Oleh: Marsigit
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Duduk Sendiri:
Aku duduk di sini. Maka aku yang telah mengaku sebagai orang tua berambut putih serta merta aku menyadari bahwa ketika aku duduk di sini, aku menjumpai ada aku yang duduk di sini, aku merasakan ada duduk dan aku mengerti ada di sini. Tetapi serta merta pula jika yang demikian aku renungkan maka aku menyadari ada diri yang bukan aku, ada diri yang sedang tidak duduk dan ada diri yang di sana. Kalau aku perjelas refleksiku itu maka aku menemukan bahwa aku yang duduk di sini menyebabkan ada yang bukan aku yang tidak duduk di sini maupun yang duduk di sana. Aku terkejut karena aku menemukan bahwa ada aku yang tidak duduk di sini, dan ada diri yang bukan aku duduk di sini. Padahal aku telah mengaku bahwa aku duduk di sisini. Maka aku bertanya siapakah aku yang tidak duduk di sini, dan siapakah diri bukan aku yang duduk di sini. Pertanyaan itu ternyata dapat saya lanjutkan, siapakah aku yang duduk di sini dan siapakah aku yang tidak duduk di sini? Saya juga bisa bertanya siapakah aku yang duduk di sini dan siapakah bukan aku yang duduk di sini? Ternyata pertanyaan itu menyebabkan pertanyaanku yang berikutnya. Kalau begitu apakah ada aku yang bukan aku, duduk yang tidak duduk, di sini tetapi tidak di sini?. Aku menjadi teringat dengan pepatah jawa “ngono ning ojo ngono”. Apakah ada ngono yang bukan ngono, dan ojo ning bukan ojo? Kalau orang jawa saja sejak nenek moyang sudah mempunyai ngono ning ojo ngono, maka enehkah jika sekarang aku bertanya aku tetapi bukan aku, duduk tetapi bukan duduk, dan di sini tetapi bukan di sini? Kalau ini masih dianggap aneh maka sesungguhnyalah kita telah kehilangan dan tidak mampu memahamiwarisan leluhur.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih (pertama) Bertemu Dengan Orang Tua Berambut Putih Yang Lain (kedua):
Orang Tua Berambut Putih kedua:
Salam. Sesungguhnyalah aku mengikuti segala yang engkau pikirkan. Akulah mungkin aku yang bukan dirimu. Kemudian engkau mungkin bertanya apakah aku itulah yang tidak duduk di sini, atau apakah akulah yang duduk di sana, atau apakah akulah yang tidak duduk di sana? Tetapi setidaknya engkau telah berkata bahwa aku duduk di sini. Maka aku pun kemudian bertanya siapakah yang engkau maksud sebagai aku yang duduk di sini? Siapakah yang engkau maksud sebagai bukan aku yang duduk di sini? Siapakah yang engkau maksud aku yang tidak duduk di sini? Siapakah yang engkau maksud aku yang duduk di sana? Siapakah yang engkau maksud aku yang tidak duduk di sana? Siapakah yang engkau maksud bukan aku yang tidak duduk di sana?
Orang Tua berambut Putih Pertama:
Salam kembali. Sesungguhnya pula aku juga menyadari bahwa engkau yang bukan aku telah mengetahui pikiranku sedari awal. Namun ketahuilah bahwa sebenar-benar yang terjadi bahwa aku juga mengerti tentang pikiranmu sedari awal seawal-awalnya. Maka aku juga ingin bertanya mengapa engkau bertanya tentang aku yang duduk di sini? Padahal engkau tahu bahwa aku telah duduk di sini dan engkau yang bukan aku juga duduk di sini. Jadi sebetulnya siapakah engkau yang duduk di sini? Apakah engkau yang tidak duduk di sini? Apakah engkau juga duduk tidak di sini? Apakah engkau juga tidak duduk tidak di sini?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Kedua:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku telah mengerti bahwa engkau akan mengajukan pertanyaan seperti itu, tetapi aku ragu apakah aku mengerti atau tidak mengerti jawabanmu.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku juga telah mengerti bahwa engkau akan memberi komentar seperti itu, tetapi aku ragu apakah aku mengerti atau tidak mengerti komentarmu.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Kedua:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku juga telah mengerti bahwa engkau akan memberi komentar seperti itu, tetapi aku ragu apakah aku mengerti atau tidak mengerti komentarmu.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama:
Mengapa engkau selalu menirukanku?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Kedua:
Mengapa engka selalu menirukanku?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama:
Kalau begitu apa maumu?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Kedua:
Kalau begitu apa maumu?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Ketiga Menjumpai Ada Dua Orang Berambut Putih Berkelahi:
Wahai para orang tua. Mengapa sesama orang tua seperti engkau berdua saling berhantam? Apa kau pikir yang ada di sini cuma engkau berdua? Sebenar-benar yang terjadi adalah bahwa aku telah mengerti pikiranmu berdua sedari awal. Apakah engkau berdua tidak mengerti bahwa sedari awal aku telah duduk di sini bersamamu? Maka apalah gunanya mengapa engkau saling bertengkar? Bukankah saling bertukar pikiran itu lebih baik dari pada berkelahi.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama dan Kedua Secara bersama-sama menjawab:
Sesungguhnya pula aku juga menyadari bahwa engkau yang bukan aku telah mengetahui pikiranku berdua sedari awal. Namun ketahuilah bahwa sebenar-benar yang terjadi bahwa aku berdua juga mengerti tentang pikiranmu sedari awal seawal-awalnya. Maka aku berdua juga ingin bertanya mengapa engkau bertanya tentang aku berdua yang duduk di sini? Padahal engkau tahu bahwa aku berdua telah duduk di sini dan engkau yang bukan aku berdua juga duduk di sini. Jadi sebetulnya siapakah engkau yang duduk di sini? Apakah engkau juga tidak duduk di sini? Apakah engkau juga duduk tidak di sini? Apakah engkau juga tidak duduk tidak di sini?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Ketiga:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku telah mengerti bahwa engkau berdua akan mengajukan pertanyaan seperti itu, tetapi aku ragu apakah aku mengerti atau tidak mengerti jawabanmu berdua.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama dan Kedua Secara bersama-sama menjawab:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku berdua juga telah mengerti bahwa engkau akan memberi komentar seperti itu, tetapi aku berdua ragu apakah aku berdua mengerti atau tidak mengerti komentarmu.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Ketiga:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku juga telah mengerti bahwa engkau berdua akan memberi komentar seperti itu, tetapi aku ragu apakah aku mengerti atau tidak mengerti komentarmu berdua.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama dan Kedua Secara bersama-sama menjawab:
Mengapa engkau selalu menirukanku?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Ketiga:
Mengapa engkau selalu menirukanku?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama dan Kedua Secara bersama-sama menjawab:
Kalau begitu apa maumu?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Ketiga:
Kalau begitu apa maumu?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Keempat Menjumpai Ada Tiga Orang Berambut Putih Berkelai:
Wahai para orang tua. Mengapa sesama orang tua seperti engkau bertiga saling berhantam? Apa kau pikir yang ada di sini cuma engkau bertiga? Sebenar-benar yang terjadi adalah bahwa aku telah mengerti pikiranmu bertiga sedari awal. Apakah engkau bertiga tidak mengerti bahwa sedari awal aku telah duduk di sini bersamamu? Maka apalah gunanya mengapa engkau saling bertengkar? Bukankah saling bertukar pikiran itu lebih baik dari pada berkelahi.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama, Kedua dan Ketiga Secara bersama-sama menjawab:
Sesungguhnya pula aku juga menyadari bahwa engkau yang bukan aku telah mengetahui pikiranku berdua sedari awal. Namun ketahuilah bahwa sebenar-benar yang terjadi bahwa aku bertiga juga mengerti tentang pikiranmu sedari awal seawal-awalnya. Maka aku bertiga juga ingin bertanya mengapa engkau bertanya tentang aku bertiga yang duduk di sini? Padahal engkau tahu bahwa aku bertiga telah duduk di sini dan engkau yang bukan aku bertiga juga duduk di sini. Jadi sebetulnya siapakah engkau yang duduk di sini? Apakah engkau juga tidak duduk di sini? Apakah engkau juga duduk tidak di sini? Apakah engkau juga tidak duduk tidak di sini?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Keempat:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku telah mengerti bahwa engkau bertiga akan mengajukan pertanyaan seperti itu, tetapi aku ragu apakah aku mengerti atau tidak mengerti jawabanmu bertiga.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama, Kedua dan Ketiga Secara bersama-sama menjawab:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku bertiga juga telah mengerti bahwa engkau akan memberi komentar seperti itu, tetapi aku bertiga ragu apakah aku bertiga mengerti atau tidak mengerti komentarmu.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Keempat:
Sesungguh-sungguhnya aku juga telah mengerti bahwa engkau bertiga akan memberi komentar seperti itu, tetapi aku ragu apakah aku mengerti atau tidak mengerti komentarmu bertiga.
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama, Kedua dan Ketiga Secara bersama-sama menjawab:
Mengapa engkau selalu menirukanku?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Keempat:
Mengapa engkau selalu menirukanku?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Pertama, Kedua dan Ketiga Secara bersama-sama menjawab:
Kalau begitu apa maumu?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Keempat:
Kalau begitu apa maumu?
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Kelima Menjumpai Ada Empat Orang Berambut Putih Berkelahi:
.....
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Keseribu Menjumpai Ada Sembilan Ratus Sembilan Puluh Sembilan Orang Tua Berambut Putih Berkelai.
.....
Orang Tua Berambut Putih Ke-n Menjumpai Ada n-1 Orang Berambut Putih Berkelahi:
.....
Ada diri yang bukan mereka menjumpai mereka berkelahi:
Aku sendiri tidak tahu siapakah diriku. Apakah diriku itu diriku atau bukan diriku. Aku juga tidak tahu apakah diriku adalah satu dari mereka? Aku juga tidak tahu apakah aku tahu pikiran mereka sedari awal? Aku juga tidak tahu apakah aku duduk? Aku juga tidak tahu apakah aku di sini atau tidak di sini? Aku tidak tahu apakah mereka mengetahui pikiranku sedari awal. Aku tidak tahu apakah mereka tahu atau tidak tahu aku di sini atau tidak di sini, aku duduk atau aku tidak duduk? Aku tidak tahu apakah yang akan mereka tanyakan? Aku tidak tahu apakah yang mereka akan komentari. Aku tidak tahu apakah mereka akan selalu menirukanku? Aku tidak tahu apakah aku akan selalu menirukannya. Aku tidak tahu apakah aku juga akan berkelahi atau tidak akan berkelahi dengan mereka? Aku tidak tahu apakah jika aku berkelahi dengan mereka maka akan ada diri yang bukan diriku dan bukan diri mereka yang juga mengetahui pikiranku dan pikiran mereka sedari awal? Itulah sebenar-benar bahwa aku tidaklah mengatahui siapakah diriku itu. Tetapi aku mengetahui bahwa setidaknya aku bisa mengucapkan kalimatku yang terakhir. Maka akupun tidak tahu apakah itu batas ku yang ingin ku gapai. Artinya aku tidak bisa menjawab apakah aku bisa menggapai batasku.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Friday, January 2, 2009
The Metaphysic of Science
To be reviewed from many sources by Marsigit
Steven Kreis , 2001 in his Lectures on Modern European Intellectual History elaborated Giambattista Vico position in his “The New Science (1725)” some notions of the ontology and or metaphysic of science. Accordingly, Vico, G (1725) stated that Science or metaphysic, studying the common nature of nations in the light of divine providence, discovers the origins of divine and human institutions among the gentile nations, and thereby establishes a system of he natural law of the gentes, which proceeds with the greatest equality and constancy through the three ages which the Egyptians handed down to us as the three periods through which the world has passed up to their time; these are (1) The age of the gods, in which the gentiles believed they lived under divine governments, and everything was commanded them by auspices and oracles, which are the oldest institutions in profane history. (2) The age of the heroes, in which they reigned everywhere in aristocratic commonwealths, on account of a certain superiority of nature which they held themselves to have over the plebs. (3) The age of men, in which all men recognized themselves as equal in human nature, and therefore there were established first the popular commonwealths and then the monarchies, both of which are forms of human government.
Next, Vico (1725), as cited by Kreis (2001) indicated that peoples who have reached the point of premeditated malice, when they receive this last remedy of providence and are thereby stunned and brutalized, are sensible no longer of comforts, delicacies, pleasures, and pomp, but only of the sheer necessities of life. And the few survivors in the midst of an abundance of the things necessary for life naturally become sociable and, returning to the primitive simplicity of the first world of peoples, are again religious, truthful, and faithful; thus providence brings back among them the piety, faith, and truth which are the natural foundations of justice as well as the graces and beauties of the eternal order of God.
Meanwhile, Thales (1999) in SAINTS argued that there is no reason why modern religion shouldn't incorporate the latest discoveries of Psychical Research or Metaphysics; from the time of Aristotle (300 BCE) to the time of Galileo (1600 CE), nearly 2000 years, the worldview, the background of all thought, was that of Aristotle and Ptolemy. It made a large distinction between the heavens (i.e. stars, the moon, the sun, and the planets) and earth. Earth was made of four elements, earth, air, fire, and water, and was mutable and perishable. The heavenly bodies were made of a fifth element (quintessence) which was immutable, imperishable and eternal. Thus, the correct translation of this metaphor is "realm of the imperishable," or "realm of the quintessence."
Thales said that it is not unusual for religions to begin with the mystical teachings of the founder to a small circle of disciples; as the religion develops it is not unusual for it to absorb elements from other religions over the centuries (syncretism) and to incorporate fantastic fairy tales, which may incorporate some symbolic truth (mythology). According to him, the religions who gave up worldly concerns and went off into the desert as seekers of the illumination of fire often succeeded, and when they returned to the world (or when the world came to them), they were not only holy and wise, but they also had "miraculous" powers, such as healing, or walking on water. The miracles of one age are the science of the next. The age of faith passes, and the age of spiritual science begins.
Bryan Appleyard, 1992, in “Understanding the Present: Science and the Soul of Modern Man” clarified that Western science is not simply a neutral method of acquiring knowledge but that it is ‘a metaphysic like any other.’; the foundations of this metaphysic were laid by Galileo, for his discovery was that one of the most effective ways of understanding the world ‘is to pretend that we do not exist.’ He, further indicated that it is the history of science in which he traces the development of physics from Plato and Aristotle through Thomas Aquinas to Galileo, Descartes and Newton and their modern descendants; modern science gradually emerges not as the embodiment of reason but as a form of worldly mysticism whose zeal for accumulating knowledge about the inanimate and the non-human, and whose ‘rational’ commitment to technological power and material wealth has almost completely obscured its radical anti-humanism.
However, Appleyard, B., (1992), pointed out that the contradictions between science and religion are absolutely and irresolvable conflict; he, then stated that the most obvious problem here is that Islam developed directly out of the Judaeo-Christian tradition and shares much of its world-view with Judaism – whose prophets Muslims revere. On the other hand, according to him, at the same time modern science was the almost exclusive creation of zealous Christians who were seeking not to escape their faith but to confirm and magnify it. Descartes, Newton and Robert Boyle, to name but three representative figures, all believed they had triumphantly succeeded through their science in bearing witness to the majesty and rationality of God.
Appleyard, B., (1992), explained that one reaction to the failure to escape is for us all to throw up our hands and loudly proclaim our belief in the reality and complexity of the human soul in the hope that by doing so we can triumph over science; while, the other reaction is to think more carefully, more sensitively and more systematically about the very aspects of human reality which science has traditionally neglected. He, then concluded that only if we do this is it possible that our intellectual culture may yet triumph over its own history, and over the spiritual extremism which shaped modern rationalism and bequeathed to us a contempt for the ‘human element’ whose religious origins we too readily forget.
REFERENCE
Appleyard, B., 1992, “Understanding The Present: Science And The Soul Of Modern Man”: Picador
Giambattista Vico in Kreis, S., 2001, “The New Science: Lectures On Modern European Intellectual History”, The History Guide
Iranzo, V., 1995, “ Epistemic Values In Science” : Sorites
Katz, M, 2004, “Value Science Can Change The World (And Be Changed By It)” : Cristina Lafont
Meer, J.M.V.D., 1995, “The Struggle Between Christian Theism,
Metaphysical Naturalism And Relativism: How To Proceed In Science?”, Ontarion: Pascal Centre, Redeemer College
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.,
Wilson, F.L., 1999, “Plato, Science And Human Values”, Rochester Institute Of Technology: Physics Teacher.Org
Steven Kreis , 2001 in his Lectures on Modern European Intellectual History elaborated Giambattista Vico position in his “The New Science (1725)” some notions of the ontology and or metaphysic of science. Accordingly, Vico, G (1725) stated that Science or metaphysic, studying the common nature of nations in the light of divine providence, discovers the origins of divine and human institutions among the gentile nations, and thereby establishes a system of he natural law of the gentes, which proceeds with the greatest equality and constancy through the three ages which the Egyptians handed down to us as the three periods through which the world has passed up to their time; these are (1) The age of the gods, in which the gentiles believed they lived under divine governments, and everything was commanded them by auspices and oracles, which are the oldest institutions in profane history. (2) The age of the heroes, in which they reigned everywhere in aristocratic commonwealths, on account of a certain superiority of nature which they held themselves to have over the plebs. (3) The age of men, in which all men recognized themselves as equal in human nature, and therefore there were established first the popular commonwealths and then the monarchies, both of which are forms of human government.
Next, Vico (1725), as cited by Kreis (2001) indicated that peoples who have reached the point of premeditated malice, when they receive this last remedy of providence and are thereby stunned and brutalized, are sensible no longer of comforts, delicacies, pleasures, and pomp, but only of the sheer necessities of life. And the few survivors in the midst of an abundance of the things necessary for life naturally become sociable and, returning to the primitive simplicity of the first world of peoples, are again religious, truthful, and faithful; thus providence brings back among them the piety, faith, and truth which are the natural foundations of justice as well as the graces and beauties of the eternal order of God.
Meanwhile, Thales (1999) in SAINTS argued that there is no reason why modern religion shouldn't incorporate the latest discoveries of Psychical Research or Metaphysics; from the time of Aristotle (300 BCE) to the time of Galileo (1600 CE), nearly 2000 years, the worldview, the background of all thought, was that of Aristotle and Ptolemy. It made a large distinction between the heavens (i.e. stars, the moon, the sun, and the planets) and earth. Earth was made of four elements, earth, air, fire, and water, and was mutable and perishable. The heavenly bodies were made of a fifth element (quintessence) which was immutable, imperishable and eternal. Thus, the correct translation of this metaphor is "realm of the imperishable," or "realm of the quintessence."
Thales said that it is not unusual for religions to begin with the mystical teachings of the founder to a small circle of disciples; as the religion develops it is not unusual for it to absorb elements from other religions over the centuries (syncretism) and to incorporate fantastic fairy tales, which may incorporate some symbolic truth (mythology). According to him, the religions who gave up worldly concerns and went off into the desert as seekers of the illumination of fire often succeeded, and when they returned to the world (or when the world came to them), they were not only holy and wise, but they also had "miraculous" powers, such as healing, or walking on water. The miracles of one age are the science of the next. The age of faith passes, and the age of spiritual science begins.
Bryan Appleyard, 1992, in “Understanding the Present: Science and the Soul of Modern Man” clarified that Western science is not simply a neutral method of acquiring knowledge but that it is ‘a metaphysic like any other.’; the foundations of this metaphysic were laid by Galileo, for his discovery was that one of the most effective ways of understanding the world ‘is to pretend that we do not exist.’ He, further indicated that it is the history of science in which he traces the development of physics from Plato and Aristotle through Thomas Aquinas to Galileo, Descartes and Newton and their modern descendants; modern science gradually emerges not as the embodiment of reason but as a form of worldly mysticism whose zeal for accumulating knowledge about the inanimate and the non-human, and whose ‘rational’ commitment to technological power and material wealth has almost completely obscured its radical anti-humanism.
However, Appleyard, B., (1992), pointed out that the contradictions between science and religion are absolutely and irresolvable conflict; he, then stated that the most obvious problem here is that Islam developed directly out of the Judaeo-Christian tradition and shares much of its world-view with Judaism – whose prophets Muslims revere. On the other hand, according to him, at the same time modern science was the almost exclusive creation of zealous Christians who were seeking not to escape their faith but to confirm and magnify it. Descartes, Newton and Robert Boyle, to name but three representative figures, all believed they had triumphantly succeeded through their science in bearing witness to the majesty and rationality of God.
Appleyard, B., (1992), explained that one reaction to the failure to escape is for us all to throw up our hands and loudly proclaim our belief in the reality and complexity of the human soul in the hope that by doing so we can triumph over science; while, the other reaction is to think more carefully, more sensitively and more systematically about the very aspects of human reality which science has traditionally neglected. He, then concluded that only if we do this is it possible that our intellectual culture may yet triumph over its own history, and over the spiritual extremism which shaped modern rationalism and bequeathed to us a contempt for the ‘human element’ whose religious origins we too readily forget.
REFERENCE
Appleyard, B., 1992, “Understanding The Present: Science And The Soul Of Modern Man”: Picador
Giambattista Vico in Kreis, S., 2001, “The New Science: Lectures On Modern European Intellectual History”, The History Guide
Iranzo, V., 1995, “ Epistemic Values In Science” : Sorites
Katz, M, 2004, “Value Science Can Change The World (And Be Changed By It)” : Cristina Lafont
Meer, J.M.V.D., 1995, “The Struggle Between Christian Theism,
Metaphysical Naturalism And Relativism: How To Proceed In Science?”, Ontarion: Pascal Centre, Redeemer College
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.,
Wilson, F.L., 1999, “Plato, Science And Human Values”, Rochester Institute Of Technology: Physics Teacher.Org
Ritual Mathematics
By Marsigit
In Javanese society all aspect of daily life or activities can be viewed as underpine from religious perspectives. It is not surprising that, for example, in a certain village, the people in one week get invitation to come to ritual activities for more than seven. Some of the important activities are the celebration of the 'fifth' and the 'thirty fifth' baby birthday, the ritual feast to mark some one's death in the 'seventh day', 'forthyth day', 'a hundreth day' and 'a thousanth day'. The problem is the people, specifically the man who are responsible of carrying out the ritual meal, should exactly decide that the death has long been whether seven days, forthy days, one hundreth days, or one thousand days. They do it well and they learn it for generations. The people, who are concerned about it, sometimes involves in the dialog informally to justify whether the counting the numbers of tha days is right or wrong. Most of them are relatively correct. They just use simple formula which is ussualy spoken and not ever written, e.g. 'nomosarmo', 'norosarmo', nonemsarmo', etc.
They use three kinds of numbers system at the same time : 10 based numbers system, 7 based numbers system and 5 based numbers system, in the frame work of position system. Position system for numbers was found by Indian and Javanese people knew it before the Europen because it directly was brought by Indian to Indonesia. They use Numbers System Basis 10 when they should decide the duration of time; 35 days, 40 days, 100 days and 1000 days. They use Numbers System Basis 7 (Week system) when they use the name orderly of the days : Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thuersday, Friday and Saturday. They use Numbers System Basis 5 (Dino Pasaran system) when Javanese people have been using system 'Dino Pasaran' for along time before Western system of callendar came to Indonesia. In this system there are only five days orderly in a cycle of period of time called 'Pasar'. Those are 'Legi', 'Pahing', 'Pon', 'Wage', 'Kliwon'. One day in this system is equals to one day in Week system, that is 24 hours. Thus one Dino Pasaran has five days, two Dino Pasaran has 10 days, three Dino Pasaran has 15 days, etc.
Mathematically, for all of the system numbers, the notation of numbers 'm' can be written as polynomial from 'b' such as follows : m = a0 bn-1 + a1 bn-2 + a2 bn-3 + ... + an-1 b + an
where, b is any numbers greater than 1, and a is the basis. According to this formula, we can write any number at any system using the same pattern i.e. for basis 10, basis 7 and basis 5. In Basis 10 we have the numbers : 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. In Basis 7 we have the numbers : 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
We can match the name of the day with those numbers orderly : 0 = Sunday 1 = Monday; 2 = Tuesday; 3 = Wednesday; 4 = Thuersday; 5 = Friday and 6 = Saturday. In Basis 5 we have the numbers : 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. We can match the name of the day in Dino Pasaran with those numbers orderly : 0 = Legi, 1 = Pahing, 2 = Pon, 3 = Wage, 4 = Kliwon. How can we write 35 of Basis 10 into Basis 7 ? The following is the formula 3510 = 5 x 71 + 0 x 70 = 507. How can we write 100 of Basis 10 into Basis 7 ? The formula is 10010 = 2 x 72 + 0 x 71 + 2 x 70 = 2027. How can we write 1000 of Basis 10 into Basis 7 ? The formula is 100010 = 2 x 73 + 6 x 72 + 2 x 71 + 6 x 70 = 26267
How can we write 35 of Basis 10 into Basis 5? The following is the formula 3510 = 7 x 51 + 0 x 50 = 705. How can we write 100 of Basis 10 into Basis 5? Thai is 10010 = 4 x 52 + 0 x 51 + 0 x 50 = 4005 How can we write 1000 of Basis 10 into Basis 5 ? That is 100010 = 1 x 54 + 3 x 53 + 0 x 52 + 0 x 51 + 0 x 50 = 130005
Javanese people always have two unseparated name for the day. For example : Sunda Legi, Sunday Kliwon, Monday Wage, Friday Pahing, Saturday Kliwon, Saturday Pon, etc. It is clear that the numbers of combinations is 35 names. If this day is Monday Pahing then the duration up to on the next Monday Pahing is 7 x 5 = 35 days. Thus when somebody wish to celebrate the 35 th of his son's birthday he just waiting for the next day with the same name. It is easy and he need not to do with mathematics at all in his mind. Forthyth days ritual feast to mark some one's death by transforming 4010 = 557 and 4010 = 805. Numbers 55 is ended by 5; it mean that 'the fourty days duration of time' will begin on the day i and ended on the day 5 th of Week System. Thus, if now is Sunday then forty days to come will be the fifth day from Sunday that is Thuersday. Javanese people called 'five' as 'limo' or briefly 'mo'. Number 80 is ended by 0; it mean that 'the fourty days duration of time' will begin on the day of Pasar j and ended on the day j + 0 or ended on the same day. Thus If this day is Sunday Kliwon then it will be 40 days on the next Thuersday Kliwon.
If this day is Friday Legi then it will be 40 days on the next Tuesday Legi. If this day is Wednesday Pahing then it will be 40 day on the next Sunday Pahing, etc. Javanese people just called 'no mo; sar mo' that mean : no = dino = day; mo = limo = five; and sar = Pasar = Basis 5. Thus, no mo means 'the fifth day of Week System' sar mo means 'the fifth day of Pasar System'
For one hundred days ritual feast to mark some one's death as I described that :10010 = 2027 and 10010 = 4005. Number 202 is ended by 2; its mean that 'the one hundred days duration of time' will begin on the day i and ended on the day 2 th of Week System . Thus, if now is Sunday then forty days to come will be the 2 nd day from Sunday that is Monday. Javanese people called 'two' as 'loro' or briefly 'ro'. Number 400 is ended by 0; it mean that 'the fourty days duration of time' will begin on the day of Pasar j and ended on the day j + 0 or ended on the same day. Thus If this day is Sunday Kliwon then the next 100 days will be on the next Monday Kliwon. If this day is Friday Legi then the next 100 days will be on Saturday Legi. If this day is Wednesday Pahing then the next 100 day will be on Sunday Pahing, etc. Javanese people just called 'no ro; sar mo' that mean : no = dino = day; ro = loro = dua; and sar = Pasar = Basis 5. Thus, no ro means 'the second day of Week System' sar mo means 'the fifth day of Pasar System'. One thousand days ritual feast to mark some one's death is calculated by the same way they use the formula 'no nem; sar mo' that mean 'the sixth day of Week Syatem and the fifth day of Pasar System'
In Javanese society all aspect of daily life or activities can be viewed as underpine from religious perspectives. It is not surprising that, for example, in a certain village, the people in one week get invitation to come to ritual activities for more than seven. Some of the important activities are the celebration of the 'fifth' and the 'thirty fifth' baby birthday, the ritual feast to mark some one's death in the 'seventh day', 'forthyth day', 'a hundreth day' and 'a thousanth day'. The problem is the people, specifically the man who are responsible of carrying out the ritual meal, should exactly decide that the death has long been whether seven days, forthy days, one hundreth days, or one thousand days. They do it well and they learn it for generations. The people, who are concerned about it, sometimes involves in the dialog informally to justify whether the counting the numbers of tha days is right or wrong. Most of them are relatively correct. They just use simple formula which is ussualy spoken and not ever written, e.g. 'nomosarmo', 'norosarmo', nonemsarmo', etc.
They use three kinds of numbers system at the same time : 10 based numbers system, 7 based numbers system and 5 based numbers system, in the frame work of position system. Position system for numbers was found by Indian and Javanese people knew it before the Europen because it directly was brought by Indian to Indonesia. They use Numbers System Basis 10 when they should decide the duration of time; 35 days, 40 days, 100 days and 1000 days. They use Numbers System Basis 7 (Week system) when they use the name orderly of the days : Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thuersday, Friday and Saturday. They use Numbers System Basis 5 (Dino Pasaran system) when Javanese people have been using system 'Dino Pasaran' for along time before Western system of callendar came to Indonesia. In this system there are only five days orderly in a cycle of period of time called 'Pasar'. Those are 'Legi', 'Pahing', 'Pon', 'Wage', 'Kliwon'. One day in this system is equals to one day in Week system, that is 24 hours. Thus one Dino Pasaran has five days, two Dino Pasaran has 10 days, three Dino Pasaran has 15 days, etc.
Mathematically, for all of the system numbers, the notation of numbers 'm' can be written as polynomial from 'b' such as follows : m = a0 bn-1 + a1 bn-2 + a2 bn-3 + ... + an-1 b + an
where, b is any numbers greater than 1, and a is the basis. According to this formula, we can write any number at any system using the same pattern i.e. for basis 10, basis 7 and basis 5. In Basis 10 we have the numbers : 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. In Basis 7 we have the numbers : 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
We can match the name of the day with those numbers orderly : 0 = Sunday 1 = Monday; 2 = Tuesday; 3 = Wednesday; 4 = Thuersday; 5 = Friday and 6 = Saturday. In Basis 5 we have the numbers : 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. We can match the name of the day in Dino Pasaran with those numbers orderly : 0 = Legi, 1 = Pahing, 2 = Pon, 3 = Wage, 4 = Kliwon. How can we write 35 of Basis 10 into Basis 7 ? The following is the formula 3510 = 5 x 71 + 0 x 70 = 507. How can we write 100 of Basis 10 into Basis 7 ? The formula is 10010 = 2 x 72 + 0 x 71 + 2 x 70 = 2027. How can we write 1000 of Basis 10 into Basis 7 ? The formula is 100010 = 2 x 73 + 6 x 72 + 2 x 71 + 6 x 70 = 26267
How can we write 35 of Basis 10 into Basis 5? The following is the formula 3510 = 7 x 51 + 0 x 50 = 705. How can we write 100 of Basis 10 into Basis 5? Thai is 10010 = 4 x 52 + 0 x 51 + 0 x 50 = 4005 How can we write 1000 of Basis 10 into Basis 5 ? That is 100010 = 1 x 54 + 3 x 53 + 0 x 52 + 0 x 51 + 0 x 50 = 130005
Javanese people always have two unseparated name for the day. For example : Sunda Legi, Sunday Kliwon, Monday Wage, Friday Pahing, Saturday Kliwon, Saturday Pon, etc. It is clear that the numbers of combinations is 35 names. If this day is Monday Pahing then the duration up to on the next Monday Pahing is 7 x 5 = 35 days. Thus when somebody wish to celebrate the 35 th of his son's birthday he just waiting for the next day with the same name. It is easy and he need not to do with mathematics at all in his mind. Forthyth days ritual feast to mark some one's death by transforming 4010 = 557 and 4010 = 805. Numbers 55 is ended by 5; it mean that 'the fourty days duration of time' will begin on the day i and ended on the day 5 th of Week System. Thus, if now is Sunday then forty days to come will be the fifth day from Sunday that is Thuersday. Javanese people called 'five' as 'limo' or briefly 'mo'. Number 80 is ended by 0; it mean that 'the fourty days duration of time' will begin on the day of Pasar j and ended on the day j + 0 or ended on the same day. Thus If this day is Sunday Kliwon then it will be 40 days on the next Thuersday Kliwon.
If this day is Friday Legi then it will be 40 days on the next Tuesday Legi. If this day is Wednesday Pahing then it will be 40 day on the next Sunday Pahing, etc. Javanese people just called 'no mo; sar mo' that mean : no = dino = day; mo = limo = five; and sar = Pasar = Basis 5. Thus, no mo means 'the fifth day of Week System' sar mo means 'the fifth day of Pasar System'
For one hundred days ritual feast to mark some one's death as I described that :10010 = 2027 and 10010 = 4005. Number 202 is ended by 2; its mean that 'the one hundred days duration of time' will begin on the day i and ended on the day 2 th of Week System . Thus, if now is Sunday then forty days to come will be the 2 nd day from Sunday that is Monday. Javanese people called 'two' as 'loro' or briefly 'ro'. Number 400 is ended by 0; it mean that 'the fourty days duration of time' will begin on the day of Pasar j and ended on the day j + 0 or ended on the same day. Thus If this day is Sunday Kliwon then the next 100 days will be on the next Monday Kliwon. If this day is Friday Legi then the next 100 days will be on Saturday Legi. If this day is Wednesday Pahing then the next 100 day will be on Sunday Pahing, etc. Javanese people just called 'no ro; sar mo' that mean : no = dino = day; ro = loro = dua; and sar = Pasar = Basis 5. Thus, no ro means 'the second day of Week System' sar mo means 'the fifth day of Pasar System'. One thousand days ritual feast to mark some one's death is calculated by the same way they use the formula 'no nem; sar mo' that mean 'the sixth day of Week Syatem and the fifth day of Pasar System'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
