Teaching Philippine Indigenous Cultures Modules PDF

Teaching Philippine Indigenous Cultures Modules for Higher Education Institutions Hazel T. Biana, Ph.D. Melvin A. Jabar, Ph.D. Homer J. Yabut, Ph.D. Crisanto Q. Regadio, Jr., Ph.D. Cand. Philippine Copyright © 2016 by DLSU Social Development Research Center ISBN 978-971-528-023-5 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without written permission from the copyright owner. Printed with the support of the UNITED BOARD FOR CHRISTIAN HIGHER EDUCATION IN ASIA (UBCHEA) Published by: Social Development Research Center De La Salle University Manila 3/F William Hall Building 2401 Taft Ave. Manila, 1004 Philippines Tel. +632 524-5349/ 524-5351 www.dlsu.edu.ph/research/centers/sdrc www.sdrc.org.ph Edited by: Connie Jan Maraan Cover design by: Claude Rodrigo Layout by: Maria Catherine D. Domingo Views and opinions expressed in this work are those of the project team members and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asia, De La Salle University or the Social Development Research Center administrators, faculty, and staff. Table of Contents Acknowledgements i Dedication iii Foreword v Background and Rationale vii The Modules Module 1: The Peopling of the Philippines 1 Module 2: Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines 4 Module 3: Who are the Indigenous People? 12 Module 4: Filipino Indigenous Philosophy and Worldviews 25 Module 5: Indigenous Filipino Spirituality 28 Module 6: Indigenous Languages and Literatures 34 Module 7: Philippine Indigenous Arts and Crafts 53 Module 8: Philippine Indigenous Customary Laws, Livelihood and Technology 57 Module 9: Indigenous Filipino Psychology : Kapwa at Pakikipagkapwa 66 Appendices Appendix 1. IPRA and Dep. Ed. Order no. 51 series 2014 72 Appendix 2. Rules of Engagement with an IP Community 74 Acknowledgements The team would like to thank the following people and organizations for their contributions: The United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asia (UBCHEA) for their generous grant, without which this project would not have been made possible; The director and staff of the Social Development Research Center (SDRC) of De La Salle University; The faculty, staff and students of De La Salle University-Manila; Dr. Dennis Pulido for playing an important part in this project's inception; The Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center (LNRC); The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP); The Indigenous Peoples Education Office (IPsEO), Department of Education (DepEd); The teachers and educators from all over the Philippines who participated in the focus group discussions, workshops and forums; And the readers, advisors and editors who tirelessly helped in perfecting this work. i ii Dedication To the Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines iii iv Foreword This set of modules for teaching indigenous cultures in Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) could not have come at a better time. With Philippine education transitioning to the K-12 system, and some basic courses being devolved to grades 11 and 12, there is now an opportunity to enrich tertiary level curricula by including traditional knowledge and expressions of the country’s Indigenous Peoples (IPs.) By making this knowledge accessible to Filipino students, learning becomes more contextual, founded on one’s roots, and therefore, more authentic. The variety of cultures expressed by the many IPs in the Philippines cannot but promote the value of diversity and pluralism, while teaching students to be open to and appreciate different worldviews. On the other hand, the more people know about the cultures of our Indigenous Peoples, the better protected their knowledge system and cultural expressions will be. I was working on another United Board project when the team of Dr. Biana, Dr. Jabar, Dr. Yabut and Mr. Regadio was granted the fund for Reclaiming Filipino Indigenous Cultures through Teaching and Learning. I was a little disappointed that I could not be part of this work since I have always had a love for tribal cultures. They are rich and creative sources of alternative ways of thinking and living that provide needed insights when mainstream methods do not seem to work out that well with certain problems. When our curriculum still allowed more units for electives, I taught Tribal Philosophy, and Dr. Biana, then still a graduate student, took my class. She was kind enough to keep me posted on her team’s progress in their project on IPs. When finally the team invited me to give a presentation during the forum on “Teaching Philippine Indigenous Cultures” held at De La Salle University (the forum was a component of this UBCHEA project), I was only too eager to participate. Having been initiated into the world of intellectual property issues by the DLSU Intellectual Property Office (DITO), I thought it best to focus on the protection of traditional knowledge (TK) and traditional cultural expressions (TCEs). Although protection and promotion of TK and TCEs are not simple issues, the debates can only begin and proceed meaningfully if people are aware of them, their status, identity, and significance. Again, the conference was an excellent venue for getting this awareness started. Scientists, researchers, teachers, and students exchanged ideas and experiences that contributed to the drafting of the present modules. v Of the four authors, I have known Dr. Biana longest, since the time of her undergraduate years in the Philosophy program. But I worked with Dr. Jabar on some programs for the graduate students of our college when he was the Director of the Social Development Research Center (SDRC). He, Dr. Yabut and I also bonded during a research fellowship in Thailand. Our shared interest allowed me and Dr. Yabut to collaborate on a research paper afterwards. On the other hand, Mr. Regadio is one of our college’s doctoral apprentices and is about to finish his degree. His advocacy of IP cultures keeps our conversations lively as we plan for more events intended to promote them. The team worked diligently and effectively to produce this particular set of modules on teaching IP cultures. Nine modules are compiled herein, beginning with the peopling of the Philippine Islands, proceeding through each aspect of the IPs’ social life, and then capped by an insight into the psychology of the indigenous Filipino. Using a transformative outcomes-based pedagogical framework, each module provides guide questions for students’ prior knowledge, interesting learning activities leading to specific outputs, procedures for processing what students learn, and suggested teaching resources in print and electronic form. It is a valuable resource that will hopefully be used by many Filipino educators who are convinced of the importance of integrating knowledge of the IP cultures into relevant program curricula. It is also hoped that this endeavor inspires other forms of promotion that will help preserve and sustain the development of indigenous cultures. Dr. Leni dlR. Garcia Full Professor, Philosophy Department Director, Research and Advanced Studies College of Liberal Arts De La Salle University Taft Avenue, Manila vi Background and Rationale In 2014, the Social Development Research Center (SDRC) of De La Salle University was awarded a grant by the United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asia (UBCHEA). This grant provided support for the project entitled Reclaiming Filipino Indigenous Cultures through Teaching and Learning. One of the matters raised by the UNESCO Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues is that IP knowledge is not integrated into the curricula at all, and there has been a gradual disappearance of indigenous cultures. There is a call to set up programs that will recover such cultures, which comprise a vital element of sustainable development. Since the Philippines is at the crossroad of transitioning to a K to 12 educational system, higher education institutions are now redeveloping and redefining their courses and curriculums. Given these impending changes, the team hopes to reawaken interest in and reclaim Filipino indigenous cultures through teaching and learning. The main goal of the project is to integrate Filipino Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and culture into the upcoming revised Higher Education Institution (HEI) curriculum of Liberal Arts and Education courses in step-by-step phases. The set of modules was developed as a guide to help HEIs conceive of and imagine their own ways of integration. Before coming up with the modules, the team sought to determine Philippine HEI educators’ understanding of indigenous cultures. Are there efforts to integrate? If there are, how do teachers do so? Furthermore, what are the issues and challenges faced by teachers? Through focus group discussions all over the country, visits to IP communities, forums and workshops, the project team came up with a recommended process of integration and a set of modules. It is important to note that exposure of the teachers to the IP experience will allow them to recognize and appreciate the differences between peoples. Integration can only be done if the lack of interest and capacity and skills of teachers are addressed. vii Capacity- Building of Teachers Enhanced & Immersion Awakened & Exposure Interest Dialogue & Appreciation Experience Fig. 1 Recommended Process for the Integration of Filipino Indigenous Cultures in the HEI Curriculum The task of educators does not end with integration of IP cultures in the curriculum. Training and capacity-building of teachers must go beyond curriculum development – they should also contribute to the social and structural development of justice. This objective makes teachers not only sources of information but nation-builders as well. The cumulative effect of such integration must go beyond education. Toward Social Appreciation and Structural of IP Culture Justice Curriculum Integration Knowledge and Capacity Building of Educators Figure 2. Knowledge-Building of Educators Toward Curriculum Integration, Cultural Appreciation and Social and Structural Justice viii Module 1 The Peopling of the Philippines Learning Outcome At the end of the module, the students should be able to familiarize themselves with the different theories of the peopling of the Philippines. Learning Content Archaeological finds in Palawan (e.g., Tabon Skull fragments) suggest that there were already prehistoric inhabitants in the Philippines as early as the Pleistocene period. Through carbon dating, the fossil remains were believed to be about 22,000 years old. In the Philippine cultural landscape, the new Stone Age was the impetus of the development of Filipino modern societies. At this point, early Filipinos were starting to domesticate plants and animals, and food production was no longer limited to family consumption. At that time, people were dependent on agricultural as well as hunting and gathering activities. The work of Gaillard and Mallari (2004) summarized the different schools of thought to explain the peopling of the Philippines. The first hypothesis argues that there is an internal development happening within the so-called Austronesian region (citing the work of William Meacham).This means that there was an internal human evolution that transpired around that area. Another theory is the Multiple Homeland Hypothesis proposed by Bayer, which argues that there are multiple origins of the peopling of the Philippines. The first wave relates to the movement of people coming from Indonesia to the Philippines. The second movement also originated from Indonesia—when the people reached the country, they dispersed and proceeded to different islands. The third wave came from Indochina, while the last wave came from Mainland China to the Philippines. The other theory is the Melanesian Homeland Hypothesis (cited in the work of Dren), which argues that the movement of people originated from Melanesia around 3,500 BC. The Unique South China Sea Homeland Hypothesis proposed by Solheim, meanwhile, argues that the peopling of the Philippines was related to the thriving of trade relations happening around Borneo and the Celebes Sea (Gaillard and Mallari, 2004). The trade activities brought the Nusantao to the Philippines and even as far as Taiwan. 1 The last theory, which is the Unique Mainland Southeastern China Hypothesis, made use of linguistic evidence (lexicon and morphology) to demonstrate the origins of the movements of people to the Philippines, but to this day the movement routes are still in question (Gaillard and Mallari, 2004). Archaeologist Heine-Geldern believed that the movement started in South China, then proceeded to the Malay Peninsula moving toward Borneo and then finally through Palawan (Gaillard and Mallari, 2004). A slightly different hypothesis was proposed by Thomas and Healey and Llamzon (in Gaillard and Mallari, 2004). Their theory argues that the movement started from Southeastern China, to Indochina, Malay Peninsula, then to Borneo, finally entering the Philippines through different routes, one group going to Palawan and Mindoro and the other through the island of Mindanao. Lastly, the theory proposed by Suggs and Shutler and Marck maintains that the movement of people to the Philippines started in China, proceeding to Formosa, then to the Batanes Islands until the group scattered around the archipelago and reached as far as Borneo (Gaillard and Mallari, 2004). Learning Resources/Reading Materials Jocano, L. (1967). Beginnings of Filipino Society and Culture. Philippine Studies, 14 (1), 9-40. Gaillard, J., and Mallari, J. (2004). The peopling of the Philippines: A cartographic synthesis. Hukay: Journal of the University of the Philippines Archaeological Studies Program, 6, pp.1-27. 2 Activity Sheets/Learning Activities Based on our discussion, plot the movements of people to the Philippines on the following map. 3 Module 2 Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines Learning Outcome To familiarize students with the different ethnic or indigenous groups in the Philippines. Objective of the Module At the end of the session, the students should be able to identify the different geographical locations of the indigenous peoples of the Philippines. Learning Content Although not accurate, the population estimate of indigenous peoples in the Philippines is 12 million. Many of them reside in the uplands, while some are in coastal villages (De Vera, 2007). The indigenous population is about 14% of the country’s total population. The report of De Vera (2007) notes that there are 110 indigenous groups in the Philippines, many of which reside on the islands of Mindanao (e.g., Manobo) and Northern (e.g., Ifugao) and Southern Luzon (e.g., Mangyan, Tagbanwa). The indigenous peoples are generally dependent on agriculture, although some indigenous groups like those in the island provinces are dependent on fishing. In Region I and CAR, the northern mountain ranges of the Cordillera are home to the Tingguian, Isneg, northern Kalinga, Bontoc, Sagada, Ifugao, Southern Kalinga, Ibaloi and Kankanaey. These groups occupy the watershed areas near the Abulag, Tineg and Chico rivers, or interior of the hills, narrow strips of flat land along deep valleys, and plateaus. In Region II, the Cagayan Valley and Carabbalo range are home to the Ibanag, Itawes, Yogad, Gaddang, Ilongot, Ikalahan, Isinai, and some Aeta groups. In Region III, the Sierra Madre range of eastern Luzon is the home of the Dumagat, Pugot, and other Aeta groups. The Zambales range and the mountains of Pampanga and Tarlac are the home of the Aeta and the Sambal. In Region IV, the Pacific coast of Quezon province, and the islands of Polillo and Alabat are the home of different Agta groups. The island of Mindoro is the home of seven Mangyan groups: Iraya, Alangan, Tadyawan, Tao-Buid, Buhid, Hanunoo, and Gubatnon. The island of Palawan is the home of the Tagbanua, Batak, Palawanon and Cuyunon. 4 In Region V, the mountains of Bicol Peninsula are the home of different Agta groups: Kabihug of Camarines Norte, Agta Tabangnon, Agta Cimarron, and Itom (Camarines Sur, Albay, and Sorsogon). In Region VI, the interior foothills and remote coastal areas of Panay and Negros Islands are the home of the Sulod and the Ati. In Mindanao, the hinterlands and coastal lowlands of the Zamboanga peninsula, the plateaus of Bukidnon, the upper headwaters of the Davao, Tinanan, and Kulaman rivers, the coastal areas along the Davao Gulf and the interior hinterlands of southeastern Mindanao are the home of the Lumads. “Lumad” is the generic term used to refer to the indigenous peoples of Mindanao. They are considered to comprise the largest number of indigenous peoples in the country. The 18 groups that compose the Lumad include the following: Subanen, B’laan, T’boli, Mandaya, Mansaka, Tiruray, Higaonon, Manobo, Bagobo, Bukidnon, Tagakaolo, Ubo, Banwaon, Kalagan, Dibabawon, Talaandig, Mamanwa and Manguangan. Source: De Vera, D. (2007). Indigenous peoples in the Philippines: A Case Study. Retrieved from http://www.iapad.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/devera_ip_phl.pdf. 5 Map of Philippine Indigenous Population 6 Activity 1 Philippine Indigenous Peoples Crossword Puzzle Familiarize yourself with the different indigenous peoples in the Philippines. 7 ACROSS 5. This group inhabits the province of Zambales. 7. They are the Suluk people. 8. One of the indigenous peoples groups of Bukidnon. 12. They inhabit the provinces of Cagayan, Isabela and Nueva Vizcaya. 13. They occupy the mountainous regions of Misamis Oriental, Bukidnon plateau, and the mountain borders of the provinces of Agusan and Lanao in the east and west. 14. They can be found in Central and Northern Palawan. 18. An indigenous group that can be found in Tigwa-Salug Valley in Bukidnon. 19. They are referred to as the "sea gypsies of Sulu and Tawi-Tawi." 22. They can be found in Mountain Province. 25. They inhabit the provinces of Lanao del Norte and Lanao del Sur. 26. An indigenous group that can also be found in Bulacan. DOWN 1. They are natives of the Zamboanga Peninsula. 2. They can be found in the Southern part of the Philippines. 3. They are the "first forest dwellers." 4. A generic name referring to the different indigenous groups of the island of Mindoro. 6. They are natives of Batanes. 9. This is a South-Central Cordillera indigenous peoples group. 10. They can be found in the Sulu Archipelago. 11. A traditional hill people of Southwestern Mindanao. 15. An indigenous group related to the Aetas. 16. This is a generic term that refers to people who are still in a subsistence level economy and are generally in the mountains of Bukidnon. 17. They can be found in Cuyo Islands in Palawan. 19. One of the largest indigenous groups in Southern Mindanao. 20. An indigenous group in Central Cordillera. 21. They are also known as the Ilongot. 23. One of the indigenous peoples groups in SOCCSKSARGEN. 24. They can be found in Davao Oriental and Davao del Norte. 8 ANSWERS ACROSS DOWN 5. Aeta 1. Subanen 7. Tausug 2. Blaan 8. Talaandig 3. Mamanua 12. Ibanag 4. Mangyan 13. Higaonon 6. Ivatan 14. Tagbanua 9. Kankanaey 18. Matigsalug 10. Yakan 19. Badjao 11. Tiruray 22. Bontoc 15. Agta 25. Maranao 16. Manobo 26. Dumagat 17. Cuyunon 19. Bagobo 20. Ifugao 21. Bugkalot 23. Tboli 24. Mandaya 9 Activity 2 Map the Locations of 20 Philippines Indigenous Groups You Know. 10 Useful Youtube Resources on Indigenous Peoples (Film Showing) Investigative Documentaries: Indigenous Communities https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1B1bFWHWbE Ifugao: Chanters of Ages https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZVEhYI3lU8 Talaandig: Dancing as Moved by the Spirits https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtcN-9hPUY0 T’Boli: Tribal Sounds of the Philippines https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0DU3zvo_JA Tribal Journeys: The Agtas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNrzuELmZTY 11 Module 3 Who are the Indigenous People? Learning Outcomes Students should be able to recognize the different indigenous peoples groups in the Philippines and to articulate the reasons for their inclusion based on a well-founded definition of indigenous people. Objectives of the Module At the end of this module students are expected to: 1. Recognize the need to have a well-founded definition of the concept “indigenous people”; 2. Attain a well-founded definition of indigenous people and identify who are IPs; 3. Understand the historical development of the concept “indigenous people”; 4. Be familiar with the different approaches and definitions of “indigenous people”; 5. Determine the commonalities among the different approaches and definitions; 6. Provide an example of indigenous peoples groups in the Philippines and discuss why this group should be included. Learning Content 1. Why is there a need for definition? The flexible definitional approaches to indigenous people can enhance the human rights protection of IP groups and communities (Corntassel, 2003). Consequently, the United Nations Declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples strongly suggests that even with the absence of a formal definition, the rights of IPs need to be upheld and protected. The International Working Group for Indigenous Affairs outlined three primary rationales for a clear and well-defined conceptualization of Indigenous Peoples. First, is that self-identification is an essential component of the IPs’ sense of identity. Thus, without a well-defined and universally acceptable definition and criterion, IPs self-identification is indefinite and doubtful (Corntassel, 2003; Kingsbury, 1998). Second, it will be easier for them to be accepted as belonging to the IP classification, which is necessary to assert their collective rights as a group and advance the 12 group’s particular needs (Bowen, 2000; Barsh, 1986). Contrary to other ethnic minorities in a country, IPs are considered to suffer a higher level of marginalization and discrimination. Third, a clear definition of “indigenous peoples” will provide IPs the opportunity to be heard and seen by the local and international government and enable them to assert their right to self-determination. This right is substantial in their collective effort to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral claim, which is home to their ethnic identity (Kingsbury, 1998). The underlying issues in the naming of indigenous peoples groups is that, most often, the name associated with them is also employed as a derogatory term to address them. In the case of the Aetas in Pampanga, they are referred to as “baluga” or black people, similar to the case of the Sama people being called “siyamal” or dirty. The existence of the derogatory remarks and other forms of discrimination necessitates the need for a well-defined conceptualization of indigenous people. 2. Defining Indigenous People The word “indigenous” comes from the Latin word “indigen” which means native or original inhabitant—an idea that became popular in the 17th century. Thus, the most common understanding of the concept suggests that they are people who are the original inhabitants of the land. According to the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, the term “indigenous” has been used continuously, whether as a form of collective names for categorization or as representation to the legal issues in the corresponding state that governs them. They are most often mentioned as tribal people or ethnic groups or communities. Still, there are different names associated with indigenous people in different countries such as Canada, where they are referred to as first/people or nations; in Australia where they are aboriginals; in India where they are adivasi; in Nepal as janajati; and in Indonesia and Malaysia where they are referred to as orang asli which means tribal people, or bumiputera which means son of soil. a. Asian Development Bank Framework The Asian Development Bank (2002) observed that there are two primary similarities in the existing definitions of indigenous peoples groups. First is that they are descended from population groups that lived in a particular geographic area before a modern state, territories and borders were defined. Second, they maintain unique cultural identities, or their social, economic, cultural and political institutions are different and separate from the 13 mainstream or dominant societies. Consequently, the ADB defines IPs as “those with a social or cultural identity distinct from the dominant or mainstream society”; hence, these characteristics put them at a disadvantage in the process of development. b. International Labor Organization Framework The Indigenous and Tribal Peoples' Rights in Practice: A Guide to ILO Convention, Number 169 provides the criteria to separate the concept “tribal people” from IPs. The tribal people are regarded first as those with culture, social organizations, economic conditions and way of life that are different from other segments of the national population. Second, tribal people are those who have their own traditions and customs and/or legal recognition. The Indigenous People on the other hand are characterized first by their historical continuity, and their societies thriving during pre-conquest and colonization. Second is the territorial connection and their ancestors inhabiting the country or a region of the country of which they have a claim. Third, they have distinct social, economic, cultural and political institutions and retain either some or all of their own institutions. Notice that the primary difference between tribal people and IPs is their historical continuity and territorial connection. This criterion has also been exemplified in the working definition of the United Nations, Asian Development Bank and other relevant international organizations that cater to the rights of the IPs. It is necessary to explore further our understanding of historical continuity. c. United Nations Framework The Martinez Cobo’s Report to the UN Sub-Commission on the Prevention of the Discrimination of Minorities in 1986 provides what can be considered as the most quoted working definition of Indigenous People. The Martinez Cobo Study also highlights the importance of historical continuity in its definition of IPs. They are those: 1. Having historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed in the territories; 2. That consider themselves distinct from other sectors of those societies that are now prevailing on those territories or part of them; 3. That form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories and their ethnic identity; 14 4. Whose preservation, development and transmission are the basis of their continued existence as peoples who are in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system. Chairperson-Rapporteur Madame Erica-Irene Daes of United Nations’ Working Group on Indigenous Populations designates IPs as those: 1. Descendants of groups that were in the territory of the country at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived there; 2. Isolated or excluded from other segments of the country's population and so have preserved almost intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors; and 3. Distant from or alien to the national, social and cultural characteristics of the State structure that claims them. According to the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs, the historical continuity discussed by the Martinez Cobo Study can be characterized by the following factors: 1. Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them; 2. Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands; 3. Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, instant loans, lifestyle, etc.); 4. Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language); 5. Residence in certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world; and 6. Other relevant factors. Furthermore, Article 1 Section 2 of ILO Convention Number 169 defines the magnitude of the right to self-identification of tribal or IP groups. Self- identification is considered as a fundamental criterion for whether a person considers himself or herself as tribal or indigenous. In addition, Jeff Corntassel (2003) remarks that the question of “Who are indigenous?” can be best answered by self-identification. The indigenous people themselves can best answer the question. To date, according to the International Labor 15 Organization, there are approximately 370 million people categorized as belonging to at least 5,000 indigenous groups living in 70 different countries. The data changes from time to time when a new definition or categorizations appears, because there is still no official definition to date approved by the United Nations and other international bodies on IPs. d. The World Health Organization Framework The World Health Organization primarily aims to advance the health status of indigenous people in the world. They acknowledge the fact that most IPs’ health status is poorer than non-indigenous population groups in countries all over the world. In the absence of an official definition from the United Nations, the WHO provides a modern and inclusive understanding of IPs, which include those who: 1. Identify themselves and are recognized and accepted by their community as indigenous; 2. Demonstrate historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies; 3. Have strong links to territories and surrounding natural resources; 4. Have distinct social, economic or political systems; 5. Maintain distinct languages, cultures and beliefs; 6. Form non-dominant groups of society; and 7. Resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinctive peoples and communities. e. Scholarly Definitions of Indigenous People Corntassel (2003) provides a historical development of the conceptualization of the term Indigenous People in the academe and its implication to the status and condition of these groups. Franke Wilmer is considered as the first social scientist to examine the condition of IPs in the world and defines IPs first as those with tradition-based culture; second as those who were politically autonomous before colonization; and third as those who continued to struggle for the preservation of their cultural integrity, economic self- reliance and political independence against colonizers and the modern states. Wilmer and Gerald Alfred and Franke Wilmer teamed up in 1997 to come up with three criteria for a group to be considered as IP. This was intended to correct the ambiguities provided in Wilmer’s 1993 definition (Corntassel, 2003). These criteria include the fact that they are descended from the 16 original inhabitants of the geographic areas they continue to occupy, making them aboriginal. Second, they intend to live in conformity with their tradition- based cultures, which are evolving. And last, their political destiny is subjected to policy from outside forces, which refers primarily to the State they belong to. Thus, their political destiny and existence is beyond their control. In his definition of IPs in 1996, James Andaya highlighted the issue of ancestral roots and the continued colonial domination of IPs’ homelands by the modern state (Corntassel, 2003). To Andaya, Indigenous Peoples are those who are living descendants of pre-invasion inhabitants and whose lands are now dominated by others. Second, they are indigenous because their ancestral roots are fixed in the territory they occupy and will continue to occupy or in areas in close proximity to this land in case of dislocation. Third, they can be considered as a distinct community because their ancestors’ way of life is carried over into the present generation. Ted Gurr provides the distinction between indigenous people and the emerging ethno-nationalist phenomenon in some countries. Some ethnic groups have been proclaiming that they belong to the category of indigenous people and their assertion of the right to self-determination has escalated to efforts to separate and establish their own state. Based on Gurr’s classification (2000), ethnonationalists are those communities that had stable and resilient political organizations prior to conquest, colonization or establishment of a modern state, and have had persistent support from modern movements that assert withdrawal from the State and the establishment of their own state. Indigenous People, on the other hand, live mainly in conformity with traditional social, economic, and cultural customs that differ acutely from the dominant group without assertion of cessation. However, Fred Riggs challenges this claim and emphasizes that the IP definition should include four variables: First to consider is the cultural level of the community from primitive to more complex societies. The more primitive are considered as IPs. Second to consider is the historical sequence of who came first and who followed. Those who inhabited the land first are considered to be IPs. To consider the political position, the IPs are those marginalized communities, and the dominant communities cannot be considered as IPs. Last to consider is the geographical area, and the ancestral domain claim is highly taken into account. 17 Benedict Kingsbury (1998) makes a case of the constructivist approach in defining IPs; moreover, he contends the impossibility of universally applicable criteria in defining who are IPs and who are not. Kingsbury promotes maximum tractability in categorizing IP groups while maintaining four essential criteria: self-identification as a distinct ethnic group; historical experience of, or contingent vulnerability to, severe disruption, dislocation or exploitation; long historical connection with the region or territory; and the aspiration to retain a distinct identity. Summary In summary, the existing definition of IPs based on the frameworks of the different international organizations that aim to advance their rights and interests highlights the following elements: a. Self-identification – an individual belongs to an IP group once he or she is accepted as belonging to the group; b. Ancestral Roots and Descent – they boast of a common ancestry and their lineage can be traced back to the community or group of people that thrive within a particular territory prior to colonization, or the establishment of modern state; c. Historical Continuity of Way of Life – the community or the groups’ distinct way of life (e.g. religion, tribal system of governance, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.). This tradition-based culture is inherited from a group of people in a particular territory prior to colonization or the establishment of a modern state; d. Ancestral Language Sustained – the language identifiable to them and their ancestors has persisted and endured either as the only language, as mother tongue or habitual means of communication at home or in the family; or is considered as the main, preferred, habitual and general language. e. Ancestral Land Claim – continued occupation and claim to a particular portion of land that IPs believed to be home to their ancestors, thus providing them with a right of inheritance to this land; f. Distinct Way of Life and Non-Dominance – the sustained beliefs, customs and traditions IPs inherited from their ancestors makes them consider themselves as distinct from other sectors of society, particularly the dominant groups prevailing in the territories or state they are placed under; g. Aspirations for Self-Preservation and Self-Determination – as a non-dominant sector of society, which has continuously been influenced and assimilated by 18 dominant sectors of society, IPs have a strong determination to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories and their ethnic identity. Who Are IPs in the Philippines? In the Philippines, Indigenous People are commonly referred to as katutubo. In Mindanao they are collectively called Lumad to separate them from the Islamized ethnic groups in the region (Arquiza, 2016). The legal definition is provided by Republic Act No. 8371 otherwise known as “An Act to Recognize, Protect and Promote the Rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples, Creating a National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, Establishing Implementing Mechanisms, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and for other Purpose.” Chapter 2 Section 3 (h) of R.A. 8371 refers to IPs as synonymous with Indigenous Cultural Communities or ICC, and defines them as having the following qualifications: a. A group of people or homogenous societies identified by self-ascription and ascription by others, who have continuously lived as an organized community on communally-bounded and defined territory; b. Those who have, under claims of ownership since time immemorial, occupied, possessed and utilized such territories, sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions and other distinctive cultural traits; c. Those who have, through resistance to political, social and cultural inroads of colonization, non-indigenous religions and cultures, become historically differentiated from the majority of Filipinos; d. Peoples who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations that inhabited the country at the time of conquest or colonization, or of inroads of non-indigenous religions and cultures, or the establishment of present state boundaries; e. People who retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions; and f. People who may have been displaced from their traditional domains or who may have resettled outside their ancestral domains. The definition of ICCs or IPs in the Philippines in R.A. 8371 constitutes the common elements of the existing definition of IPs in the literature. The definition highlights the need for self-identification, the qualifications of ancestral roots and descent, the historical continuity of life, the sustained ancestral language and ancestral land claim, the persistence of a distinct way of life and status as non-dominant group and their 19 aspirations to self-preservation and self-determination. In addition, the mandate of the law states that it can also include people or groups who have been displaced from their ancestral homeland and those are displaced as in the case of the Lumads and the Moros in Mindanao. On the other hand, utilizing Tedd Gurr’s classification (2000), we can consider the Islamized ethno-linguistics in Mindanao, which is generally called Moro and the Igorots in the Cordillera region as ethnonationalist groups and not IP groups. However, the National Commission on Indigenous People in the Philippines (NCIP), the national government and other government agencies, and most academic literatures consider the Igorot and the Islamized ethnic groups in the Philippines to belong to the IP category. Learning Resources Internet Materials 1. http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::p12100_i nstrument_id:312314 2. http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/5session_factsheet1.pdf 3. http://www.iwgia.org/culture-and-identity/identification-of-indigenous-peoples 4. http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/28027/indigenous-peoples- regional.pdf 5. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs326/en/ 6. https://documents-dds- ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N06/512/07/PDF/N0651207.pdf?OpenElement 7. http://www.arcticcentre.org/EN/communications/arcticregion/Arctic- Indigenous-Peoples/Definitions 8. http://www.katutuboproject.org/updates/ Prior Knowledge (Guide Questions) 1. What is the first thing that comes into your mind when you hear the word katutubo? 2. Can you enumerate the name/s of the groups of people in the Philippines that you consider to belong to the classification as katutubo? What are their characteristics? 3. What do these groups have in common? 20 Learning Activities 1. Film Viewing: a. Investigative Documentaries: Indigenous Communities, available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1B1bFWHWbE b. Philippines' Indigenous People Struggle Between Modernization and Heritage available in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1d2ygQzqPA c. A Glimpse into Three Indigenous Cultures of the Philippines, available in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drF-Hg_UBo4 Activity Sheets 1. My Prior Understanding of IP groups in the Philippines 2. The Indigenous People in the Philippines: I Want to Learn More Teacher Reader Erni, C. (Ed.) (2008). The Concept of Indigenous Peoples in Asia: A Resource Book. International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA): Copenhagen, Denmark. Available at: http://iilj.org/aboutus/documents/IndigenousPeoplesinInternationalLawAConstructivist ApproachtotheAsianControversy.Kingsbury.pdf References Alfred, G. & Wilmer, F. (1997). Indigenous Peoples, States and Conflict, in Carment, D. & James, P. (Eds). Wars in the Midst of Peace. University of Pittsburgh Press: Pittsburgh. Anaya, S.J. (1996). Indigenous Peoples in International Law. Oxford University Press: NY. Arquiza, M. (2016). Philippine Ethnic and Muslim Minorities: Educating Children the Traditional Way. Mountain Research and Development 26(1). P. 24-27. Barsh, R. (1986). Indigenous Peoples: An Emerging Object of International Law. The American Journal of International Law, 80(2), 369-385. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2201975 Bowen, J. (2000). Should We Have a Universal Concept of “Indigenous Peoples' Rights”?: Ethnicity and Essentialism in the Twenty-First Century. Anthropology Today 16(4). Pp. 12-16 21 Corntassel, J. (2003). Who is Indigenous: ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethnonationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 9(1). P. 75-100. Gurr, T.R. (2000). Peoples versus States: Minorities at Risk in the New Century. United States Institute of Peace Press: Washington, D.C. Indigenous. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved May 13, 2016 from Dictionary.com website http://www.dictionary.com/browse/indigenous International Labor Office (2009). Indigenous and Tribal Peoples' Rights in Practice: A Guide to ILO Convention, Number 169. Washington, D.C.: International Labor Office, 2009. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 29 May 2016. Kingsbury, B. (1998). "Indigenous Peoples" in International Law: A Constructivist Approach to the Asian Controversy. The American Journal of International Law, 92(3), 414-457. doi:1. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2997916 doi:1 Riggs, F. (1997). Who’s Indigenous? A Conceptual Inquiry. Proceeds from a panel discussion on ethnic nationalism at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Toronto, March 18-21, 1997 cited in Corntassel, J. (2003). Who is Indigenous: ‘Peoplehood’ and Ethnonationalist Approaches to Rearticulating Indigenous Identity. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 9(1). P. 75-100. United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (2013). The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: A Manual for National Human Rights Institutions. Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights August 2013. Wilmer, F. (1993). The Indigenous Voice in the World Politics. Sage: Newbury Park, Ca. 22 My Prior Understanding of IP groups in the Philippines 1. What are the things that come to mind when you hear the word katutubo? 2. Can you enumerate the name/s of the group of people in the Philippines that you consider as belonging to the classification as katutubo? Please provide a description of each. # Name of the Group Description 1 2 3 3. What do the groups you identified have in common? The Indigenous People in the Philippines: I Want to Learn More 1. Which among the definitions discussed in class do you think is the most appropriate and acceptable? Why? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 2. Identify one IP group in the Philippines you think matches the definition of IPs that you think is most appropriate and acceptable. Find and paste a picture of this group in the box below. 23 Provide an explanation why this group can be categorized under Indigenous Cultural Communities or Indigenous People. __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ What do you want to learn about them? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 24 Module 4 Filipino Indigenous Philosophy and Worldviews Learning Outcome The students are expected to contribute to the intellectualization of Filipino indigenous thought. Learning Objectives At the end of the module, students should be able to: 1. Identify the approaches to Filipino Philosophy; 2. Examine various native riddles, rituals, legends, epics, etc. and determine particular perceptions, experiences and worldviews that they exhibit; 3. Appreciate Philippine indigenous philosophy and worldviews; and 4. Develop a scholarly article or paper on Filipino indigenous philosophy Learning Content Filipino Philosophy can be divided into three approaches with 16 different meanings. According to Gripaldo (2014), the following approaches can be observed: the traditional/ philosophical approach, the cultural approach and the nationality/constitutional approach. The traditional approach is based on the Greek model, wherein individual Filipino philosophers’ ideas are discussed. The nationality/constitutional approach deals with writings of Filipinos in general, whether it be on a Western or Eastern topic. The cultural approach, on the other hand, addresses the people’s philosophical perspectives and views on socio-linguistic, cultural and folk concepts. Philippine indigenous philosophy and worldviews are classified under the cultural approach; accordingly, they can be divided into the following categories: Filipino grassroots or folk philosophies Folk philosophy appropriation Interpretation of Filipino identity and worldview Local cultural values and ethics research and Implications and presuppositions of Filipino worldviews (Gripaldo, 2014) 25 Timbreza (2014), in his book Pilosopiyang Pilipino, discusses the issue of whether Filipino philosophy exists or not. Since philosophy starts and ends with people’s experience, it follows that there is Filipino philosophy, considering that the Filipino experience exists. Timbreza uses the cultural approach as classified by Gripaldo, as he analyzes unique life experiences to harness these worldviews. Furthermore, if these worldviews are based on literature, art, ethics, practices and attitudes, Filipinos can be said to have their own Weltanschauung. Consequently, Timbreza uses indigenous and native legends, poems, epics, songs, riddles (bugtong), proverbs (salawikain), rituals and dances as basis for the collective Filipino philosophy of life. (He attributes the general Filipino worldview to the experiences of these honorable groups –Ivatan, Ilokano, Tagalog, Pampanggo, Pangasinensi, Ibanag, Igorot, Bicolano, Cebuano, Boholano, Bisaya, Tiruray, Tausug, Maranao, Maguindanao, Aklano, Bukidnon, Sugnuanon, Zambaleno, Romblomanon, Kiniray-anom, Kalinga-Banao, Waray, and Ilonggo.) Worldviews are “mental lenses that are entrenched ways of perceiving the world” (Hart, 2010). Significantly, all over the world, indigenous worldviews have a commonality, which is the relationship with nature or surroundings. Hart (2010) identifies seven principles of these worldviews: 1. Knowledge is holistic, cyclic, and dependent upon relationships and connections to living and non-living beings and entities; 2. There are many truths, and these truths are dependent upon individual experiences; 3. Everything is alive; 4. All things are equal; 5. The land is sacred; 6. The relationship between people and the spiritual world is important; and 7. Human beings are least important in the world. For Timbreza, the Filipino philosophy of life can be divided into five fragments: “the law of reversion, balance of nature, cyclic concept of nature, centripetal morality, value of non-violence, and concept of life and death” (Garcia, 2013). Considering these ideas, Filipino thought is not a philosophy of being (as the Greek thinkers espoused) but rather the intellectualization of “indigenous perceptions of reality” (Garcia, 2013). 26 Learning Resources/Reading Materials/ References: Garcia, L. dlR. (2013). Exploring the philosophical terrain. Manila: C&E Publishing, Inc. Gripaldo, R. M. (2014). Filipino Philosophy: Past and Present. Kaisipan,1(1), pp.1-14. http://www.academia.edu/6363265/Filipino_Philosophy_Past_and_Present_2013_ Hart, M. A.(2010). Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge, and Research: The Development of an Indigenous Research Paradigm. Journal of Indigenous Voices in Social Work, 1(1), pp. 1-16. http://ahrnets.ca/files/data/3/2011/08/Indigenous%20Worldviews,%20 Knowledge,%20and%20Research.PDF Pavo, R. (2010). Filipino Philosophy and Post-Modernity. International Journal of Arts and Sciences, 3(15). http://www.openaccesslibrary.org/images/HAR166_Raymundo_R._ Pavo.pdf The Department of Philosophy (1990). Readings in Filipino philosophy. Manila: De La Salle University Press. Timbreza, F. T. (1982). Pilosopiyang Pilipino. Manila: Rex Bookstore. Prior Knowledge (Guide Questions) 1. What is Filipino indigenous philosophy? 2. What are the characteristics of Filipino indigenous philosophy and worldviews or perspectives? Activity Sheets/Learning Activities Document indigenous legends, poems, epics, songs, riddles (bugtong), and proverbs (salawikain) and describe rituals and dances and discuss their themes in class. How do they reflect the Filipino philosophy of life? Interview indigenous elders on their perceptions of reality and belief systems. Create a reflection journal that describes the wisdom of the elders. Articulate the Filipino philosophy of life through unique quotes and posters. Craft a term paper or journal article on the Filipino worldview. 27 Module 5 Indigenous Filipino Spirituality Learning Outcomes 1. Students should be able to gain understanding about Indigenous Filipino spirituality by identifying and discussing different religious and spiritual beliefs and practices among indigenous groups in the Philippines; 2. Students should be able to compose a story about how indigenous people experience or manifest their religious and spiritual experiences. Objectives of the Module At the end of this module, students are expected to: 1. Discuss Filipino spirituality as well as the different religious practices of Filipinos; 2. Identify an indigenous group in the Philippines like the Aetas and discuss their spiritual beliefs and practices. Learning Content Filipino Spirituality Spirituality is related to the search for the sacred in a person, object, or ritual that is above the self (Hill et al., 2000). Filipinos are known to be religious and spiritual people. The Filipino culture is rich in religious traditions, which include various rituals, devotions and beliefs. Long before the Spaniards came, Filipinos already believed in a God and they already had different religious rituals that demonstrated their spirituality (Enriquez, 1994). When it comes to Filipino spirituality, early Filipinos had many animistic practices across different places in the Philippines. For Salazar (1993 as cited in Aquino, 2000), Filipinos’ belief in an “anito” is an important factor in their faith. He considers the “anito” as a pure soul, pure spirit, or god. He asserts that this “anito” religion still thrives today and can be seen in different Catholic folk practices. Aetas consider Apu Namalyari as their supreme God and they have other gods that abound in the environment. Mangyans consider Mahal-Umako as their god because he is the one who created all things that can be seen and unseen. The relationship of Filipinos with 28 “anitos” can be considered as something deep and can be viewed as a form of pakikipagkapwa (Hernandez, 2014). The deep relationship of Filipinos and “anitos” can still be seen in their religious traditions. For us to understand the spirituality of Filipinos, it is important to look at the different religious practices, especially those in Folk Catholicism (Yabut, 2013b). Demetrio (1991) has documented various rituals and prayers Filipinos have across the Philippines. These different practices can be seen not only in different devotions among Filipinos but also in indigenous practices such as the ones in Mt. Banahaw. On this sacred mountain, devotees consider rocks, caves, trees and bodies of water as sacred. Filipino devotees from different places in the Philippines go to Mt. Banahaw to worship and express their spirituality. According to Covar (1998) the puwestos in Banahaw are sacred spaces, which Filipinos for generations have acknowledged as holy places. In addition to this, he claims that pamumuwesto is symbolic of a prayerful journey through this life into a future life (Covar, 1998). In the contemporary setting, some devotions like that to the Sto. Entierro in Calabanga in Bicol can be traced to the rich tradition of Filipinos in venerating the dead (Cannell, 1999). This dead Christ is bathed and perfume is applied to it as it is treated as a very sacred object. In this devotion, Catholics try their best to reach out to the dead Christ in order to feel better or ask for supplication. This devotion can also be found among Kapampangans with their devotion to the Sto. Entierro, whom they call Apung Mamacalulu. Yabut (2013b) found that most devotees feel the presence of God when they touch the image and it is their way of connecting with the sacred. Among indigenous groups, this Catholic folk practice of venerating the dead Christ is related to their practice of treating their departed loved ones as Gods. Postma (2005) states that Mangyans consider their departed loved ones as their Gods. These practices in Catholicism, commonly called “popular piety,” can be traced to the long tradition of Filipinos in a religion that has animistic qualities. Aetas of Pampanga, Bataan and Zambales The Aeta groups in the Zambales range and the mountains of Pampanga have preserved some of their traditional or indigenous spiritual ideas despite the introduction of Christianism (Seitz, 1998). The belief in the “anito” (good spirits) and the kamana (bad spirits) is central to these beliefs (Gaillard, 2006). Carunungan (2005) discusses explicitly the religious practice of the Aetas, mentioning that Aetas believe in the god Gutugutumakkan. Aetas call their supreme being, which lives in Mt. Pinatubo, located in 29 Zambales, “Apo Namalyari.” This is a Kapampangan term that means “the God who makes things happen.” Aetas believe this supreme deity has power over other lesser deities. Carunungan (2005) identified the other gods of Aetas. These include Tigbalog, who is considered as the “great creator” and is considered as the source of life and action; Lueve, who is the god of production and the growth of goods; Amas, who moves people to pity, love, unity and peace of heart; and Binangewan, who is responsible for change, sickness and death. Relationship with Anitos The relationship of aetas with “anitos” is very profound in spirituality. Consistent with what historians have been saying—that Filipinos were predominantly animists—it is believed that Aetas are also animists who believe that spirits abound in the environment—in rivers, seas, plants, trees and animals. Apo Namalyari is the Aetas’ god of creation, their counterpart of our God who created the world and all that is in it, including man himself. However, they believe that their creator god can only take care of trees that are useful to the Aeta, making this god limited in power, according to our standards. Because of these beliefs, they cut down trees that are not useful for them or trees planted by those from the lowlands. The belief in the “anito” (good spirits) and the kamana (bad spirits) is central to these beliefs (Gaillard, 2006). If offended or disturbed, the anito can cause illnesses or death, while Apo Namalyari can cause natural disasters like the recent eruption of Mt. Pinatubo. The spirits must be appeased and a spiritual medium is called to perform ritual and sacrifice (Shimizu, 1992). The link between the Aetas and the spirits are referred to as the “manganito.” The “anito” are believed to inhabit certain places in the environment that could affect people’s health and livelihood if disturbed or offended (Shimizu, 1994). Thus, there are some springs, trees, rocks or forested areas where a certain “anito” is believed to reside that people avoid. The most essential among these places is Mt. Pinatubo, which is considered to be the center of their Universe, for it is the home of their Supreme Being or Creator, “Apo Namalyari” or Apo Mallari (Garvan, 1964 cited in Seitz, 1998). Mt. Pinatubo is also believed to be the final resting place of the souls of their ancestors, and where their souls will find peace as well upon their death (Fondevilla, 1991). Thus, when Aetas pray or perform rituals and sacrifices, they face Mt. Pinatubo (Fondevilla, 1991; Fox, 1952). Sickness in an Aeta society is a social experience. A sick person is not alone and the community shares in an individual’s suffering, collectively seeking for a cure. The curing 30 ritual involves the “manganito,” the sick person, family friends, relatives, as well as the unseen spirit (Shimizu, 1989). Aetas who particularly live in Morong have rituals like Kagon, which involves song and dance that can remove these evil spirits from a person’s body. In Kagon, Aetas try to exorcise the demon from the sick person using sticks that are strung together. Strong Faith and Religious Rituals of Aetas Carunungan (2005) also highlights the faith and some religious practices of Aetas that exist to this day. Most Aetas have a strong faith in God. It is not unusual for them to explain or attribute their experiences in life to God. They usually use the phrase “kaloob ng Dios” or “tadhana ng Maykapal,” meaning “will of God.” Even at the time that they suffer problems, they remain faithful to God and say "Kung ano man ang ipagkaloob ng Diyos" ("Whatever God provides”). Lastly, Carunungan (2005) identifies various Aeta religious practices that include certain rituals like as in the form of prayers and dancing. For example, she mentions that there are various ceremonies done in pig hunting. Aeta women perform some dances and collect shellfish the night before the hunting. The dance is meant to show gratitude and is also a form of apology for the killing. Aeta men also perform bee dances before and after collecting honey. Learning Resources Aeta, Kalinga and Ifugao: A Glimpse into Three Indigenous Cultures of the Philippines (In Tagalog): http://suprememastertv.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=featured&wr_id=767 Watch film “Mumbaki” – This is an Igorot film about their religious practices. Activity Sheets Prior Knowledge (Guide Questions) Watch the video “A Glimpse of Three Indigenous Cultures of the Philippines” Write a list of at least 10 common religious rituals or practices that you know are practiced by Filipinos. 31 Learning Activities Group processes and sharing Discussions/lectures Film viewing Processing Watch movie “Mumbaki.” After watching the film, identify religious activities of Igorots and the importance or relevance of these activities or rituals. Discuss the spirituality of Igorots. Activity sheets Religious Rituals among Filipinos 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Teacher Reader Hernandez, J.B. (2014). Manipulasyon o pakikipagkapwa: Ang ugnayang tao-anito sa sinaunang pananampalatayang Pilipino. Malay, 27(1), 84-95. References Aquino, C.C. (1999). Mula sa kinaroroonan: Kapwa, kapatiran, at bayan sa agham panlipunan. Nasa A.M. Navarro at F. Lagbao-Bolante (mga pat.), Mga babasahin sa agham panlipunang Pilipino: Sikolohiyang Pilipino, Pilipinohiya, at pantayong pananaw. Quezon City: C&E Publishing, Inc., 2007: 201-240. Cannell, Fenella. (1999). Power and Intimacy in the Christian Philippines. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press. 32 Covar, Propero (1998). The puwestos of Mt. Banahaw. In T. Obusan (Ed.), Roots of Filipino Spirituality: 221-228, Philippines: Mamamathala. Demetrio, F. (1991). Prayers. In Encyclopedia of Philippine Folk Beliefs and Customs Volume 2, 503-522. Manila: Xavier University. Enriquez, V.G. (1994). Pagbabagong-dangal: Indigenous psychology and cultural movement. Quezon City: Akademya ng Kultura at Sikolohiyang Pilipino. Fox, R. (1952). The Pinatubo Negritos: Their Useful Plants and Material Culture. The Philippine Journal of Science 81, 173-414. Gaillard, J.C. (2006). Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards: The 1991 Mt. Pinatubo Eruption and the Aetas of the Philippines. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 24(1), 5-43. Hernandez, J.B. (2014). Manipulasyon o pakikipagkapwa: Ang ugnayang tao-anito sa sinaunang pananampalatayang Pilipino. Malay, 27(1), 84-95. Hill, P.C., K.I. Pargament, R.W. Hood, M.E. McCullough, J.P. Swyers, D.B. Larson, at B.J. Zinnbauer (2000). Conceptualizing religion and spirituality: Points of commonality, points of departure. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 30 (1), 51-77. P. Carunugan (2005, March 5). The Aeta of Bataan. Retrieved from http://theocultura.blogspot.com/2005/03/aeta-of-bataan.html Seitz, S. (19980. Coping Strategies in an Ethnic Minority Group: The Aeta of Mt. Pinatubo. Disasters 22(1), 76-90. Shimizu, H.(1989). Pinatubo Aytas: Continuity and Change. Ateneo de Manila University Press: Quezon City, Philippines. Shimizu , H. (1992) Past, Present and Future of the Pinatubo Aetas. In Shimizu, H. (ed.) After the Eruption, Pinatubo Aetas at the Crisis of their Survival. Tokyo. Postma, A. (2005). Kultura Mangyan. Manila: Mangyan Heritage Center. Yabut, H. J. (2013a). Isang paglilinaw sa mga paniniwala at pagpapakahulugan sa ispiritwalidad at relihiyon ng mga Pilipino. Diwa E-Journal, 1(1), 162-179. Yabut, H. J. (2013b). Apung mamacalulu: Ang Sto.entierro ng Pampanga. Dalumat eJournal, 4(1-2), 1-13. 33 Module 6 Indigenous Languages and Literatures Learning Outcomes Students should be able to recognize the different indigenous languages and literatures in the Philippines and to articulate the different forms, characteristics and their role in the preservation and conservation of the socio-cultural characteristics of indigenous people and indigenous cultural communities. Objectives of the Module At the end of this module, students are expected to: 1. Recognize the need to understand and identify indigenous languages and literature; 2. Attain a well-founded definition of indigenous languages and literature; 3. Be familiar with the different types of IP languages and forms of indigenous literatures in the Philippines; 4. Understand the role of indigenous languages and literature in the preservation and conservation of the socio-cultural characteristics of indigenous people; 5. Be familiar with and appreciate the different indigenous languages and literature in the Philippines; and 6. Provide examples of indigenous languages and literature in the Philippines and explain their role in the development of Filipino nationhood. Learning Content 1. Why do we need to study indigenous languages and literature? David Crystal (2000) provides the different reasons why we need to care for the IP languages and prevent their dying or extinction. These reasons are: a. Linguistic diversity enriches our human ecology; b. Languages are expressions of identity; c. Languages are repositories of history; d. Languages contribute to the sum of human knowledge and each language provides a matrix of wisdom of a particular group of people; e. Languages are interesting subjects in their own right. 34 In contemporary times, there is a growing advocacy for an increase in awareness and concern to help IP groups in some nations to conserve their languages. IP languages’ abandonment or the extinction of IP languages has been an evident adverse outcome of the process of language convergence, or they die naturally (Headland, 2003; Crystal, 2000). This is primarily influenced by the utilization of national or official languages in educational institutions; thus, IP children do not learn to speak or use their own language. Second, the need to communicate to non-IP results in frequent borrowing from dominant languages in the region. These situations are also evident in the Philippines, and necessitate the need to help in the efforts of IP groups, government agencies and NGOs to conserve and preserve the dying and threatened IP languages. 2. Role of Indigenous Language An Indigenous Peoples Language can be defined simply as the language spoken uniquely by a group people who affiliates with a particular indigenous group and/or with origins in the particular group (Spolsky, 2002). The Martinez Cobo Study in 1986 provided an expanded definition of IP language, saying it refers to a language identified with and unique to a particular indigenous community. This language can either be used as the only language, as mother tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or considered normal language. There are two other concepts that posed a constant threat to the preservation and conservation of IP languages: national and dominant regional language. National language is defined as the official language/s adopted by a particular state or nation (Bamgbose, 1991). This is typically learned when the child of an IP community engages in school. Dominant regional language, on the other hand, refers to the language spoken by dominant ethno-linguistic groups in a particular geographical location. It is usually adopted by the IP community to be able to communicate and establish trade with non-IP. The role of IP languages has been reduced to a medium for communications at home and in the community, which is the result of the need to learn and adopt to regional and national languages (Headland, 2003). However, according to the United Nations General Assembly, IP language must not be regarded as second-rate or indifferent. It is a significant part of indigenous people’s ways of life, culture and identity. A particular language embodies the ideas, beliefs, values, and abstraction that contain their sense of history, psychology and mindset, understanding of the world, spirituality, and the vision of their community. 35 Thus, it is the most essential symbol of their uniqueness and interconnection with each other. 3. Philippine Indigenous Languages a. Linguistic diversity in the Philippines The Philippines is considered to be one of the richest sources of linguistic diversity in the world. According to Nelson Castro (2002), the archipelagic character of the country is one of the factors that can be attributed to the diversity of languages in the Philippines. Curtis McFarland (2004) contends that the linguistic diversity in the Philippines is a result of natural processes. These include the language change, divergence between linguistic communities caused by lack of communication, and the converse convergence affected by a high rate of communication between communities. 36 Figure 1: SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1 Linguistic Diversity in Northern Philippines Source: http://www.ethnologue.com/map/PH_n 37 Figure 2: SEQ Figure 3 \* ARABIC 2 Linguistic Diversity in Southern Philippines Source: http://www.ethnologue.com/map/PH_s 38 b. Status of Philippine IP languages The number of individual languages listed for the Philippines is 187. Of these, 183 are living and 4 are extinct. Of the living languages, 175 are indigenous and 8 are non-indigenous. Furthermore, 41 are institutional (green), 73 are developing (blue), 45 are vigorous (purple), 13 are in trouble (yellow), and 11 are dying (red), and 4 are extinct (black) (see Figure 3). Figure 3: Status of Philippine Languages Source: http://www.ethnologue.com/profile/PH Among the IP languages in the Philippines, only two are widely used for communication: The Maguindanaon and the Tausug. Department of Education Order number 74 series of 2009, also known as “Institutionalizing Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MLE),” acknowledges the advantage of the use of the learner’s mother tongue in improving learning outcomes and the promotion of education for all. Only 27 of the 175 indigenous languages in the Philippines are currently employed as mother languages. These include Balangao, Chavacano, Ibanag, Ibatan, Ifugao- Mayoyao, Ifugao-Tuwali, Inabaknon, Inakeanon, Isnag, Ivatan, Kagayanen, Kalinga-Butbut, Kalinga-Limos, Kalinga-Lubuagan, Kallahan-Keley-I, Kinaray-a, Maguindanaoan, Manobo-Obo, Maranao, Paranan, Sambal, Sama-Central, Surigaonon, Tagabawa, Tagakaulo, Tausug, Tboli and Yakan. 39 There are 13 IP languages in the Philippines that are considered to be in trouble. These include Agta-Dupaninan, Atta-Faire, Ayta-Magbukun, Bolinao, Isinai, Itneg- Inlaod, Manobo-Kinamiging, Subanen-Eastern, Agta-Mt. Iraya, Alta-Northern, Batak, Butuanon and Giangan. There are 11 dying IP languages in the Philippines. Dying or endangered languages are evident when the children in the community are not speaking the language of their parents and there are only a few people left in the IP community (Cahil, 1999). These include Agta-Alabat Island, Agta-Isarog, Arta, Ata, Ayta-Sorsogon, Ratagnon and Tagbanwa-Central. The Eskayan language is dormant and is dying, while Agta-Dicamay, Agta-Villa Viciosa, Ayta-Tayabas and Katabaga are already classified as extinct. In the Philippines, the IP language is always in constant threat of debasement and reduction to a second class language of either the dominant regional language or the national language. In the case of the Aetas in Pampanga, the regional language that they need to adapt and learn is Kapampangan. This language enables them to establish communication and trade with the “tiga- patag” or lowlanders. In the case of the Manobos in Mindanao, Cebuano is a language that also encroaches on their symbolic communication and interaction, and which influences the status and utility of their native language. Filipino as a national language is taught in school—this also subjects their native language to debasement, and reduction to minority status. In the Philippines there are two official languages in education and commerce: Filipino and English. c. Surviving Ancient Syllabic Script among IP languages Among the different IP languages in the Philippines, the Buhid-Mangyan, Hanunuo-Mangyan and the Tagbanwa of Palawan have maintained the ancient pre-Hispanic syllabic script. The Buhid and Hanunuo Mangyans have been able to preserve their indigenous way of writing due to natural borders provided by the mountains against the influence of modern living. The traditional poem “ambahan” is engraved on bamboo plants, boards and containers with the use of a knife. According to Emerenciana Lorenza Catapang (2014), the scripts may have originated from the Brahmi script of India and could also be related to the Kawi script of Indonesia. 40 Figure 4: Mangyan Syllabic Script Source: http://www.ancientscripts.com/mangyan.html All consonant letters in the alphabet contain the default vowel /a/, and to represent another vowel other than /a/, the “kulit” mark is used. A horizontal line or “kulit” above the letter denotes the vowel /i/ or /e/; on the other hand, if it is positioned below the letter, it denotes the vowel /o/ or /u/. One may notice the absence of separation between the vowels /i/ and /e/ and in the same manner the vowels /o/ and /u/. The script is written from left to right and is read from bottom to top. To be able to read the text, you need to rotate the bamboo canister 90 degrees counterclockwise. Figure 5: Sample Mangyan Script on a bamboo slat Source: http://mangyan.org/content/introduction- ambahan 41 There are three IP groups associated with the Tagbanwa: the Aborlan Tagbanwa, Calamian Tagbanwa and the Central Tagbanwa. All of these IP communities and languages can be found and are spoken in Palawan in the Philippines. Despite the common groupings, all three languages are not mutually intelligible. However, all three groups use the same ancient syllabic writing system known as Tagbanua script. The Tagbanua syllabic script (Figure 6) is obviously closely related to baybayin, another ancient syllabic script known to be utilized by the Tagalogs before the Spanish colonization. The same is true for the Mangyan script: Its origins can be traced back to the Brahmi script in India through the Kawi script from Indonesia. The features of Tagbanua script are the same as the Mangyan script: All consonants carry the vowel /a/. An accent mark on top of the letter denotes the vowel /i/ or /e/, and at the bottom the vowels /o/ or /u/. Notice again the lack of separation between the vowels /i/ and /e/ and the vowels /o/ and /u/. The script is traditionally written on bamboo cylinders from bottom to top, and left to right. It is also read in the same manner. Figure 6: Tagbanua Syllabic Alphabet Source: http://www.omniglot.com/writing/tagbanwa.htm 4. Why do we need to study IP Literature? The epics, stories, folk tales and legends give us a glimpse of the worldview of the IP group (Cole, 1915; Tiu, 2001). Cole (1915) argues that these literatures provide the IP’s explanation of the origin of a significant source of food and livelihood like hills, mountains, lakes and rivers. Similarly, the characteristics and origins of certain plants and animals are also elaborated on in these narratives. They convey their beliefs in supernatural beings and their spirituality. Some stories capture significant 42 events in their community, their form of governance, the adventures of their heroes and the legacy of their group. Thus, through IP literature we gain the knowledge of their past, their mental life and their customs, beliefs and traditions (Cole, 1915). These are a fundamental aspect of their identity and must be ensured to be inherited by their future generations to preserve and conserve their uniqueness as groups of people. 5. Role of Indigenous Literature IP literature provides different functions in an IP community. It may simply be intended as a form of entertainment during ordinary days and special occasions (Tiu, 2015; Asain, 2006). However, it also serves as a non-material artifact that contains the group’s history (Asain, 2006). Moreover, according to Asain, the stories and legends can be a form of instructional tool and define the cultural and ethnic identity of the IP group to future generations. IP literature is also meant to justify rituals and institutions, and guides the members of the group to follow its prescribed norms (Tiu, 2001; Cole, 1915). In contemporary times, they are narrations of the struggle of the IP groups to assert their rights for self-preservation and self- determination (Bañez, 2002). Thus, IP literatures serve as a vehicle of cultural transmission to the future generations of IPs of particular customs, belief and practices (Asain, 2006; Bañez, 2002; Tiu, 2001; Cole, 1915). The primary role of these literatures is the preservation and conservation of the identity of the Indigenous Peoples as a distinct and unique group. 6. Indigenous Literature in the Philippines IP literatures in the Philippines can be categorized in conventional literary forms (Asain, 2009; Cole, 2000; Blake, 1911). These include epics, stories, “bugtong” or riddles, folk tales, mythology, legends and oration. However, elaborate prayers and ritual chants can also be considered as forms of IP literature (Scott et al., 1956). Existing studies on IP literatures in the Philippines suggest that these literatures are told, memorized and retold in oral form (Bañez, 2002; Tiu, 2001; Cole 1915). In some groups, selected individuals are tasked to be storytellers and they pass on this vital responsibility through inheritance within the family, as in the privileged “binukot” of the Tumanduk group of Panay Island (Bañez, 2002). Keeping a “binukot,” a cloistered young girl in the family who learns to chant the epic of the community gives the family prestige, exempts her from labor, and commands a high bride price. In certain IP groups there is the retelling of the myths and legends—among the Igorots, the 43 elders and the priests or “mumbaki” are known to be the storytellers (Scott et al., 1956). However, in some IP communities, while most members of the community can retell the stories to their children, the details vary from one person to another. Among the Hanunuo-Mangyan in Mindoro, the “ambahan” is not limited to a single individual or family (Postma, 1981). It can be learned and sung by all members of the community. The pitch and the words can differ from one person to another. Several researches suggest that the storyteller can unconsciously retell the stories and add their own or the group’s current experiences, contemporary beliefs of the tribes and contact with outsiders (Bañez, 2002; Cole, 1915). Thus, one of the major characteristics of IP literature is that it is constantly evolving and adapting to the changes in the way of life and beliefs of the community. Learning Resources Internet Materials 1. http://ncca.gov.ph/subcommissions/subcommission-on-the-arts-sca/literary- arts/the-literary-forms-in-philippine-literature/ 2. http://www.ethnologue.com/country/PH 3. http://www.ethnologue.com/map/PH_n 4. http://www.ethnologue.com/map/PH_s 5. http://www.ancientscripts.com/mangyan.html 6. http://mangyan.org/content/introduction-ambahan 7. http://www.nationalmuseum.gov.ph/nationalmuseumbeta/Collections/Ethn o/Writings.html 8. http://www.omniglot.com/writing/tagbanwa.htm 9. http://mangyan.org/content/introduction-ambahan 10. http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/philippines.html Video Materials 1. Si Pilanduk wey ke Datu te Buaya 5.5MB mp3 Pilanduk and the Crocodile Chief, by Ampatuan Ampalid. Recorded: August 2, 1976 Oral transcription published in The Song from the Mango Tree by Hazel Wrigglesworth and Ampatuan Ampalid, 2004 Available at http://www-01.sil.org/asia/philippines/mbi-narrative.html 44 2. Ke Kenakan ne Mevantug ne Midrirunrirung ne Mibpebaluy ne Pilas ne Uval 4.6MB mp3 The Famous Young Man who Disguised Himself as a Monkey, by Ampatuan Ampalid. Recorded: August 2, 1976 Oral transcription published in Narrative Episodes from the Tulalang Epic by Hazel J. Wrigglesworth, Ampatuan Ampalid, Letipá Andaguer and Adriano Ambangan 2008 Available in http://www-01.sil.org/asia/philippines/mbi-narrative.html Prior Knowledge (Guide Questions) 1. What are the different languages in the Philippines you are familiar with? Whom do you think spoke these languages? 2. What are the different Philippine literatures you are familiar with? Provide an example of each. 3. Are you familiar with the languages and literature of different IP groups in the Philippines? Why or why not? Learning Activities Activity 1: Getting to Know Their Language Instruction 1. Identify one IP language in your locality and region. Mark the location of the IP group that speaks the language with the appropriate status of the language based on the assessment presented in http://www.ethnologue.com/country/PH. 2. If possible, conduct a language immersion activity in the community and fill up the vocabulary table on the next page. 45 Processing After the presentation, ask the class the following: 1. What have you learned about the difference of the IP language you encountered compared to your primary language or dialect? 2. What do you think is the role of the particular IP language you encountered to the IP community? 3. What are the things that you can do to help preserve ad conserve this language? Activity 2: Poetry Reading / Storytelling Instruction 1. Ask the students to look for an indigenous poem or stories. 2. Ask the students to read the poem or tell the stories in the original language if available and the Filipino translation. Processing After the presentation ask the class the following: 1. What are the particular IP values highlighted in the poem or story? 2. What are the common values highlighted among the poem and stories? 3. Do these IP values differ from the values you learn from your parents or at school? Why or why not? Activity Sheets 1. My Prior Understanding of Different IP Languages and Literatures in the Philippines 2. An IP Language Close to Me 3. IP Creative Drama 46 Teacher Reader Reader 1. The IP languages in the Philippines available at http://www.ethnologue.com/country/PH 2. The Hanunuo-Ambahan available at http://mangyan.org/content/introduction- ambahan References The Journal of History Asain, C. (2006). The Tausug Parang Sabil Kissa as Literary, Cultural, and Historical Materials, Vol. 52 (2006): Available at: http://69.174.53.45/index.php?journal=TJH&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=475 Asain, Calbi A. (2009). Literary Commonalities among the Peoples of the Cordillera and Muslim Mindanao. The Journal of History, Vol. 55 (2009): Available at: http://www.ejournals.ph/index.php?journal=TJH&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D =361 Bamgbose, A. (1991). Language and the Nation: The Language Question in Sub-Saharan Africa. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Bañez, M.A. (2002). The Political Biography of Dalama: From Binukot to Revolutionary. Tambara 19. Pp. 123-138. Blake, R. (1911). Philippine Literature. American Anthropologist, 13(3), 449. Catapang, E.L. (2014). International Workshop on Endangered Scripts of Island Southeast Asia, organized by the Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, held on 27 February to 1 March, 2014. Castro, N. (2002). Indigenous Languages for Development: The Philippine Experience. In Lo Bianco, J. (ed.). (2002). Development and Language: Global Experiences and Local Effects. Melbourne: Language Australia, Ltd. Pp. 67-74 Cole, M. (2000). Philippine Folk Tales. Tennessee: University Press of the Pacific. Cole, F.C. (1915). A Study in Tinguian Folk-Lore. Unpublished Manuscript. Ph.D. in Philosophy. Columbia University Crystal, D. (2000). Language Death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 47 Headland, T. (2003). Thirty Endangered Languages in the Philippines. Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session, Volume 47. Available at http://www.und.edu/dept/linguistics/wp/2003Headland.PDF Himes, R. S. (2012). The Central Luzon Group of Languages. Oceanic Linguistics, 51(2), 490-537. McFarland, C. D. (2004). The Philippine language situation. World Englishes, 23(1), 59- 75. doi:10.1111/j.1467-971X.2004.00335.x Postma, A. (1981). Treasure of a Minority. Manila: Arnoldus Press, Inc. Postma, A. (1971). Contemporary Mangyan Scripts. Philippine Journal of Linguistics 2:1- 12 Reid, L. (2013). Who are the Philippine Negritos? Evidence from language. Human Biology, 85(1-3), pp. 329-358. Robinson, L. C., & Lobel, J. W. (2013). The Northeastern Luzon Subgroup of Philippine Languages. Oceanic Linguistics, 52(1), pp. 125-168. Scott, W., et al. (1956). Sagada Secular Literature: Prose. Philippine Sociological Review, 22(1/4), pp. 151-180. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23892250 Saleeby, N. (1905). Studies in Moro History, Law and Religion. Department of the Interior Ethnological Survey Publications. Volume IV Part I. Bureau of Public Printing: Manila Tiu, M. (2001).Worldview, Community and Lumad Poetics. Tambara 18. Pp 137-154. United Nations General Assembly paper, fifth session, Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Study on the role of languages and culture in the promotion and protection of the rights and identity of indigenous peoples, 2012, p. 8. My Prior Understanding of Different IP Languages and Literatures in the Philippines 1. What are the different languages in the Philippines you are familiar with? Whom do you think spoke these languages? # Language People or Region 1 2 48 2. What are the different Philippine literatures you are familiar with? Provide an example of each. # Literary Form Example 1 2 3. Are you familiar with the languages and literatures of different IP groups in the Philippines? Why or why not? An IP Language Close to Me 49 Instruction 1. Identify one IP language in your locality and region. Mark the location of the IP group that speaks the language with the appropriate status of the language based on the assessment presented in http://www.ethnologue.com/country/PH. 2. If possible, conduct a language immersion activity in the community and fill up the vocabulary table on the next page. Name of the IP Group: __________________________________________ Language: __________________________________________ Other Languages spoken in the community: Name Characteristic (Regional or National) 1. ___________________________ ______________________________ 2. ___________________________ ______________________________ 3. ___________________________ ______________________________ 1. What are the different activities that you can promote to help preserve and conserve their language? How do you think it will be able to preserve and conserve their language? IP Language: Regional Language Filipino Translation English __________________ Translation Translation IP Creative Drama Instruction Divide the class in groups of ten students and hand them the list of the different local Indigenous tales you prepared like the sample of Tinguian folklore below or you may ask 50 your student to search for a popular indigenous tale that they appreciate. Ask them to prepare a drama presentation of the tale during the next class session. A lazy man goes to cut bamboo, and a cat steals his cooked rice. He catches the cat in a trap and takes it home. It becomes a fighting cock. The man starts for a cock fight, and on the way is joined by a crocodile, a deer, a mound of earth and a monkey. The rooster kills all the other birds at the fight, then the crocodile wins a diving contest, the deer a race, the mound of earth a wrestling match, and the monkey excels all in climbing. The man wins much money in wagers and buys a good house (Cole, 2015). Title of the Tale: ________________________________________________________________ Origin: ________________________________________________________________ The Cast/s: Paste a picture of the members of the group in the box provided below. Main Actors: Secondary Actors: Setting/s: Value/s: Script/Story Line: 51 Processing After the presentation ask the class the following: 1. What are the particular indigenous values (values of the particular IP group) that are highlighted in the drama? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 2. Can you identify a popular TV show, telenovela or movie that also highlights the same value of the tale/s presented in the class? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 3. Do these indigenous values reflect contemporary Filipino values? Why or why not? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 52 Module 7 Philippine Indigenous Arts and Crafts Learning Outcomes At the end of the module, students are expected to: 1) recognize and appreciate Philippine indigenous arts and crafts from their own regions; and 2) create a venue in which these works can be showcased, reclaimed or preserved. Learning Content Each region of the Philippines has its own indigenous communities. Similarly, each of these communities has its own unique arts and crafts. In northern Luzon, for example, the Ilocanos are known for the craftsmanship of the cotton fabric inabel and the folk dance binatbatan. Whether it be visual arts, song and dance, handicrafts, tapestries and clothing or pottery, each region boasts of exceptional talent, skill and creativity. Unfortunately, these masterpieces have been “downgraded” by outsiders to merely crafts or handicrafts that are only worthy of being sold in tourist shops (This is also known as the art vs. crafts controversy) (Racette and Robertson, 2009). Indigenous artists do not showcase their efforts, and their accomplishments are rarely valued. The earliest art forms in the Philippines that have not yet been somewhat penetrated by Western influences are music and dance. The war dance interwoven in Igorot rituals, the Ifugao funeral dance, and the Benguet victory dance are examples of the dances in pure indigenous form. Other dances represent the daily affairs of the community such as planting, fishing, pounding rice, etc. (Panizo and Rustia, 2003). Indigenous peoples decorate their everyday implements with art. In the Mountain Province, “shields, spoons, ladles, bowls” and figurines are infused with art through woodcarving. In Mindanao, on the other hand, original Muslim art can be recognized through certain motifs, colors and patterns. These stylized elements are evident through brasswork, tools, weaponry and musical instruments. (Ortiz et. al., 1976) 53 A Filipino person’s characteristic of being relational or communal is evident in his or her art. Traditional art reflects this orientation as well, with the following specifics: Art is not separated from its other values and functions such as “religious, moral, spiritual, social and ecological concerns” Sensory modes are cultivated holistically and have to be developed together Art is assimilated into life The community is involved in the work of art; thus, one artist is rarely recognized and remains anonymous most of the time There is no dichotomy of the artist and so

Teaching Philippine Indigenous Cultures Modules PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue