![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The prominence of Hindu-Buddhist mythology, imagery, and religiosity in Islamic Java has puzzled observers. The shadow play with its Mahābhārata- and Rāmāyaṇa-derived subject matter is a prime example. Another is the late 18th-century ‘renaissance’ of Old Javanese literature in the Islamic kingdom of Surakarta, which produced classics still celebrated today. Beyond a misguided assumption that the Javanese were so strongly disposed to syncretism that blatant doctrinal clashes did not bother their intellectuals, the factors that animated this enterprise remain obscure, despite its critical consequence for the development of Javanese religiosities. I scrutinize several unstudied manuscripts and piece together information from hitherto unconnected scholarship to try to understand these factors, with reference to pressing circumstances, living theories, as well as people who think, feel, and hope. First I examine Javanese theoretical ideas about the relationship between the Hindu-Buddhist and Islamic traditions and the connection between epic narratives and the present and future of Java. Against this background I consider the initiative, in 1778, to reinterpret the ancient epic heritage, beginning with the Arjunawiwāha (composed c. 1030). Focal points of interest in the Islamic hermeneutics of this poem were a quest for inner potency and the resulting external power of violence, knowledge and revelation, and future kingship.
Acknowledgements
For critique, questions, and references I thank Edwin Wieringa, Els Bogaerts, Nancy Florida, Ronit Ricci, Tony Day, Willem van der Molen, and the other members of the research group New Directions in the Study of Javanese Literature at the Israel Institute for Advanced Studies (2018/2019). My membership was co-funded by the IIAS and the Marie Curie Actions, FP7, in the framework of the EURIAS Fellowship Programme. Andrea Acri, Verena Meyer, and an anonymous referee helped to remove clutter and sharpen the argument.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Note on contributor
Bernard Arps is fascinated by worldmaking through performance, texts, and media, particularly in religious contexts in Southeast Asia. Currently Professor of Indonesian and Javanese Language and Culture at Leiden University, his most recent book is Tall tree, nest of the wind: the Javanese shadow-play Dewa Ruci performed by Ki Anom Soeroto; a study in performance philology (Singapore: NUS Press, 2016). Email: [email protected]
Notes
1 See Ricklefs (Citation1978: 153, 1993: 364); McDonald (Citation1983); Gallop with Arps (1991: 86–87); Arps and van der Molen (Citation1994).
2 My translation from the Dutch.
3 See Ricklefs (Citation1978: 153 n. 12; 1993: 364 n. 56).
4 As noted in a version of the Book of Cabolek (Sĕrat Cabolek), set in the 1730s. The oldest dated Cabolek manuscript in which this recollection is mentioned is DFT S 240/280-18 (p. 74), written in 1839 (Ricklefs Citation1998a: 322), although the text in this manuscript may, of course, be older. The passage in question is not in Soebardi’s edition (Citation1975), a composite from different versions. It does occur in Jayasubrata (Citation1885: 75–76). The Cabolek gives a fascinating account of discussions around kakawin in the Kartasura court (Ricklefs Citation1998b: 127–162), but because the text has several as yet unextricated versions, and to the extent that it is datable, it seems to present a perspective formulated in late 1788 or 1789, I have not used it for my reconstruction of ideas about religions in the first three quarters of the 18th century.
5 This crown prince was probably Prince Buminata, Paku Buwana III’s uncle, appointed to the position in 1749. He left the court and rebelled in early 1753 (Ricklefs Citation2018: 126).
6 The codex, MSS Jav 8 in the British Library, contains two manuscripts. The first, the latter half of which is severely damaged, ends with f. 135v. It is this manuscript that is of interest here.
7 MSS Jav 8, ff. 18r, 29r, 36v, 38v, 40v. On f. 40v the addition, in archaic script, ‘from his father the venerable noble Sir’. A name is lacking. My reading saking ikang rama Kajĕng Kiyai Riya is tentative.
8 Or Muhyadin and Mukyadin, common Javanese spellings of variants of the same Arabic name.
9 For reasons unknown, the second half of the manuscript which contained the Bima Suci, Sewaka, Wiwaha, and other texts has been ripped out.
10 The term buda designates a property of writing (buda mĕliking sastra ‘the writing’s sparkle [i.e. characteristic?] was buddhic’) in a narrative in an East Javanese manuscript dated 1738 (Schoemann II 18 f. 100v; described in Behrend Citation1987: 40, 45), a historical period (duk ing buda ‘in buddhic times’) in the Wiwaha versified at the court of Surakarta in 1778 (Gericke Citation1844: 1), a religion viewed historically (agamane maksih buda ‘the religion will still be buddhic’) in a 1795/1796 manuscript of a mythological narrative (Add MS 12316, f. 43v), and a religious system (agamane tata buda ‘their religion was of the buddhic system’) in the same text (f. 44r) as well as another version (MSS Jav 71 in the British Library, f. 23r) datable on circumstantial evidence to 1782 or earlier, although the manuscript is probably from 1812 (Weatherbee Citation2018: 93). Buda is an adjective. Etymologically, its substantival counterpart means ‘(the) Buddha’. In Old Javanese, the adjective was boddha, ‘Buddhist’.
11 Awignam astu namas siddhi (MSS Jav 8, f. 88r). Siddhi is likely to be a variant of sidhĕm (from Sanskrit siddham); cf. footnote 31.
12 Day discussed Javanese poetic values in the early 19th century, but I believe this principle was followed also at the courts in the 1770s.
13 Ricklefs (Citation1997) has emphasised that there is no contemporary evidence of Yasadipura I’s authorship of these (and other) works.
14 These are appellations of the susuhunans of Kartasura and Surakarta and the sultans of Yogyakarta.
15 A broad-stroked but comprehensive theory of religions was composed from these notions (possibly in 1777 in Yogyakarta, definitely before 1796) in the shape of a narrative (inter alia in Add MS 12316). Lack of space compels me to leave this for later discussion. It possibly became known in Surakarta only when the kakawin adaptation programme was well underway.
16 Some sources are as follows. The distinction is stated or implied with regard to aksara ‘script, characters’ and wisik ‘secret instructions’ in the Suluk Wujil (Poerbatjaraka Citation1938: 148). At the Kartasura court in 1730/1731 there was a pangiwa specialist with duties such as observing omens and portents, divination, and protective magic (Arps Citation2016: 520). For left-sided and right-sided noble genealogies see de Graaf Citation1970 and Kouznetsova Citation2006 (both of whom identified them as ‘secular’ versus ‘spiritual’), and Mangku Nagara I’s historical notes of 1769–1771 (Ricklefs Citation2018: 246–247).
17 As implied in Sêrat Cênthini (Citation1986: 160). However, among the dedications documented in the diary studied by Kumar (Citation1980a: 15–16), only Islamic figures appear, and some living ones who were presumably Muslims.
18 For instance in the 16th-century text edited by Drewes (Citation1969: passim) and several of Ratu Paku Buwana’s texts written in 1729–1730 (Ricklefs Citation1998b: 68–69, 80, 82, 85, 111).
19 Left-right theory remained prominent into the 19th century. See especially Kumar’s discussion of Yasadipura II’s Sasana Sunu (Pedagogic Precepts), composed in 1819/1820 (Kumar Citation1997: 404–405).
20 In the alternative contrasts involving kafir in the 18th century, Christianity could be given a place (e.g. Ricklefs Citation1998b: 68–69).
21 As gracefully noted by an anonymous reviewer. See especially Qur’an 56: 9, 41 and 90: 19.
22 Sang Yyang Tugal Guru putranekī Guru ika apuputra lilima [one supernumerary syllable, BA] / [ … ] / Wisnu wuragilira / Kang jumnĕng ratū Angadĕg ing tanah Jawa [/] Pan kinarya titibanganing agamī Islam nagareng Arab (MSS Jav 33, ff. 9r–9v). The phrasing in the Babad Kraton from Yogyakarta, written 1777–1778, is similar (Add MS 12320, ff. 8r–9v). Judging by Gordijn’s Dutch translation, the nature of the balance differed somewhat in the Sajarah Raja Jawa manuscript that Gordijn bought from his aged Javanese teacher Sutrapana in Surakarta, 1750 (van Iperen Citation1779: 135). Here Wisnu was the first king of the divinities (‘alle de Dewas, of Heiligen’) and equal to the Islamic king of Arabia (van Iperen Citation1779: 139–140).
23 [ … ] / Jarwaning wisik aksara tunggal / Pangiwa lan panĕngĕne / Nora na bedanipun / Dene maksih atata gĕndhing / Maksih ucap-ucapan / Karone puniku (Poerbatjaraka Citation1938: 148). Both buddhic and Islamic texts were read aloud, the versified ones with melodies.
24 Isbat iku pon asal nafi / Nafi pon asal isbat / Musbat kang denrĕbut (Poerbatjaraka Citation1938: 159).
25 In ancient India, texts about the yuga self-presented as predictions regarding the present and recent past but hailing from a distant past (Pollock Citation2006: 70–71). In Java in the 18th century (and the 19th century; see Florida Citation1995) some of them functioned as predictions of the present’s future.
26 Baksaha is not a known numeral. It may be a slip of the pen for laksa ‘10,000’.
27 sakwehning waniteng yuganta kaharĕpnya mangka karanani prang atbuta (Ms. Or. fol. 402, p. 41). Poerbatjaraka’s edition reads almost identically (1933: 48) whilst Drewes (Citation1925: 164) translates away the cynicism.
28 The same is suggested, for a later period, by the fact that the translation from Raffles (Citation1817, I: 264–265), of the same stanza, invokes yet other elements not in the Old Javanese.
29 Van der Tuuk (Citation1897: 699, 500) identifies her – under the names of Reṇukā or Aniruka – as an object of strife in an episode preceding the Rāmāyaṇa, mainly on the basis of the Old Javanese Caṇṭakaparwa, a compendium of mythic lore and Old Javanese lexicography known from Bali and Lombok, and the kakawin Rāmawijaya. This was possibly composed in Bali (Zoetmulder Citation1974: 402–404).
30 The text, written on Javanese paper, is in MSS Jav 27. There is a note in another codex also taken from the Yogyakarta court in 1812 that a play script written on Javanese paper was copied onto European-made paper (MSS Jav 19, f. 68r), while the datings of the preceding script (on European paper) in the same codex suggest that this happened in 1781/1782 (ff. 49r, 67v). The play script of MSS Jav 27 contains several archaic elements that corroborate an early dating.
31 Awignam astu nama‹s› sidhĕm (MSS Jav 27, f. 69v, likewise in false starts on ff. 67av and 68v). Other dance-drama scripts from the 18th-century Yogyakarta court also begin with variants of this invocation (e.g. MSS Jav 4, f. 74v).
32 An image of considerable antiquity, evoked in different form in the exordium of Balinese shadow play (Zurbuchen Citation1987: ix, 268). The Javanese and Balinese traditions of shadow play probably lost direct contact in the 1500s. A similar image occurs in Old Javanese and Old Sundanese texts from the 16th century and earlier (Gunawan Citation2017: 10).
33 kawula gusti, gĕdhe cilik tuwa anom, lanang wadon ala bĕcik (MSS Jav 27, f. 69v). Note that left and right are not included, unsurprisingly, as this is a left-sided text. While gĕdhe cilik means ‘big and small’, it is often used to indicate social hierarchy: ‘noble and common’ or ‘high and low’.
34 Named explicitly in two cases and comfortably taken for granted in the other two.
35 wong ala jumnĕng bopati (Ms. or. fol. 402, p. 40). This is part of the paraphrase of stanza IV.7 in Poerbatjaraka’s edition (1933: 44). The order of stanzas is partially different and the manuscript contains fewer stanzas.
36 benjing Kaliyoga buwana iki gonjing-gonjinge Sang Ratu ilang kadunyane tka karatone (Ms. or. fol. 402, p. 40), from the paraphrase of Poerbatjaraka’s stanza IV.8 (1933: 44–45).
37 Key characteristics ascribed to the different yuga in this text also occur in a 1795/1796 Yogyakarta copy of a mythological narrative, although without the reference to the Prophet (Add MS 12316, ff. 35r–37v).
38 Other manuscripts in Windusana’s library also contain the same text or part of it. None of them is dated (Setyawati et al. Citation2002: 115, 177, 198).
39 Punika nusa Jawa, makseh kapir (Brandes Citation1889: 383).
40 jaman iku muli [sic] kadi ing Trita (Brandes Citation1889: 385, 387). For the year the manuscript reads sewu wongatus (Brandes Citation1889: 384), an error that Brandes (Brandes Citation1889: 387) emends into sewu wolung atus (1800). The occurrence of Hijri 1200 in the second text treated by Drewes (see above) makes sewu rongatus (1200) more plausible.
41 Perhaps more so than the schema’s explicit utilisation, which may have had the purpose of pushing a new or marginal idea.
42 Despite the apparent contradiction, the Story’s prediction that ‘the times will revert to a condition like the Trita’ actually confirms this.
43 Serat Kandha Citation1985:1. Ras (Citation1992:293) dates this work to the period 1700–1710.
44 I am thinking of the romances centred on Princess Lĕmbah in the 1690s and events involving the Lord of Madura Cakraningrat III’s daughter and wives in 1718. These are described in Babad Kraton, the former in extensive detail (Ricklefs Citation1993: 118–121, 172).
45 See Robson Citation2008: 68–71. Paku Buwana III’s versified paraphrase – which refers to Shiva as Sang Hyang Siwah (Gericke Citation1844:61) – and a Dutch translation are in Berg Citation1933: 212–217 (cf. pp. 220–225 for a comparison with the Old Javanese original).
46 Kurniawan (Citation2017: 10) does not identify the locus in the Arjunawiwāha to which the latter explication pertains. Was this XII.2–3 (Robson Citation2008: 70–71)?
47 Both texts are in Prince Purbaya’s collective manuscript of 1736/1737 (Ms. or. fol. 402).
48 The chronogram her muksa gora-goraning bumi (‘the water vanished as the earth was roaring’) denotes 1704 AJ (1778 CE). Kuruwĕlut is one of 30 seven-day cycles (wuku), which in 1704 fell in early October 1778.
49 Wiryamartana (Citation1990: 407–408) interpreted lines 19c–g as predicates to a generic person of high standing rather than to the Wiwaha which is actually thematised in 19b.
50 The reading ora bakal ‘won’t’ is odd syntactically and semantically, unlike ora batal ‘not void’ in another copy of the text (Wiryamartana Citation1990: 240).
51 Khan (Citation2015: 201) argues that the genre in question could be warranted theoretically as ‘a kind of lie that has the effect of nullifying false thoughts, a lie which is also a counter-lie, and which therefore has a salutary moral effect despite its essential sinfulness’.
52 My translation of lines 18d–j is in the present tense, but the Javanese is tenseless and I propose that they refer to the present of the writing and reading as well to Mintaraga in the story world.
53 As I hope to demonstrate elsewhere.
54 See also Arps (Citation2018: 80–81, 84).
55 Prabawa continues to play a role in contemporary Indonesian politics. Subianto Prabowo, unsuccessful presidential candidate in the 2014 and 2019 Indonesian elections, is named after it and his public performances were designed to project it. Like sĕkti, prabawa is only indirectly about social power, social dominance, or social control, so they should not be understood in the standard sense of the English word power. Cf. Anderson Citation1990.
