2/2 Again: really long.
The above post covered 1) some questionable decisions in modern reconstructionism (e.g. Religio Roma) - which make it unrepresentative of the past and 2) the dubious nature of "neopaganism".
This post is about the P/IE reconstructionism (including "Vedic reconstructionism") going on in the west and how it's attached to various European reconstructionisms.
I'm picking a simple, blatant and therefore self-evident example to illustrate the (sole) recurring pattern I've noticed in such reconstructionism. The pattern is something that's immensely troubling IMO. There exist more complex/advanced (and serious) examples on the web and they are *very* disturbing.
1. odinicriteofaustralia.wordpress.com/how-europe-was-overrun-by-christians/
A timeline.
It contains the familiar reference to the native American chief Hatuey's steadfast rejection of christianism even when he was about to be brutally murderded by christians.
Looks harmless enough. Even positive. A supposed NW European religion reconstructionist page shows respect to native American tradition. Friend of all traditionalists? Wait.
2. odinicriteofaustralia.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/odinistimage.jpg [color="#0000FF"]<- Go look[/color]
The above is from the page
odinicriteofaustralia.wordpress.com/odinism-in-the-indo-european-religious-family-tree/
The image is self-explanatory. And yet I'm still typing, just to make doubly sure no one misses the various obvious things:
Skipping the hilarious opening section titled "our *ancient* faith" on how the "mythology" of the ancestors of Europeans - 'the Cromagnons' (I suppose they are now identified as the proto-Aryans, ja?) - whose "religious beliefs can be inferred from these paintings" [line refers back to their statement "unsurpassed artwork on cave walls in N Europe"*] was spread over the world: "ME, northern Africa, India, Asia and perhaps even beyond, as suggested by recent discoveries in America." (Usual Oryanist claims to all civilisation again.)
[* the "unsurpassed artwork on cave walls in N Europe": reminiscent of those news articles with the images of the hyper voluptueuze females (otherwise not much detail) which the eager researchers dubbed were indicators/proof of early imagination in humanity [corollary: therefore imagination was born only in the Urheimat, I mean Europe]. This sort of thinking is the origin of such conclusions.]
[color="#0000FF"]Note the following items in the diagram:[/color]
=> FINNISH?????? In an "IE Religions" diagram? Very funny.
=> Indian -> "Rig Veda, etc." -> "Modern Vedic purism"
"Modern vedic purism" because IE reconstructionism always entails Vedic reconstructionism, of course.
Note:
Iranian -> "contemporary Yazdanism, Alevism, Yezidism, and Kafiri beliefs".
So, while contemporary Iranian and "Kafiri" (Kafiristan?) beliefs are mentioned, Hindus' religion is totally dismissed since it's not what any IE reconstructionists I've come across on the web consider "vedic purism". Only christoconditioned west (post-christianism though it be) will determine what is "vedic purism", and it gives its stamp of approval to "modern vedic purism" which is Da Only 'existing' Indian religion worth approving by the modern self-declared polytheisticals (<- but they are christoconditioned all the same. So it isn't "polytheism" that is the proof of true heathenism, free from the influence of the mindvirus. The difference is merely authentic 'heathenism'. I.e. real natural traditions rather than imaginary/invented/constructed ones.)
And if you were to look further into what they mean by "vedic purism", you will find that their opinion is that this "vedic purism" is practised by ... who did you think? The Vedic Reconstructionist movements of course. In the west (goes without saying). Carried out by christoconditioned post-christian western dabblers dabbling in what they should *NEVER* be messing with, but which they insist is *theirs* (by Oryan right) and which they are convinced does not belong to miscegenated Hindus. Or at least, not to the same degree (unless said Hindoos recognise that it belongs to the oryanists and moreso if said Hindoos were to *train* the oryanists in Vedic rituals. Like good natives teaching their betters.)
^ By the way, the miscegenation thing is actually the implied subtitle to the impure vs pure statement: it is always there in the back of most P/IE reconstructionists' minds if not in the forefront. Not only are Hindus "miscegenated", their religion is to have had a similar 'fall from grace'.
3. odinicriteofaustralia.wordpress.com/introduction-to-odinism/
Leaving aside the issue of the other Dharmic religions of Buddhism and Jainism (and Sikhism) in the following paras, since they are unrelated to the Vedas and Hindu epics and fortunately can't really be beaten with the IE stick/backhand except to be always dismissed by reconstructionists for being 'unVedic' (yeah, well that's because they *are* specifically non-Vedic, duh). But then, the oryan reconstructionists always declare Buddhism etc to be "impure" IE religion precisely for the "Unforgivable Flaw" of being thus unVedic and hence 'non-IE'. <- Since IE reconstructed religion is The True religion (and for example, Hindu religion is specifically Not True), you see - and you thought it was only christianism that makes the claim.
And the above (and bold bits below) is exactly why modern "European religion" reconstructionists in the west think they have a right to the Hindu Vedas: they de-legitimise Hindus from Hindus' own sacred texts by declaring Hindus' understanding and practise of Hindus' *own* religion wrong/corrupted/impure, and also instead insist that *they* (the P/IE and/or Vedic reconstructionists) are the rightful owners of the same (claims from IE/PIE, aka argumentum ad IE) and the proper/pure practitioners.
odinicriteofaustralia.wordpress.com/introduction-to-odinism/
Hindus will learn nothing true about the traditional European religions from such reconstructionisms of European religion. They are not practising the actual religion of the northwest of Europe. They are not looking for that. They are reconstructing as per their idea of what it ought to be, 'would probably be, based on thus-and-so'.
There are many reconstructionists of European religions (except Hellenismos and of course European religions not regarded as IE) who do PIE reconstructionism and who ally with 'Vedic reconstructionists' (=Europeans).
They all speak of the Hindu religion as different from the 'original true' religion that is centred on the Vedas. They have the same monotheistic tendency seen throughout: delegitimisation and take over, at which point they start speaking as the "true legitimate" voices for that which they've appropriated. (Rather like the Brahmo Samaj: they declare 'polytheistic idolatrous' Hindus are "wrong" and that they know the *real* Vedic/Hindu religion. Same .... monopolytheistic tendency.)
That is, christianism declares itself the True Religion. Whereas all the visible P/IE-influenced reconstructionisms always declare themselves to be the True Inheritors, the True Owners, the True Practitioners and the True Followers of the True Version of the (IE) religion. In "Vedic Reconstructionism" this always reduces to "the True Vedic religion" (vs the false "Hindoo" religion).
This dichotomy - Vedic vs Hindu (a splitting process whereby Hindus are automatically disinherited from their Vedas) - is another sign of christoconditioning. Note that reconstructionists are always polytheists - they will swear by it and denounce "monotheism" and "soft polytheists" - and they behave exactly like their still-internally christian self.
It bears to always remember: Hindus are the true heathens here.
Not these 'reconstructionists' - nor the dedicated PIE (let alone Vedic) reconstructionists that deny Hindus. They have no legitimacy. They merely claim it vocally. By invalidating Hindus. They are still fundamentally christian - as in, christoconditioned: in behaviour and thinking patterns, even if no longer in conscious, (self-)admitted religious adherence.
Truly, Taoists and Shintos are very fortunate for not being beaten with the PIE/IE stick. At least no one is interested in pulling the rug from under them. (Well, Taoists are witnessing the beginnings of appropriation on the edges from IE quarters, but if they remain invisible/play dead long enough maybe the predator will get bored and they'll slip past the radar. Please the Gods, they may be spared.)
Hindus should make a distinction between those following their ancestral religions (the ones known to history) - like the Hellenes writing the main articles at ysee.gr seem to be doing - and those who are looking for something entirely different and hence constructing what they *want* rather than what was. The latter are not really interested in their ancestors' Gods. They're interested in an idea of what they want their people to have been and what they want to be(come).
They have recognised christianism destroyed who they were. They know what they lost is religion and that *that* is what they want back because it is their identity*. But in their search for rediscovery 'reconstruction' they are haughty and arrogant and - like christianism - will appropriate and run down others who are still practising true heathenism (a.o.t. falsely and opportunistically 'reconstructed' religion).
[* And it truly is a Self-driven enterprise on their part: they're not so much - not truly - interested in their ancestral Gods, as in 'regaining' *their* identity (what they imagine their lost identity was like). The Gods are seen as constituting an intrinsic part of that - but a *part* nevertheless: the Gods are not the end in themselves in this pursuit to "get" religion.]
Many modern reconstructionist movements - purporting to reconstruct *historical* religions - sadly end up dabbling. And some even associate with P/IE reconstructionism, despite the fact that no *known* heathen religion (i.e. as documented by practising traditionalists of our or earlier times) worshipped the reconstructed PIE Gods or worked with reconstructed PIE rituals from reconstructed PIE texts in reconstructed PIE language, making the matter as irrelevant to the religion of the Asen as it would be to the *known* Hellenes ancient and present. The NW traditionalists - including the later Vikingen - were Nordic and Germanic populations, just like how Hellenes were Mediterraneans. They were not the Proto-IE people - whoever these are supposed to be - they did not practise the PIE religion. (If one were to - for now, for the sake of argument - take it as a given that these existed.) The GRs practised their GR Olympic religion and the Germanic/Nordic populations practised the G/N religion of the Vanen en Asen en de kabouters enz. (I am guessing ysee.gr wouldn't mention IE/aryan/PIE - or rather, it doesn't *seem* to me like the sort of thing that would remotely interest them. They are reviving, moving on from where they had left off, not reconstructing from - assumed - first principles.) Just as the still-extant Hindus - who are Indians in Bharatam, not PIEs of the unknown urheimat - do not practise the variously-reconstructed PIE religion or worship the PIE Gods. They continue to worship the Gods well-known to their Hindu ancestors (and extant relatives).
So if people in the future wanted to "reconstruct" the Hindu religion as it was known to their Hindu ancestors, one would think/hope they would look at the information that the known Hindus of by-then history would have left behind about how the old Hindus viewed the Hindu Gods and religion, rather than using PIE and reconstructions to "recreate" the "Hindu religion". I don't know how far the last would get them, frankly. Just like it seems an impossible distance from [a] PIE-ism to [b] the religion of Seneca/Sallust/Julian/etc/known traditional GrecoRoman population such as their Hellenistic ancestors (of which they were the natural product). Can the latter [b] be retrieved from reconstructing the former [a]? Can, in future, a lost Hindu religion be retrieved from PIE. Or can it be retrieved from the then presumably extinct Hindus' own view (words) concerning their religion.
And there lies the distinction between what goes in this thread and what may go elsewhere: natural traditions as are *known* to exist and to have existed, based on what the traditional practitioners of those religions themselves tell us of their view of their religion (Gods). Their view=their religion. E.g. Julian speaks of Asclepius, Zeus, Pan - his Father Helios of course - his Mother who shared in the throne of his Father Jupiter (i.e. Juno; [similarly, the Attis reference implies that the Mother is Rhea/Roman Magna Mater]), etc. He worshipped in Temples and performed rites as other Hellenes of the empire did - as his Hellenistic ancestors did too - which were derived from what his highly-regarded forbear Numa Pompilius had taught in conjunction with the teachings of Greeks and other Roman traditionalists on this matter. He loved the Greek epics and its heroes (which Romans regarded as their own) - his view on these is that of his Hellenistic ancestors. He made it his business to regain his religion (his Gods).
Reconstructionisms of European religions - including especially the P/IE-based kind - go in another thread. So too neo/paganism.
The above post covered 1) some questionable decisions in modern reconstructionism (e.g. Religio Roma) - which make it unrepresentative of the past and 2) the dubious nature of "neopaganism".
This post is about the P/IE reconstructionism (including "Vedic reconstructionism") going on in the west and how it's attached to various European reconstructionisms.
I'm picking a simple, blatant and therefore self-evident example to illustrate the (sole) recurring pattern I've noticed in such reconstructionism. The pattern is something that's immensely troubling IMO. There exist more complex/advanced (and serious) examples on the web and they are *very* disturbing.
1. odinicriteofaustralia.wordpress.com/how-europe-was-overrun-by-christians/
A timeline.
It contains the familiar reference to the native American chief Hatuey's steadfast rejection of christianism even when he was about to be brutally murderded by christians.
Looks harmless enough. Even positive. A supposed NW European religion reconstructionist page shows respect to native American tradition. Friend of all traditionalists? Wait.
2. odinicriteofaustralia.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/odinistimage.jpg [color="#0000FF"]<- Go look[/color]
The above is from the page
odinicriteofaustralia.wordpress.com/odinism-in-the-indo-european-religious-family-tree/
The image is self-explanatory. And yet I'm still typing, just to make doubly sure no one misses the various obvious things:
Skipping the hilarious opening section titled "our *ancient* faith" on how the "mythology" of the ancestors of Europeans - 'the Cromagnons' (I suppose they are now identified as the proto-Aryans, ja?) - whose "religious beliefs can be inferred from these paintings" [line refers back to their statement "unsurpassed artwork on cave walls in N Europe"*] was spread over the world: "ME, northern Africa, India, Asia and perhaps even beyond, as suggested by recent discoveries in America." (Usual Oryanist claims to all civilisation again.)
[* the "unsurpassed artwork on cave walls in N Europe": reminiscent of those news articles with the images of the hyper voluptueuze females (otherwise not much detail) which the eager researchers dubbed were indicators/proof of early imagination in humanity [corollary: therefore imagination was born only in the Urheimat, I mean Europe]. This sort of thinking is the origin of such conclusions.]
[color="#0000FF"]Note the following items in the diagram:[/color]
=> FINNISH?????? In an "IE Religions" diagram? Very funny.
=> Indian -> "Rig Veda, etc." -> "Modern Vedic purism"
"Modern vedic purism" because IE reconstructionism always entails Vedic reconstructionism, of course.
Note:
Iranian -> "contemporary Yazdanism, Alevism, Yezidism, and Kafiri beliefs".
So, while contemporary Iranian and "Kafiri" (Kafiristan?) beliefs are mentioned, Hindus' religion is totally dismissed since it's not what any IE reconstructionists I've come across on the web consider "vedic purism". Only christoconditioned west (post-christianism though it be) will determine what is "vedic purism", and it gives its stamp of approval to "modern vedic purism" which is Da Only 'existing' Indian religion worth approving by the modern self-declared polytheisticals (<- but they are christoconditioned all the same. So it isn't "polytheism" that is the proof of true heathenism, free from the influence of the mindvirus. The difference is merely authentic 'heathenism'. I.e. real natural traditions rather than imaginary/invented/constructed ones.)
And if you were to look further into what they mean by "vedic purism", you will find that their opinion is that this "vedic purism" is practised by ... who did you think? The Vedic Reconstructionist movements of course. In the west (goes without saying). Carried out by christoconditioned post-christian western dabblers dabbling in what they should *NEVER* be messing with, but which they insist is *theirs* (by Oryan right) and which they are convinced does not belong to miscegenated Hindus. Or at least, not to the same degree (unless said Hindoos recognise that it belongs to the oryanists and moreso if said Hindoos were to *train* the oryanists in Vedic rituals. Like good natives teaching their betters.)
^ By the way, the miscegenation thing is actually the implied subtitle to the impure vs pure statement: it is always there in the back of most P/IE reconstructionists' minds if not in the forefront. Not only are Hindus "miscegenated", their religion is to have had a similar 'fall from grace'.
3. odinicriteofaustralia.wordpress.com/introduction-to-odinism/
Quote:What does Odinism involve?
Odinism is the key to both the past and the future. It is one of the few living traditions that still honour the religious and philosophical traditions of ancient Indo-European spirituality.
Modern Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism have perverted that tradition, but the eternal truths of Odinism have been preserved, both in texts and in practice.
Leaving aside the issue of the other Dharmic religions of Buddhism and Jainism (and Sikhism) in the following paras, since they are unrelated to the Vedas and Hindu epics and fortunately can't really be beaten with the IE stick/backhand except to be always dismissed by reconstructionists for being 'unVedic' (yeah, well that's because they *are* specifically non-Vedic, duh). But then, the oryan reconstructionists always declare Buddhism etc to be "impure" IE religion precisely for the "Unforgivable Flaw" of being thus unVedic and hence 'non-IE'. <- Since IE reconstructed religion is The True religion (and for example, Hindu religion is specifically Not True), you see - and you thought it was only christianism that makes the claim.
And the above (and bold bits below) is exactly why modern "European religion" reconstructionists in the west think they have a right to the Hindu Vedas: they de-legitimise Hindus from Hindus' own sacred texts by declaring Hindus' understanding and practise of Hindus' *own* religion wrong/corrupted/impure, and also instead insist that *they* (the P/IE and/or Vedic reconstructionists) are the rightful owners of the same (claims from IE/PIE, aka argumentum ad IE) and the proper/pure practitioners.
odinicriteofaustralia.wordpress.com/introduction-to-odinism/
Quote:The majority of Odinists around the world are of Anglo-Saxon origin. Our spirituality is therefore certainly not confined to texts that have survived from Scandinavian sources. Our religion doesnââ¬â¢t lay claim to an historical founder. Nor is it defined by a single holy book. All sincere affirmations of our faith may be considered holy as long as they are sanctioned by the following sources of tradition:These people are not friends.
* Historical information that has been handed down from relatively early times ââ¬â such as Tacitusââ¬â¢ observations on the continental Angles, Bedeââ¬â¢s disclosures on the faith of his ancestors, and so on.
* Archaeological evidence bearing on our ancestral beliefs and religious customs, such as the excavations at Yeavering and Sutton Hoo.
* Aspects of our religion that have been transmitted in non-literary ways, such as folk-customs, music and art.
* Incorporations of our beliefs into partially or even predominantly Christian texts and activities, such as Beowulf, Caedmonââ¬â¢s Hymn, and the Yule and Easter festivals.
* Primary religious texts in non-English languages that may have been written in Britain, such as Eiriksmal.
* Surviving texts and traditions from the related pre-Christian faiths of Europe and Scandinavia (uh, Scandinavia was in Europe last I checked), as well as the broader Indo-European tradition.
Hindus will learn nothing true about the traditional European religions from such reconstructionisms of European religion. They are not practising the actual religion of the northwest of Europe. They are not looking for that. They are reconstructing as per their idea of what it ought to be, 'would probably be, based on thus-and-so'.
There are many reconstructionists of European religions (except Hellenismos and of course European religions not regarded as IE) who do PIE reconstructionism and who ally with 'Vedic reconstructionists' (=Europeans).
They all speak of the Hindu religion as different from the 'original true' religion that is centred on the Vedas. They have the same monotheistic tendency seen throughout: delegitimisation and take over, at which point they start speaking as the "true legitimate" voices for that which they've appropriated. (Rather like the Brahmo Samaj: they declare 'polytheistic idolatrous' Hindus are "wrong" and that they know the *real* Vedic/Hindu religion. Same .... monopolytheistic tendency.)
That is, christianism declares itself the True Religion. Whereas all the visible P/IE-influenced reconstructionisms always declare themselves to be the True Inheritors, the True Owners, the True Practitioners and the True Followers of the True Version of the (IE) religion. In "Vedic Reconstructionism" this always reduces to "the True Vedic religion" (vs the false "Hindoo" religion).
This dichotomy - Vedic vs Hindu (a splitting process whereby Hindus are automatically disinherited from their Vedas) - is another sign of christoconditioning. Note that reconstructionists are always polytheists - they will swear by it and denounce "monotheism" and "soft polytheists" - and they behave exactly like their still-internally christian self.
It bears to always remember: Hindus are the true heathens here.
Not these 'reconstructionists' - nor the dedicated PIE (let alone Vedic) reconstructionists that deny Hindus. They have no legitimacy. They merely claim it vocally. By invalidating Hindus. They are still fundamentally christian - as in, christoconditioned: in behaviour and thinking patterns, even if no longer in conscious, (self-)admitted religious adherence.
Truly, Taoists and Shintos are very fortunate for not being beaten with the PIE/IE stick. At least no one is interested in pulling the rug from under them. (Well, Taoists are witnessing the beginnings of appropriation on the edges from IE quarters, but if they remain invisible/play dead long enough maybe the predator will get bored and they'll slip past the radar. Please the Gods, they may be spared.)
Hindus should make a distinction between those following their ancestral religions (the ones known to history) - like the Hellenes writing the main articles at ysee.gr seem to be doing - and those who are looking for something entirely different and hence constructing what they *want* rather than what was. The latter are not really interested in their ancestors' Gods. They're interested in an idea of what they want their people to have been and what they want to be(come).
They have recognised christianism destroyed who they were. They know what they lost is religion and that *that* is what they want back because it is their identity*. But in their search for rediscovery 'reconstruction' they are haughty and arrogant and - like christianism - will appropriate and run down others who are still practising true heathenism (a.o.t. falsely and opportunistically 'reconstructed' religion).
[* And it truly is a Self-driven enterprise on their part: they're not so much - not truly - interested in their ancestral Gods, as in 'regaining' *their* identity (what they imagine their lost identity was like). The Gods are seen as constituting an intrinsic part of that - but a *part* nevertheless: the Gods are not the end in themselves in this pursuit to "get" religion.]
Many modern reconstructionist movements - purporting to reconstruct *historical* religions - sadly end up dabbling. And some even associate with P/IE reconstructionism, despite the fact that no *known* heathen religion (i.e. as documented by practising traditionalists of our or earlier times) worshipped the reconstructed PIE Gods or worked with reconstructed PIE rituals from reconstructed PIE texts in reconstructed PIE language, making the matter as irrelevant to the religion of the Asen as it would be to the *known* Hellenes ancient and present. The NW traditionalists - including the later Vikingen - were Nordic and Germanic populations, just like how Hellenes were Mediterraneans. They were not the Proto-IE people - whoever these are supposed to be - they did not practise the PIE religion. (If one were to - for now, for the sake of argument - take it as a given that these existed.) The GRs practised their GR Olympic religion and the Germanic/Nordic populations practised the G/N religion of the Vanen en Asen en de kabouters enz. (I am guessing ysee.gr wouldn't mention IE/aryan/PIE - or rather, it doesn't *seem* to me like the sort of thing that would remotely interest them. They are reviving, moving on from where they had left off, not reconstructing from - assumed - first principles.) Just as the still-extant Hindus - who are Indians in Bharatam, not PIEs of the unknown urheimat - do not practise the variously-reconstructed PIE religion or worship the PIE Gods. They continue to worship the Gods well-known to their Hindu ancestors (and extant relatives).
So if people in the future wanted to "reconstruct" the Hindu religion as it was known to their Hindu ancestors, one would think/hope they would look at the information that the known Hindus of by-then history would have left behind about how the old Hindus viewed the Hindu Gods and religion, rather than using PIE and reconstructions to "recreate" the "Hindu religion". I don't know how far the last would get them, frankly. Just like it seems an impossible distance from [a] PIE-ism to [b] the religion of Seneca/Sallust/Julian/etc/known traditional GrecoRoman population such as their Hellenistic ancestors (of which they were the natural product). Can the latter [b] be retrieved from reconstructing the former [a]? Can, in future, a lost Hindu religion be retrieved from PIE. Or can it be retrieved from the then presumably extinct Hindus' own view (words) concerning their religion.
And there lies the distinction between what goes in this thread and what may go elsewhere: natural traditions as are *known* to exist and to have existed, based on what the traditional practitioners of those religions themselves tell us of their view of their religion (Gods). Their view=their religion. E.g. Julian speaks of Asclepius, Zeus, Pan - his Father Helios of course - his Mother who shared in the throne of his Father Jupiter (i.e. Juno; [similarly, the Attis reference implies that the Mother is Rhea/Roman Magna Mater]), etc. He worshipped in Temples and performed rites as other Hellenes of the empire did - as his Hellenistic ancestors did too - which were derived from what his highly-regarded forbear Numa Pompilius had taught in conjunction with the teachings of Greeks and other Roman traditionalists on this matter. He loved the Greek epics and its heroes (which Romans regarded as their own) - his view on these is that of his Hellenistic ancestors. He made it his business to regain his religion (his Gods).
Reconstructionisms of European religions - including especially the P/IE-based kind - go in another thread. So too neo/paganism.
Quote:In the very first post of this thred one of the reasons you listed for starting this thread was to better understand the true traditions of other peoples. There was nothing said about using only their own words from ancient times which at any rate is hard these days as much of their literature has been destroyed by the Xtian cult.