Situaciones que no deben interpretarse como acoso laboral

I would like to start with the world view of tribal Filipinos because that has been our original way of thinking. Then I shall go to the modern Filipino world view.

Filipinos in general are not individualistic. The tribal Filipinos identify in their tribe and place. The tribal Filipino is like a tree that is rooted on something more than himselfhis family, his clan, his "tribe". This explains the phenomena of marriage as a union of two groups and not of two persons alone.

If we go further, the Filipino does not think of himself as separate even from the departed. The latter are part of his sakop thinking. I would illustrate this point with a personal experience. After my priestly ordination there was a first solemn high mass at

the hometown of my father in Naga, Cebu. Since our family stayed in Manila for some time, we told my relatives in Cebu to make the arrangement for the mass. During the mass, those who prepared the celebration put two chairs in the center of the aisle, one for my mother and the other for my deceased father. My mother felt uneasy about the empty chair, but my relatives insisted that the chair remain because they believed that my deceased father was present in the occasion. Anthropologist say that this way of thinking is tied up with animism, or better, primal religion.

The typical Filipino's relationship with nature is reflected in his rituals.¹ Before a farmer plants or cuts a tree, he first consults the spirits. The act is analogous to "presenting one's legal permits and licenses."² He asks the spirits of the ancestors and non-ancestors to bless his planting and harvesting. We see this mentality among the Hanunoo Mangyans of Mindoro. They believe that

all kinds of plants, as well as animal and human beings, have spirits (kalag). The cultivation of rice is believed tobe impossible without the power of kalag paray (rice spirits). However, they lack a clear image of what these spirits look like or where they come from.³

The same applies to fishermen. They have rites of "buying" the port from the spirits or offer food in order that they may have a plentiful catch.⁴

In short, the Filipino considered nature (kalikasan) as something to be in harmony with.

Or in the words of Hornedo,

The traditional Filipino lived with nature. The forests and rivers were his "brothers."

Their preservation and conservation was his life. Their destruction, his destruction. He had lore to teach his society this fact. When he told his children the divine beings prohibited the desecration of the forest, he was speaking with the authority of life and in the name of life, not of money.⁵

But when the traditional Filipino went against nature, he had to suffer for it.

Anthropologists say that myths and folklore in general reflect a people's mind. In the theme of Maria Makiling, the goddess Maria Makiling extends help to the people as long as the people do not harm the mountains, forests, animals and ecology in general. But Maria Makiling vanishes when the people are unfaithful to her.⁶ The myths also show how a great flood, similar to the Deluge in the bible, happened when the people became greedy and lazy.

In short, the Filipino orientation to nature is part of his world view which J. Bulatao calls

"transpersonal."⁷ This world view might become clearer is contrasted with the typical western world view (see Table 5).

Bulatao says whereas the Buddhist model has only one reality, the Christian model is dualistic. Dualism means the dichotomy between the finite and infinite. The transpersonal world view differs from the Christian world view in the sense that the former admits the

existence of spirits "as living normal, earthly lives of their own as if they were a race of humans, unlike the Christian view of spirit which polarizes them into the totally good and totally bad."⁸

The Filipino is not individualistic because he belongs to a larger reality.

Each individual is like a tree and his consciousness is rooted in an unconscious. But the roots go beyond a personal conscious, and at the level of collective unconsciousthe roots of one tree intermingle with the roots of another.⁹

The Filipino philosophy of nature then is similar to Taoist philosophy. Taoist art shows nature paintings where man is just a small part of the whole scene. A typical painting will show mountains, rivers, and earth. Man is just a tiny part of the scene. The mountains are often partly covered with mist. This mist seems to indicate that the mountains are alive and breathing.

In short, man is a part of the cosmos. He is rooted in it and is not over nature. This view differs greatly from the mastery-over-nature mentality that has characterized Western thought.

The traditional Filipino saw himself as part of his people and of his place. For example, a typical tribal Filipino may see a tree as inseparable from its roots and environment. In contrast, a Westerner would tend to isolate the tree, contrast it to other trees and label it as being of a particular species or kind of tree. Western individualism stresses the person's uniqueness and separateness from other people and from nature itself.

The Filipino Continuum

Will the traditional Filipino philosophy of nature change with the advent of materialism?

Will he become secularized and forget his traditional harmony with nature?¹⁰ The answer of that question cannot be a simple yes or no; it has nuances.

Filipinos form a continuum: from those with the life style of tribal Filipinos, to the sophisticated ones who live in posh areas of Metro Manila. The latter tend to be very westernized. However, there are not a few urbanites who believe in spirits and other traditional factors of the transpersonal world view. Demetrio's two volume Encyclopedia of Philippine Folk Beliefs and Customs is replete with entries from the whole country where the transpersonal world view is very much alive.

Hornedo speaks of Filipino urban animism. He notes that some persons with Ph.D.'s and M.A.'s in management and residing in Dasmariñas Village and Forbes Park believe in the existence of spirits in the same way their counterparts do in the mountains.¹¹ One evening a man living in one of those rich enclaves was disturbed by unusual happenings in his house. For example, his bed moves; his blanket is pulled off when no one is around, or the air-conditioner switches to high or low without anyone touching it. After consulting a medium, he finds out that he had built a swimming pool on what was formerly a clump of

bamboo. Rather than destroy the swimming pool and restore the bamboo, the owner sells the hourse to a German national. The new German owner later dies in a helicopter crash.

The former Filipino owner feels guilty because he thinks he was partly responsible. If he did not sell the house, there would be no helicopter accident.

Another person bought a bottle a wine when he was abroad and brought it to his tennis club friends as pasalubong. A Visayan member asked the oldest in the group to "do it", namely, to open the bottle and pour a few drops of thw wine on the ground. Nobody questioned the act and they all understood the ritual.

Living in Metro Manila does not necessarily do away with the transpersonal world view.

However their roots and become totally individualized and westernized. Those who keep the transpersonal world view have, in the expression of Martin Buber, an I-Thou relationship with nature. The mountains, forests, rivers are Thous. They are like St.

Francis of Assisi who called the elements of nature `brothers' and `sisters', like Brother Sun and Sister Moon. The transpersonal world view is ecologically friendly. But when nature is depersonalized, it becomes an `It' and in consequence is exploited as a commodity.

Let us relate now the transpersonal world view to ethics.