Knowing your dieties

[Dulliath]

TeaDidikai

Dulliath

And that's where I guess I'm still stubbornly fluffy. I don't have a problem with people believing in their own UPGs unless they don't make sense or contradict a pre-existing religion.

Which these do.

I agree. That's why I am questioning it. I keep hoping it will make sense to me. So far, it doesn't.

Quote:

I figure, if the deities they call on don't appreciate it, the deities will make it pointedly obvious to them. Or their followers will.

Or they aren't actually following the deities in question.That's why I said I am still fluffy there. If it makes sense, and it is not bothering another religion, I personally don't see it as a problem.

Example of "makes no sense": Paganism is not an umbrella term, it's a religion. Everyone who is pagan can believe anything they want! It doesn't matter that there is nothing unifying the religion, and that we understand religions and the give the label "religion" to a faith with a unified doctrine of some kind. Paganism is still a religion.

Example of "conflicts with other pre-existing religions": I am 14 and I am a Solitary Wiccan. I worship the threefold earth goddess, who is Briget as the maiden, Kali as the mother, and Mhat as the crone.

Example of UPG: I work with Loki 'cause he's cute. I saw him in an anime. ***moves away slowly to get out of the strike zone***  

[TeaDidikai]

Dulliath

That's why I said I am still fluffy there. If it makes sense, and it is not bothering another religion, I personally don't see it as a problem.

Depends on what you mean when you say problem.

On a spiritual level- I don't care if they are playing with Thoughtforums that play at being deities.

On a social level, someone who claims a theology that isn't really theres can influence the standing different sects have within the community.

Case in point: Fluffy Wiccans.  

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

You misunderstand. I acknowledge that there are non-closed traditions. I even acknowledge that some of these stem from closed traditions.

But at what point does the new "open tradition" become an actual open tradition, and not just a blaspheme?

Quote:

Culture does grow with it's people, and your practice allows for converts.

And in this case, it grew apart...
I wonder if other cultures, in their growth and life spanns, have similar instances, where, over the centuiries, changes were inflicted upon the religion that were due to cultural neccessity, rahter than faith.

Quote:

And their culture has evolved so that while it is part and parcel, the foundations of the claim lead to the natural evolution of your sect's tradition.

Ah, but they are claiming sole right to the dieties.
They changed, as a result, not of their dieties, but rather, of their own chosing... the culture altered the faith, as often happens...
When a culture changes, and attempts to impose their changes on the religion, do they really have a right to claim it is still the religion it once was?
Do their political needs allow them to re-write the faith to their own needs, and still calim it as the original?

Quote:

One can have right practice, but be dead inside.

Irrelevant to an orthopraxis religion...
In fact, depending on the claims of that Orthopraxy, it may be considered a direct atttack on their very faith.

Quote:

My money is on the mortals actually. If a deity wants an individual, they should pull their chips to have the individual land in the culture if they are already bound within a closed tradition.

Bound...
Interesting terminaology there...
Makes it sound almost like the God in question is a house-pet, or a slave... Also, depending on the diety, not all of them have so much sway over births beyound their immediate environs...
But that gets into predestination adn the nature of the soul...
Something that, while pertinent, is slightly beyound the scope of this topic...  

[Dulliath]

TeaDidikai

Dulliath

That's why I said I am still fluffy there. If it makes sense, and it is not bothering another religion, I personally don't see it as a problem.

Depends on what you mean when you say problem.

On a spiritual level- I don't care if they are playing with Thoughtforums that play at being deities.

On a social level, someone who claims a theology that isn't really theres can influence the standing different sects have within the community.

Case in point: Fluffy Wiccans.

True. However, I view fluffy wiccans as conflicting with a pre-existing religion. Therefore, they are a problem.  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

But at what point does the new "open tradition" become an actual open tradition, and not just a blaspheme?

At the point of authority.

Heresy is heresy- but can only come from within the tradition itself.

Quote:

And in this case, it grew apart...
I wonder if other cultures, in their growth and life spanns, have similar instances, where, over the centuiries, changes were inflicted upon the religion that were due to cultural neccessity, rahter than faith.

Good question. We'd need to look at the source texts of the traditions.

Quote:

Irrelevant to an orthopraxis religion...
In fact, depending on the claims of that Orthopraxy, it may be considered a direct atttack on their very faith.

Indeed. But then, depending on the faith- it may be apt. Else we know one Celt who would still be Wiccan, yes?

Quote:

Bound...
Interesting terminaology there...
Makes it sound almost like the God in question is a house-pet, or a slave...

No more so than anyone else who is worn is a house-pet or a slave for having taken an oath.  

[iolitefire]

Dulliath

iolitefire

Hmmmm....By definition Hindus could be called Soft Polytheistic since they believe every god is merely an aspect of the greater whole. I actually work with my deities as a hard polytheistic. If you read mythology, you find that some deities are very similar in style, behavior, and abilities. Yama and Durga are two of these. While different cultures change them a bit as cultures do, the story is inherently the same.

Okay, here is where I'm getting confused. And I like things to make sense. Let me paraphrase you to see if I have this straight.

Yama and Durga are aspects/avatars/parts of a larger deity in the Hindu religion.

They have counterparts that are NOT aspects/avatars/parts of a larger deity in other religions.

You choose to use the names of the aspects/avatars/parts of a larger deity rather than the names used by their counterparts.

Query: How can you worship the specifically named aspects/avatars/parts of a larger deity, rather than the specifically named counterparts that are NOT aspects/avatars/parts of a larger deity without putting those aspects/avatars/parts of a larger deity into the context of the religion they are specifically named for? I don't get it.

I see what you mean and in the end, it was my error to use the Hindu given name for Durga. However, the name Yama is used in othe cultures as well so I will continue to refer to him as Yama. I called the goddess I worked with Durga since it was the easiest way to explain her. Some of her other names aren't as recognized.
And I will continue to stand by both historical and cultural record that some gods and goddess are the same. I've seen more then enough proof of it and no proof to prove that the Yama from the Fertile Crescent is different deity from the Yama in Hinduism. In the end I believe its the same god, just worshipped in different ways.
I don't do this for every deitiy I come in contact with. Many are very different in mannerisms, powers, etc. However when you have cultures like the Fertile Crescent it is only natural that one culture will use deities from a past culture. Sumerians used Akkadian gods, etc.  

[Dulliath]

iolitefire

I see what you mean and in the end, it was my error to use the Hindu given name for Durga. However, the name Yama is used in othe cultures as well so I will continue to refer to him as Yama. I called the goddess I worked with Durga since it was the easiest way to explain her. Some of her other names aren't as recognized.
And I will continue to stand by both historical and cultural record that some gods and goddess are the same. I've seen more then enough proof of it and no proof to prove that the Yama from the Fertile Crescent is different deity from the Yama in Hinduism. In the end I believe its the same god, just worshipped in different ways.
I don't do this for every deitiy I come in contact with. Many are very different in mannerisms, powers, etc. However when you have cultures like the Fertile Crescent it is only natural that one culture will use deities from a past culture. Sumerians used Akkadian gods, etc.

Thanks. I know you aren't obligated to do so just to clear up my confusion. I think though, even if people don't recognize the name you use for your goddess, it might help clear up some confusion for others in the future.  

[TeaDidikai]

iolitefire

I see what you mean and in the end, it was my error to use the Hindu given name for Durga. However, the name Yama is used in othe cultures as well so I will continue to refer to him as Yama. I called the goddess I worked with Durga since it was the easiest way to explain her. Some of her other names aren't as recognized.

Just because something isn't easy to recognize doesn't mean it shouldn't be used.

Quote:

And I will continue to stand by both historical and cultural record that some gods and goddess are the same. I've seen more then enough proof of it and no proof to prove that the Yama from the Fertile Crescent is different deity from the Yama in Hinduism.

The Yama I a familiar with from the "Fertile Crescent" is a demon that has been known to eat it's victim's intestines.

Which is part of my point. Having a similar, or even the same name does not make these beings the same individual.

Let's head up north shall we?

A number of Slavic Deities differ from their neighbor's dieities. There was no set pantheon until right before the Prince of Kev converted.

His assertions that Mokosh and Mata Syra Zjemja were the same being is flawed. For one- Mokosh is a distinctly humanoid dieity. Mata Syra Zjemja is without personification and in fact has prohibitions against doing so.

Now- it has become popular with Slavic recons to treat them as the same being to the point where even though the different songs teach that Mata Syra Zjemja "broke the heads" of those who made images of her- they still do it (and then wonder why their alters tip over rolleyes )

These dieties are from neighboring groups within the same land that profess to be part of the same religion! But the deities themselves state they are not the same- and yet modern recons who ignore this claim the same things you do.

Now- what hasn't been addressed is the side effects of violating these dieities commands.

Why- for example, is someone who claims to worship "The Morrigan- goddess of lust, poetry, battle and romantic love" not being struck down?

Pretty simple to my eyes. It isn't the Morrigan. They are in essence, talking to a Thoughtform they designed to look like the Morrigan.  

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

At the point of authority.

Heresy is heresy- but can only come from within the tradition itself.

And who has that authority?
By what right is it held?

Quote:

Good question. We'd need to look at the source texts of the traditions.

Especially fun when it is not texted, but rather maintained as a cultural tradition with no written record of why it came to be...
At least the Tribes of Israel keep track of when their God gives them rules.

Quote:

Indeed. But then, depending on the faith- it may be apt. Else we know one Celt who would still be Wiccan, yes?

My knowledge of said person does not include any details of that matter, I have no ground to speak on that, if he chooses to tell me, that is his concern...

Quote:

No more so than anyone else who is sworn is a house-pet or a slave for having taken an oath.

I suppose it involves more egalitarian relations with dieties than I am used to...
Of course, I'm an arrogant a**, indoctrinated in a "mystical" tradition that any diety that can be bargained with and bound by mortal power is not treated with much more respect than any other domesticated creature, or regular person, depending on the level of cognizance in said divinity... and certainly is unworthy of worship... respect, maybe, worship, never. This is, mind you, the doctrine of my (non-religious) order, and has nothing to do with my actual spiritual leanings.  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

And who has that authority?
By what right is it held?

I am afraid when it comes to your theology I am not as well aware of the structure as I should be. Is your faith founded on any solas?

Quote:

Especially fun when it is not texted, but rather maintained as a cultural tradition with no written record of why it came to be...
At least the Tribes of Israel keep track of when their God gives them rules.

Some traditions kept songs which held the same function.

When it comes to oral traditions- it does get sticky. But then, most faiths I have come across do hold at least one of the solas. In which case, we can look to the authority present there.

Quote:

My knowledge of said person does not include any details of that matter, I have no ground to speak on that, if he chooses to tell me, that is his concern...

He has mentioned it openly in the Wiccan FAQ's before.

Quote:

I suppose it involves more egalitarian relations with dieties than I am used to...
Of course, I'm an arrogant a**, indoctrinated in a "mystical" tradition that any diety that can be bargained with and bound by mortal power is not treated with much more respect than any other domesticated creature, or regular person, depending on the level of cognizance in said divinity... and certainly is unworthy of worship... respect, maybe, worship, never. This is, mind you, the doctrine of my (non-religious) order, and has nothing to do with my actual spiritual leanings.

Fair enough. wink  

[iolitefire]

Quote:

Thanks. I know you aren't obligated to do so just to clear up my confusion. I think though, even if people don't recognize the name you use for your goddess, it might help clear up some confusion for others in the future.

No problem. I think I will just not use Durga as the name for my goddess in the future.

Quote:

The Yama I a familiar with from the "Fertile Crescent" is a demon that has been known to eat it's victim's intestines.
Which is part of my point. Having a similar, or even the same name does not make these beings the same individual.

Its not just the name that makes them so similar. I agree, just having the same name isn't enough. But when both deities have the head of a bull, wear a necklace of skulls/heads, preside over the underworld, judge where a person is going to go, and even have twin sisters, thats when I get kinda skeptic that its all just coincedence, you know?
Also, a death deity that matches Yama's characteristics is also found in several sects of Buddhism and in Japan. In Buddhism he is also known as Yama but the Chinese may have a different name for him.

Quote:

Let's head up north shall we?

A number of Slavic Deities differ from their neighbor's dieities. There was no set pantheon until right before the Prince of Kev converted.

His assertions that Mokosh and Mata Syra Zjemja were the same being is flawed. For one- Mokosh is a distinctly humanoid dieity. Mata Syra Zjemja is without personification and in fact has prohibitions against doing so.

Now- it has become popular with Slavic recons to treat them as the same being to the point where even though the different songs teach that Mata Syra Zjemja "broke the heads" of those who made images of her- they still do it (and then wonder why their alters tip over )

These dieties are from neighboring groups within the same land that profess to be part of the same religion! But the deities themselves state they are not the same- and yet modern recons who ignore this claim the same things you do.

Now- what hasn't been addressed is the side effects of violating these dieities commands.

As I said before, I certainly don't use the belief that all similar deities are the same deity. In this case I'd agree with you, Mokosh and Mata Syra Zjemja don't appear to be the same god at all. Mainly because one is viewed as a humaniod and the other is not. A difference this big pretty much gurantees that they are different. But a few cases with other deities are different in that they are incredibly alike.

I think that if the deity is being worshipped in a way that the deity is finding offensive, the deity will make it known. Either through negative action or simply no action at all toward its followers. In the end it depends on the deity and their personality.

Quote:

Why- for example, is someone who claims to worship "The Morrigan- goddess of lust, poetry, battle and romantic love" not being struck down?
Pretty simple to my eyes. It isn't the Morrigan. They are in essence, talking to a Thoughtform they designed to look like the Morrigan.

In my eyes it could just be that the Morrigan is ignoring those who worship her like this. A deity doesn't have to always kill you or harm you for disrespecting them, they can simply not aid you. They can choose not to answer your prayers or giving you guidance, whatever.
Ignoring and avoiding someone annoying is a lot easier then smacking them around with a 2x4. And a lot less messy. I personally think deities have better things to do then bother with people who do this.  

[Kuroiban]

iolitefire

In my eyes it could just be that the Morrigan is ignoring those who worship her like this. A deity doesn't have to always kill you or harm you for disrespecting them, they can simply not aid you. They can choose not to answer your prayers or giving you guidance, whatever.
Ignoring and avoiding someone annoying is a lot easier then smacking them around with a 2x4. And a lot less messy. I personally think deities have better things to do then bother with people who do this.

My only qualm with this is that...you know...dieties aren't known for being thoughtful or compassionate towards people who have no idea what they're talking about.

I can't really imagine Ares going... "What? Some idiot over in Bumdirt, Kansas decided that I'm actually a god of peace cause he says so? And invoked my name in the same breath as he invoked the name of a dragon which dosen't exsist? Oh well....even though I ACTUALLY am a God of war and destruction, I think I'll just let this one slide...I'm not going to let my pride get the better of me over something silly when I could just pinch the fabric of reality and ruin this idiot's next three months of pitiful exsistance."

Um...yeah...I really can't go with you on that one.  

[TeaDidikai]

iolitefire

Its not just the name that makes them so similar. I agree, just having the same name isn't enough. But when both deities have the head of a bull, wear a necklace of skulls/heads, preside over the underworld, judge where a person is going to go, and even have twin sisters, thats when I get kinda skeptic that its all just coincedence, you know?

And I don't make that jump.

I've seen it happen far too often with messy results (usually in the Greek and Roman pantheons).

Quote:

Also, a death deity that matches Yama's characteristics is also found in several sects of Buddhism and in Japan. In Buddhism he is also known as Yama but the Chinese may have a different name for him.

And there is a Slavic Velos that matches the discription above. They aren't the same individual.

Quote:

As I said before, I certainly don't use the belief that all similar deities are the same deity. In this case I'd agree with you, Mokosh and Mata Syra Zjemja don't appear to be the same god at all. Mainly because one is viewed as a humaniod and the other is not. A difference this big pretty much gurantees that they are different. But a few cases with other deities are different in that they are incredibly alike.

Like say- Aphroditie and Venus? stare

Quote:

I think that if the deity is being worshipped in a way that the deity is finding offensive, the deity will make it known. Either through negative action or simply no action at all toward its followers. In the end it depends on the deity and their personality.

And what I am saying is that instead of even contacting the diety- the individuals in question create "deity shaped things" to interact with.

Quote:

In my eyes it could just be that the Morrigan is ignoring those who worship her like this. A deity doesn't have to always kill you or harm you for disrespecting them, they can simply not aid you. They can choose not to answer your prayers or giving you guidance, whatever.
Ignoring and avoiding someone annoying is a lot easier then smacking them around with a 2x4. And a lot less messy. I personally think deities have better things to do then bother with people who do this.

None of which accounts for the individual's experiences with the being they claim is working with them.  

[Deoridhe]

Dulliath

Example of UPG: I work with Loki 'cause he's cute. I saw him in an anime.

That's not UPG. There is no gnosis in seeing someone else's fictional representation of a deity and accepting it wholesale. If fact, I'd say that's almost the opposite of upg, because it's not perosnal, either - it's a product being sold.

UPG is something that through effort, reflection, and personal ritual and action one experiences and takes to be true.  

[TeaDidikai]

Deoridhe

UPG is something that through effort, reflection, and personal ritual and action one experiences and takes to be true.

By that measure- would you say that the Mass wholesale of cultural deities cannot be UPG unto itself?