Uttaraśabda in Java and Bali

A. Kurniawan & D. Puspitorini Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia

ABSTRACT: The aim of this research is to provide access to less well-known Javanese literary text, Uttaraśabda, which can be categorised as a tutur (utterance) text. It contains dialogues on religious speculation, which is also valuable for the study of religions in Indonesia. To make the text readable, textual editions should be arranged. However, the previously-necessary step taken is to explain the cultural background of all material evidence. It also stands as a consequence on the textual analysis. Uttaraśabda is documented in fifteen copied manuscripts: eight from Java and seven from Bali. If it is assumed that a manuscript is as an equal textual variant, then careful observation of each manuscript can be expected to give explanation on cultural-background peculiarities. Particularly, there are two manuscript groups from different cultural loci: Java and Bali; therefore, this research will apply a philological approach based on textology. The approach will provide comprehension about textual problems and the history of textual development. Thus, the understanding on the reception process to a tutur text, at least in two different cultural loci, can be dug up. Hence, this research wishes to contribute generally in the study of tutur which so far still has been polarised only on Balinese or Javanese traditions.

1 INTRODUCTION

There is an undeniable fact that we have not obtained a comprehensive portrayal about the history of Javanese literature which has been going on for more than a thousand years. There are a number of literary works which have been discussed before. One of them is Uttaraśabda. The previous scholarly works are just kept silent, except for some catalogues which contain information about its material evidence: manuscripts (Cohen Stuart, 1872; Poerbatjaraka, 1933; Pigeaud, 1967–70; Behrend, 1998; Setyawati et al., 2002). However, every catalogue only provides limited information. To make Uttaraśabda accessible, textual editions need to be prepared. Is it worth making Uttaraśabda accessible? First, it is less known. Other materials which record its text are unfamiliar to the present-time readers. Meanwhile, research about this text will make an important contribution to the study of the religion development in Indonesia. Uttaraśabda is a pre-Islamic work. It can be categorised as tutur: a genre of a philosophical text on theological speculation, and it sometimes contains religious manuals for ritual (see Acri, 2009; Soebadio, 1971, pp. 3–4). Uttaraśabda contains dialogues between Uttaraśabda and his elder brother, Ajñān․aśura, about those subjects. Analyzing Uttaraśabda and its textuality will give a comprehensive understanding about the dynamics of thoughts on a religious concept, particularly in the society where its text is produced. Indeed, the efforts to make Uttaraśabda accessible began when a Dutch philologist, A.B. Cohen Stuart, was employed as a manuscript conservator in the Batavian Society of Arts and Sciences (Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, abbreviated as “BG”) from 1862 to 1871 (Behrend, 1993, p. 423). With the assistance of Radèn Panji Suryawijaya and Radèn Mas Samsi (Suryawijaya’s son), he made a copy of many palm-leaf manuscripts in a Buda script which was brought from Mt. Merbabu, Central Java, in the middle of the 19th century. They transliterated from Buda into the type of script which was used commonly

531 for a Javanese text at that time: Modern Java script. In spite of that, there were no scholars interested. Uttaraśabda was considered as a minor literary work. Pigeaud did a very limited analysis in the first volume of his catalogue that was published in the late 1960s. Uttaraśabda is classified as a Javanese tutur from Bali in this catalogue (Pigeaud, 1967, pp. 69–74). However, he had a reason for his classification because it was based on two copied manuscripts compiled by Proyek Tik (Tik Project) which were kept at Leiden University Library, the Netherlands. Is it true that Uttaraśabda was written in Bali as argued by Pigeuad? From the dating of the manuscripts, the Javanese materials are a few centuries older than the Balinese ones. From this step, we uncovered that Uttaraśabda developed in two sets of traditions: Javanese and Balinese. These two different traditions share similar historical trajectories in literature, specifically pre-Islamic literature. Some colonial orientalists, such as Kern (1900) and Gun- ning (1903), argued that pre-Islamic Javanese literature should be depended on the text of Balinese tradition which has more superior quality than Javanese tradition itself. They positioned Bali as conservation space for Javanese culture before Islam established its domination along Java Island. However, this theory would be rejected later. Every tradition has potential and rules to grow in each scope. Thus, every textual artifact should be positioned as a variant which has certain functions in a specific historical phase. One manuscript: one variant. Hence, fifteen manuscripts which document Uttaraśabda text should be examined thoroughly. This article will discuss the manuscript distribution in Java and Bali and when those manuscripts were produced. Those categories will be very useful in reconstructing the genotext (which could be called as cultural context) which encloses the production process of each phenotext (manuscript). The discussion has been limited on the palm-leaf manuscripts from those traditions. The copied manuscripts in Java script and from Proyek Tik are not included because their functions are different from the original function intended by the text. Informa- tion about where and when a manuscript was produced could be identified from the colophon or any external sources. This is just a beginning step of the ongoing research. Its aim is to make a crude mapping connected to textual transmission and reception in every historical stadium. The comparison of each manuscript will be discussed in another occasion. We will start the discussion about the textuality of Uttaraśabda from this step. Furthermore, by this discussion, we can decide the most suitable edition model for this text.

2 MANUSCRIPTS FROM JAVA

Five palm-leaf manuscripts are of Javanese traditions, and they are included in the manuscript group named Merapi-Merbabu collection. This collection was discovered by authoritative colonials for the first time in 1822 through a survey initiated by Van der Capellen, a Gover- nor-General who ruled from 1816 to1826. In 1852, thirty years after being discovered in the western slope of Mt. Merbabu, there was a report that those manuscripts existed in Batavia and became the first collection of BG library. In total, there were 400 palm-leaf manuscripts in Buda and Java scripts, which covered many genres of texts: kakawin, kidung, tutur, pawukon, and mantra (Van der Molen, 2011, pp. 141–148; Wiryamartana and Van der Molen, 2001, pp. 53–55). Five manuscripts which document Uttaraśabda text are PNRI 6 L 46, PNRI 7 L 49, PNRI 1 L 170, PNRI 1 L 225, and PNRI 86 L 334. Four manuscripts contain the complete text, but PNRI 7 L 49 is in a poor-conditioned bundle of fragments from several manuscripts. There are just five folios (lempir) which contain the text (cf. Setyawati et al., 2002, p. 38). All of them are heavily damaged. PNRI 7 L 49 will not be discussed in this article.

2.1 The origin of the manuscripts Although excavated from Mt. Merbabu, information from the colophon shows that the text was copied (or produced) in several different locations. PNRI 6 L 46 and PNRI 1 L 170 were copied in Rabut Pamrihan, an ancient name for Mt. Merbabu (Noorduyn, 1982, p. 416). 532 More precisely, PNRI 1 L 170 was copied in the northwest slope (imbang bayabya), in the hermitage (panusupan) called Wanakarya. Other manuscripts, i.e. PNRI 1 L 225 and PNRI 86 L 334, were copied in Sang Hyang Giri Mandharagěni (ancient name of Mt. Merapi) and Sang Hyang Giri Karungrungan (ancient name of Mt. Ungaran). Terminologies such as ‘rabut’ and ‘panusupan’ can explain the status of the scriptorium. Both refer to a religious center or a place for spiritual education in the past. We can trace this back to a Middle Javanese prose work, Tantu Panggělaran (Pigeaud, 1924), or from an Old Sundanese poem, Bhujangga Manik (Noorduyn and Teeuw, 2009). In the last text, for example, one part of the story describes a main character named Bhujangga Manik who came back from the east area of Pasundan in West Java, after studying religions in Pamrihan located in Mt. Damalung (Noorduyn and Teeuw, 2009, p. 292). This brief explanation can clarify what kinds of environment in which Uttaraśabda text was produced and what its role was. Of course, it had a relation with religious activities in that society.

2.2 Dating problems Among the four complete manuscripts, only two manuscripts have dating evidence: PNRI 1 L 170 and PNRI 1 L 225. It should be noted that the dating element which will be emphasised is the year. The colophon of PNRI 1 L 170 informs that the text was already written in 1585. Thus, through the chronogram “watu sina(m)bi hoyěging wong” (the stone was accompanied by the trembling man), we know that the text in PNRI 1 L 225 was already written in 1611. Unfortunately, there is no definite conclusion from previous scholars about how to convert the Merapi-Merbabu calendar system to the common system (AD calendar). Van der Molen (2011, pp. 93–108) and Wiryamartana (1984) have tried to convert it by comparing it with the Těnggěr calendar system, especially Pasuruan Těnggěr. However, these efforts are not reach- ing the precise system yet, because the Těnggěr calendar system is also still undecided (see the reconstruction by Proudfoot, 2007). As stated by Wiryamartana (1984), even though there are a number of pre-Islamic texts from the Merapi-Merbabu collection, the dating evidence from the manuscripts indicates that they were actually from the later period, i.e. Mataram era, from the 17th to the 18th century. The sufficient evidence comes from PNRI 32 L 313 which also includes the Merapi-Merbabu collection. The Gita Sinangsaya text in this manuscript was copied in 1592 and represented in a variety of chronograms (sěngkalan). The colophon also explains that the year 1592 was the same year in which the Prince of Madiun, Wiramanggala, was murdered and the ammuni- tion warehouse (paobatan) was exploded. These incidents happened in 1670 AD as recorded in babad stories and colonial archives (Ricklefs, 1978, pp. 179–180). Thus, Gita Sinangsaya in PNRI 32 L 313 was written after the aforementioned incidents, perhaps a few months after. Thus, the year 1592 was in close proximity to the years 1585 and 1611. Therefore, the time when the Uttaraśabda from the Merapi-Merbabu collection was copied— and also had a particular function in its society—was approximately during the second part of the 17th century, between the reign of Amangkurat I/Sinuhun Těgal Arum (1645–1677 AD) and Amangkurat II (1680–1702 AD). At that period, obviously, the Islamic influence had been spread out all over Java. However, the existing pre-Islamic text in Java in that period can trigger a question: what kinds of societies that became its proponents? Interestingly, in the Merapi-Merbabu collection, there are both Islamic and pre-Islamic texts, and they come from the same period. Another interesting aspect which can be taken into account is the use of Buda script (for more explanation about this script, see Pigeaud, 1970, pp. 53–60; Van der Molen, 2011, pp. …). At the period when Merapi-Merbabu manuscripts were written, Java script had already been well acknowledged massively. In several manuscripts of this collection, Java script was also used, even though it was not as much as Buda script. There was a possibility that the writer or copier of the manuscripts knew Java script very well despite the use of Buda script. Therefore, it is not surprising to find one or two Java scripts among the lines of Buda script in a manuscript. They might have made some mistakes in their work. Using the Buda script was their conscious choice, and it also had certain functions in their society. 533 However, the reasons behind making this conscious choice have not yet been known. Pre- vious theories claim that there were particular societies that lived in exile after Islam spread out all over Java. They maintained their old way of living conservatively. Unfortunately, that theory can no longer be used because the Islamic influences had also infiltrated into the literary work in the Merapi-Merbabu collection. The society in this literary environment was more open than the conservative. The use of Buda script could be considered as having a function as an identity marker besides the written devices to make limited communication among this society.

2.3 Manuscript materials Manuscripts of the Merapi-Merbabu collection were produced in a place high above the sea level. However, these manuscripts were made from the materials which could not be grown in such environment. The Palmyra (Borassus flabellifer) only grows in lowlands which is hot, dry, located about 500 meters above the sea level, and particularly in a coastal area (Ensikolopedi Indonesia IV, 1992, p. 2046). If the palm-leaf manuscripts were produced in highlands, where did they get the materials from? Van der Molen (2011, pp. 108–110) estimated that they got these materials from the coastal area in north Java where Palmyra plants can be grown well. It is important to take into account that the members of literary society chose palm leaves as the writing sheet rather than other materials which they were also familiar with, such as tree-bark paper, gěbang, and so on. It is possible that palm leaves had social and religious functions, or other functions related to identity.

3 MANUSCRIPTS FROM BALI

The existence of Uttaraśabda manuscripts of Balinese traditions is related to Gedong Kirtya in Singaraja, which was established in 1928 at a convention held in Kintamani. Dutch scholars, brahmana, and local aristocrats attended this convention. Through this institution, palm- leaf manuscripts which contain Uttaraśabda of Balinese traditions—which were originally disseminated as personal collections—were able to be accessed by public. Four Balinese manuscripts used in this research belonged to Gedong Kirtya. These manuscripts were coded with Roman number “III” which implies that they were included in the tutur or wariga group. This categorisation was made by a Dutch scholar, Roelof Goris, when he was working as a curator for this institution in 1931 (Swellengrebel, 1966, pp. 205–228). It could be used as the basis to identify what literary genre that Uttaraśabda of Balinese traditions should be included. So far there are only two manuscripts that can be accessed which are (1) K 247 and (2) T/xxiv/5 DOKBUD (the second manuscript will be named as “lontar Pusdok” in this article). Three other manuscripts will only be identified through secondary sources that provide information about them. It is still ongoing research. It still needs more new data to accomplish our understanding on the function of Uttaraśabda in Balinese traditions.

3.1 The origin of the manuscripts As a matter of fact, information about where each manuscript comes from could be identified from internal evidence (colophon). In the first folio of K 247, there is information in Malay written in Roman character: “dapat dibeli dari curator Kirtya di Moenggoe [Badoeng]” (could be bought from Kirtya’s curator in Munggu, Badung). There is no other detailed information in this manuscript. According to a regular report from Kirtya, there was a pědanda (Balinese priest) from Munggu, Badung, who was employed as an administrator in Kirtya, i.e. Ida Pědanda Gde Pěmaron Munggu (Palguna, 1999, p. 281). Perhaps this manuscript comes from him. The colophon of lontar Pusdok provides more comprehensive information. This manuscript comes from Desa Dencarik, Kecamatan Banjar, in Kabupaten Buleleng. Someone 534 named Putu Ngurah Měrta was considered as the writer. Unfortunately, we do not know who he is. The writer’s profile can reveal in which social group the Uttaraśabda text became functional. These problems still wait for further research. Moreover, three other manuscripts’ origin can be discerned from the catalogue. The Palm-leaf manuscript which became the exemplar of K 6527 originated from Griya Pěmaron, Munggu, Měngwi. K 6538 took its exemplar from the palm-leaf manuscript pos- sessed by Makele Tarěna, Puri Kawan, Singaraja. Its location is so close to Gedong Kirtya. K 1525 was a copy of a palm-leaf manuscript from Bakung, Sukasada, Buleleng. Hence, there were three manuscripts from North Bali (K 1525, K 6538, and lontar Pusdok), and two others from South Bali (K 247 and K 6527). Moreover, there were two scriptorium categories where the manuscripts of Uttaraśabada were produced: griya and puri. To Balinese societies who recognise warna as the divisional system in social roles, the concept of griya has always been associated with the priesthood (brahamana). A griya is where priests (pedanda in Balinese) used to abide in, where any priesthood activities—especially literary—were held inside. On the other hand, a puri is associated with a place where ksatria or a group of noblemen used to live in. They also had a particular activity related to literature. This difference would definitely constitute the literary characters and genres which developed each scriptorium. We can roughly assume that the types or genres of literary works developed in a griya were adjusted to the needs of the priest group. Textual genres, such as tutur, mantra, babad, or stories about a figure of priest, or even texts on ethical codes in priesthood, were developed in griya’s. Meanwhile, the literary genres, such as kakawin, kidung, laws, ethics, and babad or history about kings’ genealogy, were developed customarily in puri’s. This division was maybe significant to explain the functions of these texts. By considering the substance of Uttaraśabda which is about religious speculation and ritual manual, it would have been appropriate if such a text was developed in a griya. Its function can be related to priesthood religious activities. Nevertheless, that text was also living in a puri. The question remains: why did a tutur text, like Uttaraśabda, also exist in a ksatria circle? What was its necessity? This problem should be further investigated. This problem will be adjourned for a while by considering that the exemplars of K 6527 and K 6538 have not been physically accessed.

3.2 Dating problems Uttaraśabda manuscripts of Balinese traditions are not as old as those of Javanese. The dates in these manuscripts could be acquired from internal information, which is the colophon. However, lontar Pusdok was the only manuscript that has dating information in its colophon. We have not found any such information from K 247 and also K 1525. These manuscripts were recorded in the list of the Kirtya Liefrick-Van der Tuuk manuscript collection which was published in 1948. Consequently, it could be predicted that both manuscripts were produced at the beginning of the 20th century. The copies of both manuscripts were also produced in the early 1960s through Proyek Tik which was conceived by Christiaan Hooykaas and Kětut Sangka. Meanwhile, the Uttaraśabda text in lontar Pusdok was already completely inscribed by 19th November 1988, coincided with the birthday of Goddess Saraswati (piodalan Saras- wati): Saniscara Umanis, wuku Watugunung, in 1910 Śaka. According to Hindu-Balinese traditions, any kinds of literary activities, either reading or writing, were not allowed from sunrise to sunset. During this time, people gave some offerings in front of literary works, such as palm-leaf manuscripts (lontar). The purpose of this ritual was to wish for the blessings of science from Sarasvati—who was believed as the protector of art and science—that would be descended into the literary works. Any literary activities would be permitted again after the sunset in the evening. Literary texts would be read during the night. Thus, why was lontar Pusdok finalised during the celebration of piodalan Saraswati? When was the exact time it was finished if any literary activities were not allowed until the sunset? If the writers of this manuscript revered to the tradition, there is a possibility that the manuscript was finalised a day before the celebration. The expression “wus puput sinurat” 535 (has already been inscribed) can be interpreted as on the celebratory day, and the manuscript was finalised and existed.

4 CONCLUSION: TUTUR IN TWO TRADITIONS

According to the previous explanations, besides evidence which has already been discovered, it could be concluded that Uttaraśabda of Javanese traditions was older than of Balinese traditions. In Java, Uttaraśabda was developed approximately at the end of the 17th century, in the religious circles living in the serene of a mountain area. Afterwards, the Uttaraśabda tradition seemed to have stopped, and its manuscripts were not found outside of Merapi- Merbabu scriptoria. However, if we pay a closer attention to the text, there are a lot of elements which could also be found in suluk texts of Javanese Islam mysticism traditions. The use of simile expres- sions (tamsil) concerning God-and-human relationship can support these arguments. We may know that the depiction of the relationship between fish (humans) and water (God) in Uttaraśabda could also be found in Sěrat Sastra Gěn ing by Sultan Agung of Mataram. Moreover, the relationship between shadow puppets (wayang) and its puppet master (dalang) was very popular in suluk texts (see Zoetmulder, 1991). It is no wonder that Raden Mas Samsi, the writer of the copied manuscript CS 78, also named Uttaraśabda as Suluk Lon ang, even though these words do not exist inside the text. When we read it briefly, we would come up with an impression that the “horizon of expectation” of its copier was directed to Suluk Lon ang. In his view, both works share many similarities. An intertextual analysis will poten- tially reveal these problems. The textual connection between two literary genres, i.e. tutur and suluk, will rise up as the gain of those attempts. Meanwhile, in Balinese traditions, Uttaraśabda was developed in the early of the 20th century, although we could not really identify the precise time. Was the movement of this text from Javanese traditions to Balinese traditions related to Dhang Hyang Nirartha who went to Bali after the widespread of Islamic influence to eastern part of Java in the 16th century? There has not been any clue yet. However, when van der Tuuk was living in North Bali for a long period in the second half of the 19th century and collecting hundreds of palm-leaf manuscripts from many Balinese people for his lexicography projects, there was no palm-leaf manuscript entitled Uttaraśabda or Partha Ajñān․aśura (see Brandes, 1901–26). In reality, three of five manuscripts come from North Bali. Therefore, it is possible that Uttaraśabda was brought into Bali, and obtained its proponents, at the beginning of the 20th century, or as late as the last 19th century. In present time, Balinese people recognise Uttaraśabda as the tutur text. Thus, it is still ongoing research that needs more data to solve any problems internally. An in-depth analysis on this text—specifically on its dynamic structure, function, and dissemination—will give a thorough depiction about how a religious text was read and accepted in a specific society, specific time, and space. The understanding of its dynamics will open up new perspectives about how Indonesian people—especially in Java and Bali— comprehended the religious way and other related discourses of it.

REFERENCES

Acri, A. (2011) Dharma Patañjala: A Saiva Scripture from Ancient Java, Studied in the Light of Related Old Javanese and Sanskrit Texts. [Ph.D. Dissertation] Leiden University. Barthes, R. (1987) Theory of the text. In: Robert Young (ed.) Untying the Text: A Post-Structuralist Reader. London & New York, Routledge & Kegan Paul. Behrend, T.E. (1993) Manuscripts production in nineteenth-century Java. Codicology and the writing of Javanese literary history. In: Bijdragen tot de Taal-,Land en Volkenkunde, 149 (3), 407–37. Behrend, T.E. (1998) Katalog Induk Naskah-naskah Nusantara Jilid 4 Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia (The Main Catalogue of Archipelago Manuscripts of the 4th edition of the National Library of the Republic of Indonesia). Jakarta, Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

536 Brandes, J.L.A. (1901–26). Beschrijving der Javaansche, Balineesch en Sasaksche Handschriften aangetrof- fen in de Natalenschap van Dr. H.N. van der Tuuk, en door hem vermaakt aan de Leidsche Universiteits- bibliotheek, 4. Batavia, Landsdrukkerij. Cohen Stuart, A.B. (1872) Eerste vervolg catalogus der Bibliotheek en Catalogus der Maleische, Javaansche en Kawi Handschriften van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen. Batavia, Bruining & Wijt; s’Gravenhage, Nijhoff. Ensiklopedi Indonesia, vol. 4. (1992) Jakarta, PT. Ichtiar Baru—Van Hoeve. Goedenleer. 7 L 49. Palm-leaves, Buda script. Jakarta, Perpustakaan Nasional RI. Gunning, J.G.H. (1903) Bharāta-Yuddha: Oudjavaansch Heldendicht. ‘s-Gravenhage, Nijhoff. Kern, H. (1900) Rāmāyan․a, Oudjavaansch Heldendicht. ‘s-Gravenhage, Nijhoff. Molen, W. van der. (2011) Kritik Teks Jawa: Sebuah Pemandangan Umum dan Pendekatan Baru yang Diterapkan kepada Kunjarakarna (Javanese Text Critiques: A General Perspective and New Approach Applied to Kunjarakarna), Achadiati Ikram (trans.). Jakarta, Yayasan Obor Indonesia. Noorduyn, J & A. Teeuw. (2009) Tiga Pesona Sunda Kuna (Three Charms of Ancient Sunda), Hersri Setiawan (trans.). Jakarta, Pustaka Jaya. Oettarasabda. 1 L 334. Palm-leaves, Buda script. Jakarta, Perpustakaan Nasional RI. Oettarasabda. 33 L 225. Palm-leaves, Buda script. Jakarata, Perpustakaan Nasional RI. Palguna, IBM D. (1999) Dharma Śūnya: Memuja dan Meneliti Śīwa (Dharma Śūnya: Worshipping and Researching Śīwa). Denpasar, Yayasan Dharma Sastra. Parimbon Arabisch, Javaansch en Soendasch. 6 L 46. Palm-leaves, Buda script. Jakarta, Perpustakaan Nasional RI. Partha Ajñān․aśura. K 247/IIIb/9. Palm-leaves, Balinese script. Singaraja, Gedong Kirtya. Pemerintah Kabupaten Buleleng. (2011) Buku Katalog Salinan Lontar UPTD Gedong Kirtya (A Catalogue Book of the Palm-Leaf Copy of UPTD Gedong Kirtya). Singaraja, Dinas Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata Kabupaten Buleleng. Pigeaud, Th. (1924) De Tantu Panggělaran: Een Oud-Javaansch Prozageschrift, uitgegeven, vertald en toegelicht. ‘s-Gravenhage, H.L. Smits. Pigeaud, Th. (1967) Literature of Java: Catalogue Raisonné of Javanese Manuscripts in the Library of the University of Leiden and Other Public Collections in the Netherlands, Volume I: Synopsis of Javanese Literature 900–1900 AD. The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff. Poerbatjaraka, R.Ng. (1933) Lijst der Javaansche handschriften in de boekerij van het kon. Bat. Genootschap, Jaarboek Bataviaasch Genootschap 1, 269–376. Proudfoot, I. (2007) Reconstructing the Těnggěr Calendar. In: Bijdragen tot de Taal-,Land en Volkenkunde, 163 (1), 123–33. Ricklefs, M.C. (1978) Modern Javanese Historical Tradition: A Study of an Original Kartasura Chronicle and Related Materials. London, School of Oriental and African Studies University of London. Sěrat Oettara-sabda. 1 L 170. Palm-leaves, Buda script. Jakarta, Perpustakaan Nasional RI. Setyawati, K., Wiryamartana, K., & Molen, W. van der (2002) Katalog Naskah Merapi-Merbabu Per- pustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia (The Merapi-Merbabu Manuscript Catalogue of the National Library of the Republic of Indonesia). Yogyakarta & Leiden, Penerbitan Universitas Sanata Dharma & Opleiding Talen en Culturen van Zuidoost-Azië en Oceanië Universitiet Leiden. Soebadio, H. (1971) Jñānasiddhānta. The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff. [Bibliotheca Indonesica 7]. Swellengrebel, J. (1966) In memoriam Dr. Roelof Goris (with a bibliography by R.S. Karni). Bijdragen tot de Taal-,Land en Volkenkunde,122 (2), 205–28. Uttara Sabda Amrěta. K1525/IIIb/36. Palm-leaves, Balinese script. Singaraja, Gedong Kirtya. Uttara Sabda Amrěta. T/xxiv/5/Dokbud. Palm-leaves, Balinese script. Denpasar, Pusat Dokumentasi Budaya Bali. Wiryamartana, I.K. & Molen, W. van der (2001) The Merapi-Merbabu manuscripts: A neglected collection. In: Bijdragen tot de Taal-,Land en Volkenkunde, 157 (1), 51–64. Wiryamartana, I.K. (1984) Filologi Jawa dan kuñjarakarna prosa (Javanese philology and kuñjarakarna prose), Basis, 33, 255–72. Wiryamartana, I.K. (1990) Ajunawiwāha: Transformasi Teks Jawa Kuna Lewat Tanggapan dan Penciptaan di Lingkungan Sastra Jawa (Ajunawiwāha: Ancient Javanese Text Transformation through Responses and Creation in the Javanese Literary Environment). Yogyakarta, Duta Wacana University Press. [ILDEP]. Zoetmulder, P.J. (1991) Manunggaling Kawula Gusti: Pantheisme dan Monisme dalam Sastra Suluk Jawa (Manunggaling Kawula Gusti: Pantheism and Monism in Javanese Suluk Literature), Dick Hartoko (trans). Jakarta, Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

537