Algo de Ori Traducir

8/9/2019 Algo de Ori Traducir

1/13

International Journal of Social Science Tomorrow Vol. 1 No. 8

ISSN: 2277-6168 October|2012 www.ijsst.com Page | 1

Hermeneutic Analysis of the Idea of Ori (Destiny) in I fa Literary Corpus in Yoruba Culture

Adebayo Aina, PhD, Philosophy, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, Nigeria

AbstractThe study is an analysis of the place of Ori in Yoruba culture. It transcends the ethnographical presentation ofthe idea in cultural anthropology and the metaphysical construct of the idea in the African philosophical

literature. We employed content analysis hinged on the hermeneutic approach in philosophical analysis. Thisapproach involves the analysis of aspects of the Ifa Literary Corpus dealing with the concept of Ori as a meansof going beyond popular beliefs in order to have a deeper insight into the significance of the concept in Yoruba

culture. We find that there are roles associated with the concept of Ori than the idea of destiny. These includeOri as guardian, sympathizer and provider of man. The study goes beyond the discussion of the concept inYoruba tradition within the framework of the freewill-determinism debate in western philosophy and draws

attention to the study of Ifa literary corpus.

Keywords: Destiny, Hermeneutics, Ifa Literary Corpus, Ori, Yoruba culture.

One of the themes that attracts attention in the study of yoruba traditional thought is the idea of destiny. Butmost of the studies have been based on the people‟s oral tradition, particularly as recorded by scholars inanthropological and religious studies. The general impression that has been given in most of these studies is that

or , as one of the components of the person, is primarily concerned with human destiny. Hence most of thediscussions on the concept are centred on the idea of freewill and determinism. Besides, not enough attentionhas been paid to the various manifestations of this theme in if literary corpus, which can be regarded as the

encyclopaedia of yoruba wisdom and philosophy. The paper aims at filling this gap.


2/13



Hence, we attempt a clarification of the meaning of hermeneutical approach in philosophy as a means ofunderstanding better the meaning of Or in If literary corpus. We shall explore what If literary corpus standsfor and of what relationship has it to the concept of or in Yoruba thought system; most importantly a review ofthe anthropological and philosophical studies of or will be examined. Afterwards, we apply this hermeneuticapproach in order to reveal the core ideas of Or in the corpus. The application of this method demonstrates thata meaningful understanding of Or in the If literary corpus demands not only reflection on the past traditions, but also analytical engagements with texts which reflect the complexity and dynamism of the concept. This

interpretative exercise is neither fixed nor closed.

1. The Hermeneutical Approach in PhilosophyHermeneutics simply means the study of understanding, in particular, the interpretation of a text, a thing, orhuman action. According to Palmer, „it is the most basic act of human thinking‟ (Palmer, 1994:8-9) as humandaily existence involves a constant process of interpretation. This involves the process of bringing to momentfrom unintelligibility to understanding. Gadamer describes this as „bridging the gap between the familiar worldin which we stand and the strange meaning that resists assimilation into the horizons of our world‟ (Gadamer,1975: xii). Thus, the hermeneutical call is to make something that is unfamiliar, distant and obscure in meaning

into something real, near and intelligible to man (Palmer, 1994:14). It is derived from the Greek verbhermeneuein, that is, „to interprete‟, and the noun hermeneia, „interpretation‟. According to the ancient Greektradition, the noun hermeneia is associated with the god Hermes who is responsible for making intelligible what

are originally beyond human comprehension (Palmer, 1994:14). It is also the „search for the original,

undistorted message of a written source‟ (Bauman, 1978:8). Hence, it is a tool employed in the „act ofelucidation‟ (Madu, 1995:6).

Hermeneutics was first introduced to address the question of authenticity in christian texts, as there appeared thecontraction of the true version versus distorted one. At that stage, it became imperative to recover the truemeaning „as identical with demonstrating the authenticity of the text‟ (bauman, 1978:7) . This biblical exegesiswas swiftly refocused, in the romantic age, to a „purposive system‟ whereby the interpreter had to „plumb theimpenetrable depth of the author‟s spiritual experience‟ (bauman, 1978: 9-10). It was a state at which theinterpreter employed his imagination in line with the author‟s state of mind. Methodologically, this consciousunderstanding is meant to form anticipatory ideals, to make them conscious and acquire right understandingfrom the things themselves (gadamer, 1975:239). He projects before himself a meaning for the text as a wholeas soon as some initial meaning emerges. Again, the latter emerges only because he is reading into the text with

particular expectations in regard to a certain meaning. It indicates that the interpreter is infested with prejudices,

prior mind‟s eye and prior question, in his preliminary approach to a text. Meaning in this sense is the creationof the interpreter. It is his intent upon reading the text. In other words, the interpreter approaches the text withcertain presuppositions, interests, historical understanding and experiences which sum up to shape, overtime, the

way he understands the text this, in turn, actualises the condition whereby it is possible for two differentinterpreters to reasonably come out with different interpretations of a given situation or text. Nonetheless, it isimportant for the interpreter to exercise caution not to introduce a prior stance into determining the meaning of atext before the act of reading even begins. This arbitrariness of inappropriate fore- meaning only comes to

nothing in its working-out. Indeed, it is honourable for the interpreter to be both aware of his presuppositionsand open to having it challenged by the text. Openness here means the willingness of the interpreter to reviseand to correct presuppositions newly: this creates the atmosphere of presuppositions without prejudices. Palmer

comments thus:

We understand a given text, matter, or situation not with an empty consciousness temporarily filled with the

present situation but rather because we hold in our understanding, and bring into play a preliminary intentionwith regard to the situation, an already established way of seeing, and certain ideational „pre-conceptions‟(Palmer, 1994:176).

This preconception is bound by subjective seeing and understanding of the present standing which is tradition based.

Tradition, then, connotes the horizon within which man perceives the world. It also contributes to the stream ofconceptions within which we stand, and we must in this state be prepared to distinguish fruitful presuppositionsfrom those that imprison and hinder our thinking and seeing faculties. Richard Palmer metaphorically expresses

this idea thus: „We are immersed in the medium of our tradition which is as transparent to us and therefore asinvisible to us, as water to a fish‟ (Thiselton, 1980:306). The interpreter is automatically filled with anticipatoryideas gathered from the present tradition in which he finds himself towards a text. This horizon, to Gadamer,

represents the prejudices in which certain values, attitudes or institutions turn authoritative within such atradition. Though by „prejudices‟ we mean a judgement passed before all the factors responsible for a situation


3/13



have been finally examined, we are expected to employ „true prejudices‟ that is, prejudice which are justified byrational knowledge in making our judgements. We are thus required to develop a critical awareness of our prejudices and correct them in our effort to hear what the text says to us. This is not to proffer a prejudice-freeapprehension but rather to maintain a flexible set of them, which encourage effective history (Gadamer, 1975:

xxviii). It shows prejudices to be integral to all understanding as against wilful bias or bigotry in the tradition.Therefore the interpreter, in his hermeneutic state, has to recognise the importance of his present tradition or prejudices, in shaping the meaning of the text. Gadamer writes about this situational interpretation thus:

Every time will have to understand a text handed down to it in its own way, for it is subject to the whole of thetradition in which it has material interest and in which it seeks to understand itself. The real meaning of a text

as it assesses the interpreter does not just depend on the occasional factors which characterize the author andhis original public. For it is also always co-determined by the historical situation of the interpreter and thus bythe whole of the objective course of history. The meaning of a text surpasses its author not occasionally, butrather always. Thus understanding is not a reproductive procedure, but rather always also a productive one. It

suffices to say that one understands differently when one understands at all (Gadamer, 1975: xxv).

And this understanding is realized through the process of „temporal distance‟. According to Gadamer , temporaldistance is:

a filtering process…. It not only lets those prejudices that are of a particular and limited nature die away butcauses those that bring about genuine understanding to emerge as such. It is only this temporal distance that

can solve the really critical question of hermeneutics, namely, of distinguishing the true prejudices, by which weunderstand, from the false ones by which we misunderstand. Hence the hermeneutically trained… mind willmake conscious the prejudices governing our own understanding so that the text, as another‟s meaning, can beisolated and valued on its own (Thiselton, 1980:306).

All these raise the point that meaningful understanding of a text, given the necessary effort and goodwill,demands not only reflective exercise on past events, but also speak of something new. This fusion of horizon, between the text and the interpreter, takes the form of the logic of the question (Gadamer, 1975:333). It showsthe „logical structure of openness‟ (Gadamer, 1975: 325) whereby questions, which are implicit, are asked in allexperience. We cannot have experiences without asking questions. Hence the openness that is part of experience

is precisely the openness of being this or that. These attributes represent the structure of a question. It isimportant that every true question must achieve this openness. True openness then must attract both negativeand positive judgements. Gadamer opines thus:

This is the basis of the essential relation between questions and knowledge. For it is the essence of knowledgenot only to judge something correctly, but at the same time and for the same reason to exclude what is wrong(Gadamer, 1975: 328).

Gadamer further claims that there is no definite method to ground this thought of idea and questioning. Everysudden idea has the structure of a question, which presses itself on us. That is why it is impossible to understand

an object that turns away real questions. That is to say, to understand the questionable ness of something isalways to question it. It is a conversational approach conditioned by the fact that the partners to it do not talk atcross-purpose. Rather the art of conversation herein requires absolute understanding of the parties involved.This dialectical conversation must exercise discipline of understanding. Gadamer expresses this idea thus:

It is true that a text does not speak to us in the same way as does another person. We must ourselves make it speak. (It) is not an arbitrary procedure that we undertake on our own initiative but that, as a question, it is

related to the answer that is expected in the text. The anticipation of an answer itself presumes that the personasking is part of the tradition and regards himself as addressed by it. We described its realisation as the fusionof the horizons of understanding; this is what mediates between the texts and its interpreter (Gadamer, 1975:340).

To this end, the interpreter is tradition-bound to creatively shed more light on the intended meaning of the text by the author. It is undoubtedly true that the interpreter is in a better situation to update the facts in the text

rather than mere “naïve assimilation”.

In general, the application of this method to the If literary corpus centres not only on the „logic of questioning‟through conversation with the text but also to emphasise that the interpreter involved is grounded in Yoruba

tradition which facilitates his preconceived “prejudice” on the discourse. And the choice of this as ourtheoretical framework to the study of the idea of Or Yoruba ontological discourse is premised on the fact thatGadamer describes understanding as embracing three distinct but inseparable moments: the initial understanding


4/13


5/13



The ori which is the essence of personality, the personality-soul in man, derives directly from Olodumare whose sole prerogative it is to put it in man because He is the one inexhaustible source of being.( Idowu, 1982:170-171)

Or then occupies an important position because, firstly, it rules man‟s personality. Secondly, it is man‟sessence. Also, it is man‟s guardian soul and the guardian ancestor. That is, it is a deity with a supernaturalcontrol over man‟s activity in his earthly sojourn. Thus or has a mission which is to fulfil a destiny;

Ohun or ́ wa se , k ma ni s`ali se e Ttranslate as: What the ori comes to fulfil it cannot but fulfil it. (Idowu, 1982:170-171)

In this sense, or acts the role of cause and effect leading to man‟s history. It tailors man‟s activity on earthdown to the unknown. This informed the appeal to or as a worthy element of worship by the Yoruba.It is believed that if or is kept in good condition , it may confer on man social respect in hiscommunity. More so, it will bestow the status of Being ness on man. In other words, it facilitates a speedyattainment of life expectancy on man. In this turn of mind, or represents an important element of praise in theYoruba culture. That is, it is a personal god rather than other gods which are concerned with the affairs of

everybody.

Hence it is imperative to consult or before any life-venture is embarked upon. In this sense or serves toresolve some of the important problems bedevilling human condition on earth.

However, the Yoruba take O ̀ ru ́ nm l̀a ̀ to be present at the point of selection or allotment of or by man. rnmlis then capable of revealing to man what pleases or displeases or . In this vein, the consultation of an if priest isto reveal the wishes of or . If, in his intermediary capacity, mediates between the inquirer and his or . He takesthe message of or , the supplicant, and, in return, accepts the sacrifice for onward transmission to or .(Abimbola, 1976: 115) It is against this clarification that we briefly review the dominant approaches to the studyof Or . These are the religio-anthropological explanation and the analytic reactions.

2.1 The Religio – Anthropological ApproachThis approach attempts to present the concept of Or (destiny) as is popularly expressed in Yoruba oraltraditions. It also seeks to promote the understanding of the concept „through the exposition of their logicalstructure and the assumptions on which they are based‟ (Oladipo, 1992:21). These assumptions centre on the

belief that Oldmar, the Supreme Being, represents the source from whom all things emanate. This belief isexpressed in a mythological fashion in order to reveal some actual or imaginary reality, which is not adequatelyunderstood and so cannot be explained through normal description. (Mbiti, 1991:77)

A number of claims define this approach. First, it contends that the creation of human destiny is that of a freechoice by man. This stance is mythologically exposed by Abimbola, in Ifa: An exposition of Ifa literary corpus.According to Abimbola, after the physical part ( Ara) is moulded by Orisa-nla, the arch – divinity, the life givingforce ( m ) is introduced by Oldmar, the Supreme Being, Himself. Thereafter, man proceeds to the storehouse of Ajala, the incorrigible being and head baker, to select his preferred Or . (Idowu, 1982:173) This beliefabout Or is expressed thus:

Omo e ̀ n ̀ yan ku ́ nle ̀ o ́ yan ̀ p ́n yan ik t ma p je

Oldmar se t si i ,O wa ́ di a ̀ ̀ pada ̀ Or mo Ibsn kyn re , Alr r ni k mo on Translate as:The son of man kneels and chooses his portion He chooses the death that would kill himOlodumare seals it

It becomes unalterableOri knows his lasting place It is its carrier that does not know (Orangun, 1998:131)

From the above, we can deduce that Or or personality is freely chosen and accordingly sealed by Oldmar.

This portion or pn becomes impossible to alter on earth. Man then is neither conscious of his beginning norwhen his final end will come in as much as all is taken to be Or‟s business. This confirms the belief that man


6/13



must have truly seeped the water of forgetfulness at the gate of heaven before proceeding to sl – ay (theworld). (Oduwole, 1996:45-6)

Thus, once destiny has been chosen, it becomes unalterable and irreversible. This is the bases of the Yoruba

belief that what has been doubly sealed by both Oldmar at the point of conferment and at the “gate” ofheaven by Onbod, the gate- keeper, could not be reopened; what has been affixed to Or can under nocondition be subjected to modification by medicine man or by any other means. This reflected in the following

saying:

ynm gbgn Igi t ́ Olo ́ run gb ̀n d kan k l f tuTranslate as:That which is affixed cannot be altered by medicine

The tree which God plants No creature can uproot it (Orangun, 1998: 131)

This explains the possession by different people of different preferences, inclinations, capacities and talents.Each Or is preordained to fulfil a given character distinct from those of others. This is also noted in an Akansaying on destiny thus:

Every destiny is different from the other. All men have one head but heads differ. Antelopes souls (destiny) isone, duiker‟s another. Oh cocks do not compare your destiny with that of the hen. (Gyekye, 1987:107)

However, in the same account, as presented by Idowu, in his work Olodumare: God in Yoruba belief , theYoruba also believe that destiny can be altered. Idowu lists some ways through which this may be possible.First, man may consult the god of divination, rnml, not only to know which Or one has chosen, but also toalter an unfavourable portion.

Another means of possible change but for the worse is by Omo ar‟aye (children of the world) including the jand Os (witches and sorcerers), Elnn (those who do not want progress for others), the Alrk (theubiquitous gossiper), and all the other persons who desire ill for their fellow men. (Morakinyo and Akiwowo,1981:34) These evil spirits, perhaps human beings, may truncate the cause of man ‟s development towards hisdesired goals and aspirations. The Yoruba often refer to this set of wicked people as re-creators ( Atnib ).(Makinde, 1984: 45)

Generally, it is believed that it is only the support of one‟s Or that can help a person wade through all lifedifficulties and nothing else. But this wonderful personality may be lost through w – character. Its relationshipwith Or is such that it manifests the former‟s activities here on earth. (Morakinyo and Akiwowo, 1981:29) Thischaracter must thus be guided jealously by man. According to Idowu, a good destiny needs the support ofcharacter; otherwise it becomes worthless. (Idowu, 1982:179-80)

By and large, this approach is able to describe the various aspects of the belief in destiny by the Yoruba, thus providing „raw-materials‟ or foundation for further philosophical inquiry. Also, it is able to show how theconcept of destiny fits into the Yoruba belief system.

However, we cannot be contented with this “reported” world-view approach. This being the case, first, becauseit does not address the Yoruba belief in destiny in a holistic manner. Thus, it leaves some of the logical and

epistemological problems associated with it unaddressed. For instance, this approach creates an inconsistentsituation whereby the destiny chosen and sealed by Oldmar and Onbod could otherwise be reviewed in a post – natal state of man. This shows that the influence of Oldmar is underplayed, as He could after all notsanction His creations. Thus, man‟s inordinate ambition could be realized in as much as destiny may be altered.Generally, on this account, the authority of control over destiny lies with man and not with Oldmar becauseOmo Ar‟a ́ ye ́ (children of the world) could attempt the re-engineering process of man. Also, it presents theconcept of destiny as a closed system, thus denying it its dynamism. According to Gbadegesin, this approach

only „shelter lazily behind the authority of a tradition and projects its own theses and belief to that tradition.‟(Gbadegesin, 1991: 11)

The short comings highlighted above, among others, have generated some philosophical reactions.


7/13



2.2 Philosophical Reactions to the Concept of Ori The philosophical reactions to the study of destiny in Yoruba culture are characterized by a rational and criticalanalysis of the concept with underpinning elements of “argumentation and clarification”(Gbadegesin, 1991: 49).This approach recognizes the “reward that may accrue from a critical engagement” (Gbadegesin, 1991: 49) withthe “reported” world – view earlier discussed. It will no doubt enable us to see the strengths of the concept ofdestiny in traditional society. However let us look into some reactions of which characterise the philosophical

approach to the concept of destiny.

First, the choice of Or by man, as mythologically conceived, is after all not a free choice because what ischosen is unknown. The premises for this include, first, that the act of choosing destiny is by mere luck or

chance and not a free choice. Also, it is the unconscious self that man has chosen in the spiritual world which isknown only when he becomes successful in life (Orangun, 1998:146).

For this reason what is chosen could not

have been preferential because no man in the presence of alternatives could decide to go for a bad Or . So, mancan actualise his ambition to re-open what have been given him at the prenatal state in life.

Furthermore, Makinde, in „A philosophical analysis of the Yoruba concepts of Ori and of human destiny‟,recognises the importance of sacrifice to the concept of Or . To him, it serves as a means of rectifying ormodifying an unalterable destiny chosen in heaven after several efforts at ventures. In addition, the appeasementof Or through sacrifice does not neglect the relevance of hard work since man exercises the element of freedomin his earthly existence.

Makinde‟s analysis is based on two schools of thought in the study: The strong sense of destiny, whereby oncedestiny is chosen, it becomes impossible to alter it in real life; and the weak sense of destiny which claims thatthe chosen Or can be altered either through some sacrifices to it in the event that it was a bad one or throughhuman effort in order to maintain the good Or (Makinde, 1985:62-65). Makinde questions the possibility of astrong destiny in the scheme of things in Yoruba society. In this sense no person can be held responsible for hisdoing since he has been fated to be so. Even where a person blames rnml for not influencing the initial pn to be a good one, he may respond that if man is shown the way at the pre-natal state, then we may experience asituation whereby struggling in life and appeal or sacrifice to one‟s Or becomes impossible. In the same vein, a person may be tempted to mess up a good Or (Makinde, 1985: 64). On the other hand, Makinde claims that theweak sense of destiny is possible because “there is no logical reason to expect that every choice of a good Orwould lead to a successful life and every choice of a bad Or to a complete failure” (Makinde, 1985: 64). This practical outlook recognizes how important the Yoruba take the issue of moral responsibility and punishment.

Oladipo attempts a pragmatic interpretation in his analysis of the paradoxical nature of destiny as well as itscompatibility with freewill and moral responsibility (Oladipo, 1992:36-49). His literature spreads from the pre-natal state of man wherein “whatever a person has chosen when coming to the world (pn-Or ), whether good or bad, becomes doubly sealed” (Oladipo, 1992: 48-9) to the state of compatibility of determination and freewill.Like Makinde, he believes that the Yoruba are not fatalists, but determinists in their interpretation of destiny.However, this deterministic interpretation is not compulsorily conditioned but rather to explain away life

puzzles (Oladipo, 1992: 48-9). Gbadegesin maintains the same position when he writes that the belief in destinyis “a means of resolving some of the significant puzzles of the human condition” (Gbadegesin, 1984:184). Thatis to say, the Yoruba only attribute to Supreme Being, Oldmar, those things for which they “cannot findnaturalistic explanation” (Oladipo, 1992:49).

However, there are other scholars who think that the concept of destiny in Yoruba thought does not

accommodate the idea of freedom. Oduwole, for example, argues for a fatalistic interpretation of the Yorubaconcept of Or as more consistent with Yoruba world-view. (Oduwole, 1996:53) She gives some reasons forthis. First, she holds that destiny cannot be changed. Indeed, for her, any attempt to do so is a “fruitlessexercise”. She says that efforts taken towards changing the destiny may actually be a means of fulfilling thedestiny itself. There is a saying in support of this view.

ynm l b ye Translate as:

Destiny cannot be changed.

The statement means once Or has been chosen, it cannot be altered. She cites the Odewale‟s misfortune in OlaRotimi‟s play; The Gods are not to Blame. Odewale had been predestined to kill his father and marry hismother, and every attempt to avoid this fate failed. Also, Oduwole contends that character is part of the totality

of a “person”. (Oduwole, 1996: 49) Thus character cannot under any condition be a motivating factor inmodifying the Or . (Oduwole, 1996: 50) Unlike Gbadegesin, Oduwole also thinks that communal influence hasno place in determining destiny.


8/13



By and large, we are able to manifest a dynamic process in which critical attitudes are integrated into an order ofthe concept of destiny. The scholarship involved promotes counter-intuitive analyses, which clear the ground forfuture debates of the concept. Similarly, the study creates an intellectual atmosphere, which Prof. Bodunrincharacterizes as, “freedom of enquiry, openness to criticism, a general type of scepticism and fallibilism andnon-veneration of authorities.” (Bodunrin, 1985: xii) It encourages diversity of opinion on the concept of destinyand unity of purpose to fashion out a coherent and consistent interpretation of the concept.

On the other hand, the flaw of this approach is its inability to produce a comprehensive idea of destiny. Rather it

continues to recycle arguments and counter arguments, which at the end do not provide any further illuminationof the idea of or and the role it plays in human life. It is against this viewpoint that we next have an eagle-eye‟sview of the concept of or in the If literary corpus, through the aid of hermeneutic analysis, with the view totranscending earlier scholarship and forging a strong and dynamic conception of it in Yoruba thought system.

3. Hermeneutics and the Concept of Ori in Ifa Literary CorpusThe poem below centres on the significance of Or as a god more at home with an individual‟s life affair thangeneral wishes. The Od- If shows that whenever man is in want, Or should be the source of contact. The storydescribes an If priest who seeks for money, woman, and children. Having consulted O ̀ rnml, the oraculardivinity, for a way out, he was referred to s, rnml‟s messenger, who advised him that all his wants should be channelled through his Or . Having done that, he received the blessing of all the good things of life from hisOr . The following excerpt concludes thus:

Olt t mbe ly p‟ gnSksk ib won mo nwn egbf.Oj esn o lo tt K j K‟rn o dun ni d fn rn gbogbo t dun akp B ni won o dun if Nj , ohun gbogbo t‟ o ́ ba n du ̀ n m ́ , ‟o ma r f ‟r mi.Or eni ni algbrndn Or mi l m o wo lalgbrn dn

TRANSLATE AS: Truthful men are not as many as twenty on earthWicked men are much more than sixty score.

The day of vengeance is not far,That is why one is not aggrieved. Ifa was consulted on account of all matterswhich a certain priest desire.

Therefore, all the things I desire, I will disclose to my Ori. A man‟s Ori is his sympathizer .

My Ori, save me,You are my sympathizer (Abimbola, 1976:143-45)

Hermeneutically, the poem shows Or to be of central importance to man than any other parts of him . Our Ifa ́ priest consulted his If when he was in need. He, in turn, was referred to relate with his Or . Or then determinesa man‟s success or failure in life. In other words, whenever man is to embark on any venture, a journey, trade,marriage, etc., he needs to appease his Or to be in his favour. For example, a person embarking on an enterprisesays “Or mi gbe ̀‟m ́ kn‟l jr ln” (my head kindly be on my side for me to have a profitable outing today).Implicitly, the Yoruba believe that there is always some spiritual „forces‟ out to thwart prosperity in businessventure. Thus, it is always reasonable to overcome them by consulting one‟s Or . Similarly, to a bride on herwedding, it is said, “mu ́ or ́ lo ma ́ mu ́ ewa ̀ lo” (may you be guided by ori and not beauty). The belief here is thatthe absence of Or at this point may attract doom to her.

What is obvious from the analysis above is that Or is the essence of the human personality. Also clear is thefact that Or is not something totally fixed and unchangeable-a feature of the concept emphasised by manywriters on Yoruba beliefs-but something dynamic and alterable. This takes us to other dimensions of Or that are

usually neglected in the anthropological and philosophical literature on the idea of Or in Yoruba culture. Theseare: Or as guardian, sympathiser as well as provider of man.


9/13



3.1 Ori as GuardianThe Yoruba believe that whatever a man may be in the world, be he a king, a wealthy being, a prominent man, afather, etc. it is his Or that does it for him. Thus they say:

It is the head of a young rat that will be served For the rats, it is the head of a fish that will be served For the fishes, it is the head of a young animal that is

Served for the animals, it is the head of the young birdThat is served for the birds and it is the head of the youngThat is served for bringing salvation to mankind. (Ibie, 1993:135)

Or then is regarded as eld (creator) who monitors man‟s activities on earth. It follows man through hisearthly existence and never let him go astray. Osamaro ibie, in his work ifism, adds that this „guardian angel‟(ibie, 1986:27) seems to mirror events to man through dreams. This occurs, whenever man deviates from whatare sanctioned by oldmar, to forewarn him about impending events. We have an example of this in asituation where man takes to a completely different profession in which he would never be able to make endsmeet, having deviated from his chosen profession from heaven. Hence, the yoruba consult rnml for adviceon what sacrifice to make in order to rectify this problem. In other words, it is only through rnml that onemay know the „content‟ of or and what can be done to improve it , hence the sayings, „a tun or ́ ti ko suan se‟(he who repairs the unfortunate ori) (abiodun,1975:429) this atonement takes the following forms, as found inotura-ika poem, thus:

Or Awo W , wgb M Ni , Or Awo W , wgb M Ni , Or Awo W , wt M Ni , Or Awo W , wt M Ni , Or Awo W , wm M Ni , Or Awo W , wm M Ni ,

Translate As: The Head Ifa Priest Cleanse, It Becomes Everlasting One; The Head Ifa Priest Cleanse, It Becomes Everlasting One; The Head Ifa Priest Cleanse, It Remains Sanctioned; The Head Ifa Priest Cleanse, It Remains Sanctioned; The Head Ifa Priest Cleanse, It Is Pure; The Head Ifa Priest Cleanse, It Is Pure (Lijadu, 1972:78)

Implicit in the chant is the concept that once Or is cleansed of ill luck; the path to a fulfilled destiny isguaranteed. Also, the If priest is expected to be forthright in his dealings and avoid manipulating his skills tohis personal advantage. As a result, once the priest performs the necessary rites either to alter or improve onman‟s destiny, it remains sanctified. Also, a man‟s Or can be empowered to overcome all adversaries that lifecould produce. Similarly whenever Or is sanctioned, it remains pure in its outwards dealings. Furthermore, itmakes it possible for man to live a reasonably inoffensive life that is, a life without many problems. Thus Or acts the role of cause and effect in a person‟s history. It tailors man‟s activity on earth. That is the reason whythe If priest would always recite the following liturgy in praise of his Or thus:

Or l d eni Es ody rs l npa n d On o ̀ pa o ̀ r ̀ sa ̀ a da ̀

rs l npa ni d B isu on s ̀ un Ay m pa tmi d K or mi ma se or hehe K ma gba bd Translate as: Ori is the creator of being Before the world began It is the orisa (supreme being) Who can change being No one changes orisa (supreme being) It is orisa who changes one, like a yam being roasted. Aye (evil forces) please do not interfere with my destiny.

My ori, let me not become a laughing stock, Do not allow evildoers to spoil my lot. (Adetunji, 2002:102)


10/13



3.2 Ori as SympathiserThe yoruba belief system recognises the nefarious activities of the „children of the world‟, popularly calledajogun (witches and witchcraft) and elnn (evil-wishers). Their primary goal is to act as cog in the wheel of progress. This they affect through the diabolic chanting of incantation of their victim‟s or . The influence of thisobstacle on man is described in wrbogb, a major od poem. The narration runs thus that when wribogbwas about leaving heaven , he promised to eliminate all wicked and vicious elements from the surface of the

earth. This olo ́du ̀mare ̀ blessed and sanctioned . But he refused to underwrite his wishes with elnn sinceoldmar (god) had consented it. Nevertheless, elnn was annoyed and decided to introvert the wishes ofwribogb. This attracted to him the opposite of whatever he wished on earth. He also became mostdisillusioned because no man dared consult through him. He then decided to go back to heaven and pay

obeisance to eleenini in form of sacrifice. Later, he returned to earth for a more fruitful and fulfilling life. (ibie,1992:27)

This narration carries some implications. First, it indicates that in fulfilling the book of destiny, man mustalways recognise the existence of other forces apart from god. This recognition involves the process ofappealing for their favour at all times. That is the reason why man pleads thus:

E ma ́ p m n‟p e p‟agbe K‟a ́ gbe o ́ to ́ ‟d‟alaro igbo ́; E ma ́ pe ̀ m ́ n‟ ́ pe ̀ e p‟a ̀ lu ̀ ko ̀ , K‟a ́ lu ̀ ko ̀ o ́ to‟ d‟olo ́ sun ega ̀ n ,

E ma ́ pe ̀ m ́ n‟ ́ pe ̀ e p‟o ̀ bu ̀ ro ́ ,

K‟o ́ bu ̀ ro ́ o to ́ ‟ d„ala ̀ w ̀-rn eye nn oko Tr anslate as:

Do not charm me as you did agbe So that agbe became the indigo-coloured one of the forest; Do not charm me as you did aluko,

So that aluko became the camwood-coloured one of the wilderness; Do not charm me as you did oburo, So that oburo became the vagrant-babbler of the groove (idowu, 1982:176)

Also, it shows that man‟s success on earth is his responsibility. In social practice, for example, whenever manfinds himself in an unpleasant circumstance, all he needs do is to act fast by giving in to the sacrifice prescribed

at divination. It is believed that there will be a relief in as much as man abides by the instruction guiding thesacrifice. But if our man resigns to fate or refuses to heed advice, then he would find himself to blame in theend.

In this regard, the Yoruba believe that however we conceive the influence of Ajogun and Elnn in a man‟slife; it is the Or that is appeased for conformity with what are highlighted at the prenatal state for him. In short,each man‟s Or is his personal god who pleads for him before these forces; otherwise man can only achieve nextto nothing. For example, Epega in his 207

th Odu-Ifa says thus:

Or rere n sgun t Or aisn l‟t i d l dpa Translate as: It is good head that overcomes the enemy It is the defective head that the enemy renders

Impotent permanently. (morakinyo, 1983:71)

It is then reasonable for man to appeal for a good or in order to have the capacity of withstanding forcesmilitating against his wishes. The following verse adds thus:

Gbogbo aye ́ n ́ n ́ wa ́ ohun rere s ́ ara won j tmi b dra , tre b dra; Gbogbo aye ́ n ́ n ́ wa ́ ohun rere s ́ ara won; Eni-elni n w ohun burk fn-ni Sugbn or eni lalgbrndn eni Translate as: Everybody wants something good for himself If mine could turn out well, yours could turn well; Everybody want something good for himself;

A bad wish for one can only come from another person. But my ori will always mediate on my behalf.

(morakinyo, 1983: 78)


11/13



3.3 Or as Provider The traditional Yoruba society punishes any man who neglects his/her responsibility to both his family andsociety. He/she is expected to sustain the financial strength of his/her family whenever the occasion demands.

Also, he/she is to foster the spirit of co-existence and brotherhood in his/her community. As a result, manalways endeavours in life to improve his conditions with a view to meeting these challenges. Besides, they also believe that this personal effort is not sufficient to provide for man. That is why the Yoruba do not hesitate to

say „Or eni n‟i a ̀wure‟ (Man‟s Ori is his provider). An Ose-Ogb poem explicates further on this thus: Almrn-rndn-rindin a da fu

́n al‟a

́ gemo

Ye t‟igbi gbe ́ o ̀rn al‟gemo, oran al‟agemo B y t a s‟p so. Gbjm na kan w T gbogbo aiy ro ibi s , o ru ́ ebo ko ̀ f ́n , s‟gn , k j fn u. K r eiye‟l Mj ati egba mrn k or re ma ba Bur pt- pt , Ntor t or bbur ni gb ti orun w. Translate as:“Foolish lizard” was the one who cast ifa for “chameleon” long, Long ago. Chameleon‟s trouble, chameleon‟s trouble like this A curse is pronounced. There is a gentleman of whom all the world is thinking evil,

He makes a sacrifice, but it has no effect; he makes medicine, But it does not work for him. He should sacrifice Two pigeons and two shillings six pence, that His luck may not be completely bad, because He has come from heaven with a bad head. (bascom, 1969:457)

This narration depicts two worlds: the prenatal and post-natal. In prenatal existence, our man chose a complete

bad destiny. As a result, his post-natal existence would always reflect a total failure. Therefore, any attempt toengage in business will crumble. But sacrifice serves as a means of modifying his destiny. For example, theyoruba believe that a person who has chosen bad luck as part of his destiny can make sacrifice so that his luck

will not be as bad as it might have been if he does not sacrifice. However, it is only or that is a prosperous one(or -rere) that is sufficient to provide for man in the society. What we try to infer here is that man must always be at home with his or in order not to labour in futility. Hence, this song to emphasise the importance of or

thus: B o b ma lw Br lw or re; B o b ma s wo , Br lw or re w; B o b ma lya o; Br lowo or re w; Or , mse pkun de Ld re ni mo b W sa y mi di rere Translate as: If you want to have money Inquire of your head;

If you want to start trading, Inquire of your head first; If you want to build a house, Inquire of your head, If you want to take a wife, Inquire of your head first. Head, please do not shut the gate It is to you i am coming, Come and make my life Prosperous. (awolalu, 1989:140-41)

Implicit in this verse is the belief that for or to respond favourably to a man‟s wants; he needs the patronage ofdivination and sacrifice. Divination will enlighten him further on the step(s) to take; whereas, sacrifice needs be

offered to the benevolent forces so that he will continue to enjoy their support and blessings, and to themalevolent ones in order that they might not go against him whenever the need arises. (abimbola, 1975:391) However, ka -meji verse adds:


12/13



b re re awo in da fn in; wn n ibi kibi t in ba fi or l Ni y ́o je o ̀ na ̀ fun; Nwon ni ki o ru ́ a ̀ k ̀ko ad ̀e me ́ ta , Egbetallogbon ti epo pupa. In r‟bo. Translate as:

To pay homage from afar the diviner of fire, Was the one who cast ifa for fire.

They said wherever fire should turn, There would be a way for him; They said his head would open the way for him. They said he should sacrifice three cocks, One shilling seven pence eight oninis, and plenty of palm oil. Fire made the sacrifice. (bascom, 1969:454-55)

It is, therefore, the responsibility of every individual to seek rectification of his own or for the better. In the caseof misfortune, prayer to or is paramount.

4.

ConclusionWe have attempted a hermeneutic interpretation of the idea of Or in the If literary corpus. For the Yoruba, Or is one of the components of a person, which is primarily associated with human destiny and personality. TheYoruba believe that the choice of a good Or assured a life of success and prosperity while that of a bad Or guarantees a life of failure. Hence, for the Yoruba Or plays a crucial role in determining the direction of a person‟s life.

The study employed an interdisciplinary approach to achieve a hermeneutic interpretation of the concepts of Or and human destiny. Hence, we emphasized the importance of tradition in our hermeneutic interpretation of Or in Yoruba thought system. This is premised on the understanding that it is impossible to carry out an adequateinterpretation in a vacuum, without some presuppositions, usually carried forward from our prior beliefs,attitudes and values. Tradition, therefore, constitutes one of the major frameworks within which we interpret theworld. An adequate understanding of the concept of Or in the If literary corpus requires a prior understandingof the related cultural context. And, drawing out the cultural relationship between the concepts of Or in Yorubatraditional thought and its cultural context involved a process of discovering, proposing, testing, accepting andrejecting.

This research employed the method of hermeneutic interpretation to arrive at an understanding of the idea of Or that is more comprehensive and acceptable than the previous philosophical attempts to render Or meaningful.

The work is that beyond being a symbol of destiny, the Yoruba regard Or as a guardian, sympathizer and provider. As a guardian, it monitors human activities and assists individuals to overcome all adversaries that life

could produce. It also forewarns man of any impending event, so as to avert evil occurrence, while good eventsare ensured. It is in this sense that the Yoruba maintain that Or sympathizes with man in the face of malevolentforces. This conception of Or underlies the consistent effort made by the Yoruba to always seek the consent andfavour of Or in all endeavours. In the course of the work, for example, we recognize importance Yorubaattached to the idea of Or as man‟s intercessor. For them, Or ought to be appeased before any venture isembarked on. Thus they say to a bride on her wedding m Or lo m mu wa l (may you be guided by Ori andnot beauty).

Our hermeneutic interpretation of the Yoruba conception of Or in the If literary corpus has shown that the previous philosophical analyses of the idea and their rigid identification of Or with destiny have undulyrestricted the meaning and implication of the concept. We have been able to show, in this work, that the Yorubanotion of Or , though includes the idea of destiny, also incorporates other important ideas: the ideas of Or asguardian, sympathiser and provider. This presents us with a more holistic, comprehensive and acceptableunderstanding of the notion of Or .

Adebayo Aina, PhD, Lecturer I,

Department of PhilosophyOlabisi Onabanjo University, Nigeria


13/13



References Abimbola, W. 1975. Yoruba Oral Tradition. Ibadan: University Press.

Abimbola, W. 1975. Sixteen Great Poems. Lagos: UNESCO.

Abimbola, W.1976. Ifa: An Exposition of Ifa literary corpus . Ibadan: Oxford University Press.

Abiodun, R. 1975. „Ifa Art Objects: An Interpretation based on Oral Traditions‟ in Yoruba Oral Tradition Wande Abimbola (ed.)Ibadan: Ibadan University Press

Awolalu, O. 1989. Yoruba Belief and Sacrificial Rites. Essex: Longman Group Ltd.

Bascom, W. 1969. Ifa Divination: Communication between Gods and Men in West Africa. Bloomington and London: Indiana

University Press

Bauman, Z. 1978. Hermeneutics and Social Science: Approaches to Understanding. London: Hutchinson and Co. Ltd. Gadamer, H. 1975. Truth and Method. New York: the Seabury Press.

Gadamer, H. 1977. trans. and edited by David Linge. Philosophical Hermeneutics. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Gbadegesin, Segun. 1991. African philosophy: Traditional Yoruba Philosophy and contemporary African Realities. New York: Peter

Lang

Gyekye, Kwame. 1987. An essay on African Philosophical thought: The African Conceptual Scheme. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Hallen, Barry. 2002. A Short History of African Philosophy. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press

Ibie, O. 1992. Ifism: The Complete Works of Orunmila. Vol. II. Lagos: Efelu Ltd.

Ibie, O. 1993. Ifism: The Complete Works of Orunmila. Vol. IV. Lagos: Efelu Ltd.

Idowu, E. 1982. Olodumare: God in Yoruba Belief. Ikeja: Longman Nigeria Ltd.

Klemm, David. Ed. 1986. Hermeneutical Inquiry, Vol.II: The Interpretation of existence . Atlanta: Scholars Press.

Lijadu, E. 1901. Ifa: Imole re ti I se Ipinle Isin ni Ile Yoruba. Exeter: James Townsend and Sons.

Madu, O. 1995. African Symbols, Proverbs and Myths: The Hermeneutics of Destiny. Owerri: Assumpta Press.

Makinde, M.A. 1984. „African Concept of Human Personality: The Yoruba Example‟, The Ultimate Reality and Meaning, Vol. 7,

No. 2. Makinde, M.A. 1985. “A philosophical Analysis of the Yoruba Concepts of Ori and Human Destiny” , International Studies in

Philosophy, Vol. XVII, No. 1

Mbiti, John. 1991. Introduction to African Religion. Ibadan: Heinemann.

McClelland, E. 1982. The Cast of Ifa among the Yoruba. London: Ethnographical.

Morakinyo, O. and Akiwowo, A. 1981. „The Yoruba Ontology of personality and Motivation: A Multi-disciplinary Approach‟ . Journal of Social Biological Structure. 4: 19-38

Morakinyo, O. 1993. The Ayanmo Myth and Mental Health Care in West Africa. Journal of Cultures and Ideas. 1(1)

Oladipo, O. 1992. „Predestination in Yoruba thought: A Philosopher‟s Interpretation‟, Orita: Ibadan Journal of Religious Studies,Vol. XXIV, Nos. 1 & 2

Oduwole, E.O. 1996. „The Yoruba Concept of “ori” and Human destiny : A Fatalistic Interpretation‟, Journal of Philosophy anddevelopment, Vol. 2, Nos. 1 & 2

Orangun, Adegboyega. 1998. Destiny: The Unmanifested Being, (Ibadan: African Odyssey Publisher

Palmer, R. 1994. Hermeneutics: Interpretation Theory in Scleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger and Gadamer. Evanston: North western

University Press.

Thiselton, A. 1980. The two Horizons: New Testament Hermeneutics and Philosophical Description with Special reference to

Heidegger, Bultman, Gadamer and Wittgenstein. Exeter: The Paternoster Press.

Algo de Ori Traducir

Documents

Transcript of Algo de Ori Traducir