What are the expectations?

[Maggie]

I've watched the Druid forum almost from the beginning and still have questions.

What are the expectations of those come here?
What does it mean "discuss Druid ways?"
What do those following different ways see as the purpose in talking "across denominations", so to speak?

Even further, on what basis do people see druids as "truth seekers?" What is this Truth?

Maggie

[Maggie]

Okay dokey.

Gonna start over. My motivation for asking these questions is simple curiosity. I am always interested in the why and wherefore of what people do. And what people mean by the words they use. Nothing more.

I've thought some more about my questions and have decided to rephrase them.

To start at the very beginning:

Even as a kid I have seen the seaons of the year as cyclical, turning from one season to another and back again. I have always liked to grow things, enjoyed the natural world. I was raised in an almost Calvinist brand of Lutheranism which deliberately turned away from this world in expectations of a better life in heaven. It never 'took' even as a child primarily for this reason, although there were others as I grew older.

Now, none of this is specifically druidical or even particularly celtic. This way of looking at the world is indigenous to all earth religions of every culture, it's inescapable. I turned to celtic paganism because of emotional resonance, because of availability of resources and information, and because of events that happened to me in Scotland. I had a "eureka" moment when I came across a particular phrase in Kondriatiev's __Apple Branch__. He described the natural world as something of a La Belle Sans Merci, uninvolved with human affairs or welfare. The king, as the consort of Nature, was the intercessor with La Belle, while the dieties were those who kept this balance from static stillness. As I understand it, the druids' role in this would be to guide the king, to interpret signs and to petition the dieties to intervene on the behalf of humans. To me this is part of the celtic world view that perhaps distinguishes this particular POV from others.

Any thoughts?

Maggie

[Dave the Druid]

I've watched the Druid forum almost from the beginning and still have questions.

[QUOTE=Maggie]What are the expectations of those come here?

I came here to meet others. I found this place quite by accident and had no real expectations beyond talking to other Druids.


What does it mean "discuss Druid ways?"

Share what we have learned with no pretense. Just sharing knowledge.

One thing I have noticed over the years is there is a lot of interpretation here. This is nothing new, even in the hard sciences NB- Physics, Chemistry, Astronomy etc there exist differing interpretations of hard data. Here with Druidry we delve into the social sciences of History and Sociology; beyond Economics some of the most inexact and open to interpretation of the sciences. Consider the multiple stripes of christianity as an example, from a single source no less and the infighting it has caused.


What do those following different ways see as the purpose in talking "across denominations", so to speak?

My intention is to learn what I can from others while I make up my own mind about the content offered there in.


Even further, on what basis do people see druids as "truth seekers?" What is this Truth?

Last first (did you really mean to ask this? :hehehehe: ) "What is truth" asked Pilate? As a scientist, truth is observable, measurable and reproducible.
I think your first question is a hangover from literature (Classical sources as well) that described Druids as keepers/seekers of truth.


Maggie

I need to add that I met a couple of wonderful Wiccans from MW on a trip a few years back. They fairly asked me what is up with the Druids? always arguing about who is right and who to follow. I have shied away from teaching for just this reason, I want people to make up their own minds not accept what I say with out question. In this I am greatful to Nantonos for holding my feet to fire to back up my sources even though we tend to disagree on them from time to time, it is good skull sweat .:graduate:

[Mithrea]

If there is such a thing as Truth, people have to be shown it, not told about it. They must be guided to it, not slammed over the head with and told they are stupid if the don't get it, or wrong if they disagree.

You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. :)

My expectation for this subforum is the same expectation I have for the Paths forum as a whole. I come here to share my path with others, to celebrate my path and to help others on their path, when and if I can. If everyone else treats it similarly, it will become a positive place where one can seek and find the Truth without beating anyone up for it, or being beaten up for it.

[Dave the Druid]

Well put and wonderfuly said Mithrea.

[KellyP]

What are the expectations of those come here?

I don't recall coming into MW with any expectations at all. I certainly didn't come here to find my "path" or to teach others about my path. For me, visiting MW is like browsing the newspaper.


What does it mean "discuss Druid ways?"
Well, I think the easiest interpretation is to claim that Druid ways are like the Wiccan ways, but different. Or like the principles of Thelema, but different. They are what we make of them and they are defined more by their exceptions than by their rules.


What do those following different ways see as the purpose in talking "across denominations", so to speak?The greatest value gained in cross-denominations discourse is the realization that we are much more alike than we are different.


Even further, on what basis do people see druids as "truth seekers?" What is this Truth?I don't believe the Druids are or ever were the seekers of Truth. I don't believe there is a Truth.


As Mithrea has already said, the Paths forum and its related subforums are for sharing what we have learned or experienced. Those of us that have been around the clearing a few times can gather up the new learners and herd them along.

[Maggie]

One thing I have noticed over the years is there is a lot of interpretation here. This is nothing new, even in the hard sciences NB- Physics, Chemistry, Astronomy etc there exist differing interpretations of hard data. Here with Druidry we delve into the social sciences of History and Sociology; beyond Economics some of the most inexact and open to interpretation of the sciences. Consider the multiple stripes of christianity as an example, from a single source no less and the infighting it has caused.

Or of many other religions as well, including pagan. I've remarked before that in my opinion this is pretty normal human behaviour. What is so curious is how badly it so often is handled precisely among those, given the popular conception of druids, who one would think would handle it better.


Last first (did you really mean to ask this? :hehehehe: ) "What is truth" asked Pilate? As a scientist, truth is observable, measurable and reproducible.
I think your first question is a hangover from literature (Classical sources as well) that described Druids as keepers/seekers of truth.

Two interesting points here. Yeah, I did mean to ask it, the urge was almost irresistable!:hehehehe:

In my opinion there is no absolute Truth when it comes to religion and the practice thereof. Because of my fundamentalist upbringing that word in relation to the practice of religion makes me break out. I agree with the word in the scientific sense, there is truth and untruth in the common sense of lies and mispresentation between people, of misrepresentation of events that can be checked, etc. But "Truth" in religion is a very slippery term.

The other point is that of the description of druids. I've wondered about that one for a LONG time. I am pragmatic to the point of being unimaginative at times, a Martha rather than a Mary, if you will. This idea of druids being keepers/seekers of truth, of being some kind of otherworldly seekers of Truth, or even "free thinkers", as I've heard it described, is very curious. To me all of this is counter intuitive. The druids were the keepers of the laws, advisor to the king, responsible for religious practices, and in a culture where this was all passed orally. Such a function using such a method would almost have to be conservative and NOT open to new ways or free innovation. It seems to me that people cannot help but be influenced by the opinions and writings of the past centuries, at least unconsciously. I realize this is heresy (:shhhh: ) but at least some of this sounds like the picture of druids has been influenced by the druidic revivals perhaps more than we realize--or want to admit.




I need to add that I met a couple of wonderful Wiccans from MW on a trip a few years back. They fairly asked me what is up with the Druids? always arguing about who is right and who to follow. I have shied away from teaching for just this reason, I want people to make up their own minds not accept what I say with out question. In this I am greatful to Nantonos for holding my feet to fire to back up my sources even though we tend to disagree on them from time to time, it is good skull sweat .:graduate:


I know, I've noticed the same thing--and I have no answer either. I deal with it by trying to keep academic/source questions separate from religious type questions. Debating religion itself is a no win situation.

Maggie

[Maggie]

If there is such a thing as Truth, people have to be shown it, not told about it. They must be guided to it, not slammed over the head with and told they are stupid if the don't get it, or wrong if they disagree.

Yes, if there is such a thing as Truth. I'm not sure that question can be answered. I don't think Pilate ever got one. :hehehehe: In religion I suspect there as many Truths as there are seekers.



My expectation for this subforum is the same expectation I have for the Paths forum as a whole. I come here to share my path with others, to celebrate my path and to help others on their path, when and if I can. If everyone else treats it similarly, it will become a positive place where one can seek and find the Truth without beating anyone up for it, or being beaten up for it.

That's kinda what I was hoping for myself, I'm an Elephant's Child.

Maggie

[Maggie]

I don't recall coming into MW with any expectations at all. I certainly didn't come here to find my "path" or to teach others about my path. For me, visiting MW is like browsing the newspaper.

LOL Yeah. I sit down with my coffee and (horrors) a cigarette to read in the morning.


Well, I think the easiest interpretation is to claim that Druid ways are like the Wiccan ways, but different. Or like the principles of Thelema, but different. They are what we make of them and they are defined more by their exceptions than by their rules.

I'm not entirely convinced any longer that there is something concrete and discrete that can be called "druid ways," actually. If asked I'd recommend that someone read the mission statement of whatever group they're interested in to see how those are defined by that group.


The greatest value gained in cross-denominations discourse is the realization that we are much more alike than we are different.

Ha. The fact that there are denominations to dialogue with proves to me that we're all humans.

I actually asked this question because I don't worry about the fact that there are different kinds so I don't worry about getting everyone back to gether or on the same page under a commonly defined name. I see the value when there is a common goal that different groups would like to accomplish together but that's usually not the purpose of ecumenical councils, so to speak.


I don't believe the Druids are or ever were the seekers of Truth. I don't believe there is a Truth.

I don't either--maybe. I find the words used interesting. Words have meaning, words are used for communication but no communication takes place unless all parties agree on the meaning of the words they are using. I've become extremely wary of certain words such as Truth.

Most that I've read in this respect talk about Truth before the Gods, before the king, before the people. It APPEARS TO ME that these are specific usages of the word. To respect the Gods, to perform the rituals correctly, to behave as They have said. Truth before the Gods. To the king? To interpret omens and rituals honestly, to give advice that seems true to the druid. To the people? Once again, to lead the rituals/festivals correctly, to give good advice to the king that would make him a good leader, etc. That type of thing. Now, when contemporary druids talk about Truth, it seems to be something of an amorphous abstract. Are we, meaning contemporary westerners, using the word in the same sense and the same meaning as the ancient druids?

Maggie

[Mithrea]

That's kinda what I was hoping for myself, I'm an Elephant's Child.

Maggie

An Elephant's Child?

[Maggie]

An Elephant's Child?

A Kipling's Just So story, believe the "formal" name is how the Elephant got its trunk. Instead of curiousity killing the cat, the baby elephant got its nose stuck in a trunk and in trying to pull it out the nose got stretched into a trunk.

Maggie

[ap Dafydd]

I've watched the Druid forum almost from the beginning and still have questions.

What are the expectations of those come here?
What does it mean "discuss Druid ways?"
What do those following different ways see as the purpose in talking "across denominations", so to speak?

I used to be just an occasional visitor to this forum, thinking that as I'm not a Druid myself, it wasn't really a place to hang out. But having found that there were people here with whom I have a lot of common ground on the Celtic path, folk for whom I have a great deal of respect and who I'm also familiar with in the wider webby world, I've made it a regular port of call.

Sadly I note that Searles has departed and Croman's been disapproved since my last visit...


Even further, on what basis do people see druids as "truth seekers?" What is this Truth?


It's the one that stands against the World!

gwyn eich byd

Ffred

[Dave the Druid]

Maggie, that is a tough one. I agree about how you see the 'truth'. For me, if it isn't scientific, data driven and reproducable it is subjective and personal. It is at that moment that I have to walk away. I don't need to be told I'm wrong by someone who knows that what they feel is right for everyone.

Subjective Truth is depressingly referential. My point of view differs from yours by the simple fact that we have different expirences to model our expectations.

[Dave the Druid]

ap Dafydd,

Can you get me reference on that "Truth against the world" thing? I keep seeing it and it bothers me for it disallows the notion of negosiation or diplomacy; both are about not showing the whole truth.

[Maggie]

Maggie, that is a tough one. I agree about how you see the 'truth'. For me, if it isn't scientific, data driven and reproducable it is subjective and personal. It is at that moment that I have to walk away. I don't need to be told I'm wrong by someone who knows that what they feel is right for everyone.

Subjective Truth is depressingly referential. My point of view differs from yours by the simple fact that we have different expirences to model our expectations.

Not necessarily. I agree with your definition--when it refers to subjects that can in fact be evaluated that way. But when it comes to subjective experiences and beliefs how does one set up the experiement? What is the Truth of Allah, of Kali, of Scathath, of Mary, of Buddha? And I tend to do the same thing. That's why I may or not discuss/debate academics offered to "prove" a particular religious point or practice. But when it becomes a debate on the "truth" of the religious belief itself, I also walk away.

Maggie

[skilly-nilly]

An Elephant's Child?

http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/K/KiplingRudyard/prose/JustSoStories/chap5_elephantchild.html

:smile:

[Maggie]

http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/K/KiplingRudyard/prose/JustSoStories/chap5_elephantchild.html

:smile:

oops. Not a trunk but a croc. That'll teach me to depend on my memory. On the other hand, the 'satiable curiousity is still true....

Maggie

[Dave the Druid]

Not necessarily. I agree with your definition--when it refers to subjects that can in fact be evaluated that way. But when it comes to subjective experiences and beliefs how does one set up the experiement? What is the Truth of Allah, of Kali, of Scathath, of Mary, of Buddha? And I tend to do the same thing. That's why I may or not discuss/debate academics offered to "prove" a particular religious point or practice. But when it becomes a debate on the "truth" of the religious belief itself, I also walk away.

Maggie

That's it! the Truth of Allah, Buddah, Kali, etc is subjective. I know better than to even try to set up experiments on those subjects. I think we are in the same camp as far as walking away goes.:adidas:

[skilly-nilly]

I came here looking for well-informed people (have been both satisfied and dissappointed) that would be conversant about Celtic origins and history. To me, there is no truth in belief--not only does everyone have one, but they are all somewhat different while having the same basic structure.

There is factual, as in historically true;
eg 'The Druids did not construct Stonehenge'
contrasted with presumed opinion;
eg 'The Druids conducted rituals at Stonehenge'.

But since there is no one revealed Truth
in Druidry, there can be no one answer to "What do Druids believe?" IMO, Celtic-based belief systems are a combination of historical research and personal interaction with the Timeless Land and so all indivuated.

[Myrddyn Emrys]

But since there is no one revealed Truth
in Druidry, there can be no one answer to "What do Druids believe?" IMO, Celtic-based belief systems are a combination of historical research and personal interaction with the Timeless Land and so all indivuated.

I like that...a lot.

[ap Dafydd]

ap Dafydd,

Can you get me reference on that "Truth against the world" thing? I keep seeing it and it bothers me for it disallows the notion of negosiation or diplomacy; both are about not showing the whole truth.

Originally from the Iolo tradition and the Barddas

http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/celt/bim1/bim1000.htm

Can't find any useful discussions on the web though, or at least not in English.

I would consider it to be about holding to the truth, not matter what compromises you have to make, no matter what nice words you have to say to be diplomatic, no matter that you're not free.

gwyn eich byd

Ffred

[Dave the Druid]

Thanks for that.
I've always been soft for the old fraudster.
Your read of it sounds very like what I had thought. Not much in english discussions strikes me as funny in it's own way. Is there a deeper meaning in Welsh?

[Morgandria]

Personally, I've a bit of a reconstructionist slant, so I came here hoping to talk about some history, some archaeology, and about how people have modified ancient practices and beliefs to fit into a modern-day life. I mostly was interested in the balance between factual knowledge, and personal inspiration in practice - I think knowledge without personal gnosis is dry and boring, and that personal gnosis without basis in knowledge is in the realms of pure fantasy and self-indulgence.

I didn't really have a whole lot of expectations, though, since I didn't know what I was coming into. Colour me surprised when even those few expectations got frustrated quickly.

[Maggie]

Personally, I've a bit of a reconstructionist slant, so I came here hoping to talk about some history, some archaeology, and about how people have modified ancient practices and beliefs to fit into a modern-day life. I mostly was interested in the balance between factual knowledge, and personal inspiration in practice - I think knowledge without personal gnosis is dry and boring, and that personal gnosis without basis in knowledge is in the realms of pure fantasy and self-indulgence.

I didn't really have a whole lot of expectations, though, since I didn't know what I was coming into. Colour me surprised when even those few expectations got frustrated quickly.

:caffeine: Have a cup. This is pretty much what I was looking for too--particularly "how people have modified ancient practices and beliefs to fit into a modern-day life." For me this is what makes the difference between an object of study and a living religion.

Maybe we can start our own thread? :yikess:

Maggie

[Morgandria]

Ooh, mebbe. I'm not really a reconstructionist anymore - just a Wiccan slanted that way. It makes sense to me, though, to know where my practices come from and what they're based on. My scholarly slant this way is actually quite appreciated by my High Priestess - our practices have a British Traditional Wicca structure, but we can bring in elements of cultural appropriateness when calling specific deities, so knowing as much as you can is a bonus. I consider this to be applying ancient ideas and practices to a modern faith.

I still only work with the Irish Gods, primarily, when I'm at home. Before joining the coven I am with, I had never worked with a pantheon other than the Irish...but because of my coven I am now constantly being exposed to other pantheons. I had never considered working with other pantheons before this...and I still really like coming home to the Irish.

We're putting on a Bríd invocation ritual at a convention in Michigan in February...I am really looking forward to speaking to Her, and I am enjoying the preparations for the ritual, since I am getting a fair bit of input into our setup. It's nice to know I can had little bits of reconstructionism to it.

[ap Dafydd]

Thanks for that.
I've always been soft for the old fraudster.
Your read of it sounds very like what I had thought. Not much in english discussions strikes me as funny in it's own way. Is there a deeper meaning in Welsh?

I agree with your feel about old Iolo. He was more than just a fraudster, he was actually a very accomplished poet (otherwise he wouldn't have got away with it) and passionate about Welsh culture, he used to travel for miles to track down and copy ancient manuscripts.

Trouble is these days that no one seems to want to sort out the genuine stuff from what he wrote himself.

Most of the Welsh links looked to be Gorsedd/Eisteddfod ones (for of course it's the Gorsedd's motto) so I don't think there's anything more than that out there.

gwyn eich byd

Ffred

[Dave the Druid]

It is good that he did. Removing the wheat from the chaff is time consuming and alas if you do it properly (imho) you would tend to find I should expect most of the original material and then the job of seperating the real from the imagined would be merely an exercise left to the student. Still a good effort if he included things not already extant in other works.

:fofftopic
who do you support?

[ap Dafydd]

:fofftopic
who do you support?

I'm an Aberavon boy, me.

C'mon the Wizards...

gwyn eich byd

Ffred

[Dave the Druid]

Cheers!

Newi Cefn Druids here

C'mon Druids!
(Amazingly cheeseily cheerful!)

dave