The Evil Holy Book that Never Was.

Lodi

I posted a while ago in the rants thread about my dislike for the Apocrypha, which ultimately inspired me to wright a new holy book for Mhaldor. But, with the current epic changes (R.I.P Apollyon!), its now pretty meaningless in parts. Thought I'd share it here. Once this event is over and the dust has settled, I may attempt a rewrite.

@Vasool @Boosteya @Xer @Jiraishin @Antidas @Kaevan @Rakon

You guys seemed a bit interested in it. Some of you just liked my original post in rants, others spoke more directly, so I thought you may like to read the final product.

Enjoy!

The Book of Provenance.

Lodi

Oh, in the past some people have not be able to respond to my threads on this board. If you want to leave a message and can't, can you message me so I can try and get the bug fixed. Thanks.

Antidas

i would like this so many times if I could. Waaaay better than what we currently have. Should ask tecton or whoever if we can try to get it implemented

Lodi

Glad you like it, heh. It took me months to finish. Did a tone of research into RW theological beliefs for it and, well, trying to work Mhaldor's current mishmash of ideologies into an epic, history spanning framework doesn't half hurt the brain at certain times.

I'd love it if @Tecton gave clearence for it to be implemented. I e-mailed a copy to Apollyon when he return, but he didn't get back to me for obvious reasons. Once this event has finished, I'll be rewriting if people want me to.

Sherazad

Yes please at rewriting it.

Silas

I'd have reservations about making this official game canon, since it goes way too in-depth for the scope of something like this. It's a really interesting read, don't get me wrong, just makes it a bit too easy to argue Evil, when it's already easy enough.

Jiraishin

I think it's interesting, and a much better work than the Apocrypha. I'm not sure I like it, however. Something about it seems off-- I'll probably comment again later when I've had a chance to reread it in more depth and check out a couple of things IG.

Alynna

I've been pondering such a work myself. With the year of Keresis resentment, I felt I should wait. Perhaps when this event is over it is something that can be worked on and developed to reflect the new status quo.

Tecton

I'll take a look through it when time permits (probably after the conclusion of this event), but I don't have any objections to expansions to that part of the lore!

Lodi

@Tecton: Thank you so much! I've taken a few liberties in it, which can be removed if they clash to much with existing lore. All of them done with a solid reason though, so I can explain if you wish. Thanks for saying that you'd take the time out to have a look when you get a chance, means allot to me.

@Jiraishin: I'd love to hear your feedback. I know you got allot out of The Book of Suffering's Law. This works very different. Its more narrative based, although it draws heavy influence from the writings of Aliester Crowley and Hinduism, just as Suffering's Law did.

Jiraishin

I'm still mentally working through it, but here are a couple things:

1. The references to Oppression and Suffering from when Shaitan was still Dreadlord Shaitan.
I know that they are part of the Aspects of Evil, but Suffering and Oppression really came into play at the Sundering and not before. Those two domains made sense within the framework of how Shaitan and Apollyon were combined and split. It seemed like Suffering and Oppression became -defined- parts of Evil because of the events that took place and the subsequent dominant place of those concepts in the Twin Lords' natures. It makes less sense to me to say that they were there and defined all along.
I actually feel fairly strongly about this, but if I say much more I'm going to end up using quotes and re-arranging this post way too many times for organization and clarity, which is effort I -should- be putting into my homework right now.

2. The descriptions of the Truths' representatives.
Maybe I am just strange like this, but the appearance of things IG and particularly the colors mean a lot to me. I can definitely see the Hindu influence here, which is neither a good nor a bad thing (for me at least), but the colors and the faces and the lotuses are just incredibly jarring. It could be a description of myth, yes, but not any myth I would associate with Achaean Evil. Likewise, the creation story doesn't do much for me despite how well-written it is because it doesn't feel right for the world. I think that is getting into a separate discussion, however.

Perhaps use Greek concepts or names, given the setting of Achaea and some of the words used to frame Apollyon's concepts? It added a lot to my experience knowing that Adikoi meant unjust, Aletheo meant truth, etc.

Vayne

I can see some conflict and overlap with Kabbalistic ideas.

edit: Used "some" far too many times.

Beya

Please be very careful with terminology that implies other ideas. 

For example, the praising of Shaitan in brackets after the name could be seen as very offensive.

In addition, Sat-Chit-Ananda should be renamed in greek terms, as @Jiraishin mentioned for the same reason.

You want to distance your terminology as far from the source concepts as possible. As @Babel once said, it's okay to take ideas from other media, so long as you chop it up fine enough for it to be a flavouring spice as opposed to the main dish (or he said something similar and less fancy).

I would also agree with @Silas, where you have Evil as being the core of Ayar. That puts an unnecessary weight to the balance of debate.

Vayne

Beya said:

Please be very careful with terminology that implies other ideas. 

For example, the praising of Shaitan in brackets after the name could be seen as very offensive.

In addition, Sat-Chit-Ananda should be renamed in greek terms, as @Jiraishin mentioned for the same reason.

You want to distance your terminology as far from the source concepts as possible. As @Babel once said, it's okay to take ideas from other media, so long as you chop it up fine enough for it to be a flavouring spice as opposed to the main dish (or he said something similar and less fancy).

I would also agree with @Silas, where you have Evil as being the core of Ayar. That puts an unnecessary weight to the balance of debate.

Perhaps change it to "Logos" instead? Reminds me, someone did Dark philosophy in a Vedic tradition, I cannot remember who wrote it though. A series called the "Brahman Darkwalker."

Tvistor

I was informed by a very intelligent gentleman that the Apocrypha was a near direct copy from some Christian dealie. I haven't had time to verify that myself and this was a long time ago, but apparently it also explains the missing verse.

Vayne

The Apocrypha is a bunch of selections from the Psalms, Pentateuch, and Gospels.

Tvistor

Man, that is weird.

Lodi

Thanks for the responses and criticisms I'm going to have to rewrite about 90% of it anyway, so they will all be getting taken into account when I do so. My next attempt is going to be radically different to this one.

In many ways your comments have confirmed a number of fears I already had. Even though I'm happy with its wordsmithing, I think I've tried to be a bit too clever. Ultimately I've ended up obsessing over incorporating a number of neat little ideas at the expense of overall acceptability within Mhaldor (although a number of Mhaldorians do seem to approve of what I've done) and Achaea as a whole.

When I re-right I'm going to be stripping it seriously down to the bones. This will shorten it greatly as well. Its a touch to long at the moment I feel.

I'm going to respond now to a few points. Sorry for the essay.

@Jiraishin

"It seemed like Suffering and Oppression became -defined- parts of Evil because of the events that took place and the subsequent dominant place of those concepts in the Twin Lords' natures."

I've always hated how Suffering and Oppression where brought into being actually. There was need for a second God to help run Mhaldor (as I'm sure you know), but every time a new Divine was imported in to assist, most Mhaldorians eventually forced them out. For some reason many Mhaldorians cant RP absolute obedience to the Gods (which sucks), I mean, just look at all the fuss around Keresis.

The work load needed to be split, so to get around this the Admin literally split Sartan. The RP reasons crafted to justify this are, well, flimsy at best.

I think you may be getting hung up over the fact that, according to current lore, Suffering and Oppression didn't exist before the sundering. The point of this work was to expanded heavily on current lore and not be shackled to a simple, conservative interpretation of it. A complete re-hall of something that, in all honesty, has become very bland and dusty over the years. That's one of the reasons Mhaldor has been struggling. We're just not exciting ideologically any more.

The concept that Oppression, Suffering and Vengeance reflect the Three Ages of Ayar (Creatore, Maintainer and Destroyer) and in turn, the Three Ages of Creation, is a far more beautiful and well rounded concept than, "Competely out of the blue, Sartan split into Shaitan and Apollyon, with Shaitan announcing 'I was training Him all along!' Bet you guys didn’t see that coming, did ya?" and "This is Keresis. She's Evil now. Deal with it."

Also, the way the Three Ages ultimately work into and expand upon the idea of Judgement Day is an aspect I love the most. The Age of Destruction (whats dealt with in the last chapter) has some waaaay cool stuff in it.

“It could be a description of myth, yes, but not any myth I would associate with Achaean Evil. Likewise, the creation story doesn't do much for me despite how well-written it is because it doesn't feel right for the world. I think that is getting into a separate discussion, however.”

Cultures change over time. Current 'Achaean Evil', as you call it, is a very, very different beast to the 'Achaean Evil' that existed back in Ashtan under Sartan. Because of this, the idea was not to create a work that culturally echoed Mhaldor.

Provenance is meant to be the holy scripture of a lost Evil civilization, written sometime after the Chaos Wars but also a long time before Ashtan and Shallam where founded. Obviously, this culture wouldn't be anything like Mhaldor. Its symbolism would, therefore, be radically different to ours. Much in the same way that the Bible tells a story that is foreign and exotic when compared to the Catholic Church and its European setting.

The imagery that I chose is a purposefully done hint at the aesthetic of the culture from which it sprang, not Mhaldor's. Ultimately, the idea that an ancient Evil civilization would be (visually at least) anything like Mhaldor is just distinctly unbelievable.

In other words, the imagery is sometimes meant to jar and stand at odds with contemporary Evil. Its supposed to feel a touch alien and exotic, to challenge overriding social norms and instigate fresh richness within Mhaldors 'old hat' theology. To bring some new life and ideas into things, basically.

In my next attempt I will now be working a heavier dose of Mhaldor friendly aesthetics into the piece. What style of work would you like to see me create? Should I abandon the narrative style in favor of something more akin to 'Suffering's Law'? I'd very much like to hear your thoughts.

@Vayne

“I can see some conflict and overlap with Kabbalistic ideas.”

Yep, purposefully done to create tension between Darkness and Evil.

@Beya

“Please be very careful with terminology that implies other ideas.

For example, the praising of Shaitan in brackets after the name could be seen as very offensive.”

Not quiet sure what you mean by this...

“In addition, Sat-Chit-Ananda should be renamed...”

I totally agree.

“I would also agree with @Silas, where you have Evil as being the core of Ayar.”

One of the key things to remember is that Provenance is the Holy Book of a distinct civilization, therefore it is also a work of political propaganda. How much of it is true and not just a myth said civilization has formed around itself, is open for debate. Much like with the Bible, for example. I wrote the work with that in mind.

This means that even though the theories presented do depict Evil as the foundation of, well, pretty much everything (something Mhaldor already sorta believes), their validity and academic accuracy can still be challenged by non adherents of Evil. Their just beliefs at the end of the day.

Jiraishin

Want to respond now but have to leave Will respond later.

Jiraishin

I have 10 minutes to write, apologies if this is a bit rushed or unclear.

@Lodi
I don't think that including Evil in the nature of Ayar works that well. I agree, after thought, that incorporating Suffering and Oppression from the beginning of Evil would be beneficial, but the claims seem overly grand and the use of the concepts in reference to Dreadlord Shaitan are jarring.

This being the book of a lost Evil civilization makes less sense than it being a lost book of Evil from our current Achaean civilization, which basically began with the world. The Greek theme and Achaea's religious concepts begin with its creation story. The book would be more useful and easier to relate to if its references matched up with the rest of Achaea, even if it is not necessarily Mhaldorian. I think the work is less likely to seem exotic than alien as it is.

Damnit, 2 minutes left. Argh.

I think @Beya was referring to 'hallowed be his name', having looked through the work for references to Shaitan followed by bracketed or parenthetical phrases. I only vaguely know the reference to be religious, but I do agree with him in general. As I said previously on the ranting thread, I cannot type out two of the names you wrote into the intro ritual in your book on ritualism. I can only say them when praying or teaching a child how to pray. Really I shouldn't even be reading them in my head without altering a syllable so they aren't holy names anymore. That's just a minor note, but it -is- something to be careful of.

I would love to see something like Suffering's Law. That was one of the big losses of the Temple Library

Now I'm late. Oh well.

Vayne

I think it would greatly strengthen Evil in the philosophical arena to have an cosmology that could stand up against Chaos or Darkness and is definitely something worth putting an effort into. Something more concise would have more mass appeal though I like it how it is.

I do not think it would imbalance of the argument unfairly, or at least anymore of one than the Nihilists' "inevitable oblivion" or the Darkwalkers "Ain Sof." It would really even the playing frield. As long as it is an argument and not taken universally as truth(even canonizing it would be within reason). People take all sorts of things as facts that are not necessarily true because they fit into their paradigm, so I don't think an Evil dominated cosmology would tip the scales, it would balance it, unless the other factions can't keep up and whose fault is that?

Tvistor

To be honest, Evil is so thoroughly inapplicable in reality that it probably doesn't matter. If we didn't respawn we'd all be so dead it is ridiculous. I'm more concerned with how interesting the new history is rather than how it holds up in an argument. There is a reason that most modern societies have evolved ideals opposed to those of Evil (particularly the part where we don't all die. I am very fond of that part.)

The fact is Mhaldorians are religious zealots (so the actual truth/validity of our religious ideals and history does not matter too much) , and it's hard to objectively prove the truth of what Strength is when everyone comes back to life. I don't think Strength is the ability to take someone out of commission for five minutes.

Otherwise I'd just be walkin' around like "Hey, does this smell like chloroform to you?" 

Silas

Lodi said:

“I would also agree with @Silas, where you have Evil as being the core of Ayar.”

One of the key things to remember is that Provenance is the Holy Book of a distinct civilization, therefore it is also a work of political propaganda. How much of it is true and not just a myth said civilization has formed around itself, is open for debate. Much like with the Bible, for example. I wrote the work with that in mind.

This means that even though the theories presented do depict Evil as the foundation of, well, pretty much everything (something Mhaldor already sorta believes), their validity and academic accuracy can still be challenged by non adherents of Evil. Their just beliefs at the end of the day.

My point here was that, essentially, that's exactly what I'd like to see - this work released as a clear work of Evil, and ideally of mortal Evil. That's what I meant when I said I'd have reservations about seeing it become official game canon - i.e., I wouldn't want to see it being given the same weight as, say, the mythos. Keep it in the same sense as the Apocrypha, as a very clear piece of Mhaldorian propaganda, and something like this can work very well.

Beya

@Lodi "Provenance is meant to be the holy scripture of a lost Evil civilization, written sometime after the Chaos Wars but also a long time before Ashtan and Shallam where founded."

If this is the case, try to embody what Evil is and always has been. Apollyon and Keresis should not be removed (and perhaps don't even need to be mentioned). If the book is written before the sundering, don't mention Oppression and Suffering, but only Evil. Shaitan will be called 'Sartan'. It may also be valuable to you to use words like 'Strength' instead of 'Oppression'. Currently, the work you have looks like an interpretation of a text (not necessarily a good or bad thing), but if you want lots of philosophical discussion to sprout from it, you should make it very open to interpretation.

As to the brackets, @Jiraishin hit the nail on the head. For the benefit of Muslim readers I have censored the name in the extract below. It is typical for the Islamic prophet M*hammad (S.A.W) to be followed by a blessing for him. 

Directly from this text;

"S.A.W. is the abbreviation for the Arabic phrase salla Allahu alaihi wa-sallam. It means "may Allah pray for him and salute him," and is a respectful phrase used only with the name of the Prophet M*hammad (SAW). Western Muslims who speak English often use the abbreviation "P.B.U.H" instead of "S.A.W." - PBUH stands for "Peace Be Upon Him.""

The main idea I'm trying to point at, but not directly confront, is the implication of drawing lines between Lord Shaitan and His realm and external religious figures. Such a comparison may be seen as disrespectful, which obviously is not your point of writing the text, but may be jarring to readers none-the-less.

Phew! I don't remember when the forums were graced with such a dignified discussion. Good work, lads and ladies. This comment took me about an hour to write, rewrite, scrap and rewrite, so I'm hoping it's clear.

TL;DR Brackets after Shaitan not a good idea, excited to see revised version.

Vayne

After reading the OP I went back and took a look at the Apocrypha again. After you mentioned how some parts of the new book might be construed as offensive, @Beya, I thought it funny that whoever copy and pasted the Apocrypha originally didn't see the need to remove the mentions of the tetragrammaton and left all the instances of "LORD" capitalized. I am assuming it was due to ignorance of the meaning behind it.

Jhaeli

I think trying to avoid direct parallels between real religions for the sake of originality and uniqueness to Achaea is a better argument for the lack of "bracket praise" than to avoid it for the sake of possibly offending someone. It's pretty clear that this wasn't done with the intent of being offensive and it isn't being written from the perspective of any real religion, so there really isn't any need to be so politically correct as to require tip-toeing.

To repeat @Beya and @Babel, "You want to distance your terminology as far from the source concepts as possible. [It's] okay to take ideas from other media, so long as you chop it up fine enough for it to be a flavouring spice as opposed to the main dish." This should be because, although influenced by a variety of mythologies, Achaea is still it's own unique environment and the best additions understand and apply the human motivations behind these mythologies without directly re-creating them.

And on the concept of an origin story - there are other Orders that have different origin stories. (The Nerai, for example.) They don't have to be held on the level of the Mythos by Sapience, but they still add an incredibly interesting flavour to an ideology, especially when they're more of a re-interpretation of the Mythos in favour of a particular point of view.

Just my two cents!

ETA: In reply to @Beya below - actually, I just quoted you from above! It doesn't really matter who said it, the point still stands.

Delphinus

I was writing a post in reply, but Jhaeli said basically all that I'd intended to say in the first and second paragraphs.

Beya

And @Jhaeli cleans it up nicely. The main drive should be for originality above all things.

Also, super impressed you managed to find the Babel quote.

Jiraishin

@Jhaeli While it's not something I want to make an issue out of and I don't know if the example @Beya cited is of a similar nature, there is also a difference between offending someone and writing something their religion forbids them from reading.

Jhaeli

Jiraishin said:

@Jhaeli While it's not something I want to make an issue out of and I don't know if the example @Beya cited is of a similar nature, there is also a difference between offending someone and writing something their religion forbids them from reading.

That may be true, but I still think that originality is a better argument against it in this case. That said, we're really just arguing the principle - I do agree that anything directly taken from a real religion should be changed.

Lodi

@Jiraishin: I take your point about Ayar and will be removing that in the second draft.

“This being the book of a lost Evil civilization makes less sense than it being a lost book of Evil from our current Achaean civilization, which basically began with the world.”

‘Civilisation’ didn’t start with the world, it started with the founding of Ashtan and Shallam, imo, as they are literally the first recorded Civilizations. The early humans certainly didn’t have a civilization. A culture, yes, but a hunter gatherer tribal culture, not a ‘civilisation’ – something more akin to Europe in the Palaeolithic.

Civilisation is a very specific social structure that needs certain conditions in which to exist (agriculture, for example). Saying that civilisation started with the dawn of this planet, is like assuming humans have always been civilized. We haven’t.

Also, the ancient civilisation I proposed doesn’t actually spring from Sapience, it springs from the Inferno. Hence the Hindu aesthetic. Indrani takes her name from a Hindu deity and uses Hindu imagery. I’ve taken this as a nod towards a certain aesthetic within the Inferno, which I have carried over into this civilisation.

“The Greek theme and Achaea's religious concepts begin with its creation story.”

As other people have mentioned, many other Orders have their own creation stories that draw influence from outside the Greek paradigm. Hence why it doesn’t matter that what I’ve created fails to fit in with that particular RW mythological aesthetic.

In regards to the other points you and @Beya make, well, to be honest I hadn’t thought of it that way. I’m a Druid and have to deal with my tradition being humiliated and looted for its mythology regularly, so I’m kinda used to it. However, I do take your point and I really meant no offense.

You should really raise this with the admins as well if you’re going to do so with me. They pillage bloody everything. Again, look at Indrani. Her name is taken from a Hindu deity, that could cause some serious offense.

Also, what about the Apocrypha? Or the fact that the Priests of Mhaldor have often based themselves on a Catholic model? We had a ‘Black Church’ with a ‘Black Pope’ once. Lodi’s title (something actually earned within said Black Church) has been ‘Cardinal’ for centuries. The Blood Congregation has ‘Apostles’, ‘Messiahs’, ‘Deacons’ etc.

Mhaldorian's have been saying things like ‘Hallowed be His name!’ from pretty much day one. Its in our prayer books, sermons, rituals... If we start fully going down this path, Mhaldor will have to throw out 90% of its lore and symbolism. We would have to burn down the Cathedral, for example.

I do accept your points as valid and will be taking them into consideration in the future, but taking them to their ultimate conclusion would literally kill Mhaldor off.

“Writing something their religion forbids them from reading.”

That’s me being ignorant there, sorry. I’ll have to change them. I wrote that book around five or six years ago. Their part of Crowley’s Pentagram Rituals, didn’t realise some people weren’t permitted to read them. Your Jewish then I’m guessing?

@Silas: Ah! Cool.

@Beya:

“Currently, the work you have looks like an interpretation of a text (not necessarily a good or bad thing), but if you want lots of philosophical discussion to sprout from it, you should make it very open to interpretation.”

Very good point and it will defiantly be taken on board for the second draft.

@Jhaeli:

“Achaea is still it's own unique environment and the best additions understand and apply the human motivations behind these mythologies without directly re-creating them.”

I’ve generally done quite a good job of that, other than with the ‘Sat-Chit’ part (I’ll be changing that on the second draft). There’s loads more RW influences in there than people have picked up on, which is a testament to this.