Umbali si nafasi ya kimwili tu; ni pia muundo wa kimaadili na kisaikolojia. Kwa namna hii, umbali pia hufafanuliwa na mtazamo wa watendaji wa uhalifu kuhusu wahanga. Mauaji ya ana kwa ana yanawezeshwa pale wahanga wanapokuwa wamepitia ibada mbaya ya kupita kutoka hatua moja hadi nyingine, ambamo tayari wameshakufa "kifo cha kijamii" machoni pa watendaji.

Distance is not simply a physical space; it is a moral and psychological construct as well. In this way, range also is defined by the perpetrators’ perception of the victims. Face-to-face killing is enabled when the victims have been through a lethal rite of passage in which they have already died a “social death” in the eyes of the perpetrators.

Kanali Col. Dave Grossman katika kazi yake maarufu, ‘On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society’, anaeleza yale yanayofanya iwe rahisi (au rahisi zaidi) kwa mtu kuua. Anaiona umbali kama kipimo muhimu, akiuchukulia kama wigo unaofafanua – kuanzia umbali wa juu kabisa hadi mapambano ya mkono kwa mkono. Umbali kutoka kwa mhanga huzuia mtu kumtambua mhanga huyo kama mtu binafsi. Kurusha silaha au kudondosha bomu kutoka mbali huwageuza wahanga kuwa ‘walengwa wasiojulikana’, wingu la kutokuwa na chochote linaloweza ‘kufutwa’ kwa urahisi. Rubani wa ndege hutegemea msaada wa kimitambo; picha iliyopangwa inayoonyesha wahanga wenye maumbo ya vivuli walioonekana kwenye skrini. Umbali wa kimwili hurahisisha mauaji, na hivyo uwajibikaji na hatia hupunguzwa. Kinachoundwa na umbali ni kutengana kihisia na lengo, hivyo huzuia hisia za huruma. Grossman aligundua kwamba kwa umbali wa kimwili katika mauaji, hakuna “…tukio hata moja la watu ambao wamekataa kumwua adui chini ya hali hizi” wala “tukio hata moja la kiwewe cha kisaikolojia kinachohusishwa na aina hii ya mauaji.”75

Col. Dave Grossman in his popular work, ‘On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society’ details what makes it easy (or easier) for a person to kill. He considers the distance spectrum as a vital indicator, seeing it as a defining range - from maximum range to hand-to-hand combat. Distance from a victim disallows individual identification with that victim. Firing a weapon or dropping a bomb from a range converts the victims into ‘unknown’ targets, a mesh of nothingness easily ‘obliterated’. The aircraft pilot relies on mechanical assistance; a projected image showing silhouetted victims spotted on a screen. The physical distance facilitates the killing and therefore responsibility and guilt are stemmed. What distance creates is an emotional disassociating with the target, and thus disallowing feelings of empathy. Grossman found that with physical distance in killing, there is no “…one single instance of individuals who have refused to kill the enemy under these circumstances” and nor “a single instance of psychiatric trauma associated with this type of killing.”75

Kadiri umbali kati ya mhalifu na mwathiriwa unavyopungua, ndivyo kuua kunavyokuwa kugumu zaidi. Kile ambacho mhalifu angekabiliwa nacho ni kanuni za kibinadamu za kutambuana, ambamo sehemu kubwa ya sisi wenyewe inaonekana na kuhisiwa kwa wengine. Qur’ān inatufahamisha kwamba katika kiwango cha msingi sisi ni sawa kwa njia nyingi sana:

As this range between perpetrator and victim decreases, the killing becomes far more difficult. What a perpetrator would be exposed to is human codes of recognisability wherein much of ourselves is observable and felt in others. The Qur’ān informs us that at the base level we are similar in so many ways:

49:13 - Enyi watu, Sisi tulikuumbeni nyote kutokana na mwanamume mmoja na mwanamke mmoja, tukakufanyeni kuwa makabila na koo ili mtambuane. Mbele ya Mwenyezi Mungu, aliyeheshimiwa zaidi miongoni mwenu ni yule aliye mcha Mungu zaidi. Hakika Mwenyezi Mungu ni Mjuzi, Mwenye habari zote.

49:13 - People, We created you all from a single man and a single woman, and made you into races and tribes so that you should recognize one another. In God’s eyes, the most honoured of you are the ones most mindful of Him: God is all knowing, all aware.

Kadiri mhalifu anavyomwona mwathiriwa wake kuwa karibu naye, ndivyo mauaji yanavyozidi kuwa magumu, isipokuwa pale tu, na mpaka pale, waathiriwa hao wawe tayari wamepitia "kifo cha kijamii," ambapo waathiriwa wanasukumwa pembezoni mwa kile kinachokubalika kijamii, wanatengwa na kanuni za kile kilicho cha maadili katika jamii, na kuwekwa katika hali ya kudhalilishwa ambayo watoto wao pia watazaliwa nayo.

The closer a perpetrator perceives his victim the more difficult a killing becomes, unless and until those victims have already experienced a ‘social death’ wherein victims are pushed to the margins of what is socially acceptable, excommunicated from the norms of what is moral in society, relegated to a state of dishonour into which their descendants will also be born.

Factors hizi, kwa mujibu wa Patterson, zinamaanisha kwamba vizazi vyao vijavyo vitazuiwa kujenga juu ya mila za mababu zao. Kifo cha kijamii hivyo kinalazimisha kuchipuka kwa mielekeo ya mauaji ya kimbari, kwa sababu maisha ya waathiriwa wa mauaji ya kimbari yameshafanywa kuwa yasiyo na maana. Utu huu kuondolewa unalenga utambulisho wa kikundi. Primo Levi alilalamika kwamba Wanazi walipovua kila kitu utambulisho wa Kiyahudi wa kujitambua, hata majina yao. Kitu pekee ambacho wangeweza kubakiza ni maana ya nafsi zao kutokana na majina waliyokuwa nayo zamani:

These factors, Patterson argues, mean that their subsequent generations will be prevented from building on the traditions of their forefathers. Social death therefore necessitates the burgeoning of genocidal tendencies, because the lives of victims of genocide have already been rendered meaningless. This dehumanisation targets group identity. Primo Levi lamented that with the Nazis stripping everything of Jewish self-identity and even their names. The only thing which they can retain is the meaning of themselves from the names they once had:

"Hakuna kitu chochote tena kinachotuhusu; wametuchukulia nguo zetu, viatu vyetu, hata nywele zetu. Tukisema, hawatatusikiliza, na wakitusikiliza, hawatatuelewa. Watatuondolea hata jina letu: na kama tutataka kulihifadhi, itatubidi kupata ndani yetu nguvu ya kufanya hivyo, kuweza kwa namna fulani ili nyuma ya jina kitu chetu, chetu kama tulivyokuwa, kiendelee kubaki."76

“Nothing belongs to us anymore; they have taken away our clothes, our shoes, even our hair; if we speak, they will not listen to us, and if they listen, they will not understand. They will even take away our name: and if we want to keep it, we will have to find in ourselves the strength to do so, to manage somehow so that behind the name something of us, of us as we were, still remains.”76

Dehumanisation huanza kwa kuondolewa kwa kanuni ya kimaadili ya kibinadamu inayotuunganisha kama binadamu. Hadhi ya kijamii iliyo nyuma ya mtu au kundi inaondolewa, na uharibifu huu hutangulia madhara yoyote ya kimwili au kifo kinachompata mhanga. Ni muhimu kwa Mwislamu kila wakati kumpa anayeshughuliana naye heshima stahiki kwa mujibu wa desturi. Mtume ﷺ alikuwa akiwataja watu kwa vyeo vyao, akitambua hadhi yao ya kijamii na kushuhudia mafanikio yao. Mambo haya ni muhimu si tu kwa kujenga mahusiano yenye tija, bali pia kama kinga dhidi ya kuibuka kwa mielekeo ya mauaji ya halaiki katika jamii, kwa kutoa mazingira mazuri ya kijamii iwapo jamii au kabila lolote litalengwa. Katika hali zisizo nadra, hili, kwa maana pana, ni kutimiza wajibu wa kujitokeza “kwa manufaa ya wanadamu wote,” kwani hudumisha mshikamano wa kijamii na kuzuia mbegu za kifo cha kijamii zisipandwe au kuenea. Nchini Ujerumani, muda mrefu kabla ya vifo vya kimwili vya Wayahudi kuanza, Wajerumani wa kawaida, wanaume kwa wanawake, walikuwa wakiwafanya Wayahudi kuteseka kifo cha kijamii kila siku. Hili linaonekana kwa uwazi katika maelezo ya Filip Müller kuhusu Kambi ya Familia iliyopelekwa Auschwitz. Katika maelezo yake, tunaonywa kuhusu uharibifu wa kile Müller anachokiona kuwa mpangilio wa kijamii ambapo Wayahudi walikuwa wakilindwa zamani. Kwa maneno yake, anaeleza kifo cha kijamii cha kijumuiya ambapo mandhari yake ya kawaida yalikuwa yamepotoshwa, na hisia ya mahali na kuwa mali ya mahali hapo ikakataliwa.

Dehumanisation begins with a stripping away of the moral human code which bonds us as human beings. The social vitality behind a person or group is stripped away and this defacing precedes any physical injury or death inflicted on that victim. It is important for the Muslim to always afford a customary privilege to the one with whom he is engaged. The Prophet (peace be upon him) would refer to people with their titles, recognise their social standing and bear testimony to their achievements. These factors are essential not only for the progression of effective relationship building, but also as a preventative in the social emerging of genocidal tendencies, providing a positive social backdrop if any community or ethnicity is targeted. In less-than-rare situations, this, in a broad context, is a fulfilment of a coming out “for the good of mankind” since it maintains a social cohesiveness and disallows the saplings of social death from being planted or spread. In Germany, long before the physical deaths of Jews began, ordinary German men and women made Jews suffer a social death every day. This is felt evocatively in Filip Müller’s description of the Family Camp taken to Auschwitz. In his description, we are alerted to a decimation of what Müller views as a social order in which Jews were once protected. In his words, he describes a communal social death in which his familiar landscape had been disfigured and a sense of place and belonging denied:

"Sasa, nilipowatazama wenzangu kutoka nchi yangu wakiingia katika chumba cha gesi, wakiwa jasiri, wenye fahari na wenye azma, nilijiuliza ni aina gani ya maisha yangekuwa mfano kwangu endapo nitatoka hai kwenye kambi hii, ambalo halikuwa jambo lenye uwezekano mkubwa. Nini kingenisubiri nikirudi mji wangu wa asili? Haikuwa sana suala la mali, kwani hizo zingeweza kubadilishwa. Lakini ni nani angeweza kuwabadilisha wazazi wangu, kaka yangu, au familia yangu nyingine, ambao mimi peke yangu ndiye niliyenusurika? Na vipi kuhusu marafiki, walimu, na wanajamii wengi wa Kiyahudi?"

“Now, when I watched my fellow countrymen walk into the gas chamber, brave, proud and determined, I asked myself what sort exemplary of life it would be for me in the unlikely event of my getting out of the camp alive. What would await me if I returned to my native town? It was not so much a matter of material possessions, they were replaceable. But who could replace my parents, my brother, or the rest of my family, of whom I was the sole survivor? And what of friends, teachers, and the many members of our Jewish community?

Je, si walikuwa wao walionikumbusha utoto wangu na ujana wangu? Bila wao, je, kila kitu kisingekuwa kisicho na roho na kilichokufa, ule mtaro unaofahamika wa mji wangu wa nyumbani pamoja na mto wake mzuri, mandhari yake inayopendwa sana, na raia wake waaminifu na wanyofu? Na ingetokea nini kama ningekutana na walinzi wa Hlinka na wanyanyasaji Wayahudi, au wanaume wa FS*, wote hao wakiwa ni mbwa-koko waliowanyonya raia wenzao Wayahudi hadi kukauka kabla ya kufukuzwa kwao na kuiba mali zao za duniani? Kukutana nao uso kwa uso kungenirudisha nyuma hadi kwenye giza la zamani. Haingewezekana kabisa kuyachukua tena maisha yangu ya zamani yenye furaha na yasiyo na wasiwasi. Nyumbani kwetu, ambacho kilikuwa kitovu cha maisha yangu, kungekuwa na wageni. Katika shule ya Wayahudi, ambako nilijua kila kona na kila pembe, kungekuwa na ukimya.77

For was it not they who reminded me of my childhood and youth? Without them would it not all be soulless and dead, that familiar outline of my home town with its pretty river, its much loved landscape and its honest and upright citizens? And what would happen if I ran across the Hlinka guardsmen and Jew tormentors, or the FS men*, leeches all of them who had sucked their Jewish fellow citizens dry before their deportation and stolen their worldly belongings? Coming face to face with them would take me back to the darkest past. It would simply not be possible to pick up the threads of my former happy and carefree life. In our house, once the centre of my existence, there would be strangers. In the Jewish school where I knew every nook and cranny there would be silence.”77

S. Yizhar anaeleza katika riwaya yake fupi Khirbet Khizeh, kufukuzwa kwa nguvu kwa Wapalestina kutoka kijiji cha Khirbet Khizeh mwaka 1948, na anatafakari mapambano ya dhamiri ya mtenda uovu. Yakikabiliwa mara moja na kujitafakari na nyakati za nafasi, haya yanatumika kama njia ya kuchunguza mipaka ya kibinadamu inayohusiana na mateso, hali ya kuwa mwathirika na kuwa na mahali pa kuhusika. Yizhar anaonyesha katika Khirbet Khizeh jinsi maeneo hayo yanavyobadilika daima, huku wakazi wa kijiji wakisukumwa nje na wavamizi vijana wakiwaza nyumba mpya. Ni ndani ya mazingira ya kutojali kwa pamoja kwa wanajeshi ndipo msimulizi anaweza kuona "kutoachwa" kiakili kwa nyumba hiyo.

S. Yizhar describes in his novella Khirbet Khizeh, the violent expulsion of Palestinians from the village of Khirbet Khizeh in 1948 and considers the struggle in conscience of a perpetrator. At once challenged by self-reflection and temporalities of space, this serves as a medium for consideration of human boundaries related to suffering, victimhood and belonging. Yizhar shows in Khirbet Khizeh how those sites are in flux, as the villagers are pushed out and the young occupiers imagine a new home. It is in the frame of collective indifference of the soldiers that the narrator can see the mental ‘unabandoning’ of the home.

Anaona:

He sees:

"kuta zilizopambwa kwa makini…mapambo madogo yaliyoning'inia kwenye kuta, yakishuhudia upendo na uangalifu ambao msingi wake ulikuwa umefutwa; athari za "hekima ya mwanamke ndiyo iliyojenga nyumba yake", zikizingatia kwa makini maelfu ya maelezo ambayo wakati wake sasa ulikuwa umepita; mpangilio unaoeleweka kwa mtu fulani na mtafaruku ambao mtu fulani, kwa urahisi wake, alikuwa ameutengeneza njia yake ndani yake; mabaki ya sufuria na vyungu vilivyokusanywa bila mpangilio, kadiri mahitaji yalivyojitokeza, vikiguswa na furaha na huzuni za faraghani ambazo mgeni hawezi kuzielewa; vitambaa chakavu vilivyoleta maana kwa mtu aliyezoea kuvitumia – njia ya maisha ambayo maana yake ilikuwa imepotea, bidii iliyofikia kukanushwa kwake, na ukimya mkubwa na wa kina sana ulikuwa umetua juu ya upendo, shamrashamra, usumbufu, matumaini, na nyakati nzuri na zisizo nzuri sana, miili mingi ambayo haijazikwa."78

“walls attentively decorated…little ornaments that hung on the walls, testifying to a loving care whose foundation had been eradicated; traces of female-wisdom-hath-builded-her-house, paying close attention to myriad details whose time now had passed; an order intelligible to someone and a disorder in which somebody at his convenience had found his way; remnants of pots and pans that had been collected in a haphazard fashion, as need arose, touched by very private joys and woes that a stranger could not understand; tatters that made sense to someone who was used to them – a way of life whose meaning was lost, diligence that had reached its negation, and a great, very deep muteness had settled upon the love, the bustle, the bother, the hopes, and the good and less-good times, so many unburied corpses.”78

Tunapopitia maisha, tunaona katika dhiki ya mwingine kwamba huenda kukawa na uwezekano wa dhiki kama hiyo, ya kuwaziwa, katika maisha yetu wenyewe. Yizhar anaeleza:

As we navigate through life, we see in the distress of another that there may be a potential for similar imagined distress in one’s own life. Yizhar describes:

“Watu ambao wangeishi katika kijiji hiki – je, kuta hazingepiga kelele masikioni mwao? Zile sura, vilio vilivyopigwa na vile visivyopigwa, ile hatia iliyochanganyikiwa ya kondoo waliopigwa na butwaa, unyenyekevu wa wanyonge, na ushujaa wao, ule ushujaa wa kipekee wa wanyonge ambao hawakujua la kufanya na hawakuweza kufanya lolote, wanyonge walionyamazishwa – je, walowezi wapya wasingehisi kwamba hewa hapa imejaa vivuli, sauti, na macho yanayotazama?”79

“The people who would live in this village – wouldn’t the walls cry out in their ears? Those sights, screams that were screamed and that were not screamed, the confused innocence of dazed sheep, the submissiveness of the weak, and their heroism, that unique heroism of the weak who didn’t know what to do and were unable to do anything, the silenced weak – would the new settlers not sense that the air here was heavy with shades, voices, and stares?”79

Ni uwepo dhahiri wa mwingine katika nafasi iliyojaa "makelele yaliyokuwa...yasiyopigwa kelele", pamoja na yale yaliyopigwa kelele, yakiwekwa karibu na sauti za "wanyonge walionyamazishwa", ndivyo vinavyofanya simulizi hili liwe la kuhuzunisha sana na pia lenye mafunzo makubwa.

It is the patent presence of another in a space made up of “screams that were…not screamed”, as well as having been screamed, juxtaposed with the sounds of the “silenced weak” that makes the account so harrowing and yet so instructive:

“Nilihisi kuporomoka kwa kutisha ndani yangu. Nilikuwa na wazo moja lililokaa imara, kama msumari uliopigwa kwa nyundo: kwamba sitaweza kamwe kupatana na chochote, mradi machozi ya mtoto aliyelia bado yanang'aa alipokuwa akitembea pamoja na mama yake, ambaye alikuwa akizuia kwa hasira machozi yake yasiyo na sauti, njiani kuelekea uhamishoni. Alibeba pamoja naye kilio cha dhuluma, na kelele ya namna ile – ingekuwa haiwezekani kwamba hakuna mtu katika ulimwengu wake angeikusanya kelele ile wakati ukifika – kisha nikamwambia Moshe: ‘Hatuna haki, Moshe, ya kuwafukuza kutoka hapa!’ Sikutaka sauti yangu itetemeke.”80

“I felt a terrifying collapse inside me. I had a single, set idea, like a hammered nail, that I could never be reconciled to anything, so long as the tears of a weeping child still glistened as he walked along with his mother, who furiously fought back her soundless tears, on his way into exile, bearing with him a roar of injustice and such scream that – it was impossible that no one in his world would gather that scream in when the moment came – and then I said to Moshe: “We have no right, Moishe, to kick them out of here!” I didn’t want my voice to tremble.”80

Hivyo basi, mbinu mbalimbali za kuwanyima watu utu hutumika, zikilenga kuwasaidia watendaji wa uhalifu kusahau ubinadamu wa waathiriwa wao. Mbinu moja ni mabadiliko yanayofanywa kabla ya kuuawa. Katika Maangamizi ya Holocaust, kwa mfano, Wayahudi walilazimishwa kukusanyika wakiwa uchi na kusukumwa pamoja kama kundi. Hisia ya kuwa "wengine" iliundwa kuzunguka umati wa miili isiyo na nguo ikisogea kando ya kambi huku ikiwa na hofu kuu na mshangao. Kuvuliwa nguo kulifanana na kuvuliwa utu, kwa kuwa tofauti kati ya kile kilicho cha kawaida na kisicho cha kawaida ilikuwa dhahiri sana. Onyesho hilo la wazi la kuwa "wengine" kisha lilipanuliwa ili kuhakikisha kwamba tabia za waathiriwa hizo zilionekana kuwa za mbali sana na zisizo za kibinadamu. Wanazi walifanya hivyo kwa kuwafanya wafe njaa. Katika hali zilizokithiri ambapo wafungwa walilazimishwa kuishi katika uchafu wao wenyewe, walipunguzwa hadi kuwa kama si kitu.

And so, various techniques of depersonalization are put into action, aimed at helping perpetrators forget the humanity of their victims. One such technique is a transformation before being killed. In the Holocaust for example, Jews were forced to congregate naked and to be herded together. An impression of Otherness was created around the naked mass of bodies moving along the camp in abject terror and bewilderment. Being stripped of their clothing was akin to being stripped of their humanity since the dissimilarity between what was normal and abnormal was too striking. The visual display of otherness was then extended to ensuring that the behaviour of such victims was too remote and unhuman. The Nazis did this by subjecting them to a starvation. In the extremity of such situations where inmates were forced to live in their own filth, they were reduced to a nothingness.

Vivyo hivyo, wafungwa wa vita wa Urusi, na Höss ambaye kwa kejeli alikuwa na jukumu la kuunda hali kama hizo, alisema, "Hawakuwa tena wanadamu… Walikuwa wamegeuka kuwa wanyama waliofikiria tu kula."81 Wolters anadhani kwamba udhalilishaji wa kingono wa wanaume wa Kiiraki unaoonyeshwa katika picha za Abu Ghraib unaashiria utambulisho wa hadhira na wanajeshi wa Kimarekani, na hivyo unawajumuisha watazamaji kama washiriki katika simulizi la kikoloni-mamboleo ambamo Mwarabu duni, Mwingine, anatawaliwa na mvamizi wake wa Magharibi.

Similarly, Russian prisoners of war, Höss who was ironically responsible for creating such conditions, said, “They were no longer men…They’d turned into beasts who thought only about eating.”81 Wolters surmises that the sexual humiliation of Iraqi men depicted in the Abu Ghraib pictures implies audience identification with the American soldiers and thus incorporates viewers as participants in a neo-colonial narrative in which an inferior Arab Other is dominated by his Western invader.

Uumbaji wao wa tamasha la kutisha la mateso na uigizaji wa msiba wa kibinadamu unawafanya walinganishwe na picha za waathiriwa weusi waliouawa kwa kunyongwa, picha ambazo zinaonyesha mateso ya watu weusi kwa namna tofauti na jinsi watazamaji wazungu walivyokuwa wakisimama tu kama mashahidi. Kuwafunza waathiriwa na kuwafanya wageni (Othering) kulikuwa hatua ya lazima ili kuhakikisha kwamba walinzi wanatekeleza sera zao bila mzigo wa hatia wa kihisia. Njia ya asili ni kuwafanya wengine wawe binadamu kama wewe, kuweka kwa mwingine kile mtu anachokiona ndani yake mwenyewe. Mfano wa Hābīl, aliyemuua ndugu yake, ni muhimu hapa kwa sababu alibadilika kutoka wivu wa kiovu hadi majuto ya kudumu kwa matendo yake. Alipomwona kunguru akikwangua ardhi, alitambua kwamba kuharibika kwa mwili wa ndugu yake na kwa ardhi aliyolala juu yake kunahitaji kufunikwa, ili kurekebisha na kurejesha kile kilichopotea:

Their creating of an iconic spectacle of torture and the staging of human trauma renders them comparable to photographs of black lynching victims which contrast the projection of black suffering with the mode of bystanding in white spectators.82 This conditioning of victims and Othering was a necessary step to ensure that guards carried out their policies without the emotional burden of guilt. The natural way is to humanise, to place onto another what one sees in oneself. The example of Hābīl, having murdered his brother is important here in that he transitioned from pathological envy to entrenched regret over his actions. In observing a raven scratching away at the earth, he realises that the disfigurement of his brother and of the earth upon which he rests require a hiding away, so as to normalise and repair what had been lost:

5:30 - Lakini nafsi yake ilimshawishi amuue nduguye: akamuua, na akawa miongoni mwa wenye khasara.

5:30 - But his soul prompted him to kill his brother: he killed him and became one of the losers.

5:31 - Mungu alimtuma kunguru achimbue ardhi na amwonyeshe jinsi ya kufunika maiti ya nduguye, naye akasema, 'Ole wangu! Je, sikuweza kuwa kama kunguru huyu na kufunika maiti ya nduguyangu?' Akajuta sana.

5:31 - God sent a raven to scratch up the ground and show him how to cover his brother’s corpse and he said, ‘Woe is me! Could I not have been like this raven and covered up my brother’s body?’ He became remorseful.

Uchaguzi ambao Allah anaufanya wa kunguru pia ni wa ajabu:

The choice Allāh makes of a crow is also remarkable:

Chukua mfano wa kunguru-maji (magpie). Kwa kutumia mfumo ule ule wa alama bandia ulioitumika kwa pomboo na tembo, utafiti wa hivi karibuni umeonyesha kwamba magpie wanaweza kujitambua kwenye kioo. Lakini tafadhali kumbuka, magpie si ndege wa kawaida: ni wa familia ya corvid, inayojumuisha kunguru, kwale na ndege aina ya jay, ambao wana ubongo mkubwa sana kuliko kawaida. Anapowekwa mbele ya kioo, magpie hujaribu kuondoa kibandiko kidogo cha rangi kilichowekwa kwenye manyoya ya koo lake. Atakuna kwa mguu wake bila kukoma hadi alama iondoke, lakini ataacha alama nyeusi peke yake, labda kwa sababu haionekani sana dhidi ya koo lake jeusi. Pia hawakuni kwa haraka na kwa fujo endapo hakuna kioo cha kujiona ndani yake.83

“Take the magpie. Applying the same sham-mark design as used with dolphins and elephants, a recent study has shown mirror self-recognition in magpies. Now, mind you, the magpie isn’t just any bird: It is a corvid, a family that includes crows, ravens, and jays, endowed with exceptionally large brains. Put in front of a mirror, magpies will try to remove a tiny colored sticker attached to their throat feathers. They will keep scratching with their foot until the mark is gone, but will leave a black mark alone probably because it doesn’t stand out against their black throat. They also won’t do any frantic scratching if there’s no mirror to see themselves in.”83

Inavutia sana kwamba kunguru-maji hakuweza kuvumilia kitu cha kigeni mwilini mwake. Aliweza kutambua kasoro na akatafuta kuiondoa. Vivyo hivyo, kunguru aliyeanza kuchimba ardhi alimfundisha Hābīl kwamba ndugu yake alihitaji kuzikwa, kwamba mwili wa marehemu ni wa chini ya ardhi. Uovu wa mauaji huchafua ardhi na dhamiri ya binadamu, na utambuzi huu ulizaa ndani yake kuamka kwa nafsi kwa majuto. Ni rahisi zaidi kwa mtu kujitenga na yule asiyeweza kushirikiana naye, na tofauti zinazotangazwa na mchakato wa Kumtenga Mwingine hukataa mifumo ya kibinadamu ya kutambulika inayotuingiza katika fremu ya pamoja tunayoita 'ubinadamu'. Katika kumbukumbu ya Phillip Caputo ya mwaka 1977, A Rumor Of War, kuhusu utumishi wake katika Kikosi cha Wanamaji cha Marekani (USMC) mwanzoni mwa Vita vya Vietnam, anaeleza kifo cha kutisha cha mvulana wa Viet Cong na kuandika kwa uwazi kuhusu jinsi kuutambua 'ubinadamu' wa mwingine kwa kuzingatia mifumo ya kibinadamu ya kutambulika inayotuunganisha sote kungehitaji kuunda upya fremu ya Mwingine huyo:

It is very interesting that the magpie was unable to tolerate a foreign substance on its body. It was able to detect an abnormality and sought to remove it. Similarly, the raven that began to scratch the earth taught Hābīl that his brother needed to be buried, that a deceased body belongs under the earth. The vileness of murder defiles both the earth and the human conscience, and this realisation produced a self-awakening of remorse within him. It is far easier for a person to disconnect from one he cannot associate with, and the differences heralded by a process of Othering deny the human codes of recognisability that enter us into a collective frame of what we call ‘humanity’. In Phillip Caputo 1977 memoir, A Rumor Of War, about his service in the United States Marine Corps (USMC) in the early years of the Vietnam War, he describes the graphic death of a Viet Cong boy and writes lucidly about the way accessing another’s ‘humanity’ by considering the human codes of recognisability that connect us all would necessitate a re-framing of that Other:

Hakukuwa na kitu chochote kwake, hakuna picha, hakuna barua, wala kitambulisho. Hilo lingeikatisha tamaa idara ya ujasusi, lakini kwangu ilikuwa sawa. Nilitaka kijana huyu abaki bila jina. Nilitaka kumfikiria si kama binadamu mwenye jina, umri na familia, bali kama adui aliyekufa.

“There was nothing on him, no photographs, no letters, or identification. That would disappoint the intelligence, but it was fine with me. I wanted this boy to remain anonymous. I wanted to think of him not human being with a name, age, and family, but as a dead enemy.

"Hilo lilirahisisha kila kitu."84

That made everything easier.”84