The Matter of Mysteries

[Juniperberry]

Why on earth would you think something like that?  I mean, given that that's exactly what Mysteries are, saying that that means that they aren't Mysteries is ... kind of weird.

 
I feel like I'm going to repeat myself a bit.

Mysteries, to my understanding of them, are revelations from the gods of some outer reality. Some deeper truth behind an incomprehensible god and reality that we can't know because of the limitations of our physical existence.

Spiritual experiences in natural religions don't reveal a truth behind an unknowable reality. There isn't a mystery to solve or experience. They only really confirm a reality that we are aware of and that is in the presence of the gods. It takes the meaning of 'mystery' out of what some might describe as a 'Mystery' experience.

Don't know if that clarified it for you. I know I expressed the thought a bit awkwardly.

[Darkhawk]

Mysteries, to my understanding of them, are revelations from the gods of some outer reality.

That is certainly not related to any use of Mystery that I would cite, and thus is not governed by anything I am talking about.  It is not in accord with the usage of the word in its culture of origin, either, so from a recon standpoint it's not terribly useful.

[Jenett]

That is certainly not related to any use of Mystery that I would cite, and thus is not governed by anything I am talking about.  It is not in accord with the usage of the word in its culture of origin, either, so from a recon standpoint it's not terribly useful.

In case it's of help; the Oxford English dictionary gives the following two theological definitions (I'm leaving out the 3 Christianity-focused ones)

(from the online version of the OED)
†1. Mystical presence or nature; mystical significance. in (also through) his mystery : in or by its mystical presence or nature. in (a) mystery : mystically, symbolically; with hidden or mystical significance. Obs.

2. a. A religious truth known or understood only by divine revelation; esp. a doctrine of faith involving difficulties which human reason is incapable of solving.

It's worth pointing out here that what we know of the Eleusinian mysteries appears to be profoundly focused on agriculture: there are mysteries (and Mysteries) in understanding how life flourishes, dies, and is renewed again (season to season) that do not rely on anything requiring an unknowable divine.

Even though we (as modern humans) have science that explains many of those things... do other people not walk through a harvest field or an orchard, or look at the first buds in the trees, and go "This is really awesomely amazingly cool?" or is that just me?

Science-me knows how it happens in reasonable detail. Spiritual-me still thinks it's amazingly awesome that it does, and is fascinated by how I can be a part of that, and participate in that sense of renewal and hope as an individual, as well as a person with connections to various other beings (other humans, other animals, plants, and to the Gods.)

[And, just to complicate this: my religious Mysteries mostly don't focus on the agricultural cycle at all. Just, I can see how other people's would, could, and almost certainly have for extended periods of time.]

[Juniperberry]

Even though we (as modern humans) have science that explains many of those things... do other people not walk through a harvest field or an orchard, or look at the first buds in the trees, and go "This is really awesomely amazingly cool?" or is that just me?

No, not just you.

I don't feel like I'm arguing semantics here, if that's how its coming across, but scratching the surface of the philosophy behind what makes a mystery a Mystery.
...And how those experiences differ according to religion/worldview/culture. Same difference, maybe.

I told my atheist cousin that the awesome thing about Germanic Mythology is that it doesn't find contradictions in science, since the gods, man, everything is a PRODUCT of the Universe (not the Creator of). Rather, it explains the intangibles behind the science, the spirit in it all.

For some, experiencing those intangibles could very well be considered a Mystery. From my POV, this doesn't qualify as a Mystery. It doesn't reveal to us anything we don't already know (something hidden/ mystery) but just reinforces, by degrees, that which we are already experiencing.  

Anyway, apparently I'm off on some irrelevant tangent  so I'll just leave it at that.  

[Finn]

Mysteries, to my understanding of them, are revelations from the gods of some outer reality. Some deeper truth behind an incomprehensible god and reality that we can't know because of the limitations of our physical existence.

 
Hm... I'd argue that is probably one definition of Mystery, and probably the way Christianity understands Mysteries to be, since the cosmology of Christianity requires there to be:

1) a god(s) outside of reality
2) a reality we cannot know

This, obviously, is not the cosmology of all religions, and so it seems a rather narrow definition and a rather narrow religious point of view, as both Darkhawk and Jenett pointed out.

[Aster Breo]

This, obviously, is not the cosmology of all religions, and so it seems a rather narrow definition and a rather narrow religious point of view, as both Darkhawk and Jenett pointed out.

 
Hmmm...  

I think, for me, it would be helpful to have a better understanding of the kinds of things that other people consider to be Mysteries.  

I realize that's sort of a contradiction in terms -- if you can explain it to me, it can't be that Mysterious.  

But I'm thinking more of larger topics -- like the agricultural cycle.  

F'ex, I believe there is a Mystery connected with Brighid that involves Her participation in the creation of the universe, while still also being an integral part of the universe, and -- somehow -- a *product* of the universe.

Is that the sort of thing y'all are talking about, or am I on my own page all by myself here?

[Darkhawk]

But I'm thinking more of larger topics -- like the agricultural cycle.  

F'ex, I believe there is a Mystery connected with Brighid that involves Her participation in the creation of the universe, while still also being an integral part of the universe, and -- somehow -- a *product* of the universe.

Is that the sort of thing y'all are talking about, or am I on my own page all by myself here?

 
I would file that as "a Mystery of a specific deity".  My basic feeling about the Mysteries of specific deities is that they tend to be focused either on understanding how superficially-conflicting Stuff is actually a unified, seamless whole, or in understanding how aspects of a deity's interest combine to produce a specific not-necessarily-stated result.  (My UPG title of Neb.y as "Lord of Initiations" is one of the latter.)

There are also Mysteries of combinations of deities.  The Eleusinian Mysteries appear to have dealt primarily with the interactions between Demeter and Kore/Persephone, and addressed both the agricultural cycle and matters of life and death.  The Wiccan central Mystery is reputed to be in part about sexual generation.  I've been chewing on the relationship between Heru and Wesir the last few days because it's come up a bit in my note-taking, and what their interaction means about the realms of the living and the spirits.

There are Mysteries that emerge from human involvement with divine image (singly or in groups).  The Doors of the Sky group here is working on a cycle of some Mysteries of Nut about the nature of the night, death, restoration, and birth.  Mystery psychodramas that involve bringing a person through the psychological stages of particular myths (Descent of Inanna is a popular one of these in modern paganism) would fall here; these often illuminate and encourage human development by paralleling it with the Image.

There are Mystery experiences that depend in no way upon divine presence, but because of the way people gravitate towards them as transformational experiences that are often spiritual or spiritualisable, they tend to accumulate goddiness around them (or, in some cultures, accumulate ritual reasons that the gods are not present for them).  The big ones of these are birth, death, and sex.  Dealing with these as sacred Mysteries can reveal deeper things about the nature of the world and the presence of the gods within it, if one has an appropriate set of gods for such things.

There are Mystery experiences of human groups, which may also partake of pieces of the above; as I have no personal experiences of group Mysteries I am hesitant to speculate too hard about them.  Perhaps Jenett or some other initiate will be able to elaborate.

[Jenett]

There are Mystery experiences of human groups, which may also partake of pieces of the above; as I have no personal experiences of group Mysteries I am hesitant to speculate too hard about them.  Perhaps Jenett or some other initiate will be able to elaborate.

I think I can, but I need to think about how to do it (for both 'how much context do I need to explain' and 'what stuff hits oath issues' reasons)

Also, about to be away for the weekend, with less 'Net access than usual, and lots of non-computer things to do with my time!) so it may be a few days for that reason.

[Juni]

 
I'm hanging this here as I'm not responding to any particular post; I've been skimming with interest (and will read more thoroughly when I have the attention span) but I thought I would share something Koi posted back on one of the Beehives, in response to a question of mine (the context was sacraments being Catholic mystery):

It's not hard to explain to someone "this is how the sacrament works" but it's impossible to understand the meaning of a sacrament without experiencing it.

The definition that's usually given is that a mystery is something we cannot come to the end of knowing -- no matter how much you know or experience of it, there's still yet more depth to be explored, and therefore it will never been fully comprehensible or explicable, not because it's "unreasonable" but because it grows beyond the bounds of human reason. If that makes sense.

I think people sometimes confuse "mystery" with "secret" or with "things that are too hard to explain." A mystery in theological terms is generally something that has to be experienced and can't be fully known (or let's say semi-fully known!) until and unless experienced -- but knowledge can also be a form of experience, so there can be intellectual religious mysteries.

Mysteries also must point to a reality beyond the mystery itself; Catholics talk about the sacraments bearing God's grace to the participants; Wiccans use different language, but it means the same thing. Mysteries point to something to do with deity, eternity, or ultimate truth (depending on the faith) and serve as both an expression in and of itself and as a symbol of something greater.

Sex is a mystery. You can learn a lot about it, but the experiencing of it is a very different form of understanding, and (at least in theory) sex points to a reality beyond itself -- a reality of love between partners, which is never the kind of thing you can express. "Why do you love your husband?" "Um .... he does dishes?" Sex is a mystery that points to and partially expresses the inexpressible that is love between two people. It is both an act with meaning in and of itself, and an act with a meaning BEYOND itself that points to a greater reality.

Mysteries also generally strengthen and reaffirm a bond of some sort (or initiate it) -- between a person and God, a person and their family or faith, a person and their beliefs. In the case of sex, it strengthens and reaffirms the relationship between the partners.

If that helps any.

[stephyjh]

AFAIK, Mystery cults were specific to the Greco-Roman culture, as a extracurricular secret ...club?society?... outside of the state/home worship. So they wouldn't be present in other systems.

Other reconstructed religions also aren't Revealed religions but Natural religions, so calling a deeply moving experience a "Mystery" in modern context would be dishonest. Hlewegastir and I were very slightly speaking about this in a thread recently (and it's a  topic in other places). It doesn't have to be just as the ancients did it, but interpretations have to follow the same sort of POV as those who originally practiced them (ie. revealed vs natural).


That's why heathenry isn't a Mystery religion...it doesn't operate on the revelations of a God to mankind but rather on experiencing the gods through the process of living.  There are spiritually significant moments in recon's lives that are personal and don't have any source evidence, but recons just don't talk about it with everyone-- and it isn't secret revealed knowledge or wisdom (Mystery). It's just part and parcel of having a relationship with deity/ancestor/wight.

Just wanted to throw that out there.

Disagreeing with you from a neo-Druid perspective. Several sources talk of the years of study required of the paleopagan Druids, but despite the presence of written language, none of their learning was written down. That certainly implies mystery tradition to me.

[RandallS]

Disagreeing with you from a neo-Druid perspective. Several sources talk of the years of study required of the paleopagan Druids, but despite the presence of written language, none of their learning was written down. That certainly implies mystery tradition to me.

I don't think "oral tradition" necessarily implies "mystery tradition." That is, I really doubt that everything passed down orally is a mystery.

[stephyjh]

I don't think "oral tradition" necessarily implies "mystery tradition." That is, I really doubt that everything passed down orally is a mystery.

But to me it does provide reasonable doubt for Juniper's idea that mystery traditions only existed in one cultural context.

[Asch]

I don't think "oral tradition" necessarily implies "mystery tradition." That is, I really doubt that everything passed down orally is a mystery.

Mmm yeah I concur as to its relation to whether or not historical Druids had a mystery tradition I'll say this, absence of any evidence isn't indicative of positive evidence, it's just a big 'ol void.

Is it possible? Totally but the existence of an oral tradition isn't particularly indicative of such a possibility, it just fails to disprove it.

If only they'd written things down...

[Juniperberry]

Hm... I'd argue that is probably one definition of Mystery, and probably the way Christianity understands Mysteries to be, since the cosmology of Christianity requires there to be:

1) a god(s) outside of reality
2) a reality we cannot know

This, obviously, is not the cosmology of all religions, and so it seems a rather narrow definition and a rather narrow religious point of view, as both Darkhawk and Jenett pointed out.

 
Taking a deeper look at it outside of the pagan community, discussions, and writings *is* me being open-minded, rather than just leaving it un-examined. Not everyone will have the same opinion of them, and that's fine and not something *I* can criticize about their religious views, but it does address what Darkhawk herself brought up as the controversy and lack of respect of it to some recons.  (I also think it falls in line with TC's main objective as a debate and discussion board.)

Encyclopedia Britannica has Mystery religions listed as Greco-Roman. It states further that the concept of initiationary rites sprang from primitive tribes, where  *everyone* participated in the  ceremonies and religious experience. But Mystery Cults originated in Hellenic culture, with only a few select people experiencing the ceremonies.

It goes on to state that the experiences weren't possible to communicate: "Therefore, it was not possible to communicate to the non-initiated by words, but it was treachery to reveal the secrets dances." These Mysteries, as others have noted would most likely have dealt with life, death, rebirth.

Those three things are all things we experience. Along the lines of what Juni shared about sex as mystery, childbirth is something you cannot explain to someone. This would make it a 'mystery' of life, but not a Mystery.

There are clearly things we all experience in life that are  spiritual and profound. We can call them mysterious,  but it was the process by which these experiences were induced that was the Mystery in Mystery  cults.  

Think about it: every culture has rites and ceremonies that deal with life, death, rebirth, sexuality etc. They experience ecstasy, connection, and spirituality. The exact things that Mystery Cults dealt with, so what sets them apart if not the secrecy, the membership, the exclusivity?

Idh Fadar-something documented a death rite in Northern Europe where a slave girl sacrificed herself to die with her Master. The 'angel of death' proceeded over the ceremony,  the men of the villages all had intercourse with her, they went through the routine of saying the appropriate things, looking past the beams and then killed her. According to Bauschatz, the intercourse was intended to fill her womb with seed so that she could bring fertility to the afterlife and generate a rebirth. She spoke of all she saw beyond as she looked past the beams, of what the after-life looked like, who she saw.... The *only* things that keeps this from being a Mystery experience/cult are either a) the fact that it wasn't secret or b) that it wasn't something that was divinely revealed. Which is it?

What sets a Mystery apart from other spiritual experiences, per neo-pagans, if not divine revelation or secrecy? Or is it a term that has become applied to any profound experience. If so, that's good to know.

And if it *is* divine revelation about true nature, or incomprehensible reality than that's a valid answer. Its just not applicable to some recon groups and philosophies, and neither are secret initiations. I don't think that's narrow-minded,  I just think that's what makes religion diverse.

[Darkhawk]

The *only* things that keeps this from being a Mystery experience/cult are either a) the fact that it wasn't secret or b) that it wasn't something that was divinely revealed. Which is it?

Sounds like a Mystery experience to me.  Since neither your a) or your b) is a requirement for being a Mystery experience, I'm really kind of disinclined to start spreading misinformation by lending either one of them the credibility of any support.  I am not going to lie to you no matter how nicely you insist that I do so.

What sets a Mystery apart from other spiritual experiences, per neo-pagans, if not divine revelation or secrecy? Or is it a term that has become applied to any profound experience. If so, that's good to know.

Experiential knowledge, as has been stated over and over again.  Mysteries cannot be explained, they can only be experienced.

You can learn all kinds of things about sex theoretically, by talking to people, reading books, studying poetry people have written about sex, but you can only know how sex is for you by fucking.  Sex is a Mystery (it's even a secular one).  And this is one of the reasons that sex is a popular topic for Mystery work in a wide variety of religions.

The fact that you have to do sex to understand the experience of sex does not make it secret; the fact that many people find it spiritual does not make it something divinely revealed about distant transcendent bullshit.  I in fact defined Mystery in the first post in this thread: "Mysteries in this context are experiential spiritual events, the sorts of things which cannot be fully explained in advance but only truly understood when on the far side of them."

Can we please get back to substantial conversation now, rather than reiterating the sort of 101 that belongs in the newbie folders?