Collision — Akan Aboa Animal-Form vs DiCara Vedic Deity-Form Yoga

Both traditions claim the named-deity-postural-attunement practice. Both have substantial-evidence for their independent-existence. Each tradition's practitioners typically claim cultural-origin status; the Akan-Kemetic frame's claim is more explicit and more directional (Africa → India transmission). Mainstream archaeology does not support the directional-transmission claim; mainstream Indology treats the practice as Vedic-Tantric-developed; mainstream Egyptology treats Egyptian seated-meditation iconography as independent.

The collision is doctrinally-substantive: - If the Akan-Kemetic-substrate claim is correct, the Vedic-Tantric tradition is a downstream-derivation, and contemporary practitioners engaging with it through Vedic-cosmological-framework are operating with secondary-cosmological-content; - If the independent-development reading is correct, both traditions developed the practice-form independently because the practice-form itself is robust and reliably-emerges across cultures with sophisticated cosmological systems; - The mainstream-scholarly position is more aligned with independent-development; the practitioner-tradition position is more aligned with directional-transmission.