in any way link the keris to the Syailendras.

Dear Usmen, Alan and all,
Alan's finding is very interesting. This argument shows us, that we still need to research furthermore on the origin of keris form. Archeologically, or whatever. Thank you, for the enlightment, Alan.

This will bring a good discussion too, if we bring this finding to -- for instance -- writer on keris world such as Mr Haryono Guritno. In his book, "Keris Jawa, Antara Mistik dan Nalar" (Java Keris, Between Mystique Belief and Logical Reasoning?) Mr Guritno wrote "on inscription" as follows (page 7):

... In some prasasti (old inscriptions) found in Java, as Prasasti Karang Tengah and Prasasti Poh (inscriptions on stones) which was made around 750 CE in the era of king dynasty of Sailendra (Buddhist), it had been mentioned of the word "kres" which bore the meaning of "keris" now. These prasasti which were found in Kedu (Magelang) Central Java, had said that a king from Sailendra dynasty had ordered an empu to make keris.

Also, according to Mr Guritno -- in Prambanan (Hindu) temple -- which was build around 910 CE (after Borobudur), there is a statue of Roro Jonggrang (Durga) which in one of her eight hands held a kind of "keris" that called as "kadga"...

It shows, that Mr Guritno still believes that keris had been known in the era of Syailendra (Buddha) too...

Ganjawulung

[A. G. Maisey]

Pak Ganja, let's get this straight:-

I have not at any time said that the keris could not be traced to a point of origin that coincides with the presence of the Syailendras in Jawa.

In fact, I have demonstrated in my "Origin" paper that the Early Classical Period of Jawa, which coincided with the presence of the Syailendras in Jawa, was the beginning point for the keris.

However, the keris does not owe its origin to the Buddhist culture fostered by the Syailendras, but rather to the Hindu culture evidenced by the erection of Prambanan.

The weapon held by the Durga statue at Prambanan is more a sword, or pedang, than a form which can be likened to a keris. Yes, in Old Javanese the word "kadga" can be taken as either "pedang", or "keris", but in this specific instance the weapon concerned is not able to be considered as a keris. If it could be so considered, is it not logical that I would have used this as evidence in my "Origin" argument?

I repeat:- there is no evidence linking the origin of the keris to the Syailendras, nor to Buddhist culture.

In respect of the word "kres".
In Zoetmulder the word "kres" is not to be found.
However the words "keris" and "kris" are to be found.
Mr. Haryono Guritno mentions the word "kris" in the Rukam inscription, and "kres" in the Poh inscription, in all liklihood these are different renditions of the same word.
However, although these words occur in Old Javanese there can be no certainty that the implement to which they refer would be recognised as a keris in today's world. Possibly it would, however equally possibly, it would not. Do not lose sight of the fact that other words occur in Old Javanese which could also refer to an implement which we would recognise as keris. The meaning of words can change over time, and what was known as a "kris" 1000 or so years ago, may not have been what we recognise as a keris today.

In any case, when we refer to any "keris" of this period, it is to a weapon bearing proportions of the keris buda form, the modern keris did not evolve until much later.

I am on record as supporting the initial appearance of a keris-like dagger in Central Jawa during the Early Classical Period, a period which coincides with the presence of the Syailendras in Jawa, however, the Syailendras were foriegners:- they came, they held power for a while, they brought Buddhism with them, and then they went.

The indigenous kings of early Jawa were Hindu. They were there before the Syailendras, and they remained after the Syailendras left.

There is no evidence at all that can link the Syailendras, nor Buddhist culture, to the keris.

I am not at variance to Mr. Haryono Guritno in that the roots of the Javanese keris go back a very long way, at least to around 900AD, certainly to the Early Classical Period, and perhaps even before that. Personally, I see no point of disagreement between Mr. Haryono Guritno and myself.

My disagreement is with those who would wish to attach origin of the keris to Javanese-Buddhist culture, rather than to Javanese-Hindu culture. Those who may wish to promote this position need to produce evidence to support it; at the present time all evidence points to Javanese-Hindu origin.