Messages In This Digest (8 Messages)
- 1a.
- Re: One question From: Trinity
- 1b.
- Re: One question From: LorriePaige
- 2a.
- Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three" From: LorriePaige
- 2b.
- Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three" From: LorriePaige
- 2c.
- Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three" From: Czigany Shimza
- 2d.
- Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three" From: Ladyhawke
- 3a.
- ??on solitary elemental Re: [Witc From: Trish Curtis
- 4.
- Problems with "Eclecticism" & "Eclectic" Wicca From: gaia_d
Messages
- 1a.
-
Re: One question
Posted by: "Trinity" witchofhope@yahoo.com witchofhope
Fri Jul 8, 2011 4:14 pm (PDT)
I'm sorry I didn't meant to be confusing.
In Trad Witchcraft we have no rule of three or karma laws.
So reading it here threw me a bit as I thought it was a Trad Craft group.
There are some very interesting subjects here, but different from my path.
Thank You all for your responds .
--- On Fri, 7/8/11, lori esau <kirubitme@yahoo.com > wrote:
From: lori esau <kirubitme@yahoo.com >
Subject: Re: [Witch_Essentials] Re: One question
To: Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. com
Date: Friday, July 8, 2011, 3:08 AM
I would like to add that I totally agree with Blackbird on this Trinity. We would love your input.
From: Blackbird <blackbird_61@yahoo.com >
To: Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Thu, July 7, 2011 9:55:11 PM
Subject: [Witch_Essentials] Re: One question
Hi Trinity,
I'm a bit confused by your use of the term, "Traditional Witchcraft"
here, but our group is a pretty ecletic one,
I believe I am correct in saying Gaia is a Wiccan on a Brit Trad Path,
I know we have others on a more Electic Path, and I Identify myself as
simply Pagan, as my interest in Witchcraft is more focused on The Craft,
than on Wicca as a Religion per se; my own spiritual path resonating
with a more Archaic Paganism really. I do hope you will rething
resigning your membership, certainly till Gaia has replied; if you have
another point of view to offer, I think it would profit all concerned
to hear it, no?
Brightest Blessings, BB.
--- In Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. , "Trinity" <witchofhope@com ...>
wrote:
>
Is this a wiccan
group.
I was looking for Traditional Witchcraft where there isn't a rule of
three or
karma, so I think I'm in the wrong group. Could someone please help me
out. If
this is Wiccan then I'm sorry but I've made a mistake in joining and
will
respectfully decline my membership.
Thank You.
- 1b.
-
Re: One question
Posted by: "LorriePaige" anindigogirl@yahoo.com anindigogirl
Fri Jul 8, 2011 4:16 pm (PDT)
Yes, I agree. About 30 years ago NO WAY did I believe in a lot of major things I believe in now, but you know what? I'm all the more happy and peaceful in my life becuase of my beliefs/lifestyle today.
I get that nirvana kind of feeling more and more, longer and longer...and it's..majick! :)
Lorrie
--- In Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. , ~T'rosy~ <rosyrock1968@com ...> wrote:
>
> I have to say I enjoy the diversity of opinion here. It keeps the old brain ticking over and more than once has sent me on hours long sessions of internet searches which have expanded my knowledge and my mind. I suppose there's always that attitude of "take what you need and leave the rest," but even the "rest" I find I love to research and dissect and understand before I leave it behind!
>
> Be totally at peace with whatever you decide, that's what's most important.
>
> rosy
- 2a.
-
Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three"
Posted by: "LorriePaige" anindigogirl@yahoo.com anindigogirl
Fri Jul 8, 2011 4:15 pm (PDT)
I just wish our replies were instant. It's a bit frustrating if there is a misunderstanding and you have to wait for your corrections to be posted for others to see.
A reason I tend not to discuss heavy subjects (definitely not politics--lol!) on the Internet, becuase of constant misunderstandings I see on other group boards.
Lorrie
--- In Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. , Ladyhawke <ladyhawke.karen@com ...> wrote:
>
> LOL..
> Yeppers. Agreed. I am just not as eloquent in speaking/explaining my
> thoughts as some here. I love seeing what others are doing, how they are
> doing it. It helps me to further define/hone my own beliefs and ways of
> doing. Sometimes I reply in hope of starting a conversation about things to
> see where/what people are thinking. Expanding one's worldview and sources
> of wise council, sharpens the student/blade/tool.
> karen
>
have a
> > defence system?"
> >
> > My reply was no.. it won't come back to you three times. And that I didn't
> > believe in the Rule of Three. I never said there wasn't an energetic
> > return. Just that it doesn't come back three times.
> >
> > If you believe in the Rule of Three.. Then it happens 3 times. Three is
> > equal to three, every time!
> >
> > Otherwise it would be called the Rule of 1/2 to 3.
> > Like when someone thinks about doing something a lot, plans it, build
> > energy just by the the energy of thought, and then never actually presses
> > the button to MAKE it happen..but it happens because of the energy already
> > built up, maybe that's only a 1.5 return? LOL
> >
> > karen
> >
> > BB re:
> >
> > Please do understand I was taking the oppertunity to use your Bank Account
> > Analogy as a jumping off point, but I was not in any way trying to dis your
> > position. Which you made quite clear in a post I approved, but seems to
> > have gotten lost in cyberspace. My bad I expect, things have been
> > malfunctioning around me all week; I seem to have my own personal Mercury Rx
> > going on just now.
> >
> > No I actually agree with the detail of your position, as I think my larger
> > post makes clear, if the Buddhists are right, and I think they are about
> > this issue; it is the Dharma of the Universe to seek balance, the rule of 3
> > taken literally would create a very unbalanced universe that inheriently
> > over reacted to any energy put into it's system; and I dont believe that is
> > the case;
> >
> > but of course ... the world is a bit more complex in that as Chaos theory
> > tells us A butterfly beating its wings in Africa under just the right
> > circumstances can create the imbalance that grows into a Hurrican, but a
> > Hurrican (or any storm really) is the process by which nature rebalances
> > herself. So while Balance is the ultimate Dharma, the road taken to get
> > there might lead us through Katrina.
> >
> > Blessings, BB.
> >
> >
> >
>
- 2b.
-
Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three"
Posted by: "LorriePaige" anindigogirl@yahoo.com anindigogirl
Fri Jul 8, 2011 4:15 pm (PDT)
I agree with you, yes it should work every time but the thing is, I doubt every person always 100% believe in every single thing at all times. Plus, as I mentioned earlier there are other factors. :)
If you don't believe, that's great. I don't care what you believe in. I'm not the debating type of person. Most times people will believe in what they believe no matter what regardless of what people say. I'm not saying it's that way with you, but I find that's how people are in general. And that's fine; I'm pretty strong in my beliefs as well. :)
Lorrie
--- In Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. , Ladyhawke <ladyhawke.karen@com ...> wrote:
>
> Who said we should poopoo all rules?
>
> I just said that I do not believe in the "Rule of Three". Nor do I
> believe that the writers of said rule, mis-wrote it to make it easier to
> understand the principles of energetic return. The "Rule of Three" is a
> religious tenant followed by some Wiccans. Certainly not followed by all
> Wiccans, nor only by Wiccans. Many witches and pagans who aren't Wiccan
> don't follow the "Rule of Three" either.
>
> I also find it interesting that the words "experienced" are thrown about as
> though anyone who is truly an experienced practitioner of the arts would
> naturally follow that particular rule. Not so. I know of many very
> experienced pagans, witches, magicians, etc (including many experienced
> people on this list) who don't follow this "tenant" and their lives have the
> same ups and downs as any other mindful practitioner.
>
> The "rule of 3" isn't a natural law. If it were, it would work for
> everyone, every time. And it would quickly make firm believers after the
> first working.
>
> I'm not saying that anyone else should or shouldn't agree/believe in it.
> Just that I don't.
>
> karen
>
- 2c.
-
Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three"
Posted by: "Czigany Shimza" trishahorn@aol.com monkeywhispers725
Fri Jul 8, 2011 4:18 pm (PDT)
Thank you Karen, Very well done!
Czigany Shimza
-----Original Message-----
From: gaia_d <Gaia_D@yahoo.com >
To: Witch_Essentials <Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. >com
Sent: Fri, Jul 8, 2011 4:33 am
Subject: [Witch_Essentials] Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three"
--- In Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. , Ladyhawke <ladyhawke.karen@com ...> wrote:
>
> Who said we should poopoo all rules?
>
> I just said that I do not believe in the "Rule of Three". Nor do I
> believe that the writers of said rule, mis-wrote it to make it easier to
> understand the principles of energetic return. The "Rule of Three" is a
> religious tenant followed by some Wiccans. Certainly not followed by all
> Wiccans, nor only by Wiccans. Many witches and pagans who aren't Wiccan
> don't follow the "Rule of Three" either.
>
> I also find it interesting that the words "experienced" are thrown about as
> though anyone who is truly an experienced practitioner of the arts would
> naturally follow that particular rule. Not so. I know of many very
> experienced pagans, witches, magicians, etc (including many experienced
> people on this list) who don't follow this "tenant" and their lives have the
> same ups and downs as any other mindful practitioner.
>
> The "rule of 3" isn't a natural law. If it were, it would work for
> everyone, every time. And it would quickly make firm believers after the
> first working.
>
> I'm not saying that anyone else should or shouldn't agree/believe in it.
> Just that I don't.
>
> karen
>
GAIA:
I'd just like to say that i agree with Karen, and want to clarify my position:
-- There are many (both Wiccan and non, both Pagan and otherwise) who do NOT accept or follow the "Rule of Three" ;
-- and in no way did i intend to suggest that it "must" be or is followed by all --
Blessings - Gaia
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:16 PM, LorriePaige <anindigogirl@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > I agree with Gaia....
> >
> > In every kind of living, there are rules--like them or not. Be it laws of
> > government or laws of nature. To poo-poo all rules will land a person in
> > deep trouble.
> >
> > I find it interesting when I hear witches always using spells and/or
> > complaining about their life's problems...a witch going by nature's laws
> > will rarely have problems in their life and will VERY RARELY use spellwork,
> > as when a witch goes with the laws of nature they will not need to use
> > spellwork as things will naturally turn out wonderful every day in their
> > life 99% of the time. They will only need to use spellwork to help others
> > less fortunate....I have found this is true through my own research, through
> > experienced, very knowledgeable witches, and more and more in my own life. I
> > rarely need to use spells.
> >
> > Lorrie
> >
> >
> > --- In Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. , Ladyhawke <ladyhawke.karen@com >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > LOL
> > >
> > > To me the rule of 3 smacks too closely to tenants of other religion's
> > > rules.
> > > Maybe as a form of control?
> > > Maybe to make Wicca look better. (as in: Hey! Wiccans can't be all that
> > bad,
> > > after all: whatever they do comes back to them 3 times!)
> > >
> > > Whatever the truth may be, I don't think the rule of 3 was stated that
> > way
> > > as a matter of convenience in explaining the principle of energetic
> > returns.
> > >
> > > karen
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 9:03 AM, gaia_d <Gaia_D@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Since this subject has arisen lately, i'd like to make a few comments:
> > > >
> > > > The idea of "Karma" is not necessarily a part of Wicca, but many
> > Wiccans
> > > > have "adapted" it -- Albeit, without really understanding it!
> > > >
> > > > Karma is *NOT* any sort of "punishment" for bad deeds and "reward" for
> > good
> > > > deeds --
> > > >
> > > > That's a faulty understanding of the principle.
> > > >
> > > > Karma is instead, the NATURAL CONSEQUENCES of whatever intentions,
> > deeds,
> > > > and emotions --
> > > >
> > > > Think of it as the "economy" of the Universe: Whatever we send out,
> > returns
> > > > to us -- NOT in "reward" or "punishment", but because that is what we
> > have
> > > > PROMOTED and "sown" (made grow) into the Universe.
> > > >
> > > > And the idea that it must always be "three times" what we've sent out,
> > is
> > > > again, a FAULTY understanding of the principle --
> > > >
> > > > For *convenience* the principle has been named, "The Rule of Three",
> > but
> > > > it's no "rule" and it's not always "three times".
> > > >
> > > > It's important to do some study of the principles we hear passed around
> > --
> > > > especially from more experienced, knowledgeable and/or well-trained
> > folks,
> > > > rather than other beginners who may not know much more than we do, but
> > are
> > > > just repeating what they've heard in chats or discussion groups, from
> > OTHER
> > > > beginners --
> > > >
> > > > Blessed Be -
> > > > ~Gaia
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
- 2d.
-
Re: On Karma & the "Rule of Three"
Posted by: "Ladyhawke" ladyhawke.karen@gmail.com yerb5
Sat Jul 9, 2011 1:23 am (PDT)
Lorrie,
Yes! Exactly. Many of us are strong in our beliefs. We have learned to
trust our experiences. That is as it should be.
Sometimes I try to get people talking about tough subjects. I love hearing
other peoples thoughts and experiences. I've been doing this for a couple
of decades. I have students and I still learn from them. People approach
things from their unique situations. The more I hear from other people, the
more I have to think about, research, learn from and possibly share. Maybe
it'll just go into the.. "not for me" pile. But that's ok too. But I
respect and take into consideration ideas that people present, when they are
presented in a respectful way. I also try to do the same. It doesn't
always come out that way in email. But if we assume goodwill it goes more
smoothly.
Thanks
karen
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:31 PM, LorriePaige <anindigogirl@yahoo.com > wrote:
> **
>
>
> I agree with you, yes it should work every time but the thing is, I doubt
> every person always 100% believe in every single thing at all times. Plus,
> as I mentioned earlier there are other factors. :)
>
> If you don't believe, that's great. I don't care what you believe in. I'm
> not the debating type of person. Most times people will believe in what they
> believe no matter what regardless of what people say. I'm not saying it's
> that way with you, but I find that's how people are in general. And that's
> fine; I'm pretty strong in my beliefs as well. :)
>
>
> Lorrie
>
> --- In Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. , Ladyhawke <ladyhawke.karen@com ...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Who said we should poopoo all rules?
> >
> > I just said that I do not believe in the "Rule of Three". Nor do I
> > believe that the writers of said rule, mis-wrote it to make it easier to
> > understand the principles of energetic return. The "Rule of Three" is a
> > religious tenant followed by some Wiccans. Certainly not followed by all
> > Wiccans, nor only by Wiccans. Many witches and pagans who aren't Wiccan
> > don't follow the "Rule of Three" either.
> >
> > I also find it interesting that the words "experienced" are thrown about
> as
> > though anyone who is truly an experienced practitioner of the arts would
> > naturally follow that particular rule. Not so. I know of many very
> > experienced pagans, witches, magicians, etc (including many experienced
> > people on this list) who don't follow this "tenant" and their lives have
> the
> > same ups and downs as any other mindful practitioner.
> >
> > The "rule of 3" isn't a natural law. If it were, it would work for
> > everyone, every time. And it would quickly make firm believers after the
> > first working.
> >
> > I'm not saying that anyone else should or shouldn't agree/believe in it.
> > Just that I don't.
> >
> > karen
> >
>
>
>
- 3a.
-
??on solitary elemental Re: [Witc
Posted by: "Trish Curtis" anartfullmind60@yahoo.com anartfullmind60
Fri Jul 8, 2011 4:17 pm (PDT)
whatt ia a solitary elemental?
_____________________ _________ __
From: "roberta.dinnie@three.com. " <roberta.dinnie@au three.com. >au
To: Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Thu, July 7, 2011 10:57:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Witch_Essentials] One question
Hi Trinity,
I'm not Wiccan, just a Solitary Elemental.
I view this group as an eclectic melting pot where you can get to see all ideas
and opinions.
---- Original Message ----
>From: Trinity <witchofhope@yahoo.com >
>To: Witch_Essentials@yahoogroups. com
>Sent: Fri, Jul 8, 2011, 10:45 AM
>Subject: [Witch_Essentials] One question
>
>
>Is this a wiccan group.
>I was looking for Traditional Witchcraft where there isn't a rule of three or
>karma, so I think I'm in the wrong group. Could someone please help me out. If
>this is Wiccan then I'm sorry but I've made a mistake in joining and will
>respectfully decline my membership.
>Thank You.
>
>
>
- 4.
-
Problems with "Eclecticism" & "Eclectic" Wicca
Posted by: "gaia_d" Gaia_D@yahoo.com gaia_d
Sat Jul 9, 2011 3:31 am (PDT)
The following material was posted by "Callisto" in another Group (see
the link) which i titled, "Problems with Eclecticism" --
-- And i thought it was so logical and articulate an explanation of the
problems of Eclecticism (in Wicca), that i wanted to post it here -- I
hope it's helpful to someone.
Problems with Eclecticism -
http://www.wiccantogether.com/ forum/topics/ silver-ravenwolf -1?commentId= \
1070680%3AComment%3A2721005
<http://www.wiccantogether.com/ >forum/topics/ silver-ravenwolf -1?commentId\
=1070680%3AComment%3A2721005
Permalink
<http://www.wiccantogether.com/ > Replyxn/detail/ 1070680:Comment: 2721005
by Callisto
<http://www.wiccantogether.com/ >forum/topic/ listForContribut or?user=3o80o\
9s6e42cr
...Realistically there are not a multitude of Wiccan paths. There are a
ton of witchcraft paths, and paths that borrow from Wicca. There is
Traditional Wicca, which is the original form. It has a particular set
of traditions, they are few in number, descend from one another and
resemble each other so much that it's clear to see that they're closely
related. There is no mix and match in Trad Wicca, it's a very specific
thing and a person can't simply declare that they're a traditional
Wiccan. It requires attaining proper training and initiation from elders
of the traditions.
Next is an entirely separate practice, Eclectic/Solitary Wicca that
originated by taking the outward non-initiatory aspects of traditional
Wicca to use as a template or base upon which the individual builds a
personal mode of practice. Since it does not have the inner teachings
and knowledge of Trad Wicca (as that's attained via initiation), it's a
different practice all together. One that also differs from person to
person since it's developed on an individual basis. This is where some
of the confusion comes in, because each person does things differently.
Various deities, myriad influences from other sources, one person
focusing on a particular discipline, another focusing on something else.
There is no unifying core, only basic parts from original Wicca (and
even that will vary in extent). It's up to the individual to determine
the overall purpose, to give it its "heart". No two Eclectics practice
the same and can be widely different to one another. Again, this differs
from Trad Wicca in which it's abundantly clear those practices are akin
to one another as they share a core purpose, meaning and function.
Lastly, there are eclectic pagan practices that don't claim to be Wicca
but clearly show signs of the person having been strongly influenced by
Wicca because they borrow practices that are Wiccan. Sometimes they'll
make claims that are not entirely accurate, such as claiming to practice
Religio Romana (reconstruction of ancient Roman religion) ... yet are
casting circles and celebrating sabbats (which are not part of authentic
RR).
So this is why so many erroneously think that "Wicca is whatever you
want it to be". If that were true, Wicca would not be an identifiable
practice, just an cacophony of seemingly random pairings with no
discernable structure, everyone simply doing his or her own thing.
That said, Christianity is a religion unto itself. Traditionally, so is
Wicca, and the two do not mesh. From a Trad Wiccan standpoint, there is
no such thing as "Christo-Wicca" as Gaia has explained. Traditionally,
Wicca has its own deities and how the divine and the connection between
it and Man is perceived does not mesh with the Christian notion. Further
to that, Trad Wicca is a type of priesthood, that of a Mystery cult
("cult" in the ancient sense, not the modern brain wash sense). The
Christian god simply does not fit into traditional Wicca, he is not a
Wiccan deity.
As for Eclectic Wicca: it's often stated "Wiccans don't believe in
Satan, that's a Christian deity and we don't worship Christian deities."
So which is it, do Wiccans believe in Christian deities or no? It's all
or nothing. Pagans, witches and wiccans don't claim to only believe in
parts of pantheons. The whole is either accepted or rejected. If there
is no Satan, there is no montheistic God. If it's ok to graft one
Christian deity on to an Eclectic Wiccan practice, there's no valid
argument to deny someone else from grafting on the other and form
"Satanic Wicca".
WHY? Because: There's a different POV between tradition based practices
and eclectic ones. Tradition based practices place primary emphasis on
maintaining a balance between religio-mythic authenticity and unverified
personal gnosis (UPG) -- with authenticity taking greater precedence
over UPG. That's because UPG is "personal truth" which is not universal,
and often does not mesh with religio-mythic authenticity. Whereas
Eclectics are most often the direct opposite and put far greater
emphasis on UPG than authenticity, with insistence that all UPG be
deemed valid and equally true to the path regardless of one person's UPG
differing from someone else's understanding. Basically, if someone
claims the Christian god within a Solitary Wiccan practice, so too then
can another claim Satan within a Solitary Wiccan practice.
See the problem and contradictions that arise from declaring a practice
is "anything you want it to be" and all you need is to "do what feels
right"? There ceases to be any coherent reason to the alleged path.
There's also no longer the ability to say "yes, this fits" or "no,
that's not allowed." Anything goes when something's "anything you want
it to be."
Need to Reply?
Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Individual | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu