Your Religion and Hospitality

[Recursive Paradox]

From at least some of the Laws of Mutual Respect within my path there's a lot of dual treatments which, if a person violates that dual treatment with you or one tied to you they lose any right to the normal treatment unless they atone in some acceptable manner.

It isn't perfectly put together yet and there are a few where the ban is completely and entirely non contextual (so say, if someone was getting others to worship him, that would not open him to be pushed into worshiping you, as the ban on worship or encouraging worship of yourself is non contextual)

So if someone were to threaten my safety with violence they would have violated the Laws of Mutual Respect and I would be ethically allowed by my path to become violent to them. If they stopped the offending action and atoned however (and the rules for atoning for a violation in my path are still being worked on) I would no longer be ethically viable to harm them.  

[Fiddlers Green]

Religiously, there are a few things, however, in keeping with the sacred oaths I have rendered, I must give 3 days food and safe lodging to my foe or a stranger, when requested. 3 months are due my allies and kinsmen.
I must protect my guest from all their foes so long as they are in my household, as I would any vassal. However, they are obligated to inform me of all foes they have when they arrange to stay. Further, they are obligated to stand with me against any foe that attacks my household.
If food is short, the guest is served in the same round that the children are serve. Which is first. The elderly and master/mistress next. Those who work or serve following. Finally the lay-abouts of the household, permanent residents who do nothing to support the household.
Hospitality is violated if the guest ignores a warning against blaspheme twice. Also if they aid in an intruder's attack on the home, they have breached and are not protected. When Hospitality is breached, the unwelcome guest has one full day to be gone, or the are considered intruders.

Intruders are not guests. Guests are invited. Intruders are at the very mercy of the Master/Mistress of the household they invaded.

As a Guest, one is required to inform the host of your impending visit, so they may invite you, even if it is on the doorstep. Bringing a gift is encouraged, but not required. Be ready to reveal an danger you pose. Be ready to protect the home sheltering you.  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

Religiously, there are a few things, however, in keeping with the sacred oaths I have rendered, I must give 3 days food and safe lodging to my foe or a stranger, when requested. 3 months are due my allies and kinsmen.
I must protect my guest from all their foes so long as they are in my household, as I would any vassal. However, they are obligated to inform me of all foes they have when they arrange to stay. Further, they are obligated to stand with me against any foe that attacks my household.
If food is short, the guest is served in the same round that the children are serve. Which is first. The elderly and master/mistress next. Those who work or serve following. Finally the lay-abouts of the household, permanent residents who do nothing to support the household.
Hospitality is violated if the guest ignores a warning against blaspheme twice. Also if they aid in an intruder's attack on the home, they have breached and are not protected. When Hospitality is breached, the unwelcome guest has one full day to be gone, or the are considered intruders.

Intruders are not guests. Guests are invited. Intruders are at the very mercy of the Master/Mistress of the household they invaded.

As a Guest, one is required to inform the host of your impending visit, so they may invite you, even if it is on the doorstep. Bringing a gift is encouraged, but not required. Be ready to reveal an danger you pose. Be ready to protect the home sheltering you.

This is very insightful as well. Thank you so much Fiddler!

Some of your verbage reflects established concepts that I was having a hard time coming up with an English word for. May I nick it?  

[IH_Zero]

I don't really have any specific rules for hospitality within the principles of Ma'at, besides your basic "Don't be a d**k to people" stuff.

Guests are treated with honor and respect, though I am not required to go above and beyond, unless I feel the need (which I often do). Were we down to dire straits, I would not have to give a guest my last morsel of food, as an example, though under Ma'at, I would share it, so as to not cause another suffering. Unless they are children. One of the (many) Negative Confessions is "I have not taken milk from the mouth of children."

However, I would request they were to leave my shrine alone, and to not inadvertently leave anything on it. There are purity issues in place, and one must have purified themselves before approaching the Netjer, and offerings must not be of certain materials to be considered pure. While just leaving something on the shrine would not directly count as an offering, I would rather not take my chances.  

[Recursive Paradox]

One big part of the Laws of Mutual Respect is the recognition that authority is rarely present outside of the interactions of equals in standing and that a great deal of power and capacity to harm can be present in beings for whom ethically, the growth of the Self and the being encasing the Self is held above all other pillars of philosophy.

So there are defined rules wherein one may strike out in... well I wouldn't really call it vengeance necessarily. Nor self defense because it isn't always based on you being attacked or harmed. Deterrence? Striking out in deterrence, because in the end, Etherism does not expect that anyone more powerful than you or the individual you are in quarrel with will intervene (if anyone more powerful than either of you is even present)

With a philosophy that expects one to elevate oneself in power, wisdom and growth without limit, it could become very possible that one would surpass all the powerful beings within range of interaction. Which really makes it hard to appeal to a higher power or higher authority for ethics.  

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

This is very insightful as well. Thank you so much Fiddler!

Some of your verbage reflects established concepts that I was having a hard time coming up with an English word for. May I nick it?

Tell me which verbage and then feel free. 3nodding

Poe, quick aside, how would Etherism react to a more powerful (or equal, or lesser for that matter) outside party attempting to interfere in a quarrel? I know it is unexpected, but is there any frame work to extrapolate from? Not that I'm powerful, but I am something of a meddler, and I often try to become a buffer in many quarrels around me.  

[Recursive Paradox]

Fiddlers Green

Poe, quick aside, how would Etherism react to a more powerful (or equal, or lesser for that matter) outside party attempting to interfere in a quarrel? I know it is unexpected, but is there any frame work to extrapolate from? Not that I'm powerful, but I am something of a meddler, and I often try to become a buffer in many quarrels around me.

Interference in quarrels is usually directed by alliance and or already established hostilities of outside individuals, but in general it is considered somewhat bad to intercede directly or violently in a quarrel between two or more beings.

Mediating is fine (or attempting to, if they'll listen). One does need to realize that if they intercede they are acting with authority they do not have over the individuals quarreling. Doing such strips any protection they have from intercession by the parties they meddled with in future quarrels the interloper has with others as per the Laws of Mutual Respect.

It isn't a horrible infraction as far as infractions go (for instance, it only really strips you of your right to refuse intercession from others and only the ones you interceded for in the first place). It isn't like other violations where you lose all the protections of the Law of Mutual Respect beyond the most sacred ones.

If someone does intercede violently though, without an established alliance or hostility and permission from at least one of the parties to enter in alliance with them against the other, then the Laws of Mutual Respect dictate that both the quarrelers may take to violence against the hostile interloper. Mediation is one thing, armed interference is another.

It needs more work though to hammer out more details.  

[Fiddlers Green]

What about the party that simply attempts to stand b'twixt your blades as it were?
Sorry, still curious.  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

Tell me which verbage and then feel free. 3nodding

Intruder is the main one. There's a similar concept... but I hadn't thought of any single word that I could use to sum it up.  

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

Intruder is the main one. There's a similar concept... but I hadn't thought of any single word that I could use to sum it up.

Ah, rightio, by all means use it.
3nodding

Intruders are generally very bad, as they are sorta defecating all over the hospitality rules I am bound by. 3nodding  

[Recursive Paradox]

Fiddlers Green

What about the party that simply attempts to stand b'twixt your blades as it were?
Sorry, still curious.

This comes under the heading of mediation. Slightly dangerous mediation, but simply putting yourself at the mercy of the two quarrelers (while maybe a little... foolish) isn't a violent intercession.

And so you haven't lost your rights to the Laws of Mutual Respect regarding violence. If they were to try to cut through you, they would lose their right to Mutual Respect to not be subjected to violence by you or your allies.

It's actually a good way to stop a quarrel if you have the power to back up the imminent threat of lethal response if they do try to cut through you and break the Laws of Mutual Respect.  

[Fiddlers Green]

Recursive Paradox

This comes under the heading of mediation. Slightly dangerous mediation, but simply putting yourself at the mercy of the two quarrelers (while maybe a little... foolish) isn't a violent intercession.

And so you haven't lost your rights to the Laws of Mutual Respect regarding violence. If they were to try to cut through you, they would lose their right to Mutual Respect to not be subjected to violence by you or your allies.

It's actually a good way to stop a quarrel if you have the power to back up the imminent threat of lethal response if they do try to cut through you and break the Laws of Mutual Respect.

Ah, thank you. 3nodding  

[Recursive Paradox]

Fiddlers Green

Recursive Paradox

This comes under the heading of mediation. Slightly dangerous mediation, but simply putting yourself at the mercy of the two quarrelers (while maybe a little... foolish) isn't a violent intercession.

And so you haven't lost your rights to the Laws of Mutual Respect regarding violence. If they were to try to cut through you, they would lose their right to Mutual Respect to not be subjected to violence by you or your allies.

It's actually a good way to stop a quarrel if you have the power to back up the imminent threat of lethal response if they do try to cut through you and break the Laws of Mutual Respect.

Ah, thank you. 3nodding

Glad I could help.

Were you just curious about how Hospitality works in Etherism?  

[TeaDidikai]

ninja My latest experience with extended hospitality has been positively amazing.

I think there is a lot to be said about being inquisitive of another's traditions as a tool for getting through situations.  

[Fiddlers Green]

Recursive Paradox

Glad I could help.

Were you just curious about how Hospitality works in Etherism?

Amongst living traditions, I am just as interested in how the practitioner applies something, as what it is.
I like studying the human face, as well as the ideals behind them. 3nodding

Tea, I am in agreement.
I remember the stance of the Curious Child, innocent and without malice ,still it is the harbinger of knowledge, and encourages forgiveness.