The literature on loob or kalooban has been considerable since our initial study in 1972.1 The interpretations on loob have been differentiated. Is there no possible consensus on these views?
One way of getting a synthesis on the different views on loob is to look at it from a different perspective, that is, comparing it with its Indonesian counterpart, or specifically, the Javanese concept of batin. We shall compare batin with loob. We believe that this perspective will give richer insights to the understanding of loob.
In this chapter we shall use the following methodologies: comparative oriental philosophy, metalinguistic analysis, and phenomenology of behavior. We have used these methodologies in our previous studies. Concerning the use of Philippine languages, we shall limit the references to Tagalog for reasons of brevity: the inclusion of Cebuano Visayan and Ilocano (as we have done in previous studies) would greatly lengthen this chapter.
THE CONCEPT OF BATIN
In our opinion the different Asian philosophies have a family resemblance. While each member of a family is distinct, they also have many points of similarities. In family resemblance no one member contains the whole picture; it is the whole composite that reveals the essence of the family resemblance.
Why select the concept of batin? Indonesia as a nation has several sub-cultures. For example, the people of Irian Jaya certainly are more Melanesian than Indonesian. But the Javanese, who constitute more than one-half of the total population and who also dominate the government, have many things in common with Filipinos. Although every culture is unique, we find many features common between Javanese and Filipino thought.2 Like Filipinos, the Javanese strive for harmony and order for the common good.3 Likewise Javanese society is hierarchic as manifested in its language, which reflects the three levels of society. Their group orientation (where the individual is supposed to have a lower profile, to be obedient and cooperative) discourages competition.4 Ileto finds many similarities between the Javanese and Filipino concepts of power, anting-anting, mysticism and the like. "But historical circumstances have given a unique shape to Filipino beliefs and practices", one factor being the influence of Christianity.5 We shall explain this point later.
Bahasa Indonesia has many translations of loob. For example, `utang na loob' is utang bodi (literally, utang ng budhi in Tagalog) or a debt of the mind. But `sundin ang loob mo' (`your will be done') in the Lord's Prayer is `jadilak kehendakmo' where `kehendak' is will. Bahasa Indonesia as a national language developed from a small island and was made mandatory for all Indonesians.
Batin and Javanese mysticism also have much literature.6 (As loob as stem builds up to kalooban, batin in Indonesia becomes kebatinan.)
Briefly, kebatinan is the inner self of a person or the inner person; it is opposed to the physical, the outward appearance. One meets the absolute in the kabatinan where the absolute resides. The instrument of realizing kebatinan is rasa, which is an intuitive-feeling or the way to essential knowledge. Harnessing batin needs spiritual discipline (ngesti), which unifies and directs all the powers of an individual to a single end. The person who actualizes or harnesses the powers of batin gets a mystical experience. However, this power can be used for good or misused for evil purposes.
To the original animistic or primal religious culture of Java came Buddhism, Islam, Christianity. That is why Jogyakarta, the cultural capital of Java, has Borobudur (one of the world's greatest Buddhist temples), Prambanan (an Indian temple) and the Kraton (the Muslim palace). But in spite of these accretions, the main inspiration is still primal religion.
World View and Batin
The Javanese sees a continuum from material, gross and earthly (kasar) conditions to conditions that are increasingly refined, ethereal, and spiritual (halus). Thus animals and those who live on the material level are considered kasar. The mystical ethos is to move to the halus or spiritual.7
The Javanese view the universe as suffused with energy. The macrocosmos can also be realized in the microcosmos which is man. That is why man can accumulate this cosmic energy in himself by some form of mysticism.
Batin, from the Arabic word, can mean spiritual, inner character and aspects of humankind--the inner itself or as a realm of human existence. Batin therefore is "the inner or spiritual aspect of one's personal existence; inner-man, the secret place where man and `God' may meet."8 It is a complex of feelings. As a religious expression, "kebatinan links individual experience directly to higher truths, without the interference of a religious community or even the mystical group itself."9 Batin therefore is the core of the microcosmos.
If batin is the inner aspect of man, its contrast is lahir, his outward and bodily aspect.10 In Indian thought, man is composed of seven layers or sheaths, the outmost being the body, and the innermost being the atman. But Javanese thought simplifies or reduces the seven layers into three: the inner, middle and outer self. The inmost layer is batin. Ultimately the self (aku) and God are the same and God manifests himself in the individual. The swara ing asepi (the voice in the quiet) could only be reached only in meditation. This voice of the quiet "is the voice of God in the individual, the manifestation of God in the depths of the person's inner life."11
Rasa
Javanese mysticism recognizes that ordinary life is the flux between good and bad feelings, between happiness and unhappiness. Because "the source of man's troubles is in" himself, one must "recognize, face, and deal with this and unify oneself and find peace."12 Hence the goal of life in its pursuit of happiness is "to minimize the passions altogether so far as possible, to mute them in order to perceive the truer `feelings' which lie behind them."13
The Javanese does not reason through the head, but through the heart (rasa) because this way "penetrates the heart of the matter and reveals the truth."14 The Javanese believe that the Western type of scientific knowledge does not penetrate reality. The history of knowledge has shown that new scientific theories debunk older ones because these theories came from brain knowledge. On the other hand, insight from batin is more lasting.
Beneath the coarser feelings is rasa, a pure basic, meaningful feeling "which is once the individual's true self (aku) and a manifestation of God (Gusti, Allah) within the individual."15 Hence rasa, the self (aku) and God are almost interchangeable. God and the ultimate rasa can be found in a special organ which may either be the heart (manah) or the liver.
If God is also the indwelling rasa, the aim of kebatinan as a this-worldly mysticism is to know and feel this ultimate in oneself.
Tapa and Ngesti
As we said earlier, the macrocosmos can be realized in the microcosmos. While the individual has no control of the macrocosmos, he can control himself as microcosmos. Contact or union with the Absolute in oneself releases tremendous energy.
How does one achieve the mystical in oneself? Or how does one meet the ultimate rasa in oneself? The answer is through asceticism (tapa). The purpose of tapa is the "purification to reach samadi, which is a state of mind that can be described as a world-detached concentration in which one is open to receive divine guidance and ultimately the revelation of the mystery of life, of origin and destiny."16 One particular aspect of tapa is in ngesti, which is "to unify all the powers of the individual and direct them toward a single end, to concentrate one's psychological and physical faculties toward one narrow goal."17 All of one's powers focus on that goal of contacting one's inmost part. To do so requires purity of will or a strong sense of purpose to achieve the ultimate rasa. Purity has little to do with morality but is tied up with the concentration of power. The batin has to be emptied of its mundane content in order to come in contact with the divine. It means curbing or blunting one's instinctive life through spiritual discipline.
The asceticism through spiritual discipline includes retreats or periodical withdrawal from mundane activities and staying in special places like caves and mountains. For example, top Indonesian generals are reported to regularly meditate at night in auspicious places in order to receive divine guidance to better rule the nation. Holy (keramat) places for meditation include the graves of ancestors, kings, and mythical teachers. These sites not only supposedly impart mystical insight, but also spiritual powers.
The retreat includes practices like concentration on inward things. Staring at a lighted lamp or gazing at a single point helps achieve the goal. Other practices include fasting, praying, meditation, lack of sleep by staying awake during the night, kungkum (sitting for hours immersed in rivers during the night), sexual abstention. One's batin gets strong through fasting because "one gets very hungry and thinks a lot about God, and then God gives one the power."18 A teacher or guru who has had this realization of the batin will hasten the spiritual discipline, which entails a teacher-pupil relationship. Belonging to a mystical group (aliran) also promotes kebatinan, although the practice of mysticism can also be an individual endeavor.
Power and Kebatinan
What happens if the batin is emptied? The realization of the mystical experience occurs in different levels. In the surface level, it means living according to the religious rules. A further realization is when one realizes that God need not be met in Mecca, but in one's own heart. But the deepest realization is the stage of Mahrifat where one and the universal become one. The rasa then grasps the essence of reality as "revealed in the quiet batin."19
The result of the mystical experience as mentioned above is samadi where the person receives "divine guidance and ultimately the revelation of the mystery of life, or origin and destiny."20 The enlightened person who overcomes lahir is no longer self-interested. Instead he becomes more active in the world by practicing his duty (darma) in his state of life, be he a farmer, servant, or a government functionary. He believes that to work and sacrifice in the spirit of social harmony will be highly rewarded. Furthermore, the person acquires an increased spiritual strength. This is shown in the ecstatic shaking. This spiritual power can do wonders in achieving one's aims in the world. One such spiritual power is the power to heal. Some kebatinan sects have healing sessions where the patients mystically surrender themselves and pray. Another is the power to predict things, like predicting lottery numbers. Obviously the powers can be used for good or bad things.21
The Javanese penchant for power is shown in their sacred household heirlooms (pusaka), which should be revered and ritually respected. An example of pusaka is the keris dagger which is supposed to have divine power.
The batin religious experience does not separate the profane from the sacred. All things participate in the one and the same experience.
Can batin be applied to loob?
LOOB AND BATIN
Let us see if batin can give light to loob. Let us follow the outline given above.
World View
In the traditional Filipino primal (animistic) world view, the world is full of spirits.22 The divine energy which permeates the universe is manifested in "every aspect of the natural world, in stones, trees, clouds, and fire."23 Mountains, caves, rivers, plants, animals, and people have power.24 Because the holy for the Filipino is immanent to an extreme degree, the divine can be in material things and in persons, and in creation in general. This divine presence or power as permeating the universe can be actualized or concentrated in objects and persons.
The light (liwanag) in the sun or other sources is the image of such power and divine presence. Sunlight from the east has life-giving powers. The same light or the "sun of reason" also points the path of death, "the way of the cross", which the revolutionaries must take.25
The attainment of paradise through hardships is also the attainment of liwanag.26 The light of heavenly beings also goes to extraordinary human being with transformed kaloobans.27 These transformed individuals have a radiating light coming from their kalooban that attracts other people.28 On the other hand, a weak loob is in the "state of darkness."29
Loob
In this section we shall follow the historical exposition of Ileto as to how certain Filipino nationalists (like Apolinario de la Cruz, the Katipuneros like Andres Bonifacio, members of the Colorum, Macario Sakay, Felipe Salvador) practiced kalooban.
Ileto defines loob as "inner being" which is "intimately connected with the ideas of leadership and power, nationalism and revolution."30
Does rasa (in the case of batin) have a counterpart in Filipino thought? A purified kalooban requires a special knowledge, which is "given more to the leaders, and to a lesser degree to the members."31 This requires a new kind of "seeing" in the state of light (liwanag) and to be supported by constant prayer.32 True knowledge "implies a loob that maintains its equilibrium in the face of threats and pressures to abandon its commitment to a cause."33 Light is associated with awakening freedom (kalayaan).34
The loob that "has been continually purified and strengthened" acquires commitment to the cause of the individual.35
Sacrifice for the revolutionaries had little to do with the atonement of sins. It had something to do with the purifying, steadying actuation, and transforming of the loob and thereby the accumulation of power. Sacrifice was endurance of hardship and the "forceful effort" which "implies not merely a passive avoidance of sin but a disciplined effort to live in accordance with certain rules and precepts."36 The forms of sacrifice included prayers, abstinence from certain kinds of food or comforts, sexual abstinence. "Constant prayer and religious exercises . . . purify the loob and render it serene in the face of certain danger."37 The ultimate form of sacrifice was and is the way of the cross during Holy Week. "At the end of the road, the penitent is usually half-dead of exhaustion, pain and loss of blood, but he emerges a 'new man' whose loob has been renewed, ready to face squarely the challenges of this world."38
What drives the present-day flagellants to whip themselves during Holy Week? The motive is not so much penance for sins or for the release of evil spirits in the person. The real motive, according to Covar, is to purify the body so that it becomes a worthy temple of the anting-anting.39 If the cave was an original venue of acquiring the amulet, the new venue is the "cave" of the church. The hardships and their motivation which pilgrims today undergo in Mount Banahaw, like crawling through a narrow tunnel or cave, are similar to the hardships which neophytes of the revolution underwent.40
Many Catholics who make and pray novenas may, perhaps unconsciously, have this motivation in mind. Prayer and ritual is a source of power.
The revolutionaries regarded their leaders as men of psychic power in winning military victories. This power comes from their anting-anting (amulet).41
Those who use the anting-anting believe that the words of Christ and the things used in Catholic liturgy are a strong source of power. While the Scriptures say that the word of God is efficacious (Heb. 4:12; 1 Th. 2:13 ff), their belief extends to other rituals and liturgical language in the Catholic rite. That is why pig Latin as seen in the oracion is supposedly powerful. For example the wearer of one type of amulet believes that it will make him bullet-proof. He believes that the power accumulated in the amulet will flow to him, on condition that his loob has been purified and renewed through self-discipline as mentioned above. The efficacy of the anting-anting "depends upon the proper execution of certain rituals and the following of strict rules."42
Holy Week is supposedly the best time for obtaining, testing and recharging the powers of anting-antings.
The beliefs on the acquisition of power are by no means limited to the historical description of the revolutionaries. This is also applicable to other Filipinos today, especially the healers.43
Those who have acquired the power try not to misuse it as in the case of showing off or of taking advantage of people. Doing so would diminish the power. They use power only for necessary occasions.
The Javanese aliran or mystical group of kebatinan has its counterpart in the Philippines, namely, the `lakaran' which comes from `lakad.' Lakad or walking has other nuances in Tagalog. Having a task to perform is `may lakad' (literally, has a walk). The walk (lakaran) need not be business, but also leisure as in a picnic. But during the Philippine revolution, lakaran had a technical meaning as a pilgrimage, a mission, an ascent (with Christ to Calvary) to spread the word. Members of the roving group (cofradia), which was united in kalooban, went to evangelize to other communities.
We find many things in common between batin and kalooban. But let us postpone our critique till later. In the meantime let us clarify more the concept of loob. Its relation to other aspects of the Filipino will be a way of clarifying it. Let us see loob in its relation (1) to the body, (2) to the self, (3) and to bait.
LOOB AND THE (KATAWAN)
Is the batin relationship to the body applicable to the Filipino counterpart? Chapter I discussed the Filipino philosophy of soul and spirit. We said that the soul and spirit are distinct from each other. Here we shall consider the relationship between body and kalooban.
Paradigms of the Body
Paradigms are important for discussing our topic, and facilitate creating hypotheses.
One type is the dualistic paradigm as we have explained in Chapter I. There we also explained the Indian paradigm that man is composed of layers. The body is just the outermost layer while the innermost is the atman. Chapter I also explained the non-dualistic or holistic paradigm. Here the body expresses the whole being which is body, soul, and spirit. The biblical expression, to `know' (as in Adam knowing Eve through `carnal knowledge') is not only cognitive, but the whole person. Likewise feeling is not only of the senses, but also of the intellect.
Merleau-Ponty also has a holistic model and approaches Heidegger. The "phenomenal body expresses its existence and intentionality by means of speech and gestures which give significance, (and) hence, transcend the world."44 Thus when somebody gets angry, the livid face, the trembling voice and hair on end are not signs but is the whole person being angry. Towards the end of Merleau-Ponty's life, his posthumous work, The Visible and the Invisible, introduces the ultimate further category of flesh. This is his ultimate notion and grows from his previous notion body.
The flesh is the body inasmuch as it is the visible seer,
audible hearer, the tangible touch--the sensitive sensible:
inasmuch as in it is accomplished an equivalence of sensi-
bility and sensible thing.45
Flesh, according to Merleau-Ponty, has the following dimensions. It is chiasm, that is, an exchange between me and the world, or an exchange of man as soul and body together. Secondly, flesh is an entralacs, a network or like an interlacing of ribbons. Thirdly, flesh is dehiscence, a never completed differentiation as well as union whereby the seeing blends into the visible and the invisible. Lastly, flesh is the overlapping of the body and the world.46
The statement, "I have a body" betrays a dualistic model, as if the self were separate from the body. But "I am a body" shows a non-dualistic or holistic model of the body. Our hypothesis is that the Filipino philosophy of the body is non-dualistic or holistic in the paradigm proposed by Merleau-Ponty.
Metalinguistic Analysis
Since the body is one, any part can also assume the whole. We find this phenomenon in Fe Maria C. Arriola's book on the body.47 The book lists the various expressions connected with the parts of the body from the head to the toe. But here, we want to cluster the meanings of the body according to domains of the intellectual, volitional, emotional, and ethical. In each domain we want to show that the body partakes in the loob and that the loob as well shows itself in the body as a whole or as symbolized or manifested in a particular part. Let us show them in the following tables.48
A note on the tables. Some of the entries may belong to more than one domain. Likewise the entries are just a part of a much richer mine. The English translation is a mere approximation of the more poetic expressions of the kalooban and of the body.
If the entries in the tables are to be taken "synchronically", then loob cuts through the domains mentioned. Likewise expressions of the body, such as dugo, puso, etc., appear in several domains. Some bodily expressions also have their equivalence in loob. For example, `magaan ang katawan'(literally, light body) can also be rendered as `magaan ang kalooban' (literally, light loob, to mean being carefree or feeling good). Likewise `mainit ang dugo' (literally, hot blood) can also be rendered as `mainit ang kalooban' (literally, hot loob), both meaning to be angry. The foregoing tables show that the loob manifests itself in the body as a whole or in one or several parts. The evidence points to the holistic model of the body.
The Body as Metaphor
Culture has its share in the body symbolism. In some cultures the liver--not the heart--is the of love. A young man in Papua New Guinea, for example, refers to his girl friend as his `lewa' (liver), not his sweetheart. Alejo gives an alternate translation to "Sacred Heart of Jesus" as `Dakilang Loob ni Jesus.'
How come different cultures show emotions in varying degrees? For example, a Japanese who is angry smiles, which is different from a European showing anger. Each culture has been so embodied that the emotional expressions of its culture-bearers are also relative. Since Philippine languages and reasoning border on the symbolical and metaphorical, the body has its share. Thus people with `malaking tiyan' (big bellies) are corrupt government officials such as grafters and bad policemen. `Magkapantay ang paa' (the feet on even length) or `una ang paa' (feet first) is a corpse.
The use of the body as metaphor of society is quite old. Already St. Paul used the analogy in describing the church as a mystical body with Christ as its head. The president is the head (`pangulo'). Undertakings need brains (`utak') and a trusted, indispensable aide as right hand (`kanang kamay'). The head also has representatives (`kinatawan') who assume responsibility (`pangatawan'). The followers literally are the fingers (`galamay').
The tooth also has the same character. `Kabagang' (of the same molar tooth) means a close friend. While `kabiyak ng dibdib' (half of one's heart) or `kapilas ng puso' (a piece of one's heart) means spouse.
A cooperative undertaking rests on `collective shoulders' (`balikatan')
or with linked arms (`kapit-bisig'). The labor force is the `arm of the worker'
(`bisig ng manggagawa').
The intestines show the social dimension. `Kaputol' or `utol' (part of the umbilical cord) means brother or sister. Likewise `kapatid' (from patid or cut from the same umbilical cord) means brother or sister.
An offspring is either `flesh of my flesh' (`laman sa aking katawan') or `blood of my blood' (`dugo sa aking dugo').
Now let us return to the discussion about the loob and the body.
The Javanese model of batin rests on the Indian paradigm, namely, that man is composed of several layers. It contrasts the spiritual to the material. Because the material is coarse, the Javanese model of batin therefore strives toward the spiritual.
On the other hand, the data mentioned above shows that the Filipino does have that dichotomy between matter and spirit.
We shall see this point clearer when we situate loob and sarili (self).
LOOB AND SARILI
What is the difference between sarili and loob? In this section, we shall focus on the self as reflected in the word sarili.
Metalinguistic Analysis
The different usages of `sarili' give rise to the following domains. First, sarili means self. Second, by extension, sarili connotes freedom or independence. Third, sarili extends itself to property or possession.
Sarili as Self. `Sarili' in Tagalog as self comes in expressions like `sa sarili' to or for oneself as `sabi ko sa sarili ko' (I said to myself). `Aking sarili' or `sarili ko' (myself), `iyong sarili' (yourself), `kanyang sarili' or `sarili niya' (his self" and `kanilang sarili' or `sarili nila' (themselves). `Makasarili' means selfish. `Nanawala sa sarili' is to lose consciousness, poise, personality, or to become insane.
Sarili points not to man (tao) but to his being a man (pagkatao or personhood). The self is not separate from personhood since man is holistic as shown in emotions. When sarili is used for action, the meaning pertains to the person. We see, for example, in actions like in `paggalang sa sarili' (respect for oneself), `paghahalaga sa sarili' (self-worth), `pagmamahal sa sarili' (love of self). Even in the negative sense, 'makasarili' (selfish) still pertains to the personhood.
In short self embraces the whole self. It is closely related to but/loob/nakem which is the whole person as viewed from within.49
Sarili and Freedom. Furthermore, sarili as self expresses itself in freedom as in `sariling pag-iisip' (one's own free thinking), `sariling paraan' (own way), `magsarili' (to be alone), `kasarinlan' (freedom), `tiwala sa sarili' (self-confidence), `sariling sikap' (self-persistence). `Kaya ang sarili' (can manage herself/himself). `Kasarinlan' is independence, autonomy. `Magsarilinan' is to act independently from each other as in the case of adults. `Magsarili' is to live separately from friends and relatives.
What is the difference between freedom as `kalayaan' and freedom as `kasarinlan'? Emilio Aguinaldo used `kalayaan' to mean independence from colonial powers while his rival, Andres Bonifacio preferred `kasarinlan'. Kalayaan may be only autonomy or freedom from external powers like colonialism or slavery. But kasarinlan goes much deeper than kalayaan because the former goes to the self. One can have kalayaan while not having kasarinlan, as when a person has lost his cultural identity, when he no longer knows who he is.50
Sarili implies freedom, responsibility, growth, maturity, and intelligence.
Sarili and Property. The self also expresses itself in property or possessions as in the following expressions. `Sariling bayan' (own country) certainly goes beyond the individual. It promises a good future and whatever comes from independence. The same idea appears in `nasa sariling pamumuhay' (in one's own occupation), `pansariling kapakanan' (for one's own sake), `sariling atin' (our very own). `Magkasarili' is to have one's own. `Sarilinan' is exclusive for each other. `Sariling gamit' (own property), `sariling pera' (own money).
Negatively, `walang sarili' means having nothing of one's own. A person who is `walang sariling isip' is unoriginal or does not have a mind of his own.
Property participates in the selfhood of a person. Since property is communal for most Filipinos, sarili has a collective sense. The following expression shows this social dimension: `tangkilikin ang sariling atin' (support our own products).
Furthermore, since the property and the body are inseparable from the self, to criticize a person's dress, for example, or his physical features is to criticize the whole person.
Sarili and Privacy. The concept of `sarili' becomes clear if we look for the translation of `private.' Philippine languages have no original word for it because privacy is not a part of the culture.
`This is my property' can be translated as `sarili ko lang ito' or as `akin lang itong gamit' (this thing is for my own use). `Private property' in English can be translated as `sariling pag-aari', as `natalagang bahagi', as `kakayahan' or as `kasarinlan.' However the property can belong either to a person or to group. Privacy connotes that no other party can see or hear what one is doing. `Sarilinan' is the nearest equivalent to privacy as in the expression, `mag-usap tayo nang sarilinan' (let us talk in private). In short, privacy is what is done in secret. However this secret deed can either by done alone or as a group. Thus if one wants to avoid the noise and desires to be alone (`makapag-isa') as an individual or as a group, this is often done inside a room or apart from others.
While the Philippine languages do not stress privacy in terms of individualism, sarili has a social nuance. A politician who campaigns for office in his speech portrays the poor people, their sufferings as his self. A mother who loves her children says that her self will be fulfilled if her children will be successful in their future careers. She sacrifices herself for her children.
Privacy for the Filipino does not involve an individual but his sakop or reference group. This sakop can primarily be his extended family or kindred. The concept of privacy may extend to the whole neighborhood. The lending of objects attest to this point, like `pahiram nga ng ating palangana' (please let me borrow our basin). However, it can also be ironic when the owner says, `pahiram nga ng aking [my] palangana.'
In the realm of confidentiality, privacy also is not individual, but has a group dimension such as a neighborhood with a strong bond of familiarity.
`Private school' or `private firm' then means the thing belongs to a particular group and not by the state. `Privacy' also means the exclusiveness and rest for a group as in `Please don't disturb us. We want privacy.' It also limits access, like in `private parts.'
What then is the difference between `sarili' and `private'? `Sarili' is a broader concept since it includes the self, freedom, and property. `Private' is more in the area of property. But the Philippine languages have taken over the word `pribado' to mean 'private' with the nuances mentioned above.
The foregoing data show that self for the Filipino is holistic. To be a person is to be related to others.
Philosophy of Sarili
From the linguistic data above, we can draw the following conclusions. First, sarili is much wider than loob. Sarili or the whole self is that which possesses the loob. Loob is only a dimension or a "part" of sarili. Self (which refers to the speaker, the I or `ako') recognizes its presence or existence. Self (sarili) is the whole self, which includes body, soul, and spirit and all its properties. It is the oneness of the whole person. It connotes harmony of the faculties. A person can speak of his own self (sarili) because he is conscious of himself/herself. Selfhood guarantees being fully authentic and human.
Second, this selfhood exercises itself in its use of personal freedom.
Third, selfhood includes the things/properties as extensions of oneself.
Fourth, being conscious of oneself implies consciousness of others, the world, and the environment in which one lives. The sarili also affirms the value of the others (kapwa). By recognizing the others, sarili also shows co-responsibility. By recognizing the others, it transcends the self. Self implies the sakop philosophy because the Filipino is not individualistic.51 It demands altruism. The human self finds fulfillment in its inter-relationship with others: selfhood then implies the collective self of society. According to a proverb: `Walang taong nabubuhay para sa sarili lamang' (no man lives for himself alone). 'Bayan muna bago ang sarili' (The country above oneself).
Fifth, individualistic privacy is not stressed.
It is true that we find similar features in other languages concerning self as freedom and property.52 Concerning freedom, English can also say `on my own', or von sich selbst (German), or da se (Italian), de por si (Spanish). Concerning property, we find its equivalent in English as `my own', or eigentum (German), i miei (Italian), los mios (Spanish). So what is new with the Philippine concept of sarili? The difference, we believe, lies in the social philosophy, that is, man is not individualistic. Or positively, the concept of self has a sakop orientation. How far this concept is different from other oriental philosophies remains to be discussed.
Sarili is related to `kapwa' (both, fellow being). However, the word kapwa and its meanings is somehow absent in Cebuano Visayan and Ilocano. But it does not mean that the Filipino is not other-oriented. On the contrary, we have said that s/he is sakop-oriented. Sakop specifies more the kapwa orientation.
After seeing loob in relation to the body and to the self, there remains one more point of reference. In the case of batin, rasa had much to do with the realization of the former.
LOOB AND BAIT
What is the counterpart of `rasa' in Tagalog? We believe that the word is bait. Earlier in the case of the revolutionaries, we saw that a purified kalooban needs a special knowledge and a new kind of seeing.
Batin, as we mentioned earlier, is not reasoning through the head but through the heart. This way of reasoning penetrates better the core of reality.
Tagalog differentiates `isip' (reason) from `bait.' The dictionary lists different nuances of isip: as thought; understanding; sense; judgment; criterion; opinion; discernment; idea; talent; intention; surmise; viewpoint; mind.53 We believe that `rasa' corresponds roughly to the English concept of reason and the faculty of reasoning. Miranda clusters the meaning of isip to thought, intelligence, reason, and conviction.54
On the other hand, `bait' is diversely translated, in one sense, as kindness, as sense, prudence:55 thus `walang bait sa sarili' (no sense of his own), or `mawalan ng bait' (to lose consciousness). Miranda translates bait as intrinsic goodness, intuitively critical goodness, and as practical goodness.56 Bait is "the inner dynamic; the essential thrust of bait is towards values that affirm and promote the authentic and ideal nature of man"; it is "the practical judgment for the good at hand."57
Synderesis would be the scholastic translation of bait. It is "the natural or innate habit of the mind to know the first principles of the practical or moral order without recourse to a process of discursive reasoning."58 The term, which goes back to ancient Greek philosophy, has been given diverse interpretations in the history of patristic and scholastic philosophy. It is infallible because "the human intellect cannot err regarding first and indemonstrable principles."59
The Western interpretation tends to give synderesis a rational interpretation. But the Filipino concept of bait is both emotional and intellectual or holistic.
CONCLUSION
We began this chapter with batin as a point of departure. Let us review the various elements: world view, batin-loob, rasa, sacrifice, power.
Concerning world view, we have seen some commonality between the Javanese and Filipino outlook of the universe as a continuum with much power. They are similar in the concepts of sacrifice which is geared to actuating the loob/batin, the resulting power, and knowledge as non-cerebral.
Furthermore, as a person ranks higher in society--like the nobility--he is supposedly closer to the truth and to God. Earlier we mentioned that the Filipino revolutionaries attributed special knowledge to the purified kalooban of their leaders.
In many ways perhaps loob and batin were the same in the early stage of both Javanese and Filipino cultures. But with the influence of new thoughts (Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam for Java, and Christianity for the Philippines), these influences contribute to some divergence. In spite of the later accretions, we can still see the original inspiration. While Filipino mystics in the state of langkap (with the variants of sapi and sanib), alleged spirit possession by the Santo Niño, Christ as Nazareno, or other saints, those in Java may give non-Christian names to the spirits.
The same is true with "feeding" or "charging" their respective amulets with prayer and sacrifices to maintain or enhance the power.
Although there are similarities, we find differences between Javanese and Filipino thought. Javanese mysticism is dualistic because it dichotomizes the inner man and the outer man, matter and spirit. It devalues matter.60
Both batin and loob, in our considerations above, point to the inner being or inner person. However, batin (at least on the studies consulted) bases itself on the Indian category of layers in the person. This layer way of thinking is not Filipino, which follows the holistic model.
With the exception of our study on buot-loob-nakem, the other researches have focused only on loob. They play on the Tagalog contrast between loob as interior as labas (outside). For example, we see this contrast in Ileto and in Salazar.61
But the contrast on loob and labas is only in Tagalog. In our study, we found similarities in how the three languages (Cebuano Visayan, Tagalog, and Ilocano) respectively agree on how buot, loob and nakem are somehow the same in four areas: as intellectual, volitional, emotional, and ethical. Similarity, however, does not imply uniformity. For example, `mahimuot' (buot as pleasing) seems unique for Cebuano. `Ang buot sa balaod' (literally, the will of the law) cannot be translated as such in Tagalog or in Ilocano.
But one area, which we call miscellaneous, is particular only for Tagalog.62 In this table, Tagalog has loob meaning the interior, inside, within or loob in the spatial sense. Thus we find expressions like `sa loob ng bahay' (inside the house), `saloobin' (to interiorize), and `looban' fenced yard around the house. Robbers are `mga mangloloob' because they enter a house. When applied to the person, we find expressions like `kaloob-looban' or `kaibuturan ng loob' (deep within the loob). Expressions like these in the spatial sense of interiority are absent in Cebuano Visayan and Ilocano. Cebuano Visayan does not contrast buot to `gawas'; nor does Ilocano contrast nakem to `iti ruar' or `ruar' (outside).
Since most of the researches on kalooban have been done on Tagalog, the researches have used this special element of loob. Thus Salazar in his study uses structuralism as a methodology.63 Now uses binary opposition like `hina' vs. `lakas', `lambot' vs. `tigas', `bigat' vs. `gaan', `sama' vs. `buti.' Naturally the opposite of loob is `labas' (outside). In the binary opposition of structuralism, things are considered as either-or.
But the Filipino does not think in either-or categories. His is both/and in his spirit of harmony.64 We said that since loob (and buot, as well as nakem) has a holistic concept of the body, there is no dichotomy between the inside and the outside of the person.
If loob is to be placed in a larger context as we have shown above, the criterion of coherence will give it a safer explanation. By coherence we mean that the explanation of loob must fit the whole of philosophy as a system. Thus we have seen that loob fits together with the Filipino world view, the body, self, and sacrifice as a means of realizing the loob and of getting power.
Therefore, we recommend that the counterparts of loob in other Philippine languages be studied in order to have a true Filipino view.
Sarili is the "bigger umbrella" which embraces loob and katawan. Katawan, in turn, is inseparable from soul and spirit. Loob is an interior aspect of sarili. The loob manifests itself in the katawan and vice versa.
Furthermore, the concept of sarili has a social dimension: the Filipino is not individualistic, as is seen in his weak sense of privacy.
Meantime, we find that our original finding still holds true as encapsulated in the statement: "The Filipino looks at himself as a self, as one who feels, as one who wills, as one who thinks, as one who acts; as a total whole--as a `person' conscious of his freedom, proud of his dignity, and sensitive to the violation of these two."65
Bait as reasoning was briefly explained in this chapter. More on the
Filipino way of reasoning will be found in Chapter III.
1. Although anthropologists have written earlier on utang na loob, we believe that the first systematic philosophical study of loob is our article, "Thoughts on Buut-Loob Nakem," Philippine Studies, 20 (1972), 577-601. This article was later incorporated in chapter 3 of our book, Elements of Filipino Philosophy (Tacloban City: Divine Word University Publications, 1974), pp. 53-72. Albert E. Alejo studies the authors who wrote on loob and makes his critique of each in his book, Tao po! Tuloy! (Quezon City: Office of Research and Publications, Ateneo de Manila University), pp. 10-44.
We are greatful to the comments of Dr. Prospero Covar and Fr. Dionisio Miranda, SVD, on the earlier version of this text.
2. We presuppose here the ideas proposed in Elements of Filipino Philosophy.
3. Niels Mulder, Mysticism and Everyday Life in Contemporary Java, Cultural Persistence and Change (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1978), pp. 16, 38-41.
4. Ibid., p. 64.
5. Reynaldo Clemeña Ileto, Pasyon and Revolution, Popular Movements in the Philippines, 1840-1910 (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1989), p. 25. The pagination of the 1979 first printing with its large type differs slightly from the third printing of 1989.
6. In English, for instance, we find the following: Clifford Geertz, The Religion of Java (London: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1960), p. 309352; Niels Mulder, Mysticism and Everyday Life in Contemporary Java; A.M. Sutrisnaatmaka, "The Javanese Kebatinan Mysticism: A Brief Observation in a Framework of a New Evangelization", paper read at the SVD Asia-Pacific Zonal Conference for Missiological Education and Research, Bali, October 21-31, 1993.
7. Mulder, Mysticism, p. 93.
8. Ibid., p. 123.
9. Ibid., p. 106.
10. Ibid., p. 13.
11. Geertz, The Religion of Java, p. 316.
12. Ibid., p. 320.
13. Ibid., p. 310.
14. Mulder, Mysticism, p. 16.
15. Geertz, The Religion of Java, p. 310.
16. Mulder, Mysticism, p. 23.
17. Geertz, The Religion of Java, pp. 321-322.
18. Ibid., p. 321.
19. Mulder, Mysticism, p. 15.
20. Ibid., p. 23.
21. For more details on the survival of the ancient Javanese beliefs on power, see Keith Loveard, "Journey Through Magic," Asiaweek, June 9, 1993, pp. 36-45.
22. Prospero R. Covar, "Potensiya, Bisa, at Anting-anting," Asian Studies, 18 (1980), 77.
23. Ileto, Pasyon and Revolution, p. 24.
24. Covar, "Potensiya." p. 77.
25. Ileto, Pasyon and Revolution, p. 86.
26. Ibid., p. 93.
27. Ibid., p. 45.
28. Ibid., pp. 45, 148.
29. Ibid., p. 152.
30. Ibid., p. 25.
31. Ibid., p. 40.
32. Ibid., p. 46.
33. Ibid., p. 145.
34. Ibid., p. 103.
35. Ibid., p. 180.
36. Ibid., p. 235.
37. Ibid., p. 222.
38. Loc. cit.
39. "Ang paghampas ay hindi upang palayasin ang mga masasamang espiritu sa loob ng katawan. Ito'y ginagawa upang linisin ang kanilang katawan para maging karapat-dapat na templo ng anting-anting," says Covar, "Potensiya," p. 78.
40. Ileto, Pasyon and Revolution, p. 96.
41. Ibid., p. 115.
42. Ibid., p. 41; see also Covar, "Potensiya," p. 78.
43. Leonardo N. Mercado, Inculturation and Filipino Theology Manila: Divine Word Publications, 1992), pp. 105-106; Covar, "Potensiya," p. 77.
44. Florencio L. Lagura, Models for the Body-Mind Problem in Merleau-Ponty (Tagaytay City: Divine Word Seminary, 1984), p. 264.
45. From the translator's preface of Maurice Merleau-Ponty's The Visible and the Invisible (Evantson: Northwestern University Press, 1968), p. liv.
46. Lagura, Models, pp. 233-247.
47. Fe Maria C. Arriola, The Body Book (QC: GCF Books, 1993).
48. We used here the list of Albert Alejo, Tao po! Tuloy!, pp. 135151.
49. Mercado, Elements of Filipino Philosophy, pp. 53-72.
50. I am grateful to Prof. Covar for these nuances (from his personal communication).
51. Mercado, Elements of Filipino Philosophy, 92-104.
52. I am grateful to Dionisio Miranda on this observation.
53. Jose Villa Panganiban, Diksyunario-Tesauro Pilipino-Ingles (Quezon City: Manlapaz Publishing Co., 1972), p. 569.
54. Dionisio M. Miranda, Loob, The Filipino Within (Manila: Divine Word Publications, 1989), p. 35.
55. Ibid., p. 100.
56. Ibid., pp. 38-41.
57. Loc. cit.
58. M.W. Hollenbach, "Synderesis," New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, XIII, 881-883.
59. Ibid., p. 883.
60. Mulder, p. 17.
61. Ileto, Pasyon and Revolution, p. 15; Zeus A. Salazar, "Ang Kamalayan at Kaluluwa: Isang Paglilinaw ng Ilang Konsepto sa Kinagisnang Sikolohiya," in Ulat ng Ikalwang Pambansang Kumperensya sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Quezon City: Pambansang Samahan sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino, 1977), pp. 131-144. The figure on p. 144 shows the contrast between labas and loob.
62. Mercado, Elements of Filipino Philosophy, p. 64.
63. Salazar, "Ang Kamalayan at Kaluluwa".
64. Mercado, Elements of Filipino Philosophy, pp. 73-91.
65. Ibid., p. 71.