Belief that Illness is due to Evil Ottofu—Ministrations of the Priestess—A Seventeenth-century Dutch Record of the Treatment of the Dying by the Formosan Aborigines—The “Dead Houses” of the Taiyal—Burial of the Dead by the Ami, Bunun, and Paiwan Tribes beneath the Hearth-stone of the Home—“Green” and “Dry” Funerals.
As on occasions of rejoicing—marriage, harvest-festivals, celebration of successful war or hunting expeditions—so in times of sorrow—illness or death—are the ministrations of the priestesses in demand. Illness—except that which is the direct result of wounds received in foray or battle—is regarded as being due to the machinations of the malevolently inclined, living or dead. That is, it may be a living enemy whose evil and powerful Ottofu causes pain and illness; or it may be the Ottofu of the ghost of some dead enemy. Serious illness is more usually attributed to the latter, since the Ottofu of a ghost is considered to have more power than that of any living person.
Naturally the element of terror enters into such a conception; also that of helplessness, since against an enemy already dead there can be no[164] reprisal. The advantage is all on the side of the dead man—an auto-suggestion which tends, of course, to aggravate the illness of the living.
In any case of illness a priestess is summoned. The usual mode of procedure on the part of this lady is first to wave a banana-leaf over the patient, chanting as she does so. This is evidently to brush away—or frighten away—any evilly inclined Ottofu that may be hovering about. Then, squatting by the side of the sufferer, she begins to suck at that spot on his—or her—body where the patient complains of greatest pain, and to breathe upon it; now and then she stops sucking, and rocks herself to and fro, as she balances on her heels, chanting in time to the rocking motion. If it be suspected that the Ottofu of a living enemy has caused the illness, the priestess will throw into the air her strips of black and white (i.e. natural-coloured) bamboo, and upon the pattern formed by these, as they fall, will depend her decision as to who is responsible for the illness of the patient. The guilty person will thereupon be hunted down by relatives of the ill man or woman,[84] and a blood-feud will result, for illness or suffering caused by the living can be cured only by the death of the one responsible.
Should the priestess decide, however, that it is[165] the Ottofu of a ghost which has caused the trouble, then only “prayer and fasting” can avail—or can be tried, the prayer taking the form of chanting, which often becomes wild and hysterical, the priestess sometimes rising to her feet and dancing as she chants. Apparently the point of the chanting is to invoke the ghosts of the ill man’s ancestors, and to beseech these to overcome the ghost of his enemy. If, by chance, the patient survives the sucking and chanting, and recovers, his recovery is of course attributed to the intercession of the priestess.
Among many of the sub-tribes—or tribal groups—of the Taiyal, especially those living in the eastern part of the Taiyal territory, the officiating priestess, in cases of serious illness, attempts to learn the decision of the ghost-ancestors, as to whether they will restore the patient to health, or whether they consider it time for him to join themselves. This she does by grasping tightly between her knees a bamboo tube which projects in front; on this tube she balances a stone with a hole pierced through it—an object which is considered sacred. Above this sacred object she waves her hands. If the stone remains balanced on the bamboo, it is thought the patient will recover. If it drops to the ground, it is believed that the ancestors have determined to call the ill man to themselves.
In any case, if death is seen to be inevitable, relatives and friends of the dying man gather[166] about his bedside and “wail his spirit across the bridge.”[85]
The Dutch writers of the seventeenth century state that among certain of the aborigines of Formosa (which tribe is not specified) it was the custom to take the very ill man out of his hut, bind a rope of vegetable fibre or twisted vines about his body, and by means of this rope suspend him to the bent-down spring-branch of a tree, then release the branch, which release would have the effect of throwing the dying man violently to the ground, thus “breaking his neck and all his limbs.” The aborigines told the Dutch that they did this in order to shorten the suffering of the dying. But the Dutch missionary Fathers, who claimed to have witnessed this peculiar act of barbarity, seemed to think the real motive which actuated those responsible was to save themselves the trouble of tending the ill and dying.
To whatever extent this custom may have prevailed in the days of the Dutch occupation of the island, it is, I think, no longer observed, either among the Taiyal nation of the North or among any of the various tribes of the South. Whether or not the giving up of this practice among those tribes where it formerly existed was due to the influence of the Dutch missionaries, I do not know. If so, it seems never to have been resumed. Among the tribes of both the North and the South, at the present time, the ill and dying are[167] tended by priestesses and wailed over by members of the family—and, if a person of prominence, by other members of the village or community as well—until the breath has left the body.
After death there is a difference among the tribes as to the disposition of the body. With the Taiyal—also the Saisett, the smaller tribe of the North which seems to have borrowed Taiyal customs—the dead man or woman is simply left in the house which was his, or her, abode during life. In the case of a man, the weapons which he used during life, also pipe and tobacco, are left with the body; in the case of a woman, agricultural implements—hoe or digging-stick—and tobacco are left. The loom which she used, for some reason, is not left. This distinction—between agricultural implements and loom—apparently is made because the former is regarded as belonging exclusively to the individual woman, while the latter is used communally by a number of women of the village. At least such is the explanation given; but one cannot help wondering to what extent considerations of a practical nature enter into the distinction made, since a digging-stick or hoe............