Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde Vol. 167, no. 2-3 (2011), pp. 322-332 URL: http://www.kitlv-journals.nl/index.php/btlv URN:NBN:NL:UI:10-1-101394 Copyright: content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License ISSN: 0006-2294 DICK VAN DER MEIJ Kakawin Sutasoma and Kakawin Nāgara Kr�tāgama Kate O’Brien, Sutasoma: The ancient tale of a Buddha-Prince from 14th century Java by the poet Mpu Tantular. A translation in English and study by Kate O’Brien based on the transcription of a manu- script in the Old Javanese language collected and arranged by P.J. Zoetmulder. Bangkok: Orchid Press, 2009, x + 332 pp. ISBN: 9789745241077. Price: USD 80.95 (hardback). Mpu Tantular, Kakawin Sutasoma. Penerjemah: Dwi Woro Retno Mastuti dan Hastho Bramantyo. Depok: Komunitas Bambu, 2009, xxiv + 539 pp. ISBN 9793731559. Price: IDR 85,000 (paperback). Cok Sawitri, Sutasoma. Jakarta: Kakilangit Kencana, 2009, 467 pp. ISBN 9786028556132. Price: IDR 55,000 (paperback). I Ketut Riana, Kakawin Dēśa Warn�nana uthawi Nāgara Kr�tāgama: Masa keemasan Majapahit. Jakarta: Penerbit Buku Kompas, 2009, xxiv + 483 pp. ISBN 9789797098. Price: IDR 85,000 (paperback). Center for the Study of Religion and Culture Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, Jakarta [email protected] There are many forms of literature in Bali. Unfortunately, many of them are virtually ignored by Indonesian and international scholarship alike. Tradi- tional poetic forms such as geguritan and especially kidung receive precious little attention; the number of edited and translated geguritan can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and the same holds true of kidung (the last edition being the Tantri Kediri by Soekatno). This is a pity, as the literary division usually made between these texts based on their metric intricacies does not necessarily reflect literary practices in Bali, where geguritan, kidung and kakawin are seen in a pulsating continuum rather than as distinct literary products in need of distinct study and appreciation. Far outnumbering editions of geguritan and kidung, kakawin come out favourably. With the three books discussed here, no less than six kakawin ‘editions’ have seen the light in the last 15 years, the other Downloaded from Brill.com09/26/2021 11:54:30PM via free access Review essays 323 three being the Kakawin Pārthāyan�a (Creese 1990), Kakawin Bhomāntaka (Teeuw and Robson 2004), and Kakawin Arjuna Wiwāha (Robson 2008). Interestingly, the number of Indonesian scholars versed in a local language other than their own is small and they mostly only study local literatures from their own re- gion (usually in some sort of government paid project or other). This is espe- cially so for Balinese geguritan, whereas kakawin, probably because they are considered beautiful and difficult, have entered the world of international, including Indonesian, scholarship much more frequently. Another trend worth noting is that the philological tradition seems to be changing. Rather than painstakingly comparing all the available manuscripts of a text, nowadays a limited choice is made between them and the other manuscripts are ignored. The books under discussion use almost no philol- ogy at all. Both editions of the Sutasoma are based on already existing trans- literations, and the Nāgara Kr�tāgama edition has not been made on the basis of manuscript comparisons. This means that despite the availability of many catalogues of manuscripts, this has not led to greater use of manuscripts! In the kakawin world, this trend was already in evidence in the text editions of the Kakawin Bhomāntaka (2004) and the Kakawin Arjuna Wiwāha, where small numbers of manuscripts were used and the choice of which was moreover insufficiently explained (Van der Meij 2006, 2009). There are two versions of the Sutasoma, one consisting of 147 and the other 148 cantos. O’Brien mentions this in note 18 to the introduction, but it remains unclear what has happened. O’Brien has not used any manuscripts, but relied on an anonymous transliteration made for and probably under the critical eyes of Prof. Piet (not Peter) Zoetmulder, and no information is provided on which original manuscript was consulted (p. x, 4). Mastutu/ Bramantyo used the transliteration made by Soewito Santoso, which has 148 cantos, as does the Balinese version published by the Dinas Pendidikan Dasar, Propinsi Daerah Tingkat Satu, Bali which, characteristically, does not mention its manuscript source. O’Brien provides the translation of the extra canto at cantos 124a and 124b. Both editors of the Sutasoma fail to provide a justification for their choice of ‘manuscript’ and also do not mention why they refrained from using any other manuscripts. Perhaps we should read in this light O’Brien’s remarks that ‘the philological aspects of the original text lay outside the parameters of my study’ (p. 7). Neither O’Brien nor Mastuti/Bramantyo mention the existence of the Balinese Dinas version, and they pay precious little attention to manuscripts to begin with. They gloss over national (Indonesian National Library, Library of the University of Indonesia) and international manuscript collections (especially that of Leiden University Library) that contain manuscripts of the Sutasoma, and collections on Bali have also been ignored completely. That manuscripts are also kept in private collections, as can easily be seen from the Downloaded from Brill.com09/26/2021 11:54:30PM via free access 324 Review essays ‘Proyek Tik’, has also escaped attention, as this project has again been com- pletely ignored. Incidentally, neither O’Brien nor Mastuti/Bramantyo show what these manuscripts look like. Photographs of the entire manuscript Riana used are added at the end of his book, but one would need a magnifying glass to consult them because of the size of the illustrated lontar leaves. Kakawin and kakawin meters Kakawin are Old Javanese poems in Indian or Indian derived meters. Many are considered adaptations of Indian sources, thus causing scholars to turn much of their attention to the Indian subcontinent for information and to look for the ‘original sources’ of the kakawin. This is, however, only true for ka- kawin that stem from ancient Java, most of which have been preserved in Bali. Famous kakawin of this category include the Kakawin Rāmāyan�a, Bharatayud- dha, Arjuna Wiwāha, Bhomāntaka, Smaradahana, Gat�otkacāśraya, Śiwarātrikalpa, Sumanasāntaka, and the Sutasoma and Nāgarakr�tāgama kakawin discussed here. We should bear in mind that in the past many kakawin have been composed on Bali (see Creese 1999), and the last couple of years have seen a proliferation of new kakawin production (Van der Meij 2006). Despite Bali’s crucial role in the preservation of old kakawin and in the pro- duction of new ones, the role of the Balinese is usually not given the importance it deserves, and the present books do not tell differently. It is remarkable that kakawin are often seen in the light of what they can teach us about the history and literary conventions of ancient Java, or about their relations to Indian ‘originals’, rather than considered part of past and present elements of Balinese culture (see especially Creese 1999; Van der Meij 2006, 2009; Acri 2010). Notwithstanding the fact that kakawin have come down to us thanks to the many activities of the Balinese, their understanding of the contents of kakawin and their practices of the use of these texts have still been insufficiently studied. For instance, no study has yet been conducted about the kakawin maarti texts from Bali, where manuscripts contain both the Old Javanese texts and surrounding Balinese glosses. These texts might teach us much of the Old Javanese textual traditions on Bali and about the way Balinese knowledge of Old Javanese changed over time. Incidentally, the modern computer-produced bilingual Old-Javanese – Balinese editions are also worth studying in this context. Let us start with some general remarks on the books first, before we turn to matters of translation and presentation. Kakawin meters are usually not indicated in the manuscripts and to decipher the meters used is not easy. O’Brien and Mastuti/Bramantyo pay virtually no attention to this aspect, if any at all, and do not present the meters of the individual cantos. O’Brien indicates the meters in the samples of the Old Javanese text she presents in Downloaded from Brill.com09/26/2021 11:54:30PM via free access Review essays 325 Appendix 1. It would have helped the readers’ appreciation of the literary value of the Sutasoma if more information about kakawin had been added. The meters used in the Sutasoma are not difficult to find. The bilingual, two- volume Old-Javanese-Balinese edition of the Sutasoma in Balinese script mentioned above provides a neat list of the meters used, and if this edition were unavailable, Zoetmulder has also provided the meters in his Kalangwan (English edition, 1974, Indonesian edition 1983). Riana differs from O’Brien and Mastuti/Bramantyo by providing the names and the structures of the meters in the Nāgara Kr�tāgama and in which cantos they are used. The Old Javanese texts of the Sutasoma O’Brien explains that she had hoped to present the story without the ‘bur- den of annexing the Old Javanese text’ (p. 7.). Now, I also used to think that a translation should be enough, and that it is unnecessary to add an almost inaccessible text in an almost unknown language. I find that my ideas on this have changed over time, and I dearly missed the Old Javanese. She decided to omit the Old Javanese because her book is not concerned with the philological aspects of the original text. This remark gives rise to various questions. How can one hope to translate an Old Javanese text, based on one transcript, with- out being constantly ‘burdened’ by inconsistencies in spelling and uncertain- ties about specific readings and without being involved in some sort of philo- logical exercise? That there is no Old Javanese text also makes it difficult (for experts) to appreciate her translation.