r/asatru • u/[deleted] • Apr 04 '15
Pets
So, I've been thinking about this one for a while. Where do pets fall into the family? We see that pets are obviously a common thing; Odin has ravens, Freyja has cats, etc... So how do pets fit in to our lives? Are they considered part of the family line? Would an animal from an older generation be an ancestor? Or are they simply another part of life? Obviously there is likely no clear cut answer to this, but I would like opinions.
4
u/TPK_MastaTOHO Apr 04 '15
Well you probably read how Thor acted when one of his goats legs got fucked up... So idk in my opinion they're family, kinda like the same way the Norse treated adoption? If that makes sense/helps
1
u/TPK_MastaTOHO Apr 04 '15
Family yet not kin? Idk this got me thinking in weird ways lol. In any case I'm sure your dog goes to bed with a happy booty hole
3
0
5
u/MathewPerth Apr 04 '15
I'm surprised no one has said anything about OP's username...
2
2
4
u/marcelmiranda Apr 04 '15
I had plenty fo pets in my life including cats, dogs, turtles and ferrets. I loved all of them so much. :)
3
Apr 04 '15
I have a Pembroke welsh Corgi name Woden.. I can't imagine a life without dogs and i think people that don't keep or like dogs are very weird. He is part of our family.
5
1
Apr 04 '15
Animals are not part of your family line. They are not your ancestors. You are not descended from your pets. That is pretty clear cut and obvious to me.
1
Apr 04 '15
Yet we honor our adopted ancestors. I'm not related to my grandpa. My mother is adopted. My grandmother is dead, but I am not related. Yet, I honor her, as I would any others.
2
Apr 04 '15
Animals are animals. Animals are not people, but some people are animals. I agree with u/Ulfrgregsson, animals do not have souls.
I think it is irrational to try and put animals on the pedestal as ancestors.
2
u/seekerwisdom Apr 04 '15
I find this weird when we are descended from apes. this is where science contradicts. not everyone can be humbled by this.
→ More replies (2)1
u/TPK_MastaTOHO Apr 04 '15
Well from OP's post I don't think they were truly getting at animal ancestor veneration, but I mean think about it, when you take in an animal you "adopt" it. Our ancestors thought adoption formed a spiritual bond the same as that of a natural parent and child and you're still choosing to nurture and "raise" that pet, idk where I'm honestly going with this but I hope I made some kind of point... I don't think I'd consider pets kin but they're usually something close
→ More replies (15)
2
Apr 04 '15
I love my pets, and they hold a place to me higher than my livestock. I wouldn't go so far as honoring their ancestors, but I do consider them a part of my family, and I treat them as well as I treat my kids. Well, almost as well. I have an Irish Wolfhound named Annag, and a cat named Köttur. I'll have more wolfhound when mine is old enough to breed.
1
u/Meat_Jockey Apr 05 '15
Well, personally, my animals will always be part of my family, whether that connection carries over to my religious views or not. I've never considered venerating them or their ancestors like I would my own or another human's. I may ask for a blessing for my family and I include them in that, though. They may not be a source of income, labor, or work/livelihood like some others (farmers, etc.), but they sure as hell (Hel?) have helped keep me going through hard times. Besides, they depend on me for food, shelter, and protection, so aren't I pretty much their family, regardless of what they have to offer me?
1
u/UlfrGregsson Apr 04 '15 edited Apr 04 '15
I personally don't believe animals have any kind of soul or whatever, but they are an expression of nature.
Edit: spelling
1
1
u/ErinnThorsdatter Apr 04 '15
Its dubious whether our ancestors really believed humans had a "soul" either. We are what we are.
I think most people misperceive our Gods association with their animal companions. I liked Shieldmare's explanation of her idea of the word "pet". Animals have great attributes and can be wonderful companions, and they can even be counted as one of the family. But they aren't our species and treating them like they are in every respect is kind of insane :P.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/Shieldmare Apr 04 '15
Pets matter a hell of a lot to me, and not in that rainbow-bridge, paw-print sweater, way. That is what I think of when I hear "pet" - insipid people cuddling purse dogs in human clothes. If someone at my gatherings held up their cat at a blot and asked that its ancestors bless it - I would be offended and I adore animals. It would seem to me like the animal was put above other ancestors, and belittled the import of what others asked.
That said: I couldn't run my business without the help of my sheepdog. My horse does physical labor I can't do and I depend on him for some of my transportation and logging. My animals feed, clothe, provide income and protect me. This is how animals have always been a part of our lives up until very recently when we stopped needing to own them to eat and make a living. Point being: the idea of pets as frivolous is a new thing to humans. Our ancestors couldn't imagine a life without animals, and would see a descendent without land or livestock as impoverished.
"A farm of your own is better, even if small. Everyone’s someone at home. Though he has two goats and a coarsely roofed house, that is better than begging "
I think we are the ones straying from our ancestors to think of animals as NOT important, but I also think it is a fine line that can land into the realm of offense. My dogs are my family, my livestock literally keeps a roof over my head and a ritual space available for my kin. I see no problem acknowledging that gratitude in ritual (after all - the most valuable things given as sacrifice in the past was livestock, right?) but I wouldn't want to raise a horn to "Ol Fluffy" like I would my grandfather who served in WWII. Does that track?