Perhaps soyinka irreverence for the inbred convebntional credos of the worship of God is subjective to his mind filled categorical bohemianism, for in true sense his credo of being and nothingness is an atavistic reaction against the two imported and most enshrined religions of Africa.
The book is an essay that attempts a propagation of the uniqueness of indigenous African religion much against the background of the inherited factions of religions (Christianity and Islam) that have since become popular sects of religion in Africa. Soyinka however, tries to identify the relationship between the two religions by comparing the Eucharist proclaimed by the bible and Koran with Mahapralayi of Buddhism; a return to the state of nothingness and void. To him if there could be a similitude between Buddhism -which happens to be an indigenous religious belief among the Indians- and the inherited factions of islam and Christianity, it would suggest that Buddhism is true, likewise, Africa indigenous religion which is the bed rock of African spirituality.
Soyinka informed a critical confrontation, assailing Christianity and islam as embodiments of banal fanatism and lacking constructive and accommodating culture for other religions. He avowed bitterly the complex structure of man’s tyrannical and impious attitudinal support for his beliefs. This according to the book has been attributive to the series of wars between the warring religious groups. The attempt for either religion to stifle the existence of the other has characterized them as both been passive and active violent harbingers on the polity. According to him, the two religions are not particularly worthy of the standard that befits a pious one.
The book shed light on the conceptual nature of nothingness, the rhetoric and underlying metaphors. The supercilious belief of nothingness immediately would mean worthlessness in indication of its lexical semantics; however Soyinka discerned nothingness as the origin. He gave an analogous representation of sheik Gumi’s memoable statement ‘Christianity is nothing’ using the seemingly profane statement as an elucidation of what he understands by nothingness. In the beginning was nothing, everything was void,so if Christianity could be described as nothing it should be observed as a gesture of compliment rather than derogation or profanity. One could not shun from the profundity of Soyinka in his cryptic explanation of the concept of nothingness, which forms a conflicting pulse on the conventional belief of nothingness, instead, the enlightenment provided therein should be admitted in gratitude by Christian.
Belief is a crucial phenomenon in the creation and sustenance of religion. A man who believes nothing is nothing. Perhaps Soyinka would have sounded this much better as a man who believes not in Christianity and islam is nothing. Noting Soyinka’s disgruntled perception of the foundational status quo of religion, his dialectics on the weighty incubus of beliefs contrasts against the regulation of mundane desires. The battle between man’s desire and the essential values of religion -which ultimately serve its ritualistic significance- has presented religion a substance of human inclination rather than a doctrine to be adhered with. Soyinka simulated instances by narrating the sad ordeal between the Christian community and the Islamic at the university of ibadan. A contest between both parties, on which totem would grace the religious icon of the citadel, is it the crucifix or the crescent. Painfully, both are just symbols determinant of the histories of the two and not the essential rudiment perceived in favour of good religious sects.
The book shows the significant influence of religion on secular politics, giving a crucial example of the fatal skirmish that erupted in Uttar Prudesh between the hindus and the Moslems. Conceivably, the hindus claimed that the Moslem shrine (mosque) sits on the origin of hindu the birth place of Rama. This consequently led to a clash between the two major religion of the state, which subsequently led to the fall of Mr. Singh the Prime Minster of the State. In this indication Soyinka proved that religion is biased in its fundamental doctrine which its bed rock is on piety, humility and truth. Apparently, these have been found laking in the above scenario. For soyika religion has only successfully built a cult of self preening, inbred, ostentatious power brokers whose legacies are abortive of religion fundaments
The credo of being ad nothingness berates the intolerance of religions, of course, all religions in this perspective are guilty except the African indigenous religion which according to Soyinka contains that true spiritual and communal value that trails a good religion. His dissatisfactory remark about religion especially chritianity and islam might have been foisted by the effervescent individual attempt by the two religions to stifle the sustenance of African spirituality. Perhaps a passage from the book will lend a hand of understanding.
I seize every occasion to call attention to the resilience and vibrancy of these religions; I shall do so again today, employing extracts from statements I have made before. Their validity remains unchanged and, they repeat a necessary warning against the unrepentant in this stubborn reiteration of the nothingness credo against African spirituality.
Let those who wish to retain or elevate religion as a twenty first century project feel free to do so , but let it not be done as continuation of the game of denigration against African spiritual heritage.
‘Althoh the African indigenous religion is the outset but today languishes at the outskirt, like an outcast’ (Oswald mtshalli), perhaps ‘a land owner that has since become a serf’ (Okot p bitek). These are statements in the wrks of some of africa’s literary giants. They might have shared serried minds with soyinka on the subject of the annihilation of African indigenous culture and origin.
However, wole soyinka atavism is not extreme for he recognizes to a certain elevation all religions –Islam and Christianity inclusive-
I must not be misunderstood. I extol, indeed, I partake with creative and human enlargemet, in the inherent and productive value of all religions, their monumental legacies to the world, their piety and unflagging spirit of the search for truth. I acknowledge that the wold would be a much poorer place without the phenomenon of religion.
Soyinka’s conceptual definition of godhead unifies all religions. It attributes the intrinsic quality of truth, beauty and wisdom in one fold for all religions. Hence if the definitive quality of every god head is based on this trinity –truth, beauty and wisdom-, it therefore suffices to hold that every god head is symbolic of these universal virtues.
… it will be sufficient to accept that wherever we find truth, wisdom and beauty in their purest essence, we have indeed glimpsed fundamental attributes of god head.
In spite of Soyinka’s indefatigable heralding of the concept of belief, he traced an outcome to the philosophical. What are we? Who are we? Why are we? In answering this queer qyestion, he bears an explanation of the human specie, describing the difference between the man and all other things that surround him.where the man is indirectly ‘we’ and other things the ‘otherness’. The philosophical summary therefore is that; should man be perceived worthless without his cognizance for this otherness. If so then the attributive statement such as I believe then I am should not present a man more worthy of his desired status in the society. In summary, it is not necessary for man to have a religion as that does not define man. Soyinka sees man a complete being even without the events of religion piety, economic power and political might. Therefore the ultimate definition of man should be I feel therefore I am and not any of I believe therefore I am, I produce therefore I am, I rule therefore I am.
In final, Soyinka advised that selectiveness is the key. He subtly charged individuals to pay more attention to their inward mind than be buffeted into a religion that contradicts their individual doctrines. Here Soyinka is encouraging people the way of bohemianism and heresy all together as some may conceive it. He preaches the acceptance of the indigenous African religion exalting Obatala, Odu Ifa, Orunmila.
I say to you go to the Orisa, learn from them and be wise. The religion of the Orisa does not believe in tenet, liturgy, catechism or practice
It must be mentioned here that Soyinka mitigated his passion by not mentioning other indigenous related African gods but restricted his canvass for the Yoruba mythological gods. Perhaps soyinka dose not recognize that human nature takes a systematic and gradual process in changing orientations. In simpler terms it is not easy to preach liberalism to a tortuous mind of religious background.
In all credo of being and nothingness is a revolutionary essay seeking to reestablish the lost African heritages which are being shoved into extinction by foreign beliefs, while at the same expressing disgust at the fanatical religious war that rage between the so much revered religions. He prophesized a surviving Africa if there will be reconciliation and tolerance of the indigenous African religion. He berated the excuse that African religion does not have a documentation for its survival and sustenance, arguing that such statements position Africa as a race without a history. After all, the real documentation of African history was documented from the oral performance and rendition of its sages.
No comments:
Post a Comment