Bali Keris for classification

VVV · 22nd August 2007, 07:44 PM

Thanks Ganja for taking your time and explaining the details!
Obviously my source for Kenci/Kentji was wrong as I was told that it meant fang.
I am a bit surprised on Naga as a Chinese influence.
This is originally a Sanskrit word, and an Indian mythological creature.
That's why I thought it was more connected to the Hindu snakedragon than the Chinese dragons also in Indonesia?
But maybe there are several explanations to the same symbol?

Michael

David · 22nd August 2007, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VVV

I am a bit surprised on Naga as a Chinese influence.
This is originally a Sanskrit word, and an Indian mythological creature.
That's why I thought it was more connected to the Hindu snakedragon than the Chinese dragons also in Indonesia?
But maybe there are several explanations to the same symbol?

I have come to believe that there always is more than one explanation with anything to do with keris.

That being said it has always been my belief and understanding that the naga is indeed of Indian Hindu origin.

A. G. Maisey · 23rd August 2007, 12:01 AM

The idea of the Naga is widespread in Asia. Yes, origin is Hindu, and from there into Buddhism. It is a Sanscrit word and in Sanscrit it means a being that is in the form of a large snake. There are a number of Nagas, probably most important amongst them is Vasuki or Basuki, who is the essence that binds the earth. In the Gita, Krishna when explaining how he could be everywhere at the same time said that as a serpent he was Vasuki.

To those who are not familiar with Hindu beliefs, it is easily understandable that the Naga can be taken as the dragon and as such as a symbol of China. Cirebon was founded fairly recently, around 1470 or 1480 I think, and as a Muslim state. That the founders of Cirebon took the Naga as a symbol of China is perfectly understandable.

The presence of the Naga image on the keris goes far beyond the simplistic icon of direct relationship. For those with an interest in this I suggest an indepth look at the way in which Hindu beliefs developed in Bali up until the European domination of that island.

In Hindu mythology the Nagas were the enemies of the Garuda.Nagas were subterranean, Garudas flew.Pretty obvious.Possibly of more interest is the fact that the value of winged Naga and a winged elephant is numerologically the same.

The word "naga" itself deserves extended study, as it can be applied in many meanings, depending on the language, place and context.

Regarding the two words "munda" and "kenci".

Is it possible that the word "munda" is in fact "mundhak"--- to become greater? Let us not forget Mr. Jensen's sources; it would be very easy for such a name to arise from these sources, and would be perfectly understandable. In fact, depending on the source involved, it could even be correct, but correct at the time and place of its origin, which is not to say that it would be recognised in present day Jawa.

To somebody unfamiliar with the Javanese language "mundhak" would sound as "munda".

"Kenci" is in fact a legitimate word in Javanese, it is a singkatan ( abbreviation) for "kertu cilik"---"small card", and refers to the small playing cards that are used in dominoes and other card games. However, I sincerely doubt that it has an application in reference to anything at all to do with the keris.

ganjawulung · 23rd August 2007, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

The idea of the Naga is widespread in Asia. Yes, origin is Hindu, and from there into Buddhism. It is a Sanscrit word and in Sanscrit it means a being that is in the form of a large snake. There are a number of Nagas, probably most important amongst them is Vasuki or Basuki, who is the essence that binds the earth. In the Gita, Krishna when explaining how he could be everywhere at the same time said that as a serpent he was Vasuki.

To those who are not familiar with Hindu beliefs, it is easily understandable that the Naga can be taken as the dragon and as such as a symbol of China. Cirebon was founded fairly recently, around 1470 or 1480 I think, and as a Muslim state. That the founders of Cirebon took the Naga as a symbol of China is perfectly understandable..

The opinion above is what written in Mr Rokhmin Dahuri's book that I mentioned. But according to "wayang" (javanese traditional puppet leather) story, naga figure known as "Antaboga". (See the picture, Central Java version and West Java version).

Sang Hyang Antaboga, or Sang Hyang Nagasesa or Sang Hyang Basuki is the ruler of the base of the earth. His royal palace called Kahyangan Saptapratala, or 7th layer in the base of the earth. His wife was named as Dewi Supreti, and had two children: Dewi Nagagini and Naga Tatmala. Although the palace in underneath the earth, the story of wayang told us that the situation is almost the same as in the other "kahyangan" above or on the earth...

And the garuda figure, in the wayang story, called as "Jatayu" or "Jetayu". This jumbo bird figure, was dead because of fighting with king of Alengka, Dasamuka who was kidnapping the wife of Rama, Dewi Sinta... (See the picture)

Hope this information is useful for you...

Ganjawulung

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

To somebody unfamiliar with the Javanese language "mundhak" would sound as "munda".

"Kenci" is in fact a legitimate word in Javanese, it is a singkatan ( abbreviation) for "kertu cilik"---"small card", and refers to the small playing cards that are used in dominoes and other card games. However, I sincerely doubt that it has an application in reference to anything at all to do with the keris.

Yes, "mundhak" is a very very common word in Java. For instance, "mundhak gedhe" means becomes bigger, or "mundhak cilik" means becomes smaller... But, "lar munda"? I am still in my opinion: this is not the correct term for a certain dhapur in keris. "Lar munga" maybe acceptable, for mentioning the "manglar munga" dhapur with figure of naga and garuda...

Ganjawulung

ganjawulung · 23rd August 2007, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ganjawulung

Yes, "mundhak" is a very very common word in Java. For instance, "mundhak gedhe" means becomes bigger, or "mundhak cilik" means becomes smaller... But, "lar munda"? I am still in my opinion: this is not the correct term for a certain dhapur in keris. "Lar munga" maybe acceptable, for mentioning the "manglar munga" dhapur with figure of naga and garuda...

Ganjawulung

Sorry, pls correction:
Not figure of naga and garuda, but "elephant with wings". That is "manglar munga" or "lar munga"...

Ganjawulung

A. G. Maisey · 23rd August 2007, 08:55 AM

Pak Ganja, I apologise for not being sufficiently clear in what I wrote.

My mention of mundhak does not necessarily disallow your hypothesis, but to disallow Jensen's use of the word it would be necessary to go to his source of information and investigate that in terms of time, place and informant.

We need to realise that what we may accept as correct today was not necessarily correct at some time in the past, similarly, something that was current usage at some time in the past, need not necessarily be correct today.

All I have done is produce a possible word that could be part of the answer to Jensen's usage. The way in which it originated could have been distorted or misunderstood by the person who provided the source that Jensen drew upon. When we start to play with possibilities in words transmitted into foreign languages we are really opening a can of worms.

My personal opinion on all these dapur names, pamor names and etc, etc, etc is that they are really not worth a cup full of cold water.Especially when we get into regional variations. Viewed from the historical perspective current names of anything can be misleading as to source.Yes, we need some sort of commonality of terminology in order to communicate, but really, the whole thing can become ridiculous.

Perhaps our time might be better spent in attempting to fathom the meaning of various aspects of the keris, rather than wandering around in wordland--Lullaby of Wordland. And when I speak of meaning, I am not speaking of the current philosophical meanings that are so readily and easily bounced around.

PenangsangII · 23rd August 2007, 02:18 PM

This may have been discussed previously, but I am still unable to figure out how anyone would properly grip bali handles such as gerantiman, cenangan or even the simplest bondolan, if keris bali is to be used for combat?

23rd August 2007, 02:18 PM	#7
PenangsangII Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 401	Bali handles This may have been discussed previously, but I am still unable to figure out how anyone would properly grip bali handles such as gerantiman, cenangan or even the simplest bondolan, if keris bali is to be used for combat?

22nd August 2007, 07:44 PM	#1
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Thanks Ganja for taking your time and explaining the details! Obviously my source for Kenci/Kentji was wrong as I was told that it meant fang. I am a bit surprised on Naga as a Chinese influence. This is originally a Sanskrit word, and an Indian mythological creature. That's why I thought it was more connected to the Hindu snakedragon than the Chinese dragons also in Indonesia? But maybe there are several explanations to the same symbol? Michael

23rd August 2007, 12:01 AM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,017	The idea of the Naga is widespread in Asia. Yes, origin is Hindu, and from there into Buddhism. It is a Sanscrit word and in Sanscrit it means a being that is in the form of a large snake. There are a number of Nagas, probably most important amongst them is Vasuki or Basuki, who is the essence that binds the earth. In the Gita, Krishna when explaining how he could be everywhere at the same time said that as a serpent he was Vasuki. To those who are not familiar with Hindu beliefs, it is easily understandable that the Naga can be taken as the dragon and as such as a symbol of China. Cirebon was founded fairly recently, around 1470 or 1480 I think, and as a Muslim state. That the founders of Cirebon took the Naga as a symbol of China is perfectly understandable. The presence of the Naga image on the keris goes far beyond the simplistic icon of direct relationship. For those with an interest in this I suggest an indepth look at the way in which Hindu beliefs developed in Bali up until the European domination of that island. In Hindu mythology the Nagas were the enemies of the Garuda.Nagas were subterranean, Garudas flew.Pretty obvious.Possibly of more interest is the fact that the value of winged Naga and a winged elephant is numerologically the same. The word "naga" itself deserves extended study, as it can be applied in many meanings, depending on the language, place and context. Regarding the two words "munda" and "kenci". Is it possible that the word "munda" is in fact "mundhak"--- to become greater? Let us not forget Mr. Jensen's sources; it would be very easy for such a name to arise from these sources, and would be perfectly understandable. In fact, depending on the source involved, it could even be correct, but correct at the time and place of its origin, which is not to say that it would be recognised in present day Jawa. To somebody unfamiliar with the Javanese language "mundhak" would sound as "munda". "Kenci" is in fact a legitimate word in Javanese, it is a singkatan ( abbreviation) for "kertu cilik"---"small card", and refers to the small playing cards that are used in dominoes and other card games. However, I sincerely doubt that it has an application in reference to anything at all to do with the keris.

23rd August 2007, 08:55 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,017	Pak Ganja, I apologise for not being sufficiently clear in what I wrote. My mention of mundhak does not necessarily disallow your hypothesis, but to disallow Jensen's use of the word it would be necessary to go to his source of information and investigate that in terms of time, place and informant. We need to realise that what we may accept as correct today was not necessarily correct at some time in the past, similarly, something that was current usage at some time in the past, need not necessarily be correct today. All I have done is produce a possible word that could be part of the answer to Jensen's usage. The way in which it originated could have been distorted or misunderstood by the person who provided the source that Jensen drew upon. When we start to play with possibilities in words transmitted into foreign languages we are really opening a can of worms. My personal opinion on all these dapur names, pamor names and etc, etc, etc is that they are really not worth a cup full of cold water.Especially when we get into regional variations. Viewed from the historical perspective current names of anything can be misleading as to source.Yes, we need some sort of commonality of terminology in order to communicate, but really, the whole thing can become ridiculous. Perhaps our time might be better spent in attempting to fathom the meaning of various aspects of the keris, rather than wandering around in wordland--Lullaby of Wordland. And when I speak of meaning, I am not speaking of the current philosophical meanings that are so readily and easily bounced around.