Higher Divine Greek Self

Originally Posted by Dreamweaver

*sigh* I understand what is basically said: to make sense to people who make worlds out of books you have to talk with the words from books. But the irony of this is that any written word at some point or another originates from the mind of some individual. When we buy things the less intermediaries there is the better it is, should it not be the same for wisdom. So when I write down some now it is not good enough because I have not used a intermediator but if someone have done the same thousands of years ago it is considered okay? that make no sense.

Well, here's the thing. People like Plato, Sophocles, Cicero, and Porphyry, all of these folks lived in the time when Hellenic/Hellenistic religion was still alive and doing well. They were at least moderately familiar with the popular religion of their day, and then some. They offered sacrifices and participated in rituals (at least at some point in their lives); they lived in a culture that was saturated with a myriad of ancient traditions, along with new exotic gods and cults. Their worldview would've been greatly shaped by the city's religion. Thus, whenever they wrote or made a comment about the religion(s) of the day, they have a window of understanding that neither you nor I would or even can have. Of course, their opinions and views aren't infallible. They're people. Sometimes they misrepresent cults or let their own biases show. But even so, there's the fact that we don't just base our knowledge of Classical religion just off textual exegesis. We have archaeology and anthropological theories to help deepen our understanding, through cross-referencing the material we have.

It isn't a matter that you're not entitled to your own view - it's just that you have to be aware that your personal gnosis on the matter contradicts some basic trends in Classical religion. Which is totally fine. So long as one remembers the difference between personal opinions and experiences, and what we've reconstructed as Classical pagan traditions.

But it is not true to say that what I propose have not been written about before. Homer wrote about Herakles that a part of him was in the underworld and another part of him resided on Olympus. That is basically the same as I wrote. And if we look through the different Pantheons we find more exambles. Though the Tuatha dé Danaan is accounted to have been mortals it is also accounted that under the stars in the sky it is not known if they were from heaven or from Earth. If we look at Norse Mythology many of the gods are accounted by Saxo in the Gesta Danorum to be actual mortals. Greek Mytholgy is also big on Demi-gods. Herakles is a Demi-god and is said to have a mortal part in the underworld and an immortal part on Olympus.

Yes, hero cults were exceedingly popular in Classical Greece. But, nearly all of the venerated heroes were never actually known as human beings in living memory. Nearly all of them originated in the Golden Age, or Age of Heroes, when people were stronger, wiser and closer to the gods. In the current age, the ancient Hellenes saw humans as rarely being able to reach a state of hero-hood. While, that did change more or less, in the Hellenistic period with Egyptian influence, it was never really adopted by mainland Greeks, so ideas of humans becoming gods remained distant from the popular religion.

It's also worth noting that Saxo Grammaticus' work is filled with vituperative comments about the Norse gods. Saxo was an ardent Christian scholar who used a popular theory in his day - interpreting pagan deities as either heroic humans, or demons. One can look at the cultii of gods and compare that to the widespread ancestor veneration; the gods were approached differently from dead relatives, and even deceased kings. If the average 10th century heathen saw his gods as being mortals, in the sense humans are, we don't have any evidence of it. That isn't to say that there wasn't ideas of euhemerization in Germanic religion - just that we have to be extremely careful in assuming so, since all euhemerized accounts of gods are written down by Christian scholars, monks and scribes.

Same goes for Irish mythological figures. We cannot readily pick out who was a pre-christian god, and who was just a mythic hero or whether a figure was made up whole cloth by the monk scribe. But we can use archaeological evidence and linguistic reconstructions to nudge us in the right direction. For instance, the Gallic Ogmios shown as having a group of followers who had golden chains connected to their ears that were all attached to his tongue. Then you have the Old Irish cognate of that name Ogma, who was said to have invented Ogham writing. Those tidbits give us a good indication that there was likely a proto-celtic god of speech and eloquence that evolved into those two respective figures. Studying ancient cultures and learning all of the nuances that are involved help deepen our understanding of the pre-christian religion and the gods they worshiped. Which, I think is a pretty awesome thing

I agree and the hard thing is to find what is and what is not. Where have they exagerated, added things, kept things out, written it as it is or simply made it up. I love the story of Tristan and Isolde but I got the thought in my head that it was made up inspirited by another legend. So I looked around and found the story of The Pursuit of Diarmuid and Gráinne. And even when trying to get down within the latter of the two, there are so many different variations of what might have happened. And this we seem to find with many written accounts about that age. The other day I tried to read up on the cult surrounding Isis after reading your thread and the worship of her seem to differ very much from place to place. This seems to be the fact about classic Paganism that the belief and worship have been different from place to place.

There seem to be an ackowledgement that these people from what you call the age of heroes (I call it the age of demi-gods) that they were half gods. And yes it do seem that in this age the interaction between the mythological beings and humans were far greater. It seems as they have existed within the same physical space. And Homer do describe Herakles as actually being a god though a part of him is in the underworld. It might not have been a major part of the belief in that age but it shows that the belief have existed. And neither are we many these days around that belief in it, but we exist the cult of the ancients, we might call us.

Also if you believe in reincarnation then you might also acknowledge that some of us actually lived back then I have been trapped in the human cycle of incarnation since 10000 BC so I have I had my share of adventures. The only problem is that my simple human existence cannot comprehend all the ancient knowledge I have, so I only get bits and pieces. Here the other day I saw parts of a documentary about the democracy in Greece in their golden age and how they are starting to change their view of it as they translate never translated Greek notes from that age. I lived in Athens when the Partheon was built and I remember it as very much a corrupt landscape. It would be lovely if I had vivid memories of that life but for now it is mostly the feelings of the life that comes to mind. The Partheon makes me very proud and I think of it as mine I also got major chills running through my entire body when they started to talk about it in the documentary.

Yes that might be about Saxo, but that does not exclude that there might be some truth in his work. Greek mythology also describe some of their gods as Daemons though in the Christian vocabulary it seem to mean something different. There might even be indications that whom they call Satan might even be Zeus making him the king of daemons, which then makes the rest of the gods daemons in the eyes of Christianity. So maybe we just need to know how to interpret things, which is not an easy task, as we all interpret things different and then get even more stories about the ancient world than we had before confusing and educating of even further. But back to Saxo: one day when I was taking a dump I was told the story of Baldr by my higher self as a demi-god and it was very similar to the one Saxo wrote. I was also told he was a nothern mortal son of Zeus. But I do acknowledge that that is one more thing that comes from the chronicles of me.