Monday Maxims: Shun & Despise Evil

The Delphic Maxims mention “evil” twice, first as something to be hated, and secondly as something to be abstained from.

But what, precisely is evil?

evil (adj.)
Old English yfel (Kentish evel) “bad, vicious, ill, wicked,” from Proto-Germanic *ubilaz (cf. Old Saxon ubil, Old Frisian and Middle Dutch evel, Dutch euvel, Old High German ubil, German übel, Gothic ubils), from PIE *upelo-, from root *wap- (cf. Hittite huwapp- “evil”).

“In OE., as in all the other early Teut. langs., exc. Scandinavian, this word is the most comprehensive adjectival expression of disapproval, dislike or disparagement” [OED]. Evil was the word the Anglo-Saxons used where we would use bad, cruel, unskillful, defective (adj.), or harm, crime, misfortune, disease (n.). The meaning “extreme moral wickedness” was in Old English, but did not become the main sense until 18c. Related: Evilly. Evil eye (Latin oculus malus) was Old English eage yfel. Evilchild is attested as an English surname from 13c.

source: Online Etymology Dictionary

According to Merriam-Webster, evil is an adjective to describe something as “morally reprehensible” or “causing harm”, and a noun for “the fact of suffering, misfortune, and wrong doing” or the something that causes it.  Extreme moral wickedness…or just the stuff we don’t like.  What is or is not evil seems awfully personal.

Back in November, I discussed Delphic Maxim #136, Gratify without harming, and touched on the idea of evil:

Evil tends to be an interesting subject in Pagan communities.  Views of what constitutes “evil” as a definition and as an action or behavior vary, but tend to emphasize the “I know it when I see it” subjectiveness of the idea of evil.  Of the many discussions (online and IRL) that I have encountered on the topic, my favorite definition comes from an essay on the Wiccan Rede from Proteus Coven–evil is a rip in the fabric of empathy.

All of this really leads me to sometimes think that either everything might be evil (either that, or nothing is)–after all, everything has the capacity to directly inflict harm and misfortune on someone, somewhere.  No one lives in a vacuum and even the most altruistic of acts is going to have a downside somewhere down the line (Newton’s Third Law–every action has an equal and opposite reaction, sometimes I think it applies to more than physics).  And if everything is evil, perhaps it all cancels out, and nothing is more evil than the next, except in the context of the beholder.

When I ran these two maxims through Google Translate, the result I got was “hate wickedness” and “abstain from wickedness”.  Wickedness certainly is implied in the dictionary definitions for “evil”, and indeed, definitions of “wickedness” include the description of “evil”.  But I like the word “wickedness” better than that of “evil”–it isn’t as loaded of a term.  When we think of evil in its usage, it often to carry an additional subtext–either as an absolute that is part of a moral dichotomy (good vs evil), or as some Supernatural Big Bad Being.  

Ultimately, I have to say that evil isn’t supernatural.  It isn’t a moral absolute, or the opposite of good.  Evil isn’t a specific action or person or event.  Evil can’t be defined.  But it does exist.  Evil happens, and it isn’t everything, or nothing.

Evil is a rip in the fabric of empathy.

Now…I guess I just need to take the time to discuss what the heck that means!!

Pagan Blog Project: Existing in Equilibrium

I’m not a big fan of “balance”, at least not as the term is typically used.  If you look at the many meanings of the word balance, from weights and measures to accounting, most of them mean to make equal.  To add or subtract from two separate and different amounts until each side has come to a middle amount, or to find a something in between one extreme and the next.  I think this is a flawed idea, when applied to ourselves and how we should feel and act, and here is why.

Two extremes are not equal in worth, even if they are equal in validity.  For example, being selfish is not equal in worth as being generous.  But (without getting into too much semantics) they are equal in validity–sometimes it is “better” to be selfish, while other times it is “better” to be generous.  For true balance between generosity and selfishness you would need to counter every act of generosity with selfishness, and vice versa.  Which makes no sense–if you live in an environment where you are abused emotionally and taken advantage of, selfishness (done well) can be healthy and healing.  And there are circumstances in which generosity can be equally healthy and healing (I’m sure we can easily think of examples).

What matters is not something between generosity and selfishness (which would essentially be nothing, since they pretty much cancel each other out), but rather the interplay of generosity AND selfishness in constant flux, responding to the demands of our environment.  What we need is equilibrium.

In chemistry, equilibrium describes a type of balance where a chemical reaction proceeds at that same rate as its reverse reaction.    It works something like this:

First, when you have a system made up of a bunch of molecules, those molecules sometimes combine. That’s the idea of a chemical reaction. Second, a chemical reaction sometimes starts at one point and moves to another. Now imagine the reaction finished and you have a pile of new chemicals. Guess what? Some of those chemicals want to go through a reverse chemical reaction and become the original molecules again…

Put those two ideas together and you have equilibrium:

1. Two reactants combine to make a product.
2. Products like to break apart and turn back into the reactants.

There is a point where those two reactions happen and you can’t tell that any reactions are happening. That’s the point when the reaction looks like it is finished. In reality, some of the molecules are turning into products and some are turning back into reactants. You need to imagine that you’re as small as a molecule and you’re watching all of these parts bouncing around and changing back and forth. Just staring at a test tube, you won’t generally notice a change in their numbers. That’s what equilibrium really is. The overall reaction is happy. There is no pressure greater in one direction over another.

When we exist in a state of emotional equilibrium, we allow ourselves to feel the range of our emotions and feelings and recognize that they all have validity, but are not of equal worth for any given situation.  There are times in our lives when sadness or anger is more healthy and appropriate than happiness.  Where emotions like grief and heartbreak are cathartic, even though we don’t think so at the time.  Where failure is necessary to build a character worthy of success…if you let it. Spiritually, there may be times when introspection is “better” than practice, or when practice is more important than thought.  Physically, there are times when sitting on your duff and eating a bar of chocolate is more useful and nourishing than running a mile and noshing of a bag of carrots.

In my practice and belief, existing in equilibrium is essential.  When we think of ourselves as cauldrons of consciousness, the sensation and experience that define us is in dynamic equilibrium.  Equilibrium is the back and forth interplay between that sensation and experience which allows us to meet the Divine; it is the equilibrium between our soul-states that allow us to deepen our understanding of the world around us so that sensation and experience have meaning down to our very core.    Equilibrium is about finding the sweet spot where all of these things are acceptable and valued in their own time and set(s) of conditions.  Where something in balance topples over at the first sign of stress, a system in equilibrium shifts around until the stress is absorbed into the system and a new equilibrium is achieved (in chemistry, this is called Le Chatelier’s Principle).

Pagan Blog Project: Divinity=EverythingEnsouled

In weaving, the warp is laid down first, lengthwise, and generally on a frame of some sort.  The weft is then woven, over and under, up and down, line by line, to create an entire piece of cloth.  They are so integrated that to remove either the weft or the warp completely destroys the fabric that has been produced, leaving it in a tangle of threads.

As an allegory, I think this describes perfectly how the material and immaterial (definition #2) weave together the fabric of the Universe.  So much so, that I don’t see a division (in the final product) between the physical reality of the universe and the non-physical reality of the universe.  There is a difference, yes…but not a division.

In a previous Pagan Blog Project post, I talked about a reoccurring theme on this blog, the idea of loving where you live.  I worship (and by worship I mean that I celebrate, revere, honor, adore, devote myself to, make offerings to, and regard with awe and deference) nature (and by little-n nature I mean rocks and trees and lakes and ponds and birds and crocodiles and slime mold and slugs) as the physical body of Nature (and by big-N Nature, I mean The Big Mystery, aka The Divine, aka The Universe, aka Nature’s Consciousness) through the language and symbolism of deity (and by deity, I mean individual gods like Zeus or Brigid).

Admittedly, the idea of nature worship can be an idea that is not without its difficulties,  difficulties that  another blogger has tackled pretty thoroughly (if you click and read any links, read these two!).    But this post really isn’t about that.  This post is more about how, when I talk to nature, Nature often talks back.  And how, when I talk to Nature, nature often talks back as well.  And how I have chosen (or been chosen) to interpret deity/divinity in a particular way.  How we have all been chosen to interpret deity and divinity in particular ways, rooted in our own independent and individual experiences of them.

D is for Divine

Last time, for the PBP, I talked about consciousness.  The ultimate question of consciousness is the question of how the physical processes occurring in the brain (such as those that occur when sensing an event) transform into the subjective experiences of the person?  What makes the firing of neurons, the flow of electrons, the transmission of neurotransmitters become something that is unique to each person, that can ultimately be seen differently, felt differently?  So far, this is a question that is unanswerable by science–not because we lack the technology or understanding, but because it is largely untestable.

In my post, I talked about ourselves as a “cauldron of consciousness”, that I think that the place where we meet That Which Is Divine, however it chooses to reveal itself to us (or how we are able to interpret it) is here, in the space between sensing something and experiencing it.  For me, deity is nature–it is rock and tree and sea and sky.  It is also Nature–as Rock and Tree and Sea and Sky.  They are separate, but so tightly woven together that they are one.  For me, my experience of deity has worn into my brain an idea that isn’t quite animism, or pantheism, or polytheism, but  contains elements of each.

When I go to the beach and make an offering to Psamathe, I am honoring the beach itself–the convergence of the physical elements and magical ones, as much as the Nereid of Greek mythology.  I believe in a Divine Universe, woven  into the physicality of the physical universe, where everything is ensouled.

This post is a contribution for the Pagan Blog Project. Be sure to check out the other contributors, and enjoy!

Pagan Blog Project: Loving Where You Live

“What?” You ask, “Loving where you live? That doesn’t start with a ‘B’!”

(Oh, but it does…)

(Really, I promise, you will see!)

“And by the way,” You say, “You are posting this a day early!”

(Well, yes–yes I am, guilty as charged, because the last time I tried to do a timed auto-post, WordPress was naughty.  Of course, it might have been operator error…)

This post is a contribution for the Pagan Blog Project. Be sure to check out the other contributors, and enjoy!

Bioregion: An area with similar natural characteristics, including plant and animal life, human culture, climate, and continuous geographic terrain.  Varies by scale, from a larger ecoregion (akin to a biome), to a very localized bioregion, depending on the features being considered–smaller bioregions nest into one another, and into larger ecoregions, and can overlap as well.

Bioregionalism:  Emphasizes the bioregion as the basis for a healthier co-existence between human culture and the natural environment and sees humanity and its culture as a part of nature, and calls upon people to build positive, sustainable relationships with their bioregion.

Spiritual Bioregionalism: Considers the bioregion, and its inhabitants (including people, past and present) as the originating inspiration for religious and spiritual beliefs.  Uses both the ideas of human cultures and ecology as the framework for a personal (though share-able) and organic religious tradition.  Is firmly rooted in the idea of “spirit of place” and celebrates the cycles of nature in relevance to individual bioregions, as well as those personally relevant in an individual’s culture.

 I talk about bioregionalism with some regularity on this blog…

• “My Paganism is a religion of location. Modern terminology might call it bioregionalist or topophilic. More traditional terminology might say that it is based in the idea of “spirit of place” or by the Roman idea of genius loci.“
• “We love where we live because it is our home, and part of our theology is the idea that we should strive to enter into a positive relationship with the land where we reside. Loving where you live is not passive–it is as much of a relationship (and requires just as much work) as a significant other…“
• “Every one of us lives in a unique ecosystem with a unique history.  Our ecosystem can strengthen us, can teach us, can shape us…if we let it.  If we know how to talk to it–and more importantly, if we know how to listen to it.“

But I’ve never really spelled out the particulars too specifically (and yes, I gave this term to my beliefs, Google implied that it hadn’t been taken yet).  The idea of Spiritual Bioregionalism isn’t entirely new–it overlaps in some ways with concepts such as deep ecology,  bioregional animism, or ecological/natural polytheism.    The choice of the name though, is based in the simple fact is that my Paganism is based in the spiritual exploration of  what I find compelling in humanity’s ideas and ideals and what I connect with in my unique ecosystem.  It all starts, and ends (though it can go to plenty of places in between), with the spirit of place…the spirit of MY place.

Spirit of place is defined as the tangible (buildings, sites, landscapes, routes, objects) and the intangible elements (memories, narratives, written documents, rituals, festivals, traditional knowledge, values, textures, colors, odors, etc.), that is to say the physical and the spiritual elements that give meaning, value, emotion and mystery to place.

from the QUÉBEC DECLARATION ON THE PRESERVATION OF THE SPIRIT OF PLACE

Spiritual Bioregionalism (as I conceive it) is bound to a single idea–showing responsibility towards the environment and ALL of its inhabitants (including fellow humans) and respecting their capacity for self-determination.  It is centered in the notion that the bioregion can take the place of a central deity (without being a deity, unless you wanted it to be one), and be interacted with and celebrated using traditional human ideas of godhood.  This interaction may (or may not) include belief in gods–whether it be one god, shit tons of gods, or no gods at all, and whether the nature of belief in said gods is literal, symbolic, or non-existant, whether said gods are a historical or created pantheon (or are the natural features of the bioregion themselves).  Spiritual Bioregionalism calls upon us to worship (or not) in any way that brings ecstasy and reverence while honoring the cycles and stages of the bioregion and its inhabitants, and may or may not include the practice of magic (however one chooses to believe in it).

Practically speaking, it might call upon us to go outside more, to get to know our land base and our native species, to volunteer in our communities, to be a lessatarian, to utilize the local farmers market and eat consciously and mindfully, to thrift store more and buy new less, to have a garden, to pick up trash on the beach or at the park, to forage more, or to only eat meat that one can hunt or fish, etc.  Magically, it might mean getting to know your local plants and animals for use in or with rituals and spells, to find a spot to commune and communicate with on a consistent basis as our energetic base.  Religiously it might mean that we develop new relationships with the genus loci or that we get to know them through traditional cultural names and norms.  It might also mean that the Army-Navy football game is just as much of a holiday as Samhain–hey, I’m a former sailor that works on a giant ship and lives in a Navy town…don’t judge.  And it might mean something totally different.

Because, I am sort of the only adherent right now (though I suspect I know of a few people that might qualify).  I only really know what it means for myself and my family at this point.  But, there’s a ton of room to spread out and grow if you want to hang out in a bioregion nearby!

And if you don’t, that’s okay too.

A Yuletide Maxim: Live together meekly

…so the Christians and the Pagans sat together at the table,
finding faith and common ground the best that they were able…

Before Jesus (as reported in the Bible, specifically Matthew 5) said “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.”, the Delphic Maxims said “Live together meekly” (Ομιλει πραως).

Meekness isn’t really a value of modern Western society.

Of course, the meaning of the term “meek” has shifted from its original use quite a bit.  Meek used to mean something like: gentle, quiet, benevolent, kind, and modest.  Today though, meek means docile, submissive, spiritless, and tame.  In those terms, I don’t really consider meekness as an admirable trait either.

But I do think that there is something to be said for finding ways to live together.

Perhaps, considering the time of year it is, we could start with opting out of the so-called War on Christmas.  I’m not sure that anyone other than Fox News (and people that actually take Fox News seriously) really thinks that there is actually a War on Christmas, but I think there are better rebuttals than “Christmas was stolen from Paganism” memes, billboards for reason, etc.  How about we say “Thanks” when someone says “Happy/Merry ______” and get over it?  The existence of people that celebrate a day differently than me is not a personal attack.

Perhaps, considering the time of year it is, we could begin with starting a tradition of service to our communities–to volunteering our time, effort, energy (which may or may not be represented as money) into programs that support our ideals.  Wouldn’t it be great if this time of year was when we renewed a tradition of giving that lasted all year long, rather than salving our holiday conscience?

Perhaps, considering the time of year it is, we could start by examining our consumption.  Choosing how and why and where we buy things more wisely.  Maybe we could consume less by buying better quality, longer lasting things.  Maybe we can worry less about the current trendy gadget, after all, it will be replaced in about six months.

If we start here, now, in learning to live together with intention, perhaps we can begin to live together softly.  We can live together with gentleness and live together kindly, together in quiet, in peace, in benevolence.