Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
Was lava diversion considered against ancient Hawaiian Kapu or is it just a desire amongst the Hawaiian people to not allow diversion of the Lava in modern time?
If it's a modern desire and not an ancient kapu... why the desire?
I understand there is a tradition of welcoming the lava that Pele has sent down and I understand she is thought to reside within Halema'uma'u crater on Kilauea and is the goddess of all volcanic activity in the Hawaiian islands.
Is there really a difference between running a D-9 ripping and rolling or moving rocks she has position elsewhere to new location constructing a wall or temple vs. diverting a flow? I'm trying to understand why some activity of altering the landscape is okay vs. Other actions such as diversion are not okay. Each are inherently large scale alterations of the landscape... so why is the molten lava any different?
I'm just trying to wrap my head around the position.
Posts: 3,035
Threads: 201
Joined: Aug 2006
"Thanks Carol,
I'd like to know something else also. When is Pele no longer present or is she always present? I.e. is she present only in the form of hot lava or is she also present in the solidified lava too? Many cultures inclusive of one of my cultures (Native American, English and Norwegian), the Native American culture side saw Nature in everything inclusive of many spirits within the animals etc. I've heard it expressed as Pele is Nature but I don't want to assume that's strictly the case from a few comments. So my question is, Is Pele present everywhere or is she exclusive to Lava and if exclusive to lava, in what forms?
Maybe this should be slide over to the Puna Talk forum. I'll post these questions in the other forum as to allow this thread to go back to the topic. Sorry."
I'm bringing over Wao nahele kane's post from the other thread just to maintain continuity.
The thing I do know is that the Hawaiian's had distinct names for virtually every landscape feature, especially along the ocean, and that there are stories that go along with each name. That usually implies a culture that considers the total landscape to be "sacred" or at least all the named parts, and here it seems everywhere had a name. I do not know how that ties in with the reverence for Pele, but cultures that view most or all of the natural landscape to be sacred tend to be pretty uninclined to change the landscape as part of their world view. Pele would be especially sacred because of her ability to both destroy and create new land.
Part of the problem for those of use who were not raised close to, or part of, this culture is we have to understand a world view where the prohibition against something like diverting lava could be so built into all aspects of the culture that they didn't need a specific prohibition against it, it was just unthinkable.
I hope those who are more knowledgeable about this bring their mana'o to the discussion.
Carol
Every time you feel yourself getting pulled into other people's nonsense, repeat these words: Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Polish Proverb
Carol
Every time you feel yourself getting pulled into other people's nonsense, repeat these words: Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Polish Proverb
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
I've heard of such sacred places and one that comes to mind are the rocks below the botanical gardens in the ocean.
So, if these sacred places exist and the lava covers them up, what happens to the previous sacred place? It's just lost to time with another lava flow that covers up the old sacred place? So in time a huge number of these sacred areas below kilauea are lost forever sooner than later with no diversion effort to save them a while longer. Correct? No desire to save some of these ancient places from inundation for future generations to see? I understand that eventually this whole area will be under a probable depth of several thousand feet of lava but to not salvage what one can while they can is somehow not making sense to me.
Let's take the Giza plateau for example or any ancient monument. I think everyone would agree that efforts to preserve these sites is of importance for all humans but since Hawaii has few of these sorts of monuments it would seem all the more reason the Hawaiians would want to preserve as many sacred sites as is possible. I can only imagine the sites that have been inundate in just the last 30 Years.
Okay, I get it, let it be covered up, lost and eventually forgotten. It's unavoidable anyhow.
I'm glad we still have a few native American mounds left in the States... not much left overall but there are those, perhaps some more archaeological dig sites laying about and the tales of long ago. But inundated by lava is pretty much not retrievable.
I just sort of wonder if the position wasn't more something inspired by missionaries rather than Hawaiians. Sort of like - Ah its just gods will and all, nothing you can do about but give thanks and become more like us as your history is entombed by rock. Let's face it, that was the missionaries quest.
Posts: 10,377
Threads: 345
Joined: Apr 2009
Kane,
Wish you kept things short and to the point, because:
"So, if these sacred places exist and the lava covers them up, what happens to the previous sacred place?"
is a really good question.
Human beings tend to have beliefs. Some are bizarre, some are downright outrageous and scary. On the other hand some people have strong beliefs about their own culture which may seem strange to some but need to be respected. I have no problem with local folk believing in Pele even if I can't quite figure it out. This is their home and has been for centuries, and we need to respect that. On the other hand, when you come across the same thing but it's presented another way (I'm thinking ISIS/ISIL) then I'm sure even you'll agree the rest of the civilized world needs to react. I don't think we're quite at that point in Hawaii.
Just to end this - I'm a scientist and the Pele or God thing doesn't come into that realm, so I tend not to discuss it unless I see something particularly silly.
Posts: 2,244
Threads: 396
Joined: Nov 2011
Mahalo, Mr. Tom. You are indeed a true Englishman, Sir. Honor and integrity is rare. Mahalo for your mana'o, and understand (to some extent) the scientist point of view. There is common ground somewhere.
(Pssst...groundbreaking on Mauna Kea is upcoming! Very exciting times as we "evolve". Sir. [ ] Trying to find the "balance". (Apologies for the O/T, our aloha to Pam, please.)
JMO.
Posts: 10,377
Threads: 345
Joined: Apr 2009
Thank you, Opihikao.
Science only deals with things that are testable. If they are not they are not part of science. People's beliefs are not testable and are therefore not part of science.
I have my own views about god or pele but they are, by the definition above, my beliefs. I can also tell you that the TMT has done all they can to respect the local Hawaiian culture (I assume that's what you are referring to when you mention groundbreaking on Mauna Kea). Imiloa was built and designed to embrace both science and the Hawaiian culture and much of the money for that came from the observatories.
Kane's questions is still a good one though!
All the best,
Tom
Posts: 2,244
Threads: 396
Joined: Nov 2011
quote: Originally posted by TomK
Thank you, Opihikao.
Science only deals with things that are testable. If they are not they are not part of science. People's beliefs are not testable and are therefore not part of science.
I have my own views about god or pele but they are, by the definition above, my beliefs. I can also tell you that the TMT has done all they can to respect the local Hawaiian culture (I assume that's what you are referring to when you mention groundbreaking on Mauna Kea). Imiloa was built and designed to embrace both science and the Hawaiian culture and much of the money for that came from the observatories.
Kane's questions is still a good one though!
All the best,
Tom
My brother is of like mind with you, Mr. Tom. Purely scientific. However, when something "happens", he is on the phone calling to see "WTH was that?" LMAO! [ ]( Sorry, he is very scientific given his "job" and lifestyle, and it's entertaining to see the "rude awakening" of sorts.)
Kane has his question, and I trust he will find the answer when he does his homework.
Have a lovely evening, Sir. I am going to listen to some Pavarotti (Sorry all for the OT).[ ]
JMO.
Posts: 1,930
Threads: 71
Joined: Jun 2012
quote: Originally posted by Wao nahele kane
what happens to the previous sacred place?
This is a western mainlander view, to develop a preconceived notion then proceed from there as if it were fact. The western view is the Hawaiians made every thing and place sacred willy-nilly. In pre-contact days, this would earn a skull bashing for breaking kapu. It would be to not have a shred of understanding of the kahuna and mana. The mana is only of importance to Kane, it means nothing to Pele and what she giveth, she taketh back.
This actually is an area of deep misunderstanding with the western mind, that Hawaiian sacred places were not to be disturbed. It shows such a lack of understanding it is difficult to even know where to begin, but the best example is the Naha stone.
"We come in peace!" - First thing said by missionaries and extraterrestrials
*Japanese tourist on bus through Pahoa, "Is this still America?*
Posts: 10,377
Threads: 345
Joined: Apr 2009
PT wrote:
"This is a western mainlander view, to develop a preconceived notion then proceed from there as if it were fact [...]"
Sorry, but that's nonsense. I've come across preconceived notions from people from around the world including Hawaiians and many others. So many people here seem to love lumping everyone into a group so their arguments might appear to have some validity.
quote: Originally posted by Wao nahele kane
Is there really a difference between running a D-9 ripping and rolling or moving rocks she has position elsewhere to new location constructing a wall or temple vs. diverting a flow? I'm trying to understand why some activity of altering the landscape is okay vs. Other actions such as diversion are not okay. Each are inherently large scale alterations of the landscape... so why is the molten lava any different?
That is an interesting question. I don't know the historical answer and am not trying to say I do.
But to share the thought that comes to me when I read this -- the lava flowing is alive, a present act if you see it that way, and the intention is unknown (again if you see Pele at work in the flow).
In many myths of creation around the world, the gods scatter and break and build and flood and resurrect as part of the process, but they don't care too much if humans come after and mess around with the aftermath.
They don't appreciate humans who interject themselves into the process while it is happening. At that time, men need to stand back and watch the gods create and destroy.
You might say that the old landscape has been handed over to other processes, human, wind, erosion, and so forth. Pele would not be very interested in that any more. But to divert a lava flow that is coming, that is like standing in front of the demi-goddess and saying, "you shall not pass." "Go that way not this way."
That's not the behavior of worshippers and believers.
In older societies, when something was built, there would be a sacrifice. It was understood that respect must be shown and thanks given, and something of worth given so that the newly built would be acceptable.
I'm sure you know about the ancient tradition of the cornerstone, the foundation stone, and the role of Freemasonry that still takes part today in laying that key in public buildings.
D9 bulldozers being OK? I have no idea, but would be interested to hear.
Kathy
ed to ad, speaking of Masonic traditions -- is well known that King Kalakaua was a 33rd degree mason, Grand Master, and the first formal dinner of Ioloani Palace, which he had built, was a Masonic function.
|