The Semiotics of the Peace Rituals ( Pomaas Atag to Kosunayan ) of Obo Manobo People

This study looked into the meanings of objects used in peace ritual, how these objects communicate the intention of parties involved, and how the ritual constitutes ideology on peace among the Obo Manobo people. Particularly, it is a semiotic reading of the Obo Manobo’s ritual for peace which employed Halliday’s social and functional approach to language and Lemke’s semiotic thinking. The peace ritual is found to be a semiotic system that embodies the values, symbols, and ideas of the Obo Manobos as a group. It is a multimodal communicative event that comprises various integrating elements to language, thoughts, feelings and aspirations, dramatizes collective representations, encodes the culture of the Obo Manobos and, therefore, conveys ideologies on peace. As embedded in the ritual, the Obo Manobos believe that peace is consequential effect of how they observe customary laws of the tribe, and disregarding this will result to punishment and chaos.


Fig 1. The Obo Manobo elders and cultural bearers with the researcher
According to the Cultural Center of the Philippines Encyclopedia of Arts (1994, in Felix, 2004), Ethnolinguist Richard Elkins (1996  The Obo are a Manobo sub-tribe who inhabit the more isolated mountains of Southwest Cotabato in the area known as Datal Tabayong, as well as, more southerly Davao del Sur. As of last count, they numbered close to 17,000 (OSCC, 1987); a follow up on their numbers in subsequent years has proved difficult. Furthermore, Vander Molen (2005) called them Obo Manobo, an ethnic minority group located on the north and west slopes of Mt. Apo on the boundary between Davao del Sur and North Cotabato on the island of Mindanao. Besides the name Obo Manobo, they have also been called Kidapawan Manobo and Obo Bagobo.
Known for their intricate casting, the Obo fashion fine weaponry and jewelry that they believe possess souls, making it harder for the maker to part with them. Agriculturally, they practice swidden, a slash-and-burn farming, oft planting and harvesting rice, root crops, and vegetables for consumption. In socio-political matters, the center of governance in the traditional Manobo society was the datu. According to Kaliwat Theater Collective, Inc. (1996), the datu's domain of authority may cover one 'kalibung kut Manobo' (cluster of houses), one 'inged' (territorial district), or the entire subtribal or tribal territory. As village chieftain (Olson, 1967), the datu performs many functions like arbiter, judge, peacekeeper, religious and ritual specialist, spokesperson, and ambassador of goodwill (Felix, 2004).
Like in other indigenous communities in the Philippines, religiosity is also deeply embedded in the communal life of the Obo Manobos (Garvan, 1931). This religiosity is manifested in their instinctive belief of the mystic and supernatural forces within themselves and their surroundings. They are animist, and they also believe in ancestral spirits and unseen beings inhabiting the animate and inanimate objects found throughout their environment. These mystical forces are personified in the forms of deities who are their champions against the powers of evil. A strong evidence of this indigenous religiosity is expressed in their performance of religious and political ceremonies and rituals.

2.2.The Pomaas Atag to Kosunayan
The Manobo people in general have rites or ritual offerings for different functions (Garvan, 1931). The Obo Manobo people in the same manner also perform their own rituals which they generally call Pomaas (ritual). In an interview conducted by the researcher with the Obo Manobo elders and leaders, Datu Basilio Padaya, the mandatory representative of the Obo Manobo tribe in Magpet, North Cotabato, said that Pomaas is performed for various purposes and occasions such as wedding ceremonies, conflict-resolution, thanksgiving, harvesting, and asking for guidance, peace and prosperity.
In this study, the researcher witnessed and analyzed a pomaas atag to kosunayan (ritual for peace). The said ritual was performed by a tidpomaas, Obo Manobo elders, and tribal members in order to frustrate the designs of evil spirits and people in order to maintain peace and order in their barangay, Brgy. Manobo/Tico of Magpet, North Cotabato. It was conducted in the Ancestral Domain house/office of the tribe. It was led by the tidpomaas who happened to be the mandatory representative of the tribe, Datu Basilio Padaya. The elders and cultural bearers of the tribe also partook in the ritual. The researcher was also allowed to serve as one of the witnesses. All of them wore the Obo Manobo traditional attire.  The pomaas atag to kosunayan consisted of two parts: the ponuvad (prayer) and pomaas proper (ritual for peace in this study). The ponuvad or prayer was led by the tidpomaas before the pomaas proper to seek for guidance and approval from their most important deity, Monama (Holy Father). This includes offering of soo (egg of native chicken), momannon (betel nut) and soopi (money).
The tidpomaas then proceeded to performing the peace ritual. In this part, he stood in front of the elders and other witnesses while holding a native chicken. He began by informing the parties of the purpose of the ritual. He then invoked the presence of the various deities and spirits. This he had done by naming and describing them one by one, following the hierarchy of the deities in terms of relevance, power and designation. After summoning all the spirits, he swung the native chicken in various directions (North, West, etc) to drive away evil spirits and elementals who according to him would want to cause discord in their village.
The ritual ended with the tidpomaas hitting the native chicken on the post that pointed directly to the heavens and eventually killing it by slitting or cutting off its neck.

2.3.On Language Multimodality and Semiotics
Van Leeuwen (2005) states that all elements of communication serve as semiotic resources, i.e. all these elements are the actions and artefacts of people to communicate, whatever their mode of productions is. Language, as a confluence of numerous semiotic resources, is a symbolic, social, and functional multimodal system. It is a very powerful tool in human civilization as it serves as an instrument of socialization and interpretation of human experiences and participation in social events. The social interpretation of language entails stating its functions and unravelling the meaning of language as used in social situations.
With its complexity and multimodality, language use in social interaction is multilayered. This entails that discourse participants draw on a wide range of semiotic resources (Ademilokun & Olateju, 2015) or integrating elements such as gaze, gestures, objects and proxemics (Vigliocco, Perniss & Vinson, 2014) for the projection of meaning. Signification or meaning making then necessitates a more complex process of decrypting the various modes and contexts involved in language use and communication (Ogunkune, 2013).
Seminal to study of language as a social and functional system is the work of Halliday (1978) who postulated that the grammar of a language is a code to produce correct sentences but a resource for making meanings. He then developed the systemic functional linguistics (SFL) and proposed the meta-functions of language as proposed. These principles aim to understand aspects of ideational (to say something about the world), interpersonal (to say something about those involved in the communicative event or multimodal practices) and textual (to say something about the text) meanings in multimodal texts. M.A.K. Halliday's social and functional approach to language and semiotics has been hugely influential in linguistics and beyond since the 1960s. Halliday's concept of language as doing things and as making meanings has led to main lines of thought developed among key figures in the generation of social semioticians, making their own original contributions to theory and practice. From social semiotics perspective, language is seen as multimodal. In addition, as claimed by Kress (2010), much of the work in multimodality is rooted in Halliday's original concept of social semiotics.

2.4.On Semiotics, Rituals and Culture and Ideologies
Danesi, (2004) expresses the relationship between signs on the one hand and body, mind and culture on the other hand as the "conceptual glue" that interconnects their body, their mind, and the world around them in a holistic fashion" while referring to the way children make sense of the world around them. His argument also establishes the relationship between signs-the concerns of semiotics and culture. From this argument, signs are established as important tools that give meaning to the culture of a people. He further states that one's understanding of the world is thus not a direct sensory one. It is mediated by signs and, thus, by the images that they elicit within the minds space.
Writing in 1964, Barthes declared that "semiology aims to take in any system of signs, whatever their substance and limits; images, gestures, musical sounds, objects, and the complex associations of all of these, which form the content of ritual, convention or public entertainment: these constitute, if not languages, at least systems of signification".
Rituals, according to Wuthnow, are symbolic and expressive, and constitute some dimension of all social activity. Finol (1994) also argues that ritual performance is not a homogeneous, univocal, and isolated behavior. On the contrary, we must see it as a living expression of a mutivocal communication process, where society and groups, culture and values, express and receive expressions of an ever-changing meaning. Other theorists stress the communicative nature of rituals. Sausure for example studies rituals through analyzing their linguistic structures, while others utilized their performative structures employing the approach of Austin and Searle.
Studies on rituals have already been started by several theorists and sociolinguistic scholars. Finol (1994), for example, conducted a semiotic analysis to find out similarities and differences of bridal shower ritual as it is practiced in Maracaibo, Venezuela and in Bloomington, Indiana, United States. His findings revealed that bridal shower ritual takes peculiarities in terms of functions and intentions of the women or brides according to the social and cultural context where it is performed. This study contributes to the present research for it proves that doing semiotic reading of rituals may reveal the values, beliefs and therefore ideologies of certain group of people.
Ogunkunle (2013) also embarks on using semiotics approach in examining symbols of Yoruba traditional marriage. Utilizing Halliday's meta-functions and Pierces conceptions of signs as theoretical framework, he explored the meaning of signs (objects) used in the Yoruba traditional marriage ceremonies. This paper affirms that communication is a multimodal system of interpreting verbal and non-verbal signs. The present study shares a degree of similarity to this paper as this also utilized Halliday's social and systemic approach to language and semiotics and Lemke's semiotic thinking which is greatly inspired by Pierces conception of signs. However, as a departure, this paper focused on analyzing the language of peace rituals of the Obo Manobo people.

Theoretical Framework
Halliday's social and functional approach to language and semiotics has been hugely influential in linguistics and beyond since the 1960s. Halliday's concept of language as doing things and as making meanings has led to main lines of thought developed among key figures in the generation of social semioticians, making their own original contributions to theory and practice. From social semiotics perspective, language is seen as multimodal. In addition, as claimed by Kress (2010), much of the work in multimodality is rooted in Halliday's original concept of social semiotics.
In so doing, the corpora of this study were interpreted based on the meta-functions of language as proposed by Halliday (1978). These principles aim to understand aspects of ideational (to say something about the world), interpersonal (to say something about those involved in the communicative event or multimodal practices) and textual (to say something about the text) meanings in multimodal texts. Since meaning exists in people's lives and performs its work through their social practices, these principles are essential to explicate how semiotic resources interact to create meaning. In exploring semiosis with the idea of semiotics as part of social practices, the analysis of multimodal activity or multimodal texts is very important. As argued by Matthiessen (2015) as far as examining semiosis is concerned, "the social, the interactive is central and essential." Aside from employing Hallidayan's metafunctional meanings, this paper also took into consideration Jay Lemke's (2015) distinction between icon, index and symbol, which is used by many scholars who are interested in multimodal semiotics. Inspired by Charles S. Peirce's semiotic thinking, Lemke makes the connection to Peirce's thinking about "firstness" (similarity of form), "secondness" (relationship through causality) and "thirdness" (relationship through convention). Particularly interested in the indexical basis of meaning making, Lemke argued that a lot of the meaning that we ascribe to signs or to acts and actions as signs come not simply from their denotation, but from another way of thinking of connotation.
This paper purposely integrates on the analysis Halliday's meta-functions of language and Lemke's Peircian-inspired concepts on the nature of sign as used in social practices in order to demonstrate clearly the interplay of connections among semiotic resources of the peace rituals and to understand how they appear together to create indexical meanings.
Modes are socially and culturally shaped (semiotic) resources for making meaning (Bezemer and Jewitt, 2009).The semiotic resources in the Obo Manobo peace ritual are considered part of the modes used because they were specifically chosen to serve functions and to mean something in the peace ritual.

METHODOLOGY
This qualitative research employed Halliday's (1978) social and functional approach to language and semiotics and Lemke's (2015) distinction between icon, index and symbol which is used by many scholars who are interested in multimodal semiotics to analyze the pomaas atag to kosunayan or peace ritual of the Obo Manobo people. Specifically, they were used to look into the meanings of objects used in the said ritual, to determine how these objects communicate adequately the intention of the parties involved, and to analyze how the ritual constitute the ideologies on peace of the Obo Manobo group.
In the collection of data, the researcher, with the help of the gatekeeper, sought first permission from the local authorities. Proper procedural activity was made and courtesy call to significant local personalities was initiated. Initial contacts were identified. With the help of the gatekeeper and local barangay officials, the researcher was able to enter the study site and gather data.
Data gathering involved video recording of the peace ritual and interview of those parties (elders, datus, and cultural bearers) involved. Participant observation was done by the researcher for her to capture the significant details which were important in the analysis of the study. The help of a videographer was also sought while the researcher conducted the interview with the participants and informants. Prior to the interview, the researcher explained to the informants the purpose of the study and asked for their consent to be part of the study.
After the transcription and translation of the corpus, validation followed. This involved peer review debriefing and member checking to determine the accuracy of the findings (Creswell, 2003). One debriefer was a cultural bearer of the Obo Manobo tribe; the other was a Manobo teacher at the Manobo High School, Barangay Manobo, Magpet, Cotabato, Philippines. The researcher ensured the process of reflecting, sifting, exploring, judging relevance, and developing themes that were accurately depicted in the corpus of the study.

4.1.On Interpreting Meanings of Objects (Signs) Used in the Peace Ritual
The first research objective focused on identifying the meanings of objects used in the Obo Manobo's pommas atag to kosunayan (peace ritual). Following Lemke's (2015) semiotic thinking which makes the connection to Peirce's framework, meanings of the objects used were labelled as "firstness" (similarity of form), "secondness" (relationship through causality) and "thirdness" (relationship through convention). The deities will not accept the offer if it is not an egg of a native chicken.
The deities will hear the prayer if egg of a native chicken which is white in color is offered to them.

Quality of Momannon
Betel nut is the favourite food of the deities and so the deities will hear the prayer.
The deities will listen to the prayer because offering betel nut is a clear sign of respect and sincerity.
Quality/Quantity of Soopi (Money) Abundance They will be blessed as money signifies blessing and wealth.

Quality of the Manuk
Purity Swiftness Truthfulness Native chicken, preferably white in color is pure, so deities will hear the prayer.
The wings of the chicken are good tool to drive away evil spirits which are not welcome in the ritual and in the community as a whole.
They are swift in enfolding blessings and answered prayers.
The deities will grant the prayer as sacrificing chicken, which is a very important creature to the Obo Manobos, mean seriousness of intention.
As shown in the table, soo (egg), momannon (betel nut), soopi (money), and manuk (chicken) were the only objects offered in the peace ritual. One piece of egg, a piece of betel nut, any amount of money, and one piece of chicken were enough offering to perform the pomaas. As witnessed by the researcher, the native chicken egg, betel nut and money were offered first in the ponuvad or prayer. As indicated in the following excerpt from the ritual's transcript, Buyuwon ku vo sikkow no Uhis no tuwantol no Monama, tohovikaa nod bikaa taddot konamin kinohiyan. Dorung ka vo konami su langun ka-ay't od puungan doy no momannon bo oyya su duwon ka. No langun doy ka-ay boggayi ket kotuwiggan (Father, we pray for your guidance for all of us who are gathered here to achieve true and lasting peace in our place. With this betel nut as our offering, please give us enough wisdom. We also pray that through this offering, may You find us rightful to call your name and may You grant us our needs and desires).
the prayer was done to ask Monama, their most powerful god, for guidance in the conduct of the pomaas. In his prayer, the tidpomaas explicitly mentioned momannon (betel nut) as offering. As gleaned from the interview, the betel nut is the favorite food of the deities. It was also revealed that only the objects shown in the table were accepted as offerings. The tidpomaas specifically said that they could not change this customary rule for it has been practice by their ancestors since the beginning of time.
Their cultural bearer also explained that there were set standards in making offerings. First, the soo or egg should be from native chicken as it needs to be pure to be accepted by the deities. Second, the momannon or betel nut is the most important of all the offerings. Even without the egg and money, it would suffice to call their deities as momannon is their favourite offering. Soopi or money is also optional.
The manuk or chicken was the last to be offered to the deities. In the pomaas attag to kosunayan that followed the ponuvad, the manuk was the sole medium used by the tidpomaas in imploring the presence of their deities and other unseen spirits. The manuk used in the ritual was native as the use of other kind of chicken would invalidate it. As exemplified in the pomaas' transcript, Daan doy tod umow kikow. Sikkow vo to ini no timpu od pomaas koy od pokiyab koy ka-ay't pakpak to manuk su ahad ondan dod dunngu konami ka-ay't daom to Tico labbi ron ko-ungkay to ko-ubpa roy (Our Holy Father, hear us call your name today. We are here in our assembly house, and we ask for you to guide our actions. At this hour, we will drive away all the evil spirits using the wings of this chicken).
The wings of the chicken play a crucial role in the ritual. The wings served as a tool to drive away evil spirits who can afflict the Obo Manobo land and people. The wings of the chicken, as told by the tidpomaas, were swift in frustrating and driving away these evil spirits.
The findings of the study on meanings of objects used prove that ritual is a multimodal communicative event that comprises different ways and tools (Finol, 1994) to language thoughts, feelings, and aspirations, and for discourse participants to draw on a wide range of semiotic resources for the projection of meaning (Ademilokun & Olateju, 2015). They also affirm Finol's (2012) notion that ritual is defined by repetitive characters, structured towards a determined context that gives it a particular sense. It dramatizes collective representations and is endowed with a mystical ethos that in the course of the communal experience did not merely promote acceptance of those representations, but also inculcated deep seated affective responses to them (Durkheim,1965).

On Communicative Functions and Ideologies on Peace Constituted in the Ritual
The second and third research objectives centered on determining how the objects used communicate the intention of parties involved, and how the ritual constitutes the ideologies on peace of the Obo Manobo people, respectively. To answer these inquiries, Halliday's functional approach to language and semiotics was employed. These include analyzing the three metafunctions of language use in the ritual. These are: the ideational, the interpersonal and the textual meta-function.

A. The Ideational Meta-function of Signs
The ideational meta-function of signs refers the lexicons used to express content (Butler (985), or the grammar resources used to construct individuals' experiences of the world around them and inside them (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004). The ideational comprises the experiential component which describes the content, and the logical component which describes the linguistic system by the fact that is expressed through recursive structures.
The objects used in pomaas atag to kosunayan encode the intention of the tidpomaas and elders, cultural bearers, and the Obo Manobos of Brgy. Tico. This in turn elucidates the ideologies on peace of the Obo Manobo people as a group. Based on the results shown in the previous table, the Obo Manobo people have a positive conception of the performance of pomaas.
In the pomaas, the offerings used are said to have positive qualities. The purity of the soo and manuk shows sincerity of intention and clear conscience of those involved in the pomaas in asking for guidance and lasting peace from the deities. The offering of momannun also signifies respect and sincerity as it is known to be the favorite of the deities, and is used as offering by their ancestors since the olden times. These qualities of the offering are crucial in communicating the intention and the fulfillment of the prayers of the Obo Manobo people.
It is also important to note that when these offerings are put together, they become a text that communicates a certain level of understanding. In a way, there is a logical relationship between the objects used. A critical examination of the signifiers reveals that there is a relationship of positivity among them, thus pomaas has a positive image among the Obo Manobo people. This shows cohesion in the text. This quality is achieved in the pomaas as no object was used to suggest negative meaning. Moreover, the gestures of the tidpomaas are congruent to his utterances. For example, when he uttered that he would swing the chicken to the north to drive away evils, he also faced north and swung the chicken. This explains the logical function of this items used in expressing meaning.
The findings suggest then that rituals are analogous to culturally produced texts that can be systematically read to endow meaning upon experience.

B. The Interpersonal Meta-function
The interpersonal meta-function of signs is defined by Bloor and Bloor (1995) as the interaction between the participants in a conversation. It refers to the mood of interaction as shown by clauses' structural relations. In this study, the findings reveal that the mood of objects used as offering in the peace ritual is declarative.
In the context of this study, understanding interpersonal meta-function requires identifying the discourse participants in the pomaas. It is apparent that the tidpomaas, a datu and the mandatory representative of the tribe did almost all the talking in the ritual. Other members of the elder council and the community just listened to him and made minimal verbal responses. This context is dictated by the structure of the pomaas. As pointed out in the interview, the tidpomaas is the one who serves as medium for the Obo Manobo people to express their prayers to their deities. The tidpomaas functions like a representative of the Obo Manobo people who communicate their desires and aspirations to their gods and spirits.
It is also clear that the tidpomaas talked to the deities and other spirits during the ritual. Even unseen, these deities were considered part of the ritual as they were called to join in the pomaas and listen to the prayer and wish of the Obo Manobo people. These deities were called by him according to their rank and relevance in the Obo Manobo religious system. The following table shows the gods and their descriptions as mentioned in the pomaas. One who gives wisdom and guides the speech of the Obo Manobo Indorudsu Overseer of the birds As observed in the ritual, the tidpomaas called first Monama (Holy Father) and followed by other spirits, from the highest ranks to the lowest. This shows that even in prayer and ritual, power structure pervades. This is affirmed by the tidpomaas. In the interview, he stated that as the tidpomaas, he cannot randomly mention and call the deities and spirits in rituals or prayers. He further said that a tidpomaas always believe and follow the hierarchy of their deities according to their rank and relevance in the Obo Manobo culture. If this would be violated, not only would he suffer but also the whole Manobo community might be cursed.

C. The Textual Meta-function of Signs
The textual meta-function of signs describes the semiotic resources needed in presenting the ideational and the interpersonal meta-functions. The analysis of the textual metafunctions involves dissecting the thematic structure of the text (ritual) to reveal how ideas and objects are arranged, developed, and projected (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004) in a cohesive and coherent manner. This arrangement and transition, in turn, may then reveal hidden ideological structures in the text (ritual).
Rituals are well-structured narratives used to promote acceptance of an idea and to inculcate deep seated affective responses in the hearers' consciousness (Durkheim,1965). In the case of the pomaas, in which data were a combination of integrating elements such as words, gestures, proxemics and objects, the logical exposition of the central thought forms in the progression of the ritual and the hearers will be able to follow because of the clear statement of theme, especially at points of transition.
As exemplified in the data transcript and as observed in the actual ritual, the tidpomaas started the ritual with a prayer to invoke the presence of the gods and ask for guidance. This was followed by introduction of the purpose of the ritual, which was asking for lasting peace and order. With this, the text producer who is the tidpomaas established the theme of the text or ritual. This was then followed by prayer to all the beneficent gods and spirits whom they believe would grant their wishes. In this part, the tidpomaas identified each of the gods according to their importance and rank. This means that a hierarchy of structure based on power was followed in the prayer. In the ritual, this was indicated by the use of transitional signals poko-oruwa (second) , poko-otullu (third), poko-oppat (fourth), pokowau (eight), and so on. This mainly characterized the structure and progression in the ritual being conducted. The text also showed the use of repetition to emphasize some important points in the ritual. Basically, the purpose of the ritual which is to frustrate threats and maintain peace is repeated.
The analyses of the objects involved and the meta-functions of the language used in the ritual clearly show that Obo Manobo ideologies on peace are constituted in the pomaas atag to kosunayan. As embedded in the ritual, the Obo Manobos believe that peace is consequential effect of how they observe customary laws of the tribe, may it be written or unwritten. For them, these gods have control over broad array of social and environmental phenomena. Adhering to established rules mean maintaining peace and order. This suggests making proper offering and recognizing the power structure of the gods and spirits. For the Obo Manobos, disregarding this will certainly result to punishment and chaos. With this, rituals become a means of reproducing politics of dominance and social stratification. They then do not only dramatize collective representations which are endowed with mystical ethos; they also forge the politics of dominance and inequality underlying the group consciousness (Lukes, 1975).

CONCLUSION
The peace ritual of the Obo Manobo people is a distinctive multimodal communicative event that illustrates not only their traditions and indigenous religiosity but also the deeply rooted symbolical and ideological structures that affect how they perceive and experience things in their surroundings and community.
The peace ritual comprises of objects or semiotic resources that lend themselves to signification to reveal something about the people's social and cultural orientations, especially their concept of peace. In its performance, customary rules and standards set by their ancestors govern the kind of objects that are acceptable as offering. These offerings-momannon (betel nut), soo (egg of a native chicken), soopi (money), and manuk (native chicken)-have ascribed meanings by the Obo Manobo people. The momannon (betel nut) is considered as the most important among the offerings as it is the favorite food of the Manobo deities, and thus offering it would signify sincerity of intention and reverence to the gods. The soo (egg) must come from a native chicken to signify that the prayers' intention is pure. The soopi (money) is an optional offering which is usually added to signify abundance. The manuk (native chicken) is another essential offering in the peace ritual as it is used to signify purity of the prayers' intentions, and the sole medium used by the tidpomaas (ritual specialist) to implore the presence of deities and drive away evil spirits which are not welcome in the ritual and in the community as a whole. Non-conformity to these set of offering rules means nonfulfillment of the prayer and futility of the peace ritual.
The objects or semiotic resources used in the peace ritual also encode the positive intentions of the tidpomaas and elders, cultural bearers, and the Obo Manobos of Brgy. Manobo. The offerings or objects used in the ritual which carry positive meanings and the gestures of the ritual performers that are congruent to their utterances form into a cohesive text that also creates a positive conception of the performance of the peace ritual. How the ritual as a cohesive text is arranged does not only reveal positivity of intention; it also reveals symbolic and ideological structures that forge social and political hierarchy and inequality. Specifically, how the tidpomaas calls each of the deities, from the highest to the lowest ranks, to partake in the ritual signifies the belief and conformance of the Obo Manobo people to social and political order of power. Recognizing and respecting the power structure of their gods and spirits who have control over broad array of social and environmental phenomena equates to maintaining peace and order in the community. The Obo Manobo people, therefore, communicate through the pomaas atag to kosunayan or peace ritual their belief that peace is a consequential effect of adherence to the established or customary laws of the tribe, may it be written or unwritten, and non-conformity or violation of these set rules does not only mean futility of the ritual but also chaos among the people and in the community.
1 Ko-ung kay ini vos od puungan tat inin mapun od pomaas ki su ambo man su inis koubpa ta ka-ay't daom to Tico dii od konongnongngan ko ondan iddos diyo't ko-unnan, moppiya a morat oton. Od buyuwon to riyonto Uhis no tuwantuk no Monama no ahad od kolendog kos pongulibpit tos bonuwa dii id od komonnu su duwon man tandu taddot unnon allow tat id dumannam ta ahad sod kolendog ikot pongulibpit ini ka-ay to daom to Tico duwon en moho kolinggow. Molinggow ki ka-ay. No kullahu ruwon patow to duwon koponoluwan so iyon od osengon dongngan no pokopongulibpity kos samak peru ka-ay't dawun molinggow, pwisu od sayow ki od kaka ki id rehes ta kos koponoluwan (We are gathered this afternoon to perform a ritual because of the present peace and security condition around Brgy. Tico. We don't know what lies ahead, if it is good or bad. We come here to ask for our Holy Father's protection. That even if our place is surrounded by evil and chaos, no harm will befall unto us. This is the promise of our Holy Father to our forefathers. Brgy. Tico will remain peaceful despite the anarchy in neighboring spaces. It is the promise of our founder which we celebrate through dancing in the tune of the "ahung").
kandan kos ponongangan (Eighth, I also beg you Ponoyangan to hear our call. Ponoyangan, provider of honey, hear our call. From the time of our ancestors until today, you have provided us with honey). 5 Pokosiyow od unawon ku iddos od ngoranan no "Toosayavi" su otin bo toosoyavan no ahad od momonnuk kovuyyahan doy timpu tod kamot ponlongottod kos koosidu nod ponlongottod langun taddot impon tod puung nod pongkotampod. Oyya su waa toosoyavan nod ke-eruwan. Purisu od ngoranan pokosiyow iddos toosoyavan. Inim mapun dorung ka vo (Ninth, I also beg the Toosayavi, lord of the planting and harvesting tools, to come and hear our prayer. You make these tools functional and efficient. Without you, they will be useless) 6 Pokosopuu, od umawon kuk Ivovasuk ahad od momonnu kos kovuyyahan doy ahad sikami. Moriyu rok sokkad no tekko kod lampos doy ko wara sanggat uwoy puruk. Oyya su iyon od gavat konami iddos poggu. Oyya su waa ivavasuk nod isau konami. Purisu od umawon kuk "ivavasuk"(Tenth, I implore Ivovasuk, giver of energy and zeal, to witness this rite. You incite our passion and industry to do our work. With you, our work becomes easy. You wipe away our indolence and idleness to work). 7 Pokosoppuu sokkad od umawon lul "Tohovikaa". Otin bo tohovikaa no sikandin en dos od bikaa tat kinohiyan doy. Ahad bo mo-uraan datu nod ooseng diid kopominog sikandan ko ondan do kandan nod osengon. Iddo-en so kandin no osngon kos od komakoy, oyya su Tohovikaa iddos od lituk taddot od ikohiyon din, no od kosorollan du iddos minuvu. No otin od olliyon no ahad wara koru-an gulari tod ooseng sikandin nod korinog taddot dumon mongo datu. Iyon od kopurut do kandin no mongo osengon. Oyya su duwon tohovikaa nod bikaa tat osengon (Eleventh, I beg the Tohovikaa to hear and bless our speech. Be with us so that even if other datus are talking, they would not be heard because you are with us). 8 Pokosopuu orowa. Od ngoranan kuk "Too-usoy" iko't ko-untura't langit. Dorung ko vo dungkow ka vo konami. Ahad od kolindog imomannon nod kosamuk kasay't ampow't ingod nod dunggu, ko wara too-usoy wara od kohimu. Sikkow en dos od pohunlonna no ini von uras nod umow a kikow no too-usoy iko't ko-unturat langit, no kopi-I ko sikkow dos od usoy konami ka=ay't ampow't ingod ko duwon od dunggu no morat. No pomon duwon sikkow dos od pokosopuu otollu nid ta-aw to Monama iko't ko-unturan dut langit. Pokosoppu oppat od umawon ku dos langun (Twelfth, Too-usuy who is in heaven, come and witness this rite. Even if the world trembles and burns, we will stay safe because of you. We beg you to come and efface all our worries. We pray that you guide us and protect us from evil. From the very beginning, you were the 13 th spirit who was tasked to watch over us. Now, I implore all the spirits to hear our prayer and be a witness of this ritual). 9 Pokosoppuu limma od umawon ku iddos mongo indorudsu, mongo mohintounan. Dos tohomaling. Piru konna koy tat tohomaling nod dorivaog, od ka-an don man nod dorung don man. Ngoranan ku konami. Tohomaling no Uhis no dorung ka konami (Fifteenth, I appeal to all other good unseen spirits, birds and all other good elementals to witness this rite) 10 No pomon duwon id bovallan du Uhis no Tuwantuk no Monama dos minuvu. Id taaw ru ka-ay't ampow't ingod su id pod dappan du Ini kod be-en ko-ungkay nod ngoranan no monusiya. Id ta-aw ru id potapik dut kod salad dut lovuta ini manuk oyya su duwon dakkoon koru-anon diyo't unnon timpu uwoy allow. Otin mongo kovuyyahan doy diyo't unnon allow duwon od kosorollan doy'n konna moppiyon ko-ubpa iyon dad sikollawon kos manuk. So daan dan tod posivoy to toholesow o tovangkak pomon tat pakpak to manuk (Our Holy Father, we are the people whom you created to take good care of all your creations. Together with our creation, You also gave life to the chicken. Since then, every time our ancestors would feel uncertainty and danger, they would catch chicken and with its wings, they drove away all evils and banes). 11 Uhis no tuwantuk no Monama dungkow ko vo konami inin allow ka-ay koy to dosiyung to konamin ubpan, livuunganan doy. Daan doy tod umow kikow. Sikkow vo to ini no timpu od pomaas koy od pokiyab koy ka-ay't pakpak to manuk su ahad ondan dod dunngu konami ka-ay't daom to Tico labbi ron ko-ungkay to ko-ubpa roy (Our Holy Father, hear us call your name today. We are here in our assembly house, and we ask for you to guide our actions. At this hour, we will drive away all the evil spirits using the wings of this chicken). 12 Od buyuwon doy diyon to kikow. Od pomintod ka. Ahad vo koppu od gellehelle sikandan od dora-at to ko-ubpa roy od gellehelle nod sombutan koy ini vo Kankan nod pokiyab a to tolikusoy, pakpak to manuk nod undiyon dot lindig to langit dos mongo bolinnuk dos ngo tovangkak, mongo toholesow nod poko-undiyon dot dipaa't dagkoon we-eg nod poko-undiyon dot divaoy't dakkon buvungan. Oyya su sikkow no Uhis no Tuwantuk no Monama no ahad bo ondan ko dunggu konami ka-ay tumawon doy do tandu konami ka-ay-tomawon doy do tandu rut unnon timpu. No ahad od kolendog, pongublibpit ka-ay't ingod to Tico nid livuung duk mongo minuvu nokodtommu tommu, id sopinpin koy nikkow. Wara koy sombuti't tossing ko konna id sombutan to tohomayang kullahu id supinpin koy nikkow. Oyya su dos kikow'n kod living od sokaddon koy nikkow (We implore that You guide and protect us in the midst of all threats to peace and prosperity in our place. We hope that with the wings of this chicken, we will be able to get rid of all evil spirits and curses. That the wings of this chicken will drive away all of them to the farthest mountains. We pray to You because You are the most powerful). 13 No imi vo od buyuwon kun mooggot, no otin ook duwon don sambut konami mooggot loggot nod buyuwon doy diyo't kikow no poriyu ru vo. Sikuyu vo dos tod tanud. No nokita rod dos kikow'n kod ginawa konami. Patow rut duwon kod ginawa ru konami ka-ay't Tico podtuus no ahad moppiya kos timpu no tigkow ron od dunnas iddos od pohunlonno'n mokoppaa'n suhoopun unayan to dii ked od pokodkita kit aka-ay't morani. Oyya su nokita ron dos kod ginawa ru konami ka-ay't ampow't Tico. No ini von mapun, pomintoddan ku, mooggot loggot vo no sikami od buyuwon doy riyot kikow Uhis no Tuwantuk no Monama (We earnestly pray to You that You vanquish all evils in our place. And now, as a sign of Your mercy, we feel that our prayers will be granted. We do not mind the heavey downpour because we know that You are always there to protect us).
14 Pokosukkad, od posivoy ad bo ka-ay't pakpak to manuk. Ini von mapun od kokita red do kekow'n eru uwoy tavang. Uhis no tuwantuk no Monama konna od topukkon oyya su otin bo mi nod puungan ini en dod botosanon tat unnon mongo ko-opuwan doy, mongo kovuyyahan doy ko duwon od kosihinda ran, no konna moppiya uwoy morat nod dunngu manuk en dod sikollawon dan. Tolikusoy nid pokiyab dan to pakpak to manuk. Ini von mapun mooggot loggot nod pokiyab koy. Tovakow vo Uhis no Tuwantuk no Monama. Otin ondan kos ko-ubpa roy ka-ay dii roy id boggoy ahad boo ran kod dunggu konami, no id panoy roy kos konami'n umuu par aka-ay't ingod nid tandu ru konami, dos od ngoranana no buwis tandu (First, as we swing the wings of this chicken, we will know the answers to our prayers. Our Holy Father, I pray that I will not be cursed for performing this rite because this is our culture and our tradition since time immemorial. Our Holy Father, please hear our prayers. Do not let something bad to happen to us and to this land that You promised to us). 15 Poko-oruwa, id po-undini ku tid Baavog, kopi-i ku od undiyon to dakkoo'n we-eg, diyot mongo moonug. Dos od Yangyang kikow diyon du en porunggu idde-en so mongo morat. Su otin bo sikami ka-ay no poriyu koy nikkow't bolinunnuk, mongo toholesow. Diyon dut ingod to sumpalit. Oraroy'd sosumpalit kikow ( Second, I will swing the chicken to the North so that all the banes will be blown away to those who criticize us. May the wings of the chicken drive all these banes to the farthest oceans and seas. Lead us not to temptations and dangers). 16 Poko-otollu, id po-isau ko riyo't id Saop su kopi-i ku iddos mongo morat od poriyu konami. Ahad bo od gellehelle nod dooman koy ka-ay, sikkow von Too-usoy sikkow'n Tohovikaa no bikaa't konamin kinohiyan. Otin ondan kod ko-oseng tat dumon mongo datu, kahi, awa koy ka-ay su od od ko-evoo kow, od ko-unung kow podtuus sikandan dod duma. Pongkovaakkan tat enosengan doy. Oyya su idda vod su Too-usoy dos od unna rayon to inosengan no idda dos so Tohovikaa dos od bikaa nod od lituk taddot inosengan doy. Purisu od kovaakkan sikandan (Third, I will swing the chicken to the West so that all those evil men who want to enter our place will be driven away to that direction. Their evil desires will never be successful. Because of You, our Father, our action and speech will be properly guided. We will not listen to leaders who will tell us to leave our place because You are there our God to protect us. The evil men fear You, and peace will always reign). 17 Poko-oppat po-undini kut Linob to poman tow. Pokolimma, kupkupon kud id polivod su daan ku tod kupkup. No idda vo sod buyuwon doy inin mapun ka-ay't tolikusoy to manuk idda vos koponoluwan doy no muopa od ubpa koy no molinggow. Ini ve-en dos od puungan doy, ahad ondan kod puungan nod ubpa ken molinggow, kopi-I roy nod. Od ko-ingan roy bonnaan kosunayan. (Fourth, I will swing the chicken to the South. Fifth, I will enfold all the blessings using the wings of this chicken. Through this, we ask for the success of this rite by granting us our prayer for lasting peace. We hope that we will live peacefully. We need lasting peace). 18 Id polingkus kudpomon tid Tollak, diyo't id Linob, undiyon tid Baavag su kopi-i ku nod pomittupittu iddos ginawa ron tongtong konami ka-ay't daan. Muopa od poriyu ran. Id lampos ku ka-ay't tukod to bulillan, tukoy lossang to langit sud kopi-I ku id lampos kut pokowau nod kovantug don kos Tico o Brgy. Manobo (I will take this chicken around from the East to South to North so that all those evil who plan to destroy our place will become weak. Finally, I will hit this chicken to the post as a symbol of our success and honor to our beloved Tico or Brgy. Manobo).