Hmm... I wonder what the post-conversion Ashoka game would look like!

Coooool! They should have more of this kinda stuff..there's so much material in Indian mythology.

So you think one should object or shouldn't? Yes, this is the way world works. A black guy can call himself a "n*****", but non-black cannot and only a dumb one can identify a dumb person. Yes, it is okay for a hindu to talk shit of kali, but not non-hindus. Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

I wish I lived in a ideal world where everyone respected everyone else and "dharma(justice)" is moving on four feet, but it isnt. Many people are cynical enough to accept the world with all its deformities. A little bit of intolerance here and there can be overseen.

Having said that, do watch out for news where bajrang dal (which many call them monkeys, hindu fundamentalists etc) raises their voice and it will fall on deaf ears.

cheers
-P

If the game makers had been white, the blogosphere would have been up in arms with people yelling “Temple of Doom, never again!”

Yup.

Well, this just proves that some Indians are just as ignorant. I know I'll get accused of being a Hindutva fundie but here goes: this is just as bad as Indians in India who refer to their own clothing, food etc. as ethnic, the ethnic look. We've become experts at viewing ourselves and describing ourselves through the eyes of outsiders. We've become a tribe brainwashed by others' depictions of our customs, religions etc. This game is not going to teach anyone any decent history. Using Kali as a mythological creature fighting Ashoka is wrong, in my opinion. Kali does not represent the opposite of Ashoka. Clearly, they have no understanding of Kali's significance. I'm sure the game's devisers would never consider using the religious figures from Islam or Christianity in this game as Ashoka's opponents, would they? If they want to invent mythological creatures based on temple sculpture, that's fine. But if you're going to have Ashoka battling Gods, why be so narrow-minded? Why not be more inclusive and include other Gods?

P.S.: I'm not saying that games people shouldn't mine India's rich traditions, but they should at least have a clue and not confuse Kali with something else. There are enough examples and stories filled with people and creatures for them to accomplish what it is they are trying to do without looking completely bereft of any intelligence whatsoever. And ALL religions are basically myths.

Kali does not represent the opposite of Ashoka. Clearly, they have no understanding of Kali's significance.

And I assume you do? And we all have to accept your understanding as sacrosanct?

I wouldn't accuse you of being a fundie or anything, but Kali has many different interpretations and values. I tend to be skeptical of anyone who wishes to see Hindu deities in one specific "approved" angle or interpretation. Feel free to accuse me of being "corrupted" by western thought, but I'd like to point out that yours (or the Hindutva brigade's) precious POV is not the only one.

For a more reasoned discussion of this, read Amartya Sen's "The Argumentative Indian". It is very tempting for nationalistic ones among us to simply dismiss alternative or historically inconvenient ways of looking at our deities or society ("the Kama Sutra was concoted by the British"!), but we should refrain from that. Kali's origins are murky and fascinating, coming from the depths of Tantrism, and I like it that way.

I like the celebrate the freedom that Hinduism provides its adherents to interpret and discuss their deities, which I feel is its advantage. And which I feel that the Hindutva brigade is doing its best to snatch away.

So you think one should object or shouldn't? Yes, this is the way world works. A black guy can call himself a "n*****", but non-black cannot and only a dumb one can identify a dumb person. Yes, it is okay for a hindu to talk shit of kali, but not non-hindus. Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

Ummm - how about judging based on the content rather than the speaker? What happens if this game gets distributed by a non-desi company, is it still alright? What if the company gets bought out? How many of the designers have to be Hindus? Supposing we find out that the idea was from a non-Hindu? Or the idea was from a Hindu, but the implementation was from non-Hindus? Whose definition of Hinduism are you using? Does the game have to be written by Brahmins or can Scheduled Caste coders work on it too?

In short, what's your minum required Hindu content for this to be OK and how would you measure it?

This is actually a live issue for at least one of the people on this blog. Nina gets hate mail for her work, but this game seems far more sacreligious ...

Nina gets hate mail for her work

Really, what do you do, Nina?

Personally, for me, it depends on the 'intent', rather than the "Hindu" composition of the programmers. I completely believe that there are people who can be non-Hindu/Indian in origin and still do a reasonable job of this. I'd reserve final judgement after seeing the game though.

Although, I admit that having more Hindus in the team will bolster my confidence about the intent.

What was wrong with Temple of Doom was not that a bunch of Americans made it, but it had no redeeming attempt to break through the ignorance and present anything real/positive about India. that does not seem to be happening here.

I don't see why someone should get a pass for offensive/opportunistic content simply because they are brown. If some Sikhs started mass distributing Guru Gobind Singh bobble-head dolls in cereal boxes, I am fairly certain the rest of the Sikh community wouldn't care who did it--they'd be mad. Whether this video game is that offensive I know not...

Also, Indian mythology never presents its entities as black/white characters. Plenty of stories abound in which gods play calamitious mischief, and demons perform good deeds. Kali, in particular, is a fascinatingly ambiguous character which arose from Tantric practices (sometime in the last 1000 years, not before that), hence steeped in violence and sex. I see any attempt at "whitewashing" Indian mythology as an affront to India's rich culture.

So you think one should object or shouldn't? Yes, this is the way world works. A black guy can call himself a "n*****", but non-black cannot and only a dumb one can identify a dumb person. Yes, it is okay for a hindu to talk shit of kali, but not non-hindus. Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

That's what we need -- pagan ritualistic interpretation of Hinduism. It invites troglodytes in chic NY stores to adorn statuettes with phalluses.
The black guy calling himself a n****** is a bad analogy. The appropriate analogy here is making a video game where anyone gets to call any black character a n******.

Besides, Nina's stuff does not insult Rama or Sita. It's pretty cool and presented tastefully. As far as I recall, her stuff does not invite wrongful interpretations -- I mean why the hell would you want to battle Kali?

My grandma is quite devoted to the goddess really and she would throw a fit if she found out that you have to battle her to reach the next level or whatever.

I'm not a Hindu, and so I don't see things in the same way that a believer might. However, I do think that many Hindus would have a problem with the idea that a Goddess was a "bad guy" that you were supposed to kill in a video game. It would be one thing if this was a Ramayana video game where, playing Rama, you fought Ravanana. In this case the story line does not conform to religious myth, yet figures of religious significance are being used (a) as tokens of exoticism and (b) as things to be killed.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this ...

Well, it certainly didn't take long for someone to mention the Hindutva brigade etc etc etc. Did I say anyone had to accept my view of Kali as sacrosanct? If I did, I would be running around the world, shoving Kali down everyone's throat. I am not. I merely expressed my opinion, just as you are entitled to yours. I agree, the beauty of Hinduism is that it is not confined to one interpretation, nor would I ever wish it to be. The beauty of Hindu Gods is that they're not so uptight. However, I do feel that this beauty is abused. Nowhere in my education, which was shockingly liberal if you must know, did I learn to associate Kali with anything that approaches evil, wrongdoing, demons etc. If Kali fought anyone, it would not be Ashoka, in my opinion. I am not averse to having games depicting Kali fighting, but I feel that the game's devisers have merely sunk to the lowest common denominator and aped Western views on Hindu deities. Oh, yes, there's a scary looking Hindu deity - just perfect for our games peopled with monster-like creatures. Let's have the good guy fight that multi-armed thing. By all means, have Kali fighting. How about being progressive and using Kali as a symbol of woman power, of the strenghth of the divine female, especially in often sexist India? How about having Kali defeat some of the real evils in Indian society using this video game? But if this game is clothing itself as a "serious use" of "history," then it has to live up to at least marginally higher standards. Otherwise, don't claim it is history and label it what it is: a mish-mash meant to purely entertain, no different from the average video game. At least the latter would be more honest. And you would do well to take a page from Amartya Sen's book as well. There's enough abysmal ignorance out there about India and Indic religions, without Indians adding to it.

Kom does make a point - Kali's legendary violence was directed at the wicked. So, are the game designers suggesting that Asoka is wicked, and Kali is trying to destroy him? Or is Asoka the good guy, and Kali the wicked? Considering that Kali can range from Shyama Kali (a somewhat tender figure) to Shamshan Kali (pure destructive power), but I cannot remember an instance of where Kali struck down an innocent.

Or could it be that Kali's ebony black skin makes her an ideal villain? Looks like Indians' color complex is entering exciting new territory.

The religious backgrounds of the game's designers does not interest me, but I would guess that few were Bangali Hindus, who tend to focus on Kali than Hindus from other parts of India. But even reading Hindu comic books (the way I learned it growing up on LI) would have been a good starting point for the designers.

"Also, Indian mythology never presents its entities as black/white characters. Plenty of stories abound in which gods play calamitious mischief, and demons perform good deeds. Kali, in particular, is a fascinatingly ambiguous character which arose from Tantric practices (sometime in the last 1000 years, not before that), hence steeped in violence and sex. I see any attempt at "whitewashing" Indian mythology as an affront to India's rich culture."

As I said, that's the beauty of Hindu Gods. They are more human. However, if you say Kali is open to many interpretations, when was the last time you saw any depiction of Kali that did not associate her with thuggees, violence, sex etc? Is it ok to continuously harp on only one interpretation of Kali? Seems to me that it is the other aspects of Kali that are being whitewashed and not the ones you're talking about. And, according to my understanding, Kali's origins go back further than 1,000 years.

I'm not a Hindu, and so I don't see things in the same way that a believer might. However, I do think that many Hindus would have a problem with the idea that a Goddess was a "bad guy" that you were supposed to kill in a video game. It would be one thing if this was a Ramayana video game where, playing Rama, you fought Ravanana. In this case the story line does not conform to religious myth, yet figures of religious significance are being used (a) as tokens of exoticism and (b) as things to be killed.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this ...

Spot on. The average Amar Chithra Katha comic would be of more use to a child than this game, if it indeed purports to be of historical significance.

This is completely OT, but Ennis, didn't you say you were going to post some Africa-from-the-desi-perspective entries???

hrmph!

ninangoja bado!

Although, to be fair, I wouldn't classify Ravana as a pure "bad guy." However, a game depicting a fight between the two would at least be faithful to the "history" upon which it is based.

N

owhere in my education, which was shockingly liberal if you must know, did I learn to associate Kali with anything that approaches evil, wrongdoing, demons etc.

It depends on what you consider evil or wrongdoing. Would you consider killing tons of people and hanging their skulls and fingers as a necklace and generally destroying the world as "evil"? Would you consider a deity who arose from a tradition that indulges in many questionable practices (human/animal sacrifices, for instance) as "evil"? I dunno, it depends on the circumstances. But that dark side of Kali is exactly what is fascinating and flexible about her.

Personally, from my understanding of Kali's nature, I can completely see how there might be situations where she might fight a human (even a righteous one). As an analogy, there is a story in the Mahabharata of a battle between Arjun and Shiva (in disguise) and other deity-human battles...

How about having Kali defeat some of the real evils in Indian society using this video game?

Pray, how does one defeat the "real evils" of a society in a video game? Never seen that happen before.

How about being progressive and using Kali as a symbol of woman power, of the strenghth of the divine female, especially in often sexist India?

Sexism in India exists, paradoxically, in parallel with female worship. We Indians are seriously good at dissociating female divine power from actual female status in society.

Kom, let's not make this into a religious argument. It does seem like we agree on certain things. And I apologize for accusing you of being part of the Hindutva brigade, it was a knee-jerk reaction. But I also allergic to anything that seems like religious fundamentalism, and I am willing to give the game designers benefit of the doubt, so far. I'd be happy if they have a good storyline which justifies the scenes and the action.

If the game makers had been white, the blogosphere would have been up in arms with people yelling “Temple of Doom, never again!”

I am always surprised by how many whites remember lines like 'Shakti Day, Kali Maa' from that movie.
I loved the movie!

Pray, how does one defeat the "real evils" of a society in a video game? Never seen that happen before.

Well, if this video game is being touted as having historical significance, I don't see why it cannot be used to spread other messages as well. I mean it's not a novel idea - using games and books etc to influence people's ideas. Of course, a video game alone will not "defeat" any problem, but they can be used to educate.

How about being progressive and using Kali as a symbol of woman power, of the strenghth of the divine female, especially in often sexist India?

Sexism in India exists, paradoxically, in parallel with female worship. We Indians are seriously good at dissociating female divine power from actual female status in society.

- We certainly are. Another reason why it would be nice to remind Indians of the respect they accord the female divine in contrast to other monotheisit religions and shame them into translating the respect for the female divine into respect for women in society.

Anyways, I do not wish to argue. My point is that, while you may understand the subtleties of Kali (although I still disagree with you about her origins and the date you give) and Hindu Gods and Sanatana Dharma, many Indians and most Westerners do not. If this game indeed portrays Kali as merely a "bad guy" vs. "good guy" Ashoka, then it is only reinforcing ignorant stereotypes in the minds of people who either already have them or who will then acquire them. People who play this game are mostly likely not going to take the trouble to learn anything about Kali and her complexity. Reducing her to this level is a disservice. I also wanted to say that while I admire Amartya Sen very much and agree with him on many points. I don't find him to be sacrosanct either and think he's a bit off base on some things.

Great comments Kom.

If this game indeed portrays Kali as merely a "bad guy" vs. "good guy" Ashoka, then it is only reinforcing ignorant stereotypes in the minds of people who either already have them or who will then acquire them.

I agree with that. And frankly, I'd find it a bit stupid for them to actually have Ashoka 'kill' Kali. Even now, it would have to be a somewhat sophisticated story for a video game. But we should all wait and look at what's really there.

Nina gets hate mail for her work Really, what do you do, Nina?

This kind.

A good Kali game could be awesome. Her enemies could include traffic jams, corrupt politicians, and Valentine's Day. Even I, a non-gamer, would give that a try.

However, I do think that many Hindus would have a problem with the idea that a Goddess was a "bad guy" that you were supposed to kill in a video game.

I think this pretty much captures the essence of it. I also agree with most of Kom's comments.

Hindus are not really "believers" in the way the other religionists are. Nobody claims Kali is real. So it is not in the least bit about your interpretation of Kali versus mine. This is mostly about tradition and in many places Kali is a cherished goddess. They certainly wouldn't like to see her being killed in a video game. I think this is in bad taste to say the least. I thought they set the bar on bad taste with the game in which you get to shoot JFK. Guess this trumps that.

Even now, it would have to be a somewhat sophisticated story for a video game. But we should all wait and look at what's really there.

True. If I jumped the gun, based on what was written above, I will be the first to apologize. But not to belabor the point. Unfortunately, here is a common, run-of-the mill Western view on Kali:

Pat Robertson: Siva [is] the God of Destruction, and his consort, the Goddess of death [Kali]-that black, ugly statue there with all those fierce eyes." "I mean these people are out to kill other human beings in the name of their God."

I know he's a nutcase. But unfortunately, he has a rather large following. I have had the misfortune to engage in conversation with people who think I worship demons like Shiva and Kali. Even from people you would call educated. Even people who weren't trying to convert me - what a wonder! -- thought Kali was some sort of evil demonic hag. From a description of the plot of a Buffy novel:

"When Willow is next to fall victim, Buffy learns that Justine struck a deal with the evil demon Kali. Justine plans to hand the world to Kali in exchange for becoming a famous artist. What Justine fails to realize is that the only way Kali can be satisfied is if the entire universe comes to an end. And not only that, but Justine's method of handing the world to Kali involves killing twenty-two people by trapping their souls in paintings of the Tarot cards - and Willow, Oz, and Xander are doomed to be her latest victims."

As Rajiv Malhotra has pointed out (am I goign to be accused again of being a Hindutva fundie:)) There's also a book written by a professor that states: "Clinical psychology should help clients get out of the negative archetype of Kali and advance them towards the positive archetype of Goddess Diana.”

So I see nothing wrong in trying to whitewash these incorrect and negative and false depictions of Kali. Why help perpetuate such breathtaking ignorance?

Anyways, I do not wish to argue. My point is that, while you may understand the subtleties of Kali (although I still disagree with you about her origins and the date you give) and Hindu Gods and Sanatana Dharma, many Indians and most Westerners do not. If this game indeed portrays Kali as merely a "bad guy" vs. "good guy" Ashoka, then it is only reinforcing ignorant stereotypes in the minds of people who either already have them or who will then acquire them. People who play this game are mostly likely not going to take the trouble to learn anything about Kali and her complexity. Reducing her to this level is a disservice.

Kali is 1337. 1337 like ninjas. Details are irrelevant at this level.

Cultural familiarity breeds a desire to study the complexities.

If India ever becomes an economic power at the same level as Japan then I predict you will see a lot of this stuff filter through into mainstream American popular culture. There will be cheap exotification on both sides. But this will serve to counter a lot of xenophobia, which is a positive thing in my book.

Sorry, I didn't really get the connection between ninjas and Kali. Perhaps I'm dense.

"There will be cheap exotification on both sides. But this will serve to counter a lot of xenophobia, which is a positive thing in my book."

Do you really think Indian gamers will exotify Jesus or Mohammed or Allah by sticking them in a video game and portraying them in a negative manner, such as control freaks hell-bent on world domination, for example? Do you think they would have "good guy" Ashoka fighting them? Somehow, I don't think so.

Nina P, some of your "hate" mail is really hilarious. And senseless. and in need of grammar checking ;)

Kom,

Your comment in #5 above regarding Indians IN INDIA referring to their OWN culture as ethnic is so perfect. I have felt that way a long time (that it is beyond ridiculous for them to do so), and never had an outlet to express that feeling. So glad to know someone else picked up on it as well. Many Indians do view themselves (and each other) with the eye of an outsider, as you said - "We've become experts at viewing ourselves and describing ourselves through the eyes of outsiders. We've become a tribe brainwashed by others' depictions of our customs, religions"

My other pet-peeve is when the English-speaking 'convent-educated' crowd derisively refers to our Indian languages as 'the vernaculars'. Almost as if they themselves have no connection to those languages and their ancestors have been speaking English for a thousand years. This is inherited British arrogance.

No one's going to have a hissy fit about this game. It's gonna be just that bad such that the fundies won't even be bothered petitioning or rioting against it. Have you seen the trailer? Eww.

Attempt to pander to stereotypes of their main consumers? Just being capitalistic, no offense intended? I guess its mostly so. But I do think its good that at least some Hindus are sensitive about it. They should make themselves heard, no matter if nothing is done about it.

Kali as a goddess is a very good example of Indic concepts whch are "lost in translation", when fitted into western black and white worldview of good and evil.

Man, I love Kali. I do. She has had such a long and entangled history of representation and misrepresentation, it's almost impossible to distill her "true" nature from the hype. Kali has been at the nexus of colonialism, Oriental imagery (both romanticised and demonised) and indigenous traditions since her introduction to the realm of popular worship.

The (mis)representation of Kali is almost as long as her history - and while she is known to modern Bengalis and other Kali devotees as a compassionate mother, her image as a bloodthirsty demon-goddess has been used, when needed, by both "Hindus" and "outsiders". Examples are of course, thugees, the image of a bloodthirsty Kali as emblematic to the Bengali nationalist movement and Kali as protector of zamindaris...

However, as slippery as it may be to define her, and as politically charged as her imaging may be, I do agree with you Kom - there is a long and irritating tendency to use her imagery completely out of context and completely inappropriately, for shock value. She's also handy when you have to represent an evil, effeminate, dark, eroticized , exotic "East". And "evil" is so problematic to traditions like those that make up Hinduism - especially sakta religions. Kali has *never* been evil. She is the embodiment of sakti - and of fury, but of a just, rightous, awesome potential - *not* as a half of the "good" vs. "evil" binary.

So saying, and setting the issues of "outsiders" and colonialism aside for a second, I think Kali is the perfect example of the problem of trying to bring together sometimes very disparate traditions under a unified like "Hinduism". There's an "us" vs. "them" rhetoric of "we" (being "Hindus") having some kind of privilage of being able to define Kali somehow more authentically than "them" - them being non-Hindus, Westerners, etc.

I would argue that not a lot of "Hindus" outside of Bengal and maybe Tamil Nadu (or other sites of widespread Kali devotion) have any much of a clue about Kali and what she means to her devotees. "Outsiders" like Nina P. (whose clips I love by the way) has a pretty great understanding of the Sita/Rama myth. Rachel Fell McDermott is a Kali expert extraordinaire. On the other hand are the strange (yes, Hindu) men I met in Karnataka who told me I should stop asking questions about Kali because she's pretty much equal to devil worship (as a Bengali who grew up in a Sakta household, I was spluttering in rage), and these desi gamer punks who obviously don't have much of a clue - or don't really care - about all the subtle nuances or the beauty of the Kali myth.

Anyway... I roll my eyes at this latest exoticized/eroticized/demonised Hindu goddess image - but it's one in a long history of (let's say it all together) Orientalist misrepresentation.

I find portraying kali as wicked and demonic as offensive.
There is no question of alternative viewpoint or nuance as some of the commentators are suggesting.
To say that there are numerous intrepretions of Kali is disingenuous, none of the interpretation show kali as wicked or evil.
That Indians (most probably Hindus) are indulging in this caricature and then supporting this ,shows how servile and spineless educated Hindus can be. One word Gunga Deen

Regards

Fox,

Kali is popular in North India, I have no idea about south india though.
In genereal Kali worship is one of the forms of Shakti (Godess worship).

Regards

There is no question of alternative viewpoint or nuance as some of the commentators are suggesting.

Fundamentalist alert!!!!! That is not the starting point for any kind of civil discussion.

To say that there are numerous intrepretions of Kali is disingenuous, none of the interpretation show kali as wicked or evil.

Er...beg to differ. Several historians believe that Kali started out as a Tantric goddess less than a 1000 years ago and later got absorbed into the mainstream (especially in Bengal, where she is potrayed more benovelently), not the other way around. So she was worshipped as part of many rituals which society might consider 'evil' or 'satanic'. Yes, these historians might be wrong, but not because you proclaim so.

That Indians (most probably Hindus) are indulging inou this caricature and then supporting this ,shows how servile and spineless educated Hindus can be. One word Gunga Deen

Ok, smarta$$, if name-calling is what you want. Another word. Taliban.

Please don't narrow Hinduism by squelching views which don't agree with you. I think standing upto people who do not tolerate dissent is the least spineless thing to do. And I don't see any justification for your view of anything being the "Indian" thing to do. So cut out the know-it-all crap you got going there.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread...it's descending into a religious brawl (I apologize for playing my part in it too), so let's get outta here!

X : B is a satan worshipper

B : I find it offensive.

A : On no ! Let's have some nuance prefarably with a dash of lemon

B : This case doesn't deserve nuance.Those who demand nuance for this are being disingenuos. This is representational of sevile attitude of elite class

A : Oh yeah! This is not how civil discussion is conducted and you are Taliban

Well, just to be fair, I'm going to fund development of a game where Krishna, Jesus, Mohammed, Moses and Buddha can all fight each other. Depending on the religion, people can fling burning bushes or monkeys at each other, strangle one another with their beards, bounce arrows off their bellies and in the end, much like this conversation, the final battle will require a player to preach his/her opponent into submission.

So she was worshipped as part of many rituals which society might consider 'evil' or 'satanic'. Yes, these historians might be wrong, but not because you proclaim so.

Even if Kali had tantric origins before being absorbed into 'mainstream' Hinduism, you are missing the point. None of the representations and interpretations of Kali are evil or satanic in the Judeo-Christian sense. Tantra itself is considered as belonging to left-handed paths (as opposed to right-handed ones like yoga) whose final goal is liberation or mukthi. These are not suitable for everyone and are disdained by some. Nevertheless, Kali was *never* meant to be a Satan or the devil in the biblical way; I do believe there is no correct equivalent concept in the Indic traditions - just like there is no *absolute* hell or heaven.
yet another false translation of concepts like "idol worship" for the propitiation of 'murthi' in temples.

Look,

I do not question anyone right to be offensive. This is a free world, go ahead fling as much as excreta you want on what I consider sacred.
But atleast be honest enough to admit that it is offensive.I find this intellectual bloviation, wherein any possibility that Hindus( Christians in US)have a right to feel offended is denied, detestable.
I beg to differ. If you have the right to offend me, I have the same right to protest and condemn it.
This position is little different from Taliban, who in all probability will be declaring fatwa, crashing planes and chopping heads off using blunt knives. But I do not expect peddlars of moral equivalance to comprehend it.

Regards

Here's an excerpt from an English translation of one of the Bengali sakta padavalis (by Dinram, trans. McDermott):
"You're a brazen woman making love in the dominant position/You've got no shame, no clothes, and Your hair flies all over the place. It is You, All-Destroyer, who sets fire to creation./I smear my body with the ash from those cinders that disgrace..." just as an example of some of the imagery sometimes used from within the sakta tradition. Somtimes compassionate mother, sometimes (and this is a quote) a "bitch goddess" - Kali exists in liminality and ambivalence.

As a philosophical point, and to play devil's advocate - if it's Asoka fighting Kali (presumably after his conversion to Buddhism,) could it not be that this is a reflection of a common Buddhist trope - of Buddhism overcoming common Hindu deities? The Hindu gods and goddesses are routinely subdued by the might of Buddhist dharma in many Buddhist myths. So unintentionally, or perhaps fully consciously, the video game designers may have actually hit apon something that does reflect a tension that existed historically between Hinduism and Buddhsim in India. In many Buddhist myths, debates often take place between Indra and the Buddha, for example, wherein the Buddha invariably wins. In much of tantric Indic Buddhism, mandalas use traditionally powerful Hindu gods and goddess (Siva/Sakti) as mere guardians to the sacred sphere, who have been overcome by the Buddha of that realm. It took a while for this to dawn on me - but it seems like the gamers might be representing this story from a wholly different POV than the one we are discussing.

p.s. Yes, this does mean that the Buddhists also (mis)appropriated (*gasp*) Hindu dieties (*gasp*) to suit thier own philosophical/mythical needs... but this was a very very long time ago, so let's not get too excited, mkay?

Brown,

Interesting view point
But I doubt that they had this in mind though.
I will like to use Occam's Razor

Regards

Brown,

I don't think that two instances can be compared.
Buddhism used deities in context of philosophical discussion
However the game is a commercial product.

Regards

Do you really think Indian gamers will exotify Jesus or Mohammed or Allah by sticking them in a video game and portraying them in a negative manner, such as control freaks hell-bent on world domination, for example? Do you think they would have "good guy" Ashoka fighting them? Somehow, I don't think so.

This was in response to the Pat Robertson comment. Japan is only 1% Christian, and even that is mainly fringe gnostic sects that robertson hates.

There is a reason why Pat Roberston isn't using ninjas to show the brutality of Japanese culture the same way he uses kali to show the brutality of hinduism. This is because Americans are culturally familiar with the Japanese largely due to things like japanese video games, and his BS would be called up immediately.

This is all irrelavent as far as I am concerned

Bottomline is that Hinduism is my religion, my culture and I will do with it as I please.

^^ that was me

brownfrown:

Yes, this does mean that the Buddhists also (mis)appropriated (*gasp*) Hindu dieties (*gasp*) to suit thier own philosophical/mythical needs... but this was a very very long time ago, so let's not get too excited, mkay?

Not only was it a very long time ago, but entirely different are the power relations involved between Buddhists' appropriation of Hindu deities (rooted in a critique emerging from within), and the appropriation of Hindu deities which we see today (ahem... Orientalism).

I like your second interpretation of the game, brownfrown, and that would rock if it turned out to be the case... but I also seriously doubt that those were the creators' intentions.

Gaurav:

I don't think that two instances can be compared. Buddhism used deities in context of philosophical discussion However the game is a commercial product.

Works of art and media such as books, journals, and CDs can all be considered commercial products. These can all be used by their creators to convey some sort of philosophy or ideology to the audience; what definition are we working with here?

If by commercial product you mean a commodity whose primary purpose is to make money, I don't think you can just throw all video games into this category and dismiss them. While some video games are quite obviously thrown together haphazardly, in which the only point is to shoot anything that moves, and in which the only creativity went into coming up with bizarre creatures that can move and be shot, and other video games obviously took a lot of thought and effort, they are all works of art which are expressions of the artists who created them. I acknowledge that a vast majority of video games fall into the former category - and this Ashoka game most likely does too (but let's not judge until we've played it) - but that doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't go about trying to interpret the meaning behind them.

And in case you now think I'm crazy when I talk about the beauty of video games, check out Dreamworks' The Neverhood, a claymation game which is founded on a mythology invented exclusively for the game, and written on a clay wall within the game.

Madurai,

As I said before I will plead Occam's Razor.

You think that the creator must have been thinking about conflict of ShunyaVada with Vedanta.
I think that the only reason that they selected Kali because it was easiest handle for them to represent demonic forces. In other words thay had temple of doom in their mind.

Regards

me:

I like your second interpretation of the game, brownfrown, and that would rock if it turned out to be the case... but I also seriously doubt that those were the creators' intentions.

and then I asked what you meant by commercial product.

Hinduism does not have a concept of evil in the western sense - i.e., something that is the opposite of good. In any case the emphasis is on the deed and not on the person. Good and bad (punya and paap) are adjectives used to describe the action and not the person. Kali is a fighter of demons and even if she is depicted with huge teeth and dripping blood, it's for a good cause and to call that evil is ridiculous. Unless we're looking at it from the judeo-christian viewpoint which declares that peace and love are good and bloodshed is evil. Hindus were pragmatic and knew that blood must be spilled once in a while and did not have absolute concepts of good and bad.

The argument about the buddhist perspective doesn't sound convincing either. Indra is routinely defeated in hindu mythology as well. Dharma is as much a hindu concept as it is a buddhist one. Ditto for ahimsa. As for tension between Hindusim and Buddhism that too is a judeo-christian concoction. There were several schools of thought in India - 6 vedic darshans, buddhism, jainism, and numerous tantric schools. There was intellectual tension between all of these schools, not just buddhism and so-called hinduism. This is the Indian way. They do not suppress any viewpoint but they routinely ridicule and argue amongst each other. Buddhism became big because of Ashoka who was the first (and perhaps only) missionary minded king. It was annihilated in India by the muslim conquest and later reconstructed in London, Paris and Heidelberg. Naturally, it was reconstructed in the Judeo-Christian image which was only capable of imagining deadly conflict and incompatibility among different creeds. The concept of co-existence was foreign to them. It is also interesting that when Buddhism revived in India it became purely tantric. The contrast is specially stark when compared to the austere Japanese zen style. The blood and gore in Indian Buddhism matches that of the hindus in every way. So it is incorrect to suggest that there is a "purity" in buddhism that is lacking in hinduism.

About various interpretations - It's not about being the Taliban or anything. There are no constraints on interpretation but that doesn't mean you can simply suck something out of your thumb. What's the point? It has to hang together with the whole context. It makes no sense to say Kali is Peter Pan for example. Where does that fit into the larger story - the concept of creation, sustenance, destruction, etc. etc.

Hello All,

Divya has raised some very important and relevant points on this subject. I have read about this company and the creation process of this game. Apparently, the company enlisted the help of some British gaming company for "initial scene and character concept sketch work" so as "to ensure that the game would appeal to Western players." So now we know where all this is coming from and what the intentions of this company are. It has nothing to do with subtle philosophies. Its purely for commercial gain and very wrong. I have already written to the CEO of this company, (email: vishal@ indiagames.com , info@indiagames.com) and would urge others who feel concerned about this to do so as well.

"Intention" is a tricky thing to measure, Gaurav. And while I would argue that these gamers are probably not stupid, and might infact have some inkling that the Asokha myth plays into this Hindu/Buddhist tension, the whole thing could also be one big coincidence. I only mentioned it because it was an interesting reflection (intended or not) of what had already come before.

Either way, I don't see very much difference between this latest appropriation and what was going on a thousand years ago between Hindus and Buddhists. Both situations essentialise another's symbols as a polemic, to further whatever they are trying to push. You don't think that was a commercial move on the Buddhists' part? They were a proselytising religion, in need of converts - and what better way to do that than to use the language and the imagery of your milieu to your advantage? I think the differences between these two situations are a lot less marked than we'd like to admit because while we like Buddhists, we don't like ignorant Western money-making corporations touching our deities. But back in the day, I bet you there was the same distaste in "Hindu" circles (at least amongst people who had *ahem* time to sit around and debate philosphical issues ad nausem) if they came accross this appropriated Buddhist version of say Siva or Durga.

And Divya, the tension between Hindus and Buddhists is not entirely a "Judeo-Xtian concotion". While you're right in that there was debate within all the various (at least Brahmanic) "Hindu" schools of thought *and* "Buddhist" schools, there was a sense of self-identity amongst Buddhsists that could only defined by defining themselves as "other" to the Hindus. And while much of the terminology between the two "religions" such as dharma, ahimsa, karma etc. are shared, thier philosophical import is (other than in perhaps schools like Advaita... but where you still have that pesky brahman vs. sunyata issue) quite different, both between H&B and within the various Buddhisms themselves.

It is also interesting that when Buddhism revived in India it became purely tantric. The contrast is specially stark when compared to the austere Japanese zen style. The blood and gore in Indian Buddhism matches that of the hindus in every way. So it is incorrect to suggest that there is a "purity" in buddhism that is lacking in hinduism.

I'm not sure who you're directing this to, but I'll respond by saying there is as much plurality in "Buddhism" as there is in "Hinduism". And Buddhist tantra, like Hindu tantra, does indeed make use of "impure" substances certain practices. I'm not sure what period you're referring to when you're talking about this specifically tantric revival in India - I'd be interested to know the dates you're thinking of. And certain Buddhist tantras are replete with the appropriation of Siva and Sakti as fierce, "lower" divinites. In some tantras, for example, dakinis and dakas refer to the "fiendish flesheating followers of Durga, often simply known as Devi" (Snellgrove, 1987) and Tilopa, a famous Buddhist siddha, sings "Brahma, Visnu, Mahesvara. Hey, boddhisatva! Bodhisattva! Do not worship these gods!/Don't make offerings to the gods, or go to the external places of pilgrimage!/There is no liberation in offertories to these deities" (Davidson, 2002).

I see the "repeated references" to "Hindu mythology" here.. Actually I grew up hearing that in India and believed most of the Hindu religious stories are BS and myths.. Never knew about Islam or Christianity much.. But after learning about how Muhammad received his revelations from God through an angel in a cave and the virgin brith of Jesus, it sounds like the same BS to me..

Do you folks treat and term those as myths too??

Brownfrown - This notion of the "other" is a modern day western concoction as well. In a land of infinite plurality this is a nonsense concept. Buddhism was simply called buddha dharma and it was one among a multitude of dharmas. There were innumerable jaatis (tribes, clans) each with their own dharma and also with different dharmas within each jaati. So differences between buddhist and hindu philosophy existed mostly at a scholarly level. Nalanda and Takshila universities were full of Brahmin scholars. Nagarjuan, Dharamkriti two of the most famous buddhists were Brahmins who continued to be brahmins. Buddha himself did not shed his caste for that matter. He was called by his caste name "Gautam" and not by his family name. These were people interested in knowledge and did not regard each other as enemies.

I do not have any specific period of time in mind. Buddhism flourished in India for almost a thousand years, yet the so-called tribal practices, sacrifices, rituals continued to flourish the whole time. The essence of buddhism was taught in universities and there were monastaries with monks, with a formal hierarchy and all of that. The muslims targeted these institutions, killed the scholars, destroyed the universities and poof Buddhism was gone. Shankara emerged in this same period, and being of the "poornata" (wholeness) school of thought rather than the "shunyata" (nothingness) school helped with the revival of hinduism. Please note, these discussions only go on between scholars and do not effect the common man who continued on as he always had. Buddha was born within a pre-existing society and culture. There was no radical change in the culture with Buddhism as you find in Greece and Arabia. Tantra gained momentum during this same period as that of the muslim conquest (8th century). The remote regions of the mountains were among the only places where buddhism survived. If you see tangkha paintings your head will reel just as much as it does on looking at images of Kali. I only had this in mind when I made my prior comment and did not intend to talk about the philosophy. I mean Indian buddhism is just as exotic as Indian hinduism. They all have tribal roots. Practice and philosophy are two very different things.

As for your quotes - the vedas themselves say that books (including the vedas), gods, pilgrimages are useless and you will not find enlightenment through them. This is a concept that is very much present in hindu philosophy which pre-dates all of the newer religions.

I'm not sure what your point is, PS... but yes... those would all be classified as religious myths. And the word "myth" is not perjorative and neither does it equate to "BS".
Here's princeton.edu's definition of "myth":
S: (n) myth (a traditional story accepted as history; serves to explain the world view of a people).

See how that works?

bf,

________________________________
This is Merriam -Webster's definition

myth
2 entries found for myth.
To select an entry, click on it.
mythurban legend

Main Entry: myth
Pronunciation: 'mith
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek mythos
1 a : a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon b : PARABLE, ALLEGORY
2 a : a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something or someone; especially : one embodying the ideals and institutions of a society or segment of society b : an unfounded or false notion
3 : a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence
4 : the whole body of myths

---------

My question was because I normally don't see people using "mythology" when they talk about Islam or Christianity..

Well.. For me I can't really differentiate the BS.. :-)

Divya -

I agree about your point about syncretism. But I think it's inaccurate to claim that certain people didn't identify with the new Buddhist traditions and didn't see a difference between what was taught under that umbrella term versus that which was "Hindu". As for the vedas as maya within "Hindu" traditions - sure. But there is an explicit imagery used in certain Buddhist texts that serve to differentiate itself from the status-quo of Hinduism. And deities do fall under "popular" religion. So whether the Vedas say that the deities are not ultimately the end of enlightenment or not is moot given the practices of the people. The response of Buddhists is also on this realm of praxis (rooted, of course, in philosophy). Ultimately, you are to let go of gods, goddesses, bodhisattvas, and Buddhas to realise sunyata or equate wisdom and compassion or nirvana or whatever permutation particular to that path.

And your point that these are all rather highbrow distinctions is valid. The "common man" (ahem) may not have been greatly affected by these philosophical distinctions... but in the same way that this discussion board is an elite excercise, those religious polemics have always been confined to the realm of the privilage few while people on the ground go about thier everyday business, picking and choosing religious practices with relative ease and freedom. Until of course, it's time to mobilise the masses and fight or something :)

If you see tangkha paintings your head will reel just as much as it does on looking at images of Kali. I only had this in mind when I made my prior comment and did not intend to talk about the philosophy. I mean Indian buddhism is just as exotic as Indian hinduism.

Yes I've seen seen them - they are pretty wild. My head, however, doesn't reel very much when I look at images of Kali - I guess you get desensitized pretty quickly when you've grown up with a particular image - especially one that's been domesticated to the extent that Kali has in Bengal... However, earlier, more explicitly 'tantric'images of Kali bear a lot of resemblence to the shock value of these Buddhist paintings.

What do you mean as Indian Buddhsim being as "exotic" as Indian Hinduism, by the way?

PS
I assure you I do :)

What do you mean as Indian Buddhsim being as "exotic" as Indian Hinduism, by the way?

The comments seemed to suggest that Kali is exotic and Buddhism (Ashoka's religion) is all intellectual. The ground reality was that Indian Buddhism fulfilled the same criteria for exoticism as does Hinduism.

I didn't used to get shocked by Kali but as I get older I seem to be getting more and more squeamish. I had to remove my little painting of Kali to a spot where I didn't see it so often.

Hey brownfrown, I finally wade into the fray. I like the comments. And yours are the first I want to comment on, cause they are so yummy. Here goes.

Brownfrown says:

Either way, I don't see very much difference between this latest appropriation and what was going on a thousand years ago between Hindus and Buddhists. Both situations essentialise another's symbols as a polemic, to further whatever they are trying to push. You don't think that was a commercial move on the Buddhists' part? They were a proselytising religion, in need of converts - and what better way to do that than to use the language and the imagery of your milieu to your advantage? I think the differences between these two situations are a lot less marked than we'd like to admit because while we like Buddhists, we don't like ignorant Western money-making corporations touching our deities. But back in the day, I bet you there was the same distaste in "Hindu" circles (at least amongst people who had *ahem* time to sit around and debate philosphical issues ad nausem) if they came accross this appropriated Buddhist version of say Siva or Durga.

I think this is a great point. There was alot of borrowing, exercising, and conversion, to use old Buddhist Studies terminology--so packed with Orientalist concerns--of local dieties by Buddhists. Nowhere did this happen more than in Tibet, where the comparative sophistication, and more importantly the cultural weight of the Subcontinent paradigm, gave Buddhism the resources it needed to "placate, exercise, and convert" all the local dieties, many of which are said by the tradition to have been hostile to Buddhism at first. In comes the mythical Padmasambhava.

However, this appropriation by Buddhism of so-called Hindu motifs masks the reciprocity of the exchange between the various traditions in South Asia. I hesitate using the term "Hinduism" in this context, because the earliest record of the term 'hindu' in Indic languages post-dates the exhaustion of Buddhism in India. What we seem to have are all sorts of traditions in contact, contestation and communication. We find, very commonly, the incorporation of Buddhist motifs, symbols, in all sorts of traditions we now call "Hinduism". It seems to me the discussion has implied that the borrowing was a one-way endeavor, which is not at all the case. This is true even if one doesn't accept the notion of pan-Indian tropes shared and used variously in all sorts of ways by Buddhists, Jains, and "Hindus" in medieval India.

And again:

While you're right in that there was debate within all the various (at least Brahmanic) "Hindu" schools of thought *and* "Buddhist" schools, there was a sense of self-identity amongst Buddhsists that could only defined by defining themselves as "other" to the Hindus.

Absolutely. This is totally correct. The sanskrit term that Buddhists used was Bauddha, just like Jains called themselves Jaina. The problem with this statement is that they didn't define themselves as "other" to Hindus, but rather to Brahmins (in the Pali literature) and Nyayas or Kapilikas, S'aivas and Vais'navas (in Sanskrit), and more commonly other Buddhist schools, for example. We have to remember that for large periods of time in particular regions of India up until the Gupta period, Buddhism was a more dominant ideology than Hinduism or Jainism. In certain instances, it was the other way around--that is, "Hindu" traditions would define themselves in response to Buddhist or Jain paradigms. Some argue that the Gita is imbedded within this context of a response to an excess of actual renunciation and move to more symbolic, internal forms of renunciation. To add another point to the borrowing,

Divya says,

Dharma is as much a hindu concept as it is a buddhist one.

Indeed, in the Vedas, there is not much emphasis on dharma, it is not until you get to the 2nd c. BCE-2nd c. CE that we find the Epics, Dharmas'astras, and puranas explicitly talking about Dharma. But this is after Jains, Ajivikas, and Buddhists have spread all across India talking about Dharma. It seems that the response to this, called "classical Hinduism" by scholars, borrowed heavily from that paradigm but went in an interesting direction with it.

Just to bring it back to Kali and Tantra, an exchange is often called pan-Indian where it is unclear which tradition "originally" developed a certain characteristic that exists in all traditions. This quest for origins is problematic at best, but just to show an example: the two earliest tantras we have are Buddhist, the Hevajra tantra and the Guhyasamaja tantra. So, from that evidence do we conclude that Tantra originally was a Buddhist tradition borrowed by Hinduism? I don't think we have enough evidence to support that claim. Nor the other way around. There is not enough evidence to support a Buddhist borrowing of Tantra from Hinduism, originally. When we starting talking about particular elements of Buddhist or Hindu Tantra at a later date, there are more clear cut cases of borrowing.

So, all this evidence is to argue that all interpretation is (mis)interpretation or--less polemically--(re)interpretation. All traditions were reinterpreting and re-imagining paradigms that were kicking around. While we can, in some cases, say that one particular element started here instead of there, I think the weight of that in terms of authenticity is overstated. Reinterpretation happens all the time--everyone is doing it. From the vantage-point of history, we might say that the violence of Buddhist or Jain or Hindu reinterpretations are not at the level of Orientalist commodification, but perhaps brownfrown is correct in questioning this assumption? The concern, of course, is the degree of systematic power-relations and relative inequality. But again, are we over-stating the power of Orientalist discourse? Can we think of examples of appropriation of "Western" motifs, watered down, commodified and proliferated in non-Western settings?

Anyway, all of these details don't really get at brownfrown's observation that perhaps the repetition of the Ashoka v. Kali battle is a (coincidental?) reproduction of a ideological battle happening in classical India. In some ways, I think it necessarily has to be. Where did those symbols come from? Even if the video game was Ashoka and Kali v. Christ and Moses (live on pay-per-view) instead of Ashoka v. Kali, the structural history would still allow that combination. There are all sorts of semiotic systems coming to bear on this game; and like literary analysis, a semiotic analysis of this particular video game could reap great benifits to unpacking a more general understanding of contemporary mythical paradigms. So, while there never was any Ashoka v. Kali in India literature, we can see how this reimagining becomes the confluence of Abrahamic and Indic semiologic systems. The interesting thing would be to unpack them.

As far as what the semiology means, one thing I tend to agree with is a distaste for the repetition of Good/Evil paradigms in relation to any symbolism, but especially in regard to imagery and traditions that explicitly attempt to deconstruct that binary. But, this is how symbols travel. Once that reality is accepted we can find more strategic ways of restaging the symbols to reflect a paradigm that we think is more appropriate. An example of a successful venture is Princess Mononoke, which many have told me they found disconcerting precisely because of its moral ambiguity. In this video game, I think the disney mythology has been used as a foundation for a co-opting of other symbols. What should be done in response? Non-dual interpretations of Abrahamic religious symbols? It seems to me more and more that direct confrontations can suppress particular instantiations of systematic representations, but the only thing that affects structure-wide change is developing a competitor on the same stage that is more attractive. It is a consumer-heavy model, but in terms of symbols, perhaps the consumption and reproduction of symbols is a more effective strategy than railing against something. Look what effect millions of people worldwide marching against the Iraq war had. Barely perceptible to none. Perhaps we need both rejection and working within the system. It doesn't look like we have much of a competitor to late-capitalism in the forseeable future. So why not market a popular product/movie/mythology that opens up room for more historically accurate, positive, or enabling interpretations of Kali? Getting Sarasvati shoes off the racks is necessary (rejection), but then video games like this pop up (does continual rejection work?). Eventually, if these symbols cannot enter the global market of symbolic exchange, they will die out. Why else does the Dalai Lama, craftily, sell Apple computers? He understands the power of branding in late capitalism. Why else did Vivekenanda and Dharmapala go to the World Parliament of Religions?

Ok, ok. Enough of the late-capitalist rant. I guess to sum up my points, it is to say we have to be careful about our analysis of medieval India. Too often we ahistoricize the past. Nowhere do I see it more commonly than about India where emotive or often well-intentioned political influences ignore certain facts or trends of the past that don't fit with contemporary desires. Nonetheless, a examination of classical and medieval India can help us understand some of the contemporary appropriations and reinterpretations of symbols, and give us a better idea of what is going on today.

Dharmaserf

I was poking around on wikipedia, and it says there that the demon Kali and the goddess Kali are two different entities and are even pronounced differently. (And spelled differently in Sanksrit and other languages, they just transliterate to the same word in English.)

this is one stupid game.. and its gonna suck no doubt.. i mean its a clear rip off of prince of persia.. they should come up with something new.. i mean the lead character even looks like the prince..

Dear Vishal Gondal,

Next time you create a game, try to use Egyptian gods like Set, Horus or Norse gods like Thor. You clearly have no idea what Kali signifies, and if you're someday fortunate enough to pull your head out of your materialistic ass, focus on your Ajaneya chakra and actually commune with Reality, you'll think twice about reducing a very primal force and a feminine principle to some super-villain like entity, and then feeding that concept into millions of global minds. What your game could likely speed up, is inevitable and indiscriminate Pralaya.

I hope people flush your game down the toilet, and I hope it doesn't sell.

Sadhu Sanyasi Ji: Heretic, poet and Saint - part of the Hindutva hate brigade - or figure this out for yourself

Actually, you can't battle Kali. Give 'Third Eye' a listen. Its a song by Tool. Kali is utter and complete dissolution. Its something that cannot be battled. At least not in gamer fashion. When your gamer population sues you because their everyday life suddenly went topsy turvy and they turn schizo. You could always get creative and change the name of the character without altering her appearance in an updated version. How about Viking Valerie? Too puerile? Vishti maybe (demoness)? Try Chandi instead. Its generic. Fits too, if you saw the movie.

Cheers Vishal! Rock on!

Oh hey - also, avoid listening to too much Tool. It can impact your perceptions significantly. I just realized this blog was for the intelligentsia, and not some dumbass who actually assumes that Beings who affect creation and dissolution actually appeared on earth aeons ago, risked themselves to do humanity some serious favors, and chose to stick around observing where humanity is headed.

Peace Out.

Cheers!