By Devi Muslianty
In the Javanese language, ‘lethek’ means dirty, but in this case the word ‘lethek’ is used as an analogy for something that is deformed, unable to be repaired, or not in pristine condition. The word candi in Indonesian normally refers to worship places from the Hindu-Buddhist period, including pre-Islamic buildings. Candi Cetho is located in the hamlet of Cetho, Gumeng village, Jenawi district, Karanganyar regency in the Central Java province. This candi is associated with Hinduism and is found at an altitude of about 1496 meters above sea level. The ruins of Candi Cetho were rediscovered during the colonial period. At that time, the candi was a stone ruin settled on fourteen terraces (punden or punden berundak) extending from the west (the lowest) to the east, although at the present there are only thirteen punden berundak, and restoration of the temple was only undertaken on sections situated on nine of the punden berundak. In an interview with a lecturer in Anthropology at Gadjah Mada University, I was told that Candi Cetho is considered to be a candi lethek, because the candi had been restored without the advice of experts in archaeology during the Soeharto era. At that time, the restoration was based on a vision called a wangsit, a kind of sacred mandate that was to guide the restoration of the candi. Under the guide of this vision, many of the original structures and the appearance of Candi Cetho were changed. Additionally, Regent Rina Iriani’s project, added a Saraswati statue to one Cetho’s punden as a part of an effort to promote tourism. In the eyes of experts, these changes exacerbate the 'deformed' state of Candi Cetho. Visitors to Candi Cetho come from Karanganyar and other towns around the region, like Solo, Wonogiri, Ngawi, Magetan, Sragen, and Klaten. They have to pay about ten thousand rupiah (.75 USD) to enter the site. When I visited Candi Cetho, I found that the tourists who visit the candi fall into a few different categories. There are the common tourists that Margry calls “secular pilgrims,” those who go to pilgrimage sites without feeling any religious ties to the place because there is no relation between that site and what they believe, however, they may visit sites for a spiritual experience (2008:20). Pilgrims like me tend to visit the site for religious and touristic purposes at the same time. The last category of visitors are the pious pilgrims who visit the candi with the strong religious motivations. In conversation, the secular pilgrims I spoke to said that they went to Candi Cetho to search for serenity and to see the natural beauty of the mountain, and for common tourists, they hoped to enjoy the view from the candi. Others said that they visited because it was part of their tour schedule on a holiday trip, one tourism destination in Karanganyar. For me, visiting Cetho is both entertainment and worship all at once, something to do in my free time. This is different from the kejawen believers that I met, who worship at Candi Cetho routinely, as a part of the regular ritual practice in their religion. Usually, the main place they use for worship at Candi Cetho is Candi Kethek. Kethek means monkey in Javanese. Candi Kethek was built on northeast side of Candi Cetho. Another group of pilgrims I encountered while at the site were from a Hindu community located in Yogyakarta. They were at Cetho to perform the Tirtayatra, a Hindu practice done on journeys to sacred places or pilgrimage sites. Most of the visitor that I interviewed said that they were unaware of the reconstruction that changed the front structure of the candi. A few of the religious pilgrims were aware of these changes, but they weren’t concerned by them. For these pilgrims, the spirit of Candi Cetho is most important aspect for their ritual. The authenticity of Candi Cetho as a structure is not an issue. In their opinion, it is impossible to avoid the influence of tourism. As Bruner said, tourism can produce a ‘new’ authenticity (Bruner 1994:407). The value and history of the transformation of a tourism object will produce new meanings for the object. New meanings can then formulate a new kind of identity. In my opinion, agent of transformation in the case of Candi Cetho is the government. Government institutions view the candi as a historical site, and their case was strengthened by the 2010 Law on Heritage No 11. The law states that heritage is something that needs to be maintained, and can be used for many interests because it has academic value, historical value, and is attractive to tourists. Therefore it is not suprising if secular pilgrims perceived the candi through its ‘new identity’, as a historical monument, a place to looking for serenity, and a tourism destination. Government institutions that manage the site treat all of the visitors equally as visitors to a historical tourist site, even those who use the site as a place of worship. This means those who go to Candi Cetho for the purpose of performing religious rituals also have to pay the entry fee to the site. However, it is the local community around Cetho that voluntarily maintains the candi. Most of them are Hindu, although others in the community from different religious backgrounds also join in caring for the temple. According to them, Candi Cetho is the home of their “grandmother”, an ancestor spirit. Maintaining Candi Cetho means maintaining their ancestor spirit’s home, no matter what their religion affiliation or belief. In addition, people in the local community also believe that Cetho is a gate to the invisible kingdom of Brawijaya V who reached moksa and still dwells on Mount Lawu. Contestation over the site emerged due to different perpectives towards the candi. When government institutions began to treat the candi as just a historical monument, the religious communities who used the candi to worship were sidelined. They also were required to pay the entrance fee as though they were just a regular visitor or tourist. On the other hand, when the government involved people around the candi to work as entrance attendants, the locals received some economic benefit. I assume this is the government’s way of maintaining their policy. As Digance notes in her article on contestation over pilgrimage tourist sites, the power of access, the struggle of representing nationality, and the human right to freedom of religion and self-determination are some of the reasons why pilgrimage sites might become contested spaces (Digance 2003:149). She writes that contestation can become conflict among different types of visitors: pilgrims, tourists, traditional religious pilgrims and secular pilgrims. Conflict can also be caused by commercial interests, the actions of volunteer organizations, and government management. The candi for us is a place of worship. When government institutions reimagine a site as a tourist destination, we feel that the government ignores our religion and our rights. Governments treat us as the same as tourists, and neglect our need to perform rituals, and in that sense indirectly discriminate against us. For example, at religious buildings in Jakarta that are also heritage sites, the religious communities who want to worship there are not required to pay the entrance fee. This is contrary to how candi are managed and how worshipers at candi are treated throughout Indonesia. Bruner, Edward M. 1994. Abraham Lincoln as Authentic Reproduction: A Critique of Postmodernism. America: American Anthropological Association and Wiley. Digance, Justine. 2003. Pilgrimage at Contested Sites. Great Britain: Elsevier Science Ltd. Margry, Peter Jan. (ed). 2008. Shrines and Pilgrimage in the Modern World. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. www.djpp.depkumham.go.id about The 2010 law on Heritage no 11. (was accessed on 13 April 2017).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives |