|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article has an assessment summary page.|
The sources I have found seem quite confused about the classification and description of nations etc., and do not agree with each other. One source says four nations, the other three; one says that nation A came from X, the other says Y... Expert help is sorely needed! Jorge Stolfi 07:06, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
OK, some tentative conclusions: the major nations MUST have separate pages because they have similar but not identical pantheons, different names for them, different hierarchies and functions in the rituals, etc. (Most of the detail which I have added today to the page turns out to be specific to the Ketu nation and may not apply to the other two). Perhaps one could put here a table showing the (imperfect) correspondence between Orixas (Ketu), Voduns (Jeje), and Inkices (Bantu), and an overview of the common points; but all else should go to the nation-spcific pages. Jorge Stolfi 08:17, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
heh, a significant part of this religion is secretive. the experts *don't* help, and those who understand it best have gained their understanding from oral tradition, with slight variations, and so its near impossible to assemble some kind of Candomble bibliography. the religion is decentralised, and while tradition is highly venerated, the individual has always been respected in a way that assures your sources, while repeating faithfully every word of what they were taught, could still give conflicting reports. to quote the haitians who have a similar laissez faire approach to religious authority: "Chak houngan, houngan lakay li" - each Houngan/Manbo is in his/her own house. there's an old consensus that people can disagree about particulars without anyone being *wrong*, so long as they don't try and force one understanding on everybody else. heh, this live and let live attitude is going to make Orisha worship rather less than uniform, and all the more difficult to study.--Feralnostalgia 05:03, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
i don't think that the "nations" MUST have separate pages. each nation is referred to as candomble by outsiders...so someone searching might not know specifically where or how to search outside of simply searching for candomble. i think it will be sufficient to list and explain the nations on the 'candomble' page proper. the differences among Orisa traditions doesn't make it difficult to study because there are fundamental "truths" about worship. Dofona (talk) 23:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
are they the same YORUBA AND CANDOMBLE
is this language have anything to do with yoruba's people in Nigeria. or what? please explain that. the reason why i say this is that some of the name of dieties mentioning in here, have something to do with nigeria myth one way or the order, or i should just say it's nigeria history.
candomble KETU uses the yoruba language as liturgical, and some other nations of candomble refer to their deities using the Yoruba names (some Angola houses will call Dandaluna Oshun instead of her Bantu name...DANDALUNA. candomble Ketu has everything to do with the yoruba of nigeria, because many yoruba who were forced into slavery ended up in brazil and were able to preserve their religious traditions there. Dofona (talk) 23:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- I can't give you a definitive answer, but as I understand it, candomblé is a syncretic religion assembled from Catholicism and the native religions of various African tribes. In particular it is partly based on the religion of the Yoruba people (who, I think, lived in what is now Nigeria). It has also undergone changes as a result of many generations of repression designed to suppress African culture in Brazil. For example, many of the words in candomblé rituals are thought to be from the Yoruba language, but after being passed down by many generations who didn´t speak Yoruba, some are unrecognizable. --Andrew 09:09, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
as I understand it each nation has its own liturgical language, and that's one of the main distinguishing features between them. the Yoruba still *do* live in Nigeria, by the way, they're one of the largest ethnic groups in the country. I've heard of american Candomblieros going to Nigeria to be initiated. it's still considered as a sort of "motherland", and everyone I've talked to acknowledges that our roots are there. Even in Africa there was syncretism between the neighboring tribes, the Yoruba borrowing from the Dahomey and so on, so while we can definitively say 'west africa', it's hard to pin down. by its nature Candomble really cannot be 'pinned down'.
also, I'd say it wasn't so much "assembled" from Catholicism as it was veneered with it. there isn't much of catholic theology that managed to seep into it. some praxis, but very little theology. there's also a significant element of Native American spirituality, particularly in Candomble and Haitian Voudoun, though not as strongly in Cuban Santeria - the "Cabaclos", or spirits of Native American dead, are venerated as helpers of Oxossi.--Feralnostalgia 04:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
in the "Beliefs" section
"The spirits (except the supreme Olorum) are "incorporated" by priests during Candomblé rites."
The word "incorperated" in the above sentence does not make particular sense to me, since I most often hear this word used to mean "form a corperation, as in business or the marketplace". I don't think I'm alone in this, although my dictionary does inform me that it also means "embody" ... how about replacing this word with "channelled" or "embodied"? J Lorraine 07:55, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
the confusion is understood, but what happens during possession is neither channeling nor embodiment, but rather incorporation. the body of the priest or initiated becomes one with the spirit or Orisa. Dofona (talk) 23:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
The Portuguese word is certainly "incorporado", though it is possible that it does not translate well into English "incorporated". The phenomenon could perhaps be called "possession" if we could avoid demonological interpretations.
There are a few references to "bantu" language or religion, as though it referred to an ethnic group like 'Yoruba' or 'Fon' rather than a broader category - a family of ethnic and language groups. It's analogous to referring to "Indo-European" religion or language as a single entity. Anyone figure these should be struck out or revised? Plynn9 06:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
no, because it is supposed to represent a broader category of descendants of the Angola and Congo regions which are made up of several sub-groups...who in brazil came to be known as bantu. Dofona (talk) 23:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I'd be interested in reading a section or article or some content about homosexuality and candomblé. A.Z. 04:46, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
|Candomblé Ketu||Candomblé Jeje||Candomblé Bantu|
|Yoruba mythology, Orisha, 1 God Olodumare||Dahomey (Fon) mythology, Ashanti mythology, Vodun, don´t have Loa, 1 Goddess Mawu||Bantu mythology (Angola,Congo), Nkisi, 1 God Nzambi|
- In Brazil, candomblé is a name generic for all, but has several nations, the best known are ketu, called Candomblé Ketu, Jeje, called Candomblé Jeje, Angola and Congo who are called Candomblé Bantu, and Nation Ijexá that there are a few homes.
- In Brazil, Orixá, vodun and Nkisi are not gods. Are below the Supreme God.
- Orixá is different and is above Egungun.
- In Brazil there are cults separated for Orixá, Vodun, Nkisi called Candomblé, and Worship of Ifa, Worship the Egungun, Worship of Gelede Jurema Oliveira (talk) 19:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
In Brazil, there is a division in worship: Ifá, Egungun, Orixá, Vodun and Nkisi, are separated by type of priestly initiation.
- The Worship of Ifá only starts Babalawos, do not come into trance.
- The Worship the Egungun only starts Babaojés, do not come into trance.
- The Candomblé Ketu starts Iaôs, come into trance with Orixá.
- The Candomblé Jeje starts Vodunsis, come into trance with Vodun.
- The Candomblé Bantu starts Muzenzas, come into trance with Nkisi. Jurema Oliveira (talk) 19:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Is there any way of deciding whether the translation of 'pai-de-santo' (and so on) as 'father-of-saint' is canonical? Although it's more accurate than 'father-of-the-saint', which also appears in a lot of texts, a better translation, in my opinion, is saint father (or hyphenated as saint-father), in parallel with the translation of the expression 'pai-de-sangue' as blood father (not father-of-blood). English translations of Portuguese terms with 'de' constructions commonly invert the term order to place the second term (sangue/blood) in an adjectival position in English. Would anyone object to the terms being translated in this way (saint-father, saint-mother and so on) in the wiki text? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 22:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
In obvious decline
Someone stuck a tag proposing a merge with Candomblé Ketu and Candomblé Jejé, but apparently did not bother to justify the proposal here in the talk page. The reasons for the original split were given:
- the major nations MUST have separate pages because they have similar but not identical pantheons, different names for them, different hierarchies and functions in the rituals, etc. (Most of the detail which I have added today to the page turns out to be specific to the Ketu nation and may not apply to the other two). Perhaps one could put here a table showing the (imperfect) correspondence between Orixas (Ketu), Voduns (Jeje), and Inkices (Bantu), and an overview of the common points; but all else should go to the nation-specific pages. Jorge Stolfi 08:17, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
There was an opinion to the contrary (9 February 2008 (UTC)) but the justification was a presumed difficulty that readers would face when searching for "candomblé"; which appears to be based on a misunderstanding of how Wikipedia searching and linking work.
Therefore I am removing the merge tags.
(By the way, the effort of inserting an editorial tag is 1/100 to 1/1000 of the effort needed to react to it. Therefore tagging articles, especially without giving a justification, is an extremely arrogant, unfair, and destructive activity. Instead of demanding that other editors do this and that or else, please do the work yourself. If you can't spare the time, why do you think that other editors can?)
All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 02:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
The first sentence says the religion is African-originated. The second sentence says it originated in Brazil. Brazil is not in Africa; if you care to dig, you will discover that it is in South America,, and always has been. Chris the speller yack 15:05, 4 May 2012 (UTC)