Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David
Sorry Jussi, you lost me here. How would you say that the keris serves the same purpose in Indonesian cultures as the crucifix does in Christian societies?
|
I said "fulfilling basically the same purpose". Key word here is basically.
If the keris in Java represents God it has basically the same purpose as the Crucifix or a cross in Christianity where it too is a symbol of God. Of course what is considered as the Nature of God differs but I am not talking about religion here - I am merely asking whether the keris had/has in itīs own cultural set the same purpose as the Crusifix or a cross had in itīs own cultural set.
Letīs concentrate on the cross. It has myriad of purposes that all apply to it varying from the circumstances and the person who is wearing it. - It is a symbol that joins people to a larger body or organization, thus belonging to a group that follow structured set of practices than reinforce the unifying core that brought those people together in the first place: common Faith. Thus the Cross acts as a binding instrument joining people together.
The cross hence has the power of differentiating people onto "us" and "outsiders", it also reinforces political and commanding power in the hands of the person who is working for the body described above (think equivalents of "Church", "Pope", "Cardinal", "Priest" etc.) and also shows and creates rank as the more meaningful the person in the organization the more expensive the Cross usually is. In this regard the cross acts as a tool for transferring perceived values from it to the bearer of it (eg. expensive Cross => person of power)...
I could go on with the various functions that a cross has or which can be attached to it in the cultural setting it is a relevant symbol in but the plot is already clear. - I am asking whether the keris, basically, function in the same manner and for the "same" purposes?
Now one thing I need to add on after reading your replies to my posting is the clarification of the terms I chose to use as I get the implication I have mismanaged to write clearly what I wanted to express. Here goes, please bear me
I am a Finn. English is not my native language. I am writing of a Javanese phenomena I know very little about to an international audience with different backgrounds. Add these variables to this equation of 1+1+1+1+1 and it becomes evident that some might get 4, some 6 and some something different. So, I feel I need to clarify what I meant.
In Finnish the word that means cross (risti) is used when speaking of any cross like in "crossroad" (risteys: +). In daily language when speaking about the cross (+) as a Christian symbol it is is used interchangeably with the word Crucifix (krusifiksi) which identifies were are not talking about just any cross like in "crossroad" but
only of the symbol of Christianity - "the" cross. Depending on who is talking most of the time one just uses the common word for cross and it has to be deduced from the situation whether the talk is about just any cross like in "crossroad" or is the talk is about the cross as the symbol of Christianity. In the case someone chooses to use the specific word - Crucifix (krusifiksi) instead of the usual word cross (risti) one is emphasizing the fact that one is not talking about just any cross but the symbol of Christianity, the symbol which caries deep powers within and is a symbol of those powers.
As I was talking about symbols of power I chose to use the word Crucifix instead of cross because of my Finnish background and the difference in emphasis these two words (Crusifix vrs. cross) have in the culture I live in and am a part of.
Now... the Finnish word for the act of crucifixion (ristiinnaulitseminen = to nail on a cross) is referenced to the word that in Finnish mean just any cross (risti) like in "crossroads"
instead of the word that is used when emphasizing that one is talking about the symbol of Christianity.
I wanted to explain this as I am just not aware of what kind of differences does the words Crucifix and cross bear in the ears of those of you who do not have Finnish backgrounds. To make it as clear as possible I am not drawing any similarities in between the keris or the act of Crucifixion. Nor do I want to draw any similarities in between Javanese culture or religions in Java to Christianity or any other religion for that matter. Religion is not the point here - the point is were/is the keris used or were it /is it attached with similar instrumental and/or symbolical loadings as the Crusifix/cross in Western Christian cultures and were/are they used on a similar way as tools for transferring perceived values, power and rank amongst the body of people who fall under its influence?
I hope I have made myself better understandable this time around. Sorry
Thanks,
J.