The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum

I first encountered this idea in an Heathen context, but I wonder how it would be perceived by people who practice other “pagan” traditions.

So, if most gods are localized, there arises a problem when a worshipper prays or offers to one of these localized gods. At least from this perspective. How do you know you're reaching the person you're proverbially dialing?

Now, there are certain gods who are named for their function. For example, it's possible to refer to Eye of Ra Netjeret as Eye Goddesses, and in referring to them, you may "get" Bast, Sekhmet, Het-Heru, Mut, Wadjet, and several others. Eye of Ra is a job title describing the active, often destructive, aspects of the sun. Hypothetically, a powerful local being could put on this "hat" for herself if she so desired.

That's similar to the actual going idea of how some (most?) "pantheons" of old mesoamerican deities were conceived and how I view my gods.

They're manifestations of a single omnipresent divine source (impersonal, perhaps non-intelligent or at least simply unknowable), whose functions define their existence. Some of them, by that reasoning, are local to their native regions, and others aren't. But they are far from "wights". However, taken to its logical end, that means when the function ceases to exist, or changes significantly, then that named god ceases to exist and goes back to the source to become something else and the new "void" gets filled with the creation of a new god (or I suppose, the extension of one or more others). And in the ancient days, I'm sure this happened all the time.

But for me it falls apart with the wight analogy.

Ah. Why not just say "being" then? Wight is very culture-specific, so if it's used in a conversation, I'm going to make the assumption that the conversation itself is also making those cultural assumptions. I'm also under the impression that not to many other heathens use wight in that way?

"Thor IS the thunderstorm." That is, from the worldview I'm coming from, correct. But the thunderstorm is more than the sum of its parts (as all things are) hence the 'deus ex'. That "more than" would be the god's personality--which gods very much have in that part of the world--however that component is in complete service to their existence as a being of function. (I'm of the opinion that they can switch between being personal and impersonal forces depending on which allows them to fulfill their duties better. The only other options I have to explain the existence of personality and realms of unwavering divine service is that they either lack free will, or that gods are tragic characters who are slaves to their purpose regardless of what they might otherwise want.)

I'll use my rain god as an example, Chaak, whom I am devoted to, who shares many qualities with Thor in function and personality. If we are to assume that he is every thunderstorm and hurricane, as per some lower mythology, then that's what he is. It is also said that the storm is a byproduct of his effects--that there is still more to him than simply that physical manifestation--such as the clouds being smoke from his cigar, and thunder the sound of his giant axe. All of those things can be true simultaneously, just as he can simultaneously be all storms.

Mesoamerican thought also allows for single beings to be "physically" broken into several while still retaining their identity as a single character, like several bodies being controlled by a single source. There's much written about the "four" Chaaks, the "four" Tezcatlipocas, etc. (Four is a number of great significance, though there are groups of other number as well. Mythological characters that come in pairs, like One and Seven Death, are sometimes thought to be a single entity, f'ex.) Anyways, this multiplicity allows for gods like Chaak to embody/rule over different sorts of things and display the appropriate changes in personality as well. A benevolent protector of mankind that sends rain to feed the crops surely couldn't also be the horrible god responsible for flooding villages, sending hail, destroying harvests (and delighting in it) and so on, right? Well, it is the same guy, and he'll be around so long as there is inclement weather on this planet. When (hopefully later rather than sooner) we wind up looking like Mars, Chaak as we know him will be dissolved back into that impenetrable Source, and who knows-- he might find another job as a god of dust storms. But saying that it's still "him" is disingenuous; it's obviously not him. As soon as he loses his domain and his effects, essentially "dying", whatever comes after that for his divine essence is, more or less, a moot point.

Haha, that's ok. There's a whole big book with really tiny text dedicated to this idea.

@Juniperberry: I can't use wight, I'm sorry. It just doesn't serve much use in my worldview. So close, but at the same time so far. :\

Since thunder is everywhere, there's no reason for anyone to think that there isn't a thunder god in their  area. You can visibly see his function in effect, and you can pray to that.