Another sect banger. Very intetesting to see some explanation on actual Paganism instead of just "RVTVRN VVHITE MVN". Personally mellowed out from tradcath to just being an actual practicing catholic instead of larping at Latin mass, but interesting to see an alternate path
Though my gut regards the possible endeavor as obviously futile, I sometimes wonder anyway about the possibility of building the most basic rituals of worship from scratch. With money and craftmanship, one could purchase some small parcel of land and build a shrine there, and leave offerings. Would anyone else find the practice compelling in these times? Would anyone else wish to continue it after one's death?
Have you ever read Temple of the Cosmos? interesting book on ancient egyptian religion, basically mirce eliades book but with concrete examples from a religion; you’d definitely like it
You can find a bunch of books pertaining to many religions here. I was able to find the exact Zend Avesta translation in my college library. Praise Ahura Mazda and his noble Fravashis born and unborn!
there's this based trad bagan book about how there's 1 ultra god in 3 entities that tells you to never goon and defeat evil niggas and how the god will return to destroy all retards and fakecels and build an eternal reich free of foodists and troonshittery. it was made 2000 years ago in rome by a dude who was the god in the book and similar to julius evola but infinitely more powerful, he even used it to tell jews to stop being so greedy and they tried killing him but he used divine aryan powers to come back, causing many to realize his vril. some say that most european warrior elites have followed it for millennia
Im not doing it as a way to turn away from God since I love Jesus, and the Bible, I specifically choose pythagoreanism and confucionism(over stuff that requires actual commitment like germanic paganism) not as a reason to turn a new leaf but to just study it since pythagoreas ( a mathematic genius) and confucious (a philosophical genius) are both interesting figures who have some good ideas. I hope I clear this up
Confucius is compatible with Aristotle and subsequently the Thomists. The Jesuits wrote about this when they went to China. I think there’s a book chronicling the similarities between Aristotelianism and Confucianism, I haven’t personally read it but I would like to and I’d recommend it. Pythagoras doesn’t have any surviving written texts, he was someone of a miraculous figure like Apollonius but his philosophy is basically a rudimentary version of Platonism
“When the Christians assumed control of Rome, they did not ban the belief in Paganism. They banned the sacrifices, the Idols, the libations, and they smashed the temples or converted them into Churches. This was sufficient in destroying the Pagan religion.”
Not only is this true but why don’t neo-pagans advocate for rebuilding or building Pagan temples? It is in essence necessary in reviving Paganism, and if anything will draw common people to it because they will want to witness or get the services of that temple.
Like look at Japan, people don’t really believe in Shinto but will visit temples and identify strongly with it, I think thats necessary for pagan revivalism.
Paganism is ancestor cult. It is first a familial cult, located in one’s home with sacred fire over the sacred ground, the source of “private property”. It is properly a home church. The outdoor rituals started with the grave mounds and springs and wells for the extended clan to get together. Later, the same ground became the place for tribal pow-wows.
My point is that our homes must be the first step. Then the outdoor festivals. Once a place is proven to be the best place out of other alternatives after a few years, then a temple can be build. This will avoid a lot of confusion and expenses.
"I have come to realize over the years, that there is a necessarily institutional element to ritual. Iamblichus describes it, as does Guenon. You can’t go it alone. It has to be above the individual. For this reason, while I consider myself a believer in the veracity of Paganism, and support the Neopagan project, there are certain things missing from my life that constitute true, full Paganism."
This seems entirely contradictory with the argument implied elsewhere, that the ritual is the whole of the religion, and belief is irrelevant and empty without it, or at least that belief follows and ritual is primary. Am I missing something?
For my own part, I agree that one cannot be religious without an institution, and so far as I'm concerned, the existing institution to be dealt with is the state, not the church.
Ritual is the religion as in, when people referred to the religion they were referring mainly to the orthopraxy rather than the orthodoxy. The religion wasn't the community of believers so much as it was a set of practices and customs, even though these practices and customs are backed by a certain belief system. But that is not the same as saying that ritual was the whole of an individual's religious experience and religious journey. Belief was important in that regard too. They complement each other.
Satanists are banned from SWABooru
As they should be
Another sect banger. Very intetesting to see some explanation on actual Paganism instead of just "RVTVRN VVHITE MVN". Personally mellowed out from tradcath to just being an actual practicing catholic instead of larping at Latin mass, but interesting to see an alternate path
Though my gut regards the possible endeavor as obviously futile, I sometimes wonder anyway about the possibility of building the most basic rituals of worship from scratch. With money and craftmanship, one could purchase some small parcel of land and build a shrine there, and leave offerings. Would anyone else find the practice compelling in these times? Would anyone else wish to continue it after one's death?
Have you ever read Temple of the Cosmos? interesting book on ancient egyptian religion, basically mirce eliades book but with concrete examples from a religion; you’d definitely like it
Perhaps I'll check it out. I know some stuff about Egyptian religion. It was quite advanced.
What if I dont know anything paganism? Where should I start to truly understand this
It depends on what kind of paganism you're interested in
Pythagoreanism and confucionism
https://mega.nz/folder/kj5hWI6J#0cyw0-ZdvZKOJW3fPI6RfQ/folder/FqA0EZ4I
You can find a bunch of books pertaining to many religions here. I was able to find the exact Zend Avesta translation in my college library. Praise Ahura Mazda and his noble Fravashis born and unborn!
there's this based trad bagan book about how there's 1 ultra god in 3 entities that tells you to never goon and defeat evil niggas and how the god will return to destroy all retards and fakecels and build an eternal reich free of foodists and troonshittery. it was made 2000 years ago in rome by a dude who was the god in the book and similar to julius evola but infinitely more powerful, he even used it to tell jews to stop being so greedy and they tried killing him but he used divine aryan powers to come back, causing many to realize his vril. some say that most european warrior elites have followed it for millennia
Im not doing it as a way to turn away from God since I love Jesus, and the Bible, I specifically choose pythagoreanism and confucionism(over stuff that requires actual commitment like germanic paganism) not as a reason to turn a new leaf but to just study it since pythagoreas ( a mathematic genius) and confucious (a philosophical genius) are both interesting figures who have some good ideas. I hope I clear this up
Confucius is compatible with Aristotle and subsequently the Thomists. The Jesuits wrote about this when they went to China. I think there’s a book chronicling the similarities between Aristotelianism and Confucianism, I haven’t personally read it but I would like to and I’d recommend it. Pythagoras doesn’t have any surviving written texts, he was someone of a miraculous figure like Apollonius but his philosophy is basically a rudimentary version of Platonism
Whats the book?
I forgot what it was called
I asked google and is it The Aristotle-Kongzi Encounter: A Comparative Study of Aristotelian and Confucian Ethics by May Sim?
oh my bad
Very good poast
Great article, your finally summary of satanists and lw pagans really makes it clear why so many of them troon out.
“When the Christians assumed control of Rome, they did not ban the belief in Paganism. They banned the sacrifices, the Idols, the libations, and they smashed the temples or converted them into Churches. This was sufficient in destroying the Pagan religion.”
Not only is this true but why don’t neo-pagans advocate for rebuilding or building Pagan temples? It is in essence necessary in reviving Paganism, and if anything will draw common people to it because they will want to witness or get the services of that temple.
Like look at Japan, people don’t really believe in Shinto but will visit temples and identify strongly with it, I think thats necessary for pagan revivalism.
Many neopagans do advocate for this, but a lot of them feel that the rites should be done in natural scenes such as sacred groves.
Paganism is ancestor cult. It is first a familial cult, located in one’s home with sacred fire over the sacred ground, the source of “private property”. It is properly a home church. The outdoor rituals started with the grave mounds and springs and wells for the extended clan to get together. Later, the same ground became the place for tribal pow-wows.
My point is that our homes must be the first step. Then the outdoor festivals. Once a place is proven to be the best place out of other alternatives after a few years, then a temple can be build. This will avoid a lot of confusion and expenses.
"I have come to realize over the years, that there is a necessarily institutional element to ritual. Iamblichus describes it, as does Guenon. You can’t go it alone. It has to be above the individual. For this reason, while I consider myself a believer in the veracity of Paganism, and support the Neopagan project, there are certain things missing from my life that constitute true, full Paganism."
This seems entirely contradictory with the argument implied elsewhere, that the ritual is the whole of the religion, and belief is irrelevant and empty without it, or at least that belief follows and ritual is primary. Am I missing something?
For my own part, I agree that one cannot be religious without an institution, and so far as I'm concerned, the existing institution to be dealt with is the state, not the church.
Ritual is the religion as in, when people referred to the religion they were referring mainly to the orthopraxy rather than the orthodoxy. The religion wasn't the community of believers so much as it was a set of practices and customs, even though these practices and customs are backed by a certain belief system. But that is not the same as saying that ritual was the whole of an individual's religious experience and religious journey. Belief was important in that regard too. They complement each other.