Intergalactic Summit

My oh my you are selfish.

Accept what? Are you talking about accepting that their little girl became a sansha suporter, and will gladly support some crazy old man's vision. Do you really want them to accept that their child betrayed them?

Sure, sure. Good work, helping, I wonder how long will it last no doubt there are greener pastures and benefactors with deeper pockets somewhere around the corner.

But you are right we are completely out of topic here. Best of luck with your "public record" or whatever your ideals may be.

Actually, the Sani Sabik faith is an offshoot of Amarr orthodoxy. In a way, you could look at it as both sides worshiping God, but from two different angles. Each is heretical to the other, but both have the same theological foundation.

And they've been around for a long, long time. Thousands of years, in fact. From the first days of the Reclaiming. Much of the core dogma remains, but there are some...ritualistic differences. So to call the Sani Sabik faith a "cult" is a bit misleading. Sansha is a cult. Sani Sabik is technically a religion.

double post

Oh, of course you are free to opine as you like without the need to elaborate further. Similarly, we are free to dismiss such opinion without giving any justification, then. That's simply my advice in regard to your post: One I maintain.


Now, I have some serious issues with that statement to begin with:
First, you assert that we share one society. We most certainly don't. A society is arguably a group of people involved in persistent interpersonal relationships, or a large social grouping sharing the same geographical or social territory, typically subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural expectations. People of the Amarr Empire are arguably not involved in persistent interpersonal relationships - at least not as a general rule. They are not one group sharing a geographical and social territory, but two groups with distinct geographical and social territories. They are most decidedly not subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural expectations.
Second, you assume an environment with low transport costs. They may be low for you and me, but the average person of the Empire and Federation doesn't have the income we have. Just to remind you: The wages you pay your crew are so low that they probably don't even show up in your wallet's log. Yes, InterBus is cheap. Cheap relative to the distances traveled and the cost of buying a spaceship.

I think you make the crucial mistake to look at this from a capsuleers perspective. You might be able to even make a strong case for 'capsuleer society'. But outside of it, your case simply doesn't hold up.

Miss Mithra,

To begin, there are many more similarities in the Amarr and Sani Sabik faith than you might think. Sani Sabik came to be as a part of the Amarr religion over 2000 years ago. It was only when the Emperor at that time felt threatened that he declared the sect heretical.

By your definition, the Amarr religion could be considered a "cult" to someone who is not of the faith. One could even argue the fifth point in that the devotion that many people have to the Empress could be considered at least a "cult of personality."

I actually put a great deal of time currently studying the Sani Sabik faith ("Sabikism isn't really a term that is used. Just like no one uses "Amarrism."). I'm something of an authority on them now, I should think.

I will have to correct you on the point that the Sani Sabik faith most certainly worship God. Yes, strength and power are important attributes. More on this in a bit. But there is God, oh yes. Those of the faith connected with Omir Sarikusa follow that path of strength and power because of the nature of the organization. They see what the Empire did to the Takmahl and do not want to meet the same fate. I'm sure your average Brutor feels much the same.

To your other three misconceptions:

1. The use of Blood in ritual stemmed from the same Scriptures that guided the Reclaiming. You simply can't discount how important those Scriptures are to either faith. The focus wasn't so much on the purity of blood, but on the concept of savant and servant.

2. The Savant/Servant dogma continues to this day in the Empire in the holding of slaves. In the past, Holder families would propagate their own bloodline, claiming savant-ism was hereditary, while Sani Sabik believed that anyone could rise to the position of savant if they were pure enough. And blood was the way to discover and assure purity.

3, The concept of immortality goes back to the First Age of the Amarr faith when the Ametat and Avetat were bestowed to Amash-Akura, which reputedly kept him in perfect health and from aging. When the ultra-orthodox (could be read as "purer") Sani Sabik sects were developed, they followed the same scriptures and the same concepts of immortality as the rest of the Empire.

So fast forward 2000 or so years and yes, there has been a degree of change in both dogmas. But they have more than just "some" dogmas and doctrines in common. A great many of them are the same, because they started as the same faith. Just because you are ignorant of current Sani Sabik theology does not mean it does not exist. While the Bloodraiders are certainly the most vocal and aggressive group, don't forget that the original meaning of Sani Sabik was "Bloodfriend."

So in conclusion, it is most decidedly a religion. It has millions of adherents in every corner of the galaxy. It has a rich and vibrant (if occult) culture. It's ties to the Amarr faith are undeniable. The Sani Sabik are certainly heretical in the eyes of the Amarr faith. But they are far, far more than a simple "cult."

A few courses in heresiology is good for formulating an opinion.

I might suggest a few more in History and Comparative Theology though.

Any religion has as many factions as it has members. Indeed, the path to God is always a personal journey.

It could be argued, that since it was based in Amarr orthodoxy and didn't change to say, allow King Khanid's actions, that the Sani Sabik might be closer to ancient Amarr faith than it is currently.

If you seriously think there is no savant/servant orhodoxy currently in Amarr, you are very mistaken. One need only look at the rise of the Empress. Amarr finally has an immortal leader.

And you should take a very close look at scripture again if you don't think it's penned in blood. Indeed, blood is a powerful metaphor in the early scriptures. Historically speaking, the Amarr faith has spilled far more blood than any mere Sani Sabik.

Ms Mithra,

You've missed my point. It is not the fact that you asked for elaboration that upset me - I'm normally quite happy to go on at length about any paticular matter, as you'd see if you looked over my post history on this forum.

What upset me is that you: One, Instantly assumed my opinion, written obviously in brief, was just as shallow as that and nothing more and went straight to attacking me for it; Two, condemned me again for having the audacity to not have dumped a wall of text on the forum right right off the bat after I had gone out of my way to attempt to clarify; And three, spent the rest of your post talking to me as if I was a child that had scuffed your boots. ("Why don't you lecture yourself"? Really?) Even now you're still adopting a tone as if to suggest I've somehow personally wronged you.

No matter how good an arguement you might make - And I do, in spite of this, admit you had some perfectly valid points that in normal circumstances I'd be happy to discuss - you're not going to convince of anyone of anything with that attitude, as I'm certain you well know. You are not my schoolmistress, Ms Mithra, and it is uncivil of you to talk to me like one.

(For the record, I apologize if I myself appeared a little short in my initial reply to you, as well, but I don't believe I came close to attacking your intellect in the way you did.)

I would agree with this, well most of it.

I most certainly am not a follower of Sani Sabik. However, I should like to point out that the holy scriptures of the Amarrian faith are comprised of hundreds of thousands of volumes spanning over tens of thousands of years. Everything from animal drawn carts to hover cars are referenced within the sacred texts.

Blood is, for all of us, faithful, heathen, and heretic, human and animal, the very essence of life.

Blood is a powerful metaphor which relates not only to one's own heritage, as in 'Blood lines', but to our emotional state as well, such as 'Blood boiling'. To engage in the most holy act of War is to spill the blood of others, as well as to have our own blood spilled in the process.

Even amongst the most primitive of cultures, there is the understanding that blood is the essence of life itself.

How is it possible then that in the holy scriptures, which do indeed reference all possible life situations and answer all possible questions, that the word 'blood' is never mentioned even once?

Have you never cut your finger, Ms Mithra?

Certainly as a woman such as myself, you have experienced your 'special time of the month'. Are the hundreds of thousands of volumes of the holy scriptures spanning tens of thousands of years completely silent on such a thing?

As far as the difference between Doctrine and Dogma, perhaps you could help enlighten us.

Is it doctrine that the sacred flesh of the Empress should never be cloned, or is that dogma?

Honestly like most Gutter Posts, people would have had a few laughs and maybe had a good think about how (though exaggerated) silly we can be. The Gutter Press though possible of being offensive allows a bit of self reflection after all is said and done accompanied with a laugh or two.

Since every one is getting so serious and letting this topic spin out of control allow me this one opportunity to put this thread back on tracks, failing that your free to return to mud slinging.

Many points in Amarrian faith do not make sense in this day and age. I'm not talking about many of the current laws but the older traditions. Things such as what to eat, clothes you can wear, who your can marry, who you must avoid, ect. Some people have taken it on themselves to argue that many of the modern Amarrian are straying from the old ways.

The reality is far simpler, we are free to eat these foods because science makes them safe, they are not forbidden because they are evil, they were forbidden because our lack of scientific knowledge could not promise safe consumption.

With that mindset lets return to the topic at hand. One would argue that marrying within the faith is also an old worn rule. That in this modern society we do not live in such a feudal system that one must convert to the others faith like in days of old.

Well this is very true I'm sure even half of you are witness to the drama on of arguing parents and broken homes. Why would one add to the possibility when married life is already difficult by having a mixed faith home? Its important to have couples on the same page on many topics. Emotions run high during marital disputes and its important to have that framework.

When science or human society comes up with a cure for that stress then marry who you see fit, till then I recommend you cling with those of your own faith.

Personally, after being interviewed by the journalist who wrote this article, I have this to say.

The idea of people actually attempting to lecture Nicoletta Mithra on religious matters, is hilarious.