The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum (Archive Board)
November 28, 2020, 02:37:32 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This is our Read Only Archive Board (closed to posting July 2011). Join our new vBulletin board!
 
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 28, 2020, 02:37:32 am

Login with username, password and session length
Donate!
The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.
TC Staff
Important Information about this Archive Board
This message board is The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum's SMF Archive Board. It is closed to new memberships and to posting, but there are over 250,000 messages here that you can still search and read -- many full of interesting and useful information. (This board was open from February 2007 through June 2011).

Our new vBulletin discussion board is located at http://www.ecauldron.com/forum/ -- if you would like to participate in discussions like those you see here, please visit our new vBulletin message board, register an account and join in our discussions. We hope you will find the information in this message archive useful and will consider joining us on our new board.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
Author Topic: Special Discussion: Nature and Pagan Religions  (Read 22287 times)
Fagan_the_Pagan
Master Member
****
Last Login:February 11, 2012, 04:39:54 am
United States United States

Religion: Ecclectic Bard
Posts: 301


Tá tine sna ceann orm

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #30: January 25, 2009, 10:35:39 pm »

Where would religions that don't real put much stress on nature at all be located in this continuum. Note, they aren't nature-hostile or the like but nature just doesn't play much of a part in the religion aside from a relatively small number (compared to the total number) of holidays or the like?
Well, these were only examples and not necessarily the whole set, so they might either be farther down on the list.  There could be some classified as maybe "Nature-Neutral."  Althought the kind you refer to is not "nature-hostile" there could be a hypothetical classification for religions that ARE "Nature-hostile" as well.  I mean, I'll admit that to actively refer to a religion that doesn't care much about nature by a term with "nature" in its name at all sounds a little silly, so these would probably only be used in comparative discussions.  So if we then compile a tentative list, we might have:

1. Nature-Centered= Religions in which nature is deemed of critical importance, and any gods that may be present are either inferior to nature, or ARE nature itself.
2. Nature-Oriented= Religions in which Nature has an important role, and any gods that may be present may be associated with certain aspects of nature, but are generally seen as more important than the idea of nature itself.
3. Nature-Honoring= Religions that give honor to nature, but do not hold the idea of nature as important to the religion. 
4. Nature-Neutral= Religions that do not take a stance on nature, and in which nature has no significant role.
5. Nature-Disdainful= Religions which take the stance that nature is decidedly unimportant or without vaule.
6. Nature-Hostile= Religions which take the stance that nature is inherently bad, should be suppressed, or is some opposing force to what the religion deems as good, right, or just.

This may not be complete, and it is possible some definitions should be revised somewhat, but as a tentative list I think this is alright.  I thought that there should probably be something in between neutral and downright hostile.  The names are rather lackluster as it is, though perhaps luster is not something that is necessary for discussion purposes.  What do you think?  Worthy of consideration?
Logged

"We're actors!  We're the opposite of people."--Tom Stoppard "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.

Welcome, Guest!
You will need to register and/or login to participate in our discussions.

Read our Rules and Policies and the Quoting Guidelines.

Help Fund Our Server? Donate to Lyricfox's Cancer Fund?

RandallS
Co-Host
Administrator
Grand Adept Member
*****
Last Login:October 30, 2020, 08:18:05 am
United States United States

Religion: Hellenic Pagan
TCN ID: ADMIN
Posts: 17181


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #31: January 26, 2009, 09:35:17 am »

1. Nature-Centered= Religions in which nature is deemed of critical importance, and any gods that may be present are either inferior to nature, or ARE nature itself.
2. Nature-Oriented= Religions in which Nature has an important role, and any gods that may be present may be associated with certain aspects of nature, but are generally seen as more important than the idea of nature itself.
3. Nature-Honoring= Religions that give honor to nature, but do not hold the idea of nature as important to the religion. 
4. Nature-Neutral= Religions that do not take a stance on nature, and in which nature has no significant role.
5. Nature-Disdainful= Religions which take the stance that nature is decidedly unimportant or without vaule.
6. Nature-Hostile= Religions which take the stance that nature is inherently bad, should be suppressed, or is some opposing force to what the religion deems as good, right, or just.

Not a bad start -- That actually covers most religions I can think of off the top of my head.  However, we might want to come up with more neutral names for the 5 & 6 end of the spectrum.
Logged

Randall
RetroRoleplaying [Blog - Forum] -- Out Of Print & Out Of Style Tabletop Roleplaying Games
Software Gadgets Blog -- Interesting Software, Mostly Free
Cheap Web Hosting -- Find an Affordable Web Host
Fagan_the_Pagan
Master Member
****
Last Login:February 11, 2012, 04:39:54 am
United States United States

Religion: Ecclectic Bard
Posts: 301


Tá tine sna ceann orm

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #32: January 26, 2009, 02:12:32 pm »

[...]we might want to come up with more neutral names for the 5 & 6 end of the spectrum.
Well, that's fine.  I was expecting there would be some renaming if this were to into any use anyway.
Logged

"We're actors!  We're the opposite of people."--Tom Stoppard "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
Sylvan
Journeyman
***
Last Login:June 10, 2011, 08:37:24 am
United States United States

Religion: Currently reevaluating
Posts: 103


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #33: March 12, 2009, 07:04:26 pm »

How important is the idea of "nature" within your religion?
I've used the term "nature based" to refer to my beliefs in the past, although I don't personally have strong feelings about the term either way.  But I also consider my beliefs to be in flux to some extent, so my answer to this may be somewhat tentative.  I basically consider myself generally pagan at the moment with leanings toward druidry.  With that said I would have to acknowledge that nature is very important in terms of my personal spiritual path.  A sense of spiritual connectedness comes much easier to me when I'm in natural settings.  I have a particular affinity for trees and find forests to be conducive to experiences of what I perceive to be divinity.  I think that this is because, for me, a forest that has largely been untouched by humans (to the extent that you can still find them) so readily demonstrates the interconnectedness of life.  Such ecosystems develop and evolve according to the cycles of nature with various species filling particular niches.  Not only do I find this fascinating, in my opinion it stands in contrast to the living environments we humans often create for ourselves.

How is nature conceptualized within your religion?
My outlook has some panentheistic overtones and I generally see divinity reflected through/in nature, while at the same time existing beyond the material universe.  I would also say that I see in nature a reflection of what I believe to be a kind of divine intent for all life - namely the interconnectedness of all life and humanity's place within the wider web of all that is.  But this isn't a conceptualization that I'm slavish to.  I've also been examining hard polytheism and the implications such an approach would have to my spirituality in general, and how it might change the way nature is conceptualized within my worldview.

How does nature -- concepts, imagery, attitudes toward -- function within your religion?
As a result of what I've stated above, much of my spiritual practice involves acknowledging myself as a part of nature and its cycles.  In rituals I try to utilize materials that are natural or which remind me of nature.  I keep plants in the room that I use for indoor rituals, as well as pictures of my favorite animals.  My practice of paganism has also led me to become involved in various conservation efforts, particularly with respect to the eastern bluebird.  I build nesting boxes and maintain various feeders on my property; I find both of these activities to be spritual in their own way.

Where do things like agricultural festivals fit into your religion overall?
At this point I mark the changing of the seasons in a very general way but I don't yet celebrate a particular set of holidays or festivals.  I'm considering affiliating with ADF so this may change in the near future.
Logged
soulfire
Journeyman
***
Last Login:December 06, 2010, 02:51:14 pm
United States United States

Religion: Practical Witch, Healer
Posts: 225


Dance Anyway!

Blog entries (5)



Ignore
« Reply #34: March 25, 2009, 03:10:20 pm »

To do a bit of Thread Resurrection . . .

I sort of like the idea of a continuum, and would muse on the idea of taking the idea of a continuum a step further, so as to come up with new terminology that was more specific on the degree to which nature was important.  For example, perhaps "Nature-Centered," for the ones where it was considered critical, "Nature-Oriented" for ones that placed a lot of emphasis on Nature, but were, say at least around 50% devoted to other things, "Nature-Honoring" for those whom give it a passing honor, and so forth. 

Also, in relation to the term "earth-based," I have heard--though the source may possibly be mistaken--that it refers not to the physical earth, but to the "earthly" in the sense that it is not looking towards "heaven" or something transcendent and beyond, but is concerned instead with the here and now.   

As to myself, I suppose I would say that I follow a nature-based path, insofar as I tend to look at all nature as holy, see the divine as the divine all.  The little pantheist I am.  I've gone all over the place with specifics, but I've always looked at it all as part of a greater whole, that incorporates everything, and never considered anything to be truly "outside" nature. 

I'm not sure where I would fall here.  Probably with a 50, 30, 20 split, with the nature thing being the middle #.  I honor the cycles of the seasons and view that as an important part of my spirituality.  But I don't worship nature in itself, nor do I feel I'm dishonoring the Gods if I miss an important day/celebration.
Logged

**Please PRAY FOR ME.  I'm in the fight of my life right now. Thank you ~SF/K
Fagan_the_Pagan
Master Member
****
Last Login:February 11, 2012, 04:39:54 am
United States United States

Religion: Ecclectic Bard
Posts: 301


Tá tine sna ceann orm

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #35: March 27, 2009, 05:55:04 pm »

I'm not sure where I would fall here.  Probably with a 50, 30, 20 split, with the nature thing being the middle #.  I honor the cycles of the seasons and view that as an important part of my spirituality.  But I don't worship nature in itself, nor do I feel I'm dishonoring the Gods if I miss an important day/celebration.
hmm, it'd probably be difficult to place without knowing more specifics about your religion & spirituality.  I mean, if the cycles of the seasons are honored, but more as an allegory to something else, then it might be Nature Honoring, but not Nature Centered or Nature Oriented.  If the role of the cycle of seasons is more important, then it might be considered Nature Oriented, especially if there are other aspects of nature or natural processes integrated into the religion. 

So I'm going to guess you'd be Nature Honoring, pending more information.
Logged

"We're actors!  We're the opposite of people."--Tom Stoppard "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
Caeia Iulia Regillia
Apprentice
**
Last Login:July 08, 2010, 07:31:44 am
United States United States

Religion: Religio Romana (revivalist)
Posts: 37


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #36: May 09, 2009, 07:55:55 pm »

I'd probably call Religio Romana "Nature Oriented", but that's just my own viewpoint.  I mean Neptune is the god of the seas, Apollo has a connection to the sun, and Jove has thunderbolts.  Pan and the Fauns and the verious nature spirits are pretty good hints of nature orientation.  So it's not like the Romans hated nature.

But the trouble here for me is that humans are natural, and the things we make are natural to us.  It's human nature to form communities and cities and so on.  (We should be doing so in a more naturalistic way -- I don't think Neptune is thrilled with the floating trash piles or the dead zones we've put in his realm)  But there has never really been a group of humans anywhere that I'm aware of that hasn't built or used some sort of technology.  So the distinction between urban and natural is false really.  Not only are the cities we build affecting nature, but they are natural human habitats.  It would be sort of the same thing as a beehive.  It's artificially constructed, it affects the natural world around it, but it's ultimately natural because it's the bee-nature to build a beehive.  To make an artificial distinction like that doesn't make sense when you think about it.  At least not to me.

Logged



BGMarc
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:August 17, 2011, 09:57:32 pm
Australia Australia

Religion: Stoic (with declining druidic/wiccish hangovers and emergent Hellenic/Kemetic affiliations)
Posts: 1525


Blog entries (0)

Marc Larkin 6marc9
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #37: May 09, 2009, 09:38:42 pm »



I can't really answer for any particular religion, as I'm not sure I have one. It is an area that I have thought on often though, so I'll have a bash at it. My perspective is heavily Stoic, but has hangovers from fluffier, neowiccan days. I'm going to use the dot point format because it's what I'm used to for this type of analysis. I hope it's not too off-putting for anyone (I've noticed in the past that such dot points can be a thread killer for some reason). I have only read the first page of posts so far, but wanted to get my thoughts down in their original form before they morph under new perspectives.

What is nature?
  • for me, (and for Stoics in general) nature has two distinct-but-related meanings. Firstly, the manifest reality we find ourselves in in its entirety. Secondly, the fundamental configuration of an individual's personality. My understanding is that we are discussing the first definition only in this thread.
  • In the first instance, there is no recognition of any significant distinction between those aspects of nature arising from humans and those arising from any other origin.
  • From the first perspective, Stoicism can be nature-based dependant on the individual practitioner, but I don't think that it's necessarily so.
  • From the second perspective, Stoicism is completely nature-based, but if that's of interest to anyone, it probably needs its own thread.

What does it mean to be nature-based?
For me, (but not necessarily for other Stoics) to say that something is nature-based is to say that the relationships, interdependencies, cycles, patterns, etc. observed in the external reality are used as a regular foundation of religious concepts. For example, in my wiccish youth I looked at the cyclical pattern of the seasons and of plant growth as a basis for my belief in reincarnation and as a general principle of relatedness within human experience.
Logged

"If Michelangelo had been straight, the Sistine Chapel would have been wallpapered" Robin Tyler

It's the saddest thing in the world when you can only feel big by making others feel small. - UPG

Stupidity cannot be cured. Stupidity is the only universal capital crime. The sentence is death. There is no appeal and sentence is carried out automatically and without pity. Lazarus Long.

BGMarc at the Pub
Yez
Apprentice
**
Last Login:June 22, 2009, 01:53:25 am
United States United States

Religion: Daoist, apparently
Posts: 24


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #38: May 20, 2009, 05:46:54 pm »

At TC, we've had many discussions over the years about "nature-based" religions....  In all that, nobody ever really gets around to talking about what we *mean* when we say "nature-based"

(Marc: dot-points not a thread-killer!)

Hmm.  Because I've completely missed the boat on the controversy at hand, I've never asked myself whether my beliefs were nature based.

I was trained in a witchcraft tradition which certainly honors nature, from the turning of the seasons to herbology, ecology and respect for all living things.  (In my case, possibly not ticks. Ieeew.)  But because I'm not a theist, I don't have the separation between nature (or natural processes) and the workings of a god.  My spirituality, therefore, would appear to be 100% nature-based.

But!  How do we define nature?  Is there a separation between nature and mankind?  In a practical sense, in this lifetime I appear to be separate from other people, and we people seem to be separate from birds, trees, rocks, etc.  Most of us act accordingly, as our framework is 3D in linear time :>

My beliefs are close to what Kasmira has said ("I believe that all matter is made out of energy, means that it is based on everything that I can see, touch, and/or interact with. Light it energy, matter is energy, sound is energy, thought is energy....but really, dividing [nature] off from everything else is creating a very artificial divide").

What I believe is that all of it, all of us, are manifestations of an ultimate single consciousness.  In all probability, in this lifetime I won't achieve the experiential certainty of that (enlightenment), but it's my spiritual goal.  In the meantime I function in this mundane framework but seek moments of spiritual clarity.

Now, I started off in TC saying my religion was witchcraft, but in my brief time here, reading others' questions and their well-considered responses, I decided that my spiritual side is kinda Buddhist (minus the Hindi gods). 

Huang Po said "If you see a Buddha in the road, kill him."  (Because if you see "him", you're conceptualizing "him" as other-than-you.  Empty your mind of all concepts!) 

Now I'm thinking a more accurate term for my spirituality would be (beginner) Daoist, as there is less (or no?) focus on gods.  I could call Daoism nature-based; many of its teachings use water images, cloud images, the dreaming butterfly (!), etc.  But if All That Is is one, there is no separation.  When asked a dualistic question (nature/not-nature), I cannot answer!
Logged

Black holes are where God divided by zero. - Stephen Wright
senilorac
Senior Apprentice
**
Last Login:June 03, 2010, 08:38:57 pm
United States United States

Posts: 47


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #39: May 22, 2009, 10:47:40 am »

How important is the idea of "nature" within your religion?
How is nature conceptualized within your religion?
How does nature -- concepts, imagery, attitudes toward -- function within your religion?
Where do things like agricultural festivals fit into your religion overall?
If you practice magic, how is nature figured -- is it *the* source of power, *a* source of power, totally irrelevant, what?

What an interesting prompt! I am going to have to spend some time pondering this...

I have to admit that I have fallen into the trap of effectively simplifying the definition of paganism as to include those religions and practices that are nature-based. I now see that I was confusing my personal perspective with a more general one. I realize that pagan religions are diverse and often have very little in common; I realize that many of them do not focus on or especially revere the natural world. But since this thread is about personal, spiritual perspectives on the natural world, I will spend more time discussing my own beliefs.

I have always considered nature both central and sacred. Since my youth, it has been a place of retreat, relaxation, introspection, and discovery. As I grew older and more skeptical of most religions, nature retained its centrality in my life. These days, I do not see anything as separated from nature. My personal self and society at large--although not often viewed as parts of nature--appear quite natural to me. I cannot escape the cycles of nature just as I cannot escape the cycles of my body. No matter how my beliefs shift with regard to the divine, my focus on nature seems to always remain intact.

Overall, then, nature is the primary organizing force in my spirituality, and I am unable to come up with a better definition for it. My goal in daily life is to revere and focus on the natural world, rather than try to divorce myself from it or control it. As far as holidays and rituals are concerned, my focus on nature means that I observe seasonal, lunar, and solar cycles; I utilize "magical" correspondences in meditation and visualization to attune my emotional state with the natural one; and I tend to view things in a concrete, materialistic, though still spiritual sense. Basically, I try to organize my lifestyle around nature as a primary force. I do not focus on abstract deities or pantheons that often feel so distant to me; I focus on what is close, which, to me, is nature.

I am not sure how to define my faith and focus in terms of a single name. For most of my life I have simply called it a pagan faith, but I see now that I might need to revise that to some degree. It is not pagan in the sense that paganism is a much broader category than a single religion. However, I do feel comfortable describing my faith as pagan. Although I do not adhere to a specific tradition, I draw from a variety of pagan religions--from Wiccan correspondences, to general meditative practices, to the ritualistic focus of many folk religions. I see no need to shy away from the term pagan, so long as I qualify it with the idea that my personal paganism might not match with other people's. I have no qualms about calling myself an agnostic even though it is not a coherent religion and includes individuals with different perspectives; the same situation applies with my self-definition as a pagan. I see nothing inherently wrong with defining myself within a larger category of spirituality rather than a specific religion, and within a personal and eclectic formation of that category rather than a general one.

So, in the end, I think the "am not"/"are too" fight about whether paganism is nature-focused is basically a misunderstanding. Paganism--by the sheer fact that it is not a single religion or tradition--includes diversity. Individuals who call themselves pagans fall under an umbrella category that includes overlapping and mutually exclusive traditions. It is not surprising, then, that some pagan traditions (personal or communal) are nature-focused, whereas others are not. I think it is better to pose your question (how does nature fit with your specific pagan spirituality?) than one about paganism in general (is it, on a whole, nature-focused?). But I do not think this is any reason to shy away from the term pagan when defining one's perspective. It simply must be clearly qualified as a personal perspective.
Logged
Kittiann
Apprentice
**
Last Login:July 10, 2013, 02:31:46 pm
United States United States

Religion: Agnostic Taoist
Posts: 23

Gravatar

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #40: June 06, 2009, 01:24:00 pm »

How important is the idea of "nature" within your religion?
How is nature conceptualized within your religion?
How does nature -- concepts, imagery, attitudes toward -- function within your religion?
Where do things like agricultural festivals fit into your religion overall?
If you practice magic, how is nature figured -- is it *the* source of power, *a* source of power, totally irrelevant, what? 
The idea of nature is very important to me spiritually.  Of course, when I speak of 'nature', I suppose I really mean everything; because to me, nature is a part of everything.  It's very important to me to recognize the natural world and the effects it has on us, because we grew out of it and, in my opinion, when we die we are going to return to it.  For me, nature isn't personified or represented by any deities; it's just the world we live in, the things we're completely surrounded by.  I believe in an energy that runs through all of nature, but that isn't solely what nature is or solely what that energy is either.  They're just connected.  And feeling closer to nature helps me to get in touch with that.

I celebrate the Wiccan wheel of the year because those are the festivals I'm used to, even though I'm very not-Wiccan Tongue.  But the festivals and what they represent are important to me.  I think nature is very cyclic, and celebrating its turns helps me feel closer to it.

I don't usually practice magic for my own reasons, but it is a part of my belief structure.  I think the source of power that magic draws upon (the 'energy' mentioned earlier) is definitely a huge part of nature, but that doesn't mean it *is* nature.  For me, using natural ingredients and being outside when doing spellwork is extremely beneficial because it brings you closer to what powers those spells, but it isn't nature itself powering them.

In the end, I guess that Paganism is just a really hard word to define.  Some people want their religion to be the end-all-be-all of Paganism, but obviously there's a *ton* of variation out there.  It's no surprise that some people aren't going to identify with nature; for instance, if my mom ever became a pagan, she'd definitely be worshipping inside with the air on and the windows closed Tongue.  But there's nothing wrong with that, and it doesn't make anyone less pagan.
Logged
Perzephone
Master Member
****
*
Last Login:February 26, 2010, 01:55:04 am
United States United States

Religion: Unorthodox Pagan
Posts: 670


Quantum Paganism for a New Millenium

Blog entries (0)

perzephone


Ignore
« Reply #41: June 06, 2009, 03:03:05 pm »

How important is the idea of "nature" within your religion?
How is nature conceptualized within your religion?
How does nature -- concepts, imagery, attitudes toward -- function within your religion?
Where do things like agricultural festivals fit into your religion overall?
If you practice magic, how is nature figured -- is it *the* source of power, *a* source of power, totally irrelevant, what?


I appreciate nature, and living in Las Vegas for many years has given me a love of the desert - there's a lot of life out here, even though most people cannot see it. I've also lived in places where nature was closer to home, like Tennessee, Louisiana and Washington. I like places that have raw, austere, almost threatening beauty, like craggy mountains, dark bayous, open expanses of desert, and I do like to get out there and experience the land on which I'm living. I love animals, trees, rocks, streams, ponds, plants, etc. and my pantheist and animist beliefs help me feel linked to every living thing. I do have respect for nature - I try my best not to impact it too much when I go to visit it. I try to limit the resources I consume. I don't go out of my way to harm living things (unless it's an unwanted guest in my house - spider rescue has its limits) but sometimes it can't be avoided. I do eat meat and I have gone hunting and fishing in the past, and I don't have the least bit of guilt about it because my health and well-being is just as important as a cow's or a fish's or a potato's right to health and well-being.

All that being said, I'm an urban Pagan at heart. My patron deities are Greek, and people seem to forget that in many ancient civilizations, the center of religion was not out in the boonies somewhere - the temples were in the heart of the cities and rites and ceremonies took place in the cities. Yes, agricultural folk had their home shrines, and there were deities who had sacred springs and caves and the like, but for the most part, the city folk wanted to be able to 'walk to church'. I love nature, but at the same time, I love modern conveniences and I don't like nature, like bugs and twigs and crumbled bark and dirt, on me. I don't enjoy camping out or 'roughing it'. I like to stay in a comfy hotel & drive to nature.  At home, we live in suburbia, and even then nature comes to visit - which is fine if it stays in the yard. Our house had a bark scorpion infestation the first two years we lived here. Not cool in the least bit.

I do take images from the natural world and incorporate it into meditation and visualization - air and clouds, the good green earth, the oceans, wildfires... but most of the things that have been on my altars are manufactured items. I don't practice magic anymore, but when I did, the most organic things incorporated into my spellcraft were usually store-bought herbs and spices, maybe a shell or rock or feather. When I was a practicing Wiccan, one of the hardest things for me to do was equating the harvest-based festivals to my real life... especially the whole fertility thing in Spring. Aside from being childfree-by-choice, I'm not a creator of anything. I don't have time or space to have a garden, I'm not a farmer or rancher. I had to figure out a way to link the growing fertility of the earth (Imbolc & Beltane) to my ability to earn a living wage and bring an abundance of opportunities to my household, and as harvest time came around (Lughnasadh, Mabon) seeing how the fruits of my labor had paid off over the year.

As far as magic goes, I think it's a combination of a psychological trick we play on ourselves and others and the expression of our own energy tied into the energy of everything else. The energy coming off a living rose bush is the same energy coming off of us - energy is energy, it's how it's used that changes what it does. I do believe we have the ability to influence people and events beyond our reach with the energy of our bodies, minds and hearts, because manipulating that energy is like plucking a strand on a spider's web - the whole web will vibrate. But for the most part, that energy comes from within us, not from an external source.
Logged

yewberry
Adept Member
*****
Last Login:August 02, 2014, 04:15:33 pm
United States United States

Posts: 2087

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #42: June 06, 2009, 06:16:00 pm »

I'm not a creator of anything. I don't have time or space to have a garden, I'm not a farmer or rancher. I had to figure out a way to link the growing fertility of the earth (Imbolc & Beltane) to my ability to earn a living wage and bring an abundance of opportunities to my household, and as harvest time came around (Lughnasadh, Mabon) seeing how the fruits of my labor had paid off over the year.

I think that's a pretty limited way to look at "creation", though.  Do you write?  Do you make things?  Sing?  Dance?  Cook?  Creation takes many forms.  And so when I think of "fertility" it's not limited to biology.

Brina
Logged
Perzephone
Master Member
****
*
Last Login:February 26, 2010, 01:55:04 am
United States United States

Religion: Unorthodox Pagan
Posts: 670


Quantum Paganism for a New Millenium

Blog entries (0)

perzephone


Ignore
« Reply #43: June 06, 2009, 09:28:07 pm »

I think that's a pretty limited way to look at "creation", though.  Do you write?  Do you make things?  Sing?  Dance?  Cook?  Creation takes many forms.  And so when I think of "fertility" it's not limited to biology.

I am singularly untalented, ungifted and... uncreative. I can play along - but someone else has to write the music Tongue
Logged

mandrina
High Adept Member
******
Last Login:August 13, 2013, 11:51:25 pm
United States United States

Religion: Reclaiming practice, still trying to identify diety, but have some ideas
Posts: 3546


Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #44: June 11, 2009, 10:38:59 am »

I am singularly untalented, ungifted and... uncreative. I can play along - but someone else has to write the music Tongue

You literally have no hobbies?  You use no creativity in your religion or your job (ok using no creativity in your job IS possible)?  Nothing? 
Logged

"I've got a bad feeling about this."

every good guy in any of the Star Wars movies.





[url=http://dragcave.net/vi

Donor Ad: Become a Silver or Gold Donor to get your ad here.

Tags:
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

* Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


EU Cookie Notice: This site uses cookies. By using this site you consent to their use.


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.074 seconds with 52 queries.