Tidying up offerings

close
more_vert
Squid Tempest S
Squid Tempest May 20, 2010 13:25:42
Replying to Alfrede

Alfrede wrote:
hmmmm - Preaching indeed.

I would be interested to hear who gives you the authority to decide another human beings personal offerings are 'detritus' and 'rubbish'?
And the presumed right to move in and 'tidy up' a location where their religious practices are taking place?

If you ever go to another part of the world, like India for example - would you take a bin bag and tidy up all the 'rubbish' offerings at their sacred sites too.
Or maybe thats different? not 'British'?

It would be very easy to see a degree of arrogance and ignorance in your post - lets hope thats not the case. But it might also be worth considering that there may be things going on that you are totally unaware of - next time you reach for the knife and binbag. Perhaps a heartfelt healing ceremony for a friend or relative with cancer (prayer rags on trees etc) ... just perhaps?

The fact the farmer cut down the thorn tree is the most disgraceful part of this. A tree that has taken years to grow in that special place and yet you sympathise with him? - curious indeed.
As for the pottery cow, where is he now ? in a land fill site?

Alfrede

If people really feel the need to offer up something at a site, there is always the option of a simple prayer or song, as suggested in the original post. Anyone who thinks that leaving bits of rubbish around by way of an "offering" is a good idea is not only deluded but is destroying the natural appearance of a site for others. Looked at like this it is a selfish act, and one to be discouraged. Sorry, but that is how I feel about the practice.

H Hob
Hob May 20, 2010 18:10:52
Replying to Squid Tempest

Strongly agree with the above sentiments by Mr Tempest.

I also think Claire has the same authority as the rest of us to spread the word about being sensible on the matter. It's not arrogance any more than it is arrogance to think that the tat* one leaves should have special status just because one has certain ideas about their significance as offerings.

People do have a right to leave tat at sites, but other people have just as much right to remove it.

In reference to sympathising with a landowner who removes a bush that has been targeted for tat offerings, how would the tat offerers feel if some farmer decided that the front garden of aforementioned tat-mongers was actually a spiritually significant place to farmers, having once been used many years ago for the rowing of wheat, and thus it was appropriate to leave an offering of wheat nourishing slurry all over the garden? Slightly flippant question I know, but you get my meaning.

Hmpf. Spiritual geocaching.

*And as a person who collects all manner of tat, I do not use that as a necessarily pejorative term.

T thesweetcheat
thesweetcheat May 20, 2010 19:20:39
Replying to Squid Tempest

Yes, with you entirely Squid. This is a road that has been trodden on previous TMA threads and I suspect there will never be a complete consensus - and where would be the fun in that anyway!

"Tat" (whether perjoratively described or not) can never do anything to enhance a site to my mind. The only arrogance going on here seems to be the arrogance that makes you want to impose your "tat" on other people and places.

However, my front garden used to be sacred to a long line of gold- and silver-smiths, so if anyone would like to come a drop some bling off, that'll be okay with me.