Re: Great Gods vs. Transcendent Principles. from Nils Weinander on 2001-09-04 (Glorantha Digest Vol 08)

From: Nils Weinander <nils_w_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 08:44:19 +0200

Me & Alex:
>
> Nils Weinander replies to me, on "High God Worshippers":
> > > rather than being part of any Mystical
> > > Ultimate, so you could argue about whether such people were "True
> > > Mystics" as such.
> >
> > Wouldn't that be the line of hardcore, all orthodox practice
> > mystics (liek Mashunasan) and not necessarily objectively
> > true?
>
> One could say also that they weren't even "manifest mystics", in any
> conventional sense, since a relationship with a High God seems to
> me to be different from any relationship with any mystical Ultimate,
> whether than be an "orthodox" one or "manifest" one.

Since the High Gods have one foot in the Ultimate, I think it is a relationship to the Ultimate.

> I do think that one could use mystical practices to achieve
> communion with a High God, however, so this is really something of
> a semantic quibble. If you're "only" seeking that, can you still be
> a "true" mystic?

Communion with the High God brings you to the Ultimate, so I think so. A "pure" mystic would disagree though. As you say, it's a matter of semantics.

> > According to Vithelan theology, the High God Oorduren _is_
> > liberation. I can't see how that can not be part of the
> > mystical Absolute.
>
> He's a part of it, and the route to it. But I don't think he _is_
> it. (Or only one defined mighty funny.)

According to non-pure mystic Vithelan theology, I think he is. I think Vithelan theists say that mystics find the Ultimate through Oorduren.

> For the other High Gods,
> this would be a even more problematic equation.

Yep.

Nils Weinander
There is nothing better for a man than to eat and drink, and for him to find enjoyment in his work. -- Ecclesiastes 2:24

Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free _at_yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com