The Admonitions of Seh Bari: A 16th century Javanese Muslim text attributed to the Saint of Bonaṅ

156 Pages·1969·6.64 MB·English

by  G. W. J. Drewes (auth.)

THE ADMONITIONS OF SEH BARI
BIBLIOTHECA INDONESICA
published by the
KONINKLIJK INSTITUUT
VOOR TAAL-, LAND- EN VOLKENKUNDE
4
THE ADMONITIONS
OF SEH BARI
A 16th century Javanese Muslim text
attributed to the Saint of Bonati
re-edited and translated with an introduction
by
G. W. J. DREWES
Springer-Science+Business Media, BY
ISBN 978-94-015-0347-1 ISBN 978-94-015-0899-5 (eBook)
001 10.1007/978-94-015-0899-5
FOREWORD
The Javanese text being published here is not appearing in print
for the first time: more than half Cli century ago it was published by
B. J. O. Schrieke in his doctQr's thesis Ret Boek van Bonang ("The
Book of Bonang") (1916). In Schrieke's work, however, the emphasis
fell O'n the historical introductiQn to the text rather than on the text
itself, the edition of which is nQt free of shortcomings. MoreQver, the
analysis of the contents of the text appended to it could not make up
for the lack Qf a complete translation.
That a new edition and complete translation of this Qld and important
text has nQt been made before now is due to the small number of
scholars of Javanese - and the even smaller number of those amQng
them who concern themselves with the Muslim works of Javanese
literature. In short, it is the piQneering character which the study of
Indonesian literatures still largely PQssesses that has caused people
to be contented with preliminary surveys Qf this extensive field of study j
it is true that a number of welcQme milestones have been erected, but it
can in no way be said that the cha:rting Qf the whole field is yet complete.
After the first publication of a text and summary of its contents people
are only too readily inclined to proceed to other projects, mOore attractive
because of their novelty.
Renewed study of the manuscript which contains the text under
consideration revealed, however, that a new editiQn was indispensable
for a correct understanding Qf the contents. Further, since Schrieke's
publication Qf the Leiden MS. (which can be regarded de facto as
unique, since the copy in Djakarta, kroPaJk 481, has become unusable
through age), a catechism taken from this text has become known.
This has also been published and translated belQw. From its existence
we can conclude that the "Admonitions Qf Seh Bari" were at one time
cQnsidered of some impQrtance for the teaching of religiQn.
CONTENTS
v
Foreword
Introduction 1
1. The Manuscript 1
2. The Script 3
3. The Spelling 4
4. The Punctuation 5
5. The Author . . 8
6. The Contents of the Work. 13
7. The Main Ideas of the Work. 17
8. The Catechism drawn from this Text. 32
9. Comparison of the Catechism with the Main Text. 34
Text and Translation of Leiden Cod. Or. 1928. . . .. 38
Text and Translation of the Catechism (Leiden Cod. Or. 11.092) 102
Plates I and II: Facsimiles of Pages from Leiden Cod. Or. 11.092
following p. 102
List of Proper Names and Book Titles occurring in the Text. 120
Arabic Words in the Text (except the Arabic quotations) . 121
Arabic Terms and Phrases in the Javanese Text 123
Glossary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
APPENDIX I The Remainder of Leiden Cod. Or. 11.092 . 139
APPENDIX II Facsimiles of Pages from Leiden Cod. Or. 1928 . 146
INTRODUCTION
1. The Manuscript
The Javanese text published here under the name "The AdmQnitiQns
Qf Seh Bari" is contained in Cod. Or. 1928 Qf the Leiden University
Library. This manuscript did nQt becQme part of the cO'llectiQn Qf
Qriental manuscripts until about 1870. BefO're that it was part of the
cQllectiQn Qf manuscripts (kept in Leiden) O'riginally made by BQna
ventura Vulcanius, whO' was born in Bruges in 1538 and was prQfessor
Qf Greek at the University O'f Leiden from 1578-1614. On the title-page
we find the wQrds Liber ] apon ensis, written there by V ulcanius him
self. It is prQbably because O'f this inscription that the book was nO't
l"ecQgnized as Javanese until some centuries later.
In the preface to' his editiQn the first publisher of the text, B. J. O.
1
Schrieke, investigated hQW Vulcanius may have CQme by the manu
script. Schrieke made plausible the theory that it was acquired in an
East Javanese port, Sedayu or Tuban, during Qne O'f the first twO'
vQyages by the Dutch to' Indonesia and hence came to' the Netherlands
befO're 1600. It was prO'bably presented to his teacher by Damasius
van Blijenburg, a pupil of Vulcanius, whO' had contacts with the or
ganizers of the vO'yages to' the East.
As is knQwn, there are Qther manuscripts in the Netherlands which
were brQught back from Indonesia as euriQs at about this time, such
as the Leiden manuscript listed in 1597 as "VQlumen quoddam Java
nieum", of which I published a new edition with tral1iSlation in 1954.2
Other examples are the manuscripts once Qwned by Jan Theunisz.,
who fQr a shQrt periQd taught Arabic at the University O'f Leiden
1 Het boek van Bonang, diss. Leiden, 1916, pp. XIII-XVI.
2 Een lavaanse Primbon uit de zestiende eeuw, newly edited and translated.
Publications of the De Goeje Foundation, No. 15, Brill, Leiden, 1954. The
first edition of the text is to be found in the Leide:n dissertation of ]. G. H.
Gunning, Een lavaansch geschrift uit de 16de eeuw, handelende over den
M ohammedaanschen godsdienst, Leiden, 1881. The first translation was made
by H. Kraemer in his doctoral thesis Een lavaansche Primbon uit de zestiende
eeuw, Leiden, 1921.
2 THE ADMONITIONS OF SEH BAR!
(1612-1613): an incDmplete copy Df the well knDwn work al-Taqrib Ii
'l-fiqh Df Abii Shuj,ac al-I~fahanI with interlinear Javanese translatiDn,
purchased about 1610 and now kept in the Library of the University
Df .,Amsterdam, and an incDmplete copy of anDther work Dn Muslim
law, aJ-i.¢a1J, fi 'l-fiqh, also in the Amsterdam Library (see Handlist
Leiden p. 368 and p. 122).3 Six Malay manuscripts which were acquired
at a very early date are now in the Library Df the University Df
Cambridge. They were Dnce in the possessiDn Df the Leiden professor
Df Arabic Erpenius (died 1624), and three Df them are said tOo have
been acquired in Acheh in or about 1604.
It seems all the more prDbable that Vulcanius' manuscript Driginates
frDm East Java - and nDt from Banren as the first person tOo describe
it, TacD Roorda, thought because it is stated at the end Df the text
4 -
that the cDntents are the wDrk of Paneran BDnan, the saint of Tuban,
as was first Dbserved by Hoesein Djajadiningrat.5 Hence we have here
a MS. which cannot be any later than 1598, the year of the second
voyage, and which contains a text which was attributed by the copyist
to Paneran Bonan, one of the nine great saints of Java (wali sana) and
the foremost saint Df Java's nDrth-east coast.
Contrary to what is said in Vreede's Catalogus der J(JIlJaansche Hand
schriften Dn p. 330, where the size 81 pp. quarto is mentioned, the MS.
numbers in fact 88 pages Df Javanese paper measuring 18 by 25 cm.;
Df these, pp. 1, 2, 86, 87 and 88 are blank. So the text itself numbers
83 pages. The MS. is bound in a shabby European cOover with a parch
ment spine and has a double fly-leaf at front and back. The first page
of the text bears only seven short lines of writing. These do nDt occupy
more space than about one third Df the writing area of the page and
are contained in a frame, while the first half Df the first line is taken
up with ornamentation. The remaining pages bear 13 lines Df Javanese
script, with theexoeptiDn of the last, which has only 9. In four places
correctiDns have been made outside the written area: on p. 23 on the
left next to line 2 has been added the word tgese, which was omitted
after la yattafit; on p. 39 the number 3 has been added in the lower
right-hand corner; on p. 41 ka has been added in the right-hand margin
3 P. Voorhoeve, Handlist of Arabic Manuscripts in the Library of the Univer
sity of Leiden and other collections in the Netherlands. Bibliotheca Universitatis
Leidensis, Codices Manuscripti Vol. VII, Leiden, 1957.
" Vreede, Catalogus lav. hss. Leiden, p. 330.
6 Critische Beschouwing van de Sedjarah Banten, doctoral thesis, Leiden, 1913,
p. 304, note 1.
3
INTRO'DUCTION
to' complete man, the final syllable on line 10; and on p. 53 next to
line 12 an i has been placed, the syllable which was forgotten between
kilap and cjep. From these corrections it appears that the MS. is a copy
which was made with some care.
2. The Script
The MS. is written in a very regular quadratic script characterized
by a number of peculiarities. These prompted Taco Roorda to make
the following comment: "This manuscript is especially remarkable
because of the Javanese characters. It is a very neat vertical script
which differs considerably as far as some features are concerned from
that which is usual at present in the Principalities, but from which the
peculiarities of the cursive script used along the whole of the north
coast of Java can be easily explained." (Cat. Vrecdc, pp. 330-331.)
In his edition of the text Schrieke did not go into this observation,
but attempted by comparison of the script of the MS. with specimens
of Javanese script of various origins, and mostly from a somewhat
later period, as well as with the script of the Balinese Ion tar MSS. to
arrive at a more precise determination of the type of letter employed.
As a result of this comparison, however, he was able to establish only
"that the letters of our MS. display in general a close affinity with
Balinese characters, though only in the sense that both could be assumed
to be derived from the same basic form. Nothing can be said about the
use of this script at any particular time, because in the period when this
MS. was written it must already have been a (stylized) archaic type."
6
Now, the history of the Javanese script is just as obscure at present
as when Schrieke made his investigation. There is at least no author
known to me (except Brandes, who was already quoted by Schrieke),7
who has concerned himself with the development of the Javanese script.
However, this is not the place to go further into this state of affairs.
I wish only to remark that in my opinion neither the method used
by Schrieke nor his conclusion regarding the archaic nature of the
script employed should be accepted without reserve. Any given script
is, after all, always a closed system of letter-shapes, so that the com
parison of individual letters with individual letters of now this and now
that type of script is a fruitless business. One could assume a priori
a relationship with Balinese script, as Brandes had already observed
6 op. cit., p. 91.
7 Notulen Batav. Geltootschap, Vol. XXXVIII (1899), pp. LIII-LVI.
4 THE ADMONITIONS OF SEH BARI
that the Balinese is a variety of the Javanese script.8 But the grounds
on which a "(stylized) archaic" character is accorded the script in
question appear to me insufficient. To be sure, Brandes when looking
for an explanation for the way the Old Javanese script remained in
use beside a later form made the plausible assumption that the former
remained in use among scholars and "the conservative godly". But
are we justified, seeing our extremely scanty knowledge of the local
varieties of Javanese script in the 16th century, in doing the reverse
and ascribing off-hand the peculiarities of the script in which a religious
work from that time is written to archaism, simply because religious
circles have been observed by their very nature to be conservative?
Or did the editor, because of the occurrence of what he (diss., p. 86)
considers as archaic niceties in the spelling of a number of Javanese
words, let himself be misled into supposing an archaic character for
the script as well? It would, however, be difficult to say anything with
certainty until one has at one's disposal a survey of the kinds of script
which can be distinguished in MSS. down to recent times, such as,
besides the Balinese type mentioned above, those from the Principalities,
East Java, Cerbon, Banten and Palembati. - and if possible also
a survey of the development of each of them.
It is worth mentioning that the copyist of the MS. strove to make
every line of equal length, as is proper in a well written MS. So he
has provided for filling at the end of every line where there was space
left which was not sufficient for a letter or combination of letters by,
for example, putting a length mark or a double punctuation mark ~
with a little curl or the letter it hetween them.9 There are numerous
corrections made during writing (or copying), sometimes two or three in
succession. The pages from ,the text which are attached by way of illus
tration afford examples of both filling up and of correction of the text.10
3. The Spelling
The peculiarities in the spelling of the Arabic words and words
borrowed from Arabic, and of some Javanese words, have for the
greater part already been described by Schrieke in the preface to his
edition of the text (p. 82 ff.). In substance they amount to the following.
8 Brandes, loco cit., p. LIV.
e Hence slightly different from the sign used for a similar purpose which
Walbeehm, lavaansche Spraakkunst2, p. 25, calls paiicak and which consists
of a tiny curve followed by the punctuation mark ~ or a multiple thereof.
10 Corrections: fol. 28, line 11; fo1. 29, lines 2 and 13.
5
INTRODUCTION
1. Letters used to represent Arabic sounds unknown in Javanese
sometimes have three dots placed over them. It is worthy of note in
this context that the double I of Allah sometimes also has three dots
placed over it, and that once or twice, for understandable reasons, the
h is given three dots in Javanese words too, as in, for example, ita:sihi.
Hence /:Ui, kha and ha occur as h; dhal as d; zayas j; :shin as s; .Jad
as s; ?i1 as I; cain as h or it; fa as p; and qaf as k, all of them with
three dots.
2. The rendering of the hamza is not uniform. Sometimes h, some
times k, sometimes it with three dOlts, and sometimes the aksara swara a
is used.
3. The distinction between the long and short vowels of Arabic
is ignored, except sometimes in Allah, rasul and dhat.
4. As is usual in Old Javanese MSS., the pepa is not written in
open initial syllables (e.g. tges, skar, etc.), or in the suffix -ken when
followed by the suffix of the irrealis -a (hence, -kna).
n
S. The at the end of a syllable or word is often not written, e.g.,
asu, rowa, maka~, i, ikait, isun for asun, rowan, maitkana, in, iitkan
and insun.
6. Monosyllabic Arabic words are sometimes made disyllabic by the
e-.
prefixation of an
e
7. An or an a is sometimes inserted between two successive
consonants.
8. After the a of the open initial syllable of a disyllabic word the
consonant is sometimes doubled, as in Arabic nabi, wali and Bari. or
Javanese ana, kadi and sami.
9. Sometimes, on the other hand, there is simplification; e.g. Arabic
sirri, here sometimes spelt siri.
s s
10. The letters s, (sh) and are used interchangeably, with the
s,
reservation that r is always followed by and that in a number of
s
words of Sanskrit origin such as manusya, rahasya, sisya the is still
marked with three dots.
4. The Punctuation
The matter of punctuation is not touched on in Schrieke's introduction
to his edition. This might give the impression that there is nothing to
be said about it, and hence that the punctuation used agrees completely
with that of the MS. But this is in no way the case, and it is in fact
surprising that Dr. H. Kraemer, who calls the style of the work under