Yoga’s and dreadlocks’ convoluted journey

Yoga’s a kind of exercise cum religious meditation that not only originated in India but specifically among Shiva worshippers, Shiva being the Hindu god of destruction and he has his own cult among the Shaivites. According to a survey at PewResearch, while yoga originated in India the Indians most likely practising this are Sikhs and Jains. The latter two belong to other Indian-based religions like Sikhism and Jainism, which also revolve around vegetarianism.

It’s not that Hindus don’t practise yoga at all, but those who do are more likely to worship Shiva. If Shiva’s considered to be the originator of yoga, it makes sense why his followers would practise yoga perhaps more often than the average Hindu (and Indian) population. The PewResearch survey failed to take note of them, even if they’re good examples of Hindus practising yoga. (Shiva sadhus, like Shiva himself, also tend to have dreadlocks.)

In the case with yoga and dreadlocks, while the latter does have a precedent among certain indigenous North American communities but they got popularised by well non-Indians generally. Both of them have been detached from not only their ties to India and Hinduism, but also more specifically their ties to Shiva as soon as they’ve reached westward. In fairness, Rastafarianism did get influenced by Indian immigrants to some extent. Especially when it comes to marijuana and of course, dreadlocks.

Speaking as a Christian, it’s not that I condone Shiva worship but it’s worth noting that yoga does have its roots in Indian religions and among Hindus a specific sect. Shiva is one of the major gods in Hinduism, as part of the Trimurti (the Hindu equivalent to the Holy Trinity in Christianity). He is associated with not only the destruction and recreation of the world but also dance, yoga and the arts.

As for dreadlocks, it’s debatable whether if nonblack people can have it but among Asians there’s a precedent for this (or rather something similar) among Buddhists and Hindus. The actual reason why some Buddhists and Hindus wear such a hairstyle is to detach themselves from worldly obsessions, it’s part and parcel of being an ascetic. Well an ascetic by Buddhist and Hindu standards, so the deconsecration of such a hairstyle would be jarring to those who practise those things.

Dreadlocks among African Americans, on the other hand, spread among them as a way to reclaim an African identity and show solidarity with others in the African diaspora (especially Jamaican Rastafarians). It’s not always well-received, especially if it’s seen as unprofessional. Perhaps strangely enough, other than certain people of a certain age, dreadlocks especially among men isn’t always that well-received in many African countries either.

In the case with African Americans and everybody else in the African diaspora, there came a time when they wanted a Pan-African sentiment. So dreadlocks and the like became popular with them ever since they spread from Jamaicans. But the odd fact that both yoga and dreadlocks have this convoluted route going from being part of an otherwise niche demographic (if Indians did come to Jamaica, this explains a lot) to getting popularised by non-ascetic demographics.

Racist white people

When it comes to racist white people, it doesn’t have to be outright discrimination in order to be racist. Sometimes it can appear as innocuous as wondering why don’t black people not write about being black when in reality they already have, some black people have written about cats for instance. That’s how ignorant they really are when it comes to things they talk about, which says a lot about how little they know when they’re talking about something.

Imagine if somebody said why don’t women not write about relationships, when in reality they already have. It would be widely regarded as sexist, but when it comes to racism it’s easier for white men and women to unite together to relate to each others’ dismissal and ignorance of what black people go through and are concerned about. If it’s ignorant, stupid and sexist to dismiss women’s writing as centred on relationships, it’s just as bad to dismiss black people’s writing as centred on blackness.

Black people have written about dogs for instance. It’s so evident to me this man has never read anything written by a black person, let alone on subjects he wants to know about. Black people have already written about things like football and fashion for instance, it’s actually not that hard to find. This ignorance is also patronising in that these white people think black people can’t write about anything else when they do.

If it’s racist for white people to outrightly fear and hate black people (or anybody who isn’t white), it’s just as racist for them to patronise the people they’re talking about. As if they see them as inferior, deep down inside whether if they’re aware or not. That’s another kind of racism we need to be alert to, especially if it involves a condescending attitude towards those they want to talk about. It’s like if you think black people only write about being black, chances are you’ve never read anything by a black person.

Likewise, it’s like being horrified and surprised that black people can like and own cats. I myself am part of a Facebook group about Kenyan cat owners, so if some black people like cats they already do. I could go on saying the same thing about Native American and Indigenous cat owners, they already exist and they only seem surprising to those who have stereotypical ideas of what an indigenous person should be.

It’s clear these people know so little about the things they want to do talk about, so little they might as well be talking nonsense. It’s like wondering where are all the black cat owners, the thing is they already exist and they exist in large numbers in countries like Ghana, Togo and Cameroon for instance. Okay, I’m being harsh on people who are ignorant but the thing here is that there will always be black people who don’t fit your idea and knowledge of black people.

There are Asians and indigenous people who don’t fit said stereotypes and preconceptions either, whether scientifically or through actual experiences with them. This kind of ignorance poisons the well, especially when it comes to the subjects they want to talk about it which reveals how little they know about it. Here’s the thing: I’m not black, I’m Filipina and I write this because this man knows so little about black people.

So little he might as well never read anything by a black person, not all black people are fixated on slavery and/or being black. There are black people who fixate on or write about anime, cats, dogs, goats and other stuff. It shouldn’t be this hard to find stuff like ADHD in Kenya, it’s not that hard at all. Black people are perfectly capable of and already have written stuff about anything else, it’s shouldn’t be hard to find stuff by black people on academic websites like Scielo, Hindawi and Plos One. They write about goats even.

Black people do write about other things, it could be folk beliefs but it could also be about bullying in school. They’re not that ignorant, they’re not that fixated on their blackness well not to the same extent that this man makes it out to be. It’s telling this bloke hasn’t read a lot of stuff written by actual black people, so he projects his ignorance onto black people. If you’ve read something by a black person, an African black person in particular, they can write anything else.

Anybody who tries to contradict me will prove me right, especially when it comes to things they don’t know much about. Something like say studies on cats and dogs in Eswatini for instance. If a black African has written it, then black people are already capable of writing anything other than being black. Racist white people will project their ignorance onto the people they talk about, so much so they might as well be stupider than they’d realise.

Pardon my harsh words, but it’s telling that if you’ve never read anything by a black person you are ill-informed on what black people write about. That’s jumping onto conclusions, based on what little you know about them. So little that you don’t even know what you’re talking about. Facts hurt whether if you like it or not. It’s not hard to find what an African black has written about, it could be football for instance and that still proves my point blacks have written anything else.

White people will commiserate over their ignorance and dismissal of blacks, not all whites do but it gets telling if you find these characters in the wild. It can even happen in the vegan and animal rights world where a good number of people think Asians eat dogs. Not all Asians eat dogs, in fact it’s outrightly forbidden in Hinduism. If Buddhism forbids eating meat, well some sects do, then there were already Asians who don’t eat dog meat before the modern animal rights movement.

While these people have good intentions, they are ignorant of people who already do the things they wish they did. There are Asians who genuinely care for animals like the dog mothers in Taiwan, there are black people who write about anything other than being black (there are those who write about dogs for instance). This is a form of racism we should be alert to because of how patronising and ignorant it is. There are already Asians and blacks who do the things whites wished they did.

I don’t think dog meat’s even that popular in Asia, from personal experience most would rather eat beef, chicken and pork as dogs are more commonly kept alive for guarding. Likewise for cats, more Africans keep them alive for pest control. Even if dog meat does exist, it’s a niche thing at best. With Buddhism and Islam* keeping things in check, so you have Asians who don’t eat dog meat and with the former, they abstain from meat in general before modern veganism and vegetarianism came into being.

(There is already a good precedent for Asians avoiding meat due to Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism.)

It’s patronising in its racism and why this should stop, Asians and black people already do things you wish they did. It’s not even that hard, if Buddhism was introduced to China in 202 BCE then you have generations of Chinese who never and don’t eat dog meat. Likewise, if you have a history of writing Arabic script in countries like Nigeria, then black people not only have a history of literacy but also a history of writing anything else.

This is why it’s racist, it assumes Asians and blacks are kind of close-minded (whether if they’re aware of it or not) or haven’t done the things whites wish they did when in fact they already have. It’s also the same reason why it’s patronising and why this has to stop.

*Dogs are considered dirty in Islam, therefore the equivalent of eating faeces.

Paganism

The more politically correct word for it, I think, is polytheism. Whether if Buddhism and Confucianism are pagan or not that’s up to anybody’s guess but since they’ve syncretised a lot with actual polytheistic beliefs, that muddies things up. Admittedly I don’t condone it though my understanding of it comes not from reconstruction movements but from countries where it’s arguably still as the majority practised faith.

Something like India and Japan, which I’ve said before, they’re not any better when it comes to sexism, Islamophobia and environmental concerns. (No seriously, Hindus attack Muslims a lot in India.) Like I said, Buddhism and Confucianism technically aren’t polytheist or rather aren’t meant to be. But when it comes to the nature of syncreticism, it can complicate things a lot especially if these are meant to be philosophies.

(And one may wonder if the same thing happened in Ancient Greece, with only a few Greek philosophies being syncretised by Christianity and to some extent Islam, indirectly or otherwise.)

Polytheism

It’s debatable whether if Buddhism is a form of paganism or not’s up to anybody’s guess but it does have profoundly syncretic tendencies that blur the line between what’s supposed to be technically nontheistic and what is polytheistic. (Same with Christianity and even Islam to some extent, especially when it comes to Anatolian Crypto-Christians being similar to Orthodox Christians.)

Technically, Buddhism does have similarities with Hinduism and I think I remember reading elsewhere that it may be a difference in philosophy. There are Hindu gods being worshiped in Buddhism, some of them go by different names especially in China, Japan and Mongolia. That and the use of Sanskrit and the like. (CS Lewis even said that Buddhism’s a simplification of Hinduism and most strains of Islam a simplification of Christianity*.)

There’s already a good study trying to quantify what constitutes as polytheism but my own understanding’s that it’s based on deifying the natural world and the dead (especially dead relatives) as well as actions causing effect, performing rituals using inanimate items and multiple deities in whatever degree of importance. Personal or otherwise.

(Saint veneration could count but at other times it’s similar to Evangelical love for CS Lewis.)

*Like I said, the existence of Crypto-Christian syncretic Islamic sects complicates things.

Ancient Greece and Rome-Contemporary India and Japan

I think if I’m not mistaken, these comparisons were brought up before fairly often enough that both Japan and India help deconstruct Greco-Roman religion. If that’s the case, that’s one worth repeating and studying if because we really don’t know what it actually was like and I think not even the best reconstruction help. So we’re left with the three extant still-continuous pagan majority countries (Japan, India, Nepal) as the go-for countries in reconstructing polytheism.

(Buddhism’s a practical grey area between non-belief proper and paganism, which’s why I’m hesitant to call it pagan even if it does show polytheistic traits and same for some sects of other religions.)

The parallels are strong and precise enough to draw comparisons but the same can be said of social practises like arranged marriage as well as social ills like sexism. Which in other words, not necessarily any better than their Muslim and Christian counterparts are (there are some Muslim communities suspected of Crypto-Christendom, hence the syncretism and extremist heresy).

Hence why they help give a better idea of how and why Ancient Rome and Greece are so sexist.

Atheism and Existentialism

That isn’t to say some degree of secularism’s bad (or good). Atheism does have some advantages, the biggest problem might be the inability to know and do what’s wrong from what’s right. Many world religions have some kind of morality and law for people to abide by and what to do. Abrahamic religions, especially if some sects like Alevi Islam may’ve been syncretism, provide a better outline for human morality.

It’s like there’s a study stating like punitive religions make people adhere better to those beliefs in order to do good helped by prosleytising for better or worse (I remember it). I can’t speak for Buddhism and Hinduism as I know little of them so to speak. Like I said, atheism may not always be bad especially if somebody’s been abused before. But that it’s inability to understand things can lead to a rather existentialist outlook.

Existentialism is practically about a person’s free will albeit in relation to an incomprehensible environment.Waiting for Godot’s considered to be one of the classic existentialist plays as characters spend their time waiting for nothing/nobody. An atheist’s attempt at understanding a divinity’s existence if you will. Hinduism and Buddhism aren’t any better but at least provide a guideline and meaning.

Christianity and Alevi Islam believe in a happy ending after so much misfortune, especially with a hero’s arrival. Existentialism’s not always atheist and vice versa but that existentialism easily lends itself to atheism. It’s up to humans to deciding things instead of finding meaning in the supernatural.

Soren Kierkegaard‘s the one who gave us the term existentialism but is actually a Christian himself. He even thought that Christianity’s a life to be lived predating the later Evangelicals as well as being in line with Christian (and Islamic) mysticism to be closer to God/Allah.

Existentialism, via Jean Paul Sartre, came to be associated with atheism in finding authenticity (going well with atheism’s tendency to discredit supernatural beliefs) though it’s also got drawbacks like profound dread over human actions and constant despair. Some religions at least have a concept of afterlife, good and bad, as well as karma to warn people of their actions.

That I think might explain the problem with atheism.

New or additional contexts

The thing about additional contexts especially in understanding literature is that you start regarding things in a new perspective. It could be knowing about witchcraft (Dante Alighieri’s she-wolf might possibly represent witchcraft) or domesticated macaques (I get the impression that Tripitaka’s able to convert and tolerate Sun Wukong’s got to do with actual Buddhist monks taming and caring for monkeys).

When you’re dealing with works written a long time ago, it can be really easy to miss the other context behind things. Moreso if it’s also from another country. I suspect given Dante Alighieri had been exiled for half of his life that staying in Northern Italy would’ve influenced him somewhat. That Northern Italy shares borders with Switzerland, Austria and Germany so there are inevitably some similarities.

Especially involving lupine witchcraft. Conversely speaking about Journey to the West, having read up on Thai monks feeding tamed monkeys it’s parsimonious that Tripitaka’s the one to handle and deal with Sun Wukong. (There’s also a superstition saying killing monkeys gives bad luck.) Not always the case but becomes amusing or different given additional context.

Religion affects mindset 3

I’ve come to regard religion as both the heart and brain/soul of human society where it exerts a big say on things. Since Orthodox churches and mosques exclude dogs for fear of filth, it’s inevitable that such sources (though not always the case) are more likely to mention canine echinococcus as capable of causing allergies. It needn’t to always be cat’s fur as dog tapeworms can do the trick. (Alevi Turks find both cats and dogs dirty and seem almost aware of what they coiuld do.)

Another one however has got to do with Buddhism and why it’s got a profound impact on East Asia despite it originating in India. Indian Buddhism’s not gone and is very much the norm in Sri Lanka. But it’s got to do with persecution and displacement as well as Hinduism becoming more prioritised (as far as I recall). Buddhism ended up thriving a lot more outside of India (and to some extent, Malaysia, Indonesia and  the Philippines). That’s by influencing Siam/Thailand, Japan and China.

Admittedly I know little about Buddhism to say something but it’s inevitable that in a Buddhist majority country, the culture’s going to be influenced by Buddhism. Be it art, clothing and accepting in reincarnation among other things.

Domesticating the Monkey King

Like I said before in another post, you start seeing Journey to the West (the story of a monk as accompanied by a monkey, pig and water monster) in a new light when you realise that Southeast Asian macaques, especially those in Thailand, have grown habituated to humans. As well as being tamed and made to grab coconuts, all of which have been noted before. It’s also true in the Philippines to some extent (I have a relative who owned a monkey).

Pet monkeys sound weird at first and owning or taming them has been attempted before in the past. It’s however more persistent in Southeast Asia where it’s more common and achievable. No doubt there’s going to be issues involving mistreatment and monkey bites. But that macaque dometication’s practically possible and accomplished in Southeast Asia makes you look at a novel from another angle.

If Thai monks are noted for feeding and looking after monkeys, it’s unsurprising that Tripitaka’s capable of managing and bearing Sun Wukong well. Arguably not wihout grievances but still able to bear with him.

Journeying into new viewpoints

Journey to the West’s often cited as having profound Buddhist influences. Let’s not forget that monkey ownership and domestication seems to have persisted in Southeast Asia. It’s not necessarily nonexistent in Uganda and England though not that common and/or current in fashion. There’s noted monkey ownership in Ecuador but it might be mostly rural. (Same goes for Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines.)

Monkeys, especially long-tailed macaques are coincidentally that domesticated in Southeast Asia where they’re not only owned but also used to grab coconuts. Though it’s also similarly noted in Egypt, it’s much more persistent in Thailand and to some extent India. The same places (and to some extent the Philippines, Indonesia and Myanmar) are also noted for monkey ownership.

In Myanmar and Thailand, monkeys may’ve been tamed enough to peacefully coexist with humans. (Same goes for Indonesia and Philippines.) In Thailand and Indonesia, there are studies of tame macaques being cared for by Buddhist monks. That monkeys do get domesticated/tamed in Southeast Asia sheds light on Sun Wukong being managed by Tripitaka.

I do have a relative who owned a macaque before and there are Filipinos who own monkeys. So it’s likely that there are people who can tame monkeys or at least treat them right as well as macaques becoming more habituated to people. It’s really not much of a stretch that the way Sun Wukong’s portrayed reflects this.