5.5. AN AFRICAN GENDERED ECOLOGICAL READING OF GENESIS 1-3
5.5.2. The first myth: The Earth Priest and the Earth Priestess
The first myth (Gen 1:1-2:4) possibly with a priestly origin, present male and female created by Elohim (God) equally directly. The narrator uses the motif of human beings created in the image of God, giving them dominion over other Earth-beings (Genesis 1:26-27). Biblical scholars generally agree that Genesis 1:26-28 draws much from, Enuma elish, the Babylonian myth of origin and other traditions in the ANE (Middleton 2005:227-28, Richter 2010). The myth has been traditionally seem as suggesting that dominion in form of rulership is the purpose for which humans were created in the image and likeness of God. However, as suggested in chapter 2, a closer look at the myths suggests that the motif of the image of God has ecological significance. The motif of male and female being created in the image of God to have dominion implies that they were expected to fulfil their roles as Earth-priest (Sikatongo) and Earth- priestess (mutantu walufulu or mukaintu wamfula).
[184]
Giving an alternative ideo-theology to that of humans being above and exploiting other forms of creation, this myth introduces the concept of humans descending (yrd). In other words, Imago Dei implies humans dwelling among and caring for other forms of creation. This is consistent with the African cosmology where the image Imago Dei manifests through humans cooperating with other forms of creation. And God is not transcendent but is among God’s creation. In this way, a patriarchal interpretation of the dominion motif (Gen.1:26-28) from the standpoint of God giving authority or violent rulership (rada or kabas) to humans over other forms of God’s creation falls away.
The equality of male and female is important for the purpose of ensuring ecological wellbeing on earth. It mirrors the union of God and the mother earth for the fertility of the land. Among, the Tonga people during a drought for example, the Earth priest (Sikatongo) and the Earth priestess (mukaintu wamfula) perform a rain calling ritual by having ritual sex. In this ritual, seeds will be put underneath the bed and the priest and the priestess will have sex. The priest represents the male side of Leza (God), the priestess represents the female side of Leza (mother earth) and the seed represents the nonhuman side of Leza. The significance of this ritual is that the wellbeing of humans is linked to the wellbeing of other forms of life. When the rain comes it gives life to the entire of God’s creation. It is from this perspective that the “image of God” and the “dominion”
motif in the first myth should be understood. It is for this reason that a patriarchal dominion motif where human beings are seen to be given the mandate to abuse nature has largely contributed to the destruction of God’s world.
The concept of rest introduced at the end of the first myth (Gen. 2:1-3) has ecological undertones. First, it gives time to land and nonhuman forms of life to reproduce. The pattern of work and rest is replicated in various ways from a weekly pattern (six days for work and one for rest), to yearly pattern including both the seven-year sabbatical and 49-year jubilee patterns (cf.
Wright 1990:124-125). These patterns gave room for crop rotation and other forms of life to reproduce. Human beings and nonhuman forms of life share the time of rest with God as an affirmation that they all beneficiaries of God’s created order. Second, the concept of rest was associated with the preservation of land in clan in the context of family or clan units (katongo).
In ancient Israel, land allocated to families of other tribes could not be sold in perpetuity (Wright
[185]
1990:175-176). In this way, the depiction of time to rest depicted in the first myth is embedded within the larger context of interrelationship between human beings, nonhuman forms of life and God. It is also an attempt to preserve or periodically restore the economic viability and independence of the smaller family land units. As Wright (1990:124-125) observes, it is also an attempt to maintain the integrity of an egalitarian community where the socio-economic life of the nation benefits all.
Similarly, in indigenous Tonga culture, there used to be “the day of rest” associated with the founding (primogenitor) ancestor (Sikatongo). On this day, people were not allowed to till the land. It is believed that the ancestors punished those who did not observe the regulation while those who did, their crops and livestock were protected. People were also not allowed to cut trees in certain places such as shrines. Further, fishing and hunting were not allowed during breeding seasons to ensure that there was continuity of the species. It is for this reason that human beings as the image of God (Earth priests and Earth priestesses) have a mandate to ensure that there is continuity of life on earth. The continuity of life on Earth which the myth in has emphasized can be exemplified the Tonga concept of buumo (interconnectedness of life).
5.5.2.1. Genesis 1:24-25 as buumo (interconnectedness of life)
The myth states that God created living creatures of different kinds and said it was good (Gen.
1:24-25). The creation myth has not ended with the dominion motif which has often been read in isolation. Rather, the narrative depicts the building of the earth and the different creatures God created. The interrelatedness of life for all God’s creatures is captured further, in Genesis 1:29-31 where plants and fruits are not only given to humans but also to other living creatures.
The concept of buumo regards humanity as part of the eco-systems that lead to a communal responsibility to sustain life (cf. Abimbola 1994:4-114). Buumo enables Africans to share what they have on a principle of equity among and between generations. As a principle of eco-justice, buumo fosters compassion, collective responsibility and respect for the intrinsic dignity of all God’s creation. In the Tonga understanding of the interrelatedness of life, one is human because they belong to the human community and view and treat others accordingly. In this way, other
[186]
forms of life are not valued in relation to the benefit they offer to human beings, but according to their intrinsic value.
Further, the concept of buumo in African culture shows that the family cannot be limited to immediate relations (cf. Abimbola 1994:4-114). It includes all human beings, ancestors, nonhuman forms of life and Earth-Mysteries. The elimination of the voice of animals in this text by the author and the redactors is clear. It must be noted that God first brought into existence those animals and those creatures whose home is water, sky and ground (Gen. 1:20-25). After their creation, God approved the beauty of these animals in fulfilling God’s purpose for creation (Gen. 21-25). The creation of human beings was then done in relation to the animals which were earlier created. This is demonstrated by creating human beings in the likeness and image of God with a mandate earlier given to animals to multiply in the Earth. This shows that the mandate to multiply and have dominion was not given to humans only (Fretheim 1994:346, Habel 2006:39).
As such, the myth eliminates the understanding of dominion by human beings over other forms of creation as Von Rad (1972:196) asserts. (Gen. 1:26-27).
The emphasis in the myths on the interrelatedness of life is well exemplified in African culture.
In African culture many aspects of nature such as rocks, trees, mountains, rivers and waterfalls demand respect from human beings because of their sacred nature. In this way nonhuman forms of life is respected rather than being seen as non-living things as it is seen in western cultures.
The concept of buumo depicted in the text is also in conformity with the principle of Ubuntu.
5.5.2.2. Genesis 1:26-27 as Ubuntu (what it takes to be human)
Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground” (Gen. 1:26). In this text, the myths show that human beings are created in relationship with other animals which God created in Genesis 1:24- 25. By emphasising the beauty of all creatures, the myth eliminates any possibility of dominion by human beings in the form of exploitative rulership. Further, as already shown, all God’s creation reflect the image of God and God refers to them all as living things. In this way, it can be argued that the current scenario of exploiting the natural world such as cutting down of
[187]
forests, running roads through every wild place, killing off world animals may be seen as Eco- cide from the perspective of the Earth.
The exalted portrayal of human beings in this text in relation to other forms of creation by a patriarchal interpretation has negative ecological implications. In fact it is foreign to the values exhibited in the text itself. Lamp (2012:17) has argued that the idea of divine image in creation states that the “world is the image of a perceptible deity, characterised by unsurpassed greatness, beauty, and perfection.” In light of this understanding, the text suggests that the created order bears the image of God.
The myth shows that life on Earth is fashioned in a web of relationships. Like the Tonga indigenous principle of Ubuntu, human beings are reminded that life is shared and experienced in relationship with other human beings and the entire creation order. The community is seen as an interlocking of forces of life for humans, nonhuman and Earth mysteries (cf. Setiloane 1986:14). This principle explains and determines how people relate to one another in the community. This means that people become human as they share experience and live together with other human beings and other forms of life in the entire cosmos.
It must be noted that a patriarchal focus on human beings has suppressed the voice of other members of the earth community in this text. The sublimation of the voice of the Earth has been done by the redactors who focused on advocating for the supremacy of human beings over other members of the Earth community. Secondly, the community of subsequent interpreters have frequently mined the text to defend the notion that human beings are more superior to other forms of life. In this way, the text reveals the author’s and the redactor’s preference to issues deemed relevant to support patriarchy to the exclusion of those relevant to support life on Earth.
It is for this reason that the concept of procreation has also been reworked to justify human occupation of the natural world.
5.5.2.3. Genesis 1:27 as Kusanda (replenishing the Earth)
The motif of replenishing and subduing the earth in biblical myths of origin has been used to support over population and exploitation of land by humans. A closer look at the myths however,
[188]
suggests that land was valued in the Jewish community and it had to be protected from human exploitation (cf. Wittenberg 2007). In this way land was never regarded as human property.
The command in the myth to multiply has been used to justify human occupation of the Earth to the exclusion of other forms of life. Based on this text, it has been suggested that large families were considered a blessing throughout in Ancient Israel. But, a closer look at the biblical myths of origin suggest the opposite. While, it is true that procreation was encouraged in the Jewish society for the continuation of the human race, it was only encouraged in consideration with other forms of life on Earth. In fact, the politics of Genesis and the entire Pentateuch seem to be against human overpopulation. Over population is linked to sin, rebellion against God and the creation of empires like the Tower of Babel (cf. Wittenberg 2007). Uncontrolled occupation of land has been portrayed to invite God’s intervention such as the flood (Gen.6). In this way, the concept of Kusanda in Tonga indigenous culture can help to retrieve and understand the motif of replenishing the Earth from an ecological perspective.
Africans have long practised family planning by employing different methods of reducing fertility (Adongo et al 1998:23-40). Caldwell and Caldwell (1977:193-217) have shown that postpartum and other female abstinence methods were common in most parts of Sub-Saharan Africa. In indigenous Tonga culture, postpartum abstinence was used to control overpopulation.
Postpartum abstinence provided time for the mother to nurse her baby. It was believed that the husband’s semen would contaminate the child’s milk and thereby bring illness and even death to the child. These methods also carried religious significance. This was the method used to allow child spacing. The other method which was used to control over population was to discourage early marriage for unplanned pregnancies. Thus, sex before marriage was discouraged. It was believed that sex before marriage will make the young man and the girl grow long fingers. Such taboos not only gave women power over their bodies but also controlled the number of children born in a given community.
From this background, it can be argued that the notion that African culture supports uncontrolled population is erroneous. While African culture values procreation for continuity of humanity and the family lineage, there are also measures in place to control population. It can also be argued that the current prevailing notion in sub-Saharan Africa where having many children is seen as