Cultural Transfer as Diffusion of Complexity

This essay is an exercise in observing cultural transfer across regions as a process of diffusion of complexity from one civilization to another.

We explore the spread of Indic traditions to other areas in that particular light.

The intent of the essay is to examine general understanding of cultural transmission as diffusion, and accordingly generate insights that are particular to the case of Indic tradition.

Civilizational Complexity

The foremost concept that is to be touched is of Civilizational Complexity, which is the degree of organisation, specialisation or interconnectedness in a civilization. A civilization, given its environment and resources, develops a variety of specialised components like law, economics, calendrics, literature, architecture. Civilizational complexity is an aggregate function of all these individual** civilizational components.

As civilization advances, these components get intricate and further segregate into more nuanced sub components eg. poetry gives rise to chandaḥ (prosody), chandaḥ gives citra bandhaṃ - a subject within prosody where composed verses are broken in syllables, and progression of those syllables is visually represented, mostly as a relatable object like lotus, snake, cakra etc.

Abstraction as Local Compression of Entropy

With time the constituent population of a simple civilization successfully compounds more dimensionality, redundancy and resolution to civilizational components.

Compounding across time and spreading across regions, the components are often pushed into an advanced process of abstraction - a term commonly used in discipline of mathematics, a process of generalization where the essence of these civilizational components is extracted, crystalized, and/or condensed into refined forms.

Eg. It takes a significant volume, intricacy and diversity(of content) in poetic productivity for a culture to abstract prosody from it, and since prosody induces its own influence on poetry, we observe a positive feedback loop between prosody and poetry, with each feeding into the other.

Such a feedback process pressurises a particular civilizational component to abstract to levels inconceivable at the beginning. At that point it appears as if the civilization is trying to locally suppress the entropy. As if the civilization is trying to compress the ever increasing output and diversity occurring within that particular component or subcomponent.

An example par excellence of this compression process is Aṣṭādhyāyī, the basis of the Trimuni Vyākaraṇa, the mainstream grammatical tradition of saṃskṛta, where the sutrakāra Pāṇini Mahaṛṣi engages actively in a principle of maximum compression or brevity, Lāghava.

Another example of significance is Vṛttaratnākara by Kedāra Bhaṭṭa where the śāstrākāra writes the verse in the exact same metrical scheme (chanda or vṛtta) that it explains, meanwhile maintaining the principle of Lāghava.

Lakṣaṇa of an advanced civilization is an increasing passion for detail juxtaposed with an increasing discipline for compression. Both are opposite movements yet are profoundly missing from simpler cultures.**

Incidentally, such a process of abstraction and information compression may cause the component to generate entirely new and unexplored ideas or applications that are full-fledged domains in themselves. A special case of abstraction, where the abstracted layer carries with itself a generative potency.

Eg. The consolidation of prosody in India happened long back with Piṅgala. However, the poets post-Piṅgala, informed their poetry (kāvya) with prosody (chandas), leading to further speciation of metrical schemes. This speciation forced prosodists to refine their art and venture into areas like combinatorics and a variety of algorithmic procedures, which eventually fed themselves into mathematics (gaṇitaśāstra), a different civilizational component altogether.

Emergence of Diversity

A component in civilization may start as a big monolith where most aspects across subcomponents are inseparably intertwined. But as soon as abstraction initiates, the specialisation kicks in, which in turn creates niches.

A complex civilization notably provides an environment conducive to this exploration of niches, this in turn results in rapid speciation across components. This is the intra-civilizational cause for the much celebrated Diversity.

Minor differences in species compound in time, meanwhile remaining loosely isolated in space.

Eg. Evolution of scripts in Indian subcontinent is an example of emergence of diversity, here an abundance of scripts came from relatively fewer source scripts. The two main ingredients that drove this emergence were -

1. compounding across long interval of time.
2. loose geographical isolation.

Differential and Diffusion - A new language for transmission

Not all societies in this world manage to become a civilization: the ingredients which make a society evolve from barbaric to civilised have been subject to interest of anthropologists and complexity theorists alike.

However, what we know empirically is that the cultural complexity varies across civilizations, even regions within civilizations. This presence of a differential in complexity is the foundation for the occurrence of cultural diffusion. Two civilizations, or even regions within civilizations, engage in a process of diffusion if they happen to have a significant differential in:

• overall complexity as a whole or
• specific complexity of a particular cultural component.

The differential is kept large by a variety of factors, including insurmountable geographical barriers, cultural memes, genetic variations and so on.

All these factors which stabilise the differential in cultural complexity could be considered as proverbial resistance to the process of diffusion.

Thus like any general transport phenomena, like fluid/mass/heat transfer, the speed and extent of diffusion is inversely related to this resistance.

Examining Cases of Diffusion

To better understand the overall concept of cultural diffusion, let us examine three unique cases.

Case 1: From High complexity to Low complexity

When a civilization with a significant level of complexity comes in contact with a novel yet culture of low complexity, it results in a rapid assimilation of that latter culture within the former, the more complex civilization.

This dynamic assimilation is of specific interest to us, because it is precisely how Indian civilization spread itself into the Āgneya region of Jambudvīpa (biogeographically termed as the Indo-Malaysian Realm).

This higher differential in complexity allows for diffusion of components that may not be as abstract. This means we observe the diffusion of stories, prosody, calendars, temple architecture and even rituals.

Eg. It is known that local Javanese folklore and mythology engaged with plots of Itihāsa. This produced long narrative poems like Kakawin Arjuna Wiwāha. But the more notable point is that this work in Old Javanese incorporated chandas of Sanskrit like Anuṣṭubha, Vasanta Tilaka, and Śārdūlavikrīḍita.

Here we observe diffusion of not only broader items like stories of Arjuna Wiwāha, but also minor detailed aspects like metrical schemes. Not a crude exchange of goods, but a much deeper seeping of ācāra and vyavahāra, a thorough diffusion of complexity.

yad yad ācarati śreṣṭhaḥ
tat tad evetaro janaḥ |
sa yat pramāṇaṁ kurute
lokas tad anuvartate ||

yat yat — whatever; ācarati — he does; śreṣṭhaḥ — a respectable leader; tat — that; tat — and that alone; eva — certainly; itaraḥ — common; janaḥ — person; saḥ — he; yat — whichever; pramāṇam — example; kurute — does perform; lokaḥ — all the world; tat — that; anuvartate — follows in the footsteps.

Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues.

This verse from Bhagavad Gītā reminds us how the values and behaviour flow in a society. This verse unironically is the guiding principle behind the essay as a whole. The culture that arose in the region from Sarasvatī to Gaṅgā left an indelible mark on the cultures that surrounded it. With time, the civilizational footprint expanded and it reached the shores of even SE Asia.

Naming of new places is often done aspirationally, and there we find this verse acted out repeatedly.

When Wat Luang Kau or Maharajadhiraja Devanika (ca 5th cent. AD) wished to create a city in Laos, he founded a stele in the centre with Kurukṣetra Māhātmya inscribed on it. Similarly, Ayutthaya was named in the glorious memory of Ayodhyā.

This process continues even today. Unfortunately, today Indians are on the receiving end of the diffusion - part of this essay is written in a lavish NCR hangout place called Vegas Mall.

Case 2 : Barbarism around High Complexity

The diffusion of complexity is not a one-way flowery street, a complexity differential across two regions may increase to a level that the direction of diffusion may flip violently.

In such case, the region of low complexity maximises on consolidation of power, meanwhile the region of high complexity expectedly engages in optimization of wealth and other nurturing components of a civilization. This wealth-power mismatch, stark juxtaposition of barbarism and civilization often results in war and plunder.

This causes a sudden and sometimes irreversible decline in complexity of a civilization.

This is the brutalist reverse-flow of complexity; wherein the two cultures are levelled, but by amputation of one. The diffusion that follows further, is a painful one, and is marked by anarchy.

The Islamic invasion of India and fall of Rome are often quoted as examples in this case.

Eg. Texts of utmost brilliance in the Indic fields of Prosody and Poetry were being created while Islamic invasion of India was underway. When Islamic invasion brought in Turkish culture, for centuries it could not leave any substantial influence on the way poetry was done in India.

It can be further noticed that Perso-Arabic poetry took hold of an influential minority of Indian poetry only in the late mediaeval, and colonial era. It took a significant decline in Indic culture, and near complete decimation of specialised Sanskrit prosody, for the poets to engage in Perso-Arabic metrical schemes like Ghazals.

Thus, the so-called Syncretism of Indo-Islamic culture as demonstrated above, is a special case of marginal diffusion preceded by a brutal decline, and hence near complete levelling, of complexity.

Case 3: Lock and Key

The process of complexity diffusion can take many forms, depending on the relative complexity of the civilizations involved.

In cases where two civilizations are of comparable complexity, the diffusion of elements is often selective and cautious. While some diffused elements may be welcomed with fervour, they may also be discarded due to their inadequacies or incompatibilities with the host culture.

This selection process is critical in understanding how cultural transmission is perceived in history. An understanding of this process also reveals the underlying survivorship bias in our historical narratives.

For example, while Buddhism successfully proliferated in China, other religions and philosophical systems that were introduced to China through the Silk Road, such as Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism, failed to gain widespread acceptance.

Similarly, while papermaking technology was successfully diffused to the West, other technological innovations, such as the compass and gunpowder, were not immediately adopted and diffused.

Even fairly recently, when the scientific community of the west struggled with lack of relatable metaphysics while making strides in the field of Quantum Physics, it increasingly veered towards the East, especially Vedānta.

The adoption of Yoga, mainstreaming of Meditation and Āyurvaidika herbs across the West is a profound example of how one civilization opportunistically selects and integrates advanced components from other civilizations, even though the overall complexity differential would suggest a flow in opposite direction.

The famous mechanism of Lock and Key, commonly observed in diffusional processes and drug absorption, provides a useful imagery for possibly understanding this selective nature of cultural transmission.

In this process, the receptor (the lock) selectively binds to the ligand (the key) that fits its shape, while rejecting all other ligands that do not fit. Similarly, the diffusion of cultural elements can be highly selective, with civilizations rejecting certain elements and incorporating others.

When Buddhism first arrived in China in the 1st century CE, it encountered resistance and scepticism from some quarters, who saw it as a foreign religion that was incompatible with Chinese culture and values.

However, over time, Buddhism began to gain acceptance among the Chinese, who saw in it a philosophy and way of life that could complement and enhance their existing beliefs. To make such a transfer successful, Buddhism shed its typical Indian characteristics and had to develop a more universal framework for easy adoption.

This acceptance of Buddhism in China can be seen as an example of the lock and key mechanism, where Chinese culture acted as the receptor (lock) and Buddhism as the ligand (key). The receptor (Chinese culture) selectively accepted and integrated only those aspects of Buddhism that were compatible with its existing beliefs and values, while rejecting those that were not.

For instance, Chinese Buddhism incorporated elements of Daoism and Confucianism, adapting to the cultural context of China. The selective acceptance and integration of Buddhism into Chinese culture also led to the development of unique and distinct schools of Buddhism, such as Chan (Zen) Buddhism.

This Lock and Key mechanism works across the strata of the society. The most recent example being the rapid inclusion of Hip Hop culture in the poorer suburbs of Mumbai/Delhi, where despite the presence of all forms of music (whether classical, folk or pop) in the larger society, there was viability of this sort of cross-cultural expression, even in lower socio-economic areas that were previously more immune to foreign influence.

Addendum : Sources and Sinks

Cultural diffusion from civilizations and regions of higher to lower complexity is continually happening; however, it shouldn’t lead us to believe that cultural complexity is a finite resource.

It may help explain why certain regions retain complexity even after intense periods of barbarism, on the other hand certain regions tend to dissipate complexity much more easily.

This leads us to another concept, mathematically termed as Divergence: the segregation of regions/cultures as either Sources or Sinks of complexity.

Sources are those networks/cultures/regions that continually generate complexity, bringing down the entropy locally through abstractions that occur regularly.

Sinks are the exact opposite - they continually swallow complexity, and the barbaric patterns reappear even if some civilization manages to establish an influence.