Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 22, Number 9, 1 September 2005 — Respect decision of kūpuna to keep possessions [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Respect decision of kūpuna to keep possessions

By Edward Halealoha Ayau and Kahu Charles Kauluwehi Maxwell Sr. Edward Halealoha Ayau and Charles Kauluwehi Ma\well Sr. are both members of

Hui Mālama I Nā Kūpuna O Hawai ' i Nei. Ayau has ser\>ed as director ofthe state Burial Sites Program. Ma.\w>ell is a longtime Hawaiian activist and culture specialist. Does our legacy as Hawaiians living today include the ability to justifiably take moepū (burial pos-

sessions) placed with the kūpuna who have passed on? Does our own cultural edification validate removing burial possessions from those whom the items were placed with? Are there ever instances in whieh the needs of the living may be inserted ahead of the burial choices of the kūpuna? Let's hope not. Shouldn't we respect the decisions of the ancestors to take possessions with them in death? Isn't it our kuleana to restore dignity by retuming the iwi and moepū when a burial is disturbed? To put it another way, would it ever be acceptable to go into tūtū's bedroom and remove her most treasured possessions without her permission? Ask yourself. Some argue that the cultural items removed from the Kawaihae burial caves are not moepū at all. However, the evidence that exists clearly places the four wood images in front of the iwi kūpuna, together in the same chamber. The evidence also indicates that iwi are found in other locations in the cave. Samuel Kamakau, a 19th century Hawaiian historian, describes the practice when he states that "objects of supematural force (mana kupua) were placed in [burial caves], with watchmen of kupua powers to take care of them." Moreover, it is the presence of these deities in the burial caves that insures "[the kūpuna] are in the care of the gods (ua molia i ke akua)." Is it conceivable that the Kawaihae ancestors wanted to be separated from the deities housed in the wood images so as to no longer be in their care? Some speculate that the kūpuna from Kawaihae intended the 1906 removal and that the cultural items "revealed" themselves. Further, they speculate that the kūpuna are in control of all that happens to them and therefore the 1906 removal, whieh included their iwi, was the ancestors' own doing. Did the kūpuna from Mōkapu, Honokahua, Pu'u Ali'i, Honuakaha, Mo'omomi and numerous other places throughout the pae 'āina cause their iwi and moepū to be disturbed? Is it conceivable that our ancestors would cause their own hann? Moreover, does this mean that those responsible for the numerous disturbances have no responsibility because they were unknowingly carrying out the will of the kūpuna? Instead, isn't it more conceivable that intentional thefts, archaeological excavations, natural erosion and inadvertent discoveries disturbed our ancestors and that it is our kuleana to mālama? Ask yourself. What happened at Kawaihae is clear. A burial cave for ali'i was broken into and robbed, and the iwi and moepū were retumed to where they were originally buried. Why some are going to extraordinary lengths to justify the original removal and advocate a second taking is unclear. What is clear is that the situation is straightforward. Inquiry into a burial cave to the point of being offensive is maha'oi. Taking moepū without permission is theft. Stealing from the kūpuna is hewa, and retuming stolen moepū to their original plaee of burial is kuleana. If the Kawaihae kūpuna intended all that has happened, they must have intended the reburial as well and the retum of the rest of their possessions. In these trying times, shouldn't we as Hawaiians be more concemed about caring for and protecting ancestral burial sites rather than attempting to re-disturb them? Ask yourself. VI

Ayau

Maxwell