[Circle of Hands] Let's talk about religion

[Ron Edwards]

I love my secular Circle of Hands religion and its priests. It's all about sumud, in knowledge of a crushing destructive presence; it's all about denial of tempting power and sensation; it's all about human ties like family and community; it's practically existential in its bleak absence of a saving or supporting universe. Love, hope, resignation, celebration, and renunciation are all in there.

Socially, it's a lot more like the early/idealized forms of Buddhism and Christianity, just people who think a lot about this stuff forming groups and mini-schools around them, then the ideas proliferate and bump into others' ideas. I like the notion that there's a huge body of competing or developing scraps and documents but no Book.

I am currently developing the following:

1. Regional practices, often gussied up with spiritualism and metaphysics that a doctrinal, scholarly priest would find dubious. (Consider the difference between these professions profiles: Priest + Scholar, vs. Priest + Martial [low] + Artisan [medicine]).

2. Political crossover, in that sometimes a priest will provide a confirmatory and justifying role for current power-establishments, and sometimes he or she will provide a rallying point for rebellion or other change.

3. Relationships to the magical war - doctrinally, all priests and spiritual counsel should be absolutely opposed to either black or white magic, but I can see how "well just this once," or "but it's OK done this way" can creep into local practices. After all, there's no centralized institution, so decisions of this kind are quite grassroots and circumstantial.

4. Relationships to ordinary customs - people follow holidays and carry out weddings and funerals, yes ... how do they look when the local priesthood is integrated into the community, and how do they look when there isn't one?

What's really missing, though, is a look which instantly says "priest" to people. They aren't bound by instutional strictures, so there's no enforced dress code, nor do I think there's a symbol (or not much of one, maybe little symbols for particular min-schools). But visual tags and all manner of social customs instantly define such roles and obviously must have developed.

I'm trying to avoid imagery of shaved/closely-cropped hair and flowing robes. I think carrying staffs is practically unavoidable, and to this day I have never encountered religious practice that doesn't include a weird hat at some point in the observances. So staffs, and the hats are probably distinctive local things, not a standardized one. Aside from that, I'm a little blocked, because I keep thinking minimalist, but I have to have something.

Any thoughts?

[Nyhteg]

What about a sadhu, Vaishnavite, Shaivite vibe?
Devotees/priests identified out by marks painted on the forehead and distinctive hair and beard stylings.
Eg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadhu

What is the core symbol of the religion?
A knotted rope (passive strength, multiple threads binding together to make a stronger whole)?
An anvil (upon which iron is beaten and shaped)?

G

[Ron Edwards]

That's an interesting option - taking it pretty much out of the German-Baltic venue. It helps me think about whether to stick with mirror-history with tweaks, like most of the stuff in the game, or to go gonzo with "this is different." I've already bucked the mirror-history with the religion's content, so I guess I have license to do any number of things with it. That's probably what's blocking me a bit.

So the first step is actually to think about what pre-Christian look of religion was, say around 600 A.D. in that part of the real world. It's interesting what's lacking: hardly a glimmer of imagery. I have a whole headful of the Nordic and Saxon mythological content, as well as a bunch of probably-romanticized images of pre-Christian practice in the British Isles ... but very little image of what a religious thinker or organizer would look like for the area I'm talking about. If I toss out the Celtic stuff (using Celt in the British Isles sense), then never mind druids and mohawks and standing stones.

... more to think about, it's percolating.

[Rafu]

What's really missing, though, is a look which instantly says "priest" to people. They aren't bound by instutional strictures, so there's no enforced dress code, nor do I think there's a symbol (or not much of one, maybe little symbols for particular min-schools). But visual tags and all manner of social customs instantly define such roles and obviously must have developed.

Never mind enforced dress codes and institutionalized symbols, if these people want to be perceived as priests by the general populace, they probably advertise this by adhering to some kind of traditional dress code. Also, I'd say there are a limited set of common, simple symbols that everybody understands as being related to religion: while priests might know the specific, doctrinal meaning of each symbol, and favor one based on their "school" of thought or small tradition, what matters in the big picture is that any religious place or religious people are marked with at least one of these symbols.

A different kind of idea (roughly based on my limited understanding of "prehistoric" art from various parts of Europe): religious professionals could be remarkable in falling outside the gender binary. They're people who're perceived as being simultaneously male and female, or neither male nor female, or belonging to a special "third gender". Their unconventional gender is what sets them apart, visually and socially.

[Callan S.]

Unless the religion is a franchise (ie, it organises advertising for itself), having 'a look' that somehow clicks in all human perceptions seems entirely out of place (beyond characters knowing what they might learn about a region they grew up in. Even then it might be 'that weirdo').

[Nyhteg]

Callan, I was thinking of posting a similar thing just now.

What is the function of trappings and accoutrements?
I'd say they are adopted only for two reasons:
1. The effect they have on the individual themselves - as a comfort or a reminder;
2. The effect they have on everyone else - either as a personal badge, marker or declaration, saying "I believe"; or as a social signal that they are special and marked out (for respect, as a group member, as a sign of power or other specialness).

Number two is probably less significant in CoH than number two, maybe?
If I'm getting the right impression, there's no central organisation to things; people in the small communities of the Crescent Land would know who the priest is - just as they'd know who the blacksmith is, or who's best at working with leather or rope or stone.

It depends how unified the beliefs are I suppose. If there's a network or a lineage that all religious folks are part of then I suppose there would be commonalities, but I think local, personal symbols might matter more. I'm thinking of the difference between the photo of your family you keep in your wallet, to a local sport supporter's shirt or team scarf, say.

Regarding practices and ritual, I was wondering if the core symbolism might be about the continuity of larger cycles and processes.
Seasons; lunar cycles; the motion of the fixed stars (with the pole star being of particular and fundamental significance*); natural processes of seeding, growth, propagation, death, decay. Not as objects of worship - the moon god, the spirits of the tress or whatever - but as indicators of the unflinching constancy of greater processes. In line with core aspects of Shinto belief, for instance, the world does not consider humans special or central in any way; existence is a matter of endurance, harmonisation and flexibility within these larger forces.

Practices might emphasise the place of individuals within these large, neutral, natural processes (where both the extremes of human passion and the forms of magic might easily be included as natural forces). Rites and group ritual would flow from that frame.
And it's probably worth bearing in mind that the function of ritual here has nothing to do with keeping divine powers sweet - the point of ritual is purely about the effect it has on the participants.

G

*In fact, could the Pole Star be the primary central image for the religion? The fixed point which endures?

[glandis]

The one that comes to me is a color - maybe woad-blue? A tunic, a hat, robe, trousers  - or even skin - conspicuously and distinctively dyed entirely to signify "priest."

[Joshua Bearden]

Blue! I'm thinking look to the Mongolian and Tibetan shamans for inspiration. 

I think if black and white (and even gray) are co-opted by the forces of magic then one would default to the anthropological third colour: red.  However red, might just be too powerful a colour for a faith that is so pacifistic.

[Nyhteg]

Ron

Just to clarify - those 4 numbered points are things you don't want input about, right?
Just the appearance aspect would be the most helpful aspect?

More thoughts on appearance.

Religious externals are about personal marking out.
So that includes what? What can a person change about themselves?
Heres the list I came up with, in order of increasing permanence:

> Jewellery - bangles, beads, brooches, fetishes
> Clothing, including head wear
> Make up
> Hairstyles, including facial hair
> Piercings
> Tattoos and scarification (along the lines of Polynesian, African traditions)
> Disfigurement - removal of a finger joint, say, or the splitting of the tongue

Not sure about the last one but piercings, facial tattoos and scarification? I can totally see those as markers of a priestly calling!

G

[Mitch R]

I'm probably going to propose something unpopular . . .

I was always confused in the D&D world, for example, why there would be two sources of supernatural powers (arcane and religious).  Furthermore, in a land like in Circle of Hands where there is an obvious supernatural power (magic - both black and white, represented by Rbaja and Amboriyon), why would anyone develop a religion that has little or no ties to those powers?

I could imagine, even now, that if a supernatural power were to reveal itself, then religion would eventually either accept that power as their God, or at the very least accept it as part of their overlying faith.  Over time, religion would evolve to encompass and include arcane magic, and there would then be either a replacement of magic as the overarching supernatural power to pray to, or a blend of magic and previous religious customs to be integrated into the existing dogma.

So, the way I picture religion in the four lands would be one of two things:

• "Religious priest" would be just another profession: there would be no special look or feel of a priest beyond the markings on their clothes, and the way that they interact socially (why would a priest with no supernatural powers be treated differently or higher than any mortal man, or as compared to a wizard?)
• Wizards (or those pretending to be wizards) would be the only recognized "priests", as they have direct access to supernatural powers - anyone else claiming to have knowledge or access to the almighty would be laughed at.  A wizard place an extra marking (or slightly altered one) on his garments to indicate that he has chosen the path of a priest.  If a "wizard" profession is chosen by a PC or NPC, then they will also have the option to add a "sub-profession", as it were: "priest"

Just my two pennies.

- Mitch

[edheil]

Throwing this out there for something slightly off the beaten path.

Insular Celtic Christians had a culture distinct from Continental Roman Catholics, including a distinct form of tonsure.  Like most distinctive elements of Celtic Christianity it was abolished and replaced by the standard Roman Catholic tonsure by the end of the Dark Ages.  Its detractors called it the "tonsure of Simon Magus."  It is commonly believed, based on descriptions of this terrible Simoniac tonsure in medieval texts, that it consisted of a head shaven in front and left shaggy in back, so that the edge of the haircut formed a line from ear to ear.  (At least one scholar, who I link to below, thinks it actually consisted of a head shaved front *and* back with a strip of hair from ear to ear, and she makes a reasonable case for that interpretation based on the texts.)

Anyway. Druids are also supposed to have had tonsures too, and many people think that the abhorred and abolished "Simoniac" Celtic tonsure was based on the Druidic tonsure.

Yes, I know, no Romantic Irish Celts in this game, only Continental Celts.

Well, Continental Celts had druids too.  And we have one of those old freaky looking La Tene sculptures of a guy with what looks like hair shaved off in the front up to a line from ear to ear, and possibly the back of his head shaved too.  It's a very famous artifact -- google up "Mšecké Žehrovice stone head".

So we *may* have an actual image of a distinctive pre-Christian, Continental priestly hairstyle.

Maybe!

Here's the article putting forth that theory:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Venerable+Bede%2c+druidic+tonsure+and+archaeology-a089075894

[Ron Edwards]

I thought I'd catch you all up on this.

I realized that a primary feature of this profession or life-style in the Crescent Land is that it's not ecstatic, nor is the religion in general intended to be so for the ordinary observant. I think that it's hard for us to talk about this because Christianity is one of those religions which insist upon such a thing, whether mediated by special individuals or felt internally - you're supposed to be able to contact the divine. It's helpful to contrast mainstream Islam, in its various forms, against the somewhat heretical subcategory of Sufi, as the former specifically has nothing to do with "feeling" anything mystic, and the latter is nothing but.

That's why mainstream Islam or doctrinal Buddhism are pretty hard to explain - they're ... well, they're pretty boring. Nearly everything in them is all about doing stuff right here in the real world with real people. They might as well be constitutions or Boy Scout manuals. However, in the real world and in the course of time, local customs and spiritual standards get factored into them, sometimes with startling results, simply because the locals know "that's how it is," so if we're all Muslims, well, this is how Muslims do things, obviously. (Christianity includes a huge dose of this happening too, but it arrives with hoodoo all its own, which isn't the contrast I'm trying to make here.) So Buddhist doctrine says the body is merely a physical vessel with no intrinsic meaning, and that there aren't any "spirits of the dead," but sure enough, on the ground, you'll see people carrying out extensive body-oriented burial practices and spirit-propitiating rituals, insisting "they're Buddhist" all the while.

Anyway, so I conceive of the religious profession as being a dialogue-based exercise, people who either travel a lot or become deeply rooted in a community because other people really like talking with them about certain principles, and communities often use the dialogues as an important foundation for doing something specific. How submissive vs. defiant regarding the magical war varies a lot. The distinction between abstract discussion, personal counseling, and political organizing is very blurry. Exactly what's done, from that point on, may or may not reflect the dialogue very well, and exactly how institutionalized the person's presence becomes (i.e. a "school" starting up) varies a lot too.

A person who does this in such a way that he or she expects (or is very frequently granted) hospitality and respect doesn't act or dress differently from most people, most of the time. There isn't any taboo activities for them, or kept away from them. He or she certainly wears an emblem denoting this expectation or reputation, and I'm thinking that the religious iconography would communicate a lot per emblem. In an official conversation ("gathering," "service," "ritual"), he or she wears a special hat.

As I see it, people handle the dead and get married and all that stuff without religious accompaniment, but if a religious person of this sort officiates, then all those things get a special treatment and a special sense of legitimacy.

Oh yeah, and I also decided that these people are skilled in reducing cannabis to its resinous form. Those conversations can get real far-ranging and abstract sometimes, you know?

[miedvied]

Perhaps they are distinguished not by what they wear, or carry in hand, but by their odors?

Taking a tangent off of "skill at concentrating cannabis", if they are habitually engaged in chemistry or habitually take up certain ritual roles (perhaps involving incense), they may come to be distinguished by the scent they are stained with?

Or, perhaps, by the scent they are not stained with? If they are peripatetic by nature, perhaps they are less likely to settle down (or to do as soon as others might).

The distinctive combination of resin and the lack of that "I live in a small house and am always ten feet away when onions are cooking" scent might be the usual, but not absolute, indicators of a holy man?

[Ron Edwards]

That's a really good idea. Not a 100% indicator, but a strong one.

And I confess I rather like the idea that reeking of hash is a distinctive character trait.

[glandis]

Anything interesting in mannerisms (some kind of bow, hat-tip type gesture, salute, and/or finger-sign)? What about vocabulary, phrase choice - like, normal folks will say "hello" or "good day" or whatever, but a priest will always say something else distinctive. Like, um, "good will to you, from me and [homeland of the priest] sent" (no idea why I chose to steal my example from Whitman, but - there it is). Just another couple places to consider.