Nhaka - The Values We Dropped Without Thinking

The Shona people of Zimbabwe had vast traditional wealth that served it very well for centuries before colonisation.  Of course there were some practices that needed to be gotten rid of but there were others that served everyone and helped families and communities live in harmony.  Some of these practices today are considered barbaric and have mostly been gotten rid of or mostly discouraged without even having debates about them.  Most of the debates have been led by women in the cities who have no understanding or grasp of what life is like for the woman in the rural area whom they are advocating change for.  Women in rural areas are not consulted and their opinion is not considered important because well,  they rural women and unenlightened so what would they know.  Except that knowledge, intelligence and a true understanding does not only come from a book.

One of the most controversial issues of our time is nhaka, a practice whereby when a husband dies after a year a memorial is held and the wife gets to choose one man within the late husband's family to become her husband.  Not all relatives would be eligible to be selected.  The few that do have a year to woo the lady in question so on the day she can pick them among the many hopefuls.  This was mostly done for young widows of child bearing age.  This was because the Shona traditions held the view that once a woman reached menopause her interest in sex died but that's a subject for another day.


Most families used to mostly encourage the older bachelors in the family or widowers too who would still be fit enough to manage life with a young wife or if she was still relatively young a young unmarried man within the family would be encouraged if he was interested to woo the lady.  The culture of nhaka was done to protect the interests of the wife and those of the family.  You see when a son married his father would give him a piece of his land to build a home and farm for his family.  He would be living within the vicinity of the rest of the family.   In Shona culture there is no such thing as extended family.   All land would belong to the family and so would the property in this case the livestock unless the wife had some but in most cases she might have next to none if she was still young.

In the event of  the husband dying the reason she was encouraged to choose a man especially an unattached one was because the elders recognised that the needs of the remaining spouse did not cease with bereavement.  These would be her sexual as well as other physical needs and also all  the various chores like farming, re-roofing the houses, fixing or building cattle kraals or even cutting down logs were jobs that man did, usually the man of the house, including help with raising the children.  If the wife didn't pick someone then all those jobs would have no one to do them and would be problematic for her to find someone to commit to take care of various chores without being asked or prompted unless she had grown children. 

Once the woman selected a man and he accepted then it made life easier for everyone.  The man also always had the choice to say no to being selected.  The lady doing the selecting would choose from a line of man sitting waiting to be picked by giving a bowl of water to one of them.  If he wasn't interested he would empty the bowl as a sign to say no thank you or refuse to wash his hands and the woman would have to continue down the line and make another choice if she wanted.  If the man washed his hands in the bowl that would be  accepting the proposal.  Most of the time in the year leading up to the memorial for the deceased, it would mostly be clear who the choice was going to be.  Others would just sit on the selection line because its customary but they they would already know who would be selected. 

Once this is done whoever washes his hands is considered her husband and responsible for her and the children.  He can marry someone else if he wasn't already but most of the time he would not.  If he was already married he would not be expected to spend too much time at this new wife's home to avoid conflict with his wife but expected to do the various jobs that needed doing without favour.  This way if he was seen leaving or entering her house at weird hours of the morning or seen arriving late at night eyebrows wouldn't be raised and the family would not be thrown into disharmony.  In Shona culture whether divorced or widowed one can not bring another partner into the home that used to be co-owned with another partner unless it is through nhaka.  A stranger is not allowed to sleep on an ex's or late partner's bed or even enter their bedroom or use utensils or tools.  Neither can they take over land that 'belongs' to another's family.  If the wife decides to remarry but from outside the family she has to vacate the home and go to the current husband's family for land.  It is thought to anger the ancestors to allow another man or woman to enter and live into the home and worse to cook or eat in a kitchen or enter or sleep in bedroom that used to be co-owned with a former partner. 

As a result even if it was a man remarrying his family would have to allocate a new piece of land for him and his new wife.  While this might sound harsh it also safe guards the inheritance of the remaining children.  Besides he would not be buying the land.  The children will always have a home especially if they don't get along with their step parent.  They will always be able to live nearer their family who can help and support them if the other parent goes.  If the mother remarries and takes the kids she has to leave the livestock so her children especially sons can use when they come back because their step father would mostly not have the capacity culturally to give step-children land because it would be tied to his family as well.  That would not be acceptable.  Mostly though wives would be asked or encouraged to leave the children so they grow up among their family and learn the norms of that family because in the end they would have to come back and this helped avoid future conflicts.  Therefore nhaka was also meant to keep the family together after death.

While this might sound very unfair for the wife we have to accept that choice was always there.  In towns all these taboos can be ignored and neighbours don't have the power to challenge you if you bring your boyfriend or girlfriend home or even if you re-marry and your spouse moves in.  In the countryside women are still facing these challenges.  It becomes hard to want to live a normal happy life and not want to move while also making sure your own needs are met.  Women in rural areas are now caught in the laws of today and the traditions that are still in existence today.  How then do they get to live their full lives and not appear to be uncivilised?  In rural areas they still can't just bring any man home with them or marry anyone outside of the family and not move.  They now don't have a choice.  While this decision to encourage women to refuse nhaka was seen as a liberating move it didn't address the whole issue.  It just took choice away and left these women more vulnerable and exposed to outside forces.  It means now they have to pay someone to do the various chores that husbands do at their homes and these are the same people who can't afford to pay.  They now can't have their sexual needs met in a safe environment and whatever secret sexual relationship they end up having with anyone can result in them being shamed in community if the man decides to tell.  They risk losing their dignity and of course being alienated by the rest of the community for sneaking around and worse still if the other party is married they even risk being banished from their home.  I would be first to accept that nhaka was becoming an abused concept by a lot of men but mostly because they too found themselves being caught between tradition and modern life.  A complete ban did not help the women left behind.  Without rights to livestock their late husband's family can take those away from her and unless she has the strength to fight its her kids that lose the most. 

Western solutions were applied to a very traditional setting and they didn't even take into account of the fact that in Zimbabwe no one can own rural land individually because it is not for sale.  This means these women can't go to court and demand rights to their land because no one can.  In rural areas no single person is given land not even man.  A man has to be married to be able to approach the chief for land.  There is a Shona saying "Musha mukadzi".  Loosely translating it means a woman is a home.   But even then not on her own.  We need to revisit this issue and be honest about what's motivating us to shun nhaka.  If it's ignorance or if its because we feel it's not for us we need to discuss it further without rushing to conclusions.  If a woman decided no matter how old that she doesn't want nhaka that too would be respected.  Most would just walk down the line and empty the bowl of water or give it to her mother-in-law, sister-in-law or son and that decision would be respected.  It's respected because it would have taken a year to arrive at the conclusion and even her family would have taken the time to help her with the decision.    She would know what would be at stake and not make a decision out of fear of being looked down on as being out of touch with the times.

Those of us, by virtue of living in town, who have taken it upon ourselves to decide for others, need to take a step back and let those in the situation reach their own conclusions.  We need to learn to respect that choice knowing that we are never going to be found supporting or assisting these women with their daily needs.  We should respect their choices accepting that they have the capacity both mentally and emotionally to make their own decisions just as we are, even without the privilege of living in towns or further education.