Approaching the Land

We live in a world, among people and animals and plants and streams and rocks and all manner of things.  So we know where we live, right?  We have a working knowledge of the place we live?  You would think so, but this is far from a certainty.  How we approach it, or don't, determines both out experience of it and our knowledge of it.  What do you truly know about the world around you?  How do you approach the world around you?  How do you approach the Land?

I would postulate that there are three main ways people approach the world around them.  These might be a bit oversimplification, or they might adequately describe the human approach.  My observation shows them to be fairly encompassing.

1) To Let the World Happen to You

In my observation, this is the most common.  It is an approach of not approaching.  Most people don't approach the world, they let the world approach them.  They go through life just trying to go through life, and learn of the world by how it collides with them, often in cross purposes to how they are trying to go through life.  Their experience of the world is that of opposition, that which is trying to stop them, delay them, irritate them, upset them.  As such, the world outside their skin becomes the enemy, something to fight against, the strive against.  Whole religious doctrines have been built off this view of the world, and are a result of choosing not to approach the world, to let the world happen to you.

2) To Seek What is Known to You

This approach is a very academic approach. You start with what you know, what you've learned, what you believe, what you think is true.  Your truth.  You take that idea, and look for the proof in the world around you.  If you find it not to be true, find proof that it isn't true, or don't find it where you expect to, you refine your idea, research a new idea, or come up with a new truth.  Rinse and repeat.  This is an abstract and symbolic way of approaching the world, because you start with something abstract or symbolic, something you believe to be Truth but don't have the experience yet to apply, then test it and find what it looks like, or doesn't look like, in the world around you.  Much of the application of scientific method uses this approach, where the theory starts in the abstract and in equations or calculations, and is then tested to see if it is true.  A lot of market research also takes this approach.

Unlike the first approach, this approach sees the world as a test bed, not as an enemy.  The world becomes that which will aid me in refining my Truth, distilling it down to its essence.  Truth becomes the driving force, and both that within my skin and without becomes the tools to obtain it.

3) To Observe the World and Find What It Teaches

The third approach is to assume nothing.  Presume you don't know anything and go out to see what the world will show you and tell you.  This doesn't mean dismissing what you know or not taking it into account, but observing the world and using it to understand what you already know.  Instead of, I know the he East means this, so what does that tell me about it, this approach is to say, if I knew nothing about the East, and I look to it and think about it and observe what is there, what would I see, and what would that tell me about what I already know or think I know?  Instead of, this is a green ash and I know these things about ash trees so how does that apply to what I'm seeing, this approach is to say, I know this is an ash, but if I did not and if I knew nothing about it, what would I see before me now, what would I learn, then, what does that say and show me about what I already knew?

In this approach, the world isn't the enemy nor the test bed, it's the teacher, showing us what is truly there.  Our Truth is refined and distilled as a byproduct rather than the goal, the goal it to know the world, the Land, around us, to understand our place in it, and to learn what it would teach whether that is relevant to what we already knew or thought we knew or isn't.

You can likely tell from my wording my thoughts on each approach, but I want to be clear, none of them are bad.  We each approach the world the way we know and can, though if aware of how we do, we have the option of changing it.  These three approaches are all acceptable approaches, and the results aren't necessarily better or worse than each other, just different.  It depends a lot where you want to go in life and what you are comfortable with.

That said, the third approach is the one I tend to recommend, the one I encourage when asked, and the one I try to take for myself.  The results of it are the results I want in my life and in the world around me, and results I'm biased for when encouraging others.

What is your heart, where do you want to go, what do you want out of life, the world, the Land?

FFF,
~Muninn's Kiss

On Doing the Work

Training is good, yes.

Books are good, yes.

But you can be trained in formal training for twenty years and never "get it", and you can go out your back door with no training or knowledge at all and just "get it".  There is no guaranties, and none of it is where you actually get experience and wisdom.  You get those from doing it.

If I went through the best medical school in the world, I wouldn't be able to go straight in and be able to do everything day one.  As an example, I want into the emergency room for something.  The doctor was concerned about something else because he hadn't ever seen it, but the nurse told him, no, that isn't normal, but it's not abnormal, and convince him not to worry about it.  He had far more formal training than she did, but she had worked in the ER for many years and seen much more than he had.  He had more knowledge, but she had more experience.  In general, nurses see more and experience more because they handle most things that don't require the expertise the doctor has because of training, so have more wisdom to see things as they really are and know what to do in a lot more circumstances.

I read a quote in a book last night, Witches, Midwives, and Nurse: A History of Women Healers.  "If a woman dare to cure without having studies she is a witch and must die."  Note the emphasis on studying (indicating training, not reading, in this context).  While the restriction of women in medical schools and the prevalence of women over men in folk practice was an issue at the time, it was more about credentials vs no credentials than about gender.  The doctors felt only they should be able to heal because they were the ones with training, who had put in the time and effort to be trained, and could prove they were training.  Not really different from today when the main argument against alternative medicine in the US is not about if it works or not, but about lack of a medical degree.

Back to the craft, same thing.

Training is good, and is required in some *traditions* to practice that *tradition*, for very good reasons, but is not required to practice the craft, and doesn't guaranty success in it, any more than reading books do.  It's the experience that builds wisdom, and if you don't do anything until you have learned sufficiently to make no mistakes and always be good at it, you'll never reach that.

Read what you can, sure.

Get the formal, or informal, training if you can, sure.

But are real teachers are the spirits, our experiences, and our own self, seen through a mirror darkly.

FFF,
~Muninn's Kiss

Thirteen Points of Advice for Those Starting on the Path

The following are thirteen points of advice and guidance I'd give to anyone starting out of the path.  They aren't exclusive, there are other things to know.  And they aren't original, they are drawn from many sources.  And they are from my point of view, so should not be taken as gospel.  I hope they help some who read them.  Before getting into them, four books I'd recommend before most others, and I have a very long recommended reading list, are the following:

• Visual Magick by Jan Fries (Paperback, Kindle)
• Drawing Down the Spirits by Kenaz Filan and Raven Kaldera (Paperback, Kindle)
• Mysticism: Initiation and Dream by Andrew D. Chumbley (J.D. Holmes - US, Three Hands Press - UK)
• The Robert Cochrane Letters by Robert Cochrane and Evan John Jones (Out of print but available through Amazon)

And that being said, here are the thirteen points of advice that are my intention if sharing this:

1. Mutual respect is essential. Respect the spirits, and expect respect in return. If you don't receive it, they're out, burnt, or cut off.
2. All things have a spirit, and that spirit can be worked with and learned from. Some work with them as servants, or worship them and become servants. I prefer to work with them as partners. There is an authority in knowing you are equal with all things.
3. People (and spirits) see what they expect to see. Open your eyes, then open them again. Observe. Perceive. Understand.
4. What conceals also reveals. Look beneath the surface, both in of what your senses (physical or otherwise) tell you and what teachings, lore, and myth tell you. What they hide is as important as what they say.
5. Learn to ask the right questions. Asking the wrong question will send you in the wrong direction. There are no bad questions, but often looking at the question in the right way opens doors. And always ask the next question, don't let the answer be the end of the question.
6. When all else fails, cheat. Don't assume that the traditional way to do something, the way everyone does it, or the way you've always done it is the only approach. If it doesn't work, do something else.
7. Divide and conquer. If something is baffling or seems to be concealing something you can't quite grasp or see, break it down, look at each part of it separately, determine where something is missing, concealed, or not working, and focus there.
8. Only you are responsible for your actions and words, no one else, and you aren't responsible for anyone else's. Do what is necessary, but accept the responsibility for it. Own what you say and what you do, regardless of the consequences or what you think of them later. Don't pass blame, and don't take it on.
9. Learn from all things. All beings, objects, persons, spirits, circumstances, lore, teachings, regardless of the source or pain or issues, contain beauty, knowledge, understanding, and wisdom, and can be learned from, if you ask the right questions, look beneath the surface, and separate what has value from what doesn't. There's a saying in Hawai'i that not all knowledge is found in one shed.
10. Be willing to consider any idea, no matter how different from your own. Examine it, understand it, but don't just accept it in you process. Hold on firmly to what you know, and only change it if there is good reason to do so.
11. Everybody lies, misrepresents, and hides things. This goes for spirits as well as living humans, and all things. Never assume you are being told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. We all speak through our filters, understand based on our experiences, hide what we don't want seen, and mislead when it will gain us something. Make no assumptions about the truth of, completeness of, or accuracy of anything you are told. This goes for what you tell yourself as well. Look deeper, examine. Observe. Perceive. Understand.
12. What is yours, you need to hold, protect, defend. As Cochrane said, "What I have--I hold!" You are guardian and keeper of what is yours. Find what that is, and keep it against the storm.
13. What you put in, you get out. As we say in computers, garbage in, garbage out. Only you control what you get from the path. No effort, no result. No danger, no gain. Victor Anderson said anything worth doing is dangerous, and Cochrane said take all you are given, give all of yourself. Huna teaches that where your attention goes, the mana goes, and Taoist thought teaches similar, where the mind goes, the chi follows. Where you focus, that's where your energy is, what you think about and contemplate, that is where you will learn. It's all about you. You hold the reins. Make the most of it.

Hope these are helpful for some.

FFF,

~Muninn's Kiss

All knowledge is not taught in one shed: My thoughts on books, oral teaching, and experience

I'm a firm believer that there is truth and things to learn in everything, even crap.  And by crap, I mean many "occult" books that which are being published lately.  And my "occult" (verses, say, occult), I mean things that claim to be secret or new but are just rewording of a thousand books mass produced before them.  Even in the shallowest, fluffiest, most full of plagiarism and dribble book, there is still truth and still things to learn, because even the most unoriginal and unimaginative person in the world is still led by the Muses once in a while, and will hit on truth and "secrets" and things worth learning unintentionally and often unaware.  I would of course rather read an author for whom that is the norm than the exception, but no book is without a nugget of truth for those that have eyes to see and ears to hear.  Though, that doesn't mean it's often worth the time to read the dribble to find it.

Point being, learning from a book, or a teacher, or the spirits, or anything, relies on the one learning more than anything.  You can't teach a rock to fly, you can just throw it and see if it can avoid hitting the ground.  The author may only produce dribble, but the right reader could find the secrets of the universe in the book (to quote Men in Black, "I promised you the secrets of the universe, nothing more.").  An author could be inspired and breathe the most profound truths into every sentence and the wrong reader might throw it away as nonsense.

Of course, on the other hand, it was fairly recent that the verb that is now our English "to learn" became the action of the student.  Even into the early 19th century, the usage was "He learned me to do it", not "I learned it from him."  A teacher, or author, imparts truth to the student, or reader, breathing that truth into them.  The teacher, or author, does the action, the student, or reader, only receives.  Receiving that truth is passive, teaching or writing it is active.  But, to passively receive something, you must be open to it.  Holding a fist in the air does not allow someone to give you a cup of water, but holding an open hand out in the air does.

This is what I mean above.  When I read, I read in a way that's open to receive whatever truth was breathed into it, intentionally and consciously or unintentionally and unconsciously.  I experience the truth in the book.  Same thing when I go out into the world.  When I stand on the top of a mountain 10,000 feet above sea level with the wind whipping through my hair, the solid rock under my feet, I'm open to receive what the spirits of that place want to teach me.  When I draw a circle, call to the spirits I work with and invite them, and perform a rite, I'm open to what the spirits and the rite has to teach me.  Reading a book really isn't different from learning from experience, it's just a different medium.

The key is to be open to it, and not make it your only source of truth.  There's a saying in Hawai'ian, "a'ohe pau ka 'ike i ka ha lau ho'okahi", basically "all knowledge is not taught in one shed."  This stems from a period when spiritual teachers in Hawai'i would teach in the three sided sheds that were common, to anyone who came to them.  The point being, each teacher teaches differently, and teaches different things.  The same is true here.  There are things best learned from a book, but things you can never learn from a book.  There are things best taught orally, teacher to student, and things that can never be passed through oral language.  There are things best taught only by experience, and things you can't learn from experience alone.  The moment you limit yourself to one source of knowledge, understanding, and wisdom is the moment you limit your knowledge, understanding, and wisdom.

A'ohe pau ka 'ike i ka ha lau ho'okahi.

FFF,
~ Muninn's Kiss

Craft of All Crafts

Plato talked of what he called the World of the Forms.  Unlike Aristotle, who would say a chair (or whatever item you choose) is called a chair and is recognizable as a chair because it is the essence of chairness, that it's very existence makes it what it is, Plato would say we recognize it as a chair because it is modeled after the ideal chair in the World of the Forms.  We recognize it as a chair based recognizing it for something following the plan for what a chair should be.

Both these viewpoints have merit, and both can be seen as simultaneously true if you can grasp paradox.  Aristotle's chair is a very real, physical chair, concrete and tangible.  Plato's chair is a reflection, an image, an illusion you could say.  Seen together, you get the model of most esoteric understandings of the universe, from the Hindu Maya, the Dream, to the Taoist Yin and Yang out of Tao and Te, from the Kabbalist upper and lower heavens and earths, and the Sepherot and Qippot, to the Celtic world and otherworld.

These themes run strong in many forms of traditional witchcraft, but especially in Grimr.  While some take on only Plato's view, seeing the material world as an illusion to be rejected, others take on Aristotle's view, seeing the otherworld as within us, to teach us about the outer world which is the only reality.  Grimr holds Plato's and Aristotle's views in paradox.  In some ways, the material world is an illusion, a reflection of worlds beyond, seen through a mirror darkly.  In other ways, the material is very real, and any rejection of it is embracing illusion and moving away from Truth.  For the separation of the worlds is the true illusion, and the Threads stretch through all worlds and the Tree and River and Web reach in both directions.

Looking at Plato's view more closely, specifically in the context of what is often called the Craft, we see a pattern take form.  It is significant that it almost seems each medieval craft had mystic and esoteric teachings and practice as part of their guilds and societies.

We see, most significantly and surviving, the Freemasons.  There was a time it was made up of actual stone masons performing their trade, though it's more often symbolic and esoteric masonry today.  The esoteric secrets and understandings are crouched in stone mason terminology and techniques, and the legends and myths are set in this context.

Another often commented on example is the Horsemen's Word, primarily in Scotland, which was strong and thriving from all evidence around the time of the turn of the 1900s, but has since died out.  There are some surviving accounts and descriptions pointing to an esoteric tradition of Cainite nature focused around horses and their training and care.

Smiths were thought to be magical in their craft, turning raw metal into weapons and tools and other useful forms.  It's no coincidence that many cultures had smithing gods and goddesses.  Smiths were treated with awe ranging from respect to fear.  There's some evidence of lore passed down master to apprentice in at least some cases that went beyond just the practical elements of their craft.

Weavers have always been associated with Fate, most cultures having weaver and weaving gods and goddesses who were usually tied to Fate or Destiny in some way.  In most of the Middles Ages, and also outside that era depending on location, weaving was a male profession.  Weavers seemed to have had a similar awe as smiths in many places, transforming plants into cloth and clothes, something people depended on as much as what the smith created.  But the respect seems less, and the fear closer to distrust.  In many areas, weavers were trusted about as much as gypsies, in other words not much.  There seems to have also been esoteric lore related to weaving passed down.

You see similar things with potters, with sailors, with tinkers.  Each skilled profession, each group that can be called a craft, seems to have had their lore and myth and secrets, specific to their craft.  There's a saying in Hawaii, 'a'ohe pau ka 'ike i ia hā lau ho'okahi, all knowledge is not taught in one shed.  Each craft, each profession, teaches that which relates to their field, their understanding, their craft.  The truths shown in how a thread is spun are meaningless to a mason, and a weaver knows nothing of plumbing a wall.

To come back to Plato's idea, each of these professions, each of these crafts, reflects the ideal Craft in the World of the Forms.  Each is made after the original, but none can fully capture that original, for they are but reflections.  The ideal Craft, the perfect Craft, can be seen through each craft, they can each teach part of it, but none are the Craft, the Craft of all crafts.

There's a reason witchcraft is so hard to define.  A mason works with stone.  A carpenter works with wood.  A smith works with metal.  I weaver works with thread and twine.  A husbandman works with animals.  But what does a witch work with?  Power?  Energy?  Spirits?  Fate?  It can't be defined because it's not a simple craft, it is the Craft, the Craft of all crafts, that which all other crafts flow out of and are a reflection of.

We don't practice a craft.  We practice THE Craft.  The Craft of all crafts.

FFF,
~Muninn's Kiss

What Would You Sacrifice for Knowledge/Da'ath/Gnosis/Power/Mystery/Wisdom?

"The Tempation of Eve"
by William Blake

It's been said that G-d lied to Adam and Eve, that he said they would die if they ate the fruit, but that they didn't...   Oh, but they did die!  But that's part of the point.  First the "small deaths" of leaving the Garden, toiling in the field, and the pains of childbirth, then the "great death" at the end of their lives, Adam at 930 years old.

What would you give up to gain Knowledge?  What would you give up to become "like G-d", to become a god?  Is the immortality of your physical body a sacrifice worth giving?  They traded a posh (Port out, starboard home, around the Cape of Good Hope, for those who don't know) life of ease, caring for the trees but not working hard, but living in ignorance, for a life of toil and hard work and pain and eventual death, but gained Knowledge, Da'ath, Gnosis.

How many Americans living a comfortable, easy life would give that all up for Knowledge/Da'ath/Gnosis?

Essentially, it's Initiation, dying to gain Knowledge/Da'ath/Gnosis/Power/Mystery/Wisdom, then being reborn/remade.  It's like Odin said:

Down to the deepest depths I peered
I know I hung on that windy tree,
Swung there for nine long nights
Wounded by my own blade
Bloodied for Odin.
Myself an offering to myself
Bound to the tree
That no man knows
Wither the roots of it ran.

None gave me bread.
None gave me drink.
Down to the deepest depths I peered
Until I spied the Runes.
With a roaring cry I seized them up
Then dizzy and fainting I fell.

Well-being I won
And wisdom, too.
From a word to a word
I was led to a word.
From a deed to another deed.

It's essentially the same story, sacrificing yourself to yourself on the tree, and gaining  Knowledge/Da'ath/Gnosis/Power/Mystery/Wisdom.

G-d mislead them by creating a taboo that the plan ultimately required to be broken.  The serpent mislead them by making it sound like the promised death was immediate and absolute, rather than in the future and temporary.  But ultimately, Adam and Eve made their own decision, not based only on what G-d said, and not only on the serpent.  They gave up something to gain something else, and though they suffered the consequences, they changed EVERYTHING.  They took their Destiny into their own hands and overcome Fate by breaking the taboo, while G-d and the serpent stood back to see what they would do.

FFF,
~Muninn's Kiss