Kemetic Orthodox / House of Netjer people? Question...

[Meirya]

All right. Please, please, please don't jump on me for this. I've been waffling back and forth on whether or not I should sign up for the new members class over at House of Netjer (which I understand has already started, so I have quite a bit more time to waffle). On the one hand, I like the people I've talked to at the forums, I like the research HoN's done, I like a lot of the conclusions they've drawn. On the other hand, I probably wouldn't go any farther than remetj, I don't agree with all HoN's conclusions in regards to their research, and - well - I've spent a couple hours reading through a very troubling (and painful on the eyes thanks to moving backgrounds, augh!) set of pages on the Almond Jar (http://demipagan.freeyellow.com/).

It's basically a review, exposition, critique etc of House of Netjer titled Meeting the Pharoah: Our Netjer Page (http://demipagan.freeyellow.com/Netjer/netjer-index.html). Some of it I've heard before in various places; most of it is news to me. It's. . . very troubling. I'd like to think well of the House of Netjer; I'd like to join the new members class. But the contents of the above pages really, really worries me.

There's a lot of HoN people here, I know - do you think you could give me some info as to the validity of the claims on the "Meeting the Pharoah" page? They're a couple years old, so even if they were true, things may have changed at this point, I don't know. But anyway . . .

. . . pleasedon'tyellatme?

[Duwayitheru]

Honestly, in this case I'd say it is best to form your own opinion from your own experiance. I have not had the problems, nor agree with much of what's on that page.. If I did, I wouldn't stay with the House. For exmaple I have certianly never once been told to take anything "unskeptically". Not one thing..

[Senushemi]

em Hotep (in peace), Meirya! I certainly wouldn't jump on you for this. If I had read that website before even taking the beginner's classes, I might well have not bothered.

Except for one thing... I prefer to find out matters of faith for myself rather than trusting what a stranger on a website thinks. :)

Because of this, I have found that Tamara Siuda is certainly NOT "just another politician, just another low rent huckster with a storefront." I have found Her to be humble and generous, neither pushing Her point of view on anyone nor insisting on any amounts of money (short of prices already set for optional things like courses at the Imhotep Kemetic Orthodox Seminary, or one of the books She has written, none of which are required for taking the Beginner's classes or even membership in the House).

The only thing She has ever asked is that IF you choose to convert to becoming Kemetic Orthodox, then you "follow the rules" so to speak of performing certain rites and rituals. More importantly, even those of the clergy are free to worship other gods - as long as you do two things; put the Kemetic gods first in your life, and to NOT worship even the Kemetic gods in a way different from "the rules" and still call it Kemetic Orthodoxy. That does *not* mean that you can't cast a Wiccan circle and pray to Isis/Aset... just don't claim that you're doing that as a function of Kemetic Orthodoxy, as that's not how Kemetic Orthodox worship their Gods - does that make sense? Converting doesn't mean denying all other gods, it just means that you are agreeing to put the Kemetic Orthodox gods first in your life.

Remember, taking the Beginner's class does not mean you have to join the House at all. You can simply say "thanks but no thanks" and either remain a guest on our boards, or leave, as you choose.

Joining the House as a Remetj does not require conversion either. You can choose to be one of the "people of Netjer" and be considered a house member without conversion.

You can even become a "divined Remetj" (a divination rite where Tamara Siuda (I refer to Her as Hemet) discovers Who your Kemetic "parent(s)" are (mine are Bast and Djehuty; some have one, some have two) and who your "beloveds" are (I am beloved of Sekhmet; some folks have several beloveds, sort of like favorite aunts and uncles amongst the Netjeru, the different Names that make up Netjer). This divination is the first (and only) thing I've *had* to pay for so far. I chose to buy three of Her books, and make a monthly donation to help support the physical building that houses the House. And still, even after being divined, I did not *have* to convert. I chose to become Shemsu anyway, as by that time, I felt very comfortable with HoN and felt as if I'd finally come home. :)

I suggest you go ahead and try the free beginner's classes and see what you think after that for yourself. Please feel free to ask if you have any other questions, I'd be happy to help, or point you to someone who has the answer if I don't.

Senebty! (be well!)

[kheretsenu]

I have read that website. I just bore in mind that he had his own point of view and intentions. Everyone's work is biased, mine is, his is - but I choose to believe what I believe.

I decided not to believe the site because, well, one of the red flags for me was the size 14 font. A lot of people come to the forums for the HoN with the intention to "discredit" us. And we can never satisfy them because they don't want to change their minds.

He set out with the intention to prove something about Hemet (AUS). He did, for him. It's up to you if you agree.

[maiem]

Many people dislike us, simple as that; just as many people dislike many other people and/or groups. ::shrug:: It's not our, or anyone else's, duty to tell you what to beleive or not to beleive. Some folks have had issues with particular people in the House, but they are just that: problems with individuals, not the entire organization, as no one knows everyone in the temple, especially with the way it has grown in the last only 3 and 1/2 years I have been with HoN. Do I agree with everything HoN members and Tamara Siuda say? Of course not. But I think Hemet is a great woman who does a lot of work for us, and we have many other great members.

To make a shorter statement: If you want to take the beginner's class and interact with other beginners and members, great. It will give you a chance to learn more about other folks as well as the preisthood, and you can decide to leave at any time if you become uncomfortable. If you don't feel comfortable taking the class, that's fine too. No one is pressuring you either way. My main reccomendation is to find out things from your own experiences :)

Ok, so that didn't really shorten it, did it? :P

[OrionNeb87]

You weren't kidding about that background. :foh:

I haven't run into any problems with HON since I joined not too long ago. I actually feel very comfortable there. I'll admit that I was hesitant about joining at first but as the others had said you have to have your own experiences and form your own opinions. Fortunately all my experiences with HON have been great. :)

[Zephyrstorm]

*I just got home from the hospital, but I'll do my damnedest to make sense here.*

Like others, I wa initially skittish about the House, but I decided I couldn't really know what was what until I found out for myself. I'm glad I did.

Let's look at what this person claims about us on that first page -
"To see the House' new initiates going berserk when one argues against their position that the Ancient Egyptians harnessed electricity, and the House hierarchy censoring one in response to that hysteria, should dispel that illusion quickly. However, sometimes the irrationality is not so blatant." -

Please someone tell me that the author's not actually claiming that we believe that Kemet had electricity? if this is in reference to the so-called lightbulb of Dendera - that's been a non-issue in Egyptological circles for years. No such animal.

"Part of the problem is that the House, under Siuda's guidance is, in effect, saying that all such claims are to be taken unskeptically, without any consideration of the possibility that this writer or that might be mistaken, or that some of these claims might have been made out of political ambition."

I've never seen it - my own experience has been that we are told to value our skepticism, to think for ourselves, to come to our own conclusions - not all of us agree on the specifics of our faiths.

"If all other gods are considered to be part of the body of one's own god, then one's priesthood will grow greatly in power, and one's temple in wealth."

which is why the live donations portion of the website continually shows the House coming up in the red financially. :p http://www.kemet.org/rtd.html

"As usual, they simply proclaimed their own interpretations to be dogma, equating teaching with group memorization, overlooking the truth that the true teacher doesn't teach her students what to think, but how to think - a process which is ill-served by rote memorization."

wow. just wow - we're each given so much to memorize. Yep. in fact, we're handed the names of our gods and the ritual of Senut, and told to go out there and learn the rest on our own - we can rely on each other for insight, but its our jobs to learn for ourselves.

"But then, when one's real focus is on selling merchandise and lessons, and maybe seeing how many members one can get to "tithe" (turn over 10 percent of their incomes), the truth will tend to take a back seat to politics."

I feel very welcome at the House, but you know... I've donated twice in my year there - once in someone elses name, and never more than a few dollars. I can't afford more than that, and they understand that fact. It's not about the money - it's about the relationships, with the Gods, with each other, with Ma'at. :)

And then we see what I suspect is a part of his true complaint with the House:
"It is, as we have said, one reason why we are as conservative in our mythic reconstructions as we are, and not open to the suggestion that we "update" them, to make them more politically correct - they would lose their force as sacred literature, and would no longer allow us to connect to the gods."

Kemetic Orthodoxy doesn't claim to be reviving the entirety of the beliefs of Egypt - we take what we know with the best information available, a dash of personal gnosis, and we definitely update the concepts.
I'm not much for slavery, nor for dynastic succession - and a hundred other little things that the ancients believed in.

*shrugs*
Some people don't get along. Some people do.
I for one am glad I could look past my hang ups over the House, because some of the most awesome folks I've ever met are there. :)

I hope that makes sense and isn't too harsh or whatever.
Zeph

[Duwayitheru]

wow. just wow - we're each given so much to memorize. Yep. in fact, we're handed the names of our gods and the ritual of Senut, and told to go out there and learn the rest on our own - we can rely on each other for insight, but its our jobs to learn for ourselves.


It's not even recomended to do Senut from memory, because then it would lack the heka of the written word.. ;)

[Erincelt]

Honestly, I couldn't even get through that article. The web designer in me was having a seizure, and my eyes were watering. So, if I am to respond to any specific allegations, someone will have to itemize the points of the article for me.

However, I do believe I can say the following and be relevant.

I have spent nearly three and a half years now on the House. I can honestly say, I regret none of it.

I am proud and confidant in calling Hekatawy Tamara my Nisut (or "King" if I must) and I am fully cognizant of what that actually entails. She is the hub of this crazy wheel we call Kemetic Orthodoxy -- not so much because we revolve around her, but rather because she keeps us all connected, both to each other and to Netjer.

I am proud and confidant in accepting Heri-Tep Hem Netjer Kai-Imakhu Antybast as my "high priest." Why? Because he shows integrity, because he shows knowledge, and because he shows humanity. He is chosen by Netjer, and by the people he serves, Nekhtet!

I may report that at no time have I ever been told I must pay for something. In fact, the one thing that is ordinarily brought up as the sole case of requisite moneys -- the Rite of Parent Divination -- doesn't even apply to me, as I was scholarshipped in because of a lack of funds at the time. (Being unemployed has its drawbacks, you see.) Since then I have made a few voluntary donations, and have bought a couple of things (the 42 Purifications booklet, and Her Holiness' "Ancient Egyptian Prayerbook" project). Do note, of course, that I got something useful for my money, and that the money involved wasn't much. (Shoot, the Purifications booklet cost me a whole ten bucks, came with an autograph, and has become an integral part of my personal practice.)

I can report on the strange but fulfilling dual nature of Kemetic Orthodox practice: that we are in fact part of two religions at once. There is the State Religion which adheres strictly to the dogma and rituals of Kemetic Orthodoxy "Proper", then there is the Personal Religion which it is up to me to define/discover. We spend the vast majority of our time concerned with the Personal Religion, which is strictly between us, Netjer, and our Akhu.

I can report that since "converting" (I am a Shemsu after all) to Kemetic Orthodoxy, I have actually had more (previous) questions answered, than I've had new questions asked. (Not to say there haven't been any new ones! Oh heavens!) This may seem strange to mention, but the point here is that, rather than "giving" me new beliefs, the House has in fact confirmed old ones for me, and helped to finally flesh them out.

The House is my home. Though I do stray a bit... being a devout Lycian Wiccan since even before joining the House, after all. ;)

[Meirya]

*nods* Thank you. I wasn't taking the site as gospel truth or anything, but I was doing some research as I decided whether or not to take the beginner's class; there's enough about the House that makes me hesitant as is, and so I've been looking around and asking around to get a feel for things for ... about a year now.

(Yes, I move slowly and carefully.)

I've been filling out the beginner's class application for the past month, actually (again, taking my time); but I'm still hesitant. You all have reassured me somewhat; it doesn't seem there'll be any harm in taking the class, anyway, as it doesn't require conversion or such.

Thanks for the input!

[Zephyrstorm]

:) Not everyone is meant to be a member of the House, because different paths work best for different folks. So long as the Gods are happy with the direction you are facing, I wouldn't stress too much.

The beginner's class was a great experience for me, but I wouldn't look askance at anyone who didn't feel they could take it for whatever reason.

[sonofthemummy]

Hi;

When I first came across the HON website years ago, I felt that some really important work was being done. At the time, I was a member of the Church of the Eternal Source. But, since my mentor, their Thoth priest passed on, I haven't had much reason to try to interact with them. And, I also like the Nuhati Fellowship, and have corresponded with HH PtahMAssu over the years.

But, I am 49 years old and have been at this since about age 16. And, as a servant of Thoth, you might imagine that I have a strong focus on intellectual independence. Also, since my first teachers were native Egyptians, that is another facet helping to guide my work.

Fyrekat is the #1 blogger with Kemetic concerns, that I know of. Philosophically, her ideas really resemble the CES more. But, I think that she is really attracted to the social amenities of the HON. My question is, do you think that there is some way that people who admire and respect HON can be of any service without becoming too involved?

The reason I ask is that there are some things I really like. But, since I am about 11 or 12 years older than Her Holiness, I have my own ways, ideas, thoughts, and interpretations, and am trying to make it on my original path of trying to build on the work of Thoth's priests in a discreetly Hermopolitan way.

Love,

Bob

[kheretsenu]

Em hotep, Bob!

I think I understand what you mean - the closest thing I can think of is that we have a level of membership called Remetj. This is not as much of a full conversion as Shemsu-hood (which is what I am, as well as several of the other posters) - it comes after taking the Beginner's Course and one is considered one of the "people of Kemet." ("remetj" means people.)

I understand hesitance about taking the Beginner's Class, but as it's free, I don't see any risk in it. After all, it's free information that you can add to your own personal store of information that you use in making decisions. Personally, I appreciate any information about the Netjeru I worship; even if I disagree with it, it helps me solidify my own beliefs.

I guess I think that Remetj are "being of service" to the House because they help let people know we exist, and lend their knowledge and support to the group.

Good luck to you no matter what you do.

Senebty,
Kheret

[Senushemi]

em Hotep, Bob! Good to "see" you here. :wave:

Thank you for sharing. I agree with Kheretsenu - take the beginner's classes just to learn what HoN is really all about, if nothing else. Then you can stay on as a guest, choose to be Remetj, or simply move on if it's really not your thing. You could even go so far as to be a divined Remetj without converting to Kemetic Orthodoxy.

I can relate to being older than Hemet (AUS) and having ones one mindset - of course, mine has been vastly different from yours over the years (all the time you spent with Thoth, I spent with Jesus). But hopefully, people learn and grow over time. I know I have, and for me, part of that growth includes HoN. It might not be the same for you, but again I have to agree with Kheret that simply being counted amongst "the people of Kemet" (which I think you already are, btw... ) is a great place to be. :)

You have my "number" - IM me sometime. :chattin:

[NefertSatSekhmet]

I would definitely recommend taking the beginners course, even if you are unsure about HON. I took the beginners class that ended in June, so I can say first hand what it is like.

In the beginners class you get to read all about what they teach and believe and how they do things. You get a chance to interact with members and other beginners both on the forums and in live chat should you choose to attend. Any questions you may have can be asked in either format, and you will get honest answers. At no point was I pressured or told what to believe, everything was left up to me. You can choose to participate as much as you want or feel comfortable with.

At the end of class you are given a few questions about the class, not a quiz, but more how you felt the class was and what worked and what didnt, and they ask you if you would like to stay on as a remetj. Again, no one pressured me to convert or stay, I felt comfortable to make the descision on my own. I really did enjoy it.

I am currently a remetj, and would like to become a divined remetj. I am still undecided about whether or not I want to become a shemsu after my RPD. I can't stress enough that at no time have I felt pressured to convert or anything. It is a really nice place. Everyone has really made me feel part of the online community there.

Like others have said, it is not for everyone, but I think that if you are interested at all, you should take the beginners course because after that you can really make an informed decision.

[sonofthemummy]

To all of you for your kind and helpful responses. What I am getting is that the HON doesn't ask for oodles of cash, nor do they expect anyone to "take it on faith" as to this or that. As possibly the largest Egyptianite organization, it has set up certain structures according to instructions by Sekhmet and Neith, it seems, in order to cope with the incoming recruits from Abrahamic dharmas.

I have a story. Years ago, I attended a Baptist church where the pastor was one of the most sought after speakers. I believe him to be a reincarnation of Amunhotep III. When he and his late wife visited Egypt, the authorities were reluctant to let her out of the country without carefully checking her papers, because she looked so Egyptian.

He was away, one week, and his very dry, sort of hayseed seminary professor was delivering the sermon. At one point, he said, "And Jesus said, 'I will make you fishers of men'." Just then, I could see a transparent astral form in the seat in front of me. The guy had a white robe and a pony tail, so I assumed it was JC. I leaned forward and whispered, "Why didn't you throw this one back?" He turned around and said, "StarKist can do that: I can't." But, when I saw his face, it was not the face of Set, the usual Jesus, but of Thoth, who seemed to be masquerading as Jesus in order to influence the affairs of a church that was certainly more intellectually inclined than most. Evidently, the gods do "get around", and often, you find Them just where you need Them.

[Erincelt]

There is an Egyptian legend (sorry but I don't remember its common "title" or such) that mentions Djehuty/Thoth guiding a boat of men back to Greece, from whence they originated. (I think the story had it that they had run aground at Egypt in a boat that was sinking, so they were headed home from a near-fatal voyage.) The legend says that Djehuty Himself stood at the prow of the boat to see them home safely, and that the Egyptians watching from the shore observed His form and features gradually shifting, such that just before the boat was out of sight, He had become the image of Hermes instead!

Your story just made me think of that, for some reason.

[Meirya]

When I saw his face, it was not the face of Set, the usual Jesus, but of Thoth, who seemed to be masquerading as Jesus in order to influence the affairs of a church that was certainly more intellectually inclined than most.

Somehow, that makes a lot of sense. I've seen/heard/sensed/intuited Djehuty and Jesu having long intellectual discussions and plotting things before. Then again, the two people in the room were myself (Kemetic) and a Gnostic, which might've had something to do with it. . . .

[sonofthemummy]

I have read that website. I just bore in mind that he had his own point of view and intentions. Everyone's work is biased, mine is, his is - but I choose to believe what I believe.

I decided not to believe the site because, well, one of the red flags for me was the size 14 font.

Are you speaking of that Hellenic pagan guy with the many pages of angry talk where he even quotes the Pyramid Texts at length in order to harm himself? The large comic font looks kind of ranty, huh? My essay pages are in 14 Bookman Old Style because I am getting old. : >} I can't get away with being that ugly, because I'm not that witty.

But, I think he thinks he got insulted and has a real axe to grind. But, on the KOL boards, that is where I find some voices that seem as if they are "out to get" HON. I mean, if you are right, why be bitter? I understand that if we are going to do our best to go about things in a proper and consistent way, we need "standard" procedures. There are some places flakes just don't belong.

One of the epiphanies of my life was when I read Peter Gabriel's comment that, though religion pursues Truth the way art, science, and philosophy do, it often falls down with the snag of the "institutional interpretation". But, I don't notice too many Egyptianites being assertive of non-existential insights. Maybe a healthy dose of shamanic background can keep purist Egyptian pagans from succumbing to the temptations that Abrahamists so often have.

In Egypt, we had shrines and temples and splendid festivals to remind us that, as the Dalai Lama said, religious belief is a "luxury" compared with the essential practice of kindness. Beliefs really didn't enter into Egyptian ritual so much as direct perception of the psychically sensitive theurgists of the pleasure of the gods. Even when the god minions come with a message, it may not always be something beneficial without deeper investigation and wise response.

http://pics.livejournal.com/bubbahotep111/pic/00012y84

[La Fortuna]

Em Hotep !

There certainly have been many great replies on this subject. I will, however, put my two cents in.

I converted to Kemetic faith through HoN about seven years ago.

For the most part, I enjoyed it and learned a few things. My main contention is that I took great pains rearrange my schedule for many of the general meetings and the Saqs and 90% of the time, they were cancelled or rescheduled. I became very frustrated with this and moved on.

Additionally, I felt that the ceremonies and teachings were leaning a little to far into Vodou and Yaruba instead of plainly staying with Kemetic ancient teachings. (Just my opionion and feeling, not necessarily accurate).

For the most part, I think it was a good introduction to Kemetic beliefs for me. As some of the other folks here, I am older than the Nisut and most of the crowd was quite young (a good thing), however, it was difficult to relate sometimes because I am older than most of them LOL.

However, most of the experiences I have had and the information I have garnered through my own research and practice fall more in line with Rosemary Clark who heads the Temple Harakhte. She has been at it for over 30 years and certainly is quite knowledgable. Since I have read her books, The Tradition of Ancient Egypt and The Sacred Magic of Ancient Egypt, I have seen results 100% of the time. I was so impressed that I entered her Seminary Program which is quite reasonable in cost and very rich in information.

If I were you, I would not listen to a lot of negative chatter. Make up your own mind. I think HoN and the Nisut have good intentions and she does an awful lot of good work as far as I can tell.

The true test of any path to determine if it is valid is to decide if you are receiving actual proof. By this I mean are you successfully seeing manifested phenomena in the areas of spiritual, material and physical. All of them. If you are not, then perhaps the guidance of someone with experience can help you attain success or perhaps that particular organization or path is not for you.
If you are getting results, then you are on the right road. I would say this is true of any religion or path.

Well, good luck, you can always PM me if you have any more questions or just need support.

La Fortuna:fpraise:

[Khesretitui]

Most points I would bring up here have been covered, but I will throw out this one tidbit that has not been addressed:

By official House of Netjer records, roughly 50% of the students in each Beginner's class choose not to stay on. A good number of those who do stay remain Remetj. So you would not be in poor company should you do so.

[Zephyrstorm]

_pounce_ Khesret, you deserve huge kudos for what you did at retreat. :hugz:

[Meirya]

Additionally, I felt that the ceremonies and teachings were leaning a little to far into Vodou and Yaruba instead of plainly staying with Kemetic ancient teachings. (Just my opionion and feeling, not necessarily accurate).

*nods* I've noticed that as well. I'd been doing a lot of reading on Kemet (namely egyptology books and some stuff from HoN and Per Ankh) and then went to an informative workshop/seminar/discussion of Vodoun and Santeria. Now I know where so many of the concepts and ideas in KO and other modern Kemetic places come from! There were some very striking similarities.

Another apparent source (among many others, of course) is Serge Sauneron's "Priests of Ancient Egypt". I was reading it and there were a lot of parts where I'm going "Wow, I've read that almost word for word at HoN. o.o"


However, most of the experiences I have had and the information I have garnered through my own research and practice fall more in line with Rosemary Clark who heads the Temple Harakhte. She has been at it for over 30 years and certainly is quite knowledgable. Since I have read her books, The Tradition of Ancient Egypt and The Sacred Magic of Ancient Egypt, I have seen results 100% of the time.

Mmm. Results are all well and good; if something works for you, then it works for you, and that's great. For myself - I try to make sure that what I'm using is at least mostly historically accurate; I think it's respectful to worship the gods in the manner of their culture, though of course with any necessary alterations for those methods to be relevant and feasible in my cultural context as well.

I've flipped through Clark's books a couple times and haven't picked them up though I've seen them at Half-Price. I don't remember why I didn't pick them up; something didn't sit right, but I can't remember what it was. I might have to look at them again; I'm looking at Amazon and Google and a few other places for reviews, and they're all good. So... yeah, going to have to look at them again, because I can't imagine why I didn't pick them up.

My criteria for books on Egypt:

1. Bibliography. If it doesn't have one, it's not worth it unless it came very highly recommended to me by several people I know to be knowledgable.

2. Original sources (as in translations of the Egyptian sacred texts). If Budge is the only translation listed in the bibliography, it's not worth it. Budge on a bibliography does not immediately disqualify a book for me, because he can be useful and relevant, so long as he's not the only translation on there. Faulkner is a big plus, but there's a lot of other good translations that aren't Budge. The book should have at least one original source (other than Budge) listed in its sources/bibliography/whichever.

3. Set. If the book is all "Set is the Egyptian Satan" then it's probably not all that good/accurate about everything else, either.


If I were you, I would not listen to a lot of negative chatter. Make up your own mind.

Making up my mind on insufficient information or warped information doesn't work too well; I need good information and input from as many sources as possible before coming to a conclusion. I probably will take the beginner's class, as then I'll have slightly more first-hand information, but I am trying to get as many reviews, critiques, and opinions (both positive and negative) as possible. Some people will see / have seen things that I won't or haven't and, while I need to use liberal amounts of salt, I believe I also need to consider various opinions.

[OrionNeb87]

My criteria for books on Egypt:

1. Bibliography. If it doesn't have one, it's not worth it unless it came very highly recommended to me by several people I know to be knowledgable.

2. Original sources (as in translations of the Egyptian sacred texts). If Budge is the only translation listed in the bibliography, it's not worth it. Budge on a bibliography does not immediately disqualify a book for me, because he can be useful and relevant, so long as he's not the only translation on there. Faulkner is a big plus, but there's a lot of other good translations that aren't Budge. The book should have at least one original source (other than Budge) listed in its sources/bibliography/whichever.

3. Set. If the book is all "Set is the Egyptian Satan" then it's probably not all that good/accurate about everything else, either.



I have to say, pretty good criteria there, especially the last one. I use that often as an indicator of how good a book on this topic is. I've even run across a few books mainly on the Gods/Goddesses that leave Set out completely.

Anyway, carry on with the conversation. :hahugh:

[La Fortuna]

Hi Meirya!:wave:

I certainly agree with your book criteria. I have, also, always made it a point, especially in my lectures, to emphasize the importance of documetation and historical evidence. I would not knowingly present any information that was not taken from a qualified or reliable source. Also important is one's own experiences. That is the proof of the theory taking place.

As for Set, Rosemary includes him in every facet of her book. If you understand the total concept in context of how she views the Netjer and the Universe, Set is an integral part of all that exists. In her book, The Sacred Magic of Ancient Egypt she has a great deal of material on Set and a ceremony which reads in part "Homage to you divine ladder. . .I pass through your region to know creation once more. O mighty one of twofold strength, whose kingdom is the northern sky,you are the great crocodile, the great one who consumes my corruption." It is rather long and really quite beautiful. My husand's parent is Set and I would not practice a theology that did not include him.( He is a Capricorn and just through mere observation, I know who his parent is.) LOL Fixed, you have never met anyone more fixed unless it was Set himself.

Here is an excerpt from The Sacred Tradition of Ancient Egypt:

". . .He represents the purely physical, spiritual unindividuated rhythm of nature. These images (ref. to spotted leopard, oryx, pig, ass, boar, serpent, crocodile, turtle) all portray the unconscious, repetitious motion of material life, which swallows, absorbs, and elevates physical survival above all else. Thus Set fulfills the 'Principle of Fixation', which when allowed to proliferate in the physical world functions as corruption"

As part of the Solar Ennead, Set plays a very important part. Without Set, the Egyptians would never have had the hope of resurrection as seen in Osiris. The universe itself was born from chaos as is all of life to some degree. Without the function of physical decay, they would be no renewal. His function is just as important as all the other Netjer.

Anyway, sorry to go on and on. I think you will find that there may come a time when you are ready for her books. In the meantime, any information from reliable sources, and I consider HoN generally reliable, is a good place to start. I found that I needed a good foundation before I tackled Rosemary's books and HoN is a good place to get a solid foundation.

If her biography is correct, and I have no reason to believe that it is not, the Nisut has quite a good education from the Oriental Institute in Chicago.

Well, good luck, and if there is anything I can do, please feel free to PM me.
I will be looking for you success.

Ankh Udja Seneb, UdjatSekhmet (La Fortuna):fpraise:

[Meirya]

I finally remembered what made me wary of Rosemary Clark's books!

From someone from an LJ community: "[Sacred Tradition in Ancient Egypt] is the book that contains the sentence, "Het-Her's two horns contain the solar disk, which represents the New Moon". I don't think I need to say anything else."

From another individual in the same discussion thread: "It's published by Llewellyn (big red flag). She cites Herodotus, who was criticized even in his time for his inaccuracy. She also relies rather heavily on the Corpus Hermeticum and other Hermetic texts, which were originally written in Greek, and which don't give a very accurate portrayal of "un-Hellenized" ancient Egyptian religion. I'm not that familiar with Hermeticism at all, so I have no idea whether she wrote about it well. But if you'd like to read about the religion before it was particularly Hellenized, not a good choice."

The first one I'd heard before; the second one is newer news to me.

[La Fortuna]

I finally remembered what made me wary of Rosemary Clark's books!

From someone from an LJ community: "[Sacred Tradition in Ancient Egypt] is the book that contains the sentence, "Het-Her's two horns contain the solar disk, which represents the New Moon". I don't think I need to say anything else."

I believe that there is a great deal of misunderstanding when statements are taken out of context. I suggest you read the entire book before you judge.
Here is an excerpt from pg. 85 of the Sacred Tradition of Ancietn Egypt":

The Neteru associated with the moon include Het Her, representing the function of conception brought by the merging of Solar and Lunar powers in her fertile womb (First Quarter)."

pg. 203 "Beautiful are the Sun and the Moon, that unite upon the crown of Het-Her, They are the lights that shine forth as from the Beginning. Ra accompanies the barque of the Golden One on her journey, Khons follows in her pathway. Her feet tread upon the heavenly fields wherein all are born. I am blessed by my mother as she travels through eternity, I seek her in the region of dawn, I am rejuvenated by the luminaries that are joined upon her brow." reading further on . . ."Het-Her: make my face perfect among the Neteru, Open my eyes, the Sun and the Moon, that I may see each day." And pg 204. . ."I am she who illumines the darkest places, My power is that which brings light in the Duat. In my seven forms I exist in all parts of the Two Lands, I guide those who harken to the day barque, I protect those who follow the night barque."

The quote "Het-Her's two horns contain the solar disk, which represents the New Moon" , I could not find anywhere in the book. Perhaps you could point me to the page it is on so I can read the context of the message.

Again, I think it is an error to not read the whole book and then judge. Rosemary Clark has over 30 years of research and experience and that is a lot more than I have had. I have read her books and they are very complex, I can see how misunderstandings may arise from those individuals who have not taken the time to read and understand her writings.

Her Seminary program offers continuing learning and explanation of her writings for those who wish to delve deeper. If you cannot afford the $25 per book, then Amazon has some good deals on them. Her seminary program is only $25 per module or praxis as she calls it. A small sum for what I perceive is a lot of useful material.

Of course, her books and her program are not for everyone, it does take a person using their critical mind, using logic and the ability to understand what she is writing. I am certain there are many people out there incapable of understanding certain people's writings. It takes sometime rereading and patience to understand what some people put forth.



From another individual in the same discussion thread: "It's published by Llewellyn (big red flag). She cites Herodotus, who was criticized even in his time for his inaccuracy. She also relies rather heavily on the Corpus Hermeticum and other Hermetic texts, which were originally written in Greek, and which don't give a very accurate portrayal of "un-Hellenized" ancient Egyptian religion. I'm not that familiar with Hermeticism at all, so I have no idea whether she wrote about it well. But if you'd like to read about the religion before it was particularly Hellenized, not a good choice."

If you have no idea about her writings, then I suggest you read them before criticizing them. I think that is only fair, don't you? She makes comment on Herodotus too and acknowledges his inaccuracy. And, truth is truth whether it is written by Hermetics, Buddhists, Muslims or Hindus, I think when you read something in context then you are able to discern. We may not agree with everything thing they put forth, however, we may agree with many things they do.

I think we rely too much on what third parties say in discussion groups who have not read and do not understand someone else's teachings. It is too bad so many people rely on such things instead of doing the work, or research themselves.

Blessings, La Fortuna :fpraise:

[sonofthemummy]

Hi;

I got a copy Rosemary Clark's book about spiritual practice. I paid more than list price for it. But, when I am thinking about buying a book, I ask myself, "Is this going to be worth the price they are asking?" So, although I have not delved deeply into it, the answer is a solid "yes". I haven't explored it enough to qualify myself to discuss it. But, I am giving it a try. But, I have almost never read a book all the way through. I have too many to get to. But, I see that she does good work and I put a bit of money in her pocket and hope that she keeps it up. Her bibliography is a gold mine, if I am remembering correctly. The only thing I would ask her to do is to make her footnotes a bit more precise. When refers to the Sallier I Papyrus or the Ansastasi V Papyrus, she doesn't include the number of the roll in the collection, but refers only to the "Sallier Papyrus" or "Anastasi Papyrus". Perhaps in the next edition of the book, she will make this a bit more clear.

Years ago, I saw a travel guidebook for Egypt. The cover featured a traditionally garbed, very handsome young man with a rather noticable pimple on his chin, which could easily have been lanced and covered with convincing makeup. But, the photographer chose not even to use Photo Shop to smooth it out. I thought about what Horus or Hathor might be trying to say about accepting beauty without taking it to task over something small. I have a copy of an old pagan pamphlet on one of my sites that refers to the ba as the "astral body". This is an error lifted straight from Henri Frankfort. But, both the organization that wrote the tract and the book this comment came from are 95% accurate, so I try not to giggle.

When I sit down to write things about Egypt or its magick, I notice that there is a vortex of power that can be somewhat disorienting. I find that I sometimes am attracted to fanciful ideas that others might find a bit stretchy. One professor said that, as an Egyptologist, he continually finds some untrained people getting excited over the antiquity of objects that turn out to be modern. And, if you look at academic works, one so often notices that wishful thinking can commandeer a treatment which supposedly is being presented within objective parameters. But, then, another scholar will come along sooner or later and adopt a radically different view.

The Hermetica was an effort to move some ideas from the oral tradition to the written one in Egypt, in order to compete with the onslaught of Christianity. As a servant of Thoth, I am particularly interested in some of it. Jasnow and Zauzich have shown that these concepts did to some extent arise from Egyptian thinkers, before being Hellenized. But, they are not essential to an understanding of, say, Old Kingdom religious practice, though some authors like Murry Hope would like to mandate their inclusion to the curriculum. They do show that pagans could aspire to the heights of lofty, spiritual thinking. I have read a passage from the Hermetica on one day and heard an intellectual Christian preacher speak on the same theme, the next. Now, that's good mojo. But, to practice the Egyptian ways, one needs no knowledge of the Hermetica, really. Perhaps to defend them, he or she might.

I think that the rather erudite authoress deTraci Regula said that the red sun between cow horns, as it appears in the crown of Isis, represents the star, Sirius. I don't know if we will ever have hard evidence of a consensus among ancient theologians for this symbol. I think it may even symbolize the red moon we sometimes see in a total lunar eclipse. Sorry if that sounds wishy washy, but it seems that Egyptologists can't really nail it down. They certainly can't nail down the Lunar Disk and Crescent. I keep seeing modern pagans insisting that it is a combination sun and moon. But, of the hundreds or thousands of depictions I have seen, the little dot indicating a solar symbol occurs only once, and that may have been a very local, confined rendering. I have seen it with the caption "Moon" in a papyrus.

HON quotes extensively from Sauneron? Cool! Their initiates seem to be getting more open minded and tolerant, as time goes on. Most every fun group goes through its "Flat Earth Society" phase. I guess it's a manifestation of the tribalizing power of Mars. I guess respecting the gods and our kinsmen is more important than subscribing to interpretations that continually change. I think that some Egyptian denominations resonate more with Santeria and Voodoo than others. And, some practitioners find that it suits their needs so, naturally, they want to incorporate it into their regimen and share what they find valuable. But, I don't think I would call a place where such rites are carried out to be an Egyptian temple. The Egyptian temple was the house of the god or a group of gods, not the house of a priesthood or of entities of questionable intent.

Best regards,

Bob

[Etezonael]

While Clark's book is far from the worst reference I've seen, I consider it an introductory level text, kind of the Kemetic version of a 101 book. I disliked her reliance on Budge in her citations, and while there were a few other names on the citations list that I recognized (Wilkinson, Faulkner, etc...) , I was disappointed that she didn't apparently use or cite Pinch's extraordinary work on ancient Egyptian magic. To me it seemed a great shame that she passed up the opportunity to include that or any other respectable academic source on magic in Ancient Egypt in her research. That doesn't mean that what she says is necessarily wrong, it just isn't overwhelmingly supported by her citations.

Like I said, not horrible books, but not particularly useful to a staunch reconstructionist who has already read the same information in Egyptology books with more academic weight. On the other hand, if trudging through thick, often difficult to read, academic texts sounds tedious to you and you don't mind the possibility of a few historical inaccuracies trickling through the Budge translations, it's not a bad primer and certainly better than “Egyptian Paganism for Beginners” is.

Besides, as long as you aren’t taking any single author as the ultimate authority on something (whether that author be academic or not), you should be okay as you can cross reference other materials with what you are reading to get an idea of the bigger picture.

My only issue with Clark is when someone cites her exclusively and than claims that as the ultimate truth, since no human possess such truth and the inadequacies of language itself are limiting in many ways, it bothers me when people do that and don’t accept the possibility that some things an author says may be inaccurate or even just plain wrong (sometimes through no fault of the author who may simply have limited exposure to issues that are not common to the lay person doing moderate research.)

[La Fortuna]

While Clark's book is far from the worst reference I've seen, I consider it an introductory level text, kind of the Kemetic version of a 101 book. I disliked her reliance on Budge in her citations, and while there were a few other names on the citations list that I recognized (Wilkinson, Faulkner, etc...) , I was disappointed that she didn't apparently use or cite Pinch's extraordinary work on ancient Egyptian magic. To me it seemed a great shame that she passed up the opportunity to include that or any other respectable academic source on magic in Ancient Egypt in her research. That doesn't mean that what she says is necessarily wrong, it just isn't overwhelmingly supported by her citations.

Like I said, not horrible books, but not particularly useful to a staunch reconstructionist who has already read the same information in Egyptology books with more academic weight. On the other hand, if trudging through thick, often difficult to read, academic texts sounds tedious to you and you don't mind the possibility of a few historical inaccuracies trickling through the Budge translations, it's not a bad primer and certainly better than “Egyptian Paganism for Beginners” is.

Besides, as long as you aren’t taking any single author as the ultimate authority on something (whether that author be academic or not), you should be okay as you can cross reference other materials with what you are reading to get an idea of the bigger picture.

My only issue with Clark is when someone cites her exclusively and than claims that as the ultimate truth, since no human possess such truth and the inadequacies of language itself are limiting in many ways, it bothers me when people do that and don’t accept the possibility that some things an author says may be inaccurate or even just plain wrong (sometimes through no fault of the author who may simply have limited exposure to issues that are not common to the lay person doing moderate research.)

As I do not depend on Rosemary Clark's books exclusively, but think there seems to be a great deal about her work that falls in line with my independent research and having come to particular conclusions myself, I enjoy her work.

Even my own conclusions are subject to being updated and at times rewritten completely. I do see the logic in her work and I am not convinced that those who have said that they have read it through, have. I, also, believe there are those critics who have not put her hymns and writings to the test, but are still trying to reinvent the wheel.

If one sees it as a primer, how else does one write a book for the general public and expect them to understand it? I am sure that if she was concerned about writing an academic jewel, that she will or may already have done so.

I will always say that someone like her and sonofthemummy who have had over 30 years of experience certainly know a great deal more than I or someone who has only been on the planet a short time.

It is fine to criticize a person's lifelong work if one has something to replace it, however, i would take that criticism with a grain of salt from someone who has had only a few years experience, who is not an Egyptologist, or who is not able to translate from the French or German texts on the subject, or who has some other agenda, perhaps having been rejected by Clark's Temple
Herakhte.

I would like to read your books on the AE religion, what are the titles and where can I find them?

Blessings, La Fortuna

[Etezonael]

It is fine to criticize a person's lifelong work if one has something to replace it, however, i would take that criticism with a grain of salt from someone who has had only a few years experience, who is not an Egyptologist, or who is not able to translate from the French or German texts on the subject, or who has some other agenda, perhaps having been rejected by Clark's Temple
Herakhte.

I would like to read your books on the AE religion, what are the titles and where can I find them?



That was entierly uncalled for. I was simply pointing out that, in my opinion, there are better more complete books if one is looking for serious pre-hermetic reconstructionist information. I am entitled to that opinion reguardless of whether you like it or not and I do not need 30 years as an egyptologist or published books to form said opinion and have it be valid as an opinion.

It sounds to me like you are being a bit over-protective of the book itself. I never said it was bad, I just said it wasn't up to my standards of academic rigor. Make of that what you will, but don't treat treat me like I'm being mean just because I disagree with you and dislike a book you are obviously very fond of...It gets old quickly and is irelevent in the long run.


I'm sorry you feel the way you do. But attacking me won't make my opinion any less improtant than yours. I am dissapointed in your response and the discussion is over for me as I do not appreciate being slighted over mere opinion. I have better things to do with myself.

[sonofthemummy]

Hey, you two ladies. I appreciate the insights of both of you, so please don't quarrel. You both have so much to offer. We are talking about the value of ideas. No need to get personal, right?

I really like the term Pre-Hermetic Reconstructionism. Actually, I had never seen the phrase, before, except in my own humble writings.

Vireonefer alerted me, some months ago, that the publication by Jasnow and Zauzich of the Book of Thoth, a Demotic composition that demonstrates the Egyptian origin of central Hermetic ideas, had been published. So, I am waiting for my copy to travel from Wiesbaden.

I think that one trouble with the concept of Kemeticism is that it is naturally an American strategy for tapping into the traditions of Native Egyptian Religion. And, most Americans, being involved more with doctrines and interpretations than gnostic practices, are rather alien to its bearing, no matter how greatly they appreciate it.

Some years ago, the late Thoth priest, Rev. Don Harrison, said to me; "I think each cult should go its own way." That is, each archetype has followers who form societies with different structures and goals. And, indeed, this was how it was in Egypt. Even when one cult center rose to administrative supremacy, it built up its own temples. It didn't march into other nomes and do harm.

Thus, I describe myself as a Hermopolitan. Some people want to say that if you are a Kemetic you should believe this or that. But, I think that the Wisdom Literature and the Funerary Literature point the way to right action. They are not great springboards for the kind of dogma one finds in Abrahamic faiths.

As time goes on, Egyptianite pagans will realize this, and I think they will come to better appreciate the multiplicity of approaches that we had in Egypt. As a servant of Thoth, I think that Crowley is naturally on the reconstructionist reading list. For a follower of Bast, however, we might find other authors to be more pertinent to the general program.

[La Fortuna]

That was entierly uncalled for. I was simply pointing out that, in my opinion, there are better more complete books if one is looking for serious pre-hermetic reconstructionist information. I am entitled to that opinion reguardless of whether you like it or not and I do not need 30 years as an egyptologist or published books to form said opinion and have it be valid as an opinion.

It sounds to me like you are being a bit over-protective of the book itself. I never said it was bad, I just said it wasn't up to my standards of academic rigor. Make of that what you will, but don't treat treat me like I'm being mean just because I disagree with you and dislike a book you are obviously very fond of...It gets old quickly and is irelevent in the long run.


I'm sorry you feel the way you do. But attacking me won't make my opinion any less improtant than yours. I am dissapointed in your response and the discussion is over for me as I do not appreciate being slighted over mere opinion. I have better things to do with myself.

Sorry you were offended, I was speaking generally for the most part. If you took it personally then I have no control over that.

I found your comments to be condescending and without any information to back up your statements.

As to my remark on anything you might have written, I was very serious as to whether or not you have anything written that is better or more informative.

I am protective of no one, one's work speaks for itself.

I get very tired of hearing from people who criticize work and have not read or understood it. If that is not the case with you, then fine. Your opinion is not a problem, however, your ciritcism is. It is without documentation or references to what you are talking about specifically. To dimiss someone's work in the entirety or refer to it as a primer may not be fair or acurate. This kind of opinion is often read and misquoted by others and can turn into a bash fest of people who have not read the work nor put the theory into practice.

If you desire to criticize someone's work, then please be fair and accurate. Refer to specific points or ideas and explain why you think they are in error.

I don't believe that I said "you" anywhere in my post except to ask to see your books that you have written because you sound as though you are quite well read on the subject of Ancient Egyptian religion and may have perhaps written something of value.

I have great respect for peoples opinions who do not present their opinion as fact. I have a difficult time accepting those who may be condescending to other's opinions as I felt you were toward mine.

Blessings, La Fortuna

[Erincelt]

Here is my take on Rosemary Clark. Now, bear in mind that I do own two of Clark's books ("Sacred Magic..." and "Sacred Tradition..."), and have read both a couple of times through. So, while I'm not exactly a "fan" I am a reader, and enough so to spend the money twice. :)

Clark takes an (admitted) symbolist's view on ancient Kemet, which is a lightly debated approach. Many do consider her work more suited for a western occultist's work (such as the various Hermetic strains), and less so for archeological or reconstructive/reinterprative works (of which KO, Per Ankh, and others are exempler). It is noteworthy that many times her ideas (and those of her predecessors) contradict or at the very least deviate from those held by others, including established stances of Egyptologists at large. It is noteworthy that sometimes a stone is just a stone, a tree is just a tree, and that a symbolist's approach to things tends to negate that simplicity.

However, given the "punniness" of Kemet, and given the definite "mystery school" seeds present there, I have found her material valuable at times. It can be useful to poke one's head outside of one's box now and then, leading to fresh insights from an angle you might never have taken on your own. So no, I don't agree with everything she asserts -- possibly not even most -- but I don't discount her entirely either. Her work suits her target audience just fine, but I happen to be standing just a couple of feet out of that audience, that's all.

Okay, return to your regularly scheduled debates. :)

[sonofthemummy]

So, she is a bit more adventurous about some things, and willing to "go out on a limb" in order to explore the possibilities hidden in a myth, it seems. This is kind of fun, and I think that pioneers of new insight like Joseph Campbell dabble in this area, from time to time. I think that she was originally a FOI priestess, though now she seems focused on a sort of Heliopolitan reconstruction effort. She doesn't seem to me to be encumbered by superfluous generalizations, the way some people seem to be.

But, you know, contemporary Egyptologists have little time for the idea that the concept of Netjer goes beyond the scope of the Didactic Literature, since He is not found in any ritual or mythical text. Yet, even Egyptian native Moustafa Gadalla seems to honor Netjer as a sort of Egyptian equivalent of the Native American "Great Spirit". So, I guess we don't have to be strictly limited by scholarly consensus if it arises from a Christian, Atheist, or purely rational viewpoint. Or, are Kemetics professing a belief in God in order to escape persecution, like the crypto-pagans in Egypt must? Or, perhaps, they are a more diverse group than other types of votaries that describe themselves with the same designation? I see more respect as time goes by, in some enclaves, less in others.

[Ishtara]

All this debate made me curious, so I got myself the two R. Clark's books mentioned in this thread. Nothing like a good controversy to boost sales, right? ;)

I plan to start reading "Sacred Tradition in Ancient Egypt" tonight. I will come back to this thread once I am able to form an opinion on these books :)