Path: Supernews70!Supernews73!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!worldfeed.gte.net!newsfeed.gte.net!news.gte.net!not-for-mail From: Herne Newsgroups: alt.native,alt.magick.chaos,alt.pagan,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.magick.tyagi Subject: Re: Honorable Eclecticism (was Hermeticism and Indigenous Spirituality (was Re: Chaos magick ...) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 1998 14:12:08 -0600 Organization: gte.net Lines: 84 Message-ID: <6df3ot$m6e$1@gte1.gte.net> References: <34F5DDF9.511A@swipnet.se> <19980227211700.QAA26161@ladder02.news.aol.com> <34f7b1e0.4308360@news.inreach.com> <34F828FB.2316@swipnet.se> <34f886f4.2168250@news.inreach.com> <6dbnaf$92d$1@shell.accesscom.com> <6dc620$kns$2@gte2.gte.net> <6dcq7t$d3$1@shell.accesscom.com> <6ddj7h$92d$1@gte2.gte.net> <6despk$8nd$1@shell.accesscom.com> Reply-To: herne@gte.net NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust35.tnt21.dfw5.da.uu.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Auth: DE01945D0AD484CD16C58491 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; U) To: nagasiva@yronwode.com Xref: Supernews70 alt.native:46948 alt.magick.chaos:16203 alt.pagan:255736 talk.religion.misc:349235 talk.religion.newage:95655 alt.magick.tyagi:14925 white-slug wrote: > Herne : > > > By rejecting the substance, one rejects the spirituality. > > how can one tell when a person rejects the substance/spirituality? > what are the signs of so doing? it is helpful to see these so > that we don't make the overly-easy association between those > who grow up in a tradition and reject the substance as 'respectful' > and those who come from outside it, perhaps like bees only partly > connected as 'disrespectful'. what attitudes, behaviors and > overall problems have you seen among those who reject the substance? It seems to me that the question is one of sincerity and commitment, and ultimately more important to the one who is borrowing from the tradition than anyone else. Others might be interested for the purpose of deciding whether to associate with or learn from the borrower, or for the purpose of advising someone else who is considering doing the same. Ultimately, again, discernment is a spiritual function. Certain signs, such as sacrifice in order to remain true to one's goals, and the fruits of spiritual maturity, can be indicative. I am not a Christian; but I think the catalog of "fruits of the Spirit" in Galatians 5:22-23 is a pretty good guide: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. I think these are generally signs that someone is on the path of Spirit, in any genuine tradition (i.e. one that works). Regarding Native Americans who complain of those who borrow bits and pieces from their traditions: I think they have a valid concern. As creatures with room to grow, we humans have a tendency to take what is comfortable, and leave what is not; and growth is not always comfortable. Irresponsible eclecticism is that which decides what to take and what to leave behind on the basis of what simply feels good, without true regard for what is actually conducive to spiritual growth. Now, there is, I think, a time for this; when we are spiritual children, relatively speaking, I think it is appropriate to satisfy one's safety needs first. But hopefully childhood passes, once safety is established, and it is time to grow; and growth is demanding and challenging. Another valid reason for their concern, to my mind, is the preservation of the integrity of their tradition. Form is not more important than function; but spiritual children are almost never in a position to decide what is and is not vital to a tradition. By widely disseminating the elements of Native American tradition, these elements are subjected to being diluted and split apart from one another in a manner which renders them much less meaningful and potent. It is true that, ultimately, meaning should not be sacrificed for mere form; but that is not to say that form is worthless -- far from it. It is the proven power of a form to provide a spiritual pathway that gives it value. The Christian church once faced the same problem, which led to the centralization of ecclesiastical authority; and wild, crazy Bible cults would not have been possible without the Reformation. This is not to say that putting the Bible in the hands of the common people was a bad thing; but it is to point out the dangers that attend the ... dare I say "vulgarization" ... of a proven spiritual form. We are all aware of the dangers that attend a power-over religious authority structure. However, it is not merely pride or a lust for domination that motivates the creation of such structures; they can also arise in an effort to preserve the integrity of a proven spiritual path. There are dangers in the wide dissemination of these things. That doesn't necessarily mean such dissemination should not occur; but it is to say that the concern is valid, and the danger is real. Lastly, Native Americans who are concerned about the wide dissemination of the elements of their spiritual paths may have insight as to those paths that others do not -- in fact, we should expect that to be true. If they say that it is inappropriate to take this but not that, to do this but not that, when applying these elements, they may well be right. It is conceivable that such people are motivated by pride, stubbornness, ethnocentrism or blindness -- and I would be surprised if there were not -- but nevertheless I think that their voices should be heard and their words carefully considered. After all, they are more likely to have walked in their own ways to a more profound extent than most of the rest of us are, and are more likely to understand them. The ultimate criterion is, of course, one's own heart. One can only follow the leading of one's own heart; and for some people this borrowing seems necessary. Whether it truly is or not, remember, is never a question of guilt, but rather of wisdom. Each person must decide for himself.