'Mabuhay'

PINOY KASI

‘Mabuhay’
By Michael Tan
Inquirer
Last updated 02:32am (Mla time) 10/27/2006

Published on Page A15 of the October 27, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

TODAY I'm going to do another two-in-one column, one on trees and the other on our Supreme Court justices. My title, “Mabuhay,” is meant to give you a hint of the drift of the articles, but before going into the topics, let me do something about “mabuhay” itself, in effect giving you a three-in-one column.

The origins of “mabuhay” are unknown. Maybe it was intended as a way of arousing public emotions and creating a sense of solidarity, as in “Mabuhay ang Pilipinas!” I suspect, too, that it was used for rulers, as in “Mabuhay ang Datu!” The Chinese “Wan sui!” and the Japanese “Banzai!” both mean “May you live ten thousand years.” (I suspect though that deep down, many subjects, chafing under the despotic rule of their emperors, probably preferred that their rulers had shorter lives.)

I digress. Adopting “mabuhay” as a greeting reflects the way we look at life. On one hand, we know how precious, and precarious, life is in the Philippines. So many Filipinos live day to day, barely surviving, so that even work is referred to as “hanapbuhay” -- a search for life. Each additional day, particularly for the very young and the very old, is a reason to be thankful. Maybe, too, that’s why birthdays, especially of children, are celebrated with much fanfare, a way of saying “Mabuhay ka, anak,” often to the point of excess.

While we see life as difficult, we do love life, so wishing someone “mabuhay,” may you live on and on and on, is intended as the ultimate in graciousness. It says something of our zest for life and more. Note how “mabuhay” is left unsaid for friends. We say it more for people we have just met, for visitors, “mabuhay” becoming an invitation to friendship, maybe for life.

Trees

I am glad the Inquirer published a letter from Sonia Mendoza of Mother Earth Foundation, in which she points out that the typhoon-damaged trees should have been saved by replanting.

I couldn’t agree more. I can understand the need to saw off fallen parts of the tree to clear the streets, but to uproot them was, well, murderous. After all, the government just launched its greening campaign and by uprooting trees, some of which are several decades old, we have to start all over again.

Trees are evolutionary wonders, with complicated structures and physiological processes that are still being unraveled by scientists. They offer us lessons for life in the way they grow, ever so slowly but surely. Each tree is a powerhouse that generates and stores all it needs to survive through the most adverse of circumstances: floods, droughts, fires.

My parents brought in two workers to clean up their garden and they certainly were as murderous as the ones who cleared the streets. They hacked away, pulled up some young saplings and would have gotten to the older trees if I hadn’t intervened. Sensing I wasn’t quite happy with what they had done, they quickly put back some of the trees they had uprooted and, for good measure, sheepishly stuck a few branches into the soil. “Bubuhay ulit” [“They will live again”], they assured me.

I knew they would. Within a few days, the saplings were on their way to recovery and the branches, goodness, were sprouting leaves almost with a vengeance.

Trees vary in their ability to thrive, but generally they’re amazingly sturdy. More appreciative humans have turned that to our advantage, finding ways to transplant tree species thousands of miles away from their original habitat, captivated by some useful aspect of the tree: food, medicine, construction material, or just plain aesthetics, the beauty of its flowers, for example.

There’s even a romantic side to the trees’ hardiness. In Southeast Asia we tend to associate the “kalatsutsi” tree (known elsewhere as plumiera or frangipani) with death because the trees are planted in cemeteries. But in Latin countries, the plumiera speaks a different language. Women would give a plumiera branch to their husbands or lovers before they set off on a long trip. The sturdy cuttings would survive long voyages and, planted in a new land, would flower and remind the men of their loved ones back home.

Next time you look at those “kalatsutsi” in your backyard (or, for students at UP, at the towering ones around Palma Hall), remember they’re probably descended from stock dating back to the Spanish colonial period, brought over by some lovesick soldier or friar. And it need not have been a woman they left behind.

Justices

The Supreme Court decision was more, much more, than what many of us expected. Just a few days before the decision, we saw one public opinion poll showing that 60 percent of the public didn’t trust the Supreme Court.

I wasn’t too sure, either. I have great respect for Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, having read his books and appreciating the breadth and depth of his wisdom. But we live in amoral, opportunistic times, where might spells right. It would have been easy for the justices to rule in favor of the gods and goddesses and taking a chance with the public, given the weary apathy we Filipinos have about public affairs.

While the 21st century ushered in new hopes for most of the world, we’ve found ourselves on a downward spiral. For many Filipinos, the solution has been disengagement, yes, a drastic uprooting. The ones who stay have become more and more apolitical, too busy trying to survive, as in “hanapbuhay,” searching for life, hopes pinned on putting children through school so they can leave.

What bothered me most about the so-called people’s initiative was the way it was riding on that despair. After robbing us blind, trampling on every sense of decency and morality, these politicians now had the gall tell us that their initiative would turn us around, get the economy going, build a strong republic.

House Speaker Jose de Venecia, the mastermind here, wailed about how the Supreme Court had dwelled on technicalities instead of so-called benefits that their initiative would bring. But the justices saw otherwise: the nation’s survival hinges on those technicalities, intricate safeguards that are products, in a sense, of a long evolution of our political system. The 1987 Constitution is not perfect, but it was a well-crafted response to dictatorship.

There will come a time when constitutional change will be appropriate. Until that happens, though, we can only hope the Supreme Court retains its integrity, given the way the executive and legislative branches have been emasculated. The justices didn’t mince words in their decision, calling the campaign a “fraud,” a “deception.” Strong words that reflect wise minds and good hearts, and I mean good in the more powerful sense of “mabait” -- being ethical and caring. We Filipinos should find reason to hope again.

The “people’s initiative” is not dead, certainly, and we can expect more storms, more challenges to the Supreme Court. You can guess the metaphor I have in mind for our justices, and how we need to wish them mabuhay.