138,759
edits
Verse:Hmøøh/Mărotłism: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
m (→Ancient texts) |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Mărotłism is agnostic about whether the universe had a beginning. | Mărotłism is agnostic about whether the universe had a beginning. | ||
Mărotłism is explicitly polytheistic; many Talmic and Lakovic gods appear in the | Mărotłism is explicitly polytheistic; many Talmic and Lakovic gods appear in the Latlaseekh. However, Mărotłism views the gods as manifestations of one ultimate God, or the ''Seth'', who is also held to be the ultimate principle or 'force' that sustains the universe. The ultimate God has given his law to man via the lesser gods and principles, especially the Second Mover, and said law is to be interpreted through the lens of the pĭdaic oral tradition. | ||
===Łăy'ür=== | ===Łăy'ür=== | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
According to Snielism, or Mărotłite mysticism, it is entirely separate from any god. The Second Mover is often called '''the Nameless''' (''φid mo tsip χum''), the idea being that following the Second Mover should not be about pursuing a name or following a predetermined procedure. Mărotłites would at best balk at "naming the Nameless" (Windermere: ''chithum fid mo tsip chum''), i.e. identifying the Second Mover with a specific god or human, like [[Verse:Tricin/Ngronaism|Ngronaism]] does. | According to Snielism, or Mărotłite mysticism, it is entirely separate from any god. The Second Mover is often called '''the Nameless''' (''φid mo tsip χum''), the idea being that following the Second Mover should not be about pursuing a name or following a predetermined procedure. Mărotłites would at best balk at "naming the Nameless" (Windermere: ''chithum fid mo tsip chum''), i.e. identifying the Second Mover with a specific god or human, like [[Verse:Tricin/Ngronaism|Ngronaism]] does. | ||
There is a set of religious statutes (CWdm: ''hooyma'', sg. ''hăyma'') partially determined by the | There is a set of religious statutes (CWdm: ''hooyma'', sg. ''hăyma'') partially determined by the Latlaseekh, and partially determined by the Pĭdas' writings. As such there is very much a concept of sin (''φrăcing''). | ||
(more on how we got from Second Mover to the Pĭdas) | (more on how we got from Second Mover to the Pĭdas) | ||