would you be comfortable elaborating on what it means for a statue to be a fully consecrated idol? what makes them different from the others? would love to know more!
TL;DR: skip to adaptation section.
First to clarify, I take the Sumerian approach to "cult statues" and apply it to both my Sumerian & Hellenic items because they are a joint/mixed practice. I've mentioned before I often lean Sumerian even though I study and incorporate both. What we know of Sumerian religion is essentially what was important to the public cult. We have some knowledge of domestic worship but not nearly enough for me to reconstruct/revive (maybe if I was an Assyriologist with university accesses, alas I am not). So when I revive Sumerian practice I focus on what was important to the cult and adapt it to modern home worship.
The cult statues and temples were of the utmost importance. So in my practice altars & idols (I prefer this name over cult statue) play a big role, albeit altars did from the very beginning— Mesopotamian practice just reinforced it.
Throughout history, cult statues in the Near East had an extraordinary position that was markedly different from the status of cult statues in Greece and Rome. In Mesopotamia, cult images were considered living entities that could breathe, eat, and sleep, whereas in Greece and Rome they functioned as a potential point of contact between the god and his worshippers. In the ancient Near East, priests were in charge of the sacred nature of these statues, and together with the king they safeguarded the sacred lore concerning the outward appearance of the gods. The iconography of such statues was often considered god-given and was thus slow to change.
— Representing and Naming the Gods. Iconography and Nomenclature of the Goddess Allat in Palmyra and Hatra by Lucinda Dirven Link
"The Gods manifested themselves on Earth through the vehicle of their cult statues. Without exactly being the god, the statue was regarded as much more than his or her image, since it was imbued with (but did not in anyway restrict) the divine presence."
— An Illustrated Dictionary of Gods Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia by Jeremy Black and Anthony Green. Page 55-56 LINK
"Purposeful omission [of divine names] is seen in its most extreme form in the records of cult statue destruction, of which there are only two attestations. Deported cult statues were largely treated with respect, depicted in the reliefs of Tiglath-pileser II as being carried away intact by the Assyrian soldiers and even placed in temples or given to Assur. The destruction of a cult statue, on the other hand, was an act of violence against the divine, even more so than deportation. The rarity of attestations for destruction of cult images is in itself indicative of the severity of such an act. The circumstances in which a polity's gods are destroyed are likewise extreme in nature - only as a result of what Richardson terms "total wars" were such measures taken, namely as part of Sennacherib's war against Babylonia and Assurbanipal's war with Elam."
— State-Sponsored Sacrilege: "Godnapping" and Omission in Neo-Assyrian Inscriptions by Shana Zaia. Page 38-40 Link
From the end of the third millennium B.C onward, Mesopotamian gods were worshipped in their temples in corporeal manifestations as living, anthropomorphic cult statues. Given the centrality of these statues to the cult, it may be assumed that a ritual for assimilating the finite, physical image to the transcendent, intangible god and transforming the humanly manufactured icon into a living deity was one of the most significant practices in Mesopo-tamian religion.
— The Mesopotamian God Image, From Womb to Tomb by Victor Avigdor Hurowitz Link
The process by which a cult statue was transformed from a piece of carved stone to the actual manifestation of a deity is through a ritual called the mis pi, or "mouth-washing." By this means, ritual specialists transferred the deity from the spiritual realm to the physical world. [...] On the second day a ritual was performed where the cult statue's mouth was "opened," and only then could the statue enter the temple. This was particularly important, because until its mouth was opened the statue was unable to eat bread, drink water, or smell incense. It thus appears that washing the mouth purified the image from human contamination, but opening the mouth enabled the statue to function as the deity. Even this important ritual was not enough to consecrate a cult statue. Mesopotamians believed that approval for the presence of the deity in the statue rested with the deity: the deity had to accept the image in order to take it as its own. Once this was done, the statue served as the god in the context of the temple's rituals.
—Introduction to Ancient Mesopotamian Religion by Tammi J Schneider. Page 76-77 Google Books
The most important feature of Mesopotamian cult was the cult statue. Understanding how the Ancient Mesopotamians thought of the statue and how they fashioned them is central to understanding the nature of their religion itself. They thought of their gods as active, thinking, and sensitive personalities; the gods were given anthropomorphic form based on these human characteristics. Statues were made out of an inner core of wood, plated with metal and possibly precious stones or substances; it is not known for certain what these statues looked like because none survive. [...] Once the statue was imbued with the essence of the god, it ceased to be a statue, and was seen as the embodiment of the god. This concept can be seen in certain genres of literature as the statues of the gods are referred to only as gods, not statues. Page 2
Deities seem to have been allowed to abandon their statues if they no longer approved of their appearance. For instance, in the Erra Epic, the trickster god Erra convinces Marduk to leave his statue because it is in need of repair. Marduk falls for Erra’s trap and when he leaves his statue Erra is free to wreak havoc. Page 2-3
The statues of the gods held great importance in that they were the representation, in a very physical sense, of the god in the temple and gave worshippers the feeling they were in the presence of the god. Page 3
—The Phenomenon of God-nap in Ancient Mesopotamia A Short Introduction by Erika D. Johnson. Link
I'm going to use excerpts from very old posts I never reuploaded
Those ancient fervent beliefs about Idols resonate with my soul. Some say that the gods can be anywhere they want to be, at any time, which I agree with. But animating an Idol makes the God tangible & visible, in my mundane, physical space. No astral, or dreams, or meditation; they are there and I am charged with taking care of this beautiful blessing they have given me.
Animated Idols are precious blessing from the Gods to me. It is a blessing they do not need to give me, but I feel as if they do. Their Altar, or shrine if you prefer that word, is the necessary way to take care of them. [...] I get this idea from the study of ancient traditions. Mine being mainly Mesopotamian and Greek. In Mesopotamia the Idols were sacred beyond words, treated like kings, fed, clothed, given water to bathe, entertained with music and dance, 24/7. The theft or destruction of an Idol had devastating effects to a city [...]. An Idol was not a statue, it was the god: "Once the statue was imbued with the essence of the god, it ceased to be a statue, and was seen as the embodiment of the god [...] the statues of the gods are referred to only as gods, not statues,"
[...] Within the Greek domestic setting the altar "constitutes the basis for communion between humans and the divine," without the home altar the "religion would hardly exist" (p. 35). All holy objects of the household are placed on that altar, including statues of the Gods (p. 36). [Labrys Households Worship Link]
The biggest difference between me and the ancients is the visibility of the Idols. In both cultures they were closed away in their houses, the temples; in the Hellenic home it was better to have the main altar out of sight if company was around (iirc), or to even cover it with a curtain if having it out of sight was not possible. With me I rarely feel the need to take down my altar; in fact, I dread the idea of taking down an altar with no plans to immediately set up a new one. I have felt no discontent from any God for keeping my altar up and having their idols in view (granted atm I live in a private basement but I used to have a studio apartment so everyone could see). It does seem strange a bit considering past tradition but, I have no city temples, I have no dedicated spare room in my house, and I am fiercely in love with the Gods— if I trust someone enough to invite them into my home then I doubt they would see aproblem with it. Except maybe a few family members (who can deal with it to be frank). If a God wishes to not be seen I cover their Idol with a pretty cloth.
...the initial request for a God to animate an item I am gifting them and make it an "idol" (consecration) is extremely important. Once something has been consecrated as an idol it never goes back to normal. It IS the God, it contains their essence as they please, it is owned by them, it simply is not 'normal' anymore. Unless I feel it very necessary to do some sort of releasing request to the God, for example if I must dispose of the item such as a paper idol or broken item. "Reconsecration" I do for a few reasons: I feel the purity of the space was diminished, the shrine/altar feels lifeless, I'm opening and using one that had been put in storage for a long time, I'm reconnecting to or doing something for that God in a special way, the idol was actually desecrated. Reconsecration is important, it takes more attention than a general ritual, but its simple. It can be done to multiple idols within the same ritual, except in the case of specific desecration. The initial gifting and request is very heavy and a more elaborate ritual to a single God. I'd never consecrate an item twice.... how do you gift something twice? Its not like the God gave the item back to me so I then somehow regifted it back to them at a later date. This is why they do not return to "normal" and even if they've been in their box for years the item still belongs completely to them and is theirs to animate as they please.
Idols. I don't consider feeling the presence of a God to be a "godphone". It just is, no message attached thus not communication. Mostly because to me Idols are animated and thus contain the Gods presence. I would never call an animated Idol a statue or object, only "Ereškigal's Idol" or "Ereškigal." That's apart of my specific religious tradition mainly from Sumerian and l apply it into my Hellenic practice as well. It rests entirely on my faith; faith that the presence is there or faith that what I'm feeling is their presence. Many of the bullet pointed experiences, such as sensations, have to do with the Idols; which makes sense because of their prominence in my practice and a direct connection to the Gods. But the presence in and of itself I do not consider to be ""godphone.""
From Feeling and Sensing the Gods Ask
Idols are so excruciatingly important to my practice, but it all rests on faith. Faith that they are present in these items. Faith the item I gave was suitable for them. Faith they animate more during ritual. Faith these idols are a strong way they manifest in my home. In other words: I usually don't feel them.
That quote [referring to quote 2 above], for me, will always be true regardless of if I feel them. Even if I never experience anything I listed above ever again I will still have faith this is true. I also have faith my idols are not fully open to the level of temple idols. They regulate their animation because they know me and my capabilities.
Because the Gods animate their idols, even if I cannot feel it. I care for them more. I am more gentle with them, make sure they are shown more attention and care than the simple representations I have for other Gods. Like the quote above says: they are literally some level of the God's actual being in my home in a concentrated vessel (beyond immanence in the world). Not as strongly as a temple of course, but they are there nonetheless. Even though I usually don't feel it.
I cannot be sure if any of these instances are actually the Gods presence or simply the result of preforming a spiritual task that many people across many different religions also feel. I simply have faith that they are (usually) my Gods. I'm sure sometimes I might just be reading to much into something
Technically a person could "open the mouth" and have a separate temple room in their home, with a bed and decorations, feed the God twice a day, dress the God, entertain the God, etc. But thats basically a full time priest-esq job. This is why I do not reconstruct and use an Opening The Mouth ritual; because my current belief is that it would require that level of care.
I believe the Gods "regulate" their presence in the idols I have; since they are simply on my altar and not in a temple.
My modern designation of an idol is:
An item I have ritually consecrated and gifted for a God
After consecration it IS the God
It will never be a normal item again
The idol is animated by the God as they see fit
The idol exudes divine presence and (in Sumerian tradition) melam
The idol will always remain theirs
I may feel a sense of ease or uncomfortableness depending on if the Gods finds the idol acceptable (a form of UPG)
Often my UPGs surrounds the idols
The idol should be on an altar. Or otherwise packed away respectfully.
I can and have asked idols to be "released" or the god to depart from it. But it will still always be theirs.
My designation of a representation is:
Closer to the bolded blue in quote one "in Greece and Rome they functioned as a potential point of contact between the god and his worshippers."
They are a "point of contact"
They are on a shrine/altar to show my worship of a God
It is not gifted to a God in a separate ritual
It is still a "normal" item
It can be reverted back to a non-religious item or even represent a different God if I so choose
While the Gods are welcome to animate their representation in the same way as an idol if they so wish, I have not consecrated the object for them.... So I'm not entirely sure if they would willingly animate it.
I'll leave this post off with a small excerpt of my monthly altar purification day ritual:
"...I humbly ask that you come to this altar which has been established with great respect. Dwell in your idols which were consecrated in your name; let it represent your being, let it house your energies, let it present you into my world. To those Gods whom I invite without an idol, I have placed representations of you on this altar so that I may connect to you and be reminded of your being."
