Contents | Previous | Next
Date: 27 Oct 2000 00:00:00 GMT
Subject: Re: "Hoodoo Chruches" (was: Re: Magical and Religious Terminology (was Spells and Rituals of Summoning ....)
Message-ID: <20001027003446.19853.00000035@ng-fg1.aol.com>
References:
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.religion.orisha
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Subject: Re: "Hoodoo Chruches" (was: Re: Magical and Religious Terminology
>(was Spells and Rituals of Summoning ....)
>From: eballard@sas.upenn.edu (E. C. Ballard)
>Date: 10/26/00 6:20 PM EST
>Message-id:
>
>In article <20001026173018.25189.00000009@ng-fw1.aol.com>,
>
>
>> I of course recognize that if your interest is in sorcery, that what you
>will
>> meet are sorcerers. I am also mindful that Western academicians --
>> anthropologists and the like -- engaged in a "study" of traditional African
>> religion, often embrace initiation as a form of research technique, to
>> obtain access to that from which they otherwise would remain excluded. The
>> obligatory book then predictably follows, and the researcher thinks he
>knows
>> all there is to know. Watch it. In traditional African religion, one finds
>> that those who are insincere or deceitful, finds "teachers" who likewise
>are
>> insincere and deceitful. So the books and exposes of Western scholarship
>> may contain useful facts here and there, but to think that these form a
>basis
>> on which to sit in the Academy making ex cathedra pronouncements is a
>> delusion. At any rate, it is clear to me that while some of what you say
>> is true, there is so much that is wrong that it must be because you take
>> that which you have been privileged to see, limited as it clearly is, and
>> mistakenly think that it is representative of the whole.
>> Peace,
>> Grisso
>
>You are completely unaware of what I have or have not been "priviledged to
>see".
I do however take you at your word when you say that your interest is in
sorcery. And I do have your myriad ex cathedra pronouncements on this list to
form a judgment that you are in error on many of those things on which you pass
judgment. In the case at hand, I have spelt out clearly, and with some
precision, where you are in error. It is important to me, not because I expect
to succeed in making _you_ see those errors, but because in a public forum such
as this, one doesn't know who is reading, and it is important to correct
misstatements about traditional African religion, especially from one who
declares himself to be an initiated priest within the tradition. Some may take
what you say to be true, when, as I have tried to show, I notice so far without
rebuttal, it is not.
To suggest you have that insight is presumptuous at the very least,
>since you know me only from the small interaction we have had here. The
>romanticism and lack of critical judgement that you consistantly exhibit
>in your remarks here is not however, unfamiliar to me.
As usual, instead of meeting argument with counter-argument, you retreat,
blowing yet more smoke.
I have at various
>times in my youth been guilty of such enthusiasms.
And more smoke again, here. That your overstatements may so easily be
demolished is evidence to me that you are the one lacking in intellectual
maturity. I challenge you to demolish the facts that I adduce, the arguments
that I put forward. My concern here is with Truth, and if you can show me where
either my facts or arguments are wrong, I _know_ I can be man enough to
acknowledge it.
Time and experience
>will hopefully temper you with a small amount of realism.
More smoke.
Your suggestion
>that my spiritual teachers may be charlatans or worse is offensive in the
>extreme, especially since you do not know them at all.
I make no such suggestion. My suggestion is merely that if your interest is
sorcery, then sorcerers are what you are likely to find for teachers. They may
be very good sorcerers, very good at what they do. I simply claim that if
that's what they are, then they constitute a biased sample, not representative
of the whole so far as traditional African religion is concerned. Clearly you
have evinced no knowledge of the sort of practitioner discussed in "Ancient
wisdom in Africa".
>
>The points which I have made that seem to go clear past you are myriad. I
>do not wish to fight with you because I know whatever else, you are
>sincere in your beliefs and that is something which I respect. You are an
>intelligent man. However laudible national, ethnic, and racial pride may
>be and however necessary for one's spiritual well being, sometime it
>blinds us to a more rational analysis of our own history and culture.
You make the mistake of so many of your race of thinking that an African
asserting certain historical truths about the role of the African in history is
ipso facto irrational. Even when I cite all-white authors like Herodotus,
Massey, Higgins, and now Bowen, to reach certain inescapable conclusions about
the role of the African in history, you depreciate it as "racial pride", or
"irrational". I notice however that you do not, and cannot, rebut what I
actually say. Look, I believe implicitly, as it is said in the Bible somewhere,
that the Truth will set us all free. I also believe, that you'll know when
you've finally grown up when you no longer have to be lied to, nor believe in
lies. I think I can say that for myself. Can you?
To
>maintain that Africa is the cradle of every idea and every wisdom in the
>world and without fault or for that matter contradiction is as grave an
>error as the opposite which was maintained by her enemies for so long.
When you're not blowing smoke, it seems that you're constructing straw men,
they are so much easier to knock down than your real-life opponent. I do not,
and have not maintained, that "Africa is the cradle of every idea and every
wisdom in the world and without fault". I do assert that religion is an African
gift to the world. Certainly the oldest religious texts extant come out of
Africa. In deference to European sensibility, and the Academy, I do not even
cite the oral traditions that go as far back as to a time when Man did not yet
have the gift/curse of speech, a time when he could communicate telepathically
with the trees and the animals. Anyhow, here it is we have evidence of an
African society, in Zululand ca. 1920, the Bonaabakulu Abasekhemu, that claims
credibly to date back to 4th dynasty Egypt, and all you can say is that to put
it out there is to suggest that Africa is the "cradle of every idea and every
wisdom". As to Africa being without fault, I have said and maintain no such
thing. If Africa were without fault it would not be in the mess it's in today.
I have very serious criticisms of traditional African religion as it now exists
and I have voiced some of them on this very list, some quite recently as I
recall. Finally, as to Africa's enemies, I have to say that your behavior is
very much like one of those. It has not escaped me that you are not much
different from Bowen in suggesting non-African origins for African
accomplishments. In his case, it's Jews and Berbers. In your case, you keep
repeating the untrue claims that African concern for religion in the highest
sense is a post-colonial acquisition, and that African priests and sorcerers
are all one and the same. Pardon me.
The
>corrective is not to make the same error in reverse.
No, the corrective, as always is to sit humbly before Fact, and Truth.
Temper yourself some
>and consider the possiblity that many of your views may at least be
>reasonably disputed.
I am very clear that we have been hoodwinked, that we have been bamboozled. I
for one don't have to be lied to any more, and my patience for untruths coming
dressed in the fancy garb of the Academy has worn thin. Nevertheless, if you
have a real argument to offer in rebuttal, instead of your usual ex cathedra
posturing, I'd be happy to lend an ear.
>Wishing you insight,
>
>Eoghan
>
Wishing you acquaintance with Truth,
Peace,
Grisso
"After the wind subsides, the leaves still fall." -- One-Minute Wisdom
--------------4AD8783D3612B11CBCF89C03--
Contents | Previous | Next
Tips for your pocket: