By
Obododimma Oha
I am not a Bible scholar. Just somebody interested in discourses. Now, the Bible gets me involved by talking about silence and talking. OK, I have to express my humble views about these, hoping I won't upset philosophy too much.
Silence and speech. Hmmm. This human technology. But let's try.
Silence is not using speech, but, of course, one can still see. One's eyes are still in use. Things that look on and chew the cud, know this. They don't use speech, but they can see things. They can observe the world. Maybe that is the time for chewing the cud and just looking.
Perhaps, we can learn from some rituals. We can consider the Catholic ritual, transubstantiation, in which bread is turned to the body of Christ and wine into his blood. The bell in tintinnabulation invites us to absolute silence while this transformation takes place. We also have moments of silence in ancient rituals. We are required not make any sound for something is happening.
The time for not talking tells us that speech could be a waste of energy. It is not every time and in everything that we need to speak. This is one reason one is not happy with those who think that they are under obligation to respond in every social media debate.
In that case, is silence not speech? Does it not tell us something eloquently?
In indigenous Igbo thought, keeping silent while evil holds sway is seen as a way of allowing evil to grow, for it to be encouraged, knowingly or unknowingly. In other words, criticizing evil is one way of holding it in check.
However, silence may not be alone. Silence may be kept company by thought, in fact, deep reflection. In that case, silence and thought, before action. Action before thought can cause regrettable mistakes.
But, of course, we know that some forms of talk can water evil and make it even grow. So, just as silence can help evil, speech can also help evil!
In a special way, advertisement on modern mobile telephony seems to come to the aid of talk. People in countries of low economy are encouraged to phone friends and relatives and talk free. There are messages like:
"Talk free with friends and loved ones."
"Talk on our network and service your network of friends."
"Talking means you are alive. So, keep on talking."
People are tricked into gambling for free talk, sometimes late in the night or early in the morning. You see people driving and holding mobile phones, talking. People are crossing busy roads but are talking on the phone. Some may even be riding motorcycles but talking on phones. Is it people walking on the road and talking on the phone? Or is those actually shouting on their phones so that everyone hears what they are telling the person at the other end in a phone conversation? These talkers are making life look absurd.
It appears that this "juju, " this charm called mobile telephone, has been misunderstood by many.
For some service providers, talking is only emphasized as a marketing strategy. You are still the one to cater for privacy. If you like, go to the rooftop and broadcast what you want to say or do some absurd things in the name of phoning. The network providers have not asked you to do those. The mobile phone is still yours. The SIM card yours. The credit also yours. So, you are the one in action, performing with that phone.
But let us return to talk.
Talking is symptom, medically speaking. It shows that you are still alive. The so-called speech organs are still working, helped by the brain.
Dead things don't talk. That explains why your grandfather that died many years ago cannot use your mobile "juju" to phone you. No. No talking there, it seems. The dead have to rest and do not talk in their sleep. They sleep for long, undisturbed.
What if we return to humans? OK. More comfortable. It is not just talking but talking with. Talking with others means that we enjoy being with others. They are not meat meant for our consumption!
That also means that we don't talk alone but with others. That requires that we also have to allow others to talk. Discourse analysts call that "turn-taking." That means that it is offensive to try to talk alone, to dominate the talk! Some discourse analysts have argued that men tend to dominate talk with women. That is bad, very. To interrupt or to prevent the other person from finishing is very rude and uncivilized. That means that we should stop grabbing the floor, even if the other person is talking nonsense, stands against us, the culture allows it, or ideologically we want to be very prominent in the talk and cannot resist interrupting.
In that case, talking must obey rules. It is not enough for it to be free. If this context says that one should shut one's mouth, why keep yours open? If you are praying to God and your phone is by you and is switched on, is God going to answer the prayer through a phone call?
There is really time for talk and time for silence.
Comments