[Glorantha]Emperor Godunya and King Boggle

From: TERRA INCOGNITA <inarsus-ferilt-z_at_mrg.biglobe.ne.jp>
Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 22:02:25 +0900

I put on my some idea of Mahayana Buddhism on my cheap story, the event happened around 1124ST. When Godunya stayed on Plateau of Statue for unknown reason.

http://www2u.biglobe.ne.jp/~BLUEMAGI/GodunyaKingBoggles.htm But I feel I don't have enough knowledge of Praxians, so this is not final version. ( IIRC, Oddi the Keen lost his power of "Sense Chaos" after he was illuminated.)

What I (subconsciously?) want to say is that Greg's definition about Void and Mysticism is not complete for some reason from POV of Mahayana Buddhism, maybe because he has distinct belief that each of indivisuals should have distinct personality and substantial existence as one of true western people since Descartes. But Nagarjuna refused that individual liberation without relationship....MUTUAL RELATIONSHIP CONSISTS THIS WORLD.

> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 13:13:03 +0200
> From: Julian Lord <jlord_at_free.fr>
> To: glorantha_at_rpglist.org
> Subject: [Glorantha]Summerland mysticism
> Reply-To: glorantha_at_rpglist.org
> >I want to divide the topic into two, "Is truly Kralori way mystical?" and
> >"How does Kralori consider their way mystical?" As I said, I don't want
> >enforce you the idea that Kralori way is mystical, and I think it is
> >nonsense we make attitude for it, Greg has changed his mind several
> >
> >
> I think the problem is that, in a near-totality of cases, if you can
> define something, then someone, somewhere will be able to prove that
> it's NOT mystical - EVEN IF IT IS !!!

VOID CANNOT BE DEFINED. (So Nagarjuna said.)

Sorry, but my concern is on Kralorela, at least not on the definition of Mysticism.

> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 00:07:41 +0100
> From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
> To: glorantha_at_rpglist.org
> Subject: Re: [Glorantha]Kralori Summerland Practice
> Reply-To: glorantha_at_rpglist.org
> On Sat, May 01, 2004 at 11:40:57PM +0900, TERRA INCOGNITA wrote:
> > No matter how you want to say this or that, I think there isn't enough
> > information and official set for Kralorela, except we can find some bits
> > Glorantha: Introduction to HW, and it doesn't tell enough about local
> > and powers of Kralorela.
> Of course not. Have I in any sense implied there is? Hence what I
> thought was fairly liberal use of "IMO" and other such qualifiers.

Quotation Bits from Greg's statement:
about Kralori Schism and Society:

http://glorantha.kondalski.org/g9index/2607.html Greg:

>> Kralorela is a grand, grand mixture of cults,
>churches, rites of all
>types. They exist side by side without hostility.

>Without hostility? Relativism and Absolutism. No
>such Society can be! ]


<<Rivalry, sure. Conflicts of interest? Yes, of course. Overt hostility AS A NORMAL WAY? No. No more than Taoism, Buddhism and Confucism are inherently hostile towards each other. Rival, conflicts of interest and occasional bursts of violence: yes. >>

I just want to express Greg's WORLD IS MADE OF EVERYTHING principle to more broadly applied form.

> > And about Kralori way with Summerland Heaven, IIRC, all "good" Kralori
> > there no matter what they believe, that is similar to Solace of the Body
> > Malkioni, and I think among Kralori, concept of "goodness" is the very
> > subject of long debate who Dragon Emperors choose and not.
> I think this comparison is misleading in (at least) one crucially
> different respect. The point of Solace _is_ Solace; the point of the
> Summer Land Heaven is not simply being in the SLH, but to achieve some
> further cosmic and/or personal development distinct from the SLH itself,
> but which the SLH makes (much more) possible. (i.e. once there,
> to further one's draconic/mystical/whateverly progress.)

I don't think that is point Kralori feels it is important, I suppose normally, no one return from Summer Land Heaven (because Kralorela is just another place of Middle World) and no vithelans talk about foolish Kralori who came before the gate of heaven but failed to pass through. And if your statement is right, what is the difference between Kralori and other vithelans?

> > (They are long sworn enemies throughout history) and Tantrists believe
> > want to help Godunya to achieve liberation and draw gaudy mandalas
> > the court, and eunuchs help them for their hidden idea.... and hinder
> > influence of snobbish, haughty mandarins. Mandarins of course want to
> > both of them off and recover old good days.
> Why 'gaudy'? You seem very keen to take my rather lightweight
> comparison to Vajrayana (which would be pretty much that we have some
> concept analogous to each of mantras, mandalas and chakras, and some
> sort of philosophy that makes sense of having them) and strengthen it to
> stress its incompatibility with some equally strong analogue to
> Confucianism. I think you're either making rather too much of these
> comparisons, or indulging in a touch of the straw men here.

I think you forcibly bulk up together too many "Oriental" sources (that primally contradict, as Confucianism and Tantrism) into one. I don't want to change my "agnostic" attitude to Emperor's opinion that defines Kralori because it more likely express the tolerance of Kralori to variety of its culture than your attitude that "I put on only One true way of Kralori, mixed all Vajrayana-Confucianism-Taoism" even if you are right, it simply ends discussion and development of stories. I want source of good stories and it needs what people believe, not necessarily what really people practise.


P.S If I have a chance, I want to write about Emperor Yanoor and debate during his reign a sort of between Zen Buddhists and Tantrists (as occured in some period of Tibetan kingdom), that brought his downfall and raising of western adventurers.

--__--__-- Received on Thu 06 May 2004 - 06:57:03 EEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun 04 Feb 2007 - 19:57:49 EET