Saturday 23 March 2013

An African alternative to the Western understanding of the self and community. Umuntu umuntu ngabantu


 
In the West we have assumed that our world view is the only world view that accurately describes reality.  Since our particular world view has led to major advances in science we have been blinded to its weaknesses, especially its failure to adequately describe and account for the complexity and importance of relationships.  We have assumed that our understanding is the norm, and should be the norm for all cultures.  As a result we have approached other cultures with an imperialistic attitude seeking to impose our world view of them failing to appreciate that they may have something significant to offer us.  Unfortunately this myopic Western bias was incorporated into the Church’s theology, especially in its approach to mission work to non-Western cultures.

Having been raised and educated in South Africa my schooling was heavily influenced by the Western world view.  However, there were not only individuals in the Caucasian community who were challenging this world view but increasingly the influence of African thought penetrated the Caucasian South African consciousness.  Exposure to this African world view greatly influenced my thinking as well as my theology. 

The difficulty in presenting the African world view is that all too often it is understood and interpreted through the Western lens of individualism.  African sayings have been unreflectively co-opted into Western thought without an appreciation of its meaning and significance.  To overcome this perceptual difficulty I have found the most effective process is to offer a comparison of the two world views.   The Western world view is best summarized in the expression of Descartes I think therefore I am while the African world view is encapsulated in the Zulu version umuntu, umuntu, ngabantu. 

Rene Descartes was seeking to prove his existence when he formulated the saying I think therefore I am.  The importance of this statement is reflected in its endurance in spite of its critique by philosophers such as Soren Kierkegaard.  When coupled with the philosophy of individualism, the self was increasingly understood in terms of the lone or solitary individual.  This view of the self has been enhanced by myths that glorify the rugged individual who is self-reliant, self-determining and self-defining; a type of rugged individualism that has often been portrayed with admiration in American movies.

Individualism has had a profound influence on the social sciences as well as Western theology. In the social sciences the focus shifted from the lone individual to the understanding of the nuclear family as being a discrete entity, and more recently to the understanding of cultures.  What is lacking in this view is an understanding that the individual is born into and shaped by relationships.  Relationships influence the development of the self but these relationships are not limited to those of the nuclear family.  Each child is born into a relationship system that includes the extended and the multi-generational family as well as relationship with the larger community.  Humankind is born into relationships and remains dependent on those relationships for survival and growth.  The importance of these relationships is reflected in that the human infant is one of the most vulnerable of all animals relying on these relationship systems for years.  Without these relationship systems the infant will die. 

The commitment to individualism has created a problem for the Western church since this philosophy undermines the biblical understanding of community.  The Western world, including the Western Church, struggles as it seeks to develop a sense of community.  Businesses have become aware of this problem and seek to address it by holding “team building” workshops.  This approach mistakenly believes that the way to build community is by the loss of self to the group.  So those who promote this approach have the slogan that proclaims that there is no “I” in “team.” 

If community is not about the loss of self to the group, or fusion, neither is it merely a gathering of discrete individuals.  I believe that there is a parallel between the experience of the church in North America as it seeks to be a community and the people of the Exodus before the Sinai experience.  We like them are a disparate people.  They were more interested in achieving freedom from the Egyptian tyranny and the benefits that would bring than on being a community.  At Sinai they found a centre that started to shape them as a community.  Their desire to achieve their goal had blinded them to the centre that was already present in the in the tabernacle and cloud.  At Sinai they discovered what it meant to be God’s community in the world. 

In a society that promotes individualism the church struggles to become a community of the Spirit that is an expression of the Kingdom of God in the world.  The deep desire to be a community drives the Church in North America to copy the business world.  It seeks to become a community by implementing one programme after another.  But pogrammes cannot create a community.  Luther is very clear about this when in his explanation of the third article of the creed he states that community is only created by the Spirit.  But the work of the Spirit can be obstructed by practices and beliefs.  One such obstruction is the influence of individualism on the church.  Until the church gives up its tacit commitment to individualism it will continue to struggle to be the community of God within Western society.  When it does it will discover that community is not only the recognition but an expression and experience of a multitude of relationships and inter-relationships.  Until it acknowledges the perverse influence of individualism, the North American church will continue to live with a deep longing for community.  It may be time for us in the West to admit that we do not understand relationships and the nature of community and that perhaps we need to seek new insights from Africa.

If the Western view can be summed up in Descartes’ saying “I think therefore I am,” the African understanding of reality can be expressed in the Zulu saying “umuntu umuntu ngabantu.”  Some form of this expression is found in every African community south of the Sahara.  The saying can be translated in two ways: “a person is a person in relation to other persons” or “I am because you are.”  Both of these translations express a profound understanding of the self that is at its very core relational.  For the African the self can only be understood in the context of the relational system.  This view of reality is in stark contrast to Western individualism.  For the African this relational understanding informs their view of family.  For them the nuclear family does not exist in isolation.  The nuclear family is part of a broad relational system which includes the extended, the multi-generational as well as the previous generations: the ancestors.  The death of a family member does not mean that the relationship with that person is ended.  The dead are still part of the family.  This understanding of the dead as being part of the relationship system is emphasized by reporting to them.  This is no different that people “talking” to their dead family members.  We had the opportunity to go with Siyathemba’s grandmother to his grave where she spoke to him in very loving personal terms and then invited us to speak to him as well.   For the grandmother Siyathemba may be dead, but he is still her grandson and part of the family relationship systm.  Death may change but it does not destroy relationships. 

It is unfortunate that people in the West have co-opted particular African expressions of reality without understanding its significance and implications.  One such saying that is often referred to in the West is that it takes a village to raise a child.  This saying is grossly misunderstood since it is an expression of umuntu as reflected in the kinship relationship system of the Africans.  In order to understand what is meant by this saying one has to understand that for the African kinship is about a multitude of relationships. This relational approach, to use a rather simplistic approach, acknowledges that uncles and aunts are one’s mothers and fathers and that one’s cousins are one’s sisters and brothers.  Birth order is understood in terms of the extended family and not simply the nuclear family.  Without this understanding of family, many of the African saying are misunderstood.

The umuntu understanding of relationships has shaped the way staff at Emmanuel’s Comfort Home staff in Richmond, KwaZulu Natal, carry out their responsibilities.  They have a profound personal relationship with each patient not only while they are being treated in the hospice but especially when they are dying.  The staff comes, even when off duty, and sit with the dying.  They read to them from the bible, pray and sing them into death.  It is important that no one die alone, but in relationship.  Each patient, no matter what their socio-economic background is treated with a great deal of respect even in their dying.  It became obvious that for the staff umuntu means not simply taking care of the physical needs of the patients but relating and treating the patient as a whole person.  To be whole means to be in relationship.

This relational understanding of reality provides us with a deeper and clearer understanding of what it means to be in community.  It does not ignore the importance of individuality, but stresses that individuality can only be fully understood in relationships.  This view of community is very similar to that of the bible.  Unfortunately we in the West read the bible as if it is a Western book.  We read it through the lens of individualism.  We have a sense of what it means to be a community but our commitment to individualism undermines our efforts.  We fail to appreciate and understand the importance and centrality of relationships in creating community.  Africans with their understanding of the concept of umuntu experience the full reality of being in community.  Their traditional experience of community is similar to the biblical description of community in which relationships with God, others, self and nature are inter-dependent and complex at times even messy.  Perhaps it is time we stop relating to Africans with an imperialistic attitude and learn from them what it means to be a Christian community.

No comments:

Post a Comment