The curious case of Naruto - Sasuke Uchiha special

pro Sasuke, pro Uchiha, overcoming Konoha, overcoming the shinobi system

[narrative-critical-understanding]

About

DNI

If you have a pinned post or “Rules” / ”About” section where you for example write that those who are pro Uchiha don’t sit well with you as people, that pro Uchiha freaks should log of and go out or write other kinds of bullshit along those lines, then don’t interact with my posts.

People who send anonymous asks to others that they should kill themselves are unwelcome. 

I don’t care about particular fans picking fights. Anyone can be a fan of any character for all I care. (My post about anti tags regarding characters.) It’s their own behavior that counts. For example if anyone claims I lack reading comprehension because of their own lack of comprehension or denial or whatever reason, then I’ll block them. That doesn’t mean you can’t tell me if you think I got something wrong. Anyone can make mistakes. I only rarely make posts and I read most chapters awhile ago. Not to mention there are slightly different translations, which can make a difference. Adding to that, different cultures and different values can lead to different interpretations. Some things, like Tobirama’s racism, are certain facts though. To give an example: Tobirama fans who want to pick a fight with me on my post about Konoha’s (and Tobirama’s, etc.) racism while starting with “why are you still fighting over fiction...” and so on is reeking of projection. (I used the tag "anti tobirama".) 

!!! This doesn’t mean that people who like characters like Tobirama are morally inferior. The reason I used Tobirama fans as example is because me and a few of my friends personally experienced “verbal attacks” from individuals who came at us because of Tobirama. !!!

This DNI came to be through experience and may get updated.

My post regarding blocking.

Sideblog

I will reblog/write about the Naruto manga, not the anime. Studio Pierrot screwed up the animation. I already see the first part of the Naruto anime critical, but Shippuden is just bad besides maybe the fighting scenes. There are a few good soundtracks and even good songs though. None of the filler episodes and none of the novels are canon.

I might be sometimes on hiatus. I'm busy... 

Content

I’m all for narrative-critical understanding. Kishimoto’s framing of the story leaves a bitter taste. For ex. “Endure oppression or else you’re evil.” is such a great outlook, don’t you think? *yeah, sure*

- pro Sasuke, pro Uchiha clan, anti Konoha, anti "Will of Fire", anti shinobi system, anti Hyuga main familiy

- anti ending, anti Boruto anime, Boruto manga critical (Honestly I’m also anti Boruto manga, but it’s canon... I still prefer not to think about it too much. If I make posts about Boruto, then it’s because of other peoples’ asks or because of thought-provoking posts. Please don’t ask about Boruto...)

This is just the core layout. I have posts on other things, too.

Tags (WIP):

conjecture: opinion / conclusion without proof or sufficient evidence

Asks:

About Naruto. I prefer to ignore Boruto.

“Asks” will be open or closed from time to time. May be non-anon most of the time when it’s open because I’m still working on my first anon ask (because it’s an extensive answer - see my “Will of Fire” series). It’s frustrating...

I take my time with answering asks that make me contemplate a lot. So, it could take months for me to answer…

Ask Masterpost

[narrative-critical-understanding]

Ask Masterpost

The first two Asks are from my main blog. Most answer-posts are on this blog.

Finished:

Ask 2 - Anon: Theory that Sasuke is faking his loyalty to Konoha (overall 21 posts; 11 important posts) 

Ask 3 - Anon: Influence of Hagoromo’s trauma over his mother in regard to disinheriting Indra and favoring Ashura (3 posts)  

Unfinished:

Ask 1 - Anon: The “Will of Fire” Ask (currently 24 posts; 13 important posts)

Ask 4 (three parts) - Not Anon: Importance of Kishimoto’s culture (currently one post: East-West dichotomy)

[narrative-critical-understanding]

This blog is on hiatus. I'm sorry. I might never finish the asks.

[narrative-critical-understanding]

yin and yang in Naruto

Yin and yang are supposed to be complementary. They're supposed to be equal. Yet Kishimoto always showed the yang part as the one who got the better part in the relationship:

The Hyuga main branch and Hinata over the Hyuga cadet branch and Neji, who in the end even died for Hinata.

Danzo doing the dirty work for Hiruzen, who got to be Hokage.

Indra inheriting nothing, while Ashura got everything.

Sasuke acknowledging Naruto and the Uchiha clan not getting any justice, while Naruto gets to be Hokage and not even does anything about the remaining Konoha elders (who where also partly responsible for the Uchiha massacre).

[narrative-critical-understanding]

Sasuke and Naruto - yin and yang

Sasuke is represented as the yin part of the relationship and Naruto as the yang part of the relationship.

[narrative-critical-understanding]

Indra and Ashura - yin and yang

Indra is represented as the yin part of the relationship through the moon and Ashura is represented as the yang part of the relationship through the sun.

Ashura inherited everything from his father while Indra got nothing.

[narrative-critical-understanding]

Danzo and Hiruzen - yin and yang

Danzo is shown as the yin part of the relationship and Hiruzen as the yang part of the relqtionship.

As such yin is shown from Danzo's perspective as lesser than yang: "nothing but" and "No matter how far I ran... I could never catch up to you..."

[narrative-critical-understanding]

The Hyuga Clan - yin and yang

Hinata - representing the main branch - is shown as the yang side of the relationship, while Neji - representing the cadet branch - is shown as the yin side of the relationship.

Yin and Yang are two great opposite but complementary forces at work in the cosmos. The interplay of the two forces makes up chi, or the material principle governing the universe. Their balance is said to be essential to harmony and health.

Yin is passive, dark, negative, cold and soft. Yang is active, light, positive, warm and hard.

Just like that Neji is supposed to accept his dark, cold and negative role as one of the cadet branch in a passive way. He is supposed to be protective and soft towards Hinata.

The main branch gets the light, positive and warm role by actively using and sacrificing the cadet branch. They are supposed to be hard towards the cadet branch.

[ethereal-sirens]

Hey everyone, my friend shared this GoFundMe to help a young woman(a friend of hers) escape her abusive father along with her sister and mother. Please boost, share and donate!

CW: Heavy abuse, physical and psychological. Sexual harassment

Urgent help is needed for a Pakistani Friend, organized by Fatima Quddus

Hi, my name is Sana, and I am fundraising for a friend in Pakistan. She is… Fatima Quddus needs your support for Urgent help is needed for

Please do not tag as d*nation post!!!!

[dushman-e-jaan]

Please, don’t tag this as donations as tumblr might take it down.

[dushman-e-jaan]

From top to bottom, children cut-outs in birds:

Uchiha Madara, Twelve, The Falcon.

Uchiha Sasuke, Twelve, The Hawk.

Uchiha Itachi, Fourteen, The Crow.

Uchiha Obito, Fourteen, The Sparrow.

(I had a hard time choosing a bird for Obito; however, in the end, I went for a sparrow. The reason I chose a sparrow for Obito is that he wasn’t as staunch in his convictions as Sasuke and Madara were: he was rather foolhardy, kind of like someone who chooses to take flight rather than fight. That makes Sasuke and Madara born fighters, birds of prey, not Obito. Itachi, on the other hand, was always a sort of scavenger, an opportunist; and whilst he’s nowhere near as clever as the idea of a crow goes, the opportunist theme for him fits.)

[tppppp]

Brother

[dushman-e-jaan]

Yet another image that proves that, when Kishimoto shows distance between two people being eliminated, he always goes for the forehead bump, not the forehead poke! Here, just like that Itachi farewell, Sasuke and Naruto bump their foreheads together whilst the rest of the chosen champions don’t, as there’s still distance, animosity, or reservations between them. So can we stop saying that the forehead bump is meaningless, when it’s literally shown as the sign of lack of distance, and the forehead poke, which is shown to keep the distance between two people, is more meaningful? It’s not. And at this point, it shouldn’t even be a thing!

[narrative-critical-understanding]

The Konoha badge still serves as a distancing factor. I wonder if this is on purpose or just an interpretation from my viewpoint.

[enby-axels]

to be a naruto villain is to transcend your fate. the protagonist is supposed to fix you but the writer doesnt know what to do with you. the fandom eats up the sanitized versions of you, while reviling the you that had agency and whose voice said something true and beautiful. you are free. you are trapped by the narrative. the real you died with talk no jutsu, killed by an act of god. you are functionally frozen in time, and thus immortal

[persephone-falling-into-darkness]

How do you interpret hashirama offering to kill himself rather than his brother ? Do you think it was genuine or more cunning and manipulative, betting on madaras intervention ?

Hashirama's self-sacrifice, an act of faith or cunning?

{A thank you goes to @narrative-critical-understanding for their input on this theme!}

It’s an interesting ask Anon and do forgive me for answering with a jet-lag of over a… year (yikes!)

Personally, I feel that if ever there was a collection of panels in which Hashirama was intended by Kishi to be shown as authentic to the bone in his intentions, it’s this one here in which he asseverates with fervent pathos and conviction to exchange his own life for the sake of harmony between the two warring clans, as it was, after all, his ultimate ambition to create a world devoid of conflict and sacrifice.

I've always enjoyed probing the artist's (or mangaka's, if your wish) representations of their characters. Kishimoto is an exquisite story-teller and I have to point out how he's an absolute maestro when it comes to drawing facial expressions — he has this wonderful capability of bringing to life his little fictional guys, bequeathing unto them this exquisite depth that allow them to express an infinite range of emotions. To me, Hashirama here is pervaded by solemnity of conviction. I don't see manipulation in his tears, in his visage at the top left corner which is so theatrical - at least, not towards Madara.

If laying down his life was the price to pay for peace, Hashirama was willing to with-go that forfeiture. 

And I think this compounding resolution of his slots in perfectly with the ethos of Bushidō, (Japanese for "Way of the Warrior”) that permeated the Kamakura period and gave rise to the bloody practice of Seppuku (ritual disembowlment) — The dominating principles of this comprehensive ideology were comprised of an unwavering dedication to martial spirit, so athletic and military skills, perseverance and courageousness when confronting a fearful adversary in conflict, filial piety, frugality in day to day life… And kindness, honesty, devotion to personal honour. 

Under Bushidō, seppuku was a paramount means to substantiate the courage, self-control, and undying resolve of the warrior…  And above all, to attest sincerity of purpose.

To execute the act, the samurai or warrior would plunge a tantō or wakizashi into the left side of their abdomen, to then draw the blade laterally across to the right, and finally turn it in an upward stroke. In some cases, they’d stab below the sternum, press downward across the initial cut and to complete the practice, they’d pierce their throat.

Needless to say, it was an extreme and exceptionally painful ritual — it certainly wasn’t a frivolous act to be sneered at, as it required an unyielding resolve to go through with it: for a warrior, it was the epitome of self-sacrifice towards an ideal, a purpose, to atone for something heinous or for an unforgivable failure. It was also an undying proof of loyalty.

Hashirama, as a warlord, as a commander, as a warrior, or as whatever you wish to see him as, was endowed with great intestinal fortitude and sense of perseverance — after all, one of his most referenced quotes is “shinobi are people who endure to achieve their goals…”, etcetera etcetera, you know the rest of it...

I can definitely see him as one to go through with a final perfervid act of sheer devotion for a cause, even if it implies inflicting horrific pain upon himself — in a sense, dedication to such a ritual amplifies the profound sentiments behind it: so it becomes an even greater sacrifice.

All things considered, yes, I think it’s intended for him to be entirely transparent in his bearing and to, figuratively, “show his guts” to Madara: he was prepared to relinquish his life for his visionary dream to become a tangible reality. Otherwise, the promise of a new world would have little value to it, if any at all.

Wouldn't it have been a massive breach of the warrior's code of honour for him to bank on Madara's "kindness"? 

Had Madara not acted in the nick of time, what would Hashirama have done, at that point, had he not been genuine in his words? 

“Ohi sorry mate, I really gotta heal myself now, I thought you were gonna grab my wrist to stop me from killing myself, or something along those lines…. whoopsie…“ ?

Madara wasn’t even one to be swayed by a talk-no-jutsu, he was diffident and constantly sought out truthfulness in those around him — I’m not sure he could be manipulated to that extent, at least not in this specific scenario (prior to black Zetsu infecting his mind).

However, this isn’t to say Hashirama’s actions weren’t without negative consequence: his tenacious firmness of purpose is such that he becomes reckless in his decisions.

For one, even though he forbade his brethren to kill Madara and reignite the feud with the Uchiha, he storms forth in his brash resolution: if you think about it, none of the Senju nor Tobirama ever gave their word. And yet, Hashirama expected absolute loyalty from them without ever considering their perspective.

 In the panels below, Tobirama is utterly gobsmacked, and what’s more is he wanted nothing more than to have Madara executed there and then, regardless of whatever his brother had to say, as to him Madara was just some raving lunatic. The only deterrent was Hashirama himself, whom he feared (I'll die on this hill: they were not on par and Tobirama did fear his judgment and probably his mental faculties as well).

It’s disconcerting how Hashirama placed such a degree of trust in him to honour his desires, and out of his own free will at that! Perhaps this is a moment in which Hashirama’s naïveté seeps through, or maybe his ardent desires for this dream of peace of his to come to fruition blind him to the reality of things: because how could he possibly expect Tobirama to concede to this? Even consider it?

It’s just so entirely unrealistic: unless, of course, it’s forced upon him. And I think that's precisely what Hashirama is pinning his faith upon: coercing his brother into acceptance.

In this sense, you could say he was (subconsciously) manipulative to a degree: through honourable suicide, Tobirama would be inveigled, out of sheer respect of his elder brother’s wishes, to uphold this imposed promise (which he never actually committed to in the first place), however begrudgingly. If anything, I can speculate Hashirama was placing far too much confidence in his younger brother to conform and internalise that very same dream, to make it his own even, a dream he once divined, fathomed and entrusted to Madara - not him, his own kith and kin, but to their bitter nemesis, an Uchiha.

That’s one hell of a gamble (not exactly ironic, since Hashirama was blighted with that very vice which made him known as a gambling man prone to squandering his riches). In these panels, he doesn't exactly show his cunning, but he certainly displays his vehemence and willing blindness and ignorance (in the archaic sense of the term, so to ignore voluntary) in acknowledging his own clan's dismay when there's something so much greater at stake in his eyes: his own ideals.

And here's a good question, relative to yours: how do you rate the sincerity of someone who bends others' wills do his, through sheer unadulterated power?

[leportraitducadavre]

Help a Pakistani friend

Hello everyone, I am returning to Tumblr because a dearest friend of mine and @dushman-e-jaan needs urgent help in order to escape an abusive situation she (and her family) is living through. We've decided to use our platforms (and also, in the case of Dushman-e-jaan, her Ko-fi user, as our friend doesn't have access to such a website due to her country of origin) to spread her request for help. We beg you to help or at least share her message:

Given my dire present circumstances, it’d be wise of me to ask for donations in regard to my future—and that of my mum and sister. I’m a woman from Pakistan, and I require urgent aid. The reason is my father: he’s unimaginably abusive (he nearly sold me off at the tender age of 10 to a fellow collogue in the military, something which I didn’t even know was wrong till much later in life as he’s seldom let me out of the house; I’ve spent nearly my entire life indoors, save for the time that I used to go out for receiving education; and he used to sexually abuse me as a child, along with the terrifying physical, emotional, and psychological abuse that he’s put me through); he’s cut off most of our finances, keeps us in a posh area for his own reputation, but gives us a pittance (95% of the house we live in is practically empty; and what is there is from my mother’s dowry); and to top it off, he’s sexually harassing us now. I spent my days locked in my room when he comes to the house (he comes and goes as he pleases, really; sometimes, he doesn’t come for weeks, and sometimes, he stays for few months straight); and my mum has seen him masturbating to my younger sister often. She’s in grave danger because of it. Last time, he called her to pick her up from a shop; it was night, and when she reached there, he ran after her (he’d covered his mouth with a cloth). My sister ran from him, weeping. It was when he gathered attention from others that he stopped and told my sister that he was joking; but I know better …

You might ask as to why I haven’t registered a complain, then … well, I live in Pakistan; and my father runs a madrassa (a religious school); and he used to serve as an officer in the army. His reputation is iron-clad, and there are many people who’d vouch for his character whilst me, my mum, and sister are the women “he puts up with”. He rejected good proposals that came for me and my sister. Every single one. Without ever asking us. (In Pakistan, it’s the parents that decide this, not the children, especially not women.) I’m in my thirties now (practically long past the expiration date for marriage in my country); and that’s exactly what my father wanted. Why? I can’t say. It’s just one of the many methods he’s used to abuse us. That brings me to the main point: I can’t stay in this country; I want out; and I want to get out fast with my family (my mum and sister; I’ve got a brother, too, but he’s a complete bum, and he’s made our lives even more miserable). My father is well-off, influential, and dangerous. We’re not safe here, and any attempt to sell the property (what little my mum has) is met with extreme antagonism from my father that I fear for her life at this point. (He already forged my mum’s signatures, sold her pension, and other furniture which was from her dowry; and he invested all of that in his own business venture; he owns a gas station, in which my mum has no share, whilst we struggle to make ends meet.) He’s isolated us from everyone. Last time when my mum stood up for me, he tied her dupatta around her neck and dragged her across the room (he told her that he’d create an example out of her; that was about a decade

I’ve got … so many of these incidents to share, but I can’t keep listing them without a reason. I require solid financial support. (I haven’t decided the amount, but 3000 ought to be fine? I don’t know) $ to be precise, so that I can apply for education in a better country, leave here, and make way for my mum and sister. I’m aware that it’s a lot to ask (maybe too much); but I don’t know how to put this any other way. The sooner we get out of here, the better. I’m disabled and the universities here are hostile to people like me. My sister struggles with her internship job. She can’t keep supporting me forever. My mum’s ill. I want to help them, too. Please, I implore you all to donate as much as you can afford to donate. Any amount would help. I need this—my family needs this! I thank you all for your compassion and generosity.

Buy themaskedmufti a Coffee. ko-fi.com/themaskedmufti

Become a supporter of themaskedmufti today! ❤️ Ko-fi lets you support the creators you love with no fees on donations.

[dushman-e-jaan]

Please, help out. Give whatever you can!

[dushman-e-jaan]

Happy Birthday, King!

Viva La Revolution, one little Sasuke for all times!

[kishimotomasashi]

Going off of this theory post. can anyone who speaks Japanese or knows enough of it tell me if there are specific indicators to know whether when someone says they have siblings, they’re referring to a group of siblings with gender unspecified or if they just have several brothers? When I looked it up, the word for “brothers” and “siblings” (兄弟 kyōdai) is the same.

Also because in some translations (the official VIZ one in particular) Madara never really specifies he had all brothers, just that they used to be five

And idk if the subs for the episodes I found on 9anime are official or fan-made or not, but they do the same

Which means there are different translations going around saying he either outright said he had 4 other brothers, or just says they used to be 5 in the family without specifying everyone’s genders

which is why I’m a bit confused. Also the original japanese version does have the actual number 5 written when he says this

Which gets me thinking the “there are 5 of us” is probably the more accurate one?

ALL this to say that I need a concrete answer for my question so as to not entirely dismiss the possibility that Madara might’ve had sisters.

[al-hekima-madara-blog]

I wanna know as well even if I think it’s just brothers…but generally the english translation of Naruto is pretty bad, it often simplifies sentences or just change the syntax. Many time I have to come back to the french version who’s trying to stay closer to the japanese version. I know translation is not easy with languages from different family group, but the english one tends to be very very lazy unfortunately…

[0tsu-s]

@al-hekima I know, righttt? The English translation is often vague and omits the real meaning of the words.

[komehyappyou]

@somethingabouttomatoes​​​​​​​​​

Viz is closest to original meaning.

兄弟Kyoudai is “siblings”, general term for siblings, any gender combo. you can say 女兄弟 to specify sisters, or 男兄弟 to specify brothers.

kanji uses 兄/bigbrother, and 弟littlebrother, so literally brothers, and there is an alternate version of 姉妹shimai/big,little sister for only sisters. It’s common to write kyoudai in hiragana きょうだい to mean siblings so less confusing.

Madara’s other siblings is generally assumed to be male, but it is possible he had sisters. 3? 2? Up to you.

“I used to have 4 siblings…” might makes more sense in eng, than “I’m one of 5 siblings”. So i don’t think it’s a bad translation. saying “I used to have 4 brothers” is adding more information…

Random Info: SOV Structure

English, French, Chinese, etc is Subject Verb Object language.

I(subject) used to be(verb) a part of 5 siblings(object)

But Japanese, Korean, Turkish(Surprisingly similar to korean/jp) etc is Subject Object Verb, so the thinking is different.  verb at the end of a sentence can change the meaning so it is more impactful.

For example,

Madara: I(subject)… 5 siblings(object)

Madara: used to be…(past tense verb).

To me it’s sadder/more impactful in jp. Because you would expect (present tense). But in English/SVO languages, the verb before the object spoils the effect before it appears.

Also about the mountains name….

妙Myou is feminine but 妙見菩薩MyoukenBosatsu is a male god of the north star. Similarly worshiped in shingon/tendai sect like Matarajin/Madarakishin. Myouken a nice name to give to a sibling of Matarajin/Madarakishin. But good luck giving a name like kurohime to a boy. (laugh)

Nagano’s Mountain kurohime is associated with some legends. 黒姫伝説, some  variation are nobleman’s daughter named Kurohime falls in love with a dragon of a lake and mt. Kurohime is the mountain is where they lived.

Another variation is a bit sadder, where Kurohime, peasant daughter, falls in love with a rich man, and when she realizes they can never be together, falls into the lake where they met, to be incarnated into a great snake.

Chinese name for Madara is spots斑, pronounce “Bān”? Madara should be “摩多罗”Móduōluō. Sounds a lot similar…. I think it’s better to keep Kurohime as Kurohime not Kuro since cultural meaning is lost.

@al-hekima​​​​​​​​​​​

https://al-hekima.tumblr.com/post/671731168243269632/how-did-madara-really-awaken-his-sharingan

Oh i forgot, im sorry. You asked… :(  But this is related concept. And I remembered.

So when Madara says “I’ve got the sha-”

Madara: I’m extremely sure! anyway, I(Subject) 写Sha, as in “写輪眼sharingan”(object)

…..but the verb is missing.

it isn’t sure that he means “I Sharingan have”, or “I sharingan have the potential to have”. translators have to make up a verb to make it work in a SVO language.

in jinosho pg 167, it does say that Madara’s sharingan awakened immediately after his parting words to Hashirama.

potential to have sharingan means you prob have better eyesight in general.

@mirins​​​​​​​

I think jp is a bit more vague language, much more context based while English is more specific sometimes. I often feel like I have to add more information in English translations to make it grammatically correct or preserve the order of information.

But if there is a translation of a specific word, they should try to keep it consistent. (Focus on words that repeat rather than specific word?) But also, I think an even bigger issue is “cultural/religious context”…

For example… Before the Hashi childhood flashback.

Madara: I have already 届いたreached!

next chapter title is “届いたReached”

And during childhood flashback

Madara: Not just you alone, but I too 届いたreached (the other side).

To answer the question the importance of “reached” is…

 why where Hashriama/Madara skipping stones near a riverbed?

A idiom 賽の河原\Sainokawara to describe a useless effort, endless labor, etc. you use it like “When you clean it up it’s messed up the next day, it’s ‘like sainokawara””

賽 -> dice (in this case it means: boundary line/point between this world and afterlife) 河原 ->riverbed, place with rocks.

In Japanese buddhist folk belief, children/stillborn who die before their parents die go to 賽の河原sainokawara, the riverbed of 三途川Sanzuriver… the river to cross in Buddhism before you go to next life/reincarnate.

The dead children are stuck and can’t cross the river to next life and stack stones into tower in memorial/to pray for happiness/in gratitude of their parents. But a demon comes to destroy the tower before it is finished. For hours, and hours, they stack a tower that will be destroyed until their fingers bleed, and they cry out beg for their living parents.

In Buddhism, attachment/mourning is bad, the children suffer for causing their parent’s to suffer. It is also considered to be a “sin” to die before your parents do. Different beliefs say different things.

It’s also said that the demons destroy the tower to symbolize that children’s prayers never reach their parents while they mourn.

when the parent’s no longer suffer, the children can be freed. This is unrealistic expectation, so the myth is continued with children end up eventually saved by jizo, a buddha connected with children who is their parent in after life.

Meaning?

Butsuma, as a father who outlived two children, can’t be sad, the sooner he moves on from child’s death, the less child has to suffer.

Madara instead of stacking the stones to honor his parents/ancestors, he attempts to throw them to the other side. Hashrama is the one to first reach the other side. Hashirama/Madara are probably in the river bed in the first place to be closer to their dead siblings.

Hashrama/Madara are still alive, they can outlive their parents, and change the world, but not like their dead siblings, who are stuck stacking stones in an endless, useless effort.

Stacking up the stones -> cycle of war, a endless, useless effort. What Children are supposed to do in riverbed

Throwing the stones -> end cycle of war attempt, desire for change. What Madara/Hashrama end up doing

stone reach other side -> peace, to cross the river and go to the next life/stage. End the cycle of war.

Madara “I have already reached” is like “I already caught up to you” but if you look deeper it’s more like “I already found a path to peace!/There’s a way out of this worthless struggle!”. Adult Madara is Kid Madara, a child who wants to change/end cycle.

Main point…. cultural/context barrier is important. Also I wanted to share some culture.

For example Nakano shrine… but i would probably have to write too much… :( If you thought this post was long…. )

Hope this clears up things.

[narrative-critical-understanding]

East-West dichotomy

In sociology, the East–West dichotomy is the perceived difference between the Eastern and the Western worlds. The division is more in regard to culture or social structures rather than geographical. Therefore, the boundaries of East and West depend on where the focus lies (in consideration to criteria, purpose, time).

[What follows below the cut are pieces of information from a few sources.]

Keep reading

[aboutanancientenquiry]

I find that this post has intersting takes on the relationship between East and West, that’s why I reblog it, although I don’t agree with everything written in it.  I will present only the objections I have to the position of  Thorsten Pattberg on Herodotus as quoted by the OP. Pattberg says:

Herodotus (484 BC–425 BC), the ‘father of history’ (Cambridge Dictionary, 1999), was possibly the first recorded historian who deliberately portrayed the ‘east’ (Persians) and the ‘west’ (Greeks) as mutual antagonists, thereby proposing the nucleus of all ancient history.

But the antagonism between Persians and Greeks was not some invention of Herodotus, it was a reality of his era, expressed above all in the failed efforts of the Persian Empire to subjugate Greece. More generally, Herodotus was not some caricatural theoretician of the dichotomy East-West, the modern notion of “West” meant nothing to him, and he cannot be seen as the forefather of the modern colonial ideology and historiography (and, although what I will say is of course pure speculation, perhaps Herodotus would have seen as “hybristic” the colonial expansion and arrogance of some Western nations in the last centuries).

[narrative-critical-understanding]

Note - short summerization: The antagonism between Persians and Greeks was real. Herodotus just happened to have been the first historian and geographer who is known to have it written down as “East” and “West” in opposition. He wasn’t an imperialist or had colonial ideas as far as I know. Thorsten Pattberg never implied this either in his book. He was only mentioned once there. I regret mentioning him here - at least this evening -  because this post could do well without him being mentioned.

I'm not sure whether this is truly an objection. Herodotus is described as “the first recorded historian who deliberately portrayed the ‘east’ (Persians) and the ‘west’ (Greeks) as mutual antagonists”. The quote even continues:

Others, Thucydides (460 BC–400 BC), and Xenephone (430 BC–354 BC), similarly, found it natural to employ strong polarities and concentrate on the ‘otherness’ of the East, while accepting the necessity of resistance to external force by defining a Western ‘self’. Thus came into being the first system of the so-called East-West dichotomy.

It’s written here that the antagonism was a reality of his era. This part is just about the beginning of the “splitting between East and West” in recorded history. It’s not about him being a “caricatural theoretician of the dichotomy East-West” and the modern notion of the “West” couldn’t have meant anything to him. I’ll admit that I don’t know much of him, but I’m fairly sure that he was first and foremost a historian (and geographer) and not a visionary or futurist or aide for conquerors or whatever. This short quote only mentioned him regarding recording history and specifically recording the history of antagonism along the geographical “East” and “West”. Sure, I wrote before the quote about “imperialist narrative of Western Orientalists” and “the origin of the concept” and immediately after the quote about the caricatural East-West dichotomy, and right after about the modern notion of the “West”, and modern colonial ideology, but I didn’t imply that Herodotus was a theoretician or that he was in favor of colonial ideology. However, I realize after reading this part of the post again that this implication could be assumed because of what I wrote before and after the quote you wrote.

What I wrote before:

Unsurprisingly, the concept is criticized for example because of the difficulties in defining regions, generalizations, overlooking regional hybridity and resulting in “elite narratives” of those with power being more easily believed as the supposed representatives of many; in particular, the imperialist narrative of Western Orientalists.

As written by Edward Said in “Orientalism” (1978):

There is nothing mysterious or natural about authority. It is formed, irradiated, disseminated; it is instrumental, it is persuasive; it has status, it establishes canons of taste and value; it is virtually indistinguishable from certain ideas it dignifies as true, and from traditions, perceptions, and judgments it forms, transmits, reproduces.

---

This brings us to the origin of the concept - here from “The East-West dichotomy” by Thorsten Pattberg (2009):

“the origin of the concept” is only meant as the origin of the “East” and “West” being recorded in opposition. At this point it’s nothing more than that. Quote from Thorsten Pattberg:

Thus came into being the first system of the so-called East-West dichotomy.

The “caricatural” (as you called it) East-West dichotomy, that includes colonial ideology and historiography, is build on that “first system of the so-called East-West dichotomy” as basis though. Again, just the opposition and geography. That’s why it’s for me the origin of the concept. It’s nothing deep really. I realize now thanks to you that some could see this as Herodotus creating the concept with ideological implications himself. Especially because I wrote about “the imperialist narrative of Western Orientalists“ right before. My intention was that the text up to --- should be seen as introduction into the topic.

“This brings us to” was surely the wrong way to continue. I could have left the entire part from “Unsurprisingly, ...” to “... reproduces“ for later, but I wanted to have the “... criticized for example because of the difficulties in defining regions, generalizations, overlooking regional hybridity and resulting in “elite narratives” of those with power being more easily believed as the supposed representatives of many ...”right after the list of “marginal area“, “alleged area of Western influence“ because this list shows exactly that.

I can go back and forth, but the point is, I’m just not a precise writer and that Herodotus could be seen as “some caricatural theoretician of the dichotomy East-West” and “as the forefather of the modern colonial ideology and historiography” didn’t even cross my mind. (See my old tag # I can't write these kind of posts...)

I made a quick step from the oppositional basis in history to the caricatural East-West dichotomy (and linked to that the colonial ideology).

See my quote for the step:

This opposition is part of the concept’s naming itself because: “A dichotomy is any splitting of a whole into exactly two non-overlapping parts. Nothing can belong simultaneously to both parts.” [Wikipedia (2008)]

Again, "This opposition” refers just to the opposition between ‘east’ (Persians, Confucian China, Aryans and Dravidians) and the ‘west’ (Greeks, others). Nothing more.

I wrote “is part of the concept’s naming” instead of “is the basis of the concepts naming” in order to avoid the implication you assumed. It clearly didn’t work as I intended.

I wrote “is part of the concept’s naming” to show why the historical recording with “geographical sense” matters in regard to the East-West dichotomy. Seeing someone unkown as opponent or even enemy - regardless whether that’s true or not - can be helpful in the perception that the unknown opponent is nothing like you when you don’t want the “other side” to be anything like you at all. I’m sure that there’s also more to it how other people perceived and/or used for their own purposes the real antagonism that just happened to be between “East” and “West”, which was just about some people wanting to conquer other land for their own reasons, and so on. However, this post and the book from Pattberg aren’t about specifically how colonial thought came to be and who bears some responsibility for that. It’s about the East-West perception and it’s long enough as it is. Herodotus just happened to have been the first historian and geographer who is known to have it written down as “East” and “West” in opposition. That’s all.