This is obviously a case for my pocket razor (I'll try it again, without cutting myself this time I hope :). Your claim depends on his intinctively comprehension, a comprehension we can't detect or see. And I claim that the text in fact leans in the direction of my position (of course). You see, even when it is made clear to him that he is illuminated he doesn't realize the implications. Implications that you claim are the essence of illumination.
Now I don't argue that illumination doesn't change Oddi, I only claim that the change comes from the powers and not the other way around. And I also claim that the changes of personality comes from Oddi's interpretation of the implications. Of course in the saga his interpretation is helped by a lunar.
> OTOH One could argue that since the Crimson Bat itself is illuminated,
> it doesn't register on Sense Chaos. But I have cold feet about this.
Is it illuminated? I can't remember. But I would think that if it didn't register on the senses of The Bull it would be a well known puzzle. I can't remember ever reading anything that implies this. A second point is that the Bat is hardly unknown in Talastar. This fact along with with the reactions of Renekot and the rest of Oddi's household, when Oddi's sense fails, is a strong indication that the bat does indeed register as chaoitc.
> There _are_ schools of illumination and there are cultural understandings
> of illumination but it is a mistake IMO to say that the Illuminated
> Viewpoint is solely coloured by the beliefs of these schools or cultures.
Of course you could say this, and it is the state-supported view of an empire. In glorantha this is a question of faith. Much like the question of the existence of the Invisible God it is a question that cannot be proven. Outside glorantha, on this digest, I claim there is no support for the view. Now we could debate the usefullness of having any views 'outside glorantha' but that is the way illumination is being discussed here on the digest.
To bring this thread back to the beginning, the question of Yelm's illumination: my original point was that saying Yelm is illuminated doesn't say much. Illumination is what you make it, and it seems that illumination is _The_ Dara Happan word of a higher consciousness (which isn't that revolutionary since that is exactly how it is used in english). And with the rather strict consensus about the usefullness of divination there isn't much hope in asking him about it, now is there.
I think, and in this I believe I'm supported by the article on glorantha.com about Humakt, that there isn't one illumination, there are many states of illumination (RQ sight was one, I believe). Of course my definition of an universal consciousness is knowledge generated by power, so ther is bound to be a large body of such knowledge.
The only thing I have to figure out now is whether this is a Godlearner view or a illuminate view. :)
You are touching the essential here, but fail to realize that this is exactly what power does: Power defines, and it defines in the way you outline. Now this isn't that revolutionary: who is Orlanth? Orlanth is the guy your Storm Voice tells you he is. Why, because he is the storm voice :) And if you say that the Storm Voice knows these things better than a mere initiate I'll just point out that he knows things better because he has the power to get the knowledge. And the power to assert his world view. Isn't this the core of the subjectivist argument in glorantha?
> In Glorantha, illumination is defined as an insight which gives the
> illuminate a number of powers. That's implicit in the sources. How can
> answering riddles give you powers independently of any insight required
> to produce the answers? Also, the same insight can lead to different
> powers, unless you are saying that many powers can give their wielder
> the same insight?
How can a man make a lightening bolt hit his enemy only by shouting a prayer? Same thing. The ability to throw lightning bolts give a lot of 'knowledge' about the order of things too. I am saying that the same powers can be interpreted in different ways.
> Riddles stretch the intelectual, imaginitive and emotional faculties of
> the subject. By presenting the subject with conundrums that cannot be
> resolved or analysed through normal mental processes, the subject
> realizes the limitations of those processes. The subject becomes aware
> of the internal architecture of her mind and becomes able to percieve
> the structure of her own conciousness, ultimately transcending it.
That's what the examiners tell you. And why do you believe them? Because you'd like to be an examiner yourself :) Or at least you don't want to be crucified. I'd love to take this discussion, but perhaps it is better outside the digest?
> Your game may, of course, vary.
Of course.
Frank Rafaelsen
Homo Ludens
End of The Glorantha Digest V5 #616
Powered by hypermail