Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - The Great Scald

Pages: [1]
1
General Earwa / The Gods - which is your favorite?
« on: September 07, 2016, 09:35:12 am »
Which of the Hundred personally appeals to you, and why? Which "aspects" are underrepresented among the Hundred?

Quote
The Encyclopedic Glossary describes twelve gods who were worshipped by the Kiünnat and latter by the Inrithi. While the Kiünnat understand these as separate Gods, the Inrithi see “the unity of the individual deities of the Cults as Aspects of the God”. The Fanim believe in only one God, viewing the other Gods worshipped by the Inrithi as demons.[3]

Ajokli, God of thievery and deception

The god of deception and betrayal, Ajokli is also known as the Prince of Hate and the Four-Horned Brother.

Though listed among the primary Gods in The Chronicle of the Tusk, there is no true Cult of Ajokli, but rather an informal network of devotees scattered across the great cities of the Three Seas. Ajokli is oft mentioned in the secondary scriptures of the different Cults, sometimes as a mischievous companion of the Gods, other times as a cruel or malicious competitor. In the Mar’eddat, he is the faithless husband of Gierra. Idols of Ajokli show him as a leering figure with a huge penis that reaches up to his chin.

Akkeägni, God of disease

The god of disease, Akkeägni is the patron of most physicians in the Three Seas, rewarding those who strive against his influence.

Also known as the God of a Thousand Hands. Scholars have oft noted the irony that the Priesthood of Disease provides the primary repository of physicians for the Three Seas. How can one at once worship disease and war against it? According to the scriptures of the Cult, the Piranavas, Akkeägni is a so-called Bellicose God, one who favours those who strive against him over sycophants and worshippers. Some of Akkeägni’s priests bear tattoos. They also use small prayer chimes which sound thanks to Akkeägni, and use pharmaka and reliquaries to combat illness.

Anagkë, Goddess of fortune

The goddess of fortune, Anagkë is also called the Whore of Fate, and is the younger sister of Bukris, god of famine.

Also known as “the Whore of Fate”. Anagkë is one of the primary Compensatory Gods, which is to say, one who rewards devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife. Her Cult is extremely popular in the Three Seas, especially among the higher, political castes. According to old Kiünnat tradition, Anagkë is the younger sister of Bukris. Anagkë is also commonly called simply the Whore,[13] or the Whore of Fate. Anagkë also seems to be associated with the stars. In the text is said that a star “had just entered the horizon of Anagkë, the Whore of Fate”. The augur calls this “an excellent conjunction”.

Bukris, God of famine

The god of famine, Bukris is the older brother of Anagkë, the Whore of Fate.

As one of the so-called Punitive Gods, who command sacrifices through threat and the imposition of suffering, Bukris has no real Cult or priesthood. According to Kiünnat tradition, Bukris is the older brother of Anagkë, which is why Anagkean Cultic Priests typically administer the rites of propitiation during times of hunger.

Gierra, Goddess of passion

One of the so-called Compensatory Gods, who reward devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife, Gierra is very popular throughout cities in the Three Seas, particularly among aging men drawn to the “aphrodisica”, Cultic nostrums reputed to enhance virility. In the Higarata, the collection of subsidiary writings that form the scriptural core of the Cults, Gierra is rarely depicted with any consistency, and is often cast as a malign temptress, luring men to the luxury of her couch, often with fatal consequences. In the Mar’eddat, she is the faithless wife of Ajokli. Gierra’s “voluptuous” idol depicts “wide-thrown ankles”.

“The temple prostitutes of Gierra believes, that despite the hundreds of men who uses them, they couples with only one, Hotos, the Priapic God.” Sumni harlots must have the Sign of Gierra, twin serpents, tattooed on the back of their left hand, apparently in imitation of the Priestesses of Gierra.

Gilgaöl, God of war and conflict

The god of war, Gilgaöl is the brother of Yatwer.

One of the so-called Compensatory Gods, who reward devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife, Gilgaöl is the second most popular of the Hundred Gods, only after his sister Yatwer. In the Higarata, the collection of subsidiary writings that form the scriptural core of the Cults, Gilgaöl is depicted as harsh and sceptical of Men, continually demanding proof of worth. Though subordinate to the Thousand Temples, the Gilgallic Cult boasts nearly as many priests, and perhaps receives more in the way of sacrificial donations. Gilgaöl is also known as the Father of Death and One-Eyed War. '

The position of High Cultist of Gilgaöl is hereditary. The priests also sacrifice goshawks, dogs and lions, by burning them in godfires for the sake of those at war. Other goshawks are released into the setting evening sun. At least in one case, the hide of a lion was retained by the offerer. After battle, the priests of Gilgaöl preside over the declaration of the Battle-Celebrant.

Husyelt, God of the hunt

One of the so-called Compensatory Gods, who reward devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife, Husyelt comes after only Yatwer and Gilgaöl in Cultic popularity, particularly in the Middle-North. In the Higarata, the collection of subsidiary writings that form the scriptural core of the Cults, Husyelt is depicted as the most anthropocentric of the Hundred Gods, as intent upon enabling his worshippers as he is upon securing their obedience and devotion.[27] In The Chronicle of the Tusk, after:

    “The Prophet Angeshraël came down from his fast on Mount Eshki. Husyelt, the Tusk tells us, sent a hare to him, so he might eat at last. Angeshraël skinned the Hunter’s gift and struck a fire so he might feast. When he had eaten and was content, Husyelt, the Holy Stalker, joined him at his fire, for the Gods in those days had not left the world in the charge of Men. Angeshraël, recognizing the God as the God, fell immediately to his knees before the fire, not thinking where he would throw his face. And the God said, ‘Why does our Prophet fall to his knees only? Are not Prophets Men like other Men? Should they not throw their faces to the earth?’ To which Angeshraël replied, ‘I find my fire before me.’ And peerless Husyelt said, ‘The fire burns across earth, and what fire consumes becomes earth. I am your God. Throw your face to the earth.’ So Angeshraël, the Tusk tells us, bowed his head into the flames.”[28]

The Cult of Husyelt is rumoured to be extraordinarily wealthy, and high-ranking members of the Husyeltic priesthood often possess as much political clout as Shrial apparati. Shanks of butchered antelope are burned for Husyelt. He is also commonly called the Dark Hunter and the Holy Stalker.

Jukan, God of sky and season

One of the so-called Compensatory Gods, who reward devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife, Jukan almost rivals Yatwer in popularity among peasants yet is scarcely represented in major urban centres. The priests of Jukan are readily recognizable by their blue-painted skin. The Marjukari, an extreme ascetic branch of the Jukanic Cult, are notorious for living as hermits on mountaintops. During the mass migration to Momemn before the Holy War, priests of Jukan led people while singing soft hymns and clinking finger cymbals.

Juru, God of virility and fertility

One of the so-called Compensatory Gods, who reward devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife, Juru is popular among aging caste-noble men, and possesses only a handful of temples, most of them found in major cities. It is often mocked as the Mistress Cult.

Momas, God of storms, seas, and chance

One of the so-called Compensatory Gods, who reward devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife, Momas is the primary deity worshipped by seamen and merchants, and is the patron divinity of Momemn (whose name means "Praise Momas") and of Cironj. In the Higarata, he is depicted as cruel, even malicious, and obsessed with minute matters of propriety—leading some commentators to suggest he is in fact a Bellicose, as opposed to a Compensatory, God. His primary device is the White Triangle on Black (representing the Shark’s Tooth worn by all devotees of Momas). During the Feast of Kussapokari, which marks the summer solstice, the upper castes in Momemn celebrate on pleasure galleys, where the first swallow is spat into the sea as a propitiation to Momas.

Onkis, Goddess of hope

Goddess of hope and aspiration, Onkis is also known as the Singer-in-the-Dark, she who drives men to forever reach for more than they can hold.

One of the so-called Compensatory Gods, who reward devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife, Onkis draws followers from all walks of life, though rarely in great numbers. She is only mentioned twice in the Higarata, and in the (likely apocryphal) Parnishtas she is portrayed as a prophetess, not of the future, but of the motivations of Men. The so-called “shakers” belong to an extreme branch of the Cult, where the devotees ritually strive to be “possessed” by the Goddess. Her symbol is the Copper Tree (which also happens to be the device of the ancient Nonman Mansion of Siöl, though no link has been established). Onkis is also called the Singer-in-the-Dark. Her idol depicts the severed head of a beautiful woman upon a copper tree.

Yatwer, Goddess of birth

Yatwer is the oldest and most powerful of the Hundred. She is one of the so-called Compensatory Gods, who reward devotion in life with paradise in the afterlife. While Gilgaöl is the most popular deity among caste-nobles, his sister is favoured by the lower castes — some six out of ten caste-menials regularly attend some kind of Yatwerian rite. Yatwer is far and away the most popular of the Hundred In the Higarata, the collection of subsidiary writings that form the scriptural core of the Cults, Yatwer is depicted as a beneficent, all-forgiving matron, capable of seeding and furrowing the fields of nations with a single hand. Some commentators have noted that Yatwer is anything but revered in either the Higarata or The Chronicle of the Tusk (wherein “tillers of soil” are often referred to with contempt). This is why Yatwerians tend to rely on their own scripture, the Sinyatwa, for their liturgical rites and ceremonies. Despite the vast numbers of adherents enjoyed by the Cult, it remains one of the more impoverished, and seems to generate a large number of zealous devotees as a result. Her symbol is a harvest sickle that also forms the outline of a pregnant belly.

One knowing lamb is equal to ten unwitting bulls, it is held.[41] Yatwerian priestesses also use unguents of manure.[

2
Author Q&A / Creation myth in Eärwa?
« on: June 22, 2016, 09:57:19 pm »
Reading the latest TSA books, it's clear that the Hundred Gods have a very limited perception when it comes to Eärwa (not only blind to the No-God, but presumably to all soulless creatures). Also, they obviously need earth-bound agents to enforce their will on the living.

And where is the creation myth? Your series is so full of religion and religious metaphysics, but so far there's no reference to how "it all began". Who created the human race? What is the equivalent of Adam and Eve, in a universe where religious scripture is an objective reality? It seems that the Hundred didn't create humanity after all, and they're more like extra-dimensional parasitic demons than "Gods" in any traditional sense...

3
Author Q&A / Nil'Giccas and Nin'Cilijiras
« on: June 22, 2016, 08:54:37 pm »
Which of them is the present-day King of Ishterebinth?

If you carefully go through the first trilogy, there's a couple references to the Nonmen of Ishterebinth being ruled by Nin'Cilijiras. From what I remember, we know nothing about him other than this - Aurang makes a comment to the effect that Ishterebinth is monitored and that Nin'Cilijiras can't take a dump without the Consult knowing about it.

In the second trilogy, he's not mentioned at all, and the Nonman messengers claim they're speaking for Nil'Giccas. Of course, there might have been a regime change in Ishterebinth, since Nil'Giccas turns out to be "Cleric" who's been in exile for god knows how long. But the Nonmen imply he's still the king, with no mention of the other guy.

Did the Nonmen lie? Or is this just a continuity error? 

Inquiring minds want to know.

4
General Earwa / Anasurimbor Pseudonymus
« on: September 22, 2015, 03:30:23 am »
Bakker mentioned once, in a bit of an off-hand remark, that some of the chapter epigraphs in TJE and WLW were supposed to be written by Kellhus under a pseudonym.

So, which ones?

5
Literature / Peter Watts thread
« on: December 27, 2014, 11:49:34 pm »
Peter Watts is probably my favorite author of sci-fi/fantasy, right next to Bakker. Last week I finished "Blindsight", and I don't think I have been so impressed by a sci-fi book in a very long time.

"Blindsight" can be found for free here:

http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm

"Starfish", his first book (and the first part of a trilogy), was also a really fascinating read. Not for the light-hearted, since it's far more perverted and disturbing than "Blindsight", but pretty compelling. If you liked Bakker, you'll like this. Can be found here:

http://www.rifters.com/real/STARFISH.htm

Post your own thoughts and Watts recommendations.

6
Introduce Yourself / Reintroducing myself...
« on: September 25, 2014, 10:52:20 am »
After about a year's hiatus, I'm rejoining Bakker-world. I guess I had to make some sort of announcement, so here it is. Nice to see the forum's still going well.

7
Philosophy & Science / Suicide or not
« on: February 11, 2014, 12:18:20 am »
I want to hear some input from the Bakker-reading crowd on this serious dilemma I've had.

Is there anything of value in the world? The answer, at least to me, seems to be "No". I've long had these ideas myself, and reading up on neuroscience basically confirmed them. Neuroscience definitely seems to prove that meanings and purposes (as we see them) don't actually exist and that "the self" is an illusion of bio-chemistry. We're not "real". Consciousness fools us all into believing that we're real instead of a puppet of our biology. The old-school pessimist philosophers like Schopenhauer have the same view - that every single thought, idea, concept, image, symbol, and representation are fundamentally distractions that prevent people from realizing that everything is meaningless.

Last week, I read Thomas Ligotti's The Conspiracy Against The Human Race, a book I really recommend to anyone who liked Neuropath: http://forums.philosophyforums.com/download.php?attachid=4970

Reading this book was sort of enlightening to me, although probably the most depressing kind of "enlightenment" imaginable. Most of these ideas were thoughts I'd already had myself, but Ligotti's book made things a lot clearer. He's basically a Schopenhauer-style pessimist who writes that life isn't worth living and explains the reasons why. Through the whole book, I couldn't find anything to disagree with.

I've been thinking about suicide on and off, over the last few weeks. On some level, I obviously have the instinct for self-preservation, which is probably the main thing keeping me from killing myself. I've tried going to a psychiatrist, but half the time he doesn't understand what the hell I'm talking about. I take antidepressant pills, but they're not helping much. I've stopped going to my uni lectures and basically don't give a shit about anything. I've stopped going to work. Since I now know that my life is meaningless, and that all "goals" are pointless distractions created by chemical reactions in my head, I don't do much at all.

To use Bakker's terms, going back to "Disney World" isn't really possible for me anymore. I want to, but it's impossible. I'm not good at compartmentalizing my thoughts and willfully ignoring stuff. There's some philosophy professors (Brassier, for example) who have wives and kids that they love, follow society's norms and rules in their daily lives, and then go to their universities (or wherever) and hold lectures about the meaningless and deterministic nature of reality without breaking a sweat. I'm not one of those. I can't live a lie. But neither can I really, fully be a nihilist/determinist and stay sane.

I tend to agree with Bakker (and Lovecraft, etc) that there are realities so hostile and alien that human minds can't handle them. But once you've stumbled onto these truths, what can you do?

(To be honest, I wish I'd never read Bakker, Schopenhauer, Brassier, Ligotti, Cioran or any of those authors. But what's done can't be undone.)

8
Philosophy & Science / Eternal Recurrence
« on: December 22, 2013, 12:02:49 am »
What do you think of Nietzsche's ideas on "eternal recurrence"?

Quote
Fellow man! Your whole life, like a sandglass, will always be reversed and will ever run out again, - a long minute of time will elapse until all those conditions out of which you were evolved return in the wheel of the cosmic process. And then you will find every pain and every pleasure, every friend and every enemy, every hope and every error, every blade of grass and every ray of sunshine once more, and the whole fabric of things which make up your life.

What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more' ... Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.'

Do you agree with Nietzsche's view that time is infinite but all things are finite, so they'll eventually happen over and over again for all time?

9
Philosophy & Science / Is Materialist Morality Possible?
« on: December 15, 2013, 10:01:20 pm »
Is there any point to morality at all? I'm sure I'm not the only person who feels like there's a dead end in materialist/determinist logic. Take the Blind Brain Theory, for example. Everyone wants to deny nihilistic understandings of reality, to some extent; it's very difficult to think like Bakker and maintain any sort of daily happiness.

The dilemma that "materialist morality" opens up is pretty obvious. Where do atheists get their morals from? Not from any external God, that's for sure. With no reference point for "right" or "wrong" outside your own self, you don't have any objective standard, you just have emotional urges that come and go. When you use Jon Haidt's five evolved foundations (harm reduction, equality, authority, loyalty and sanctity) you'll notice that they interfere with each other. Haidt's point was that morality is pre-determined and controlled by intuition. The thing is that one of these moral urges will overpower another, and create serious value conflicts. Atheists often say shit like "We don't need religion for morality, because compassion exists". That's a really limited and dumb understanding of both morality and religion, isn't it? Religion tried to stabilize moral urges, bind together people into an organized collective group by a shared belief, while also maintaining a sense of personhood.

So people follow different moral codes, depending on how their brains are hardwired. You could spend your whole life working your ass off, and feel morally righteous about it, while your boss laughs all the way to the bank. You could live your life for pleasure, getting as many highs as possible while in existence. You could devote your life to helping others, and never thinking about your own needs. You could destroy the world - and why not? You'll only exist once. From a pure materialist viewpoint, there's nothing inherently wrong with murder or child-porn or whatever. It feels like an equilibrium between "contribute to society" and "I'm going to die" is impossible to manage if you're a nihilist/materialist/determinist (which I am).

Religion, in many ways, moderated the sense of personhood with the process of survival. Notice how you see more of an "essence" in your life partner or child than you do in a random stranger on the street, who is more of a background object. You "humanize" people differently. This is essential to your survival because if reality is drained of this sentimental layer - what Bakker called "Disneyworld" - it looks like a genetic determinist hell.

Thoughts?

10
Literature / "An Experiment With Time"
« on: November 18, 2013, 05:32:18 pm »
I just finished reading JW Dunne's book An Experiment With Time, which is about the human cognition of time.

I was recommended the book this summer, when I had the privilege of speaking to Gaspar Noé (the director of Irreversible, among other stuff) at a film festival. Noé apparently found it really good, so naturally I had to check it out.

Basically, the theory of the book is that linear time is an illusion. Human consciousness can only experience time as a linear passage from point A to point B, because that's the flawed way our human brains are made to perceive reality. All moments in time are taking place at once, and thus there isn't really a "future" or "past", just in our heads. Dunne's point, basically, is that the universe is deterministic (no such thing as "free will" or "choice") and that every change in existence has already happened/is happening/will happen.

I agree with much of the book, although not all of it. I found some of Dunne's ideas, especially his thing for dreams and deja vus, a bit weird and unconvincing - the book has an odd experiment where he tells the readers to scribble down notes after waking up from a dream, and then make connections between the dream notes and real-life events that happen afterwards. I dunno what to make of this. There's no serious proof that dreams are not just another product of your brain, or that they're somehow disconnected from waking consciousness. Maybe it's got to do with Dunne writing the book in 1927, and neurology has come a long way since, maybe it's just his own beliefs. Still, even with this kooky semi-spiritual stuff, it's a pretty interesting book.

So, gentlemen and Meyna, anyone else read this book? Do you agree with this idea on time or not? What are your own pet theories?

11
Introduce Yourself / Reprezentin'
« on: October 14, 2013, 03:54:04 pm »
Hi again, forum.

Some of you may or may not remember from the old forum. What's up?

Pages: [1]