Discover Top Posts Tagged with #mazu

Musing on Chinese Religion and Respect 2: Electric Boogaloo

...Sometimes, even mentioning the dumpster fire of discourse feels like you are adding more fuel and stopping it from dying out, which is why this unfinished draft has been lying in my folder for a long, long time.

Let's just say, I'm both angry enough to finish it because of recent stuff, and calmed down enough to try and write something at least a little productive and informational to casual readers.

---

In my previous musing, I've mentioned that vernacular novels are Not Scriptures, even though characters from vernacular novels did get worshipped in Chinese folk religion.

Well, the part of JTTW adjacent fandoms who don't make that distinction tends to reduce it to "You can't ship Buddhist monks and Buddhist deities"...but with the curious exception of SWK.

And honestly, the idea that 1592 novel Sun Wukong, who's completely uninterested in sex and romance because that's not his allegorical function, needs to experience Love and Passion and everything encompassed by the umbrella term Qing?

It's already there in the late Ming Supplement to the West.

Well, he needs to experience Qing in order to realize its emptiness and illusory nature for that particular novel. In a way, the modern SWK romances are our quirky continuation of that tradition.

But these folks aren't interested in symbolism and non-literal reading, just "I've been telling people not to ship Buddhists/monks, but SWK is also a Buddhist and I'm into a SWK ship, how do I reconcile my own arbitary, conflicting and frankly unnecessary standards".

(Oh, the Ming lewd monk jokes and "monastery = places of gay" association y'all have no idea of...)

Most simply handwaved it with "He's not a Buddhist in this adaptation" or "Well if we disallow SWK shippings we'll have very little popular pairings left".

Okay, you do you, though I dunno who has given you the idea that shipping needs some kind of Seal of Approval in the first place.

Maybe it's the tiny minority who take the enforcement of vows of celibacy over fictional Buddhists way too seriously, and believes that:

SWK is clearly part of the Buddhist pantheon

Calling him a fictional character = calling the religion fake and thus being disrespectful

If SWK is to be considered a fictional character, then one is also saying that every other member of the Buddhist-Daoist pantheon that appeared in vernacular novels are fictional.

There are so many holes in this argument, it's hard to know where to begin, but this is kinda symptomatic of the Dumpster Fire Stuff I'll be getting into later, so bear with me for a sec.

First: What kind of god is SWK in the context of IRL Worship?

Sun Wukong attains Buddha-hood at the end of JTTW novel, but outside of the story, he is not exactly a "Buddhist" god in the same way Bodhisattva Guanyin is.

Rather, he is an amalgation of vernacular fiction, Xuanzang's IRL pilgrimage, Chinese monkey legends, and monkey worship in Fujian (which didn't worship a specific god that's exactly like Novel! SWK prior to the novel, but a bunch of monkey deities).

He is best classified as a folk religion deity, whose worship is highly regional in nature, and mostly popularized by the Ming vernacular novel.

It is also perfectly normal and not too uncommon for IRL Chinese Buddhists and Daoists to think of JTTW as just fiction. In fact, there are Chinese Buddhists who personally find JTTW disrespectful because it turns historical Xuanzang into a caricature.

In the autobiography of Yang Jie, the director of JTTW '86, she mentioned that she tried to get a renowned Buddhist named Zhao Puchu to write calligraphy for the title, and he refused because of his rejection of JTTW's portrayal of Xuanzang.

(The crew also got barred from a temple on Mt. Jiuhua, whose monks were like "Your Party destroyed our temple and statue and forced us into hard labor during the Cultural Revolution, I'm not letting y'all in here if you won't even offer a single incense and pay your respect to the Bodhisattva.")

(However, in another temple on the same mountain, the monks are very curious about the filming process, helped the director when she nearly had a heat stroke, and welcome her warmly when she revisited the temple several years later.)

Heck, going back 400+ years, in Pu Songling's Liaozhai Zhiyi, he made it pretty clear that he doesn't believe in Sun Wukong as a religious deity, despite writing a story about the Great Sage!

Are the IRL Buddhist monks, who actually received ordination and lived in a temple, "disrespectful" because they don't believe in a folk religion deity from a vernacular novel and prefer to stick to the more canonical sutras?

Are you somehow "disrespectful" for liking JTTW novel and adaptations, just because some monks don't like it?

Clearly not. You can be a faithful monk, priest, or lay Buddhist/Daoist while still seeing SWK as a fictional character. You can just be one of the atheist/agnostic majority who enjoys JTTW as a good story.

You can be a lay practitioner who believed in SWK as a more Daoist god, or straight-up didn't care about what the Buddhists said, like folk religion had always done——"Care not for canon nor scriptures nor orthodoxy, only that your prayers and offerings work and your deity is pleased."

Heck, to use Argument #3 as an example, you are perfectly capable of thinking SWK is a fictional character, while believing that all the other Daoist gods and immortals are real, because the variant of folk religion pantheon you grow up takes more inspiration from institutional Daoism than JTTW.

Like, seriously, if you want to be really doctrinal about Buddhist canons, you shouldn't even be worshipping SWK or treating JTTW like sutras.

Conversely, if you want to worship SWK like his IRL folk worshippers, it will do you well to acknowledge the laid-back, diffused, widely diverse nature of Chinese folk religions and stop beating people with the "respect" stick.

Second: Again, what Does "Respect" Even Mean?

As my first musing has hopefully made clear, it sure as hell doesn't mean "No Fun & R18 Allowed at All Time".

But also, the more you get down to the village level of things, the more ridiculous the idea that there can be a universal expression of "respect".

Like, two or more villages may worship the same folk god, but essentially treat them as different "entities", for a lack of better words.

To use an example: Village A and Village B both have a temple to Guanyin. However, when you ask Lao Wang from Village A about the temples, he tells you: "Go to our temple, our Guanyin is more efficient than Village B's Guanyin."

Though Guanyin A and Guanyin B are not seen as two different goddesses, and may very well share the same iconography, there's still the sense that they are distinct from each other, kinda like…two streams that flow out of the same giant river.

And Lao Wang's commentary is similar to someone saying "Don't go get water from that stream, it's drying up while ours are still plentiful".

How, then, can you apply a single universal anything to all the streams and rivets of the river, other than "They contain water" (Arguably worship the same deity)?

And the difference betwen the "streams", gods/icons worshipped in individual local temples, goes beyond the matter of efficiency.

In more mountainous and geographically fragmented areas, two neighboring villages can very well develop entirely different rituals of worship around a single deity. What Village C considers as proper respect to Guanyin C may be completely unnecessary to Village D and never demanded by Guanyin D.

(And that's not even getting into the divide between officially-sanctioned state rituals of worship + promotion of a deity vs. the local customs and interpretations of the same deity.)

There are probably a few things that the majority will see as disrespect——clogging up the waterway completely with trash, building a dam that cuts off the water supply downstream, etc.

However, whether you believe in the legitimacy of a folk deity originating from a vernacular novel or personally worship him is NOT one of those things.

You know what's disrespectful, though? Acting like a fundamentalist and not just refusing to engage with something, but demanding the ban of things that don't fit your narrow conception of canonical doctrines.

Or, alternately, saying that anyone who don't believe in your niche popular deity and your personal taboos regarding their depiction is somehow disrespecting the religion as a whole.

(Pop Culture SWK is the GOAT, but religiously worshipped SWK is very much tied to Southern Coastal China + SEA. And even in Fujian where his worship is A Thing, he's more niche than Mazu or Nezha.)

And whereas taboos exist in folk religion too, you really cannot separate these taboos from the everyday practices and individuals and communities around those deities.

Respect or disrespect is often about how you conduct yourself in front of altars and icons or inside temples, the inclusion and exclusion of people from certain activities or spaces, and the presence of "dirty/impure/unlucky" substance and objects.

Like, some Daoist ceremonies take place in a closed environment where all participants are priests, lay worshippers and visiting strangers are not allowed entry, and photography is prohibited.

These ceremonies are also often set in the larger context of religious festivals, where they are parallel to other religious activities that lay worshippers, passerby, and visitors outside of the community are engaging in, which have their own set of rules and procedures.

Here, even within a single event in one location, what is considered "proper" and respectful can vary according to context.

These very same Daoist priests, after finishing that particular rite, are likely going back to the lay worshippers to provide more services for them.

Whereas the expectation for their conduct may still differ, they are no longer following the same set of rules specific to that ritual environment. An act that would be extremely disrespectful while they were performing the rite, like some journalist taking a photo, might not be that big a deal once they left and joined the parade oustide.

As you can see from the scenario above, "Respect" has far more to do with, well, what you say and do IRL than what is and isn't "canonical" when it comes to artistic depictions and beliefs. And, again, very few practices are universal.

Using my temple-touring experience as an example: there are temples out there that will let you take as many photos as you like. There are temples where there's a "No Photography" sign, but neither the vistors nor the temple staff take it seriously.

There are also temples without "No Photography" signs, but the staff will loudly tell you to stop the moment they see you reach for your phone.

If you can accept "It depends" as a valid answer for whether certain activities are allowed in a place of worship, what's so hard about accepting that there is no stories and depictions of a popular deity that's True and Correct and agreed upon by all Chinese people, religious or not?

If you or your Chinese friend doesn't accept a particular story or version of a deity, or has personal taboos regarding that deity: perfectly understandable, carry on with your day/respect their approach and be a good friend.

But neither you nor them have the authority to claim these personal taboos as cultural + religious universals for all Chinese people everywhere, or attempt to enforce it in online fandom spaces of all things.

Third: Fuck, There's No End to This Bullshit, Isn't It?

Which brings me to the flaming, rotten heart of the dumpster fire, the reason this draft stayed unfinished for so long: The dreaded "You can't ship a Chinese deity because _____" discourse.

On first glance, it's a classic case of people being unable to distinguish between "Depiction of a deity in popular culture" and "The deity worshipped IRL" and treating other people like crap over it.

But I feel like it's also built on a different conception of how deities function in general.

Using Nezha as an example: it's not like we Chinese folks don't have our own squabbles over different versions of Pop Culture Nezha.

Like, there are absolutely Nezha purists who only accept the FSYY version of the character as "valid" because that version is what inspired most subsequent depictions of Nezha and the most influential on his iconography, and view all modern adaptations with disdain.

Or people who only like the Nezhas in modern adaptations and vehemently reject the premodern depictions of Nezha, because these depictions are a product of their times, and thus saturated with premodern values that they find oppressive and backwards.

But still, the argument is about which "version" of the character is the best, with the implicit recognition that 1) there are multiple versions of Nezha, and 2) these versions are fictional characters, distinct from the Nezha worshipped IRL.

To use a rough analogy, it's kinda like arguing about which incarnation of Batman or Optimus Prime is their favorite/most compelling portrayal of the character.

Which can get quite heated and nasty, as those discussions often do. Oh, and the shipping wars + top/bottom debates, can't forget that. Rare is a fandom that hasn't experienced one of those at some point in time.

But the underlying logic is still noticeably different from the English Nezha discourse. Like, even when they aren't conflating Pop Culture Nezhas and Religiously Worshipped Nezhas, there seem to be the ideas that:

There's Pop Culture Nezhas, and there is the One Mythical Nezha

The One Mythical Nezha's iconography and backstory are ancient, timeless, and set in stone

The Ming vernacular novels that these iconographic traits and stories derive from, by virtue of inspiring later folk religions, are like the Bible or something

You can say that "Oh, his depictions differ between media adaptations", but that's still not the One Mythical Nezha, who is Authentic and Sacred, and certain divergences from it are Unacceptable Blasphemy

And if I were to further narrow those beliefs down into two assumptions, it would be:

The Books Define the Deity, Literally

Once a deity is "defined" via text and art, it becomes their One True Form, and deviating from the text/art = Disrespect

...Assumption #1 is particularly funny because most haven't even read either the original Chinese books or the English translations, which both differ from the pop culture version and leave plenty of ambiguous blank spaces.

Also, I can't help but look at both assumptions and go "Chinese descent or not, it's very hard to take your claims about Chinese culture and religion seriously when you are going Bible Literalist on vernacular novels."

But, to bring the subject matter back to Chinese folk religion: deities having multiple forms of varying appearances and functions aren't just A Thing, it's kinda the norm.

I've brought up Bodhisattva Manjusri as an example of a deity with both adult, elderly, and child forms before. Though the idea of multiple, co-existing manifestations are more common for Buddhist deities, especially esoteric ones, it's far from exclusive to Buddhism.

Even if you disregard the classic folklore trope of Daoist immortals and gods turn into children, old guys, women, and people of all trades to teach or help out mortals, the phenomenon is well and alive in Hokkien + Taiwanese Mazu worship.

These are known as the "Pink-faced", "Dark-faced", and "Golden-faced" Mazus, each with different symbolic associations and functions: Mazu as a gentle, merciful lady (based on her pre-ascension form), Mazu as demon-vanquisher and rescuer, and Mazu as the Divine Heavenly Consort.

They are distinct, but still very much the same goddess. None of these are her One True Form, because all three forms are equally true and venerable and, well, Mazu to her worshippers.

It gets even more complicated when you bring the "Division of incense/spirit" (分香/分灵) into this, where individual worshippers and temples go to a renowned, well-established temple, participate in a rite, then take an incense burner, icon, or tablet back for worship.

This representation of the deity is seen as an avatar/divine copies of the deity, with roughly equal efficiency, but must be taken back annually to the "main temple" to replenish their power. (And these divine copies can absolutely have different temperaments and specialties too.)

In this context, the different iconographies aren't just symbolic, but can also be a visual marker of "temple lineage". If you invite a Mazu from Big Temple X, then your Mazu icon is likely gonna share similar features to the one in Big Temple X.

Now, if you can accept everything I just said as valid for Mazu (and many other Hokkien gods), great! Because the same applies to Nezha too.

Much like SWK, he's closely tied to Southern Coastal China and the Hokkien diaspora. As a member of the regional pantheon, he can also serves as Mazu's attendant deity——here's one such Nezha I saw in Quanzhou's Tianhou Palace.

So tell me, friend: is there any good reason you think what's true for Mazu——all her distinct forms and "divided spirits" are still Her and equally important, even though one may be more popular in a particular time and place——somehow WON'T be true for Nezha too?

If, say, someone only recognizes the Pink-faced Mazu as the One True Mazu, calls her other forms wrong and inferior and disrespectful, and starts attacking her worshippers over it...without actually being religious or Chinese, they'd be rightfully viewed as a Fucking Clown.

And if you go to an actual Buddhist temple, point to the existence of Child Manjusri and the few ritual texts that refer to him using the "Child" epithet, and demand that they replace all of their adult Manjusri statues with the Five Buns Child Manjusri because the Bodhisattva is clearly an Eternal Child?

You'll be laughed out of the temple door.

Yet most of the Nezha Discourse are following that exact line of logic, where folks:

-See only Child Nezha as the One True Nezha. -Dismiss Adult Nezha or Multi-armed Wrathful God Nezha as a mere "disguise" or "battle technique", instead of an equal, yet different aspect with their own historical roots. -When Chinese people point out they can co-exist in both IRL folk religion and media adaptations, call them nasty names. -Don't realize Nezha existed long before JTTW and FSYY. -Or, believe that Child Nezha's popularization via vernacular novels means that folk religion practitioners must treat the books like sacred scripture. -Overly literal interpretation of both texts and iconography in a manner that's starkly disconnected from their historical, cultural, and symbolic context. -Just, trying to apply modern ideas of childhood and human development to either supernatural characters or IRL gods that are hundreds and thousands of years old. -Insist that Nezha is a Chinese God and not just a character...while treating him exactly like a character defined by a single piece of "canon".

It's never about "respecting Chinese culture" or even genuine desire to learn about Chinese myths and religions, but using them as a "Shut Up You Should Feel Bad" button in shipping wars.

Which is, ironically, the most disrespectful thing you could've done——treating living, breathing religions like online fandoms and fandom discourses like religious wars, where all your preferences must have a Moral Justification and serve a Righteous Cause.

Final Thoughts

I cannot give you a list of "Dos" and "Don'ts" when it comes to something as complicated as folk religions and respect, as this post has hopefully shown.

(Mostly because there's always gonna be an exception, and I, too, am still learning. This post is hella long as a result.)

In fact, the obsessive need for there to be One Right Answer, one foolproof way to never accidentally hurt people or come off as disrespectful, is how you end up with the aforementioned jackassery going unchecked and the Dumpster Fire That Just Won't Die.

I will say that "Stay on the safe side and just don't write/draw it" is nowhere as helpful as 1) asking questions, 2) asking more than one people who has experience with the subject matter and not just the loudest, angriest one, and 3) learning to do your own research, though.

TL;DR: You can't really divorce the definition of "Respect" and "Disrespect" from the community of worshippers, regional differences, and ritual context.

Also, the whole "Media adaptations might vary, but the deity worshipped in IRL religion is always ____ and you are wrong to think otherwise!" argument is almost always bullshit.

Like, when it comes to Chinese folk religion, these folks are so off the mark, it'd be hilarious if they aren't being giant asshats about it.

#mazu

Trending Tags

Recently Viewed Tags

#mazu