Lots of quick response to my posting:
> From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
>> What does this mean for Glorantha? It means that for Orlanthi and other
>> polytheistic cultures, belief is largely irrelevant. I can join a cult for
>> whatever motives I choose, and if I perform the form of the heroquest
>> correctly, Orlanth has to accept my efforts.
>
> I don't think this is entirely true, though on one level I'm glad to
> see someone making this counterpoint to the more commonplace, 'no
> one could ever have an ounce of religious doubt or cynicism' type
> arguments that one sees deployed. You are, however, using rather
> too broad an umbrella, I think, when you speak of 'polytheisism'.
> The poloytheism of the Dara Happans, for example, which is based
> almost entirely on sacrifice, and the correct rituals for same,
> would be much closer to the Romano-Greek model you cite. (Possibly
> the Vedic religion is the best comparison of all.) For the Orlanthi,
> though, religion isn't purely sacrificial, it has a large devotional
> aspect to it too. (What Greg was wandering around describing as
> the 'one third shamanic' portion of Orlanthi religion, to widespread
> confusion, over the last year or so.)
Well, I think this is Greg being fuzzy on how religion actually operates. Shamanism operates on an orthopraxis model, just the way polytheism does. Yes, it involves communicating more directly with the spirit, but it's still a question of giving in order to get. Part of the reason I think this is important, drawing off of the model of early Christianity, is that in many ways, these two models are in conflict. Christian writers all the way back to St Paul have attacked Judaism for getting it 'wrong' and emphasizing legalism (ie, practice over personal devotion). The whole Donatist quarrel of the 4th century is essentially a quarrel over practive against belief. If there really was a strong devotional element in Orlanthi religion, there would probably be factions arguing over which element was primary. Also, as many people have argued until it's a cliche, Faith is believing in something you haven't seen. In Glorantha, one sees the gods and their direct manifestations on a fairly regular basis, in worship services and so on. There's no real need for a devotional element in a religion where you can directly talk to your god and get a 7-word answer back (playing with the old Divination rules for a minute). If I could dial up Jesus and get his advice on job-hunting or my relationship or whatever,I wouldn't have to be devoted to him in the same way.
> Normally I hate it when people cite HW (or RQ!) answers to Gloranthan
> questions, but in this case, I must beg the court's indulgence. ;-)
> Having a personal relationship with Orlanth very much _is_ part of
> the Orlanthi religion, especially for those on the devotional (aka
> 'Rune Lord') path. Thus one will see a 'Relationship to Orlanth'
> number on many a character sheet, reflecting the importance of...
> well, y'know. ;-)
>
> But I think you can go quite some way as an initiate, or even as a
> priest, just by going through the right motions. To be a 'true
> devotee', you do as Andrew says, also have to be appropriately
> 'virtuous', which isn't necessarily in itself a matter of actual
> theology or religious experience. But at some level, that
> relationship does come into play.
I can see that this makes some sense, on the angle that the god is only going to accept as a Rune Lord those few who have a unique ability to manifest his virtues, but I'm not still not sure it's the same thing as being devoted to him, regardless of what Greg says. The more I watch, the more I'm convinced that Greg gets it wrong on a regular basis. Just look at this Storm Bull vs Urox stuff. I ask you, are we not in the hands of a madman?
> From: "Roger Nolan" <Roger.Nolan_at_Symbian.com>
> Subject: RE: The Glorantha Digest V7 #685
>> For example, the benefits of Christianity revolve around
>> whether or
>> not one has a personal belief in Christ as the Savior.
> <snip>
>> What does this mean for Glorantha? It means that for Orlanthi and other
>> polytheistic cultures, belief is largely irrelevant.
>
> I think that this is one case where Earth religion is not a good model for
> understanding Gloranthan religion. I don't see that the sort of Faith
> (capital intended) that is central to all Earth religions is ever something
> that a Gronthan theistic culture needs. I don't need faith to believe in
> Orlanth because I can go and see him every so often. Similarly, as Douglas
> pointed out, it'd be might scary to visit the GodPlane with your fingers
> crossed behind your back.
>
I think perhaps you misunderstood me. I agree wholeheartedly with you
on this, and essentially said so in my previous post.
> Using the God's power without giving them sincere worship is exactly the
> sort of this which got the God Learners into trouble - for this reason
> alone, I would imagine most people would avoid it.
Yes, but I think it's still possible. It must be extremely rare, because in a world where gods are as deeply immenent as Glorantha, anyone in a cult is likely to have some degree of 'belief' in a god.
A while ago, I ran a scenario where a Thanatari performed a ritual that allowed him to do the Lightbringer's Quest, having first collected 7 appropriate heads. Essentially, he was using the heads to allow him to masquerade as the 7 gods of the LBQ. The players wound up counter-questing against him, doing a quest to resurrect one of the heads he was using. They finally met up with him in front of the Throne of Yelm, and had to defeat him to prove which group were the real Lightbringers. The players loved it.
> From: "Nick Brooke" <Nick_Brooke_at_btinternet.com>
> Subject: Do Ut Des
>
> Andrew mistranslates a Latin tag:
>
>> The key idea here is "I do so that You will give."
>
> "Do ut des" means "I *give* so that You will give." (Bloody Latin irregular
> verbs...)
Yeah, I was afraid someone was going to point that out. It was intention (honest--I'm not lying!) because I wanted to emphasize that ritual doesn't just mean sacrifice. For some cultures, it can be a lot more than that. Either way, the basic idea remains the same. For example, tending a shrine or a statue is not really a form of sacrifice, but it is an act which can please a god or offend him if it's not done. Prayers and vows and ritual purification are all important acts which do not inherently involve sacrifice.
Andrew E. Larsen
Powered by hypermail