Caer Abred

In my gloriously inconsistent way, I have gone woo woo again*. But its not druidry. I've gone Classically Pagan and I'm into the Western Mystery Tradition. So long Druidry, and thanks for all the mead. Wine? Bring it on Bacchus!

I'm going a bit Western Mystery Tradition too, though more along modern lines, particularily Alice. A. Bailey.

I've been looking at Esoteric Schools, which has been very interesting.

A lot of interesting principles and psychological models, if you can shed the complicated metaphysics.

Interesting indeed. The WMT (not to be confused with the WMD) can be interpreted in 'psychological terms' entirely. For supreme being read 'higher consciousness', for 'god' read 'archetype' and so forth.I don't discount the metaphysics entirely, and though so much of the WMT is arcane goobledegook, there is a golden thread of ideas and mysticism that speaks to me, to the extent that I find I have to believe in some form of supernature. One must however, as the Emerald Tablet declares 'separate the subtle from the gross'. So much of WMT is 'gross' but even as a journey in imagination and an internal journey within one own's consciousness it is fascinating.

Modern Druidry, though arising out of the WMT in the 18th Century, has today as far as I can tell, no intellectual core, no metaphysics, no coherent substance or cosmology. Its almost a truism, Neo Pagans don't do philosophy or theology. In fact I agree with the naturalists that not only does druidry not have to be religious, it is not, and never has been, in its modern form, a religion in any meaningful sense. The sooner 'druids' stopped playing at religion and grew up into a mature naturalism or adopted a more serious spirituality the better me thinks.

White Horse wrote:Interesting indeed. The WMT (not to be confused with the WMD) can be interpreted in 'psychological terms' entirely. For supreme being read 'higher consciousness', for 'god' read 'archetype' and so forth.I don't discount the metaphysics entirely, and though so much of the WMT is arcane goobledegook, there is a golden thread of ideas and mysticism that speaks to me, to the extent that I find I have to believe in some form of supernature.

Today's supernatural, tomorrow's natural. To place one's beliefs into the restrictions of what is presently "known", IMO, denies the inherent ability of humanity to go beyond the current understanding. The difficulty is differentiating between instinct and fantasy.

White Horse wrote:Modern Druidry, though arising out of the WMT in the 18th Century, has today as far as I can tell, no intellectual core, no metaphysics, no coherent substance or cosmology. Its almost a truism, Neo Pagans don't do philosophy or theology.

Then I may have a problem with the talk I'm giving at the TDN conference in November.

RR

"Modern Druidry, though arising out of the WMT in the 18th Century, has today as far as I can tell, no intellectual core, no metaphysics, no coherent substance or cosmology."

As a whole I agree with you.

But that's if you want to see it as a "something". Now if you're talking of specific Orders and othwer Druids groups then they can have something more coherent. But they don't reflect modern Druidry as a whole.

WH are you initiated into an particular mystery school or esoteric tradition?

It is just after 5am in the morning and its all gone. The Woo Woo has been dispelled again, this after a troubling night. I was having a conversation yesterday with my next door neighbour. He was telling me about his daughter who died four years ago. She was born with a congenital condition that meant her lungs were not properly developed, and died while still a young teenager. Tragic.
As a father of two daughters, these kind of encounters brings home the truth about our human condition in a more personal and direct way. That truth should of course be obvious, if only we didn't want so much to believe otherwise: that there is no universal controlling mind or providence at work in nature. Oh yes, there are universal laws of nature that ensure a unity and overall general harmony of function in our universe most of the time, but these laws are blind and/or involve no human scale compassion. Indeed Death/Life and Chaos and Order, are in a sense 'necessary' to each other for the functioning of the cosmos, but the pain that nature brings should be as apparent as the happiness.

But it is easy to imagine how our experience of universal laws of nature are conflated into the notion of a universal law giver, but if there is such a universal mind then it is not benevolent in any meaningful sense of the term.There are more obviously multiple forces of nature, some with 'good' and some 'bad' effects on human interests - no doubt the human awareness of these awesome. competing but rather capricious amd at best indifferent powers and forces is why humans so naturally tend to polytheism. I also understand now why most religions try to offer some form of 'salvation' from this world, whether in the Kingdom of Heaven, by attaining Nirvana, or through some apocalyptic belief in a new perfected physical reality, a heaven on earth. The supreme 'good' if it is not just a projection of naive human hopes and ideals, cannot be located within nature itself. Its 'natural' ironically, given some religious aspirations for a supreme good or perfection, that physical nature is seen as corrupted or corrupt in some way. I think now there may be no actual, coherent intellectual 'middle ground' between adopting a thorough going naturalism or a fully transcendental belief system. Nature cannot be made into a God that satisfies our craving for immortality or perfection, even if these cravings have no metaphysical 'solutions'.

treegod wrote:WH are you initiated into an particular mystery school or esoteric tradition?

Well, once i was an armchair Kabbalist, or Cabalist - we are talking here the Hermetic tradition not Judaism proper; and then I was involved with these guys a few years ago:

http://www.prometheustrust.co.uk/

These very intellectual but (i must say) rather friendly types are seeking to re-cover the 'Neo Platonic' Tradition for modernity, not an ignoble venture. At the time my interest was sparked by reading the Enneads of Plotinus, but I was put off at the time by the polytheistic and theurgic ways of Iamblichus and Proclus; though I later incorporated some of these elements into my ritual practice/thinking.

My mate Meic is a hard polytheist Hellenist or Hellismos, and also into the Hermetica and Orphic traditions, and recently I participated in some attempt to re-enact the mystery traditions including those of Dionysius and Eleusium. But I haven't been initiated into a larger theosophical school or occult order if that is what you mean, indeed I am rather suspicious of such (I'm afraid I rather think Madame Blavatsky was probably a bit of a charlatan.) But then Druidry, or at least meso-pagan druidry, is firmly within the WMT and I've been initiated into that mystery school (more than once!). The Barddas is very much re-heated Neo-Platonism.

A common thread in the WMT is the need for personal 'gnosis' which seems right. But the metaphysics require a belief in a 'graded hierarchy' of beings and a primitive view of the workings of the cosmos, planets etc that can't be taken literally today.

White Horse wrote:It is just after 5am in the morning and its all gone. The Woo Woo has been dispelled again, this after a troubling night. I was having a conversation yesterday with my next door neighbour. He was telling me about his daughter who died four years ago. She was born with a congenital condition that meant her lungs were not properly developed, and died while still a young teenager. Tragic.
As a father of two daughters, these kind of encounters brings home the truth about our human condition in a more personal and direct way. That truth should of course be obvious, if only we didn't want so much to believe otherwise: that there is no universal controlling mind or providence at work in nature. Oh yes, there are universal laws of nature that ensure a unity and overall general harmony of function in our universe most of the time, but these laws are blind and/or involve no human scale compassion. Indeed Death/Life and Chaos and Order, are in a sense 'necessary' to each other for the functioning of the cosmos, but the pain that nature brings should be as apparent as the happiness.

The loss of a loved one is a difficult thing to appreciate from afar. The loss of life for such a young individual is always difficult. However, how can anyone else make a decision about whether an individual's limited existence, because of it's lack of linear time spent here, shows an inequality or inherent unfairness about it? Free will is suggestive of a lack (or maybe not) of controlling external influence. I detect in this piece a fall back to the monotheistic position of an overseeing and benevolent figurehead, or am I reading this wrong? Did your neighbour indicate that they wish their daughter hadn't been born or did her presence enhance their lives?

White Horse wrote:But it is easy to imagine how our experience of universal laws of nature are conflated into the notion of a universal law giver, but if there is such a universal mind then it is not benevolent in any meaningful sense of the term.

Maybe it dares to think outside the human perspective?

White Horse wrote:There are more obviously multiple forces of nature, some with 'good' and some 'bad' effects on human interests - no doubt the human awareness of these awesome. competing but rather capricious amd at best indifferent powers and forces is why humans so naturally tend to polytheism. I also understand now why most religions try to offer some form of 'salvation' from this world, whether in the Kingdom of Heaven, by attaining Nirvana, or through some apocalyptic belief in a new perfected physical reality, a heaven on earth.

Sorry WH, we are poles apart here. The salvation you speak of here is, IMO, just a control mechanism.

White Horse wrote: The supreme 'good' if it is not just a projection of naive human hopes and ideals, cannot be located within nature itself. Its 'natural' ironically, given some religious aspirations for a supreme good or perfection, that physical nature is seen as corrupted or corrupt in some way. I think now there may be no actual, coherent intellectual 'middle ground' between adopting a thorough going naturalism or a fully transcendental belief system. Nature cannot be made into a God that satisfies our craving for immortality or perfection, even if these cravings have no metaphysical 'solutions'.

Speaking personally, I have no cravings whatsoever for immortality, therefore this difference in perspectives maybe why I don't relate to a lot of your post here.

RR

true enough. There are consolations that paganism cannot offer such as a mapped out afterlife, any escape from the impermanence of 'samsara', or hope that all things will be alright in the end (at the end of time). certainly pagans cannot be accused of peddling escapist fantasy