Now I'm really confused. I read the BBC report, and I don't really
understand what's at stake here.
Robert is asking whether this was or was not "a ritual killing of some
sort."
Mogg says that Washington says it was not a "muti" killing, and I guess
that it was blamed on the "babalou." He says, apparently, that a
particular piece of mythology about "Ori" (possibly related to the
Santeria term orisha?) makes human sacrifice impossible. Have I got
that right?
Assuming I have it more or less right, a couple of questions:
1. Why would we assume an absolutely consistent orthodoxy among these
groups, in Africa and elsewhere, such that any particular practice might
be a priori exclusible?
2. What is a "muti"? What is a "babalou"?
3. In what sense does Washington represent (as in speak for) the people
accused of involvement with this crime?
4. Supposing that this is a deviant group of some kind, why does that
make the murder not "ritual" -- or was that claim made?
Chris Lehrich
A R W Forrest wrote:
>I've had some involvement in the scientific investigation of Adam. If it wasn't
>a ritual killing of some sort then what might it have been? That's a genuine
>question, not a retorical one...
>
>Robert Forrest
>Quoting Mogg Morgan <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>
>>Dear all
>>
>><cut> ps: went to an excellent lecture by Colin Washington - who is a lukumi
>>priest but with a lot of experience of western occultism (see blurb) he
>>mentioned his appearance on C4 to discuss the issue of Adam as a supposed
>>'muti' killing blamed on the 'babalou?' - he explained how there was a
>>specific piece of mythology to do with Ori - that contains an interdiction
>>on human sacrifice with its 'historiola' - so he thought the whole thing was
>>a bit of a put up job - i'm trying to get him to write some of this up for
>>the next issue of our newletter mandrake speaks - but can i also recommend
>>that he be invited to speak at future events - as he is v informative.
>>
--
Christopher I. Lehrich
Boston University
|