An African Gnosis - For a Reconsideration of an Authoritative Definition

Author(s): Johannes Fabian

Source: History of Religions, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Aug., 1969), pp. 42-58
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1062141
Accessed: 08-12-2017 18:30 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to History of Religions
 Johannes Fabian AN AFRICAN GNOSI S
-FOR A RECON-
SIDERATION OF AN
AUTHORITATIVE
DEFINITION

This paper originated as a spont

voked by a recent colloquium of
produced an authoritative stat
undifferentiated use of the terms
to be advisable to identify, by
typological methods, a concrete
methodologically with a certain
Century A.D. which everyone agre
term. In distinction from this, gn
the divine mysteries reserved for
to such a definition was, first
attempts to put up a fence around
had overruled sound methodologic
important was a considerable bo
matic movement and its doctrinal
seemed to bear too striking a resem
discarded merely as an "interestin
By way of reaction, we have trie
a review and critique, from an an
1 U. Bianchi (ed.), Le origini dello Gnos
Aprile 1966 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1967), p
42
some of the problems raised by the definition quoted above and
the presentation of ethnographic evidence supporting our critical
attitude.
* * *

Let us look a
which the col
logically with
A.D. which e
term...." The
historical del
statistical cla
To start with
question obvio
the colloquium
Gnosticism. E
and it will be more instructive to concentrate on the first element
of delimitation.
But even more confusing is the part of the statement whi
supposed to express the historical delimitation. Already the fo
lation is awkward, to say the least. I fail to see how an empi
phenomenon can begin "methodologically." If we underst
right, this part of the definition reflects the conviction expr
for example, by van Baaren when he says: "I personally am
convinced that all attempts to define gnosticism as a phenom
logical complex must be doomed to failure; the only way of
ing to a satisfactory definition is that of considering gnostici
a historic complex belonging to a certain age and a certain
and forming part of a certain culture."2 What is very distur
however, is the fact that, in the final document, the intent
define Gnosticism "historically" materialized itself in a ch
logical statement. If "historical" and "chronological" could sim
be identified it would seem that contemporary religious sys
and movements constitute non-problematical cases as fa
historical delimitations are concerned, since they present
serious problems of chronology. But this is not the case.
Because what one may call Anglo-Saxon anthropology has b
concerned for a long time with the study of contemporary so
and cultures which did not pose any problems of chrono
fixation (and could be regarded methodologically as "time
theory and method in this field have been dominated by a-h
2 Th. P. van Baaren, "Towards a Definition of Gnosticism," in Bianchi
p. 174.
43
cal procedures of delimitation. Units of observation and analysis
were defined as systems, the boundaries of which were thought to
be sufficiently accounted for by the specific functions they per-
formed, the equilibrium of forces they were aiming at, the logical
and structural necessities they had to conform with, etc.-all of
them playing some variation on the Durkheimian theme of
"society" as the ultimate reality. Only recently have anthropolo-
gists begun to see the dangers of exclusively structural-functional
methods. While these methods serve to analyze the formal aspects
of human action, they are unable to account for its specific con-
tent-for the material element which differentiates one culture
from another, one belief system from another, even tho
may perform identical "functions" and be very similar
structural setup.
In other words, while it is possible and useful to app
tional-structural methods to the study of those elements o
and culture which can be derived "systematically"-in
explanation similar to those used by the natural scien
elements which are of a contingent non-systematic natur
the specific intentional content of human action) must b
"historically." Historical study certainly implies chron
fixation and chronological order, but more than that,
recognition of a continuum of ideas, beliefs, and valu
historical factor in the development of culture and soc
criteria for defining such continua in their spatiotem
logical-meaningful aspects must be sought in the vicinity
M. Weber has called Sinnzusammenhang ("meaningful"
tion of systems as opposed to "natural"-systematic inte
If these assumptions are valid, a historical definition of Gn
the necessity of which is wholeheartedly accepted, must
on the identification of a specific intentional content, irr
to functional or mere logical exigencies and shared b
systems of belief and action.
One question that such a view raises immediately is how
determine the limits of the postulated "historical continu
answer to this depends to a large extent on the kind of e
that is available for analysis. Since our own preoccup
primarily with the content as embodied in symbols (langu
others), one promising approach seems to be offered by t
ods of structural linguistics combined with methods of id
critique developed by sociology of knowledge. More co
Procedures derived from linguistics allow the isolation of d
44
systems, the recognition of their internal structures, and the
identification of units for comparison. Once doctrinal systems are
"prepared" in this way they can be related to other systems
synchronically and diachronically.
H. Jonas and Th. P. van Baaren certainly perceive the necessity
of such an identification of a "historical whole." But the former
appeals to a musical ear;3 the latter uses the term "
whole"4 (something to which social scientists have becom
gic). This is hardly the sort of methodological advice an
observer, plagued by problems very similar to those encou
in the study of Gnosticism, would look for.
* * *

We shall now,
which will exp
give a brief d
(Congo) in or
cultural context.5 Then we shall use the contribution to the col-
loquium by Jonas as a paradigm in terms of which we w
the essential elements of Jamaa doctrine. At the same time we
shall discuss similarities and dissimilarities and try to fo
underlying principles of generic and specific distinction
1. The Jamaa movement in Katanga.-Ever since K.
and B. Sundkler6 drew our attention to the phenomenon
pologists have studied a great number of "prophetic mov
"sects," and "new churches" arising in the wake of co
and increasingly dominating the ethnographic scene
Saharan Africa. Without going into typological and class
questions, we may place the Jamaa movement in this
prophetic-charismatic activities.
The Jamaa (Swahili for "family") originated in the ear
as an inconspicuous, small group of Roman Catholic C
near Kolwezi, one of the major urban-industrial centers
Katanga. It soon spread to other miners' settlements in t
its propagation reached a truly spectacular scale and p
years following Congolese independence (1960) with its u
3 H. Jonas, "Delimitation of the Gnostic Phenomenon-Typological and
Historical," in Bianchi, ibid., p. 103.
4 Th. P. van Baaren, op. cit., p. 175.
5 Fieldwork on the Jamaa movement was carried out between January,
and May, 1967. It was made possible through grants from the Wenner-Gren
Foundation for Anthropological Research, New York, the Department of Anthro
pology, and the Committee on African Studies, at the University of Chicago.
6 K. Schlosser, Propheten in Africa (Braunschweig, 1949); B. G. M. Sundkler,
Bantu Prophets in South Africa (London, 1961).
45
resulting in an increase of mobility (sometimes of entire ethnic
groups). Today the Jamaa is firmly established not only in most
Catholic missions in Katanga and the Kasai, but also in Kinshasa,
the capital of the country. Because the movement lacks any sort
of overt, formal organization, it is impossible to assess its numeri-
cal importance. A minimal guess would be in the neighborhood of
30,000 members.
In its origin and spread, the Jamaa is similar to other prophetic-
charismatic movements operating in the same geographic area,
but certain of its characteristics make it an exceptionally interest-
ing case. The founder was not an African, but the Belgian mission-
ary Placide Tempels who first became known as the author of
Bantu Philosophy (published in French in 1945).7 The book was
widely acclaimed and wildly criticized. From the later develop-
ment we know now that it was misunderstood by most of its
critics. The book must be seen as Tempels' first manifesto in which
he laid down the basic elements for the message which later be-
come the doctrine of the Jamaa movement. Bantu Philosophy
(which should be read together with the essay "Catechese B
toue"8) was at the same time the "discovery of the Bantu soul,
critique of sterile, rationalist Western thought, and, for Temp
personally, a symbol of his conversion from a colonizer to a p
phetic rebel. Its central idea was that the gap between Christia
and paganism can be bridged once it is recognized that both
basically concerned with "man," his innermost desires, and
aspirations. However, it is essential to know that, for Tempels,
constituted not so much a theoretical task as a practical s
"encounter" between Christian and Pagan. Encounter, which
came one of the key concepts of Jamaa teaching, implies, a
all, recognition in the two connotations of the term: recognize
which people have in common, and acknowledge its validity
importance as a basis for reconciliation and ultimate "unity."
In the Congo, the Jamaa is the only religious movement of impor
ance to arise from the Catholic context. The nature of the prop
tions of its doctrine (their seemingly broad, general human
character) and the absence of any explicitly fanatic elements (s
as millenarianism, messianism, violent opposition to mission an
government) made possible a largely peaceful coexistence with
hierarchy of the church. Such coexistence is reinforced by the
that Jamaa members most actively participate in the ritual lif
7 P. Tempels, Bantu Philosophy (Paris: Edition Presence Africaine, 1959).
8 P. Tempels, Catech&se Bantoue (Brugge, n. d.).
46
the established church (which has led most observers to see in the
movement a sort of enthusiastic revival within the mission
church). Activities specific to the movement are mostl
to meetings in which instructions in the doctrine are
these meetings are inconspicuous enough to pass for th
of just another pious society.
If observation would concentrate on externally o
ritual it would probably be impossible to recognize the
distinct religious movement.9 An approach through th
writings and the standardized doctrine transmitted in t
tion (called mafundisho), however, shows beyond any d
Jamaa teaching is not a mere extension or "Africanizat
Catholic catechism. It has its own basic principles, its o
teristic structures. In our presentation of this material
that it will speak for itself and make explicit compariso
Jamaa teaching and Catholic catechism unnecessary.
avoid, as much as this is possible, any misgivings,10
cepts and propositions to be quoted were taken from i
recorded in the field and stated by Congolese mem
movement. It also should be kept in mind that we o
results (a systematic analysis was attempted elsewhere)
plies that we shall not be able to justify our choice of
in every case, nor will it always be possible to demons
position in the full context of the doctrine.1l
9 On this point I disagree with my colleague who participated in t
and who thinks that ritual is "much more easily observable than
that "beliefs can often be derived more safely from a study of ritual
way round" (E. M. Mendelson, "Some Notes on a Sociological Appr
ticism," in Bianchi [ed.], p. 673). This is the reflection of an appr
"stable" and "ritualistic" primitive society, it is not very useful i
turmoil and change in which most prophetic-charismatic moveme
10 Our presentation involves rather grave ethical problems. We m
that our labeling the Jamaa a charismatic movement and compari
to Gnosticism are analytical devices, conceptualizations which hav
the larger context of anthropological theory. We are not making
concerning the orthodoxy or heterodoxy of the movement, and w
not want to endanger the precarious coexistence between Jamaa a
church which is accepted by sensible representatives of the hierarch
of growth. On the other hand we claim the same rights for which
sionary to Indochina has found these words: "En observant un peu
necessairement dans son existence et la modifie donc; de plus j
abstraction de la Verite dont je suis I'envoye. C'est ne pas la trahir la
ma seule facon d'etre juste et non pas double. Quel ethnologue d'ai
tout recevoir sans rien donner?" (J. Dournes, Dieu aime les paien
de l'eglise sur les plateaux du Viet-Nam [Paris, 1963], p. 41).
11 With one major exception, a written catechism of Jamma doct
group of Musonoi near Kolwezi, my documents consist of instructio
and hymns, recorded on tape. The language in which Jamaa doctri
lated and first standardized is a variety of Swahili spoken in the ur
regions of South Katanga.
47
 2. Jamaa doctrine presented in terms of H. Jonas' paradigm of
Gnosticism.-In his attempt to delimit the gnostic phenomenon,
Jonas starts out with the generic traits, that is, traits, "shared by
Gnosticism with other religious systems."12 The term gnosis serves
as a "natural starting point."13 We shall introduce Jamaa teach-
ing in a similar way. The pivotal concept of the doctrine which
seems to correspond exactly to gnosis is mawazo, a plural form (and
in Jamaa language a plurale tantum) of -wazo. In a very general
way, it may be translated as "thought," "idea." Its full meaning
however, can only be derived from the various functions the term
has in the system of Jamaa teaching. Elsewhere I have defined it
as the common denominator of the various elements of the doctrine
and given this general description:
God is "creator" but, in relation to man, much more "thinker." Before
Man was created as Adam and Eve he was already present in God's m
This preexisting muntu mawazo is invariably described as someone
neither male nor female, neither young nor old, neither white nor
Being mawazo, he is in perfect communication with God. Therefore,
mawazo and God make the primordial Jamaa. Then God created ma
mwili na mawazo (body and mawazo) because he wanted someone on
with whom he could be Jamaa. He also wanted that perfect union be
God and man be dependent on perfect union between man and man,
all between husband and wife. There are endless mafundisho on the m
ties and intricacies of this union.... Mawazo is the principle of unity,
whereas mwili causes diversity. For husband and wife to become kintu
kimoja "one thing" it is not sufficient to unite their bodies; they must
penetrate each other in their mawazo. It is because of the body that man
kind is split up by bukabila "tribalism." Because they are united in the
mawazo people of different tribes are together in one Jamaa. Even the diffe
ent stages of initiation are often called wazo since they are steps to perfe
union. Sometimes speakers end their mafundisho with the standard formu
"These are some mawazo I had"-even if their instruction was nothing bu
a recitation of standardized doctrine. Finally, dreams are called mawazo
because they make it possible for man to communicate with God and oth
men beyond the limits set by his body.14

Since I formulated this description, the work on the Jamaa doc-

trine has progressed farther. A structural analysis has led to the
distinction of several major foci in the teaching.
There is, first, a set of ontological concepts, most of them refe
ring to basic attitudes, values, and modes of human and divi
existence, projected to a transcendental level. Even though mo
of these terms are morphologically characterized as abstrac
(through the Swahili prefix u-) they are conceived of as concrete
12 H. Jonas, op. cit., p. 92.
is Ibid., p. 91.
14 J. Fabian, "Dream and Charisma-Theories of Dreams in the Jamaa Move-
ment (Congo)," Anthropos (1966), LXI, 558 f.
48
sources of being, very similar to Platonic ideas. Six among these
concepts are usually classed in two groups: (a) the three mawazo
(thoughts): uzima (life/force), uzazi (fecundity), umoja/mapendo
(union/love); (b) the three majina (names): in two variants; either
as ubaba (being father), umwana (being child), roho mutakatifu
(Holy Spirit), or as ubaba (being father), umwana (being child),
ubwana/ubibi (being husband/wife). It is quite obvious that we
have here a reflection of Christian trinitarian formulae (even
though the second variant would hardly pass as orthodox). How-
ever, it is important to see that the "three names" which might or
might not be the names for divine persons are secondary to the
"three thoughts" which define the nature of both God and man.
Another group of Jamaa concepts could be labeled a "theology"
in the sense that it contains the names of those actors who initiate
the drama before the beginning of time and the creation of t
world: Mungu: God; muntu mawazo/Jamaa: thought-man,
Jamaa. In the accounts at my disposal the relationships be-
tween these actors are not quite clear. Mungu appears most of th
time as a single person, without trinitarian differentiation. Sinc
"time" is not applicable to this level it is impossible to say who i
"first," Mungu or muntu mawazo. But whenever relationships ar
named there is no doubt about their nature. Invariably they a
characterized as Jamaa (family). God is depicted as the one w
has all power and all wealth but who suffers from upeke (loneli-
ness). He therefore thinks (ku-waza, not ku-umba, create) h
Jamaa, that is, someone with whom he might share his three bi
mawazo: uzima, uzazi, umoja (see above). The Jamaa which
originates in the mawazo of God is muntu mawazo, a being whos
nature is described as pure thought (see the above quotation).
The transition to what one might call the mythological level i
marked by these two tenets of Jamaa doctrine: Muntu mawa
(thought-man) has a secret name, Bikira Maria (the Virgin Mary
and, apart from muntu mawazo, God thinks (or creates?) anothe
Jamaa, malaika (the angels). The reason why the angels cannot be
included among the actors on the "theological" level is that they
invariably are described as the heavenly counterpart to the
Jamaa on earth, both as its model and as "servants." The ange
are model of the visible Jamaa not only in the ideal, positive sens
but also in a negative sense. Lack of unity and love among men i
prefigured in the primordial rebellion of Lucifer and his "group
(nkundi; the same term is used to refer to the Jamaa as a move-
ment). Lucifer, by the way, is punished with the same state tha
49
caused God to think his Jamaa-he is condemned to upeke (loneli-
ness, solitude).
Visible man, whose nature is body and mawazo, is created by
God and muntu mawazo; this is what one must conclude from
statements in the theology of the Jamaa, even though in actual
accounts of creation only Mungu appears as creator. He com-
municates his three big thoughts to the first man, Adam. The
further differentiation of mankind repeats in a sense the origin of
the first Jamaa: Adam is alone, and in his loneliness he "thinks"
Eve-a thought which is then realized by God. One recurrent idea
in accounts of creation is that man is created similar to God (ku-
fanana). But the similarity is not so much expressed in terms of an
ontological likeness; it is described in existential, often psycho-
logical terms: Adam proves that he is "like" God when he has pity
on Eve (huruma). The "original sin" is, in a general way, seen as a
repetition of Lucifer's sin: conceit and the attempt to realize one-
self "alone." One account is more concrete and identifies the sin as
a quest for self-satisfaction (symbolized in the act of masturb
with an interesting, almost Marxian, theory that from this
ment on man and woman thought of themselves as their
property, and possessions to be sold to the partner "for mone
The time after Adam and Eve is seen as a series of Jamaas-
realizations of God's three thoughts by paradigmatic
paradigmatic situations (Noah, Abraham, Moses), culm
the advent of the "Jamaa of Nazareth." This last of t
logical Jamaas serves as the immediate, and if one wishe
cal, model of the present Jamaa. In their marriage, hus
wife enact the hieros gamos between Mungu and Bikira
which God realized his "three names" (see the secon
above): Mungu baba, God father, becomes Mungu m
child, through the realization of ubwana, being husband
"visible" husband of Mary, plays a very minor role. The
fect realization ofjamaa on earth is between Bikira Mari
son Bwana Jezu Kristo. On this level the apostles (mitum
as the immediate model for the Jamaa as a movement.
The structural level of Jamaa doctrine to which we have to turn
now could be called ritual. It contains all those conceptions wh
15 This is a point where we might see how concrete social and economic
can serve as symbols for doctrinal propositions. One trend to be observed
moder Congo is a commercialization of the formerly symbolic bridew
another is the increase of prostitution, often involving women who are n
"professionals," but forced by their families to serve as sources of cash.
instances are perceived as dehumanizing and often as the cause of all othe
50
signify the ritual enactment of the ontological principles and their
paradigmatic realizations in the mythology. Included in this
category are such "technical" terms as kufundisha (instruct), ku-
ingiza, ku-endelesha (initiate), jamaa as the name of the move-
ment and, again, mawazo, this time referring to the content of the
teaching, especially in the sense of a latent shared "myth." To
quote only one example for this, Jamaa members define them-
selves in contrast to "ordinary people" (bantu ya inchi, literally,
"natives"), as mwenye kuchunga mawazo-those who guard the
mawazo.

Other structural foci of the doctrine contain

refer to a direct, non-mediated union between
mystical theory), others to a union mediated by m
visible Jamaa (an ethic).
Now, concerning the crucial function of the co
in this doctrinal system of which we have given a
sketch, we may venture the following conclusion
Mawazo signifies communication in three basic
the origin of communication in that it is the motive
ation of the one God/Mungu who thought, not cr
part, jamaa. It is also the basis for communicatio
is the common nature, or substance, of the comm
and man, man and man. (b) It signifies the proce
communication. Ku-waza, to think, is neither in
a theoretical function. The object of mawazo is n
at or reflected upon, it is embraced, and the emb
be fertile. In this sense, Jamaa ethic demands th
wife "think" each other before they unite their
as a progressive penetration by mawazo is not
internalization of doctrine-it is change and re
mawazo signifies also the content of communi
gives to his Jamaa are the three mawazo; any ch
trine can be called mawazo because it contain
thoughts of God.
If our understanding of Jamaa doctrine is
corresponds exactly to gnosis in the sense charac
Gnosis is

specified by a particular theoretical content, the object-world of this kn

edge, and this object-world significantly includes the role of know
itself within its scheme: The "what" of the knowledge contains the ex
ation of its own origin, communication, and promised effect. Indeed
system of universal being which gnosis on its theoretical side expoun
51
centered around the concept of gnosis itself and has thereby in its v
stitution a reference to its becoming known by the individual kno
broad metaphysical, theologico-cosmological underpinning of th
power of "knowledge," signalized by the appearance of the term
the subject and the object side of the system, is the first distinctiv
of gnostic speculation.16

Jonas then goes on to name some of the important elem

the "objective content" of the gnosis. I shall briefly re
summary and point out similarities and dissimilarities b
gnosis and Jamaa teaching.
Jamaa doctrine certainly includes a transcendental genes
drama of the lonely God in search of his jamaa, the emerg
thought-man, the rebellion of the angels, all this before th
ning of the world. In this respect, gnosis and Jamaa d
correspond in almost every respect. A very important dif
however, must be acknowledged when it comes to the sym
tion and conceptualization of the outcome of this transcen
genesis. Although Jamaa speculation uses "cosmologica
cepts such as mbingu (heaven), dunia (earth), mwanzo (begi
of time), and even spaciotemporal representations of the d
itself, often called njia yetu (our way), it definitely lacks
pation with such things as "stratification along a vertic
"antithesis of the heights and the depths," "distance betwe
terrestrial and the divine world," and the "plurality of wo
between."'7 What this apparently very fundamental dissim
implies shall be worked out as soon as we have commented
other traits on Jonas' list.
A complete parallelism can be observed on the third them
preoccupation with "man," his "origin 'beyond' in con
with the precosmic divine drama; his composite and sunke
dition here; his true destination."'8
Similarity can also be recognized concerning the final po
doctrine of salvation, only that the Jamaa does not sp
about the "return to God" in terms of elaborate eschatological
symbols. This, however, must be seen in connection with the la
of interest in cosmology stated above.
Before we proceed to a comparison of specific traits let us form
ize the implications of our findings up to this point. First, I thin
we are entitled to register a full, logical, and functional agreeme
as far as the two key concepts gnosis and mawazo are concerned
16 Jonas, op. cit., p. 91.
17 Ibid., p. 91.
18 Ibid.

52
Furthermore, on some important points we were able to state
similarities, if not identity, of more specific tenets. Affected by
dissimilarity is only one theme (a secondary theme in the logical
development of the basic principle, I might add): cosmological
symbolism. Jamaa and gnosis share the conception of a transcen-
dental genesis but make use of different symbols, sets of symbols,
or composite models, in the elaboration of these conceptions. We
may express the difference by saying that gnosis uses a cosmologi-
cal model, the Jamaa a social model. Gnosis symbolizes space and
time in a series of "worlds;" Jamaa, as is implied in the name
itself ("family"), visualizes the dynamics of mawazo as a sequence
of "families," as a genealogy of Jamaas. If this interpretation is
accepted it would reduce dissimilarities between gnosis and Jamaa
to a much lower level of sub-specific differences. In fact, our argu-
ment could suggest that preoccupation with cosmology, often
regarded as the central element of Gnosticism, is actually a very
contingent, exchangeable trait in the sense that it can be replaced
by other models closer at hand in other cultures and at a different
time in history.19
Similarities between Gnosticism and Jamaa teaching do not end
on the generic level. Mawazo (thought), is not only the central
ontological, logical, and existential concept of the doctrine, it also
is the medium of a dynamic history. Certainly in the Jamaa as
much as in Gnosticism, origins, creation, fall, and salvation are
considered "as one grand movement"20 of the central idea (mawazo
or gnosis), constituting the "time axis" of the world. As we might
suspect, however, for the Jamaa the history of mawazo progresses
through a genealogy, a line of "ancestors"-not through a
sequence of worlds.
The beginnings of the history of mawazo (as those of gnosis) are
emanationist in the way Jonas describes it: "divinity itself...,
from the repose of eternal preexistence, is stirred into what be-
comes the 'inward' history of creation, unfolding in a series of
spiritual states of the Absolute whose primarily subjective,
mental qualities become objectified, or hypostatized, in external
realities-such that their succession marks the gradual progressus
of the hierarchy of worlds (we would have to say: Jamaas, F.) out of

19 This, of course, implies that emphasis on the cosmological speculation would

make a definition of Gnosticism more "historical" (because more limited to a
specific culture and time). In that case, however, one would have to make t
terminologically explicit and refer to "Second Century A.D." Gnosticism
"cosmological" Gnosticism, or something of that kind.
20 Jonas, op. cit., p. 92.
53
the original deity. 21 Concerning these objectified subjective mental
states, I refer to our remarks about the "three thoughts" and the
"three names."22 Again, it is characteristic for the Jamaa that the
"catastrophic" element as a motivating factor in the history of
mawazo is symbolized in social, not in cosmological terms. In
Jamaa thinking, catastrophy is not so much "crisis" (which
has a physical connotation, a separation of elements) but some
form of social insufficiency: the solitude of God, the conceit
of Lucifer, the selfishness of Eve.23
Not much has to be added to our remarks on the mythological
character of parts of Jamaa teaching. Jonas identifies this trait as
typical for gnostic thought and links it to the development of
"dualism" as an all-pervading theme. He points out that such
dualism may be derived from a monistic precosmic stage.24 The
latter is also the case in Jamaa teaching. Concerning the theme of
dualism, we have again to suggest that a cosmological presenta-
tion of the "divided state" of man is only one possibility and that,
therefore, the Jamaa, starting out with the same basic idea (history
is a history of the fate of mawazo), may use different images. Cer-
tain doctrinal formulae speak of a dualism in man's constitution
and between man and the "world," and it is significant that the
Christian definition-"man is body and soul"-is reformulated as
"man is body and mawazo." However, the crucial dividing lines
are social/psychological, not cosmic/ontological: In the precosmic
myth it is the opposition between God and rebellious Lucifer, in
the time after creation it is "difference" (ukabila, literally "tribal-
ism"), which divides people into young and old, men and women,
black and white, Luba and Lunda. The fact that groups of the
Jamaa movement are intertribal is never just seen as a reflection
of the intertribal population of the urban-industrial centers. It is
almost ritually enacted and consciously perceived as a "sign" for
the final return to the state of umoja, unity.
Jonas' review of the successive stages of the gnostic myth25
may now serve as a schematic guideline for a comparison of
elements (see Table 1).
21 Ibid.
22 See above, p. 49.
23 It is interesting to note that the "devolution" of mawazo is never de
as a simple "loss" (the way a material object might be lost). It is always ex
in terms which have a psychological or moral connotation (ku-sahau, to f
ku-kosa, to lack; ku-potea, to lose). Occasionally it is said that man lost his m
because he got involved with the "world" (dunia), but there is no notion o
mixture of good and evil matter that seems to be typical for gnostic specul
24 Jonas, op. cit., p. 93. 25 Ibid., pp. 94 ff.
54
 TABLE 1

Stages of the Myth Gnostic Jamaa

(1) Beginnings . Divine transcendence, Same

transcendental genesis

(2) Initial disrup- A "cosmic" imperfection A "social" imperfection

tion . . .impurity solitude

(3) Emergence of "Man" as eternal, precosmic Same

lower powers . principle,
Sophia, Aeons: cosmic ? Bikira Maria, the Angels:
powers, social powers,
"Christ": saving agency same

(4) Creation and "Imitation": cosmic/ "Imitation": social/

early fate of ontological likeness psychological likeness
man

(5) Salvation . .Overcoming and dissolving Overcoming of the social

of the cosmic system: re- system (ukabila): perfect re-
integration of the "impaired union between God and ma
god head"

We shall conclude this section with some comments on further

characteristic traits mentioned by Jonas. First, a word co
the central and ambivalent figure of the demiurge. I
teaching, God himself (but perhaps assisted by though
the creator. But it should be noticed that the originat
actual state of humanity (with its divisions and distinctio
rebellious Lucifer, invariably described both as a satan
and, in terms of highest respect, as the most beautiful an
intelligent of the angels. The accounts do not indicate that
after his fall, changed into the ugly being depicted by Ch
popular beliefs; he was simply condemned to solitude.
Another tenet of Gnosticism, the "consubstantiality
innermost self with the supreme and transmundane God,
central idea in Jamaa teaching. I think that is so for
reason that God may be called "man" (not just because
hili term muntu may vary in its connotations between "p
and "human being").
We already pointed out that "forgetting" and "ignor
regarded as the symptoms of the unsaved state. Conse
communication of mawazo is the way toward salvatio
Jonas says about this function of the gnostic myth fully
Jamaa teaching: "Gnostic myth is always, and essent
26 Ibid., p. 97.
55
argument for the importance of its own communication, and also
an account of its supranatural source. By virtue of both, revealed
content and revelatory source, it claims saving power for itself qua
known: it is, in short, the gnosis."27
Probably even more impressive parallels could be discovered if
we would give a detailed account of Jamaa initiation, the rules of
secrecy, and certain "deviant" developments in some groups of the
movement. This, however, is beyond the scope of the present
paper.
Finally we must prove our case on a point regarded as most
portant by Jonas, even though it certainly is the most evasiv
among the characteristics of Gnosticism formulated by him:
"gnostic mood." The appeal to ineffable qualities when it c
to catch the "real" essence of a culture, a society, or a movem
is very familiar to all of us who have read Nietzsche or listen
the "soul" prophets of the Black Power movement. But this i
language of poets and prophets, not of analysts. First of all,
tain of the traits mentioned in this section of Jonas' pape
hardly be accepted as being unique.28 A great number of
"movements" studied by anthropologists in contemporary Af
could be classed as "revolutionary" and "angry," as "non-n
conscious efforts to construct a message, based on the "
floating availability of traditions that are no longer binding,
pregnant with redefinable meaning." And no one would d
that these movements are "essentially [a] dialectical phenome
The "situational factor," by the way, is recognized by most a
lysts; for some it has become a central interest. No wonder,
that Jonas finally appeals to the musical ear-a reaction I
most probably get from many followers of the Jamaa who w
read this paper and not agree with my interpretation. Su
appeal to an indisputable intuition, however, is legitimate
among believers; among analysts it ends all discussion.
* * *

The somewhat harsh criticism with which we ended does not

affect our admiration for the conceptual clarity and pr
of Jonas' "Delimitation of the Gnostic Phenomenon.
digm he constructed has allowed us to describe a doctri
whose similarity with Gnosticism we had vaguely perce
concise comparative perspective. Our presentatio
course, detail, and had to be apodictic whenever sp
27 Ibid., p. 99.
28 Ibid., pp. 100 if.
56
allow us to illustrate, or document, statements from our sources.
It is hoped that the material was sufficient to support our conclu-
sions concerning the similarities and dissimilarities between the
two systems. We can now reconsider the problem with which we
started. Let us summarize the issues:
1. We started out by recognizing the attempt of the c
to arrive at a historical definition of Gnosticism, but we
against a confusion of history and chronology. In our
historical definition implies that one identifies the speci
tional content of a belief system, a culture, a movement
those elements of social-cultural reality whose origin an
tion are contingent, not deducible from structural-func
logical premises of explanation).
2. In our confrontation of Jamaa doctrine and Gnosticism as
defined by Jonas, we came to the result that the similaritie
with the basic principles (the concepts of gnosis and mawaz
pervade the systems down to very particular traits. Dissim
also showed a regular pattern which we traced back to the
ent symbolic models employed (cosmic vs. social).
3. A conclusion from this distinction might be to refine
torical delimitation of the gnostic phenomenon by assumin
different parts of the systems show a different degree of h
contingency. One could imagine that this approach cou
developed and go beyond the dichotomy we used in this pr
ary attempt (general principles: gnosis, mawazo vs. sym
models: cosmic, social). The "historical" and, if one wishes,
fic trait of Gnosticism must then be sought in its preoccup
with cosmology. That is, of course, not to say that what w
called "basic principle" is not part of the historical cont
simply suggest that it should serve as the generic eleme
definition and allow us to include systems like Jamaa d
under Gnosticism and thus profit from the insights of gn
perts (who in turn might profit from anthropological findin
make it quite clear, this is not identical with the suggestion
colloquium to oppose gnosis, as an abstract concept, to Gno
as a concrete phenomenon. The similarity between gno
mawazo does not only affect logical conformity. Those trait
we would like to regard as generic (the basic principle,
mawazo, and its development in the stages of the myth) ar
torical traits. Naturally, when we talk about "historical tra
are somehow compelled to investigate actual connections of
or diffusion. This, however, should be left to specialist
57
history of religions. As far as the Jamaa is concerned, two hypo-
theses seem to offer themselves: either the founder re-"distilled"
gnostic elements from the Christian tradition (or certain
ments in this tradition), or he rediscovered such ideas in t
systems he studied among the Baluba in Katanga (and o
be tempted to speculate about Near Eastern influences on
religion). Probably it was a combination of both. In a
once a genuine historical connection is established, or,
probable, a fruitful comparison between "Second Centu
Gnosticism and looked-down-upon "ethnological para
begin and lead to a better understanding of one of the gre
tions in human thought.

58