I don't think that we can use comparisons of attitudes to other weaponry to try to find similarities with the keris. A newly made keris can still be authentic, but it depends upon the aspect under consideration. It is even possible for a newly made keris to be regarded in the same, or similar light to a pusaka keris, if that newly made keris has incorporated a part of a pusaka keris into its forging, or if the essence of a missing pusaka keris is called into its newly made vessel. This is perhaps what happened with the pusakas that disappeared after the sacking of Kartosuro and then reappeared again in Surakarta some years later.
When we set out to collect, or to study, the keris, there are at least two different roads that we can take:- we can simply collect and focus on the object itself, or we can attempt to understand the object. To understand the object we probably need to gain at least a minimal understanding of the culture surrounding it. However, if we progress past that level of minimal understanding it is possible that we may find that our rational Western mind is in fact no more rational than the mind of the people who are a part of keris culture.
Our Western rationality has developed within the framework of our society, and within that framework it is realistic to accept that the way we think and reason is rational. However, our Western rationality is to a large degree irrational and thus non-functional in a society that is based upon different precepts and concepts.
Some of the values that apply to the keris also apply to other Indonesian weaponry, however, the keris is unique in its position as a societal icon.
|