4 Leveraging Vanua: Metaphysics, Nature …
65
community but including all ancestors and non-human spirits as well. Nature is very
much subjective: places are subjects with agency, as are living creatures. The roles
that spirits play are environmental just as much as they are social. For example, Parke
(2014, p. 32) describes so-called digiwai spirits related to natural processes:
…one [is] responsible for successful food crops, another for success in hunting, and a third
for fishing. These spirits could in turn expect to be respected and looked after by the living,
by suitable presentations of food and yaqona [kava]. Failure on the part of the living to fulfil
their reciprocal obligations could result in drought or in a person being bitten by a wild pig
or by a shark.
Similarly, Ravuvu (1987, pp. 14–15. Emphasis added) states that:
… the cultural vanua permits insights into people’s actions and how they bear on their efforts
to live and resolve the exigencies of existence both in this earthly world and in the world of
the spirit beings who can protect and destroy, or direct and make possible what is required
for life. For to live well in this world and in the other world, one has to live according to
vanua beliefs and values. Thus the concept of vanua is an encompassing one; it is the totality
of a Fijian community. Used in various contexts, it can refer alternatively to the social and
physical environments, or to the supernatural world, or to all the elements which make life
occur.
These passages show how the levels of Nature, spirit, and human are spatially and
temporally linked as the totality of community.
This co-existence requires the human community to pay customary respects to
the other realms, including respect for Nature and to the ancestral spirits (kalouvu) who fulfil a similar role—that is, in this relational cosmology, Nature and spirit
are inseparable from each other and from community. The teaching and learning of
important traditional knowledges, for example, are deemed to be “guided by familiar
vanua spirits or God” (Nabobo-Baba 2006, pp. 117, 127). These ancestral spirits
are concerned for the wellbeing of the yavusa group descendants and, importantly,
these relations between the living and the ancestral spirits are “reciprocal”—with
the community to frequently present isevu (first-fruits) and various other customs
to both placate them but also renew connections with these worlds (Parke 2014,
p. 29). Both ancestral and natural spirits watch for breaches of customary codes of
conduct or respect that mirror social norms of the community regarding reciprocity.
Consequently, these “cords” between people and vanua are constantly replayed in
Fijian ceremonies—not only solidifying existing social bonds of community but
also those of ancestral spirits and of the natural world around the locality. As stated
by Kaplama (2016, p. 158), “the people that constitute it [the community] must
continually strengthen the vanua in order to preserve their values not as individuals
but as the members of the vanua which gives them their identity.” He explains that
the “Fijian ethos” is defined by: “reciprocation, recognition, respect, appreciation,
strengthening of the bond, incorporation, unity, continuity” and the lack of any of
these is seen negatively as leading to weakness and eventual discontinuity of the
vanua bond (see Kaplama 2016, pp. 160–161).
Tomlinson and Bigitibau (2016) analyse a range of performative practices that
link spirits, kava, and various speech practices with traditional, pre-Christian society.
65
community but including all ancestors and non-human spirits as well. Nature is very
much subjective: places are subjects with agency, as are living creatures. The roles
that spirits play are environmental just as much as they are social. For example, Parke
(2014, p. 32) describes so-called digiwai spirits related to natural processes:
…one [is] responsible for successful food crops, another for success in hunting, and a third
for fishing. These spirits could in turn expect to be respected and looked after by the living,
by suitable presentations of food and yaqona [kava]. Failure on the part of the living to fulfil
their reciprocal obligations could result in drought or in a person being bitten by a wild pig
or by a shark.
Similarly, Ravuvu (1987, pp. 14–15. Emphasis added) states that:
… the cultural vanua permits insights into people’s actions and how they bear on their efforts
to live and resolve the exigencies of existence both in this earthly world and in the world of
the spirit beings who can protect and destroy, or direct and make possible what is required
for life. For to live well in this world and in the other world, one has to live according to
vanua beliefs and values. Thus the concept of vanua is an encompassing one; it is the totality
of a Fijian community. Used in various contexts, it can refer alternatively to the social and
physical environments, or to the supernatural world, or to all the elements which make life
occur.
These passages show how the levels of Nature, spirit, and human are spatially and
temporally linked as the totality of community.
This co-existence requires the human community to pay customary respects to
the other realms, including respect for Nature and to the ancestral spirits (kalouvu) who fulfil a similar role—that is, in this relational cosmology, Nature and spirit
are inseparable from each other and from community. The teaching and learning of
important traditional knowledges, for example, are deemed to be “guided by familiar
vanua spirits or God” (Nabobo-Baba 2006, pp. 117, 127). These ancestral spirits
are concerned for the wellbeing of the yavusa group descendants and, importantly,
these relations between the living and the ancestral spirits are “reciprocal”—with
the community to frequently present isevu (first-fruits) and various other customs
to both placate them but also renew connections with these worlds (Parke 2014,
p. 29). Both ancestral and natural spirits watch for breaches of customary codes of
conduct or respect that mirror social norms of the community regarding reciprocity.
Consequently, these “cords” between people and vanua are constantly replayed in
Fijian ceremonies—not only solidifying existing social bonds of community but
also those of ancestral spirits and of the natural world around the locality. As stated
by Kaplama (2016, p. 158), “the people that constitute it [the community] must
continually strengthen the vanua in order to preserve their values not as individuals
but as the members of the vanua which gives them their identity.” He explains that
the “Fijian ethos” is defined by: “reciprocation, recognition, respect, appreciation,
strengthening of the bond, incorporation, unity, continuity” and the lack of any of
these is seen negatively as leading to weakness and eventual discontinuity of the
vanua bond (see Kaplama 2016, pp. 160–161).
Tomlinson and Bigitibau (2016) analyse a range of performative practices that
link spirits, kava, and various speech practices with traditional, pre-Christian society.