So many people claim a site is sacred, but I've discovered a lot of them really mean they don't want anyone other than themselves and a limited group of others to see the site, use it, or even know about it. These sites aren't necessarily sacred. They may be sacred, but they aren't sacred just because someone said they were.
What, then, makes a site sacred?
I say a site is sacred when there are numena present, spirit feelings that can be confirmed by many people, not just a small group. A site is sacred when it commemorates an event that still lives in memory. A site is sacred when it is used for sacred purposes over many, many years' use and it is still actively used as such. A site is sacred when it holds the essence of a groups' ancestors, like graveyards and burial grounds.
Memory is what makes a site sacred, perhaps it's as small as the spot in the road where a loved one died, perhaps it's a plot of land where rites of passage have been celebrated for generations.
Should we then leave all sacred sites unsullied?
If we did that, would there be any land left for the living?
Thoughts to ponder as the year winds down.
What, then, makes a site sacred?
I say a site is sacred when there are numena present, spirit feelings that can be confirmed by many people, not just a small group. A site is sacred when it commemorates an event that still lives in memory. A site is sacred when it is used for sacred purposes over many, many years' use and it is still actively used as such. A site is sacred when it holds the essence of a groups' ancestors, like graveyards and burial grounds.
Memory is what makes a site sacred, perhaps it's as small as the spot in the road where a loved one died, perhaps it's a plot of land where rites of passage have been celebrated for generations.
Should we then leave all sacred sites unsullied?
If we did that, would there be any land left for the living?
Thoughts to ponder as the year winds down.
Tags: