Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The co-authors, a racialized woman from India and a Nanualco (Indigenous Mesoamerican peoples whose ancestral territory encompasses central Mexico to the tip of Costa Rica) man from Nahua-Pipil (another name for Nanualco people) territory in El Salvador are encountering increasing discourse and action about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within academia in Canada. The DEI initiatives rooted in the Eurocentric worldview are found to reproduce the same inequities they are attempting to address. Given this context, the co-authors engaged in a process of dialogic reflections and co-learning over a period of 6 years to critically examine the notions of DEI considering their lived experiences, the domination of Eurocentric worldview, and an emerging understanding of their own ancestral worldviews. The co-authors express the need to dismantle the domination of the Eurocentric worldview and to expand the notions of DEI by honouring diverse worldviews within and beyond academia.

Keywords

diversity equity inclusion worldviews

Introduction

In post-secondary education system in Canada, where the co-authors have worked, there is an increasing emphasis on the discourse and action around matters pertaining to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The DEI discourse and initiatives have emerged in response to an increasing awareness among scholars about the inequities permeating through various systems (Duarte et al., 2023; Goriss-Hunter et al., 2020; Hogan et al., 2023; Lee & Cox, 2022; McCarter et al., 2023). This awareness is primarily informed by the civil rights framework (McDonald, 2020; Tuck & Yang, 2012), anti-oppressive approach (Mullaly & West, 2018), critical consciousness raising (Freire, 1998, 2000, 2013) and critical theories (Caterino & Hansen, 2019; Lois, 2022). The DEI discourse and actions have empowered the co-authors, a racialized woman from India and a Nanualco (Indigenous Mesoamerican peoples whose ancestral territory encompasses central Mexico to the tip of Costa Rica) man from Nahua-Pipil (another name for Nanualco people) territory in El Salvador, to acquire the language and skills necessary to make sense of their lived experiences of inequities.

At the same time, the co-authors have gained awareness that the DEI initiatives are rooted in Eurocentrism (Ahmed, 2012; Henry et al., 2017). Hence, no matter what the theoretical and applied lens of the DEI scholars or practitioners are, these initiatives often reproduce the same inequities they are attempting to eliminate. For instance, racialized people are encouraged by leaders and colleagues to occupy the position of power within the Eurocentric education system. This encouragement is driven by the institutional agenda to promote an image of itself as being benevolent, diverse, and inclusive in the global market (Ahenakew, 2016; Ahmed, 2012; Henry et al., 2017). Once appointed, the racialized leaders are expected to conform to the parameters of leadership set by the dominant Eurocentric hierarchical structure and may represent tokenism without any real authority to bring about systemic changes (Carbado & Gulati, 2013; Cukier et al., 2021). Under the pressures of the Eurocentric imperatives, racialized leaders perpetuate the social construction about race and racial hierarchy, participate in the ongoing colonization of Indigenous peoples, and may reproduce such inequities as classism, ableism, homophobia for those who are at the bottom of this power structure.

Within academia, DEI initiatives take the form of committees, taskforces and conferences with an intention to develop toolkits, checklists and best practices (Ahmed, 2012). At times, there is a subtle pressure on the employees to applaud the academic leaders who show strong commitment to DEI while remaining complacent in maintaining the status-quo of power and privilege. Hence, DEI initiatives become the site of superficial changes, self-congratulatory postering, reinforcement of Whiteness and neoliberal ideology, mistrust, and silencing (Ahmed, 2012; Chambers, 2023; Henry et al., 2017).

The co-authors have come to understand that their employment within different post-secondary education institutions was partly driven by the equal opportunity policy for those individuals who are deemed deserving of equity and are perceived as non-threatening to Eurocentric power structures (Ahenakew, 2016). These hiring policies placed both authors in the category of immigrants and refugees, thus erasing their ancestral roots, complex histories, distinct journeys, and Indigeneity. The presence of their brown bodies was considered a significant change within these institutions; as Chambers (2023) states, “the dominant culture deludingly convinces itself that a splash of colour or splash of diversity in and itself represents meaningful and structural change” (p. 6). On the contrary, there was no critical examination of the concepts of DEI within these institutions, and these terms were utilized as if they contained certain degree of truth to them.

Given this context, the co-authors intend to articulate their lived experiences, elucidate three worldviews, including Eurocentric, Indigenous from the perspective of a Blackfoot scholar, and Tantric, meaning liberation through expansion, and present their dialogic reflections about DEI from the perspective of diverse worldviews. The reflections in this paper allow the co-authors to turn their gaze inward and outward simultaneously, to recognize the pervasiveness of Eurocentrism in their lives, and to rekindle the deepest longing to honour their ancestral worldviews. By sharing their journey and reflections, the co-authors invite the readers to recognize that there are other ways, that is non-Eurocentric ways of understanding, knowing and valuing the notions of DEI, and these other ways may allow us to restructure academia in a way that diverse cosmologies, ontologies, epistemes, and pedagogies can co-exist in a respectful manner. The co-authors acknowledge that the DEI initiatives are often combined with efforts to decolonize (DEI-D) post-secondary education (Chambers, 2023; Mawhinney et al., 2020); however, the scope of this paper is limited to the concepts of DEI. Decolonization is about sovereignty of Indigenous peoples across the globe and cannot be conflated with the current understanding of DEI rooted in Eurocentrism (McDonald, 2020; Tuck & Yang, 2012).

The question arises of how the co-authors recognized this need to explore their ancestral worldviews and to critically reflect upon the concepts of DEI. At a post-secondary education institution, the co-authors found an opportunity to engage in a conversation about themselves and the world around them. During this conversation, the second author, who was immersed in the Frierian (1998, 2000, 2013) critical consciousness-raising approach and liberation theology (Romero, 2004[1988]), asked the first author to clearly identify her ideology and articulate her responsibility in relation to the community. This question about ideology baffled the first author, who stated “I do not have an ideology, I have a Tantric worldview.” A detailed explication of worldviews appears later in this paper.

The above statement by the first author shifted the conversation as it became necessary to articulate what a worldview is and how this can potentially inform our understanding of DEI. The first author initially found it difficult to translate her worldview in the English language. Also, the question arose as to what is meant by the term worldview. There is no single definition of worldview; however, a worldview may constitute three dimensions, including ontology meaning the nature of reality, epistemology meaning ways of knowing reality, and axiology meaning values or ethics (Little Bear, 2000; Stenmark, 2022). A worldview is a foundation, often invisible, upon which we build our ideological vision as well as our religious, cultural, social, political, and communal structures.

Over a period of 6 years, the co-authors embarked on a journey of sharing their lived experiences, emerging understanding of distinct worldviews, and reflections about the notions of DEI. This became a living inquiry where questions, reflections and actions emerged from daily life and an academic inquiry metamorphosed into a way of being and becoming in the world (Ahmed, 2017). The co-authors reviewed scholarly publications and engaged in deep conversations with Inuit (Indigenous people of Arctic North America) Elder and Métis (Indigenous peoples who trace their ancestry to First Nations and French colonizers in Canada) leaders at their workplaces (Kirmayer et al., 2011). First Nations, labelled as Indians, are those Indigenous peoples in Canada who are neither Métis nor Inuit as per the Constitution Act 1982 (Voyageur & Calliou, 2001).

The co-authors travelled through Nahua-Pipil territory in central America to learn about the worldview, knowledge systems and language of Nanualcos, and encountered silence or fragmentary information from family and community members. These barriers were the result of violent imposition of capitalism and Christianity on Nanualcos and other Indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica by Spanish conquerors, decimation of various Mesoamerican Indigenous communities, including those of Nanualcos, during civil wars in the twentieth century, and fragmentation of identity and relationships among diverse groups of Mesoamerican Indigenous peoples due to forced displacement (Stephen & Velasco-Ortiz, 2023). Given this context, the exploration of worldviews became a simultaneously challenging and fulfilling journey. In the following sections, the co-authors present their lived experiences, three worldviews, and reflections about the notions of DEI.

Lived experiences of a racialized woman

The first author was born in an upper-middle class family in the state of Gujarat, India. She was born to a Hindu mother and a Muslim father who came from different regions of the country, spoke different languages, worked in France for seven years and resettled in India in the late 1970s. The first author often found herself navigating the tensions between the Hindu and Muslim communities embedded within the larger structures of coloniality of power (Dussel, 1993; Mignolo & Ennis, 2001; Quijano, 2000, 2007). Within this context, she endured ontological, epistemic, and cultural violence in the form of glorification of modern European or Western culture and rational knowledge system and denigration of her own Tantric worldview, local culture, and diverse forms of local knowledge.

After completing graduate studies in Western psychology in India, she came to Canada as an international student in 2002. The decision to migrate to Canada was taken due to escalating violence between the Hindu majority and Muslim minority in Gujarat. A pathway to higher education in Canada appeared to be a safe escape. Prior to her departure from India, she was given a clear message by her parents to assimilate into the dominant White world to succeed as a student. Canada was presented as a peaceful country with international students and immigrants coming from different parts of the world. On her part, she had no awareness that this was Indigenous land and that Indigenous people were still alive.

One day while searching for academic literature on Laurentian University’s library website, she came across the term Ministry of Indian Affairs. This created a sense of surprise, confusion and curiosity, leading to further investigation of this Ministry which in her mind worked with people from India. To her greatest shock, she came across the reality of Indigenous people being alive and being mislabelled as Indians by the government of Canada. She remembered her high school history lesson which stated that early European explorers and settlers had mistakenly labelled Indigenous peoples of Americas as Indians, assuming that they had reached the subcontinent of India. She further learned that the Canadian Indian Act 1876, divides the First Nations into the categories of status- and non-status Indians (Hick & Stoke, 2017). Hence, the term Indian continues to be used for certain groups of Indigenous peoples in Canada.

As she continued her education at Laurentian University, she received an opportunity to complete a placement with Kashechewan First Nation, which is situated in northern Ontario, Canada, in partial fulfilment of her Master of Social Work degree. This experience proved to be a turning point as she gained an understanding of deceptive treaty-making process, appropriation of Indigenous land, genocide of Indigenous peoples and the devastating impact of violence on those who survived. Further details about her learnings are published elsewhere (Shaikh et al., 2017).

After completing graduate studies, the first author was appointed as a tenure track faculty in an interdisciplinary department at a Canadian University. A process of further assimilation into the Eurocentric academia continued and she attained tenure by meeting the requirements around teaching, scholarship and service. However, this process had very little inner resonance for her, and she felt a deep sense of spiritual dislocation in the patriarchal Eurocentric academia (Ahmed, 2017), which remains oblivious to matrilineal Tantric cosmologies, ontologies and epistemes (Kali, 2003; Odier, 1996/1997, 1999/2001).

Consequently, she turned her gaze towards her ancestors in India and began an arduous journey of tracing the roots of the Tantric worldview, traditions and practices (Chinnaiyan, 2017; Kempton, 2013; Odier, 1996/1997, 1999/2001). This journey rekindled the loving memory of the festival of Navratri, a nine-night dance festival which honours Shakti, the sacred feminine known as innate power within reality. The first author engaged in extensive readings about the Tantric worldview in the Sanskrit, English, and regional languages of India, received initiation into deity meditation and contemplative practices as a lay practitioner, reconnected with Indian classical music, and developed a process of inquiry guided by inner spiritual unfolding. This inquiry was further channelled into deeper conversations about worldviews and DEI with the second author.

Lived experiences of a Nanualco man

The second author was born in the land of the Nanualco, also known as the Nahua-Pipil, currently situated in El Salvador, whose ancestral territory encompassed landmass from central Mexico to the tip of Costa Rica. Nourished by the fertile land, trees and streams, his childhood was spent under the violent impact of coloniality, Christianization, and capitalism (Dussel, 1993; Mignolo & Ennis, 2001; Quijano, 2007). The terms campesino (peasant) and Indio (Indian) were imposed on his community by the Spanish conquerors, who diminished his connection to his Nahua-Pipil ancestry, relationship with Mother Earth, and forced his family to commodify their land within a capitalist agrarian system. He felt a deep connection with the land, which was called a land of Indio Aquino, a Nahua-Pipil leader who rebelled against the Spanish conquerors. However, this connection to Indio Aquino and the land had to be kept hidden to ensure safety of one’s self, family members and communities from ongoing persecution.

During the civil war fuelled by the USA’s imperial agenda (Chomsky et al., 2016), he, along with his family and community, was forced to leave their ancestral land and flee to the vicinity of San Salvador as internal refugees. Amid grave uncertainty, he and his family channelled their hope through Archbishop Romero, who raised his voice against the oligarchy for unjustly using the military and political power to appropriate land from those people whose dignity and livelihood depended upon it (Whelan, 2019). In those days, the liberation theology expressed by Archbishop Romero (2004[1988]) resonated with the second author. Much later, did he come to realize that such ideologies perpetuate coloniality on Indigenous land (Mignolo & Ennis, 2001; Quijano, 2007).

Following the assassination of Archbishop Romero, the second author, along with family members, transitioned to Mexico and received deeper understanding of liberation theology from Mixteco (Indigenous Mesoamerican peoples of Mexico from the regions of Oaxaca, Puebla, and Guerrero) and Zapotec (Indigenous Mesoamerican peoples from the southwestern-central highlands of Mexico) scholars. In Mexico, the second author experienced a shift in his identity as he was labelled a Salvadoran man and not recognized as a Nanualco. After spending adolescence as a Salvadoran man in Mexico, he arrived in Canada as a Latino refugee, thus experiencing further erasure of his Nanualco ancestry and identity.

In Canada, he experienced fear, confusion, and hope as he encountered language barrier, cultural differences, and a lack of reliable networks. Driven by a need to gain clarity, he gravitated towards gaining post-secondary education. He chose this path believing the broader message that if he received the Eurocentric education, he will be able to serve his community better. In the face of multiple interruptions, he completed undergraduate and graduate studies in Canada. He learned the Eurocentric academic language and skills suitable for clinical and community-based social work practice. While navigating different systems, he remained oblivious to the inner spiritual need to return to his ancestral land. Even though the post-secondary education allowed him to critically examine the systemic inequities rooted in coloniality, none of the courses required him to engage in a process of reconnecting with his Nahua-Pipil roots and reclaiming his identity as a Nanualco man.

One day, he expressed a desire to learn about worldviews to an Inuit Elder Jean Becker, who pointed him in the direction of writings of Dr Leroy Little Bear, a scholar from the Blackfoot Nation which is situated in Southern Alberta in Canada (Rosen et al., 2019). The second author found the essay titled Jagged Worldviews Colliding (2000) written by Dr Little Bear; however, none of his professors and colleagues were aware of its existence. Reviewing this essay proved to be a turning point in the life of second author as he set out to explore distinct worldviews of Indigenous peoples in Mesoamerica, including that of his own ancestors. In this paper, the second author shares the Indigenous worldview from the perspective of the Blackfoot scholar whose writings significantly impacted his life and enabled him to change his narrative about his own self from being a Latino refugee in Canada to a forcibly displaced Nanualco man from Mesoamerica.

During a conversation with the first author, the second author shared a childhood memory of when he was an 8-year-old boy and was walking on a path covered by tall trees in the forests where Nanualcos lived. As he looked up at the trees swaying in the wind, a question emerged from within as to “Do we really need Jesus Christ from some foreign land to come and save us?” At that age, he could turn to no one to receive an answer to this inner question. Once this memory was rekindled, the second author recognized the enormity and urgency of reconnecting with his ancestral roots.

Three worldviews: emerging understanding

In this section, the co-authors describe their emerging understanding of three worldviews and present Table 1, wherein the readers can compare the ontology, epistemology and axiology of the three worldviews.

Table 1.

Three worldviews and differing notions of diversity.

Components	Eurocentric	Indigenous as per Blackfoot scholar	Tantric
Ontology	Reality is human-centric. Reality can be singular as in the case of one true answer, oppositional dualistic as in the case of good versus evil, and multiple as reflected in the lived experiences of non-White and non-dominant group members. There is a separation between the person and the context outside of the person. Diversity is recognized as a deviation from the norms.	Reality is energy and all of existence is energy. All things are animate imbued with Spirit and in constant motion. Earth is the Mother and cannot be separated from the being of Indigenous peoples. Diversity is the norm, it is given.	Reality is non-dual or whole, paired-dualistic that is two halves of the whole, and multiple. Shiva is the inner masculine of reality who exists in union with Shakti the sacred feminine known as innate power within reality. Shakti is the creatrix who spins the universe out of her own energy, infuses her energy in seams of universe, and dissolves the universe back into herself. Diversity is multiple transformations of Shakti within a single consciousness.
Epistemology and Methodology	Knowledge is acquired or appropriated and disseminated by humans only. Knowledge is tested and verified for validity, reliability, accuracy, and trustworthiness through quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods.	Since everything is animate, every entity in the creation has knowledge. Indigenous languages and ways of communication allow a human to connect with trees and rocks and vice versa and engage in reciprocal exchange of knowledge. Elders are the knowledge keepers and oral traditions are important aspects of knowledge transmission.	Every moment of life is a doorway to different levels of consciousness and non-dual reality. Methods of knowing reality include imagination, intention, invocation, initiation, deity meditation and contemplation practices, use of inner and outer senses, yoga asanas (postures), rituals, ceremonies, oral transmission, storytelling, study of yogic texts and dialogue.
Axiology	Separation of self and others. Superiority of humans of European origins over other humans, other species, and the planet earth. Hierarchical power structures and systems with domination-subjugation, individualism, competition, and consumerism as a way of being. Logical, linear, analytical thinking with an emphasis on goals, processes, and outcomes. Designing, commodifying, appropriating, and consuming the world.	Wholeness or totality of creation, like a flower with four petals. Humans are a part of the web of creation, neither superior nor inferior. Non-hierarchical power structures and concentric circles of family-social-political systems. Cyclical patterns of creation emphasizing the significance of process as opposed to outcome or product. Renewal, reciprocity, harmony, balance, kindness, honesty, humour, generalist way of being, grounded in place, and participation in sustenance of creation.	Recognition of all of reality as sacred, aware, and self-knowing. Spontaneity, openness, wholeness, coherence within paradox, integration, egalitarian relationships, direct experience of nonduality and unity which presents itself as diverse and multiple reality.

Eurocentric worldview

The dominant worldview, within and beyond Canada, is Eurocentric founded upon the notion of White supremacy and universal abstract knowledge (Battiste, 2018; Little Bear, 2000). As can be seen in Table 1, the Eurocentric worldview is human-centric. According to this worldview, reality can be singular as in the case of one true answer, oppositional dualistic as illustrated by good versus bad, and multiple as represented in the deviation from the norm. Reality is explained as a separation between the spirit and matter as well as the separation between the person and the context. This separation is inherent in the othering process that the co-authors have experienced as their lived experience. Within this worldview, reality has limited space for fluidity, spontaneity, reciprocity, and plurality.

Knowledge is valid when it is gained or appropriated and verified through empirical measures developed and implemented by humans only (Battiste, 2018; Little Bear, 2000). Knowledge is valued when it allows humans to measure, control, design, and commodify the reality for the benefit of those humans who ascribe to Eurocentric worldview (Little Bear, 2000). At times, Eurocentric knowledge-producers approach the non-European world, extract only those elements of non-Eurocentric knowledge systems that can be understood through Eurocentric ontology and epistemology (Ahenakew, 2016), and further commodify it for the benefits of Eurocentric structures (Smith, 2018). In this process, the Eurocentric knowledge-producers claim their expertise in specific areas of knowledge, while erasing the original sources (Hall, 2018).

Within Eurocentric world, knowledge is often utilized to organize life in a hierarchical structure where humans of European origins have higher and superior position in relation to other humans, living beings and the planet Earth (Battiste, 2018; Hernandez, 2022; Yale Divinity School, 2018). The values emanating from this worldview include domination over others, logical and linear analytical thinking, competition, individualism, modernism, commodification, and consumption of the world (Battiste, 2018; Chomsky, 2003; DiAngelo, 2018; Dussel, 1993, 2020; Little Bear, 2000).

Within this worldview, diversity is understood as a deviation from the norms (Little Bear, 2000), particularly manifesting through the multiplicity of lived experiences and voices of marginalized people. The norms are set by those individuals who hold power due to their ideology of White supremacy, patriarchy and capitalism. Within this context, equity is about removing barriers for marginalized humans to participate in the Eurocentric systems (Henry et al., 2017), and inclusion is a form of assimilation which does not pose a threat to the Eurocentric onto-epistemic hegemony (Ahenakew, 2016). In this process, the DEI initiatives, while recognizing the diversity and multiplicity of experiences among people living in the margins, become a site of White saviourism and glorification (Ahmed, 2017).

Indigenous worldview from the perspective of a Blackfoot scholar

The term Indigenous, in the context of this paper, refers to any person who identifies as a First Person/Original Inhabitant of Mesoamerica. There are diverse worldviews among Indigenous peoples within and beyond Mesoamerica (Castaneda, 1981; Hernandez, 2022; Wagamese, 1994/2006, 2014, 2021; Yale Divinity School, 2018). In this article, the second author shares the Blackfoot scholar Dr Little Bear’s articulation of Indigenous worldview which had a profound impact on his life as stated earlier.

According to Little Bear (2000), Indigenous worldview recognizes reality as energy and asserts that all of creation is imbued with energy or Spirit. Hence, everything is animate. Reality emerges as cyclical and wholistic, as can be seen in the cycles of seasons, migration of animals and birds, and renewal ceremonies and songs. Earth is the Mother and cannot be separated from the being of Indigenous peoples. Hence, there is no separation between the person and the context.

Since everything is animate, every entity in the creation has knowledge and a way of knowing (Little Bear, 2000). According to Sinclair (2017), an Anishinaabe (a group of culturally related Indigenous peoples living in the Great Lakes regions of Canada and the USA) scholar, the trees, lakes, rivers and rocks are the libraries of Indigenous peoples. Indigenous languages and ways of communication allow reciprocal knowledge exchanges among all of creation (Little Bear, 2000). This means humans and non-humans can communicate and learn from one another.

The values of all our relations, wholeness or totality of creation, cyclical patterns, and reciprocity preclude any formation of hierarchical and linear structures within and beyond the human world (Little Bear, 2000). The human life unfolds within concentric circles of living entities. Humans are part of the larger web of creation and are neither superior nor inferior in relation to all of creation. In essence, this worldview is non-human-centric, unlike the Eurocentric worldview. Elders are the knowledge keepers and oral traditions are important aspects of knowledge transmission. The values emanating from Indigenous worldview include kindness, humour, harmony, balance, honesty, process-orientation and being grounded in a place (Little Bear, 2000).

Within this worldview, diversity is the norm (Little Bear, 2000); hence, equality and inclusion are a given. Also, the DEI are not human-centric concepts. The ontology of reality as energy, the epistemology of knowledge exchange between humans and non-humans, and the values of all our relations emphasize reciprocal and egalitarian relationships among humans and non-humans across cosmos.

Tantric worldview

The matrilineal Tantric worldview is believed to have its roots in the Indus Valley civilization, which flourished between 2600 and 1900 BCE in the Indian subcontinent (Kali, 2003; Odier, 1999/2001). The co-authors acknowledge diversity of Tantric traditions, schools, and paths (Kempton, 2013; Odier, 1996/1997, 1999/2001), while presenting the foundational elements of the Tantric worldview.

The word Tantra (liberation through expansion) is derived from two Sanskrit roots, tan—which means to develop or expand, and tra—which means to liberate (Kempton, 2013). In Tantric worldview, reality is both non-dual that is a unified whole and paired-dualistic that is two halves of the whole. The non-dual aspect of reality is called consciousness. Traditionally, this is known as Shiva, the inner sacred masculine of reality. At the non-dual level, Shiva exists in undifferentiated union with Shakti, the inner sacred feminine of reality. Shakti is the creative potency or dynamic energy, and literally means the innate power of reality. Shakti is the creatrix who spins the universe out of her own energy, infuses her energy in seams of the universes, and dissolves the universe back into herself (Kempton, 2013). Shakti’s dance of creation, sustenance, and dissolution is continuous and contained within a single consciousness called Shiva. Reality is the union of inner masculine and feminine principles manifesting as stillness and dynamism, stability and transformation, void and fullness, and being and becoming (Kempton, 2013).

In the Tantric worldview, true power comes from within the reality (Kempton, 2013). From its undifferentiated non-dual state, Shakti, with her creative impulse, begins to stir her imagination (Chinnaiyan, 2017). Her cosmic imagination works its way through many levels of consciousness, progressively condensing energy and becoming denser matter. This process of creation is called involution or contraction, by which formlessness bursts into myriad forms, and oneness becomes many realities. As she further condenses herself into physical matter, she takes forms such as universes, galaxies, black holes, suns, moons, planets, animals, trees, plants, and humans. In this entire process, she embodies herself. On higher levels of consciousness, she manifests as beings with subtle bodies of light and sounds which can be accessed through meditation practices.

Within humans, Shakti manifests as breath, cells, bodily organs and functions, mind, thoughts, emotions, memories, sensations, perceptions, interpretations, and experiences (Chinnaiyan, 2017; Kempton, 2013). Furthermore, she remains coiled as kundalini, the power of spiritual awakening within humans. When kundalini is asleep, we may experience the split between self and the world. When kundalini awakens inside us, even momentarily, we experience the oneness or nonduality underneath the diversity.

Within Tantra, reality is sacred, aware, and self-knowing; that is, everything knows itself and everything else (Kempton, 2013). For humans, different methods and practices are available to access different levels of consciousness and to directly experience oneness or nonduality (Chinnaiyan, 2017; Odier, 1996/1997, 1999/2001). These methods include, but are not limited to imagination, invocation, initiation, oral transmission, use of inner and outer senses, yoga asanas (postures), deity meditation, contemplation, rituals, ceremonies, storytelling, study of yogic texts, and dialogue. The major values emanating from this worldview include spontaneity, openness, wholeness, coherence within paradox, egalitarian relationships, and oneness or nonduality (Odier, 1996/1997, 1999/2001).

Within this worldview, diversity is the multiple projections and transformations of this primordial energy called Shakti within a single consciousness known as Shiva. In other words, oneness manifests as diversity (Kempton, 2013). Hence, equity and inclusion refer to oneness which can be experienced through expansion of our awareness, dissolution of our limited sense of self, and realization of the Tantric teaching that the world is inside us (Kempton, 2013). This oneness consciousness allows us to experience diversity as a scared expression of wisdom, love and creative potentiality. In other words, in the boundless formlessness of oneness, there is a space for every form to exist and express itself without violating one another.

Reflections about DEI

The co-authors recognize that the terms DEI have different meanings across three worldviews. Within Canada, the Eurocentric worldview dominates and informs our understanding of DEI. Consequently, people ascribing to Eurocentric ontology and epistemology define what is diversity, explain why and how inequities emerge, and how inclusion can be achieved. The message given to everyone is that those who fully ascribe to the Eurocentric worldview will hold special rights, privileges, and power, and these are inherently desirable, worthy of pursuit, and most legitimate. From this perspective, as stated by Ahenakew (2016), inclusion is a form of assimilation where people with non-Eurocentric worldviews are recognized and included only when they fit the frame of modern Eurocentric institutions. Consequently, the DEI measures continue to reproduce the same inequities (Ahmed, 2012; Henry et al., 2017).

Within this DEI discourse and action, there is no recognition that there is a diversity of worldviews. There is no critical questioning about the prevalent notions of DEI and where they come from. There is no recognition that there are other ways of understanding, knowing, experiencing, and valuing diversity. These other worldviews make it clear that diversity does not have to be understood as a deviation from the norm, rather diversity is the very essence of creator, creation, and creative process.

In this journey of reflections, the co-authors have asked themselves several critical questions. These questions include, but are not limited to, (1) what exactly are we seeking when we engage in discussions and actions about DEI? (2) are we seeking the same kind of power and privilege that our oppressors have? (3) Are we seeking a piece of pie within Eurocentric world? (4) If racialized and religious minorities are seeking equal rights and resources from the dominant group members, are they further dispossessing Indigenous people of their land and land-based ways of living? (5) By sharing our lived experiences, are we reinforcing the Eurocentric notion of diversity and multiplicity as deviation from the norm? or (6) Are we seeking to create a different world founded upon a different worldview?

As the co-authors begin to question further, they recognize the inner imperative to dismantle the domination of Eurocentric worldview and to embrace their ancestral worldviews within their own lives. The co-authors feel the need to uphold their ancestral values of oneness, integration within paradox, all our relations, reciprocity, and wholeness while acknowledging that they are not just a limited time and place-bound self, rather they are boundless energy full of creative potentiality.

In the past 1 year, the co-authors engaged in dialogues about diverse worldviews, violence of Eurocentrism, and the notions of DEI with academic leaders, colleagues and students. In the process, the co-authors invited the attendees to explore their own ancestral roots, understand their own ancestral worldview and to contemplate the possibilities for DEI initiatives based on this understanding. The co-authors would like to invite the readers of this paper to do the same.

Journey ahead

There is no linear and clear path ahead. The co-authors recognize the tensions arising from inner polarities and spiritual dissonance under the impact of apparently solid Eurocentrism. To alleviate this impact, they are engaging in the process of reconnecting, remembering, rekindling, and renewing. Moving forward, the co-authors are committed to deepening their understanding of cosmologies, ontology, and episteme of their ancestors, nurturing their egalitarian relationship, and sharing their reflections within and beyond the post-secondary education system. There is a recognition among the co-authors that a dignified life requires them to relinquish human-centrism, acknowledge their place within the larger cosmos, and assume responsibility in relation to all of creation, which includes Mother Earth and life beyond. This is a lifelong journey of co-learning, unlearning and relearning, a way of being and becoming in the world.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We express our deepest gratitude to Elder Jean Becker at the University of Waterloo and Dave Skene, former Director of White Owl Native Ancestry, for many conversations about Indigenous worldview and ways of being. We are deeply thankful to our colleague Dr Trish Van Katwyk for her insightful comments on the earlier draft of this manuscript.

Authors’ note

Arshi Shaikh-Grande (BA, MA, MSW, PhD) is a scholar within a Eurocentric post-secondary institute in Canada. She is an Associate Professor in the Department of Social Development Studies at Renison University College, affiliated with the University of Waterloo, Ontario. During Arshi’s academic journey, she received research grants to complete projects related to resilience and mental health, homelessness, and supportive housing. Over the past 6 years, she changed the direction of her research trajectory with a renewed focus on her ancestral worldview, Goddess traditions of the Indian subcontinent, matrilineal spirituality, trauma, healing and wellbeing, and violence of Eurocentrism and coloniality. Arshi is currently engaged in two research projects titled Worldviews and Violence of Eurocentrism and Decoloniality as Praxis: Tantric Worldview and Scared Feminine.

Santiago Grande Garcia (BA, BSW, MSW) is a Nanualco man from Nahua-Pipil Territory in Meso-America what is called El Salvador today. Due to the civil war in El Salvador, he arrived as a displaced Indigenous man in Canada and gained post-secondary education within the Eurocentric colonial institutions. Santiago is a Registered Social Worker in the province of Ontario. Over more than three decades, he has offered services as a crisis worker, counsellor, community developer, researcher and educator at regional, provincial and international levels. Santiagao possesses a deep understanding of trauma, displacement, colonization, oppression and discrimination, and how these challenges may shape mental health, well-being and healing of individuals and communities. He currently offers trauma-based counselling services at the Purple Butterfly Healing Centre, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada. Santiago continues to work as a part-time instructor at Fanshawe College, London, Ontario, Canada. He is a co-researcher on a project titled Worldviews and Violence of Eurocentrism.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Arshi Shaikh-Grande

Santiago Grande Garcia

Glossary

Sanskrit language

asanas postures

kundalini the power of spiritual awakening within humans

Shakti the sacred feminine known as innate power within reality; the creatrix who spins the universe out of her own energy, infuses her energy in seams of universe, and dissolves the universe back into herself

Shiva the inner sacred masculine of reality

tantra liberation through expansion

tan to develop or expand

tra to liberation

Spanish language

campesino peasant

Indio Indian

Indigenous peoples

Anishinaabe a group of culturally related Indigenous peoples living in the Great Lakes regions of Canada and the USA

Inuit Indigenous people of Arctic North America

Métis Indigenous peoples who trace their ancestry to First Nations and French colonizers in Canada

Mixteco Indigenous Mesoamerican peoples of Mexico from the regions of Oaxaca, Puebla, and Guerrero

Nahua-Pipil another name for Nanualco—Indigenous Mesoamerican peoples whose ancestral territory encompasses central Mexico to the tip of Costa Rica

Nanualcos Indigenous Mesoamerican peoples whose ancestral territory encompasses central Mexico to tip of Costa Rica

Zapotec Indigenous Mesoamerican peoples from the southwestern-central highlands of Mexico

References

Ahenakew

(2016). Grafting Indigenous ways of knowing onto non-Indigenous ways of being: The (underestimated) challenges of a decolonial imagination. International Review of Qualitative Research, 9(3), 323–340.

Ahmed

(2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Duke University Press.

Ahmed

(2017). Living a feminist life. Duke University Press.

Battiste

(2018). Reconciling Indigenous knowledge in education: Promises, possibilities, and imperatives. In Spooner

McNinch

(Eds.), Dissent knowledge in higher education (pp. 123–148). University of Regina Press.

Carbado

D. W.

Gulati

(2013). Acting White? Rethinking race in “post-racial” America. Oxford University Press.

Castaneda

(1981). The eagle’s gift. Simon & Schuster.

Caterino

Hansen

(2019). Critical theory, democracy, and the challenge of neoliberalism. University of Toronto Press.

Chambers

(2023). Another way to decolonize the curriculum. Art Journal, 82(3), 5–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043249.2023.2241946

Chinnaiyan

(2017). Shakti rising: Embracing shadow and light in the Goddess of path to wholeness. New Harbinger Publications.

10.

Chomsky

(2003). Hegemony or survival: America’s quest for global dominance. Henry Holt and Company.

11.

Chomsky

Spooner

McNinch

(2016). An interview with Noam Chomsky. In Spooner

McNinch

(Eds.), Dissident knowledge in higher education (pp. 55–62). University of Regina Press.

12.

Cukier

Adamu

Wall-Andrews

Elmi

(2021). Racialized leaders leading Canadian universities. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(4), 565–583. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143221100136

13.

DiAngelo

(2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for White people to talk about racism. Beacon Press.

14.

Duarte

Losleben

Fjørtoft

(2023). Introduction. In Duarte

Losleben

Fjørtoft

(Eds.), Gender diversity, equity and inclusion in academia: A conceptual framework for sustainable transformation (1st ed., pp. 1–16). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003363590

15.

Dussel

(1993). Eurocentrism and modernity (Introduction to Frankfort Lectures). Boundary 2, 20(3), 65–76.

16.

Dussel

E. (Host)

. (2020, July 13). Eurocentrismo, “la otra mirada a la historia universal” [Eurocentrism, “the other look at world history”] [Audio podcast episode 11]. Eurocentrismo, erradicando nuestro inconsciente colectivo.

17.

Freire

(1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage ( Clarke

, Trans.). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

18.

Freire

(2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). The Continuum International Publishing Group.

19.

Freire

(2013). Education for critical consciousness (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.

20.

Goriss-Hunter

Burke

Weuffen

Plunkett

Emmett

(2020). Inclusion, equity, diversity, and social justice in education in the twenty-first century. In Weuffen

Burke

Plunkett

Goriss-Hunter

Emmett

(Eds.), Inclusion, equity, diversity, and social justice in education: A critical exploration of the sustainable development goals (pp. 1–10). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5008-7

21.

Hall

B. L.

(2018). Beyond epistemicide: Knowledge democracy and higher education. In Spooner

McNinch

(Eds.), Dissident knowledge in higher education (pp. 84–101). University of Regina Press.

22.

Henry

Dua

James

C. E.

Kobayashi

Ramos

Smith

M. S.

(2017). The equity myth: Racialization and Indigeneity at Canadian universities. University of British Columbia Press.

23.

Hernandez

(2022). Fresh banana leaves: Healing Indigenous landscapes through Indigenous science. North Atlantic Books.

24.

Hick

Stoke

(2017). Social work in Canada: An introduction (4th ed.). Thompson Education Publishing Inc.

25.

Hogan

T. H.

O’Rourke

B. P.

Weeks

Silvera

G. A.

Choi

(2023). Top-level leaders and implementation strategies to support organizational diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) interventions: A qualitative study of top-level DEIB leaders in healthcare organizations. Implementation Science, 18(59), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01319-7

26.

Kali

(2003). In praise of the Goddess: The Devimahatmya and its meaning. Nicolas-Hayes.

27.

Kempton

(2013). Awakening Shakti: The transformative power of the Goddesses of Yoga. Sounds True.

28.

Kirmayer

L. J.

Dandeneau

Marshall

Phillips

M. K.

Williamson

K. J.

(2011). Rethinking resilience from Indigenous perspectives. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 56(2), 84–91. https://doi.org.10.1177/070674371105600203

29.

Lee

Cox

(2022). Decentering Whiteness: A leadership strategy for diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education. In Marques

Dhiman

(Eds.), Leading with diversity, equity, and inclusion: Approaches, practices, and cases for integral leadership strategy (pp. 297–314). Springer.

30.

Little Bear

. (2000). Jagged worldviews colliding. In Battiste

(Ed.), Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision (pp. 77–85). UBC Press.

31.

Lois

(2022). The gender of critical theory: On the experiential ground of critique. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198857747.001.0001

32.

Mawhinney

Dell’Angelo

Alston

M. Y.

Gerity

Katz

Vanderbilt Maw

(2020). Hope and struggle to decolonize the preservice teachers’ mind: An urban teacher education program history. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 42(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2020.1728166

33.

McCarter

S. A.

Wilson

M. L.

Anderson

(2023, May 9). Evidence-based strategies to improve the effectiveness of diversity, equity, and inclusion training. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 33(6), 327–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313204.2023.2210850

34.

McDonald

D. B.

(2020). Paved with comfortable intentions: Moving beyond liberal multiculturalism and civil rights frames on the road to transformative reconciliation. In Craft

Regan

(Eds.), Pathways of reconciliation: Indigenous and settler approaches to implementing TRC’s call to action (pp. 3–34). University of Manitoba Press.

35.

Mignolo

W. D.

Ennis

(2001). Coloniality at large: The Western hemisphere in the colonial horizon of modernity. CR: The New Centennial Review, 1(2), 19–54. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41949278

36.

Mullaly

West

(2018). Challenging oppression and confronting privilege: A critical approach to anti-oppressive and anti-privilege theory and practice (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

37.

Odier

(1997). Tantric quest: An encounter with absolute love ( Gladding

, Trans.). Inner Traditions International. (Original work published 1996)

38.

Odier

(2001). Desire: The Tantric path to awakening ( Frock

C. M.

, Trans.). Inner Traditions International. (Original work published 1999)

39.

Quijano

(2000). Coloniality of power and Eurocentrism in Latin America. International Sociology, 15(2), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601164353

40.

Quijano

(2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural Studies, 21(2–3), 168–178.

41.

Romero

(2004). The violence of love ( Brockman

J. R.

Trans.). The Chicago Province of the Society of Jesus; Harper & Raw Publishers; Orbis Books. (Original work published 1988)

42.

Rosen

Genee

Ankutowicz

Petker

Shapka

(2019). A comparative analysis of rhythmic patterns in settler-heritage English and Blackfoot English in Southern Alberta. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 64(3), 538–555. https://doi.org/10.1017/cnj.2018.44

43.

Shaikh

Kauppi

Case

(2017). Flooding in Kashechewan First Nation: Is it an environmental justice issue? Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 37(2), 105–130.

44.

Sinclair

(2017, May 27 to June 2). Five hundred years of building diversity: Canadian citizenship at future’s edge [Congress presentation]. The Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences 2017: Big thinking series, Toronto, ON, Canada.

45.

Smith

L. T.

(2018). The art of the impossible: Defining and measuring Indigenous research? In Spooner

McNinch

(Eds.), Dissident knowledge in higher education (pp. 21–40). University of Regina Press.

46.

Stenmark

(2022). Worldview studies. Religious Studies, 58(3), 564–582. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412521000135

47.

Stephen

Velasco-Ortiz

(2023). Introduction: Mesomerican Indigenous mobilities in Mexico and the United States. Mexican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos, 39(1), 7–31. https://doi.org/10.1525/msem.2023.39.1.7

48.

Tuck

Yang

K. W.

(2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.

49.

Voyageur

C. J.

Calliou

(2001). Various sheds of red: Diversity within Canada’s Indigenous community. The London Journal of Canadian Studies, 16, 103–118.

50.

Wagamese

(2006). Keeper’ n me. Anchor Canada. (Original work published 1994).

51.

Wagamese

(2014). Medicine walk. McClelland & Stewart.

52.

Wagamese

(2021). Richard Wagamese selected: What comes from spirit. Douglas and McIntyre.

53.

Whelan

M. P.

(2019). “You possess the land the belongs to all Salvadorans”: Archbishop Óscar Romero and ordinary violence. Modern Theology, 35(4), 638–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/moth.12478

54.

Yale Divinity School. (2018, April 17). Individual salvation vs. cosmic balance: An American Indian perspective [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PtUcb4ImvQ

Diversity of worldviews: reflections about diversity,equity,and inclusion

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Lived experiences of a racialized woman

Lived experiences of a Nanualco man

Three worldviews: emerging understanding

Eurocentric worldview

Indigenous worldview from the perspective of a Blackfoot scholar

Tantric worldview

Reflections about DEI

Journey ahead

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Authors’ note

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

Glossary

References