(1) A noted facet of sacred language is that very often, in some way, it transcends meaning. It is not at all unusual for texts, whether written or oral, to be revered and recited, most usually in a context of ritual, even though the literal meaning of the words is not understood, or indeed that the 'words' are not in fact meaningful. Examples of this include the Zoroastrian Avesta and the Aryan Vedas, both of which were perfectly recited for more than two-thousand years even though the literal meanings of the texts were not known to those who recited them, or 'sacred phrases' which crop up in ritual contexts in some Greek texts (sorry, these days can't quote sources)--words like "Elelelu!", for example. From this a number of things follow:
(2) In some cases the reciters thought they knew the meaning, or learned other texts which included explanations of the meaning and which were composed by other people who thought they knew them.
(3) The source of the text is commonly associated with divine origin.
(4) Whether the meaning is thought to be understood or not, the ritual context in which the text or phrase is recited is the most important factor--the texts compose an integral component of the ritual of worship.
I was delighted to find from Greg's comments that the Malkioni sources contain passages written in various scripts and various runic forms also: no doubt a good deal this material makes little sense at all. Thank goodness! Now perhaps Malkionism begins to adopt a frame of its own. From what I've read the Esvulari seem to me to be far too much like Jehovah's Witnesses and (for my taste) not really close enough to rustic Dark Age pseudo-Christians. I felt that there was far too much definitiveness about them (and their cosmology)--I think an opportunity was missed: surely the recognition of the Mystery is more important than the assertion of fact, and what greater Mystery than Solace, particularly if Orlanth himself could enter into it?
As an aside I'm not sure that Malkionism really *is* modelled on Christianity at all, but people seem to be excited about that prospect given that the Malkioni do have knights and some sort of feudal system. On the other hand Christianity never had castes (unlike Hinduism--another religion, incidentally, noted for its sacred texts) and certainly never had Wizards! Christian medieval history was predicated around singular struggle between Pope and Holy Roman Emperor without which I'm sure it would have been very different--much less centralised, for example, and very likely without an overriding institution or even central tenet. This little pericope on the construction of western 'scriptures' is a real eye opener and perhaps consideration of these and their role in ritual is in order, as indeed of the nature of ritual in its own right among westerners.
In my own imagination I would venture that the written scripts perhaps primarily define action and incorrect action, most particularly in a ritual sense. What theology is there would compose implications associated with these. I would expect to find some pretty flakey stuff that stretches 'black and white' distinctions between, for example, theism and essence-oriented 'monotheism' ("the world is made of everything"), and where the identification of one's sectarian identity with the written passage perhaps requires a good deal of interpretive reading. Thus:
"This is the way Saint So-and-so blessed a field ... Afterwards he said, "Do
this and the <other people> will know you as followers of <the tradition>."
or...
"These were the fifteen rules of King <name>, the Serpent-Legged. He showed
the people how to live."
or...
"A Prayer of Saint <name>.... <poetry follows>."
The net result would perhaps be a religion, or group of religions, set apart on the basis of action first, and theology a poor second. Examples of how this identity be defined by the followers of a given tradition could be:
"Solace does not require the bloodletting of sacrifice."
or...
"The order of Malkion requires that each person acts according to his or her
place."
or...
"The <no doubt incredibly complex and inherently divisive> laws of
purity/order serve to <speculative reason--because it's the laws that are
important, not the reason...>."
or...
"It is not important that a person understands or acknowledges Solace, but
if he or she follows <these rules> he will reach it."
(This one is obviously how Orlanth got there!)
or...
"And Saint <name> said: Do not eat <x>, <y> or <z>, but do eat <xy> <in
complex circumstances> because <speculative reason, as above, because the
action, not the reason, is what defines identity>."
Cheers,
Jon.
--__--__--
Powered by hypermail