Exclusive: Secular Culturist, Olofadudu Calls For Shift From Generic Ìṣẹ̀ṣe Day To Deity-Centred Celebration
By Sherif Salau
A prominent Ìṣẹ̀ṣe practitioner and secular culturist of Yorùbá lineage, Olofadudu said the celebration of Ìṣẹ̀ṣe Day is conceptually misplaced and should be replaced by structured celebration of individual Òrìṣà deities.
Olofadudu believes that traditionalists ought to prioritise the celebration days of deities such as Ògún, Èṣù, Ṣàngó, Òṣun and Ọbàtálá rather than a single, generalised cultural observance for Isese Day.
Rotimi noted that Christians do not mark a “Christians’ Day” but instead observe Christmas and the feast days of individual saints. He maintained that no equivalent of Ìṣẹ̀ṣe Day existed in pre-colonial Yorùbá society and that the modern festival largely emerged as a reactive assertion of identity in the presence of Christianity and Islam.
“Before the arrival of colonial influence, the concept of an Ìṣẹ̀ṣe Day did not exist,” he stated.
“One does not celebrate a category that has no counterpart. Everyday cultural markers traditional attire, cuisine and modes of greeting already constitute living heritage and do not require a dedicated annual day for validation.
On the question of social stigmatization, Rotimi attributed much of the prejudice faced by practitioners to matters of self-presentation. He expressed a preference for being publicly associated with the honouring of specific Òrìṣà.
He described Ìṣẹ̀ṣe as a comprehensive way of life encompassing etiquette, dress and social conduct, rather than a discrete festival or ideological banner.
Regarding institutional protection, Rotimi expressed limited expectation of proactive government intervention. Meaningful progress, he said, depends on organised advocacy by practitioners themselves. He stressed the need for clearer terminology, distinguishing ordinary cultural habits food preferences, clothing, greeting protocols and naming ceremonies from the deeper spiritual dimensions associated with the Òrìṣà.
“Ìṣẹ̀ṣe denotes ‘that which has been practised from the beginning.
“Clearer separation between cultural practice and esoteric veneration would strengthen both internal coherence and external advocacy.”
Rotimi’s remarks form part of an ongoing internal discourse among Ìṣẹ̀ṣe practitioners concerning terminology, ritual focus and strategies for cultural affirmation in Nigeria’s multi-religious landscape. His positions emphasise historical continuity, comparative religious practice and the dynamics of identity assertion, while calling for greater conceptual precision within the tradition.
