The dictionary defines syndrome as "a set of concurrent things (as emotions or actions) that usu[ally] form an identifiable pattern."¹ In Philippine culture one syndrome is lusot.

What is lusot? The word has almost the same meaning in most Philippine languages such as Cebuano Visayan, Tagalog, and Ilocano and others. Literally, it means to pass or to go through a narrow place or barrier. In the physical sense, a thread passes (lusot) through a needle's eye, or a cold wind passing through the window. A pig sneaks (lusot) through the hole in the fence. In the applied or figurative sense, it means passing through a tight situation such as to escape danger. Thus lusot also applies a person who just passes the board examination. A boat weathers a storm and the passengers narrowly escape (lusot) from drowning. Lusot can be said of an alibi. An expectant mother is said to be nalutsan na/nalusutan na/nalsultanen (respectively in Visayan, Tagalog, and Ilocano). Obviously the word lusot here has sexual nuance. A fruit-vendor cheats her customers by tampering the scale is said to be nakalusot. The crucified thief in Calvary sneaks (lusot) to Paradise when the he scolded the other thief, defended Jesus and said, "Remember me, Jesus, when you come as King" (Lk. 23:42). Tourists smuggle in contraband goods under the nose of the custom officials.

Lusot has a particular application in the moral sense. In the context of human interaction, lusot plays a major role. For example, somebody who wants application papers expedited in business will use the lusot system. This may entail giving presents and similar forms of bribe (lagay), sometimes called pampadulas (slide), to "oil" the approval of the papers. Thus lusot and lagay can go together. Somebody offers a gift in order to land a job.

Another counterpart lagay is done through pakikisama (camaraderie). When one is in good harmony with others, a person may use that good will for lusot. In the case mentioned above, pakikisama is a way of getting the application approved faster.

In some instances cheating (pandaraya) is a means of obtaining lusot. A politician, for example, resorts to vote-buying in order to win the election.

Why do people resort to lusot? One reason is reflected in the saying, "Kapag may gusot, may lusot." It may roughly be translated: If there is a problem, there is a solution. Since man has goals and ambitions, problems or obstacles to those goals need solutions, including lusot. Goals not rarely have to be achieved, "kahit na anong mangyari" (no matter what it takes). Thus money, power, influence, personal skills (such as the skill of giving alibis) may be used to attain the goal.

Does lusot then form a syndrome in the Filipino personality and culture? What is its philosophy?

The purpose of this chapter is not to present all the aspects of lusot. We intend merely to clarify its context in Filipino philosophy.² First we shall describe lusot in the ethical context of the gray area of human acts. Secondly, we shall look at lusot from the viewpoint of legal philosophy. Finally we shall make some concluding remarks.

LUSOT AND ETHICS

We have shown elsewhere that language mirrors a people's philosophy.³ Hence we can apply it in the case of morality. Although we can present the linguistic evidence of lusot in the three major Philippine languages (namely, Cebuano Visayan, Tagalog, and Ilocano) we shall limit the linguistic data to Tagalog since the other languages are similar.

One particular clue is the prefix /naka-/.⁴ The prefix is used in different meanings. First, it can be used in the adverbial sense (e.g., `nakahiga', lying down) or to denote the past tense (e.g., `nakahiga' as was lying down). In the present tense, the word becomes `nakahihiga'. However, /naka-/ can also mean an opportunity. It is related to /maka-/. Thus `nakakahiga' means having the opportunity to lie down.

/Maka-/ offers richer nuances.⁵ First /maka-/is used to mean in favor of, or on the side of. For example, `maka-Amerikano' (pro-American). Secondly, it means being causative of (e.g., `makahinog', causative of repining; `makaalis-antok', causative of stopping sleepiness). Thirdly, it denotes ability, capacity, or authority to do something (e.g., `makabasa', able to read). Fourthly, it denotes frequency (e.g., `makadalawa', twice; `makailan', several times). Fifthly, /maka-/ expresses the chance or opportunity to do/make/perform something (e.g., `makabasa', to have the chance or opportunity to read).

Let us take a concrete example. The domestic helper tells her employer, "Ma'am, I was able to break a plate." The domestic helper was thinking in Tagalog, "Ma'am, ako po'y nakabasag ng pinggan," meaning she accidentally broke the plate. It is different when she says `binasag ko ang pinggan' where the action of breaking is intentional.

`Nakabasa ko ng kanyang liham' (I accidentally read his/her letter) is quite different from `binasa ko ang kanyang liham'(I purposely read his/her letter). We distinguish between `pumunta ako sa palenke' (I went intentionally to the market) and `nakapunta ako sa palenke' (I happened to pass by the market). The latter is equivalent to `napadaan ako sa palenke.'

/Napa-/ is the past form of /mapa-/. Now /mapa-/ can have different usages.⁶ One usage which concerns this study is when /mapa-/ is used to denote an act which is unexpected. For instance, in the example given above, `napadaan ako sa palenke' (I unexpectedly passed by the market), or `ako'y napaiyak sa kuwento' (the story unexpectedly made me cry). Thus /naka-/ and /napa-/ constructions are semantically related.

Likewise, a criminal may say, `Nakapatay ko si Jose' (I have accidentally killed Jose). Or the criminal may also admit: `Pinatay ko si Jose' (I intentionally killed Jose). The first case is homicide while the latter is murder. Furthermore, the use of `napatay' instead of `pinatay' is either is a euphemism or really implies less culpability. Moreover, `pinatay' carries the mark of a killer, but not in `nakapatay.'

A statistical study on how /naka-/ is used more than /-in/ in court, in counseling sessions, in the confessional would be quite revealing. There the /naka-/ constructions should appear much more frequently. The linguistic evidence shown above reflects the ethical gray area where one is not sure whether a particular action is good or bad.

Here a review of distinctions may be useful. Moralists and ethicians say that morality concerns human acts (actus humanus), not acts of man (actus hominis). The latter proceeds from acts without the intervention of intellect and will.⁷ Hence, the components of intellect and will are needed for human acts. Voluntary acts, according to moralists, are either perfectly or imperfectly voluntary, actually or virtually voluntary, positively or negatively voluntary, or directly or indirectly voluntary.

Now certain factors can impair the intellectual or volitional aspect of an act. On the intellectual side, ignorance, error, and inattention can lessen the culpability of an act. On the volitional side, the impairments of free consent can be passion or concupiscence, fear, violence, dispositions and habits.

In other words, with the above-mentioned factors of impairment, there is a wide latitude of gray area between what is fully a conscious, intended human act and what is not fully conscious or not fully intended.

Given the gray area of human acts, the linguistic evidence of the Philippine languages justifies saying `nakapatay' instead of `pinatay' and similar instances. This gray area is where lusot takes place.

LUSOT AND LEGAL PHILOSOPHY

Filipino legal philosophy has been compared to Western legal philosophy.⁸ Law for the Filipino is holistic in the sense that includes the supernatural, civil law, and cultural tradition. This holistic sense is quite far from western thinking which limits itself to the civil order.

Second, law for the Filipino stresses duty while the West stresses right; both duty and right are two sides of the same coin. The Filipino stress on duty stems from his social philosophy which is more group oriented; this is different from the Western approach to rights due to its individualism.

Third, law for the Filipino is interior, and hence has little need for concrete documents like contracts. On other hand, law for the West is exterior, as expressed in its need for such external manifestations as contracts and the like.

We hear the oft-quoted saying, Dura est lex, sed est lex (the law is hard, but it is the law). Victor Hugo's Les Miserables tells the story of Jean Valjean who is convicted for stealing a loaf of bread. In spite of his many good deeds, he is pursued by the detective, Inspector Javert, who is blind to the good points of Jean Valjean feels bound to prosecute him to the full extent of the law. Inspector Valjean's attitude illustrates other Latin legal maxims like Summum ius, summa iniuria (the highest law can be the highest injury) or Fiat iustitia, ruant coeli (let justice be done, let the heavens fall).

Fourth, law for the Filipino is concrete. This is because the Filipino thinks concretely; he has no abstract words.⁹ On the other hand, law in the Western context is abstract. The abstract part are the principles which then must be applied in concrete situations.

Lusot and Law as Personalized

Let us take a case. A young man is hurt in a bus accident which was the driver's fault. The young man's mother sues the bus company and asks for compensation. But the bus company manager tells the mother that perhaps the case can be settled out of court (`puwede yatang mapagusapan iyan'). The mother says all right if the company will pay for all the hospital expenses. The company manager asks for a compromise: that they equally share the hospital expenses. The mother is adamant: either the company pays all the expenses or she proceeds with the court case. At the end, the bus company accedes to the mother's wishes. Thus a settlement is arrived, a case of `napag-usapan.' It may also be called ayos (Tagalog) or husay (Cebuano), namely it was "patched up" through mediation. "The goal of mediation (husay) is mutual understanding (pagsinabtanay) in a good way (inato-ato)."¹⁰

The concreteness of law is manifested in its attention to the personal. Crimes, which in western courts have other classifications, are considered personal rather than public. People like barrio leaders who

put joints in the law in order to make it flexible; eyes to the law with which each person can be judged on his unique merits; ears to the law which will enable it to hear the cries of the wife and children of the person who is to be punished by the law; and a heart which will enable it to feel the anxieties and sorrows of the persons who are castigated.¹¹

The personal consideration of the above is found also in pre-colonial Filipinos and tribal Filipinos.¹² For the pre-colonial Filipinos, differences were settled first through a sort of judicial system before a neutral arbitrator in order to avoid bloodshed.

The same is true of the non-monolithic tribal Filipinos like the classless societies (that is, without any social stratification) as represented by the Tirurays of Mindanao. Their leaders are usually old men known for their wisdom and knowledge of customary law. Then there are the warrior societies, like the Kalingas, whose heads, the pangats, are known as successful warriors of their hierarchic societies. On the other hand, the petty plutocracies, like the Ifugaos, have the rich at the top of their society. The principalities, like the Filipino Muslims in Mindanao, reflect much of the pre-colonial, hierarchic society, with the sultan or datu as tribal heads. In all these tribal societies, differences are settled through a process of interpersonal adjudication in the light of customary law or tradition to avoid bloodshed and restore harmony. In the case the Kalingas and Ifugaos, and other tribes of the Cordillera mountain range, the settlement is expressed in a peace pact (bodong).

This concreteness and desired personalized law is the context of lusot. The lusot syndrome expresses the Filipino's need to humanize the law. That is why much recourse happens through ayos, usap and similar interpersonal arrangements. Here the process of giving the law a human face means stretching the provisions of the law. Even present-day judges have the discretion of meting out punishments, depending upon the gravity of the crime or its circumstances. For instance, a particular crime may be punishable by from six months to six years in prison.

Almost any legal cause will end up with issues on the rights and duties of the two parties. Even disputes over property like land are actually translatable into disputes between two parties. When applied to lusot, that means one party has won (nakalusot) and the other party was either lost (nalusotan) or allowed it (pinalusot niya) to happen.

An ethical principle says, Volenti non fit iniuria (no injury is done to one who wills it). If I ask somebody to slap my face, that person has done me no wrong because I wanted to be slapped. This principle may also apply to anyone who allows lusot.

Again in the novel, Les Miserables, Jean Valjean just stepped out of prison. Although he is a house guest of the bishop, he steals the plate and silver candlesticks of the bishop and runs away. Later the three gendarmes catch Jean Valjean, bring him to the bishop, and inquire about the ownership of the loot. The bishop is faced with dilemma. If he says that they were stolen, Jean Valjean would land again in prison. If he says no, then the goods are not stolen. So the bishop tells the gendarmes that he had previously donated them to Jean. The bishop's kindness converts Jean Valjean. Pinalusot ng obispo si Jean (the bishop allowed lusot to Jean). If the bishop were rigid, he would have said that the candlesticks were stolen. Hindi niya pinalusot si Jean (He did not allow Jean to make a lusot).

Lusot and Suspension of the Law

When lusot takes place the law is somehow suspended, as when a case is settled out of court. When God ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, the law against killing the innocent was suspended. (St. Thomas Aquinas adds that since God is the lawgiver, he can also unmake the law in case of his command to sacrifice Isaac.)

During a fire, the fire trucks rush to the scene disregarding all the red traffic lights while the other vehicles have to give way. This exception is still within the bounds of the law because lawgivers have provided this exception for emergencies.

We know that lawgivers do not see all the ramification of their laws and that laws are made for man, not vice versa. That is why moralists acknowledge epikia (or epikeia, epiky), where the letter of the law is broken but not its spirit. This is because the lawgiver did not foresee the law's application in all situations.¹³

Is lusot then the same as epikia? We do not equate lusot with epikia, for some instances of lusot may or not be cases of epikia. In some cases, it may be an intelligent application of the law, but in other cases lusot may be totally illegal because it is only a way out. For example, a jeepney driver who is caught for violating traffic regulations bribes (a form of lusot) the policeman to let him go. The jeepney driver thinks that the bother of going to the police precinct will make him lose business opportunities.

Lusot and the Colonial Legal System

The legal system and the legal philosophy which undergird it is colonial. The courts and legal system are copied from European and American models. For example, the Philippine Bill of Rights is basically American in its text and content.¹⁴ Filipino judges pen their decisions on legal precedence based on American court decisions.

Another example of the colonial legal system is the current policy on ancestral domain. The Philippine government still adheres to the Regalian doctrine which means that the government owns all the public lands and all the natural resources that they contain.¹⁵ Since Spain conquered the Philippines, it claimed that all property belonged to the crown so that the people who lived in it did not own the land which their forefathers presumed to be theirs. The United States of America used the same principle in its annexation of the Philippines.

Because the legal system is alien to most Filipinos, it tends to protect the interests of the elite and the powerful. The result is a double standard of justice, with a set of laws for the rich and another for the poor.¹⁶ Thus one hears of the expression, the "malakas" (the powerful) and the "mahina" (the weak) of society. One proof of this imbalance is that one hardly finds the former in Philippine jails. Since the poor have little chance in winning court cases, not a few resort to sorcery to redress their grievances.

In this context of legal colonialism, we therefore understand why lusot is another resort to circumvent the law. By going around the law, the masses believe that they can bring the law to their side.

CONCLUSION

In our book of Filipino ethics, we have shown that value ranking is the basis of judging morality.¹⁷ We speak here of the value as a people, not the value of particular persons, for that can vary.

We have shown above that lusot may be both ethical or non-ethical, legal or illegal. But understanding its intricacies may help because a correct diagnosis is half of the cure. In the context of the gray area of human acts and because of the Filipino concern for concreteness, these remarks may perhaps shed some light on lusot and its connection with Filipino philosophy.

1. Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster Inc., 1983), p. 1197.

2. We assume here the existence of Filipino philosophy in general and Filipino ethics in particular. For more details see our books, Elements of Filipino Philosophy (Tacloban City: Divine Word University Publications, 1974); Elements of Filipino Ethics (Tacloban City: Divine Word University Publications, 1979).

3. Elements of Filipino Philosophy, Part I.

4. Jose Villa Panganiban, Diksyunaryo-Tesauro Pilipino-Ingles (Manila: Manlapaz Publishing Co., 1972), p. 719.

5. Ibid., p. 675.

6. Ibid., pp. 700-701.

7. C. Henry Peschke, Christian Ethics, Vol. 1 (Dublin: C. Neale, 1981), p. 185 ff.

8. Leonardo N. Mercado, Legal Philosophy: Western, Eastern, and Filipino (Tacloban City: Divine Word University Publications, 1984).

9. Elements of Filipino Philosophy, pp. 73-91.

10. Legal Philosophy, p. 143.

11. Elements of Filipino Philosophy, p. 152.

12. Legal Philosophy, pp. 105-138.

13. Pesche, Christian Ethics, pp. 131-133.

14. Joaquin C. Bernas, A Historical and Juridical Study of the Philippine Bill of Rights (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1971), p. 277.

15. Antonio G. M. La Viña, "Recognition of Ancestral Domains: An Imperative for Democratic Upland Resource Management," Solidarity, no. 124 (October-December, 1969), pp. 119-125.

16. G. Sidney Silliman, "The Folk Legal Culture of the Cebuano Filipino," Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society, 10 (1982), 234.

17. Elements of Filipino Ethics, pp. 27-43.