Anyone into Ásatrú?

[Mikobass]

I just read in this very forum that Øystein G. Brun from Borknagar was in the Ásatrú. (Norse paganism of the Viking Age). Anyone else here is a member of Ásatrú or knows anything about this religion?

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/showthread.php?p=5365145#post5365145

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asatru

 

[Freanan]

Personally i am an atheist, but i am extremely interrested in germanic mythology.
Asatru, as a "religion" seems kind of modern and made up to me, but i think no matter wether you agree with me on this point it would probably be best to get some translations into the language of your choice of original sources:
-The poetic and prose Edda
-The volsung's saga
Or other old norse or germanic literature (i only posted the stuff that actually is about the germanic gods). I heard, that Saxo Grammaticus' History of the Danes was mostly about mythology too.

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

very close to becoming Asatru, but not there yet.

 

[Majesty]

Is there even enough sources left to know how Asatro really was? There surely can´t be enough to build a proper belief system on? (Proper might be a stupid choice of words. I´m pretty bad at choosing good words in english and right now I´m ill as well which certainly doesn´t help)

All writings that can be aquired these days have seen a thousand years of christian revision and could be way off. (edit: or written in christian times, felt I needed to specify)

 

[Jrgen]

Is there even enough sources left to know how Asatro really was? There surely can´t be enough to build a proper belief system on? (Proper might be a stupid choice of words. I´m pretty bad at choosing good words in english and right now I´m ill as well which certainly doesn´t help)

All writings that can be aquired these days have seen a thousand years of christian revision and could be way off. (edit: or written in christian times, felt I needed to specify)

Well, we mostly just have the Icelandic writings to go by and these were written during or soon after christianization and they were written down for historical, non-religious purposes, which means christianity didn't really play any role in the writing process. I'm an atheist, but I'm very interested in Norse mythology just as I'm interested in the Bible for their historical value. I also find the teachings of Havamål more appealing than those of Jesus.

 

[Freanan]

Personally i think it is quite futile to try to imitate the ritual behaviour of ancient religions of which there are nearly no records.

But concerning values and mythological stories i think there are quite many sources, which are quite likely rather correct.
Mostly the christians seem to have copied the old texts quite faithfully and just put something like "The author believes this is all bullshit." somewhere (Examples: Sturluson Edda and the Tain Bo Cuailnge).

 

[Έρεβος]

Ásatrú is ancient nordic paganism interpreted in a Christian light [hence destroying the meaning of the "religion"]. To actually believe the pagan gods exist in a literal form is lunacy, and by no means the way of the ancient religion. To a true adherant of the ancient religion, the myths are MYTHS - not actual literal teachings. It is a naturalistic faith, reverant of nature - that which actually exists; with no truly integral supernatural beliefs [though it doesn't reject them, aside from the literalistic beliefs that Christianity interpreted the religion as]. If anything the true religion that Ásatrú tries to cope out as is much closer to no "beliefs" at all, or Atheism. The gods and myths simply represent aspects of our existance, and values which our nature is best suited to follow for the bettering of humanity. The only truly "supernatural" beliefs that are part of the ancient religion are those having to do with death and the "afterlife," though one does not need to truly believe in such to follow the religion, by any means.

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

I think you have been reading too much Varg...

 

[Έρεβος]

I think you have been reading too much Varg...

Varg has it mostly correct; and no, I've only recently begun to read his articles on myth and paganism. I knew all this long prior to reading anything by Varg.

 

[Jrgen]

If that were the case, then why would they sacrifice things to the gods?

 

[Arthyron]

Hahaha, waging the war on this forum as well, moogle? (he and I had a very similar debate on the Kamelot forums)

I find Asatru interesting, as Norse mythos is my favorite of all world mythos (and I've studied many many mythos considerably). Were I not a Christian, I would probably practice something akin to Asatru, at least in spirit.

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

so why are you a christian?

 

[Έρεβος]

Hahaha, waging the war on this forum as well, moogle?

Here we are: http://www.juliusevola.com/site/neo-pagans.txt

Julius Evola explains it quite well, though the reading is semi-difficult.

 

[Arthyron]

so why are you a christian?

Go visit the "Atheism/Why do you believe in God?" thread, I speak in depth moreso there. If you have other questions feel free to post in that thread and I'll try to get to them.

Here we are: http://www.juliusevola.com/site/neo-pagans.txt

Julius Evola explains it quite well, though the reading is semi-difficult.

As I said on the other forum you posted this on, I don't see the rationale in his argument. He claims that ancient pagan practices were not literal, but he doesn't substantiate those claims with any examples from mythology, archaeology, history, or anything else. He basically says "modern neo-pagans have the wrong idea because their practices start from a Christian-corrupted version of Paganism," without showing examples of this in history or mythology. I mean that's great if he believes that, but I don't see any credibility in it other than the fact that he believes it.

The fact of the matter is there is evidence of human sacrifice and other rites and rituals which would not logically fall in as part of the more pantheistic/symbolic system of Pagan beliefs that Mr. Sevola and yourself are championing.

 

[Έρεβος]

The fact of the matter is there is evidence of human sacrifice and other rites and rituals which would not logically fall in as part of the more pantheistic/symbolic system of Pagan beliefs that Mr. Sevola and yourself are championing.

You don't get it, not even close. Do you think he denies that there was [animal] sacrifice? (There was very rarely human sacrifice in any but very ancient pagan systems, such as Sumerian and Babylonian) Of course he doesn't, and of course he doesn't deny that they believed in their Gods. You missed everything that was said in that article, it seems. The meaning of paganism is not what the common people "believed in and practiced," but rather which is evident in paganism itself. It is a complex system of values/concepts and spirituality that evolved with the people of Europe, in different forms that all basically were the same in a fundamental manner. The rituals and sacrifices were much more symbolic than anything, they were tradition, culture, a way of showing the people something physical to "connect" them to their "religion" in a clear and evident manner. Obviously the majority of individuals aren't going to understand the full symbolism and poetric truth that was/is deep within the pagan "teachings," but rather the literalistic entwined with the symbolic to maybe simplify it for them. Their faith in the literal deities, though ignorant, made this vital system of values become something "sacred" to the people, something they would die to protect and never forsake. This ensured the survival and thriving of the European people, not the literal beliefs themselves, but what those beleifs made sacred - the deep meaning and value within paganism, the perfection of the system that evolved to work in symbiosis with the European people, gave them a soul as a people, made them truly proud of their sacred heritage & tradition, made them a strong and heroic people built around the values of heroism and vir, of a non-absolute approach to life, one that allowed them to rather than fear the ever-threatening death, enjoy the lives they had to their fullest. It is something too complex for me to fully explain so simply, as this hardly truly touches on it.

 

[ChadFromCanada]

It'd probably be interesting to read about but you'd have to be about as crazy as Varg to actually practice or convert. That would be the ultimate in sillyness.

 

[Έρεβος]

It'd probably be interesting to read about but you'd have to be about as crazy as Varg to actually practice or convert. That would be the ultimate in sillyness.

What the?

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

It'd probably be interesting to read about but you'd have to be about as crazy as Varg to actually practice or convert. That would be the ultimate in sillyness.

what the hel are you talking about?
Plenty of people worship the gods.

 

[Arthyron]

what the hel are you talking about?
Plenty of people worship the gods.

Less in that vague, pantheistic way, though. As far as I know Asatru and The Odinic Rite are more literal practicioners.

You don't get it, not even close. Do you think he denies that there was [animal] sacrifice? (There was very rarely human sacrifice in any but very ancient pagan systems, such as Sumerian and Babylonian) Of course he doesn't, and of course he doesn't deny that they believed in their Gods. You missed everything that was said in that article, it seems. The meaning of paganism is not what the common people "believed in and practiced," but rather which is evident in paganism itself. It is a complex system of values/concepts and spirituality that evolved with the people of Europe, in different forms that all basically were the same in a fundamental manner. The rituals and sacrifices were much more symbolic than anything, they were tradition, culture, a way of showing the people something physical to "connect" them to their "religion" in a clear and evident manner. Obviously the majority of individuals aren't going to understand the full symbolism and poetric truth that was/is deep within the pagan "teachings," but rather the literalistic entwined with the symbolic to maybe simplify it for them. Their faith in the literal deities, though ignorant, made this vital system of values become something "sacred" to the people, something they would die to protect and never forsake. This ensured the survival and thriving of the European people, not the literal beliefs themselves, but what those beleifs made sacred - the deep meaning and value within paganism, the perfection of the system that evolved to work in symbiosis with the European people, gave them a soul as a people, made them truly proud of their sacred heritage & tradition, made them a strong and heroic people built around the values of heroism and vir, of a non-absolute approach to life, one that allowed them to rather than fear the ever-threatening death, enjoy the lives they had to their fullest. It is something too complex for me to fully explain so simply, as this hardly truly touches on it.

]

Actually human sacrifice was common through most pagan systems. There is much evidence of human sacrifice in branches of ancient Celtic religion, and even your beloved Nordic paganism. Thor was a popular diety by the virtue that he didn't require human sacrifice as Odin sometimes did. And need I remind you of the tradition of "Blot," where people spill their own blood to Odin? Like it or not, humans lost their lives as part of the worship of your gods, though animal sacrifice is far more evident in the Nordic beliefs than human sacrifice. None the less, human sacrifice was still a part of it.

What you describe is common in all religions, not just paganism. I guess when you briefly practiced a Christian-ish religion you never got to fully experience what I have in the over 15 years I've practiced it. All the things you claim come from this method of Pagan practice are things I have experienced in my own practice of Christianity.

 

[Έρεβος]

Less in that vague, pantheistic way, though. As far as I know Asatru and The Odinic Rite are more literal practicioners.

The Odinic Rite is not. If any neo-pagan religion most closely represents what I "follow" it is Odinism, but still not truly.

Actually human sacrifice was common through most pagan systems. There is much evidence of human sacrifice in branches of ancient Celtic religion, and even your beloved Nordic paganism. Thor was a popular diety by the virtue that he didn't require human sacrifice as Odin sometimes did. And need I remind you of the tradition of "Blot," where people spill their own blood to Odin? Like it or not, humans lost their lives as part of the worship of your gods, though animal sacrifice is far more evident in the Nordic beliefs than human sacrifice. None the less, human sacrifice was still a part of it.

That is a myth. Human sacrifice did occur, but it was exceedingly rare. It was by no means "common through most pagan systems," at least the European pagan systems. The Nordic, Germanic, and Celtic religions have very little evidence towards human sacrifice, especially Nordic & Germanic. There is some evidence of it occurring on very rare occasions, but not common in the least. The book "The Barbarians Speak," which I've recently read makes this quite clear. It is about the archaeological perspective on the ancient peoples of Europe, and shows there is very little archaeological evidence in support of human sacrifice occurring often in the least. Not a common or universal practice.

It isn't a qualm to me, by any means, just that I know otherwise. I know it did occur rarely, but again was not a common practice of the ancient European pagans in the least.