To your attention this
is a study of Nurlan Choybekov. It is pretty interesting to consider the
essential elements of the mentality of our citizens, expressed in the form of traditional
knowledge. Text of the study is presented in five parts. For readability, we'll
publish it in the form of five relevant chapters. Have a nice reading.
continue...
Part III
The western sociologists
consider such phenomenon with their own prism, without taking into account the
opinion of the society that practicing certain rituals. The definition of the
respondents is called as a self-deception and the basis of these rituals is seen
like symbolic violence for the sake of economic and cultural capital of one
over the other, but that is all hidden under the delusion of society, in order
to obey one another, but in a more pleasant way. French sociologist Pierre
Bourdieu follows such views also. He alleged that any symbolic system, or
cultural practices, the result of cultural practices serve to maintain public
policy, public affairs management, the maintenance of public inequality and
hierarchy in society. And also a symbolic system prescribes values that are
respected by all individuals, regardless of their social level. Due to the
symbolic system creates symbolic violence, which leads to the accumulation of
cultural and economic capital of some over others. And in order that the system
continued to operate, it creates awareness of all this for granted, that is
incorporated into the consciousness of individuals. F. Bourdieu calls this
system of self-deception.[6] Based on the view west to cultural practices
Kyrgyz giving gifts, it exists only in order to maintain the arrogant attitude
of those who reported lavish wedding, occupied a high position in society, as
the symbolic violence of those who do not have it all. Through the submission
of symbolic gifts with festive table with some claiming over others in order to
monopolize power and assert its position in society. Just as there is a ritual “ustukan”
to one individual from one social stratum could establish itself above the rest
by submitting “ustukan” and self belief is the only self-deception in society,
that individuals do not notice the symbolic violence on themselves.
Professor of
Kyrgyzstan Akmoldoeva in her "universe Manas" noted that
"Western Orientalism characterized by a lack of attention to the features
of the Turkic nomadic culture." [1] She also claims in his book that
during the transfer of donor gifts along with gift and transmits its identity.
[1] Thus, it leads to the fact that there is a connection between the spiritual
and the physical world. And this belief is not a delusion, but there is a
feature of Turkic culture, which Western Orientalism and ignores calls
self-deception. And in order to avoid biased western judgment must consider the
opinions of the individuals themselves. Necessary to look to the prism of
traditional knowledge of the society, in order to explain their social life. In
this case, we must take from the analysis of the Western theory of symbolic
violence, as an alternative theory to the prism of traditional knowledge and
ideas. For example, one of these theories is the theory of "Tsavolk"
Society of North America , which explains the physical and the invisible world
as permanent variables are closely related to each other .[2] At the time of
the study was to interview manaschi Taalantaly Bakchieva where he pointed out
that "Everything is at Manas , including Keshik . Beliefs about Keshik in
Manas, even in the epic describes this ritual is in the wedding with Manas
Kanykei or Aichurek and Semetei ... It's pre-Islamic beliefs , ritual ... This
belief suggests that the energy quality and characteristics tend to be passed
from one person to another or from one tribe to another, and this is done by
food, clothing. "Manaschi addition to words can be found in the expert
interview with ethnographer Iptarovym Sabir, who noted that" the ancient
people, due to the fact that they could not separate themselves from nature,
considered themselves to be part of it. They are separated not by nature, they
are integrally formed with it. This universalistic outlook implied that the
particle has the same properties as that of the whole and vice versa. This
understanding has made it possible idea that each portion share the object
transmitted from a whole has the same quality and properties."
The theory of "Tsavol"
says that the physical dimension is like a mirror or a shadow of the
spiritual dimension. If the spiritual dimension contains a positive force,
then the earth will experience being a positive force and also relatively
negative, destructive force. Physical area like a mirror implies a special bond."[2]
Then in the sum theory "Tsavol" response manaschi, ethnographer and
the perceptions of the respondents can say that belief is about yrysky ancient
belief , and is the traditional knowledge, which is also mentioned in the epic
"Manas". Also belief in what part of the whole property has
maintained a holistic science. Person as the owner of the spiritual qualities
through physical objects transmits them to other people , where the parts of
the object being passed from one person can move on to more people since the
ancient world contained understanding of what each part of the whole has the
same property as a whole .
Part IV
On the basis of
understanding the explanation of “yrysky” exchange rituals in Kyrgyz society
can see the constructive benefits for Kyrgyz society in general regarding the
ethics relating to the national authorities and also with respect. Ritual of
exchanging gifts in conjunction with the belief of “yrysky” will favorably
influence the attitude towards other nationalities residing in the territory of
the Kyrgyz Republic. As mentioned earlier, when the ritual “Keshik zhyrtysh” or
guests to participate in the feast , feast dishes transmit your family and
friends , colleagues, who in turn, need not necessarily be on the Kyrgyz
ethnicity. When transferring “Keshik” representatives of other nationalities ,
the dish is also transmitted on the belief “yrysky”. And thus the donor,
treating other human ethnicity, on a symbolic level it perceives as a respected
and loved one. Recipient, and recognizing the importance of taking meals,
imbued trust and respect to the donor, as well as the giver himself . “Yrysky”
belief regarding interethnic relations can reduce distrust among nations, and
in particular representatives of other nationalities of Kygyz.
Also based on the
understanding “yrysky” can see constructive benefit to society through ritual “ustukan”
or whatever it is called – “Yrys Keshik”. During the ritual “ustukan” respected
person obliged to share this symbolic power (“ustukan”) with others , or give
it to the youngest in the family. By submitting this symbolic power, he
indicates that he or she is not with individuals of different social
stratifications , he or she thus reduce the distance between themselves and
proclaim themselves as one. Thus “ustukan” expresses the symbolic and cultural
capital. When sharing it with others people do not monopolize power as a
traditional law that one who has been expressed through reverence “ustukana”
must share with others . Thus the power being distributed among the other
ceases to be in one of social stratification, and exists in all strata and
hierarchies. This ritual assumes that the government has no right to monopolize, and beliefs about “yrysky” ensures the transfer of power to others. Power
belongs to the community where the family invite guests by “ustukana” expresses
honor and respect. In this case, the belief in the ritual of “yrysky ustukan”
is not self-deception , and public law , which states that no one has the right
to monopolize power, even if that power is transferred to all members of the
society to a certain person.
Part V
Unfortunately research
has shown that the younger generation, which has received a Western education, which speaks better Russian than Kyrgyz language that live in big cities
compared to rural youth of modern Kyrgyz society, practicing rituals giving
gifts without realizing beliefs about “yrysky”. Such youth sees rituals as an
expression of gratitude “Keshik” hosts feast for the fact that guests come to
them, or see “Keshik” as an attempt to get rid of excessive abundance of food
after the feast. For other youth “Keshik” ratio implies donor recipients “Keshik”.
If “Keshik” costs expensive, it shows respect of the donor to the recipient. If
this is candy for 50 or 250 som som, it reflects the attitude of the person,
depending on the price “Keshik”. So we see that the younger generation is
trying to explain gift-giving ceremony, as remnants of the past, and the
belief of this new generation of “yrysky” forgotten. Just mercantile
interpretation is not unique to the younger generation, but also to the already
elderly. For them, in addition to beliefs about “yrysky” there is also an
understanding that through cost “Keshik” they measure the ratio of the host to
the guests, perhaps today, as a donor and the recipient, not only takes into
account the beliefs of “yrysky”, but also takes into account the commercialism
as during donation “Keshik” and during its preparation. But when you ask
leading questions of young people born in the 90s, then they can still remember
about “yrysky” belief and look at these rituals new look. And the more society
will follow the path of the greedy market relations, the greater the likelihood
that the public will forget about spirituality, about the positive aspects that
can positively affect the social life of people.
Developer Research -
Nurlan Choybekov
bibliography
[1 ] Akmoldoeva.Sh.B.
VselennayaManasa. Bishkek: Arabaeva Kyrgyz State
University, 2009.- 160
; 128c.
[2 ] Atleo, R. A
Nuu-chah-nulth Worldview.Tsawalk. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2004.- 119 ; 18c.
[3 ] Calhoun.C.,
Moody.J., Ptaff.S. Classical Social Theory.2nd ed. Hoboken. NJ: Whiley
John & Sons. Inc:
2001.- 150 -170c.
[4 ] Mauss, M. The
Gift: The Form and Reason For Exchange in Archaic
Societies. London:
Routledge, 1990.-12c.
[5 ] William A.H., H.
E.L.Prins, D. Walreth, B. McBride. Cultural Anthropology: The
Human Challenge,
Twelfth Edition. Belmont, CA. USA: Thomson Wadsworth, 2008.-186c.
[6 ] Hancock, B. and
R. Garner. "Habitus, body, practice," in Changing
Theories:
New Direction in Sociology. University of Toronto Press, 2009.-170c.
Комментариев нет :
Отправить комментарий