Kapwa, Kapatiran
Kapwa, Kapatiran and
and Bayan
Bayan in
in
Philippine Social Science
Philippine Social Science
11C
Clemenlemen C. C. AAquinoquino
Departm
Department ent of of SociolSociologyogy
University of the Philippines University of the Philippines
From the pioneering works of Enriquez, Covar and Salazar, which paved the way for From the pioneering works of Enriquez, Covar and Salazar, which paved the way for the production of social science knowledge that is particularly meaningful and sensitive to the production of social science knowledge that is particularly meaningful and sensitive to Philippine culture and society, this paper explores the social signications of kapwa, Philippine culture and society, this paper explores the social signications of kapwa, kap-atiran and bayan. In the context of the dominant inuence of Western perspectives in atiran and bayan. In the context of the dominant inuence of Western perspectives in Philippine social science, the understanding, appreciation and evaluation of their Philippine social science, the understanding, appreciation and evaluation of their contribu-tions continue to be an important undertaking. As a preliminary attempt to contribute to tions continue to be an important undertaking. As a preliminary attempt to contribute to this discourse, a panlipunang pagbabanghay is o
this discourse, a panlipunang pagbabanghay is o V V ered as an approach or an outline for ered as an approach or an outline for the analysis of Philippine social organization.
the analysis of Philippine social organization.
It was in the 1970s that the academic paths of Professor Virgilio G. Enriquez It was in the 1970s that the academic paths of Professor Virgilio G. Enriquez of the Department of Psychology, Professor Prospero R. Covar of the of the Department of Psychology, Professor Prospero R. Covar of the Department of Anthropology
Department of Anthropology, and , and Professor Zeus A. SProfessor Zeus A. Salazar of the Dealazar of the Depart- part-men
ment of Histort of Historyy —— sociasocial sciel science schnce scholarolars at the Univers at the Universitsity of the Philiy of the Philippinesppines — — converged. Through training in their respective elds, these three converged. Through training in their respective elds, these three profes-sors collectively cultivated scholarship on Philippine culture,
sors collectively cultivated scholarship on Philippine culture, diwa diwa (spirit)(spirit)
and society. In the context of the pervasive inuence of Western and society. In the context of the pervasive inuence of Western educa-tion in the country, and on social science in particular, they set out to tion in the country, and on social science in particular, they set out to for-mulate perspectives that are rooted in and signicant to their own society. mulate perspectives that are rooted in and signicant to their own society. During that particular period, a crucial factor was the imposition of During that particular period, a crucial factor was the imposition of mar-tial law in the country, especially in the task of confronting questions and tial law in the country, especially in the task of confronting questions and problem
problems that may be s that may be unique to Philippinunique to Philippine politice political and social life. Theal and social life. The pro- pro-fess
fessors provideors provided one another acd one another academic supportademic support, and the 1970s sa, and the 1970s saw thew the insti insti--tution of the course
tution of the course Sikolohiyang PilipinoSikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino Psychology) in the Department(Filipino Psychology) in the Department of Psychology and the establishment of the
of Psychology and the establishment of the Pambansang Samahan sa Pambansang Samahan sa Sikolohiyang Sikolohiyang Pilipino
Pilipino (National Confederation on Filipino Psychology), as well as the(National Confederation on Filipino Psychology), as well as the strengthen
strengthening oing of thef the Pantayong Pananaw Pantayong Pananaw ( ( PantayoPantayo perspective) in the Departmentperspective) in the Department of History. Moreover, in the latter part of the 1980s,
of History. Moreover, in the latter part of the 1980s, Pilipinolohiya Pilipinolohiya (Filipinology)(Filipinology) was established in the graduate programme of the
was established in the graduate programme of the College of Social SciencCollege of Social Scienceses
and Philosophy. and Philosophy.
Now that almost three decades have passed since they crossed Now that almost three decades have passed since they crossed acad-emic paths, it may be said that, in various ways, their intellectual emic paths, it may be said that, in various ways, their intellectual endeav-ours have been developed and advanced. Even though there is no formal ours have been developed and advanced. Even though there is no formal institution or academic organization that nurtures their common cause, institution or academic organization that nurtures their common cause, there continues the assiduous cultivation of perspectives, concepts, and there continues the assiduous cultivation of perspectives, concepts, and
A.J.S.S.
A.J.S.S. 32:1 32:1 (105(105–139)–139) also also available available online online ©
methods of research that are relevant and meaningful to Philippine methods of research that are relevant and meaningful to Philippine soci-ety. Many students and junior faculty members have contributed ety. Many students and junior faculty members have contributed substan-tially to their eld and through ongo
tially to their eld and through ongoing claricing clarication and dation and debate, they haveebate, they have added vibrancy and meaning to their cause. Over the years, these studies added vibrancy and meaning to their cause. Over the years, these studies collectively serve to further explore, understand and articulate the collectively serve to further explore, understand and articulate the multi-dimensional character of Philippine culture and society. It is equally signicant dimensional character of Philippine culture and society. It is equally signicant to note that from conventional reactions to Western ideas, the co-sojourners to note that from conventional reactions to Western ideas, the co-sojourners have been able to transcend the habitual responses to and struggles with have been able to transcend the habitual responses to and struggles with what are perceived to be colonial perspectives and foreign inuences.
what are perceived to be colonial perspectives and foreign inuences. The aim o
The aim of this paper is f this paper is to provide an exploratory analysito provide an exploratory analysis of s of selecselectedted concepts cultivated by Enriquez, Covar, and Salazar that have particular concepts cultivated by Enriquez, Covar, and Salazar that have particular relevance to the study of Philippine social organization. Written from the relevance to the study of Philippine social organization. Written from the perspecti
perspective of sociology that looks at the ve of sociology that looks at the individual in society and the indi-individual in society and the indi- vidual’s
vidual’s linkages linkages with with the the broabroader der social social structurestructure, , this this paper paper focuses focuses onon three concepts:
three concepts: kapwa kapwa , one of the concepts rst examined by Enriquez in, one of the concepts rst examined by Enriquez in his time;
his time; kapatirankapatiran, which sums up the broad eld of studies cultivated by, which sums up the broad eld of studies cultivated by Covar; and
Covar; and bayanbayan, a concept that Salazar considers integral to the under-, a concept that Salazar considers integral to the under-standing of Philippine history and cultural life.
standing of Philippine history and cultural life.
Kapwa
Kapwa in
in Sikolohiyang Pilipino
Sikolohiyang Pilipino
Integral to the work of Enriquez is the concept of
Integral to the work of Enriquez is the concept of kapwa kapwa . In 1978, in the. In 1978, in the
arti
article “Kapcle “Kapwa: A Core Concwa: A Core Concept in Filept in Filipinipino Social Pso Social Psycychologyhology”” —— one of one of the
the rst rst seminal seminal presentations presentations of of the cothe conceptncept —— Enriquez Enriquez recognized recognized thethe centrality of
centrality of kapwa kapwa to the study of social interaction among Filipinos.to the study of social interaction among Filipinos.22 Corollary attention was also given to Filipino society’s deep regard for Corollary attention was also given to Filipino society’s deep regard for pakikipagkapwa
pakikipagkapwa oror pakikipagkapwa-tao pakikipagkapwa-tao , or having good and sincere relations, or having good and sincere relations with one’s brethren.
with one’s brethren.
It is important to note that Enriquez’s study of the concept of
It is important to note that Enriquez’s study of the concept of kapwa kapwa
is inextricably linked with the
is inextricably linked with the Sikolohiyang Pilipino’s Sikolohiyang Pilipino’s cultivation of methodscultivation of methods of data collection that are meaningful in the Philippine context. In fact, of data collection that are meaningful in the Philippine context. In fact, one of the initial research activities of
one of the initial research activities of Sikolohiyang PilipinoSikolohiyang Pilipino that was priori-that was priori-tized and instituted by Enriquez in the early 1970s focused on the study tized and instituted by Enriquez in the early 1970s focused on the study of
of makaPilipinong pamamaraan ng pananaliksik makaPilipinong pamamaraan ng pananaliksik (Filipino methods of research)(Filipino methods of research) which involves
which involves pakap pakapa-ka-kapa apa (groping),(groping), pag pagtatantatanonong-tag-tanong nong (querying), and(querying), and paki pakikipakipag- g-kuwentuhan
kuwentuhan (sharing stories) (Santiago and Enriquez, 1982; Santiago, 1982).(sharing stories) (Santiago and Enriquez, 1982; Santiago, 1982). These methods of collecting data were considered integral to the These methods of collecting data were considered integral to the under-standing and articulation of social science knowledge that is sensitive to standing and articulation of social science knowledge that is sensitive to the nuances and dynamics of Philippine society.
the nuances and dynamics of Philippine society. Enriquez’s examination of the concept of
Enriquez’s examination of the concept of kapwa kapwa is based is based on Santiago’son Santiago’s
earlier study about various kinds and levels of interaction in a Tagalog earlier study about various kinds and levels of interaction in a Tagalog vil-lage. Santiago had looked at the social interaction related to the o
lage. Santiago had looked at the social interaction related to the oV V eerriinngg oof f
food to
food to ibang-taoibang-tao (outsider) and(outsider) and hindi-ibang-taohindi-ibang-tao (one of us) in a Bulacan munic-(one of us) in a Bulacan munic-ipality (1976:135).
methods of research that are relevant and meaningful to Philippine methods of research that are relevant and meaningful to Philippine soci-ety. Many students and junior faculty members have contributed ety. Many students and junior faculty members have contributed substan-tially to their eld and through ongo
tially to their eld and through ongoing claricing clarication and dation and debate, they haveebate, they have added vibrancy and meaning to their cause. Over the years, these studies added vibrancy and meaning to their cause. Over the years, these studies collectively serve to further explore, understand and articulate the collectively serve to further explore, understand and articulate the multi-dimensional character of Philippine culture and society. It is equally signicant dimensional character of Philippine culture and society. It is equally signicant to note that from conventional reactions to Western ideas, the co-sojourners to note that from conventional reactions to Western ideas, the co-sojourners have been able to transcend the habitual responses to and struggles with have been able to transcend the habitual responses to and struggles with what are perceived to be colonial perspectives and foreign inuences.
what are perceived to be colonial perspectives and foreign inuences. The aim o
The aim of this paper is f this paper is to provide an exploratory analysito provide an exploratory analysis of s of selecselectedted concepts cultivated by Enriquez, Covar, and Salazar that have particular concepts cultivated by Enriquez, Covar, and Salazar that have particular relevance to the study of Philippine social organization. Written from the relevance to the study of Philippine social organization. Written from the perspecti
perspective of sociology that looks at the ve of sociology that looks at the individual in society and the indi-individual in society and the indi- vidual’s
vidual’s linkages linkages with with the the broabroader der social social structurestructure, , this this paper paper focuses focuses onon three concepts:
three concepts: kapwa kapwa , one of the concepts rst examined by Enriquez in, one of the concepts rst examined by Enriquez in his time;
his time; kapatirankapatiran, which sums up the broad eld of studies cultivated by, which sums up the broad eld of studies cultivated by Covar; and
Covar; and bayanbayan, a concept that Salazar considers integral to the under-, a concept that Salazar considers integral to the under-standing of Philippine history and cultural life.
standing of Philippine history and cultural life.
Kapwa
Kapwa in
in Sikolohiyang Pilipino
Sikolohiyang Pilipino
Integral to the work of Enriquez is the concept of
Integral to the work of Enriquez is the concept of kapwa kapwa . In 1978, in the. In 1978, in the
arti
article “Kapcle “Kapwa: A Core Concwa: A Core Concept in Filept in Filipinipino Social Pso Social Psycychologyhology”” —— one of one of the
the rst rst seminal seminal presentations presentations of of the cothe conceptncept —— Enriquez Enriquez recognized recognized thethe centrality of
centrality of kapwa kapwa to the study of social interaction among Filipinos.to the study of social interaction among Filipinos.22 Corollary attention was also given to Filipino society’s deep regard for Corollary attention was also given to Filipino society’s deep regard for pakikipagkapwa
pakikipagkapwa oror pakikipagkapwa-tao pakikipagkapwa-tao , or having good and sincere relations, or having good and sincere relations with one’s brethren.
with one’s brethren.
It is important to note that Enriquez’s study of the concept of
It is important to note that Enriquez’s study of the concept of kapwa kapwa
is inextricably linked with the
is inextricably linked with the Sikolohiyang Pilipino’s Sikolohiyang Pilipino’s cultivation of methodscultivation of methods of data collection that are meaningful in the Philippine context. In fact, of data collection that are meaningful in the Philippine context. In fact, one of the initial research activities of
one of the initial research activities of Sikolohiyang PilipinoSikolohiyang Pilipino that was priori-that was priori-tized and instituted by Enriquez in the early 1970s focused on the study tized and instituted by Enriquez in the early 1970s focused on the study of
of makaPilipinong pamamaraan ng pananaliksik makaPilipinong pamamaraan ng pananaliksik (Filipino methods of research)(Filipino methods of research) which involves
which involves pakap pakapa-ka-kapa apa (groping),(groping), pag pagtatantatanonong-tag-tanong nong (querying), and(querying), and paki pakikipakipag- g-kuwentuhan
kuwentuhan (sharing stories) (Santiago and Enriquez, 1982; Santiago, 1982).(sharing stories) (Santiago and Enriquez, 1982; Santiago, 1982). These methods of collecting data were considered integral to the These methods of collecting data were considered integral to the under-standing and articulation of social science knowledge that is sensitive to standing and articulation of social science knowledge that is sensitive to the nuances and dynamics of Philippine society.
the nuances and dynamics of Philippine society. Enriquez’s examination of the concept of
Enriquez’s examination of the concept of kapwa kapwa is based is based on Santiago’son Santiago’s
earlier study about various kinds and levels of interaction in a Tagalog earlier study about various kinds and levels of interaction in a Tagalog vil-lage. Santiago had looked at the social interaction related to the o
lage. Santiago had looked at the social interaction related to the oV V eerriinngg oof f
food to
food to ibang-taoibang-tao (outsider) and(outsider) and hindi-ibang-taohindi-ibang-tao (one of us) in a Bulacan munic-(one of us) in a Bulacan munic-ipality (1976:135).
and Enriquez (1982) in their formulation of a scale of
and Enriquez (1982) in their formulation of a scale of pagtutunguhan pagtutunguhan (inter-
(inter-action) between the researcher and the participant in the study. action) between the researcher and the participant in the study.
Santiago and Enriquez (1982) developed eight categories of
Santiago and Enriquez (1982) developed eight categories of pagtutu-
pagtutu-nguhan
nguhan (interaction) between the researcher and the participant, and Enriquez(interaction) between the researcher and the participant, and Enriquez used these same categories in his exploration of the concept of
used these same categories in his exploration of the concept of kapwa kapwa . . ItIt
is important to emphasize that the authors also considered these categories is important to emphasize that the authors also considered these categories of interaction as methods of data gathering that the researcher may very of interaction as methods of data gathering that the researcher may very well use to discover and understand participants’
well use to discover and understand participants’ kaloobankalooban (inner self/inner(inner self/inner
feelings). The following are the categories, structured according to “the feelings). The following are the categories, structured according to “the closeness of
closeness of kaloobankalooban of the researcher and the participant”:of the researcher and the participant”: ppakakikikitituungngoo (transaction/civility with)(transaction/civility with)33
papakikikikisasalalamumuha ha (interaction with)(interaction with)
ppakakikikililahahook k (( joinijoining/ng/partiparticipatcipating ing withwith))
ppakakikikibibaagagayy (in conformity with/in accord with)(in conformity with/in accord with) ppaakkikikiisasamma a (being along with)(being along with)
pakpakikipaikipagpagpalaglagayanayan/pakik/pakikipagipagpalapalagaygayangang-loo-loobb (being in (being in rapport/undersrapport/understanding/tanding/ acc
acceptaeptance nce ofof ))
papakikikikisasangngkot kot (getting involved with)(getting involved with) ppaakkikikiiisisa a (being one with)(being one with)
Santiago and Enriquez assume that the level of
Santiago and Enriquez assume that the level of pagtutunguhan pagtutunguhan (interaction)(interaction) between the researcher and the participant is also an indication of the level between the researcher and the participant is also an indication of the level or depth of the information that may be ga
or depth of the information that may be gathered. That is why the authorsthered. That is why the authors
suggest that the
suggest that the pagtutunguhan pagtutunguhan be brought to the level of be brought to the level of pakikipagpalagaya pakikipagpalagayang- ng-loob
loob (being in rapport/underst(being in rapport/understanding/accanding/acceptance eptance withwith) b) because it is oecause it is only atnly at this level that the true
this level that the true kaloobankalooban of the participant may be understood.of the participant may be understood.44 At At this level, each one is at ease with one’s
this level, each one is at ease with one’s kapwa kapwa . “There is no more shy-. “There is no more shy-ness and the trust is almost absolute and unconditional” (Enriquez and ness and the trust is almost absolute and unconditional” (Enriquez and Santiago, 1982:158, 159).
Santiago, 1982:158, 159).
For Enriquez, the conceptual richness of the
For Enriquez, the conceptual richness of the pagtutunguhan pagtutunguhan between thebetween the
researcher and the participant, which has di
researcher and the participant, which has diV V erent kinds and levels of cat-erent kinds and levels of cat-egories of
egories of pag-uugnayan pag-uugnayan that may be applied, only mirrors the richness andthat may be applied, only mirrors the richness and value
value of of pakikipag-ugnay pakikipag-ugnay or social interaction in Philippine society. That isor social interaction in Philippine society. That is why although Santiago in her earlier study considered
why although Santiago in her earlier study considered pakikipagkapwa pakikipagkapwa anan
ideal in the eld of
ideal in the eld of pagtutunguhan pagtutunguhan (1976:133), Enr(1976:133), Enriquez iquez viewedviewed pakikipagkapwa pakikipagkapwa not as an ideal as such, but as a fundamental core concept that is not as an ideal as such, but as a fundamental core concept that is actu-ally the basis of any kind or level of
ally the basis of any kind or level of pakikipag-ugnay pakikipag-ugnay in the Filipino contextin the Filipino context (1978:103).
(1978:103).
In Enriquez’s conception, the eight categories or kinds of
In Enriquez’s conception, the eight categories or kinds of pagtutunguhan pagtutunguhan
mentioned above are subsumed within the sense of
mentioned above are subsumed within the sense of kapwa kapwa and/orand/or pakikipag-
pakikipag-kapwa
kapwa . For example,. For example, pakikitungo pakikitungo is considered “obedience to the precepts of is considered “obedience to the precepts of mabuting asal
mabuting asal (good behaviour) according to the(good behaviour) according to the kaugaliankaugalian (custom) of (custom) of pakikipagkapwa
pakikipagkapwa ” while” while pakikiisa pakikiisa is seen as “the acts, will, and speech of ais seen as “the acts, will, and speech of a person that intimate a complete and absolute love, understanding, and person that intimate a complete and absolute love, understanding, and
acceptance of what is aspired for as one’s own aspiration” (p. 159).5 As implied here and as will be further explained below, viewing the self and others as one is the fundamental essence integral to kapwa .
The categories of interaction associated with the “one of us” or “not
others” ( hindi iba ) or “not other people” ( hindi-ibang-tao ) (that is,
pakikipag- palagayang-loob [being in rapport/understanding/acceptance with] and paki-kiisa [being one with]) and the categories associated with the “outsiders” or
“others” ( ibang-tao ) (that is, pakikitungo, pakikibagay, and pakikisama ) are
com-ponents of the general concept of kapwa .6 Hence, every level
of pagtutun- guhan (interaction) between the researcher and the participant is either an indication of or subsumed within the spirit of pakikipagkapwa (Enriquez, 1978:103).
Similarly, every method of data gathering used in the research is an indication of the pakikipagkapwa of the researcher with the participant. This implies that the conduct of genuine Filipino research needs to be sensitive to the sense of pakikipagkapwa . From this perspective, pakikipagkapwa is the guiding spirit of truly Filipino research. The implication of such a view is important to social research in the country — especially in the eld of ethics – for relations between the researcher and the participant, and even to the overall objectives and orientation of the research undertaking.
Kapwa and Pakikipagkapwa as Social Signi
Wcation
The common translations of kapwa into English are “both” (Panganiban, 1972:253), “fellow being” (Panganiban, 1972:253; Vicassan, 1978:316), or “others” (Enriquez, 1978:103). However, as has been articulated earlier, for Enriquez, the social signication or meaning of kapwa is actually the unity of the “self ” and “others.” The English term “others” is commonly used in opposition to “self,” which implies their separate identities, while kapwa means the unied identity of the “self ” and “others.” If an individ-ual supposes the “self ” to be “other than” the kapwa , it will mean the loss of the treatment of “others” as kapwa . It is, therefore, recognized that at the root of the concept of kapwa is the unied single identity of the “self,” of the “not other” ( hindi-ibang-tao ) and even of the “other” ( ibang-tao ) (Enriquez,
1978:104; 1997:46).7
As has been mentioned, for Enriquez, pakikipagkapwa is the embody-ing spirit that encompasses various kinds or categories of pagtutunguhan in society. In this view, pakikisama (being along with) is seen not as a social value per se but as one of the levels or kinds of pagtutunguhan that nor-mally takes place between an individual and an “other”. Thus, pakikisama (being along with) and even pakikibaka (to struggle with) are inherent parts of the embodying spirit of pakikipagkapwa (1978:106).
“humaneness at its highest level” (1976:133). In relation to the scale of social interaction in Philippine society, and as noted earlier, she considers pakikipagkapwa or pakikipagkapwa-tao as a primary value, that is, the loftiest
aspiration of pagtutunguhan in society.
Enriquez’s view of pakikipagkapwa as an overarching primary value may be seen in the supposition that it is still possible for Filipinos to under-stand a person who is “without pakikisama ,” or one who is “walanghiya” (shameless) or “walang utang na loob” (no sense of gratitude), while the same
may be diYcult to say of an individual who has “no kapwa tao” (1978:106).
As a paninindigan or a conviction, the concept of pakikipagkapwa consists of the recognition of the humanity and dignity of the kapwa as an equal. Even in one of Enriquez’s last works before he passed on in 1994, Pagbabagong- Dangal: Indigenous Psychology and Cultural Empowerment , there is still the appre-ciation for the kind of pakikitungo (interaction) of the Filipino toward his or her kapwa , whatever the gender or social status may be (1994:75).
The collective orientation of Philippine culture in which there is a high valuation of pakikipag-ugnay (interacting with), pakikitungo (relating with),
and pakikipagkapwa (relating with kapwa ) may be implied from the
preced-ing discussion. It seems that there is a close link, or perhaps a unity,
between the social signication of pakikipagkapwa (relating with kapwa ) on
the one hand, and pagpapakatao (aspiring for humaneness) on the other.
Kapatiran in Pilipinolohiya
Known as the foremost advocate of Pilipinolohiya (Filipinology), Covar has developed anthropological studies that are based on concerns integral to his roots in Laguna. Among these studies are the cultures of rice planting, the organization of messianic communities or kapatiran, in particular, the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi as well as groups worshipping Mount Banahaw. From these rst studies, it may be seen in his book Larangan (1998a) — a collection of seminal essays on Philippine culture — that Covar has woven together four signicant interrelated concepts: pagkatao (personhood/humane-ness), kapatiran (sodality), paniniwala (belief ), and wika (language), the last being a primary basis for examining the rst three (cf. Covar, 1998b). In this paper, the focus will be on the concept of kapatiran in the context of Covar’s studies on paniniwala (belief ) and of the perspective of Pilipinolohiya he developed.
Covar presented the scope of his eld of study in ‘Balangkas ng Pambansang Kaisipan, Kultura at Lipunang Pilipino,’ (An outline of national
thought, culture and society) in the article “Pilipinolohiya”8 (1991:42) (Figure
1). The concept of pagkatao was what he developed in relation to the national kaisipan (thought) where Covar used the metaphor of the banga (earthen jar) to illustrate the externality, interiority, and depth of Filipino personhood.
Figure 1: Outline of National Thought, Culture and Society
Tao Person
Pagkatao Personhood/Being Humane
Labas Katawan Mukha Dibdib Tiyan Sikmura Kaluluwa/Budhi Isip Puso Bituka Atay Soul/Conscience Mind Heart Intestines Liver Body Face Chest Stomach Gut
Externality Loob Interiority
Pagkatao Pag-anib sa lipunan Pakikipagkapwa Personhood Social Participation Pangkabuhayan Livelihood Pampulitika Politics Kamag-anakan/Angkan/Sambahayan Kingship/Lineage/Household (Kinship) Samahan/Kapisanan/Simulain Association/Organization/Cause (Interest) Pamayanan Community (Territoriality) Sambayanan People/Nation (Citizenship) Pagtuturo at paniniwala Istrukturang Panlipunan Social Structure Education and Beliefs Pagkatao Personhood
Relating with kapwa
“Pilipinolohiya”, P.R. Covar
Pilipinolohiya: Kasaysayan, Pilosopiya at Pananaliksik Bautista and Pe-Pua (editors), 1991, p. 42
In his view, corollary to the concept of pagkatao (personhood) is the
con-cept of pakikipagkapwa (relating with kapwa ) where, as had been shared by
Enriquez, the treatment of others as kapwa is considered integral to pagpa- pakatao (aspiring for humaneness). For the Filipinos, all of humanity is kapwa ,
and pakikitungo (interaction) with anyone is guided by the consciousness of pakikipagkapwa (1998:24). Furthermore, Covar also emphasized the elements
of soul and conscience that are at the heart of Filipino personhood and are the fundamental bases of an individual’s view of his/her own life and of his/her pakikitungo with kapwa (1998a:23).
Regarding the concept of social structure as the third and last dimen-sion of Pilipinolohiya , in accordance with “Balangkas” (1991), Covar views it at four institutional levels or categories found in Philippine society: kamag-anakan (kinship)/angkan (lineage)/sambahayan (household); samahan (associa-tion)/kapisanan (organization)/simulain (cause); pamayanan (community); and sambayanan (people/nation; see Figure 1).
Guided by the structural-functionalist perspective in sociology, Covar believes that the role of these institutions is geared towards the recruit-ment of members, enculturation, distribution of goods and services, and the allocation of power and authority (1998a:23). Yet in the Filipino context, Covar — in analyzing social structure — emphasized not only the struc-ture and its attendant activities but also, and more importantly, the preva-lent and intense pag-uugnayan (interrelationships) of the people. “In the area of social organization, we classify our relationships with other people” (1998a:68).
For Covar and other specialists in Philippine society, the family is the foundation of that society (1998a:22). Viewing the family as a group liv-ing in a house or a household, he presupposes that the stability of the entire sambayanan (people/nation/citizenship) is based on the stability of families in Philippine society. It may be worth noting that in the use of the sambahayan (household) as family, Covar implies that all who live in one house, that is, the sambahayan (household), are ordinarily considered also as members of a family, although not all who live there are bound by kinship ties.
In accordance with the aforementioned, in the Philippine context, there is signicant appreciation for the nature of relations between and among the members of what is considered a family. In the Tagalog family, for instance, these relations are presented according to the various levels of a
“mag-anak ”: spouse, siblings, parents, and children9 (cf. Salazar, 1999:78).
Moreover, another concept that is included in the structure of the Filipino family is the extended family, which broadens and makes richer said relations at the level of the family (1991:39). In this context, Covar emphasized the important position of multiple in-law relations: magbalae or abalayan (in-laws, at the level of parents), manugang (son/daughter-in-law), biyenan (father/mother-in-law), bayaw (brother-in-law), hipag (sister-in-law),
and bilas (wife/husband of sister/brother-in-law). In comparison with the American family system, these are all subsumed under “in-laws.” In the
Tagalog context, there is a particular term for every category or level of familial relations that indicates the various categories and levels of relat-ing. As will be discussed towards the end of this paper, even though not all of these relations are commonly linked to the category of the mag-anak (nuclear family), these are usually considered part of the category of the pamilya (extended family) and, therefore, “not others.”
It is still an indication of the rich and broad relations of relatives that
there are, moreover, diV erences in references according to
generation: pin-sang buo (rst cousin), ikalawa (second cousin), ikatlo (third cousin), and at iba pa (and others). Also prevalent are categories according to relations by blood, baptism, marriage, and other rituals. Therefore, even those who are not members of the same blood-family or nuclear family are granted titles that make them part of the family (1991:39). For example, it may be said that those who are magkumpare (co-godparents) through baptism or mar-riage may also consider their kumpare ’s (co-godparent’s) siblings their own kumare (co-godparent) or kumpare (co-godparent). Even the siblings of the kumare or kumpare are also considered hindi iba (not others/one-of-us).
The same may be said of relations with close friends; “We are already like siblings.” As for the elders, “They are already like my own parents.” These do not only prove the Filipino culture’s rich appreciation for social relationships but also imply the unique and high regard for familial rela-tions, especially of parents and siblings as the primary kind of relationship. In studying communities as one of the vital aspects of Filipino social structure, Covar used the ethnographic approach in his study of farmers in Coralan, a rural village in the province of Laguna (1998:79) and in the city, “Panulukan ng Quezon Avenue AR West 4th” (Corner of Quezon Avenue and West 4th) (1998a:39). It may be said that in studying communities in the countryside and in the city, Covar is looking for the overarching culture that links the various groups in the archipelago. Moreover, in con-sidering the physical relation of the household to the community, Covar re-cognized not only the ethnic communities in the country but also the ancient communities that existed before the arrival of the foreign colonizers. These inquiries on Philippine communities may be considered contributions to the ongoing discovery and understanding of the breadth of Filipinohood:
Our experience is the formulation of a Filipino culture from the various ows and streams that possess a characteristic order. We shall call this ‘national culture of the Pilipino’ — not the sum total of all the ows and streams but the likeness and form of an enriched philosophy, culture, and society — thus, civilization (Covar, 1998a:32).
At this point, focus will be directed to Covar’s views on kapatiran, a con-cept he developed and which has signicant bearing on Filipino social organization. Ostensibly, corollary to the study of kapatiran is Covar’s analy-sis of belief systems, so it is proper to use as an introduction to Covar’s writings on kapatiran his views on the Filipino’s mode of knowing, which he presented in the article “Indigenization of an Ideational System” (1998a).
According to Covar, this mode of knowing consists of three dimen-sions: divine knowing, human knowing, and articial knowing. For him, the various traditions of belief and faith in the Philippines are based on the Filipinos’ recognition of the absolute supremacy of divine knowing (1998a:119). Divine knowing remains a mystery, although it is sometimes expressed through healers, mediums, baglan and others. Human knowing is considered a natural knowing that may be acquired by studying nature and one’s physical environment. Finally, what is called articial knowing is “the human creation of various forms of knowledge, especially techno-logical ones” that can alter the ow of nature. Covar cited the production of “miracle rice” or of nuclear arms as examples of this kind of knowing (1998a:119).
According to Covar, the rst two traditions of searching for wisdom in the Philippines are widespread, that is, the search for the mysterious divine knowing that is freely bestowed and the search for the natural know-ing that may be gleaned from nature. From this viewpoint, it may be said that the activities and goals of the many kapatiran and of the worshippers in Mount Banahaw form part of the tradition of searching for divine wis-dom. Corollary to these beliefs is the understanding of human wisdom about nature.
The Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi
Written at the outset of the 1960s, Covar’s master’s thesis on the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi was guided by the standards current at the time in the eld of sociology in the Philippines. He examined the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi of Calamba, Laguna as a social organization and as a social move-ment, focusing on the concept of “messianic social movement” considered as “collective enterprises designed to establish a new social order” (1961:152). He discussed the organization’s history, structure, and leadership, as well as events such as the Japanese Occupation, which furthered the cause of the organization’s sodality. In the collective quest for meaning in everyday
life and in the continuous eV orts to understand divine wisdom, the thesis
found the role of the bayani (heroes) of the country important, in particu-lar, Dr. Jose P. Rizal. Revered by members of the organization as the “new Christ,” Dr. Rizal had views and aspirations that contributed much to the formation of the character and goal of the organization.
For his doctoral dissertation in the allied eld of anthropology, Covar re-examined the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi . This time, the study focused on the structural development of the organization, that is, its evolution — from being a cause at the outset in the mid-1930s, through becoming a sodal-ity when the Samahang Watawat ng Lahi was established circa 1939–40, to its change in title from Samahan to Iglesia (Church) Watawat ng Lahi in 1944. The latter was brought about by the need to protect the organization in the face of danger at the hands of the Japanese forces (1975:109).
In relation to the process of the organization’s development, the study also showed three important forces attendant to the various changes herein: traditional beliefs, Christianity, and Protestantism. It is assumed that there is a signicant link between the traditional faith in Bathala and in nature spirits, and the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi ’s unique relationship to the spirit of Dr. Rizal, which they consider their mentor and guide. The dissertation showed how the sodality accepted and advocated the causes of their bayani not only as a specialist in the study of society, but more importantly, as the “new Christ.”
On the other hand, the inuence of Protestantism may be seen in the structure of the leadership and general organization of the sodality; for instance, in the use of phrases and positions like “presiding elder” and “second presiding elder”, and in the conduct of the ceremonies and ritu-als of the mass, baptisms, and weddings that were similar to the conven-tions of what Covar referred to as Orthodox Christianity (1975:110). From these primary inuences arose the “three golden causes” of the sodality: the aspiration to become Dios (godly), tao (humane), and maka-bayan (patriotic) (1975:95). In accordance with this, the three causes served as the regulatory ethics in the daily life of the members and as the basis of one’s own salvation.
It seems that the concept of simulain (cause), from the point of the view of the members themselves, is a key to the understanding of the Iglesia
Watawat ng Lahi . As Covar had said,
Epistemologically, the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi imputes two usages to the term simulain (cause). On the one hand, it refers to a set of objectives, aims, or purposes. On the other hand, it refers to a voluntary organization (sodality) with a special mission or cause (1975:48).10
It is important to note that although Covar had noted the reference to kapatid (brother/sister/brethren) in his master’s thesis in sociology (1961:156), it was in his later study of the groups worshipping in Mount Banahaw that he became deeply interested in exploring the spirit of kapatiran. It may be said that it was the perspective set by Pilipinolohiya that intensied this particular view of his subject matter.
The Devotee Kapatiran in Mount Banahaw
Through the ethnographic approach, Covar closely examined the groups worshipping in Mount Banahaw since the 1970s. In particular, this may be seen in such works as “Liham ng Isang Antropologista sa Kanyang Kaibigang Kristyano” (An anthropologist’s letter to a Christian friend) (1998a:83) and “Prayer in Mt. Banahaw Context” (1998a:89). In his view, even though there are divergences in the beliefs of the various worship-ping groups, they all accept the mystical transfer of the holy sites from Ancient Palestine to Mount Banahaw. In the article “Kapahayagan ng
Iba’t Ibang Paniniwalang Pilipino” (Manifestations of diV erent Philippine
beliefs), Covar supposed that this belief was actually based on what he referred to as isang alamat (a legend) (1998a:97).
Now home to many worshippers, Mount Banahaw is believed to have been rst inhabited by Hermano Pule and his companions as early as 1849. Given that the worship is centred on sacred sites, it is believed that there are about 100 such sites in Mount Banahaw, 20 of which are con-sidered traditional sites (1998a:89). To Covar, the beliefs in Mount Banahaw are eclectic, where three intertwined dimensions of belief may be observed. Highly signicant are the role of animism, the Christian element, and the acceptance of the role of their bayani , especially of Dr. Rizal.
Covar shares the view of Isabelo de los Reyes that the primordial belief of the Filipinos is animism, the term originating from the word “anima.” Covar calls them “nature spirits” that are to be found in nat-ural sites such as rivers, rocks, anthill and caves (1998a:95). In Mount Banahaw, one may observe, through candles and icons, the regard and relationship of the worshipper to such forms of nature as rocks, waterfalls, rivers, caves, and peaks. According to Covar,
The animist tradition is based on the belief that the world is full of spirits. These spirits possess power, knowledge, or amulets about various things. These are bestowed on select people. Mountains, caves, swamps, rivers, waterfalls, plants, animals, even humans have their very own powers. The power may be obtained through the cultivation of a clean heart, conscience, and spirit and through the meticulous adherence to ritual, such as fervent praying (1980:77).
Apparently, sites in nature are also named according to Christian tradi-tion: Tubig ng Jordan (Water of Jordan), Kuweba ni San Pedro (Cave of St. Peter), San Pablo (St. Paul), Santisima Trinidad (Holy Trinity), Kuweba ng Diyos Ama (Cave of God the Father), and others (1998:97). On the other hand,
while Christianity eschews belief in anting-anting (amulets) and potensiya at bisa (mystical powers) as superstition, the worshippers of Mount Banahaw as well as of many other places throughout the archipelago openly accept such beliefs. Covar added:
Many sacrices, vows, missions, spirit-worship, and prayers are performed in nurturing and testing the amulet. Every Lent, there are people who carry the cross. This is solidarity with Christ in his suV ering. They do not per-form the sacrice for the forgiveness of their sin. Their aim is to nurture their amulet in life. In like manner, agellation is not an exorcism of evil spirits. It is done to cleanse the body so that it becomes a temple worthy of the amulet. The Filipino’s attendance at mass seems like the enactment of ritual in the cave to nurture one’s native powers (1980:78).
What may also be seen is the connection of Christianity with the tradi-tional belief in the acceptance of the Holy Trinity in Mount Banahaw. However, the Holy Trinity — the mystery of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit — is a fundamental aspect of Roman Catholic belief that is accepted and appropriated in Mount Banahaw as the Holy Family that consists of God the Father, God the Mother, and God the Son. Apparently, God the Mother descended to earth, became incarnate, and assumed the form of such blessed women as Maria Bernarda Balitaan, Victoria Piedad, and Josena Lopez, who played signicant roles in the various kapatiran in Mount Banahaw (1998a:101). For Covar,
Although the doctrine of the Holy Trinity remains, the retablo’s text is linked to the concept of the holy family so as to quell the anxiety about why there are God the Son and God the Father without a God the Mother. The role of the Holy Spirit has just become a part of the three as soul. Moreover, the mat of the retablo is adorned with ornamental stories from Sacred Scripture and other streams of belief and Filipino imagination, thus creating a new order as a fruit of traditional experience (1998a:101).
Apparent here is the high regard for women and for the family. In Pesigan’s study (1992) of the Ciudad Mistica de Dios presided over by Suprema Isabel Suarez, it is evident that such a tradition remains up to the present in Mount Banahaw. The importance placed on relationships within a model family is markedly reected in the general reference to sodalities worship-ping Mount Banahaw as kapatiran (Pesigan, 1992:171; Alaras, 1988). A vital support to what Covar had already expressed, the spirit of pakikipagkapati-ran (promoting sodality) is what guides worship activities and everyday life in Mount Banahaw.
As has been said, in Covar’s study of the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi and the millenarian groups in Mount Banahaw, it is evident that Dr. Jose Rizal is revered. According to these groups’ beliefs, there is a poignant parallel-ism or analogy between the lives of Jesus Christ and Dr. Rizal: from their birth, name, ministry, and death; to their foundation of a new kingdom. For the Rizalists, it follows from this that, indeed, Dr. Rizal is the “new Christ”. The regard that these kapatiran have for their bayani and the role that these are performing or will perform in Philippine society is an
indi-cation that their faith or spiritual world includes a broad and marked polit-ical dimension (Covar, 1989).
In relation to this, Covar’s clarication about kasarinlan (indepen-dence/self-reliance) and kalayaan (freedom) as the primary aspiration of every kapatiran and every social movement is important. Looking back into history, Covar examined the Katipunan and the dovetailing of its goals according to independence and freedom. Covar considered the aspiration to freedom as a part of the political sphere (which could benet only a few people), while the aspiration to independence/self-reliance is part of the cultural sphere, which has more meaning and relevance to the people (1992:9). Many millenarian kapatiran, like the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi , actu-ally aspired for absolute independence/self-reliance. For Covar, the quest for independence/self-reliance remains current among the worshipping kapa-tiran in Mount Banahaw. At a gathering at the University of the Philippines during the early 1990s, Suprema Isabel Suarez of Ciudad Mistica de Dios reiterated: “we abide by the teachings of our ancestors” (1992:10).
As has been mentioned, the belief of all the kapatiran is not only ori-ented to the advancement of spirituality on the level of the self and of the kapatiran. It is also geared towards the well-being of society in general, as in the aspiration for independence. In connection with this, in his “Ang Pananaw sa Kasaysayan ng Pilipinas ng mga Kapatiran at Kilusang Milinaryan” (The Kapatiran and millenarian movement’s views on Philippine history), Covar emphasized on viewing these organizations as organisms, that is, as movements that have life as well as a broad cause. Covar sup-posed that such groups are the ones that truly make history (1989:2).
In said article, Covar presented the interrelated concepts that he used in his study of the worship groups, from the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi to Mount Banahaw: cause, sodality, kapatiran, and movement. Covar assumes that each of these has its respective structure, that is, leadership, mem-bership, ideology, code of ethics, and rituals. He added: “the development and prospering of a cause to the status of a movement depends on the meshing together of the said structure” (1989:2).
At the personal level in Filipino society, cleansing of the kalooban (inner self ) in the context of belief is inextricably linked to pagpapakatao (aspiring for humaneness). For Covar, Filipino spirituality is a result of the melding of one’s beliefs and personhood. The rituals performed by the kapatiran, however, are not only a sign of personal faith but also a way of achieving the fullness of one’s potential. For Covar, this is geared toward being not only a noble person but also a true Filipino (1998a:100). As in the causes of the Iglesia Watawat ng Lahi , it is not enough to become God-fearing and humane; it is just as important to be patriotic.
In Covar’s presentation, it is clear that the tradition of the search for divine wisdom, which is assumed to be the foundation of the quest for knowledge in Philippine society, is inextricably linked with the spirit of the kapatiran and with aspirations for the greater good of Philippine society.
Bayan from the Pantayo Perspective
Salazar’s analysis of the dalumat (social signication) of bayan and its impor-tance to Filipino society has broad and deep roots. It needs to be con-textualized within Salazar’s view (1993a) of the history of the Philippines since many thousands of years ago in the Austronesian world, and its forms not only in the Philippines but also in Southeast Asia. For Salazar (1997a; 1998b), the Austronesians who rst arrived in the archipelago, circa 7000/5000 BC, possessed the three important community ( pamayanan )
con-cepts: banua, ili , and bayan.11 These are considered to be the most
impor-tant elements in the traditional social structure of the archipelago from the initial arrival of the Austronesians to circa 300 AD.
In the context of Austronesian civilization, Salazar examines the his-tory of the archipelago according to three broad dimensions: the socio-political organization, concerned with concepts pertaining to leadership and state; the integration of society as a whole, with focus on community-related concepts; and culture, which encompasses belief systems, burial practices, ethno-linguistic concerns, and others (Figure 2). From a broad perspective, for example, from a sociological one, it may be said that the three dimen-sions are closely interrelated and may be viewed within an overarching framework of social organization. In any case, in relation to the outline and purpose of this study, this section of the paper will be devoted to the conception of society according to Salazar’s views.
In his study of history, Salazar examined the two diV ering traditions
of looking at the past: the tradition of historia , which expresses the Spaniards’ perspective on the events during their stay in the country; and the tradi-tion of kasaysayan as a narrative that has sense, meaning, signicance, and relevance to the people who are the very subject of the narrative (Navarro et al., 1997:70–71). That is why it is the pantayo perspective that is used in studying the history of the Filipino people, that is, from our own point
of view.12
As noted earlier, integral to the pantayo perspective is the analysis of the dalumat of bayan in Philippine history and society (cf. Salazar in Veneracion (1986:xvi); Alaras, 1988:xii). For Navarro et al., local constructs related to the pamayanan (community), bayan, and bansa (nation) “are what gave sub-stance to the alternative outline of history that is laid out by the pantayo perspective” (1997:129). Table 1 (Salazar, 1998b) gives a summary of the forms assumed by the bayan from the Austronesian period and various other eras in history: from the primordial banua /ili/bayan, the bayan; the ethnic state to which the kingdom, rajahood and sultanate (circa 300 AD–1588) belonged; the revolutionary bayan (1588–1892); and the building up of a single, unied bayan on the level of the entire archipelago (1892–1913). It is important to note that one of the aims of examining bayan is to estab-lish the links between the nacíon of the elite and the bayan of the people
F i g u r e 2 : S t a t e , S o c i e t y a n d C u l t u r e i n t h e H i s t o r y o f t h e A r c h i p e l a g o h k 7 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 B K h k 1 5 0 0 1 3 0 0 B K h k 3 0 0 M K 1 5 8 8 1 8 9 2 I A N C I E N T S O C I O P O L I T I C A L O R G A N I Z A T I O N * b a l i a n * I l i ( i l i h a n ) I L I ( H i l a g a n g P i l i p i n a s ) B A Y A N ( G i t n a n g P i l i p i n a s ) * b a l a y V A H A Y A N * y u m a h A U S T R O N E S Y A N O P I L I P I N O - I N D O N E S Y A N O ( P a g l i l i b i n g s a T a p a y a n s a Y u n g i b ) M g a K a l i n a n g a n g e t n o l i n g g u w i s t i k o n g P I L I P I N O s a D U N I A M E L A Y U N a m u m u o n g K A L I N A N G A N G B A Y A N s a l o o g n g E S T A D O N G K O L O N Y A L , m g a S U L T A N A T O a t m g a K A B U U A N G L U M A D K a l i n a n g a n n g B A Y A N a t n g m g a b a y a n , i l i , b a n u a ( b a n g s a ) s a K a p u l u a n K A L I N A N G A N G B A Y A N s a T a g a l o g o P / F i l i p i n o n a n a k a u g a t s a m g a k a l i n a n g a n g i l i , b a y a n a t b a n u a ( b a n g s a ) * l u k ù * B a n u ( v ) à b a l e i b a l e n b o n g t o l u n g s o d , d a l e p a , a t b p . B A N U A ( T i m o g P i l i p i n a s ) I L I N A S Y O N ( “ N a t i o n ” ) s a i n g l e s v s . A Y B A N s a P / F i l i n o ( b i l a n g p a g l a w a k / p a g k a b u k l o d n g i l i , B a y a n a t B a n u a ) ( m u l a s a l a b a s / i b a ) N a c i ó n / P a t r i a s a K a s t i l a B u o n g K a p u l u a n b i l a n g B A Y A N : I N A N G B A Y A N ( m u l a s a l o o b / S a r i l i ) P A G L A W A K N G S A K L A W N G B A Y A N B A N U A h a r i s u l t a n h r a a h i a r
d a t u p a n d i t a ? ? ? b a y l a n r a h a m u d a ? ? ? b a y a n i d a t u p a n d a y p a n d a y S U L T A N A T O P A G B U B U O N G B A Y A N ( H i m a g s i k , P a g h i h i m a g s i k , H I M A G S I K A N ) H A R I N G B A Y A N G K A T A G A L U G A N ( I n a n g B a y a n ) K i l u s a n g m o s y e r i k o ( m i l i t a r i s t a ) T A A L N A K A A Y U S A N G S O S Y O - P U L I T I K A L ( E S T A D O ) L a t i n o - i l u s t r a d o ( n a c i d i n ) R e p u b l i c a F i l i p i n a ( P a t r i a ) P h i l i p p i n e R e p u b l i c ( s a h u w a r a n g A m e r i k a n o ) K i l u s a n g “ M A S A ” ( b a t a y s a k a s a y s a y a n g u n i b e r s a l n g K a n l u r a n ) H a r i n g B a y a n ( p a t u l o y n a a n g p a n g h i h i m a g s i k ) B A N G S A M O R O ( K i l u s a n g P a n g - e t n i s i d a d ) K I L U S A N G L U M A D / K A T U T U B O ( K o r d i l y e r a , M i n d a n a o , a t b p . ) m g a s e k t a / k i l u s a n g m i l n a r i s t a K A R A H A A N ( K a r a d y a h a n ) b a l i a n b a g a n i * h a ( n ) d ì * d a t ù * b a y a n i * p a n d a y K A H A R I A N K A D A T U A N ( * h a ( n ) d i ) ? * d a t u I I I I I I V V V I 1 9 1 3 1 9 9 8 h k 7 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 B K h k 1 5 0 0 1 3 0 0 B K h k 3 0 0 M K 1 5 8 8 1 8 9 2 1 9 1 3 1 9 9 8 B A Y A N - S T A T E B A Y A N - S T A T E V S . C O L O N I A L S T A T E T O W A R D S A N A T I O N A L S T A T E T O W A R D S A N A R C H I - P E L A G I C B A Y A N - S T A T E B a n s a ?
A
U
S
T
R
O
N
E
S
I
A
N
C
I
V
I
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
A
B
K
S O C I O P O L I T I C A L O R G A N I Z A T I O N
S O C I A L
I N T E G R A T I O N
C U L T U R E K A L I N A N G A N
<
<
<
<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
<
}
}
> ? K U L T U R A N G L A D I N O I - L U S T R A D O S A K A S T I L A K U L T U R A N G N A S Y O N A L S A W I K A N G I N G L E S “ E s t a d o , L i p u n a n a t K u l t u r a s a K a s a y s a y a n : A n g W i k a s a P a m a n a n g P a n g k a l i n a n g a n n g P i l i p i n o ” Z . A . S a l a z a r C e n t e n n i a l L e c t u r e , U n i v e r s i t y o f t h e P h i l i p p i n e s C e n t e r f o r I n t e g r a t i v e a n d D e v e l o p m e n t S t u d i e s S e p t e m b e r 2 8 , 1 9 9 8 , B a l a y K a l i n a w , U P D i l i m a n , Q u e z o n C i t y ? ? ? S a l a z a r , 1 9 9 8 ( K a r a p a t a n g - a r i )towards the formation of one bansa (nation) for all Filipinos (Salazar, 1998b).
Bayan in a Historical Context
In Rodriguez’s ongoing study for her master’s thesis in History, she demon-strated the widespread usage of ili, bayan, banua , and other allied concepts
throughout the archipelago (Salazar, 1997a:4).13 It is claimed that in places
where bayan and its allied concepts are used, the dominant feature of a community as bayan is “in the prevalence of permanent housing structures — that is, communities in a specic territory” (Salazar, 1997a:6). However, the basic denitions of bayan in Tagalog are not only “inhabited place or territory” but also “the people living there.” It is analogous to the balei in
Panggasinense and balen in Pampanggo (Salazar, 1997a:6–7).14
According to Salazar’s study, the banua is the most important concept in Bicol, the Visayas, and Mindanao (1997a:6). The banua is part of the original Austronesian vocabulary; banu[v]a means earth/land, house/resi-dence. That is why in Indo-Malaysia, there is the term benua (Malay), which means lupalop; and in Oceania may be found the Pacic state of Vanuatu. In the context of its origins, the banua is assumed to be the oldest concept of community in the Philippines. It could also be said that it was the most prevalent community in the archipelago before the appearance of the bayan that was characterized by more permanent housing and communities. (Salazar 1997a:6–7).
As a pamayanan (community), the ili in turn may be found in places where hostilities are prevalent. Since survival must be ensured, the ili is often transferred. In these places, agriculture is based only on the slash-and-burn technique, so there is no real need to stay in a place permanently. Although the ili is widespread in northern Luzon, it may also be found in the regions of the bayan and the banua , which is why the ili is considered the most prevalent form of the pamayanan concepts (Salazar 1997a:7, 8). Salazar recognizes the signicant links of the ili to the concepts of “kuta ” and “real,” especially during the Himagsikan (people’s uprising) (1997a).
As had been mentioned and as the Filipinos know, the concept of bayan refers not only to the physical or geographical aspect or territory of the community. Bayan also refers to the inhabitants in that territory. As Salazar had said, “in all regions, the meaning of bayan is not only place (that is, land of one’s birth) but also people (that is, citizens or taumbayan [people of the bayan ])” (Navarro et al., 1997:117). Based on Salazar’s analy-sis, in summary, the breadth of territory that Filipinos refer to in relation to bayan are the following:
