by Laurenti Magesa |
|
|
RELATIONSHIPS DETERMINE THE USE OF POWER IN AFRICAN RELIGION African religion is fundamentally one of powerrelationships. In the African religious worldview, the moral universe is perceived to consist of powers or forces which constantly and necessarily interact with one another on the basis of primogeniture. This means, simply, that the older, or even more vital, the stronger the power is over other powers, it influences them accordingly. Which does not mean, however, that the lesser powers have no influence over the greater and stronger powers. On the contrary, they are seen to do so for two reasons. First,without the lesser powers the greater one is irrelevant for, in a real sense, it obtains its meaning and significance from them. Secondly, just as the lesser powers need the greater powers to survive fully as powers, so does the greater power need the lesser powers.
The relationship between and among the powers here is clear, and it is not one domination but complementarity: the greater power does not fundamentally prey on the lesser but is completed by it in its own being, which is a given in the universal order. The lesser power, on the other hand, does not relate to the greater power on the basis of inherent inferiority, but rather on the basis of an expected right: to be nourished and sustained by the greater power.
From this it becomes obvious that "power" in the African moral universe is not an abstraction: it does not exist apart from relationships. Relationships establish power and give it meaning, purpose, and specific identity. In other words, power is correctly understood not as a "noun," a state, a quality, but precisely as a "verb", an act, a dynamic reality. Further, it cannot correctly be perceived as coercive, but precisely in terms of interdependence, whereby each "power-reality" has its own independent identity, full and secure.
If we apply this understanding of power to the universal elements of God, the ancestors, spirits, humanity and the world, we may appreciate its dynamic in African religion. African religion considers the existence of these realities possible only because of the power relations they share among them. God is God only because God sustains, most supremely and efficiently, the order God has put in place in the universe, which includes all the other elements. Without God's sustenance and care of these latter, God is not God. Conversely, apart from sharing in this sustenance and care according to their own being, all other elements likewise cease to exist. Literally. And what is true of God is equally true of the ancestors, the spirits, humanity, animate and inanimate beings. Power in African religion, is therefore, "incarnated" or "personalized" in the sense that it can only be realized in relationships between and among autonomous realities or forces.
In spite of what has been said about the "abuse of power" in African traditional systems of government, the above was the controlling awareness. So what has been called abuse of "power" in Africa should best be understood as abuse of relationships and the right order of existence. And if the maintenance of relationships is the religious imperative, its distortion or destruction is the worst moral evil. It was believed that rulers in Africa who distort relationships by being dictatorial, unjust, and oppressive bring disaster not only to themselves but to the community far and wide. Right power relationships, however, create and nurture authority, the characteristic most admired in a leader.
THE PROPER USE OF POWER LIES INSERVICE
One of the places where this idea of power relationships, as well as the
distinction between abuse of power and its proper use or authority, are
most clearly expressed is in the Christian New Testament, in the words
attributed to Jesus. Jostling for positions of influence among
themselves, his disciples seem to Jesus not to understand the proper
dynamics of power relationships. Which prompts the remarks and rebuke
from him:
"You know that among the pagans the so called rulers lord it over them,
and their great men make their authority felt.This is not to happen
among you. No; anyone who want to be first among you must be the slave of
all." He then gives his own life of service as the best example of true
leadership (Mk. 10: 42-45, Mt. 20: 25-28).
We may say then, using the expression in the sense explained in the foregoing paragraphs, that the proper use of power or, in a word, authority, in African religion(as well as in Christianity, it seems clear) consists and lies in service. Power is granted for, and thrives in the process of serving, of enhancing the life of those interdependent with it. Conceived in any other way, it is an aberration, because not only does it annihilate other forces, it destroys itself in the end by rendering itself irrelevant, because non-existent, since the relationships on which it depends are now themselves non-existent.
QUALITIES NEEDED IN AFRICAN LEADERS
How, then, may we conceive the power of leadership, of knowledge, or even
military power in the context of African religion? What "qualities" or
attitudes should be brought into leadershipprowess and might to render
them forces of life? I can only offer clues here. The most important
quality of the leader in African tradition was, according to E.E. Uzukwu,
the "big ear." This metaphor implies that for the leader to execute
leadership in a proper way, he or she needs to listen. What are the hopes
of the people? What are their anxieties and fears? In other words, what
kind of relationships exist in this particular world and where and how
should they be adjusted? The true leader, the leader who commands
authority, must attend to these questions, and he or she can only do so
comprehensively through the words of the community heard directly or
through its representatives. In listening and acting according to advice
the leader shares power, but gains authority.
It is easy to see how this is so where intellectual power is concerned. The essence of intellectual power or authority is recognition, which comes through sharing of thought and imagination. Throughout human history there is no intellectual giant who has not shared ideas and knowledge in one fashion or another: by way of oral speech, as African elders did; by way of literature, as many in the West and East have done, including many religious traditions; or by way of invention, as the age of science and technology shows us. Sharing, in the real or perceived interests of advancing life, is at the root of the university.
If sharing is at the root of intellectual power, what can be said about military might? Military secrets are not readily shared, even among "friendly nations." To do so is folly. For in military terms, today's friend is tomorrow's enemy. Military sands shift quickly. So, how can military power be seen as "authority" rather than merely an oppressive instrument? It is difficult to perceive this and, as is well known, early Christians would not engage in military service nor fight war precisely because it was seen to be exclusively an agent of death, having little to do with life. Yet the inherent ambiguity in war can be overcome up to point, given the right circumstances and motivations.
The right circumstances refer here exclusively to self-defense against aggression, and the proper motivation has to do with the actual conduct of the war, or the actual use of the instrument of war. The latter must be regulated under the principles of proportionality and non-contradiction. The principle of proportionality in the conduct of war means that only that force is used that is necessary to deter the aggression and keep it in check. The principle of non-aggression is an extension of the principle of proportionality, and implies that the act of self-defense, when successful, should not itself turn into aggression Much of this is, of course, contained in the classical Western Christian ":just war theory." Its particularity in Africa, however, can be appreciated only in the context of the defense, cohesion and development of the life of the community. The ambiguity remains only when both or all the parties in conflict consider themselves as the ones suffering the aggression and thus each in need to defend itself. But that discussion is beyond the scope of the present concern.
POWER - AN ONEROUS MORAL RESPONSIBILITY
In African religion, therefore, power is ultimately "power of God," and
its proper use, known as authority, constitutes "power as God." To the
person in authority, the ever present and most important concern is how
to use the power of God granted to him or her through the community, to
enhance the life of the community, as God would do. Power is thus an
onerous moral responsibility which should not be lightly assumed. No
wonder, then, that traditionally, among some African ethnic groups, such
as the !Kung of the Kalahari desert, it was actively avoided.
Thus, as among the Akan people of Ghana, the chief (in Akan, the Ohene) symbolizes the values of hospitality, good company, consideration, and justice: all characteristics of God. The life of the chief must be exemplary because, as the head custodian of the people's moral tradition, he must be in constant contact with the power of God, ancestors, spirits and the earth to guide and sustain him.
What does all this mean as far as the use of power in contemporary Africa is concerned? To a large extent it is an indictment of Africa's civil and religious rulers who have used power entrusted to them by their communities as an instrument of oppression, injustice, and self-promotion. What aggravates the situation is that in many cases there are no structures in place to replace, with life enhancing authority, power which has been misused. It is therefore necessary for African theoreticians of all branches of knowledge to revisit African religion and discover insights on this issue. When these values are clarified, perhaps people in power in Africa will be persuaded to guide people with authority, not brutalize and alienate them with oppression.
The Online publishing of WAJIBU is by Koinonia Media Centre.