The things we cannot see

[A. G. Maisey]

David, in respect of the Hidden World, I agree with everything you have written, these concepts are a part of human existence.

Australian Aboriginal culture was the oldest untouched culture in the world, up until the arrival of Europeans a couple of hundred years ago.

Some Aboriginal groups in Northern Australia had previously had intermittent contact with fishermen from the Archipelago, and family ties still exist between Australian Aboriginal people and people from Sulawesi. First contact with these Sulawesi people dates back to the 1700's.

But until that time, Australian Aboriginal people had been isolated from the rest of the world for around 60,000 years.

Still, in spite of this lengthy isolation, similarities in Australian Aboriginal spiritual beliefs can be found that are not that much different to the spiritual beliefs of other populations throughout the world.

However, although I do agree that some understanding of the Hidden World will assist in an understanding of mystic/spiritual/religious values attached to the keris, I would like to see our attention brought back to the beliefs that we find to be associated with the keris itself.

For example, just how much of present day mystic belief that is attached to the keris can be considered to be belief that is re-enforced by other long standing cultural & societal belief, and just how much of this present day belief that is associated with the keris can be identified as something comparatively recent and that echoes other changes within Indonesian, and indeed, world societal change?

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

However, although I do agree that some understanding of the Hidden World will assist in an understanding of mystic/spiritual/religious values attached to the keris, I would like to see our attention brought back to the beliefs that we find to be associated with the keris itself.

For example, just how much of present day mystic belief that is attached to the keris can be considered to be belief that is re-enforced by other long standing cultural & societal belief, and just how much of this present day belief that is associated with the keris can be identified as something comparatively recent and that echoes other changes within Indonesian, and indeed, world societal change?

That is a very good question and i am not really sure how well we can really sort that out, though i am certainly open to the attempt. Certainly it does seem that their is quite a lot of mystical beliefs that has been attached to the keris in more recent times. While the roots of beliefs attached to Kejawèn go back for centuries, as an organized practice it seems to have a fairly recent history. While Alan has already expressed that Kejawèn is not central to our discussion about practices and beliefs associated with the keris, it does seem to me that many of the people in Jawa or other parts of Indonesia who espouse the mystical aspects of the keris have at least some belief or involvement in the Kejawèn movement. So it does seem to me that this philosophy has had at least some influence on more recent beliefs on the mysticism surrounding the keris in modern times. How much these beliefs have evolved or changed since ancient times is a question i do not have the information to answer, though i would be very interested to hear from those that do.

[A. G. Maisey]

David, in Jawa some of the concepts & ideas that are found within the Kejawen system of belief can also be found within keris systems of belief, but these concepts & ideas came from somewhere else before they entered either system of belief.

Kejawen is not central to keris belief, but both the keris and the belief system that is Kejawen might in some instances be related to one another.

However, this can be so only in Jawa.

How much of Javanese keris belief is found in Bali, and for that matter, how much of Balinese keris belief still exists in Jawa?


We are considering a wide swath of ideas when we set out look at some of the beliefs that can surround the keris, so it might help if we try to narrow things down a little and address some of these elements one at a time.

There are two very basic concepts that need to be clearly understood before we can advance, those two concepts are encapsulated in two words:-

tuah and isi

perhaps we could express our understandings of those two words within the context of keris belief?

[jagabuwana]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

There are two very basic concepts that need to be clearly understood before we can advance, those two concepts are encapsulated in two words:-

tuah and isi

perhaps we could express our understandings of those two words within the context of keris belief?

Thanks for focusing the discussion, Alan. Here is my understanding of these words.

Isi means 'contents' or 'filling'. When a keris has "isi" this means that it is inhabited by a spirit - either good or bad. The old Javanese belief would have it that this spirit is one of or from nature. Newer beliefs attributable to Islam would say that jinns can inhabit keris. I think those that believe the latter would just say that the former are just types of jinn anyway. The keris as a vessel for spirit habitation or visitation is consistent with the idea that the keris is also a shrine.

Tuah - I'm not sure what the direct meaning or etymology of this word is in Javanese or BI. But anyway it refers to the keris' talismanic power or qualities. Only an Mpu can produce a keris with tuah due to their role in keris cultures as not only being masters of their craft but also having esoteric skills and knowledge. The methods by which a keris can be given power or life is known only by an Mpu. The tuah is usually tailored/matched for a particular person. Because it's a personalised affair a keris that has tuah cannot be passed onto someone else while expecting the talismanic effects of that keris to be available, let alone the same for the new custodian.

Given that keris that were made by Empus are vastly outnumbered by those that were not, most keris neither have the ability to have isi, nor do they have tuah.

Please do correct me if I'm wrong anywhere.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yep, pretty much so Jaga.

As for "wrong" I'm a bit inclined to the idea that where opinions concerning beliefs are concerned nobody can be out & out wrong, but respected masters might well have opinions that vary from the lay opinion, or even the opinion of the bulk of keris literate people.

With this sort of thing we are talking about esoteric understanding, and the very meaning of esoteric is that things of an esoteric nature are only understood by a very limited number of people.

I think I'll be out of this discussion for a few days, I'm off to look for rocks.

[Green]

The literal meaning of the word Tuah in Malay (and bahasa Indonesia) is Luck.
When you add the prefix ber as in bertuah it means Lucky or fortunate.
Hence a keris that is deemed bertuah would give luck or fortunes to the owner. That is at least the theory. The opposite is a keris that is cursed, i.e bringing bad luck. Many people believe there exist both types of keris. How a keris has tuah or a curse is something I have not heard people explain .


One time a woman friend told me her friend wanted to let go of a keris. She and her friend have no interest or understanding about keris and hence offered it to me. It is a very old spokal type from the state of Perak Malaysia. She did not tell me about the background of the keris but I quite liked it and hence bought it. Much later I met again with her friend and asked him why he wanted to sell it. He told me that it was a pusaka in his family and has been handed down for several generations but nobody wanted it now. And I asked him why? this time he told me. It is because every family that kept this keris always had fights and bad fortunes. Basically it is a cursed keris! The bugger didn't tell me this when he wanted to sell it before!

But it didn't seem to give either bad or good luck to me as far as I can tell. It is still with me.

[David]

Originally Posted by Green

The literal meaning of the word Tuah in Malay (and bahasa Indonesia) is Luck.
When you add the prefix ber as in bertuah it means Lucky or fortunate.
Hence a keris that is deemed bertuah would give luck or fortunes to the owner. That is at least the theory. The opposite is a keris that is cursed, i.e bringing bad luck. Many people believe there exist both types of keris. How a keris has tuah or a curse is something I have not heard people explain .

In this case every Javanese to English online dictionary also seems to translate "tuah" as "luck", though i must say that i never quite trust these source (and strangely STILL have not obtained a good Javanese to English dictionary for myself!). But it should be noted that whenever we look at these words related to keris they are almost always of Javanese origin so we need to go to that source rather than BI or Malay, since even when these words appear in all three languages they sometimes have different definitions and/or implications.

[Mickey the Finn]

Mods, please delete this post.

[David Gallas]

This is a very interesting discussion, and i like to contribute a reaction looking at it from the other side.
I live in Europe. I am proud to be Javanese. My mother is born in Bandung and my father is born in Yogjakarta, but actually my family comes from east Java. In Holland there live around 2.000.000 people who have their roots in Indonesia. We didn't have the Pancasila implementation in Holland, my family in Indonesia did! My family in Indonesia were sometimes afraid to be picked up, and they hided their keris...

I have been studying the western mind very closely. I think i understand the western brain a bit. The western way of looking at science, i would call, is: stay independent in thought,
be critical in what you hear and
think logical.
Metaphysical things, the things that can not be physical seen / measured, are having no place in the earthly way of thinking.

There is a very nice article that i want to share about this theme, from the university of Kansas:

Limitations of the Western Scientific Worldview for the Study of metaphysically Inclusive Peoples

https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperi...?paperid=94195

Let me copy a part just to make you curiouse:
"“Wrong thinking in the natural sciences is lamentable but, sooner or later, will be rejected. Wrong thinking in the social sciences may escape this fate; thus it is not merely lamentable but dangerous” ( Feldhammer, 1967: p. 29).

The word “science” carries great authority in Western society ( Ryan, 2011; Turnbull, 2000), and “only through the use (and praise) of the ‘scientific method’ [can] any study put forth a claim to intellectual legitimacy” ( Feldhammer, 1967, pp. 29-30). The Western scientific worldview has become “a locus of cultural power” ( Marks, 2009: pp. x-xi), and its influence is so pervasive that “even the most liberal universities operate in ways that place substantial domains of human experience, thought, and insight outside the conventional bounds of legitimate knowledge” ( Howitt & Suchet-Pearson, 2003: p. 557). As a result, it now largely controls what is learned, what is funded, what is studied, how it is studied, and what is published ( Barth, 2002; Berkes, 2012; Marks, 2009). Seeking greater legitimacy, the social sciences adopted the Western scientific worldview and are attempting, with varying success, to align themselves with Western science through radical, uncompromising scientism ( Feldhammer, 1967).

However, the study and understanding of peoples whose worldviews include metaphysical phenomena and explanations is undermined by many social scientistsÂ’ strict adherence to the Western scientific worldview which acknowledges only physical phenomena and explanations. In anthropology and archaeology, for example, it has negatively impacted the study of those Native American and other Indigenous peoples whose knowledge traditions and worldviews make few or no distinctions between or at least inextricably link the physical world and the metaphysical world. Most importantly, it devalues and disrespects the knowledge and alternative worldviews of the very peoples that social scientists are attempting to more fully understand."

I am raised with Kejawen, we have some issues with the Dutch government, be we were free to believe what we wanted to believe. We still have spiritual meetings like the Selamatan, and there are still 1000nds and 1000nds keris here. Not only stolen but also family keris, received as heirloom from our parents, and yes for us it represent the holy mountain Meru, Kailash, no Djin or Khodam or other type of human looking spirit....

The top of the mountain is were the spirits live, the gods, your ancestors. So it can help you on a spiritual way.
Don't forget that there is also something as a placebo effect, "if i think it is, it is". So if it is really there or just my imagination, that doesn't matter for my brain, for me it is there!

[A. G. Maisey]

David, broadly, I do agree with that which you have placed before us, however, I will put this to you:-

by heritage, you are Javanese, but by location you are European

ergo, to function within European society you must have a template in your mind that understands what you see & experience in a European way
however, to function within Javanese society you must have a template in your mind that understands what you see & experience in a Javanese way.

those of us who do need to function well in more than one society & culture do develop the facility to have more than one world view.

I know a Javanese engineer who was born in a little village outside of Karangpandan, which is on the slopes of Mount Lawu, near Solo in Jawa Tengah. He once said to me something like this:-

"--- when I am working in Jakarta or Sydney, I need to think in the same way that the people I work with think, but when I go home to my village, I need to think exactly as my grandfather thinks --- "

I reckon this just about sums it up, one cannot understand the way in which other people see the world around them, unless one can adopt a mental paradigm that permits the acceptance of ideas that could be out of place in any other model.

I know from my own experience, that when I go to Solo, it takes me about two weeks to fully change the way in which I understand things, but when I come home to Australia, it only takes me maybe three or four days to think like an Aussie again.

Now, I am not an academic, I just function like this because I have developed this approach naturally over many years, but in defence of the scientific method, I will say this:- my broad understanding of the scientific method is this:-

question/observe > research > construct hypothesis > test hypothesis > analyse results > develop conclusion.

by adopting this "scientific" approach, I think it perhaps permits the academic understanding of how another society/culture functions, even though it does not permit the academic individual to understand in the same way that an individual from that other society/culture functions.