Labels

Showing posts with label Dialogues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dialogues. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 5, 2014

A Dialogue on Yoga and Orientalism (part 2)


The following dialogue takes place between a Patanjali yoga Teacher, Vidya, and a student, Brahmari.


Part 2
V: What are your thoughts now, Brahmari, is Orientalism something that we have moved beyond or is it something that continues today?
B: I went back and read through Orientalism again, and it seems that Orientalism, according to Said, is an ongoing project, because although European colonialism has formally ended, NATO nations maintain an imperial influence over the former colonial world[1].
V: How then are Orientalist discourses perpetuated today?
B: Mostly through media and popular culture. For example, Said argues that Western media largely ignores the Orient except to portray Orientals in a negative light, usually as terrorists or helpless victims of patriarchal societies, natural disasters and disease[2]. In popular culture, Said says Orientals are typically portrayed as "oversexed, degenerate...cleverly devious intrigues, but essentially sadistic, treacherous, low"[3].
V: Do you think Orientalism continues to influence how popular culture portrays Hindu images?
B: Absolutely, an obvious example is the film "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom". The majority of the film takes place in 1935 Northern India. Indiana Jones and company crash a plane in the Himalayas and are immediately assumed by the local Hindus to be saviors sent by Shiva. Already one can see the Orientalist power relationship between the Occident and the Orient being utilized by the filmmakers. Considering that during 1935 India's fight for independence was in full force it is highly unlikely that a group of foreigners would be perceived as being God-sent.
B: Further misrepresentations of Hindus are present during the banquet scene, when Indiana Jones and company are served dishes such as baby snakes, human eyeballs and monkey brains. Snakes, monkeys and eyes are all sacred icons in Hinduism, but this is ignored in favor of establishing Hindus as barbaric Heathens. The portrayal of the goddess Kali as a bloodthirsty demoness further engrains the portrayal of Hindus as barbaric Heathens. This portrayal of Kali is also highly inaccurate and ignores the sophistication of her iconography. During the first sacrificial scene in which the audience witnesses a Hindu being sacrificed to Kali, the nameless Hindu is portrayed as small, and skinny, praying to Shiva to save him. The image contrasts Indiana Jones' portrayal as the rational, brave, active Occidental hero. As the priest, Mola Ram, shows the heart he has removed from the (still living) victim's chest to the masses of followers the audience sees masses of faceless Hindus waving their arms and beating drums. As Said note: "the [Oriental] is always shown in large numbers. No individuality, no personal characteristics or experiences. Most of the pictures represent mass rage and misery or irrational...gestures"[4]. While Temple of Doom takes place in a Hindu region of India, many of the background characters portrayed are dressed in more Islamic styles, further perpetuating the idea that all Orientals are the same.

V: While the Indiana Jones films are classics and certainly perpetuate Orientalist stereotypes, on some level the audience knows that what they are watching is not a reflection of reality. Can you think of any more subtle expressions of Orientalism present in today's popular culture?
B: The other day I saw former Disney channel star, Selena Gomez's music video for her song "Come and Get It" playing on a TV that was for sale. While it is less blatantly disrespectful than the Indian Jones example, the song and music video rely heavily on Orientalist assumptions. For example, the song relies heavily on the use of technology to create the overall texture of the song, but underneath the dense sound of technology, is an Indian tabla drum, which creates the beat. The tabla gives this otherwise unremarkable, if catchy, pop song an exotic flavor. Coupled with the sexual lyrics the song relies on the listener's Orientalist samskaras to reinforce the idea in our minds that this song is exotic and erotic due to its Oriental flavors. While promoting the song Selena, a half Caucasian half Latina American, wore a variety of colorful, sparkly bindis while performing the song on television.
V: What is the significance of the bindi?
B: Traditionally the bindi is representative of the third eye chakra, one of the major energy centres located in between the eyebrows. The bindi is reminiscent of the Hindu god Shiva, as well as the goddess Shakti. The bindi is also indicative of a woman's marital status and it also indicates that the wearer is committed to her Hindu beliefs[5]. Selena Gomez is not married, she is not Hindu and the lyrical content of the song is more appropriate for the sacral chakra than the third eye chakra. Instead Gomez is using the bindi to appear more erotic without upsetting her Disney channel fan base by channeling an Oriental persona. She has created her own meaning, her own significance for the bindi, one that is completely detached from the significance it traditionally holds in Hindu culture.

V: The argument can be made, however, that the bindi is now detached from its traditional meaning in India as well, it has become more of a fashion accessory than a religious icon[6]. Why does it matter that Gomez is wearing a bindi?
B: The meaning that Gomez creates for the bindi when she wears it to perform "Come and Get It" is very different than the meaning that is attributed to Hindu Non-Resident Indians (NRI) in the West. On Selena the bindi is cool and sexy, but on an NRI woman it is a sign of failed assimilation, it brings to mind the image of the immigrant who is 'fresh off the boat' and inherently backwards. The colonial and Orientalist samskara that 'they' (the Orientals) need to become more like 'us' (the Occidentals) in order to develop as a civilization is still present in our minds. Gomez is associated with Disney, a company that embodies Occidental ideals, and therefore she can adopt the bindi and all it's Orientalist associations without demeaning herself, while a Hindu NRI woman must adopt Western dress and practices in order to experience the same level of respect in society in general. While there are exceptions, by and large North American and European culture demands that immigrants conform with cultural norms in order to be accepted, and the bindi does not fit into that cultural norm.
V: How do you feel when you see instances of ongoing Orientalism?
B: I feel very uneasy. I have an enormous amount of respect for the beliefs and the culture and that is not represented in Orientalist discourses. Orientalism tends to not only be inaccurate but also degrading and dominating. To see that Orientalism is ongoing implies that the corresponding colonial power relationships are also ongoing. It implies that the West is still a colonizing force, and so long as that persists there will be enormous inequity. The British wanted India's natural resources, and so took them by force, justifying it with the lies one finds in Orientalism. We still use those lies, but instead now we are taking what we want out of India's cultural knowledge and iconography and using them how we want.
V: Would you define what is happening here as cultural appropriation?
B:  Yes, Selena Gomez is absolutely appropriating the bindi in her performances. The main thing I struggle to comes to terms with in regards to cultural appropriation is this sense that only the more dominant group can appropriate cultural products, when technically cultural appropriation can go both ways.
V: While this may be true, ongoing Orientalism and colonial power relationships shape any kind of cultural exchange that occurs between India and the West. Specifically, your initial concern about Lululemon's Brahmacharya bag is about a Canadian clothing company appropriating the Hindu cultural concept of Brahmacharya and recreating it in its own image. Very clearly this is an instance of cultural appropriation.
B: I can see how ongoing Orientalism is insulting, but stealing on such a large scale? It does not seem that simple when one takes into account the history of Hindu Nationalism.
V: How so?
B: Hindu Indians such as Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Vivekananda and Mohandas K. Gandhi used Orientalist discourses that romanticize the Orient to justify a Hindu Nationalist movement based on the supremacy of Hinduism[7]. In the Hindu Swaraj, Gandhi repeatedly refers to how India's (Hindu Brahmin) ancestors had the foresight and wisdom to predict many of the pitfalls of Europeans' concepts of modernization, civilization and development and forge a different path. Instead, Gandhi argues for a dharma-based concept of the civilization, in which morality and self-control are the measurements of success[8]. In justifying his conceptualization of civilization he relies on the accounts of British Orientalist writers to justify the superiority of Indian Hindu culture over all other cultures, saying, "If this definition be correct, then India, as so many British writers have shown, has nothing to learn from anybody else"[9]. Years later he goes on to say "that the Europeans themselves will have to remodel their outlook if they are not to perish under the weight of the comforts to which they are becoming slaves"[10]. Not only does Hindu Brahmin India have the greatest cultural base for a thriving civilization, but the Occident would be advised to adopt the system Gandhi is arguing for as well. Gandhi is not the only Hindu Nationalist to argue that Hinduism and yoga are India's greatest goods to export; most notably Swami Vivekananda made similar arguments. Swami Vivekananda re-imagined Hinduism and yoga in an Orientalist-inspired, Hindu Nationalist vein, one that rejected the hatha yoga tradition that fuelled Orientalist heathen stereotypes, and exported it to North America and Europe[11]. If Vivekananda wanted to, in some respects, export religious and spiritual practices to the West, then not only is he countering Orientalist/colonial power dynamics, but he is inviting non-Indians to engage with these cultural beliefs and practices; therefore, it cannot by definition be appropriation. These religious and cultural ideas i.e. yoga have been freely given, not stolen, asteya. There seems to be, in a sense, a conversion process.
V: Is it a conversion process? Perhaps you can make that argument with Buddhism but Hinduism was never intended as a conversion religion[12].
B: If this huge acceptance of certain Hindu images in Western popular culture is not the result of a conversion process, does that necessarily mean that Hinduism is being appropriated en masse? Is there no middle way in which the popularity of Hindu images and practices is the result of mass appreciation?
V: Appreciation of what? Of a glorified, exotic exercise regime? Or the actual teachings? And which teachings? The ones favored by Orientalist scholars? There is a mass cultural appropriation of Hinduism taking place in the West. Yoga may be appreciated en masse, but most people in the West who practice yoga are not engaging with yoga's background; instead, yoga is being primarily used according to Western cultural norms. That is not to say that all yogis in the West are appropriating yoga, but on a popular culture level, absolutely. How many people who buy Urban Outfitters' Ganesh tapestry, have any clue who Ganesh is and what his significance is? Bhakti art is a fashion accessory in the West; do you see other religion's iconography exploited the same way?

B: People can identify the Buddha, the cross and the Star of David, but Hindu deities are not nearly as well known by name nor are their significance understood, and yet they are easy to purchase.
V: These religions have different relationships with Orientalism than Hinduism. We have proven that Orientalism is not dead and therefore our society's larger cultural attitudes towards Hinduism are still informed by those samskaras. Orientalism gives us the feeling that we have the right to appropriate Hindu icons and concepts and recreate them however we so please. We can glorify them or we can tear them down depending on what we feel like.
B: So the Ganesh tapestry and the Brahmacharya bag are only two visible examples of how these colonial samskaras are still within our minds... 
V: Exactly. Are these samskaras something Sri Patanjali would teach us to stop through our yoga practice?
B: Of course, in the passage you were discussing at the beginning of the lesson Sri Patanjali tells us that Isvara, pure awareness is part of the path to enlightenment and that Isvara is without samskaras. Furthermore, the actions that arise out of these latent impressions are harmful to others. As Said puts it so aptly, "The nexus of knowledge and power creating 'the Oriental' and in a sense obliterating him as a human being is therefore not...an exclusively academic matter. Yet it is an intellectual matter of some obvious importance"[13]. Orientalism deems Hindus as lesser human beings due to the othering of their culture. Not only is that harmful, but it is untruthful as well. Orientalism is also contributing to our belief that we in the West have the right to continue acting like our colonizer forefathers did. We believe that we have the right to take what we want from other people and use it as we please, that is stealing, and it is stealing based on greed and possesiveness. That is four of the five yamas or self-restraints broken, and considering the relationship between Orientalism and eroticism it is not a stretch to believe that the fifth yama, brahmacharya is also threatened. More importantly than that Orientalism forces us to perceive the world and the people in it incorrectly, it allows our minds to turn things around. If the goal of yoga is to stop the mind from turning, we need to combat our internalized Orientalism and our internalized experiences of colonialism, which in the West put us on a false pedestal. That is our yoga today in the West.
V: How are we to do that?
B: Sri Patanjali identifies a number of practices to engage in to work towards Isvara, among them beginning to discern between correct perceptions and the mind turning, good actions or karma through the practice of the yamas and niyamas, in addition to the external work of the asanas and pranayams etc.
V: What Sri Patanjali describes in the Yoga Sutras is how to engage in a process of 'unlearning', which is what Said himself calls for[14]. In place of all the samskaras which we are 'unlearning' Said urges us to search out alternative, nonrepressive and nonmanipulative perspectives to Orientalism[15]. Living a life according to the yamas and niyamas forces us to do just that while also furthering us along the path to enlightenment.
B: Said also notes though that, in his words, "One would have to rethink the whole complex problem of knowledge and power,"[16]. Is that not extreme?
V: Inspired by the Upanisads to question the power relations laid out in the Vedas and challenge our understanding of the world, is that not the lineage of our practice?
B: It is.
V: Then perhaps Patanjali yoga is extreme, but the ongoing effects of Orientalism and colonialism are also extreme and stretch far beyond the issue of cultural appropriation of Hindu images. That is why we need to practice yoga.


[1] Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. London: Penguin Press. p. 285
[2] Ibid. p. 286
[3] Ibid. p. 286-7
[4]  Ibid. p. 287
[5] Antony, Mary Grace. 2010. 'On the Spot: Seeking Acceptance and Expressing Resistance through the Bindi.' Journal of International and Intercultural Communication. 3(4): 346-368 (http://journals1.scholarsportal.info/show_html.xqy?uri=/17513057/v03i0004/346_otssaaerttb.xml&school=queens).

[6] Ibid.
[7] King, Richard. 1999. 'Orientalism and the Modern Myth of "Hinduism"." Numen. 46(2): 146-185. p. 151
[8] Gandhi, Mohandas K. 1909. Hind Swaraj. Ahmedabad: Navjivan, p. 65
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid. p. 66
[11] Singleton, Mark. 2010. Yoga Body: The Origins of Modern Posture Practice. Oxford: Oxford UP. p. 42
King, Richard. 1999. 'Orientalism and the Modern Myth of "Hinduism"." Numen. 46(2): 146-185. p. 160
[12] Rodrigues, Hillary. 2006. Hinduism the eBook: An Online Introduction. Journal of Buddhist Ethics. p. 463-464
[13] Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. London: Penguin Press. p. 27
[14] Ibid. p. 28
[15] Ibid. p. 24
[16] Ibid.

Sunday, March 2, 2014

A Dialogue on Yoga and Orientalism (part 1)

The following dialogue takes place between a Patanjali yoga Teacher, Vidya, and a student, Brahmari.
Part 1
Inhale.
Exhale.
Inhale.
Exhale.
When focus slips your fingers like water
Inhale. Exhale.
When the window is the most glorious painting of an alternate universe
Every sound magnified, every being fascinating
When focus slips through your fingers like water
Asana are meaningless motions
Dhyana is a game for the monkey mind
The heart reaches out for everything, grasping nothing
Inhale. Exhale.

Waiting, waiting, waiting for the timer to go off
For a voice to call you back
To free you from the prison of the monkey mind

V: Bringing your presence back into the room.
Freedom.
V: Inviting small movements into your body to ground.
Sweet freedom.
V: Today's reading is from Sri Patanjali Yoga Sutra, book I lines 23-26:
"Ishvara pranidhanad va. Klesha karma viaka-ashayair aparmairshtah purusha vishesha ishvara. Tatra niratishayam sarvajynya bijam. Sa purvesham api guruh kalena-anavachedat."
In English,
"Realization may also come if one is oriented toward the ideal of pure awareness, Isvara. Isvara is a distinct, incorruptible form of pure awareness, utterly independent of cause and effect, and lacking any store of latent impressions, samskara. Its independence makes this awareness an incomparable source of omniscience. Existing beyond time, Isvara was also the ideal of the ancients."[1].
Ishvara has been passed down from teacher to student since long before Sri Patanjali wrote it down so beautifully, which is why finding the right Teacher is essential for attaining realization or enlightenment. It is through the Teacher that one can begin to cultivate pure awareness[2]. Brahmari, you're not paying attention, your mind has wondered off elsewhere.
B: May I ask you a question? It's not directly related to this passage of the Yoga Sutra, but it is bothering me.
V: Of course, everything is inter-related.
B: I know we've been through this before, but what does brahmacharya mean?
V: What do you think it means?
B: My understanding is that it refers to a vow of celibacy and is one of the five yamas or self-restraints that Sri Patanjali outlines[3].
V: That's correct, why do you ask?
B: On the bus this morning I saw a girl carrying a blue tote bag from Lululemon. Across the bag the word brahmacharya is spelled out with different items such as cookies, French Fries, alcohol, cigarettes, prescription pills, needles for intravenous drug use and condoms. Lululemon has a huge influence over what we expect yoga to look like in North America, and now they have created an image of Brahmacharya that seems so at odds with its actual meaning. I was so confused when I saw the bag I went to go find it on Lululemon's website to take a closer look. In the description for the bag Lululemon defines brahmacharya as moderation or non-excess saying:
"Brahmacharya teaches us to recognize that moment of "just enough" so we don't move past it into uncomfortable excess. Maybe it's by pushing away the plate of French fries or using our pent-up energy for a run. By focusing inward, we keep our bodies healthy and energetic.".
Their website also features a blog post by staff-member, Sandy Wei, who goes into further detail describing this version of yoga, describing how she used to eat unhealthy foods like chips and then decided to get a gym membership. I don't have an issue with moderation, but it seems to me that Lululemon has dramatically altered the meaning of brahmacharya to serve their own needs. The blog post, and to some extent the bag itself, is an advertisement for Lululemon's other products. The bag is given to customers at the check-out counter and seems to send the message that it is okay to consume the products featured on the bag in moderation, so long as you go to the gym wearing your $100 Lululemon pants.
V: Of course, it is an advertisement, of course Lululemon is doing this for its own personal gains, Lululemon is a multi-national corporation, and capitalism is based on the concept that everyone acts out of self-interest[4]. This is a company that frequently treats women's bodies as sex objects in their advertisements, celibacy is obviously a concept that they do not want to promote and it is also a concept that many have argued is no longer relevant post-sexual revolution. 
 B: My understanding of the reason why brahmacharya is a yama is because sex, and subsequently children, were seen as distractions from yoga and the pursuit of attaining enlightenment. With contraception readily available, brahmacharya is no longer necessary in order to avoid having children, so in that respect it is outdated. However, I have also heard modern interpretations of brahmacharya as the appropriate use of one's sexual and creative energy, so in other words, one should abstain from the harmful act of adultery or wasting one's energy on meaningless hook-ups[5]. These reinterpretations at least resemble the traditional understanding of brahmacharya, but Lululemon is not adapting the concept to a new historical and cultural context, Lululemon is constructing an entirely new meaning and new image of brahmacharya. The part I find most infuriating is that this new Lululemon brahmacharya contradicts the other yamas: How can one practice ahimsa if one is using intravenous drugs such as heroin in moderation? We have established that this bag is part of Lululemon's advertising campaign for their other products, they want us to feel emotional attachment to the company and its products, contradicting the yama, aparigraha (non-attachment). And what about Satya, or truthfulness? Or Asteya, non-stealing? Lululemon is not being honest about the meaning of brahmacharya in the image it created, and it is taking a concept and using it for its own purposes. What right does a Canadian active-wear company have redefining and marketing an ancient Indian tradition?
V: Is this not to be expected, though? This is not an isolated incident. Westerners have been reinterpreting and promoting their own ideas of Indian traditions and culture for over two hundred years.
B: What do you mean?
V: Recall Edward Said's influential book, Orientalism. How does he define Orientalism? 
B: Said defines Orientalism in three ways: First he defines Orientalism in the academic context, as the (anthropological, sociological, historical etc.) study of the Orient and Orientals. His second definition is more general; Orientalism refers to the ontological and epistemological distinction made between the Orient and the Occident[6]. The final definition Said describes Orientalism,
"as the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient- dealing with it by making statements about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient,"[7].
V: What, according to Said, is the Orient?
B: The Orient is an exotic place of romance and adventure, a source of Europe's colonial wealth as well as Europe or the Occident's inherent opposite[8].
V: And where geographically is the Orient?
B: Initially it referred to the Bible lands and India, however Said acknowledges that the Orient has expanded since the early nineteenth century[9].
V: Regardless, throughout the period of India's colonization by European powers, India was considered part of the Orient and it remains in the Orient.
B:  That does not make sense to me, the Middle East and India seem to be so culturally different, how could Western Europeans lump the two together?
V: That is a valid point, and in the early years of European colonialism Muslims did not identify as 'Eastern' because they considered that term to be referring to Hindus, but with time they accepted it[10]. To this day the centre of the Muslim world is labeled " the Middle East", you yourself just used it, ignoring any regional differences between the nations that are lumped together under that term. Perhaps India was seen as being part of the Bible lands because it was part of the Muslim Mughal Empire prior to European colonization, perhaps it is just because India, like the Bible lands, is East of Western Europe, or the Occident. Either way, Orientalism via all three definitions leaves samskaras, or latent impressions, in our minds that there is an Orient and an Occident and that they are different.
B: Samskaras being psychological, physiological and cultural grooves in the in mind, body and the culture?
V: Exactly, we all have this internalized belief that the Orient and the Occident are real, they exist and there are opposites. Now, does the Orient exist by itself?
B: Said repeatedly makes it clear that the discourse surrounding the Orient is primarily determined by Europeans saying that "the hegemony of European ideas.... usually overrid[es] the possibility that a more independent, or more skeptical, thinker might have different views on the matter"[11]. He therefore establishes the fact that two people can look at that geographical region of the world and see something completely different than the Orient. If my understanding of Sri Patanjali's teachings on our sense of self is correct, then if two different people can look at the same physical thing, which does exist, and see two very different things, then the thing that one is seeing cannot exist except in the mind of the viewer[12]. Therefore, the geographical region exists, but the concept of the Orient is manmade because it relies on the viewer's perception, which is influenced by the viewer's samskaras.
V: Exactly, and Said himself argues this when he states, "the Orient is not an inert fact of nature. It is not merely there, just as the Occident itself is not just there either,"[13].
B: Therefore both the Orient and the Occident are created in our minds[14].
V: Precisely, which is why Said stresses that, "what is commonly circulated... is not 'truth' but representations"[15]. Externalities such as language, images, etc. these are not truth, but are meant to represent something else, and therefore they have the possibility of misrepresenting.
B: If the Orient is nothing but a misrepresentation then why did you bring up Orientalism? What does this have to do with Lululemon's distortion of Brahmacharya?
V: Have patience. In the mean time, you must realize that the Orient is not simply a misrepresentation, or as Said calls it, "an airy European fantasy... but a created body of theory and practice in which, for many generations, there has been a considerable investment"[16]. The Orient, and Orientalism as a whole, is a deeply entrenched samskara whose effects on the world are very real and very much relevant to your initial concerns. Now, recall for me how does Said describe the Oriental?
B: The Oriental is the Occidental's foil: The Occidental speaks for the silent, passive Oriental who is inevitably the opposite of the Occidental. The Oriental is described as dependent, irrational, lazy, gullible yet cunning and untrustworthy, while also being erotic, lustful characters worthy of starring roles in Victorian pornographic novels[17]. Conversely, their Occidental colonizers are independent, rational, virtuous, mature, intelligent and forward thinking, and constitute the norm[18]. Another key difference between the two is that unlike the diversity amongst Europeans, all Orientals are alike, irrespective of whether or not one is a Sikh Indian and another is a Muslim Egyptian[19].
V: Do Orientals exist by themselves?
B: Of course not, the Oriental is completely dependent on the Occidental, again, that is not to say that the people who live in the geographical regions named the Orient do not exist, but it is to say that the Oriental is a misrepresentation of reality that is dependent on the Occidental. European colonizers formed the concept of the Oriental in their minds and perpetuated that samskara into the minds of Europeans and non-Europeans alike through language, visual art, doctrines, scholarships as well as institutions and bureaucracies[20]. 
V: How does Said describe the relationship between the Orient and the Occident?
B: "The relationship between Occident and Orient is a relationship of power, of domination, of varying degrees of complex hegemony"[21] wherein the Occident has power over the Orient. This power dynamic can be identified in how the Occident acts and speaks on behalf of the Orient in the first two definitions, but it is the third definition, the definition Said sees as being the most important[22], that one really sees this dynamic explored.
V: Note however, that Said makes clear that the Orient was able to determine in part what was said about the Orient[23], this is especially important to remember when we consider Orientalism's role in India.
B: Of course, but it did create and enforce a relationship between the two wherein the Occident consistently gained strength from its comparison with the Orient. To paraphrase Said, the Occidental can have a variety of relationships with the Orient without ever losing the upper hand[24].
V: It is important to emphasize how strong Orientalism was as a discourse. Orientalism could be used to not only justify Europe's colonization of the Orient, but also to maintain that system through its tight knit relationship with socio-economic and political institutions[25].
B: How could Orientalism be used to justify the colonization of India? After all, Orientalism as we are discussing it now is Said's term, it was not used this way prior to 1978.
V: That is correct, but one can identify Orientalism as Said explores it in his third definition in the writings of the British colonizers. For example, British philosopher John Stewart Mill, who had worked in India on behalf of the British crown, made it very clear that he did not believe his ideas on liberty and representative democracy were relevant to India. Indians (Orientals) were civilizationally and racially inferior to Europeans and therefore the same philosophy could not be applied in both the Occident and the Orient. Indians needed the British to colonize them and run India for them if they ever had any hope of reaching the same level of civilization as the British[26].
B: That is ridiculous, not only is it obviously untrue that Indians are inferior, but it is very clear in the Yoga Sutra that the only one who can liberate us from our suffering is ourselves. British colonization would not be of true benefit for India no matter how well intentioned.
V: While this may be true that does not change the fact that Orientalism is a part of India's history. However, Said primarily explores Orientalism in relationship to Islam, what is the relationship between Orientalism and Hinduism?
B: Why are you asking about Hinduism?
V: The effect Orientalism had on Hinduism in turn affected yoga.  
B: Orientalism strongly influenced the construction of what we now consider to be Hinduism. He examines how the Sanskrit term sindhu, as in the Sindhu, or the Indus, Valley was translated into Persian as Hindu and into Arabic as Hind, all three terms referring to a geographic region now in Pakistan[27]. While people in what would become British India began using the term during the Mughal Empire, it was used primarily as a distinction between indigenous peoples and foreigners irrespective of their religious affiliations, a definition that persisted during the early years of contact with Europeans[28]. Prior to the eighteenth century, Europeans classified Hindus as being either Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Heathens, the latter being associated with worship of the devil and in typical Orientalist style was attributed to Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains as wells as groups we now consider Hindu[29]. Eventually the term Hindu began to exclude the Abraham religions leaving only the many, diverse indigenous 'heathen' religions[30].
V: Exactly, and note that Heathens are the ultimate other to the (primarily Christian) Occidental and clearly carry highly negative connotations. When the term Heathen and Hindu merged into one, Hindus inherited that negative, othered stereotype.
B: Right, and when European Orientalist scholars began examining the religious practices of Hindus they attempted to make these diverse belief systems and practices conform to a European Judeo-Christian understanding of religion[31]. European scholars picked specific texts, savior figures and other Judeo-Christian religious staples to manufacture an Oriental religious tradition that would counter their Occidental one, thus further entrenching Orientalist beliefs and values[32]. However, just as Said notes that Orientals had some ability to determine what was said about them, Hindus also played a role in shaping the discourse about their newly created religion.
V: While that is true, it is very apparent that the Hindus participated in this self-determination process were limited to the Brahmin caste[33]. This clearly contributed to the emphasis on Sanskrit, Brahminic texts such as the Vedas, as well as the belief that Hinduism as the European colonizers conceptualized it was a single, unified tradition[34].
B: King also notes how the strong Brahmanic influence over European Orientalists' construction of Hinduism also entrenched Brahmin's elite status[35]. Texts associated with the Brahmins such as the Bhagavad Gita and Sri Patanjali's Yoga Sutra were identified and romanticized by Orientalist scholars as having far more importance than they did at that point in history, to the detriment of the Hatha yoga tradition[36].
V: How do you think Orientalist assumptions and discourse about Hinduism inform Lululemon's reconstruction of the Hindu concept of Brahmacharya?
B: Well, much like how Occidentals would speak for Orientals, Lululemon is, incorrectly, explaining the meaning of Brahmacharya to a wider audience. However, I feel like there is a huge historical gap between Orientalism and Lululemon, I do not feel like the two are actually related. Besides, if I were to say to a Hindu that Hinduism is a Western invention they would be upset. Hinduism is a concept that is accepted today, why bother discussing Orientalism?
V: Is Orientalism no longer relevant? Is this something that we have moved beyond? Or is it something that continues today? Take some time to think and reflect on these questions and we'll discuss your answer in our next class.

Part 2




[1] Patañjali, Chris Hatranft. 2003. The Yoga Sutra of Patanjali: Sanskrit Translation & Glossary. (http://www.light-weaver.com/ys/ysp-skrit-eng-chip-hartranft.pdf)
[2] Patañjali, Geshe Michael Roach, Christie McNally. 2005. The Essential Yoga Sutra: Ancient Wisdom for Your Yoga. New York: Three Leaves, Doubleday. p.18-19
[3] Patañjali, Geshe Michael Roach, Christie McNally. 2005. The Essential Yoga Sutra: Ancient Wisdom for Your Yoga. New York: Three Leaves, Doubleday. p. 50
[4] Smith, Adam. 1776. 'Chapter 2: Of the Principle Which Gives Occasion to the Division of Labour.' Pp. 15-18 in An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. p. 17
Friedman, Milton. 1979. 'The Power of the Market' Pp.9-37 in Free to Choose. New York: Harcourt. p. 13-14
[5] Roach, Geshe Michael. 2004. How Yoga Works. Diamond Cutter Press. p. 325
[6] Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. London: Penguin Press. p. 2
[7] Ibid. p. 3
[8] Ibid. p. 1
[9] Ibid. p. 4
[10] Hodgson, Marshall. 1974. ‘European World Hegemony: The Nineteenth Century’ Pp. 223-248 in The Venture of Islam, Volume 3: The Gunpowder Empires and Modern Times. Chicago: University of Chicago press. p. 233
[11] Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. London: Penguin Press. p. 7
[12] Roach, Geshe Michael. 2004. How Yoga Works. Diamond Cutter Press p. 111-113
[13] Said, Edward. 1978. Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. London: Penguin Press. p. 4
[14] Ibid. p. 5
[15] Ibid. p. 22
[16] Ibid. p. 6
[17] Ibid. p. 8, 36, 38-40
[18] Ibid. p. 40
[19] Ibid. p. 38
[20] Ibid. p. 2
[21] Ibid. p. 5
[22] Ibid. p. 6
[23] Ibid. p. 3
[24] Ibid. p. 7
[25] Ibid. p. 6
[26] Ibid. p. 14
[27] King, Richard. 1999. 'Orientalism and the Modern Myth of "Hinduism"." Numen. 46(2): 146-185. p. 162
[28] Ibid. p. 162-163
[29] Ibid. p. 163
[30] Ibid. p. 164
[31] King, Richard. 2002. Orientalism and Religion. Routledge. Retrieved 9 November 2013, from (http://www.myilibrary.com?ID=33497). p. 111
[32] Ibid. p. 111
[33] King, Richard. 1999. 'Orientalism and the Modern Myth of "Hinduism"." Numen. 46(2): 146-185. p. 169
[34] Ibid. p. 169
[35] Ibid. p. 170
[36] Singleton, Mark. 2010. Yoga Body: The Origins of Modern Posture Practice. Oxford: Oxford UP.p. 41