Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

Aos Sídhe / Aes Sedai and Avi's vision


Randommer
 Share

Recommended Posts

So, I've been reading a lot of mythology lately, and I was reminded of the parallels between the Aes Sedai and the Aos Sídhe (ace sheega) of Irish myth. They were what came to be known as the fairies, and another name for them was the Tuatha Dé Danann (tooha day danan), which is clearly related to the travelling folks' name of Tuatha'an, though the why of that is a bit more confusing. But if the AS-fairy parallels are a big thing, then it does not look good for that future Aviendha saw.

 

The story goes:

There were different sorts of people who came to Ireland in groups: some were regular folk, some were giants; it's sort of vague.

 

One day, the Tuatha Dé Danann (people of the goddess Danu) show up in boats in a conjured mist. They were all magic and immortal and stuff. They have a few wars with the other groups.

 

Then the regular people turn up (aka the Spanish, for some reason), and go to war with all the other groups. Eventually it comes down to the Tuatha and the regular people, and the regular people win, forcing the Aos Sídhe (people of the mounds) from the earth and underground to another realm, where time moves differently, etc.

 

When those who aren't elevated to god status turn up in later stories, it's often as visitors to dreams, and they're often women (there are men too, but their roles in stories are different). They excel in inciting opposing sides to war, or getting mortals, and particularly men, wrapped up in otherworld plots. Some are nice, and some are not. They almost never seem to kill directly.

 

 

Clearly, RJ drew heavily on the Aos Sídhe stories in creating the Aes Sedai. But the fate of the Aos Sídhe sounds eerily like the future Avi saw for Aes Sedai and Aiel. A group of invaders comes from overseas and goes to war with them, eventually defeating them and driving them to extinction (or possibly to some other world?) before becoming the land's rulers. If RJ's using his 'myths get confused' thing as a source for a mix-up between the Tuatha'an and the related Aiel, then it might bode ill for them as well (though there are other possibilities for that parallel). Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I've been reading a lot of mythology lately, and I was reminded of the parallels between the Aes Sedai and the Aos Sídhe (ace sheega) of Irish myth. They were what came to be known as the fairies, and another name for them was the Tuatha Dé Danann (tooha day danan), which is clearly related to the travelling folks' name of Tuatha'an, though the why of that is a bit more confusing. But if the AS-fairy parallels are a big thing, then it does not look good for that future Aviendha saw.

 

The story goes:

There were different sorts of people who came to Ireland in groups: some were regular folk, some were giants; it's sort of vague.

 

One day, the Tuatha Dé Danann (people of the goddess Danu) show up in boats in a conjured mist. They were all magic and immortal and stuff. They have a few wars with the other groups.

 

Then the regular people turn up (aka the Spanish, for some reason), and go to war with all the other groups. Eventually it comes down to the Tuatha and the regular people, and the regular people win, forcing the Aos Sídhe (people of the mounds) from the earth and underground to another realm, where time moves differently, etc.

 

When those who aren't elevated to god status turn up in later stories, it's often as visitors to dreams, and they're often women (there are men too, but their roles in stories are different). They excel in inciting opposing sides to war, or getting mortals, and particularly men, wrapped up in otherworld plots. Some are nice, and some are not. They almost never seem to kill directly.

 

 

Clearly, RJ drew heavily on the Aos Sídhe stories in creating the Aes Sedai. But the fate of the Aos Sídhe sounds eerily like the future Avi saw for Aes Sedai and Aiel. A group of invaders comes from overseas and goes to war with them, eventually defeating them and driving them to extinction (or possibly to some other world?) before becoming the land's rulers. If RJ's using his 'myths get confused' thing as a source for a mix-up between the Tuatha'an and the related Aiel, then it might bode ill for them as well (though there are other possibilities for that parallel). Thoughts?

 

Thuoghts? Robert Jordan used the Aes Síde completely wrong othre than the fact that they are magickal. His Aes are humans - the ones from mythology arent. The Aes of mythology dont go much out of their way to help men and are more wont to hurt than to help - RJ's human Aes are up in everyones business. Besides that, there are theories that the account in the Book of Invasions was a construct of Christian monks - the Aes were obviously vastly superior to men, but somehow they are defeated? The theories for that construct goes that somehow mans superiority had to be constructed over the Aes, who were purely pagan and inhuman, particularly since in some of the oldest versions of the myths, that element is entirely absent. The account of Celts comin over from the continent and subjugating a preexisting population is likely historic, and so that is probably what got used as a basis for a preexisting population (inserted as the gods, howevre ridiculous that is) being subjugated by the Celts. The weakness to fire, iron, song, etc., did not come until latre when they started to be denegrated to fairy status (and the fact that if RJ was going to use this elemnt but in entities apart from his version of Aes is also strange). The fact that RJ named humans, even if they are magickal, Aes, is appallingly blasphemous (and yes, I worship Aes so it is particularly offensive).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an interesting conncection (and thanks for pointing it out!) but I don't think you can expect there to be a one to one correlation. RJ was influenced by numerous folk-tales, myths, legends and works of fiction but even when he makes a sly reference his characters aren't analogs for something else, they stand on their own. For example, it's accpeted that Gawyn and Galad come from Galahad and Gawain, but the characters are distinctly different from the knights of Arthurian legend. I'm sure RJ was aware of the reference he was making but I wouldn't jump to any conclusions about the future of the plot based on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Randommer This is quite interesting, thanks for bringing this up.

I mostly agree with @Sagacious Lu on this. RJ drew on lots of mythological and historical sources for the same characters and organizations. For example, Aes Sedai as an organization have very strong parallels with medieval convents in times when the convents had a lot of political power. RJ said so himself.

So we shouldn't get carried away trying to find an in-story parallel to every aspect of every myth he may have used. RJ was never that literal.

Also, while the connection between Aes Sedai and Aos Sídhe is certainly undeniable, I believe that when talking about mythological parallels for groups of people rather than individual characters RJ mostly restricted the similarities to various common traits and societal structures and not specific plot developments.

However, it might be possible that even some plot development parallels are present. After all, we know that in one of the future Ages channeling will disappear and the earth will be ceded to non-magic people, so to speak.

Edited by herid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sammael Darksbane you may be right about the Finns but there is no denying that the Aes Sedai are partly based on Aos Sidhe. But can you expand yon your first comment please? I've been trying to read up on Aos Sidhe and I can't find anything related to vulnerabilities to fire, iron and music and the ability to grant three wishes.

This sounds quite interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The weaknesses of the various fae in Celtic folklore varies from legend to legend, but an aversion to iron is common in many of the myths and this is true for non Celtic myths as well, wish granting is also common in many fairy myths though the number of wishes granted varies and not all fae can do this in all legends, music is common in some fairy myths as a way to entrance the fae until the hero of the story can escape or get some favor from the fae in question, and they are said to exist in a sort of parallel universe of sort in many myths. Now I am not an expert on Aos Sidhe and there are so many different kinds so I can not say for sure that the Finns are based on them however that the Finns are fae that is rather clear to me, if nothing else than their behavior and how one deals with them, that they are so alien that they might as well be evil but they are only acting according to their own customs. The descriptions of how one deal with fae is very similar.

 

I would also say that in all other than name Aos Sidhe do not remind me of Aes Sedai. To me it seams that Aes Sedai is based on nun orders in the middle ages and the Renaissance with just the added touch of magic, however I think that will all things in Wheel of Time it seams that Jordan have gotten inspirations from all over the place. For example I could say that I recognize allot of the core concepts of the channeling system from the Yogic practices of working with Prana and Kundalini, but to say that is where all of the inspiration for the system must have come from is wrong, or that Tear is clearly Spain, yes there is a fair deal of Spain there but there is also other clear influences. Jordan have gathered inspirations from all over it seams and stewed it together into something unique so I do not think that anything in the books have one, and only one thing it is based on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I've been reading a lot of mythology lately, and I was reminded of the parallels between the Aes Sedai and the Aos Sídhe (ace sheega) of Irish myth. They were what came to be known as the fairies, and another name for them was the Tuatha Dé Danann (tooha day danan), which is clearly related to the travelling folks' name of Tuatha'an, though the why of that is a bit more confusing. But if the AS-fairy parallels are a big thing, then it does not look good for that future Aviendha saw.

 

The story goes:

There were different sorts of people who came to Ireland in groups: some were regular folk, some were giants; it's sort of vague.

 

One day, the Tuatha Dé Danann (people of the goddess Danu) show up in boats in a conjured mist. They were all magic and immortal and stuff. They have a few wars with the other groups.

 

Then the regular people turn up (aka the Spanish, for some reason), and go to war with all the other groups. Eventually it comes down to the Tuatha and the regular people, and the regular people win, forcing the Aos Sídhe (people of the mounds) from the earth and underground to another realm, where time moves differently, etc.

 

When those who aren't elevated to god status turn up in later stories, it's often as visitors to dreams, and they're often women (there are men too, but their roles in stories are different). They excel in inciting opposing sides to war, or getting mortals, and particularly men, wrapped up in otherworld plots. Some are nice, and some are not. They almost never seem to kill directly.

 

 

Clearly, RJ drew heavily on the Aos Sídhe stories in creating the Aes Sedai. But the fate of the Aos Sídhe sounds eerily like the future Avi saw for Aes Sedai and Aiel. A group of invaders comes from overseas and goes to war with them, eventually defeating them and driving them to extinction (or possibly to some other world?) before becoming the land's rulers. If RJ's using his 'myths get confused' thing as a source for a mix-up between the Tuatha'an and the related Aiel, then it might bode ill for them as well (though there are other possibilities for that parallel). Thoughts?

 

Thuoghts? Robert Jordan used the Aes Síde completely wrong othre than the fact that they are magickal. His Aes are humans - the ones from mythology arent. The Aes of mythology dont go much out of their way to help men and are more wont to hurt than to help - RJ's human Aes are up in everyones business. Besides that, there are theories that the account in the Book of Invasions was a construct of Christian monks - the Aes were obviously vastly superior to men, but somehow they are defeated? The theories for that construct goes that somehow mans superiority had to be constructed over the Aes, who were purely pagan and inhuman, particularly since in some of the oldest versions of the myths, that element is entirely absent. The account of Celts comin over from the continent and subjugating a preexisting population is likely historic, and so that is probably what got used as a basis for a preexisting population (inserted as the gods, howevre ridiculous that is) being subjugated by the Celts. The weakness to fire, iron, song, etc., did not come until latre when they started to be denegrated to fairy status (and the fact that if RJ was going to use this elemnt but in entities apart from his version of Aes is also strange). The fact that RJ named humans, even if they are magickal, Aes, is appallingly blasphemous (and yes, I worship Aes so it is particularly offensive).

 

That is not anything to get bent out of shape over. I worship Jesus, who Rand is supposed to represent, and he behaves in a decidedly un-Jesus like manner for a good portion of the the book. I am sure no one who worships the Norse gods is upset because Mat isn't Perrin's father.

 

These things and people from our world are only meant to be Inspirations for the things and characters in the book, not exact replicas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of the Finns being more like the Aos Sídhe, that's not exactly true. The Finns are more like the later versions such as Shakespearean and Victorian fairies, with the iron and music thing and stuff. The Aes Sedai are very much based on the older versions, down to the Warders and all. That's not to say the White Tower doesn't draw a whole lot from the Catholic Church, because it does, but there's a whole lot of Aos Sídhe there too if you read the stories.

 

In terms of what that might mean for their fate, tbh I was of the mind that we won't know what happens to them anyway. I think that RJ planned to leave that as one of his open-ended things; 'the Great Battle done, but the world not done with battle' and all. The Aos Sídhe thing just makes me a bit more sure that it won't end well, because the story really is very similar.

 

With the pronounciation, I assumed it was sheega because the word later morphed into síoga, which would be odd if the dh hadn't originally been pronounced with the usual g sound. But I don't think I ever heard it pronounced in real life, and if I did it was probably in Irish class and I was probably asleep :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The weaknesses of the various fae in Celtic folklore varies from legend to legend, but an aversion to iron is common in many of the myths and this is true for non Celtic myths as well, wish granting is also common in many fairy myths though the number of wishes granted varies and not all fae can do this in all legends, music is common in some fairy myths as a way to entrance the fae until the hero of the story can escape or get some favor from the fae in question, and they are said to exist in a sort of parallel universe of sort in many myths. Now I am not an expert on Aos Sidhe and there are so many different kinds so I can not say for sure that the Finns are based on them however that the Finns are fae that is rather clear to me, if nothing else than their behavior and how one deals with them, that they are so alien that they might as well be evil but they are only acting according to their own customs. The descriptions of how one deal with fae is very similar.

 

I would also say that in all other than name Aos Sidhe do not remind me of Aes Sedai. To me it seams that Aes Sedai is based on nun orders in the middle ages and the Renaissance with just the added touch of magic, however I think that will all things in Wheel of Time it seams that Jordan have gotten inspirations from all over the place. For example I could say that I recognize allot of the core concepts of the channeling system from the Yogic practices of working with Prana and Kundalini, but to say that is where all of the inspiration for the system must have come from is wrong, or that Tear is clearly Spain, yes there is a fair deal of Spain there but there is also other clear influences. Jordan have gathered inspirations from all over it seams and stewed it together into something unique so I do not think that anything in the books have one, and only one thing it is based on.

thanks. very good point about the similarities between Finns and Fae. But I was interested in Aos Sidhe specifically. I'm not familiar with them at all and I was hoping that somebody more knowledgeable can comment on Aos Sidhe in particular.

In terms of the Finns being more like the Aos Sídhe, that's not exactly true. The Finns are more like the later versions such as Shakespearean and Victorian fairies, with the iron and music thing and stuff. The Aes Sedai are very much based on the older versions, down to the Warders and all. That's not to say the White Tower doesn't draw a whole lot from the Catholic Church, because it does, but there's a whole lot of Aos Sídhe there too if you read the stories.

thanks. could you explain what you mean about the Warders? sorry, as I said, don't know much about Aos Sidhe.

 

In terms of what that might mean for their fate, tbh I was of the mind that we won't know what happens to them anyway. I think that RJ planned to leave that as one of his open-ended things; 'the Great Battle done, but the world not done with battle' and all. The Aos Sídhe thing just makes me a bit more sure that it won't end well, because the story really is very similar.

Many people (myself included) believe that 'the Great Battle done, but the world not done with battle' refers to a battle before the end of the LB (the battle for Caemlyn or for the BT). But regardless of how you interpret that foretelling, as I said earlier, I think that when talking about groups of people (such as Aes Sedai) as opposed to individual characters, RJ mostly restricted mythological and real life parallels to common traits and organizational structures and not to any specific plot developments. So I wouldn't try to read off the future of Aes Sedai (or any other group) from the fate of their mythological counterparts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

With the pronounciation, I assumed it was sheega because the word later morphed into síoga, which would be odd if the dh hadn't originally been pronounced with the usual g sound. But I don't think I ever heard it pronounced in real life, and if I did it was probably in Irish class and I was probably asleep :rolleyes:

Probbly should have paid better attention in Gaeilge if you had no idea dh in the middle of a word is almost always a "y" or essentilly a generic vowel, so extreme difference between that and g.

In terms of the Finns being more like the Aos Sídhe, that's not exactly true. The Finns are more like the later versions such as Shakespearean and Victorian fairies, with the iron and music thing and stuff. The Aes Sedai are very much based on the older versions, down to the Warders and all. That's not to say the White Tower doesn't draw a whole lot from the Catholic Church, because it does, but there's a whole lot of Aos Sídhe there too if you read the stories.

thanks. could you explain what you mean about the Warders? sorry, as I said, don't know much about Aos Sidhe.

 

I do not knw where he is interpreting warders eithre because Im not remembring anything about men with no special powers followng around an Aes in any of the Cycles...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not anything to get bent out of shape over. I worship Jesus, who Rand is supposed to represent, and he behaves in a decidedly un-Jesus like manner for a good portion of the the book. I am sure no one who worships the Norse gods is upset because Mat isn't Perrin's father.

 

These things and people from our world are only meant to be Inspirations for the things and characters in the book, not exact replicas.

 

I agree with this. I am not an Åsatru believer myself but I am a Norwegian Pagan and I have never met someone who worships the old Norse Gods who also reads Wheel of Time and who is offended by the comparisons. Just like there are quite a few Pagan comparisons in the Wheel of Time books, just take the Green Man, he is slaughtered in the books while his image and the term Green Man is very similar to one of the more common images of the God, one of the deities I worship but I am not offended. I also know people who have a heavy influence of Eastern religion in their faith and if you look at it saidar and saidin is very similar to the concepts of ying and yang which is a big part of among other thing Taoist faith, and in the Wheel of Time books then you have the male energy drive people insane and kill them, I have never heard a Taoist or anyone who have Eastern concepts in their faith complain. I could continue for three pages or more just listing things in the Wheel of Time books that might be inspired by or is similar to one real world spiritual or religious concept or another the books are full of them. Now I do believe in respecting religion, but it have to be bounds of reason for when all is said and done the Wheel of Time books are fiction, they are entertainment, and if entertainment could never borrow anything from real world spiritual or religious beliefs then there would be very few stories out there as there are so many practices, beliefs and faiths all over the world that to avoid every one of them that is not easy. Also one thing more, the concepts and beliefs of religion is often very powerful archetypes which makes great elements for storytelling either in full or in part. No to be hones to be offended over the word Aes being used in a fiction story to me is the same as when a group of Wiccan protested outside the cinemas when they showed the first Harry Potter movies because in real witchcraft a broom is not used to fly on and when one dances with it, the bristles is in front not in the back.

 

In terms of the Finns being more like the Aos Sídhe, that's not exactly true. The Finns are more like the later versions such as Shakespearean and Victorian fairies, with the iron and music thing and stuff. The Aes Sedai are very much based on the older versions, down to the Warders and all. That's not to say the White Tower doesn't draw a whole lot from the Catholic Church, because it does, but there's a whole lot of Aos Sídhe there too if you read the stories.

 

I agree the Finns would be more modernized versions of the myths and not the original ones, but even with the original ones, even if there is some similarities I do not really see that they are that similar to Aes Sedai.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not anything to get bent out of shape over. I worship Jesus, who Rand is supposed to represent, and he behaves in a decidedly un-Jesus like manner for a good portion of the the book. I am sure no one who worships the Norse gods is upset because Mat isn't Perrin's father.

 

These things and people from our world are only meant to be Inspirations for the things and characters in the book, not exact replicas.

 

I agree with this. I am not an Åsatru believer myself but I am a Norwegian Pagan and I have never met someone who worships the old Norse Gods who also reads Wheel of Time and who is offended by the comparisons.

 

Maybe becuse your not in a religion that specifically tells you to curse or get rid of anyone who dishonours your gods so its not as serious to you and evn if you were, your probably of the non-zealous type and wouldnt do it anyways? Thats just an aside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe becuse your not in a religion that specifically tells you to curse or get rid of anyone who dishonours your gods so its not as serious to you and evn if you were, your probably of the non-zealous type and wouldnt do it anyways? Thats just an aside.

 

I am for religious freedom, I am however not for religious violence. My hubby is a Christian and I am a Pagan, his religion specifically tell him to kill me, but we manage to live together quite nicely. I think that if your religion tells you to kill or curse anyone who dishonors your Gods then you should take a good, hard look at your religion. Also one do not need to go looking for dishonor, I understand that Christians for example get rather pissed when someone make art of a crucifix drenched in urine, I understand that Muslims get upset when their Prophet is depicted as a pig, there are clearly things that are done to be offensive and I have no problem with being outraged about that and speaking up against it. However an author using a word is sort of similar to the name of your Gods for a group of sorceresses in a piece of fantasy fiction that is digging around for offense where none is meant. I mean that would be like if I had gone ballistic that Battlestar Galactica have a character with the call sign Athena who tuns out to be a robot, and another one names Apollo, I mean this is clearly not meant as offense.

 

My religion is the most important thing in my life and I put the Gods extremely high but I do not go look for offense. Now being non zealous do not mean one is not as offended when someone offends your religions and your Gods. However I do not think that the Goddess and the God need me to do violence for Them, or be insulted for Them, I think They are more than capable to deal with any slight They may feel Themselves. Also I do not think the Gods think of a name similar to theirs being used in a fantasy book is offense, there is such a thing as being over zealous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe becuse your not in a religion that specifically tells you to curse or get rid of anyone who dishonours your gods so its not as serious to you and evn if you were, your probably of the non-zealous type and wouldnt do it anyways? Thats just an aside.

My religion is the most important thing in my life and I put the Gods extremely high but I do not go look for offense. Now being non zealous do not mean one is not as offended when someone offends your religions and your Gods. However I do not think that the Goddess and the God need me to do violence for Them, or be insulted for Them, I think They are more than capable to deal with any slight They may feel Themselves. Also I do not think the Gods think of a name similar to theirs being used in a fantasy book is offense, there is such a thing as being over zealous.

Ok so like I said, your not in a religion that specificlly tells you to curse or do physical violence for whatevre you serve. My gods thmselves dont care about humanity, but the rules we haev saying to defend their honour is just that, something for us to do to potntially gain favour. I dont know what you are woshipping but my gods do like overzealousness - zeal gets you somewhere, over-zealous gets you moer, but if your gods arent like that, more power to you. Ill do mine and you can do yours

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so like I said, your not in a religion that specificlly tells you to curse or do physical violence for whatevre you serve. My gods thmselves dont care about humanity, but the rules we haev saying to defend their honour is just that, something for us to do to potntially gain favour. I dont know what you are woshipping but my gods do like overzealousness - zeal gets you somewhere, over-zealous gets you moer, but if your gods arent like that, more power to you. Ill do mine and you can do yours

 

My point is also that one thing is defending the honor of one's Gods I think this is positive, another thing is advocating violence. I also think that one thing is being offended over an actual slight but here we are talking about a word that is not even similar in how it is spoken but where the English translation of the word for your Gods is somewhat similar to the name for a group of sorceresses in a book, I really do not see how that can be taken as offense in any way shape or form.

 

Also as a side note I think it is distasteful to speak about doing violence or curses (that yes I believe in) to anyone who offends your religion when the person you think have caused offense is no longer with us. I am not accusing you of anything here but it is just distasteful to me. Jordan have never meant any insult to your religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is also that one thing is defending the honor of one's Gods I think this is positive, another thing is advocating violence. I also think that one thing is being offended over an actual slight but here we are talking about a word that is not even similar in how it is spoken but where the English translation of the word for your Gods is somewhat similar to the name for a group of sorceresses in a book, I really do not see how that can be taken as offense in any way shape or form.

 

Also as a side note I think it is distasteful to speak about doing violence or curses (that yes I believe in) to anyone who offends your religion when the person you think have caused offense is no longer with us. I am not accusing you of anything here but it is just distasteful to me. Jordan have never meant any insult to your religion.

Alright...these are all your opinons and I respect those, but still doesnt change how I feel; in my religion, if you aren't allowed to be named after a majour god or goddess and you aren't supposed to use their names or portray thm incorrectly, then using a word that looks similiar to Aes Sídhe or howevre you would like to spell it and usin them as inspiration seems to fall into the category of abuse. If yuo dont liek the idea of violence or curses, wll and good - I was jst suggestin at your post I responded the first time that you dont feel the same way becuse your religion doesnt demand such things, i.e. violence and curses, and/or you are of the dispositon to not do that in the first place even if it did, then you elaborated you dont support religious violence, and Im simply responded that we obviously have diffrent philosophies on that. So...that's that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright...these are all your opinons and I respect those, but still doesnt change how I feel; in my religion, if you aren't allowed to be named after a majour god or goddess and you aren't supposed to use their names or portray thm incorrectly, then using a word that looks similiar to Aes Sídhe or howevre you would like to spell it and usin them as inspiration seems to fall into the category of abuse.

 

If Jordan where a follower of your religion I could see your point, however as far as I know he was not, he was an Episcopalian as far as I know. This is like saying I am offending Muslims when I eat pork because they are not allowed to in their religion. Jordan did not share your beliefs and most likely did not even know there where people our modern day who worship such Deities so how is his books blasphemy when he was neither a followers or have intended any offense, I mean seriously you are probably doing three things right this moment that offends some religious doctrine for some group somewhere just because there is so many of them, do that mean the followers of those religious should kill or curse you?

 

If yuo dont liek the idea of violence or curses, wll and good - I was jst suggestin at your post I responded the first time that you dont feel the same way becuse your religion doesnt demand such things, i.e. violence and curses, and/or you are of the dispositon to not do that in the first place even if it did, then you elaborated you dont support religious violence, and Im simply responded that we obviously have diffrent philosophies on that. So...that's that?

 

My religion do not call out for violence no, but my hubby's religion do, by his religion both you and me are on the hit list among other things. My point is that many religions have demands for violence that most modern practitioners ignore as everything, even religion have to evolve with the times. However when we are talking about religious violence, if a member of the Taliban kill a 14 year old girl because she have kissed a boy because his interpretation of Islam tell him to do so you think he is right? Now as for respecting one another's opinions, I respect your opinion but I do not respect actions taken to do violence against those you feel transgress against your religion, this include curses that I see as spiritual violence. I think an American judge said it very well, religious freedom is supposed to be a shield, not a sword. You have the right to think what you will, to practice what you will but not to force your beliefs on others though violence.

 

Now one final question, if you think Jordan have abused your religion and committed blasphemy against your Gods bad enough that people who do such things should be cursed or done violence against, why do you have over 10 000 post on a fan page dedicated to his books? If I felt that an author had offended my religion in his books then I would give the books away or destroy them and never have anything to do with that work of fiction again and I certainly would not be a regular poster on a forum praising said work of fiction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can appreciate how sensitive the issue must be to you, however, I would ask that we stick to the topic and not discuss the merits or flaws of ones religion here. Feel free to create a topic on the General Discussion board, but this is a thread to discuss the books in relation to said religion.

 

Furthermore Wild Taltos, if you feel this post offends you or your religion, please feel free to contact myself, yoniy0 or Luckers if you wish to appeal for the removal or moderation of this topic. I cannot assure you that such a request will be granted, we allow all opinions to be voiced here, however, if explained there may be a way we can come to a compromise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ninjaed superly by that guy

If Jordan where a follower of your religion I could see your point, however as far as I know he was not, he was an Episcopalian as far as I know. This is like saying I am offending Muslims when I eat pork because they are not allowed to in their religion. Jordan did not share your beliefs and most likely did not even know there where people our modern day who worship such Deities so how is his books blasphemy when he was neither a followers or have intended any offense, I mean seriously you are probably doing three things right this moment that offends some religious doctrine for some group somewhere just because there is so many of them, do that mean the followers of those religious should kill or curse you?

Now yuo aer going to attack me when I said this is my opinon, your not going to change it, so lets leve it? Doesnt matter that he doesnt share my beliefs - he blatantly disrespected the whoel religion, and to compaer that to an accessory in a religion - i.e. not eatng pork in an Abrahamic religion - is pretty ridiculous. And hey...if I am blatntly disrescting someone else's religion right now, and they hav the power to kill or curse me, the moer power to them.

If yuo dont liek the idea of violence or curses, wll and good - I was jst suggestin at your post I responded the first time that you dont feel the same way becuse your religion doesnt demand such things, i.e. violence and curses, and/or you are of the dispositon to not do that in the first place even if it did, then you elaborated you dont support religious violence, and Im simply responded that we obviously have diffrent philosophies on that. So...that's that?

 

My religion do not call out for violence no, but my hubby's religion do, by his religion both you and me are on the hit list among other things. 1.) My point is that many religions have demands for violence that most modern practitioners ignore as everything, even religion have to evolve with the times. However when we are talking about religious violence, if a member of the Taliban kill a 14 year old girl because she have kissed a boy because his interpretation of Islam tell him to do so you think he is right? 2.)Now as for respecting one another's opinions, I respect your opinion but I do not respect actions taken to do violence against those you feel transgress against your religion, this include curses that I see as spiritual violence. I think an American judge said it very well, religious freedom is supposed to be a shield, not a sword. 3.)You have the right to think what you will, to practice what you will but not to force your beliefs on others though violence.

 

Now one final question, 4.)if you think Jordan have abused your religion and committed blasphemy against your Gods bad enough that people who do such things should be cursed or done violence against, why do you have over 10 000 post on a fan page dedicated to his books? If I felt that an author had offended my religion in his books then I would give the books away or destroy them and never have anything to do with that work of fiction again and I certainly would not be a regular poster on a forum praising said work of fiction.

1.) Ok as I said, you can be as modern as yuo like, and if you thnk me and everyone else in my religion is backward, thats that. Why do you have to go on an elaborate speech whn I already said it doesn't change what I think?

 

2.) And I already said I understood thats your opinion, not mine.

 

3.) Im not forcing my beliefs on anyone - as I alredy said, it is about respecting somethng as fundamental to religion as its gods...not eatng pork, so if I want to think poorly of Jordan for not doin that, then I wll go ahead and do that.

 

4.) Lol becuse they were entertining before I got in serios trouble for readng them, so there is some sentimental value to them? And I haev friends here, whch is why I am only mostly in the social section and not here, "praising" his works. You seriously want to keep ths going when I already said multiple times you might as wll be hitting your head off a brick wall and its gong way far away frm my original statement, that Jordan usd something based off of Aes almost completely wrong and therfore I dont liek it?

Edited by WildTaltos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can appreciate how sensitive the issue must be to you, however, I would ask that we stick to the topic and not discuss the merits or flaws of ones religion here. Feel free to create a topic on the General Discussion board, but this is a thread to discuss the books in relation to said religion.

 

Furthermore Wild Taltos, if you feel this post offends you or your religion, please feel free to contact myself, yoniy0 or Luckers if you wish to appeal for the removal or moderation of this topic. I cannot assure you that such a request will be granted, we allow all opinions to be voiced here, however, if explained there may be a way we can come to a compromise.

Its doesnt overly offend me, I jst wanted to make the statment that I dont liek how Robert Jordan borrowd from Aes and then I oculd elaborate moer on why if people were interested but thn soehow Im gettng lectured on religious tolerance after a few statements of ok, thats your opinon, this is mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough me and WildTaltos have gotten off topic. If he wishes we can continue the debate on another part of the forum more suited for such discussion but I have said my piece. I just have to say one thing more, I have never attacked WildTaltos religion, I have attacked anyone's right to use violence to force religious ideals on others. I am sorry to make this final comment off topic but for me religious freedom is so important that I can not let a comment that I have attacked someone's religion stand without commenting that no, I have not. Now then I apologize for going of topic. Wild Taltos if you wish to continue this let me know, if not then I thank you for the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...