Fighting with keris

A. G. Maisey · 13th September 2006, 01:54 AM

I personally feel that Pak Bambang`s submission on the present day position of the keris in Javanese society belongs exactly where it is.

I think the original question was something like---"when did the keris cease to be a weapon"

Pak Bambang`s submission , I believe, is perfectly in context with the search for an answer to this question, for as he points out, he is presenting only one aspect of the nature of the keris, and that aspect relates to present day belief.

I understand perfectly where Pak Bambang is coming from, and although I do not personally agree with this position, I would be a fool if I did not acknowledge that for many people in present day Jawa, what Pak Bambang has written represents the truth.

This of course raises the question of the nature of truth, but truth, like history , becomes actual when sufficient people believe that something is so.

For instance, Pak Bambang has used the dapur brojol as an example to reinforce his position.

However---

the word "brojol" has the meaning:- "lower on one side than on the other"

the association of dapur brojol with the birthing process draws upon derivatives of "brojol", that is, "mbrojol", "kebrojol", and "kebrojolan"

For somebody who wishes to attach a symbolic meaning to dapur brojol, it is natural that that symbolic meaning should be to do with birth, and if sufficient people believe that the placement of a keris of dapur brojol under a bed when a woman is ready to give birth, will ease that birth, then for those people, and for the woman concerned, the keris will ease the birth.

But for an objective cynic, dapur brojol is named thus because the base of the blade is very obviously lower on one side than on the other.

Regarding the cultural position of the keris in Bali.

Pak Bambang, I regret that I must disagree with your statements in this regard.

Whilst it is true that the keris did play a part in the puputans, a study of early literature and sources makes it very clear that the keris in Bali prior to European domination of Bali, very definitely fulfilled a weapon role. Most certainly, the role of the Balinese keris as a weapon varied significantly from the role of the spear, the sword, and firearms, but this current sanitisation of the Balinese keris is completely off the mark when measured against the evidence.

David · 13th September 2006, 03:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I personally feel that Pak Bambang`s submission on the present day position of the keris in Javanese society belongs exactly where it is.

I think the original question was something like---"when did the keris cease to be a weapon"

Pak Bambang`s submission , I believe, is perfectly in context with the search for an answer to this question, for as he points out, he is presenting only one aspect of the nature of the keris, and that aspect relates to present day belief.

Sorry Alan, i did not mean to imply that Bambang's submission was inappropriate to this thread. I was merely encouraging him to start a new thread that might go more in depth on these present day beliefs. As you point out, there are a great many people in Jawa today who accept these relatively modern philosophies of the keris as fact. I personally think there is much to be found in this approach to keris as a spiritual path. I just think that it is a subject that goes beyond the context here and is deserving of a thread of it's own.

A. G. Maisey · 13th September 2006, 04:14 AM

Yes, I take your point, David.

Perhaps we could all benefit from an exploration of this aspect of the keris.

I do still feel that Pak Bambang`s contribution belongs where it is, for my already stated reason. After all, the keris has had different natures at different times in its history, and here we have a good, clear explanation of how some people regard the nature of the keris today.

This effectively says:- in Jawa, in the year 2006, and for some indeterminate time prior to that, a body of people do not accept that the nature of the keris is that of weapon.

By clearly establishing this attitude at this time and place, it frees us to move backwards in time to the point where the keris was regarded as a weapon.

I personally see Pak Bambang`s contribution as quite valuable in establishing these parameters of time and place.

However, perhaps somebody who holds similar beliefs to those put forward by Pak Bambang may feel inclined to open new discussion along these lines.

13th September 2006, 01:54 AM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	I personally feel that Pak Bambang`s submission on the present day position of the keris in Javanese society belongs exactly where it is. I think the original question was something like---"when did the keris cease to be a weapon" Pak Bambang`s submission , I believe, is perfectly in context with the search for an answer to this question, for as he points out, he is presenting only one aspect of the nature of the keris, and that aspect relates to present day belief. I understand perfectly where Pak Bambang is coming from, and although I do not personally agree with this position, I would be a fool if I did not acknowledge that for many people in present day Jawa, what Pak Bambang has written represents the truth. This of course raises the question of the nature of truth, but truth, like history , becomes actual when sufficient people believe that something is so. For instance, Pak Bambang has used the dapur brojol as an example to reinforce his position. However--- the word "brojol" has the meaning:- "lower on one side than on the other" the association of dapur brojol with the birthing process draws upon derivatives of "brojol", that is, "mbrojol", "kebrojol", and "kebrojolan" For somebody who wishes to attach a symbolic meaning to dapur brojol, it is natural that that symbolic meaning should be to do with birth, and if sufficient people believe that the placement of a keris of dapur brojol under a bed when a woman is ready to give birth, will ease that birth, then for those people, and for the woman concerned, the keris will ease the birth. But for an objective cynic, dapur brojol is named thus because the base of the blade is very obviously lower on one side than on the other. Regarding the cultural position of the keris in Bali. Pak Bambang, I regret that I must disagree with your statements in this regard. Whilst it is true that the keris did play a part in the puputans, a study of early literature and sources makes it very clear that the keris in Bali prior to European domination of Bali, very definitely fulfilled a weapon role. Most certainly, the role of the Balinese keris as a weapon varied significantly from the role of the spear, the sword, and firearms, but this current sanitisation of the Balinese keris is completely off the mark when measured against the evidence.

13th September 2006, 04:14 AM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	Yes, I take your point, David. Perhaps we could all benefit from an exploration of this aspect of the keris. I do still feel that Pak Bambang`s contribution belongs where it is, for my already stated reason. After all, the keris has had different natures at different times in its history, and here we have a good, clear explanation of how some people regard the nature of the keris today. This effectively says:- in Jawa, in the year 2006, and for some indeterminate time prior to that, a body of people do not accept that the nature of the keris is that of weapon. By clearly establishing this attitude at this time and place, it frees us to move backwards in time to the point where the keris was regarded as a weapon. I personally see Pak Bambang`s contribution as quite valuable in establishing these parameters of time and place. However, perhaps somebody who holds similar beliefs to those put forward by Pak Bambang may feel inclined to open new discussion along these lines.