Santería en Cuba, Creative Commons License CC-SA-BY-3.0 by Jorge Royan.
http://kither.org/?attachment_id=340
(To listen to a playlist of songs about ashé while reading this paper, click here. Credit: dianaemsalvador11)
Santería is a religion animated by monetary transactions, exchange, and interconnectedness. Rituals lie at the heart of Santería, and every Santería ritual is a form of transaction, whether an exchange of goods, ashé*, or (most commonly) a combination of the two. One of the most common reasons practitioners seek ritual action or spiritual guidance from the babalawo is lack of money or the desire for more. Especially in Cuba, where access to money is especially scarce and consequently valuable, money is imbued with a degree of supernatural authority (Hearn). Not only this, but money in Santería functions as a currency or medium for ashé, to flow. Ashé is the cosmological, essential, divine energy that runs through all physical entities that connects us all to everything else. Every action in the physical transacts ashé, and practitioners use rituals as manipulated transactions in order to fulfill their desires. Due to the immense, cosmological meanings that ashé embeds into ritual transactions, monetary exchanges in Santería ritual cannot be abstracted. On the contrary, money as the currency for ashé resists the traditional logic of capitalist accumulation.
Ashé “defined”
Ashé is the central most crucial concept in Santería, and it encompasses, propels, and affects every aspect of the religion. Ashé is the life force of God; divine force incarnate. Ashé is the “creative spiritual energy embodied throughout the universe in all things” (cgflores73). Ashé is the force that connects everyone to everything; that transforms the universe into one coherent reality moving closer together. However, ashé can never be fully understood, let alone defined, since its nature exceeds the limits of human understanding. This elusiveness renders ashé fluid and universally applicable. Everyone imagines ashé differently, and ashé changes with every action and transaction (Atwood Mason 87). While no one person can ever fully understand ashé, by surveying a variety of definitions from a multitude of sources, I hope to extract some of the patterns that emerge in definitions of ashé as well as the source of some of the contradictions that emerge when people try to describe it.
One of the primary causes for the contradictory and multifarious understandings of ashé is the multiplicity of its essence. Ashé is occasionally described as the “base of all reality”; a stable force that is omnipresent (Jordi Rivero). Other times, ashé is an action that moves, creates, generates, and flows through everything. Sometimes, ashé is a channel through which we flow and we create. These three expressions of ashé are not contradictory or mutually exclusive, but are rather components of ashé’s all encompassing absoluteness.
This ven diagram visually demonstrates the meaning of “Ashé is, ashé does, and ashé allows for”
Since ashé is the divine everything, all at once ashé is, ashé does, and ashé allows for. For the remainder of this analysis of ashé, I will oscillate freely between these three notions of ashé in an effort to represent other explanations. However, it is critical to remember that every mention of ashé is always, simultaneously functioning at these – and likely more – levels.
Within the paradoxical essence of ashé, there are innumerable unique and contradicting interpretations. The word cloud below demonstrates some of the frequent and disparate themes and ideas that emerge when everyone from santeros to scholars to practitioners to casual observers attempt to define ashé.
This word cloud is a visual demonstration of the frequency with which certain concepts emerge in definitions of ashé. I compiled the definitions of ashé, controlled for spelling, language, and synonyms, and then entered the data into wordle.net, a word cloud generator. This is the final product.
Evident in this word cloud is that a recurring theme in understandings of ashé is the notion of connection. In Santería, the universe is a web of balanced interconnectedness in which everyone and everything affects and depends on everything else (Canizares). Ashé is this connection between all entities, the active force making the connections between entities, and the channel through which these connections are made. Every action between two entities is an exchange of ashé because when two entities interact, they generate connections, or ashé, between themselves.
Ashé does not connect the abstract universe, but specifically, the physical, material realm. Most descriptions of ashé make sure to connect the concept back to the body, embodiment, the physical world, and/or materiality. Some explain all physical entities as “caminos” (Sp. ways) of ashé, others argue that ashé must be realized materially, and many scholars connect ashé to physical actions in Santería, such as dance and spirit possession (Hagerdorn). A helpful metaphor for ashé as a physical force is Joseph Murphy’s definition of ashé as the “blood of cosmic life” (Murphy 8). Not only does this metaphor embrace ashé’s multiplicity through the multifariousness of blood (blood is, blood creates, and blood is the space for), this metaphor signifies ashé’s connection to the living and tangible, as well as its need for a physical channel – vein – through which to course.
All physical actions generate ashé, but rituals are the intentional manipulations of ashé that practitioners use to fortify their connections with the universe, and consequently fulfill their desires (Atwood Mason, 87). In ritual, ashé is usually exchanged and generated between practitioners, a babalawo, and either the ancestors or the orisha. Practitioners manipulate the physical realm through material offerings and spiritual embodiment – like prayer or possession – in order to “open up channels” for ashé (Lefever). The exchange of ashé between the orisha and the practitioner is one of reciprocation. On the one hand, orisha are considered by some to be the avatars or personifications of ashé, and consequently its most powerful generators (Thomson). On the other hand, however, orisha actually depend on ashé for their sustenance (Murphy 13). Therefore, in ritual transactions, orisha are simultaneously generating and receiving ashé in addition to accepting the physical offerings.
This ee shirt for sale on ChíChí&Flaco demonstrates the cultural relevance of the phrase “ashé pa’ ti”
http://chichiandflaco.spreadshirt.com/ache-pa-ti-all-things-positive-A5078488
Generating and sustaining strong ashé is one of the primary objectives of Santería practitioners. For many practitioners, scholars, and even non-practitioners, ashé has associations with destiny, auspiciousness, prosperity, and happiness (EcuRed). In fact, in popular Cuban slang, “ashé pa’ ti” (Sp: ashé for you) is a common benediction or valediction through which one wishes someone else the best (Atwood Mason 87). Whether ashé is the channel through which one can manipulate one’s destiny, it is destiny, or it is the power to shape and alter one’s destiny; practitioners in Santería believe the way to increase one’s happiness, auspiciousness, and prosperity is through the creation, maintenance and improvement of their ashé.
I have already discussed how performing ritual transactions is the most direct way to fortify bonds with the community, the physical world, the orisha, and one’s ancestors; however some practitioners and scholars argue that these rituals are not enough. For them, ashé is not only a connecting force, but actually a quality that is both natural and cultivated. Every entity has inherent ashé, some just more than others. (A sentient being, for example, will have more ashé than a plant.) With the ability to think and act intentionally, humans have the ability to further cultivate their ashé not only through rituals but daily actions. Some santeros, such as the wife of the babalawo that Atwood Mason interviews, believe that ashé has a moral component (Rivero). This woman tells Atwood Mason that to have ashé, one must be conscientious, obedient, and human (Atwood Mason, 86). For santeros like Raul Canizares, however, the key to having ashé is not through morality, but rather generating and sustaining balanced, harmonious connections in the universe (Canizares, 5). For scholars such as Joseph Murphy, one cultivates ashé through learning and understanding the mysteries of the orisha (Murphy, ). None of these conceptualizations are wrong, but rather reflect the diversity and multiplicity of ashé.
Money, Ashé, and Ritual Transactions
Ashé is not the only vital life force that passes through and between people in order so that we may actualize our desires. Money, like ashé functions simultaneously as a foundation of existence, the medium through which this existence occurs, and the thing exchanged to sustain this existence. The fullness of the relationship between ashé and money is contained in the ways in which ashé and money are similar, different, oppositional, and complimentary. By analyzing this relationship and, specifically, how the two work as complimentary allies, I will demonstrate how ashé transfigures money from a force of abstraction and commoditization into a fluid medium for re-integrating, re-personalizing, and fortifying the interconnectedness in the universe.
Before analyzing the relationship between ashé and money, it is important to understand accepted theories of monetary transactions. Georg Simmel, an influential Marxist scholar, argues that money is the ultimate tool due to its infinite exchangeability and usability (Parry and Bloch, 4). Any object or service in the world can be transformed into money, and money into any object or service (ibid.). This infinite potency and power stems, Simmel argues, from money’s ability to reduce of everything to a numeric value (ibid.). Simmel writes, “For money expresses all qualitative differences of things in terms of ‘how much?’ Money, with all its colorlessness and indifference, becomes the common denominator of all values; irreparably it hollows out the core of things, their individuality, their specific value, and their incomparability” (Simmel, 411). Both Karl Marx and Simmel point out that this reductionary quality of money leads to the de-personalization and individualization of capitalism (Parry and Bloch, 4). When transactions are no longer socially embedded or dependent, they become autonomous and invisible. “The impersonality and anonymity of money, it is argued, lends itself to the impersonal and inconsequential relationships characteristic of the market-place and even to a complete anonymity in exchange” (ibid., 6). Therefore, according to traditional Marxist theory, money is an abstracting force that, when introduced, destroys communities and interpersonal bonds in place of an abstract, commoditized marketplace.
The differences between ashé and the definition of money per Simmel, Marx, and other Marxist scholars are staggering. Though both ashé and money can claim the statuses of universal power that create common ground, they generate this authority through very different, if not opposing, means. Money reduces and distills the complexity of the world to numbers that are infinitely swappable. Ashé, on the other hand, is the cosmic connection and interdependence between all things, and is present in every action, transaction, and interaction with the world. Money disintegrates, reduces, abstracts, individualizes, and depersonalizes. Ashé, through its cosmological omnipotence and embeddedness, re-integrates, materializes, augments, socializes, and personalizes. Where monetary transactions occur anonymously between independent actors, ashé transactions are deeply embedded interactions of spiritual, social, and physical significances. Money’s advantage lies in its ability to reduce the world to a single numeric scale. Ashé’s advantage is the way it imbues every action with irreducible, unfathomable meaning.
While within this understanding of money, this dichotomy is certainly true, the provided understanding of money relies on an inflation of money and capitalism. Early sociological scholars such as Mary Douglas and Emile Durkheim have argued that the introduction of money into “pre-capitalist” societies has corrosive effects on the social and communal bonds. Preeminent Marxist scholar, Karl Polanyi, argues that in its inherent essence, money is “disembedding”, since it “aids in an ineluctable differentiation of economic activities from moral, religious, aesthetic, or political ones” (Habraad). However, as Habraad argues in his analysis of Ifá in Cuba, monetary transactions that occur outside expressly capitalist systems do not always follow the same logic provided by these scholars. Therefore, instead of projecting capitalist notions of money onto monetary exchanges in Santería, it is imperative to look at the actual use of money by this community.
While not a capitalist force, money is in fact central at all levels of Santería. From money’s power to resolver – to settle, make things happen, resolve – to the derechos exchanged at the beginning of every ritual, to the desire for prosperity, to the orisha’s need for literal cash; money pervades and, as Habraad argues, “animates” the practice of Santería (Hagerdorn; Habraad, 248). In addition to the purchase of the requisite ritual goods, almost every ritual in Santería begins with the payment of a derecho. When the practitioner gives the derecho, she or he usually folds it in a specific way and often blesses her or himself with it before giving the derecho to the babalawo. This monetary exchange functions at multiple levels of significances. The exchange is practical, since this is the way in which a babalawo makes money. The derecho also reinforces community bonds and trusts by fortifying relationships between the babalawo and the practitioner.
While money’s practical and social uses are undoubtedly important, money is unique in Santería ritual transactions specifically due to ashé. The transfer of ashé is the objective of these rituals, and the transaction must occur through the physical realm. Money is this physical object that awakens and activates ashé, and serves as the currency for its divine flow. At the beginning of rituals that involve money, the practitioners and babalawo engage in specific embodiment to physically transform the cash into a more expansive form of currency through which ashé can move. One could even go so far as to metaphorize this act as a type of spiritual possession. In the ritual transaction, ashé mounts the cash as a “horse” in order to imbue it with new spiritual purpose. Once “mounted”, the cash is no longer “money”, it is a divine medium that facilitates the generation of ashé between humanity, the divine, and all things. Money here not only does not abstract or de-personalize, rather it does just the opposite.
Note the beginning of the video below (from 0:40 – 1:30), when each participant in the ritual begins by bowing down in front of the bowl of money, blessing the altar with the wand from the bowl, enacting a specific bodily routine, and then finally embracing the babalawo. This ritual demonstrates the embedded use of money in Santería as not only a practical currency, but a social and spiritual one as well.
Curtesy of Kabiosile, 2009
The multiple significances of money, and the various forces it is transacting prevent money from being reduced to a mere quantity. According to theorists like Simmel and Polanyi, money’ quantitativeness is the source of its abstracting, individualizing power. Money’s quantitativeness still renders if powerful in Santería, since it has the ability to create “a uniquely fluent format for exchange” (Habraad 248). However, this power dissolves under the embedded, interconnected, cosmological awesomeness of ashé. In Santería, money’s quantitativeness becomes “one among other qualities of money (however special), thus eclipsing its otherwise transcendental position” (Habraad, 245). Ashé transforms money into a new form of currency that is so embedded and significant, it actually resists the traditional forces of capitalism and monetary exchanges.
However, this divine embeddedness that prevents abstraction “is not self-evident; it needs to be achieved through the structures of oracular regulation” (248-249). A popular Ifá origin myth of money, as translated and summarized by Habraad, demonstrates the powerful, though tenuous, relationship between money and spirituality:
Oragun was once in the marketplace (la plaza), when he noticed Obara Meyi going about his business. Obara had arrived at the market with two empty sacks – nothing else. Soon he approached a trader at his stall and proposed that he exchange some of his goods for one of the empty sacks. ‘Why should I do that?’, asked the trader incredulously. Obara explained that with the empty bag he could transport his goods better. The trader agreed to swap. Armed with the goods, Obara went up to another trader and managed to agree another advantageous deal, and then another, and so on. In this way Obara s wealth grew fast. Watching all this, Oragun could not help admiring Obara’s skills. But it occurred to him that too much time was wasted in the market with all these cumbersome swaps. So he decided to go to Olofin and propose to him to let people buy and sell things for money, rather than having to swap them all the time. Olofin was skeptical, ‘What do people need money for? Things work fine as it is’. Oragun said, ‘Let’s do this: give them money to use, and if there really is no sense in it you retire it immediately and banish me forever. But if I am right, you will see that people will begin to believe more in money than they believe in you’. Not one to swallow his pride, Olofin accepted the challenge, and gave the people cowries to exchange with. As Oragun had said, people’s obsession with making money became so great that they began to disrespect Olofin himself. It is for this reason that Ifá says that money is cursed (copied from Habraad, 245)
Within the context of Santería rituals and within the paradigm of ashé, money cannot be abstracted and therefore will not lead to commodification or depersonalization. However, there is clearly an anxiety in the religion surrounding the corrupting and corrosive tendencies of money that have transformed the rest of the world. This anxiety has become increasingly palpable in the past twenty years with the rise of both the Cuban religious tourism industry – santurismo, as Katherine Hagerdorn calls it – and the globalized online market for Santería commodities. Adrian H. Hearn, in “Transformation: Transcendence or Transculturation?”, for example, describes an example of a new form of exchange now popular in Cuba. While in Havana, he saw a tourist ask a clerk to choose a collares for her. The clerk chose one of the collares and said nothing to the woman except the price of the item (Hearn). Online, I can purchase cowrie shells for divination on folkcuba.com with no requisite relationship to the seller, the object, or even Santería. Do the same embedded, divine forces function in these seemingly autonomous, independent, de-personalized exchanges? Can a force as physical as ashé be exchanged in a virtual world? Can a practitioner establish ashé with an unknown foreigner who thinks collares are simply necklaces with a price tag? The question scholars must ask now is how these ostensibly capitalist exchanges function within the cosmology of ashé. While it may be the case that globalized capitalism is a new religion is crusading against and absorbing religions like Santería, the relationship between Santería and capitalism may be more dialectic than we expect. After all, one of the only patterns I could discern across every definition of ashé is that it is unparalleled, incomprehensible power. If so, it may just be powerful enough to hold its own against the global capitalist system.
* There are several accepted spellings of the word “ashé“. For consistency’s sake, I have chosen to use ashé for the entirety of this paper.
Ashé and Money in Santería 