dark side of druidry

[Zylah]

To be honest, I thought eveything had at least just a little bit of the dark side.
I mean, isn't that normal for human beings?

Yes, indeed. Whether we like it or not, we have a balance of 'light' and 'dark', as does all of nature. I think this pertains however you define those terms - revealed vs. hidden, life-bringing vs. death-bringing, etc.

This to me is where - for instance - the Wiccan Rede ['An it harm none, do as you will'], or even the Golden Rule ['Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'], is not possible to apply wholeheartedly and still live a biological life on this planet. I've seen discussions deteriorate into absurdity very often, largely because people become so averse to the simple science of life, as if it should obey our arbitrary moral laws. Just one example: We have an immune system that is highly organized and efficient at murdering alien life forms that trespass on our bodies; so even if you subsist on nothing more than pure air (which no one can do for very long), you're killing organisms just by existing. Yet people insist on taking the tack that we should strive to be 100% 'light' and 'goodness', which means never harming any other form of life. It just isn't possible. Period.

The same applies in the other direction, of course: we have colonies of 'good' life forms that live in symbiosis with us; we can't live without them, they can't live without us. One reason we have such an upsurge of certain chronic conditions (such as Inflammatory Bowel Diseases) in our times is the abuse of antibiotics, which generally go in like berserkers and murder everything in sight, including the bacteria that create the proper balance of life within our digestive system.

This is a microcosmic view of what I believe holds true for life as we know it. It is what it is - and if we're going to be really earth-based, we need to acknowledge that our lovely Mother Nature is an elegant, efficient destroyer and consumer as well as nurturing protector; and we are in her image.

I do realize that most people argue for specified application of the Rede or the Rule, but this is meant to illustrate the danger of taking principles to absurd extremes. Druidry reveals the cycle of nature and of life in all its terrible beauty; death must come for some, that life may come for others. Life --> Death --> Rebirth is the way of things, and it is not helpful to apply moral values to death unequivocally. I was taught growing up in Sunday School that Death is the ultimate enemy, brought about by the Fall of Man into sin and evil; I was taught by my Druid grandmother, however, that Death in itself is neither good nor bad. Even *bringing* death is neither good nor bad inherently; we do it every day to some form of life.

This is not to say, of course, that we should start going around taking life with malice or cruelty; but we should deal with life - as it TRULY is, not as it was when we were in Kindergarten making watercolor paintings of rainbow-strewn sunlit meadows filled with butterflies and music - in an honest, humble, and loving way.

We aren't meant for extremes; we live in a place of balance.

[Canu Taliesin]

Death is the transformation of life, and when we have embraced it, the end of the ego. Beings without the energetic complex of the human ego die very differently to those of us who have identified ourselves as personalities. Our conception of death doesn't always translate into other states of being, like those lived by animals, plants, bacterium, or rocks. We can come to appreciate how other things die, but to call the motions of bacteria 'murder' is misleading. There is life and death as we know it, but there is also life and death conceived of in ways far beyond our understanding. Reducing these mysterious things to our limited conceptual framework serves only to misrepresent them. We can experience them directly without having to make sense of them first.

On a more general note, there is only ever a duality (light and dark etc) if we choose to abstract phenomena into absolute states. Yet my experience of life tells me that there are no absolutes. As the above post states, even our living bodies are continually shifting between life and death as beings transform into other beings on and on. We only define the body as 'life' by generalising it's state to an absolute, yet death is an inherent part of it's composition. A duality is only ever a mental concept used to approach it's balance, and through that glean a small taste of a greater balance, always shifting, always dancing. But we do have to leave the duality behind to achieve that, or be bound to it and it's illusion of the absolute.

[deepwater]

I still think that in this age we know little of the ancient dark arts and they are better left alone,,Perhaps it was for the good of all men that nothing was written down by us and only recorded by others of what they saw or heard about us and not knowing the small private things that make it all work now protects us,,Many times i'm shown terrible things when in the grove alone but normal things to her,,We have evolved past the dark times and knowing they were there should be enough

[Canu Taliesin]

I don't understand what you mean, Deepwater. Are you saying that it's best we don't use practices considered dark because we don't need them any longer? Do you believe we are incapable, for example, of bringing about balance through calling for someone's karma to be addressed? The results of such a thing could be deemed as 'dark' from many perspectives, yet the overall outcome would be beneficial. What kind of dark things do you experience in the grove?

[deepwater]

I am saying the lost arts and knowledge are vital in understanding the consequences of addressing the uncontrolled events that maybe brought to the lite of day,,We are a soft and an incapable form of human from long-ago and have no need to open what we know not what,,Prattel about the edges and suppose the meanings but stay clear of opening of or investigating the dark side arts realm or what you call it

[Canu Taliesin]

I am saying the lost arts and knowledge are vital in understanding the consequences of addressing the uncontrolled events that maybe brought to the lite of day,,

What consequences and what uncontrolled events?

[Woot Diligence]

Aloha,

Look - theres a simple answer to this. One can NOT be a druid, and be "dark" or evil at the same time. We are stewards of the Earth, we Protect the creations of our Maker... We are here to Serve and Protect, in a spiritual Way. If you ever take the final vows, you will understand.

Awen

[Dendren]

Hello, my first contribution here will probably sound awful and I want to apologize in advance for stepping on anyone's toes with my curiosity.
I have read many works on druidism, and some of them mention things about magic. As I am interested in all aspects of this particular topic, this darker side of druidism just belongs to it. Not to really think about using it, just to sate my thirst of knowledge.
But to find a literature about it is incredibly hard. Are there any books that deal specificaly of this particular aspect of druidism? What I am speaking about is the destructive aspect of magic, curses, harmful magic, etc.
I know that in general there is a lot of literature on this topic but it's nearly all from "christian" groups. I want a neutral or pagan point of view on this matter and not feel like quoting the bible the whole time.
I am aware of the ethical thematic on this topic but I think that these topic also belongs to druidism but is unfortunately so rarely covered.

[Aphritha]

From what I've seen, Druidry doesn't really deal in negative magics. The magic we tend to deal in is natural and positive. I've liked the book The Druid Magic Handbook by John Michael Greer.
There are plenty of books out there from Pagan perspectives on darker magics(binding, protective, exploring our shadows), however. I've got a book on shadow magic on my shelves, though I haven't worked my way all of the way through it yet. What I have read I've enjoyed. Its called Shadow Magic Compendium by Raven Digitalis.
I had quite a few others on general magic over the years(though all were on the more positive sides), and I wish I could remember their names. Unfortunately I lost quite a few in my last two sudden moves. But books on all types of magic do exist. I'd recommend doing some searching on Amazon.

[Zylah]

Death is the transformation of life, and when we have embraced it, the end of the ego. Beings without the energetic complex of the human ego die very differently to those of us who have identified ourselves as personalities. Our conception of death doesn't always translate into other states of being, like those lived by animals, plants, bacterium, or rocks. We can come to appreciate how other things die, but to call the motions of bacteria 'murder' is misleading. There is life and death as we know it, but there is also life and death conceived of in ways far beyond our understanding. Reducing these mysterious things to our limited conceptual framework serves only to misrepresent them. We can experience them directly without having to make sense of them first.

On a more general note, there is only ever a duality (light and dark etc) if we choose to abstract phenomena into absolute states. Yet my experience of life tells me that there are no absolutes. As the above post states, even our living bodies are continually shifting between life and death as beings transform into other beings on and on. We only define the body as 'life' by generalising it's state to an absolute, yet death is an inherent part of it's composition. A duality is only ever a mental concept used to approach it's balance, and through that glean a small taste of a greater balance, always shifting, always dancing. But we do have to leave the duality behind to achieve that, or be bound to it and it's illusion of the absolute.

Interesting post; I agree with much of it, if I am gleaning the correct understanding.

I do think it's a mistake to make assertions regarding things of which we have no certain knowledge, such as the way other creatures or life forms experience what we call 'death'. For that matter, I think it's a mistake to enter a discussion and say things like "Death is __________" or "Life is _____________" and so on - and I say this knowing that I have done it myself and will probably continue to do it because language is more convenient that way. Nonetheless, assertions smack of dogma, and dogma is inherently absolutist, and it seems we can agree that there are absolutely no absolutes.

I did indeed use the term 'murder' in reference to bacteria, and perhaps I should have clarified that I was making use of a philosophical human construct to give a similarity of shape to the comparison I wished to employ. I did not intend to imply a literalist interpretation of 'murder' as applied to bacteria, although it is very amusing to contemplate it as such.

I always find it interesting to observe statements asserting the absence of absolutes, which are made in close conjunction with such expressions as "only ever" <-- twice used above, which are in themselves absolute. Bit of a contradiction there.

I say this to point out that it is unnecessary to lecture about needing to let go of dualism in order to embrace a lack of absolutes. The nature of reality is always evolving; the more scientific knowledge we amass, the clearer it is that the construct we call 'reality' is in fact very fluid and subject to change. Subatomic theory and so forth; even the densest solid is mostly empty space, etc. So we realize by default that when we discuss the nature of life, the universe, and everything, we will use the familiar constructs of philosophy because they form a convenient frame of reference. I don't really think anyone here thinks of life in literal terms of black vs. white, light vs. dark, life vs. death, etc. Dualism simply happens to be a useful discussion tool - no one mistakes it for an 'absolute reality' <-- whatever that might be meant to refer to.

[Zylah]

Hello, my first contribution here will probably sound awful and I want to apologize in advance for stepping on anyone's toes with my curiosity.
I have read many works on druidism, and some of them mention things about magic. As I am interested in all aspects of this particular topic, this darker side of druidism just belongs to it. Not to really think about using it, just to sate my thirst of knowledge.
But to find a literature about it is incredibly hard. Are there any books that deal specificaly of this particular aspect of druidism? What I am speaking about is the destructive aspect of magic, curses, harmful magic, etc.
I know that in general there is a lot of literature on this topic but it's nearly all from "christian" groups. I want a neutral or pagan point of view on this matter and not feel like quoting the bible the whole time.
I am aware of the ethical thematic on this topic but I think that these topic also belongs to druidism but is unfortunately so rarely covered.

Hi, to both Aphritha (nice post, by the way!) and Dendren, and welcome -- Dendren, your question doesn't sound awful, it sounds like curiosity, which is a healthy trait.

My understanding of Druidry is far from complete or perfect, but for what it's worth, here's my opinion based on the study I've done so far:

Modern druidry steers clear of anything like curses or harmful magic. We know too little about ancient Druidry to make assertions as to what they did or didn't use in that regard, although historical accounts like the Roman encounters with the Druidesses on the Isle of Mona make it pretty clear they probably used SOMEthing.

My experience spiritually indicates to me that "dark" magic, including curses and so forth, proceeds from a foundation of fear, and anything done with fear as a motivation is, in my personal belief, tainted spiritually. Physically speaking, fear is a natural phenomenon and a healthy reaction to imminent danger - that is not the kind of fear that people generally try to deal with in using 'curses' or other magical means, in my experience. There is a darkness that comes with anger against injustice, and that, I think, is an entirely different matter. However, in my experience with the way other people use magic [I don't claim to be a practitioner myself, although I suppose the argument could be made that I am], when they want to 'curse' someone, it usually doesn't have anything to do with righteous anger.

In short, I seriously doubt there is any accurate literature about ancient Druid magic, and anything that claims to be is *highly* suspect material in my opinion. Modern Druid magic as far as I know doesn't use curses and does not come from a motivation of fear.

I think too that a fascination with it is something to take note of if you feel it in yourself or someone else; not to condemn it, but to examine it. I often find it helpful to ask myself questions when things like this come up: Where does this fascination come from? Why is it there? Is it something I need to be thinking about in my practice and on my path? What place, if any, should it hold for me? -- Please understand I do not presume to have answers to any of these questions for anyone other than myself. But they are good questions worth consideration, to my way of thinking.

[treegod]

Here's my opinion:

Magic is the sense of "spells" doesn't work. So if you do "bad" magic you're harming only yourself. And deluding yourself at the same time. Oh, sometimes it feels good to imagine bad things happening to other people, but it's useless and, from a psychological point of view, self-destructive. But by the same token "good" magic might be self-creative (although still partially delusional). It's all psychological trickery. (opinion )

[deepwater]

I saw some very disturbing and enlightening things about the Druids the other day on Tv,,about the wars the Romans the sacrifices and some cannibalism acts,,,things i think my grandfather tried to gently warn me away from,,things of our past,,things that have no place in this age other than be known and turned from

[andromeda]

Philip Carr Gomm, in a interview with Coast to Coast about the Book of English Magic, clarified that. If I am not mistaken he said something on the order that there is no evidence that druids sacrificed people, that putting people in a wicker construction would be impractical because the people will escape as soon as the wicker got burning. He did say that druids presided over the process of death penalty of criminals, which make sense because Druids were in charged of lawgiving

[DJ Droood]

Philip Carr Gomm, in a interview with Coast to Coast about the Book of English Magic, clarified that. If I am not mistaken he said something on the order that there is no evidence that druids sacrificed people, that putting people in a wicker construction would be impractical because the people will escape as soon as the wicker got burning. He did say that druids presided over the process of death penalty of criminals, which make sense because Druids were in charged of lawgiving

Of course Philip is right, in the sense that there is very little evidence for the Druids doing anything at all, including human sacrifice, so it is easy to discount anything we find objectionable (or invent things we find pleasing) on those grounds. I think the "escape clause" for wicker man victims is a bit weak...they could have disabled the folks first.

For me, though, I can't see a difference between a death penalty and human sacrifice. Just looking at "modern" death penalties, in countries that still retain it, the whole system of justice is based on notions of the divine, priests are often in attendance to solomize the process and the rituals of "last meals" and the like are well established. Human sacrifice was practiced by the dominant cultures of the Druid era, so I think dismissing it in the lands of the Druids is a bit of fanciful revisionist thinking.

[DaRC]

Just looking at "modern" death penalties, in countries that still retain it, the whole system of justice is based on notions of the divine, priests are often in attendance to solomize the process...

Did you mean solemnize or did you mistype an l for a d

Anyway, aside from my base attempt at humour, the sort of discussions around Druidic human sacrifice need to be put in context:
Celts / Druids - Miranda Green (I think I'd need to check references) refers to head taking and storage amongst the cultures of modern day Northern Spain / Southern France. Then there are the various Bog Bodies, such as Lindow Man and Tollund Man, who indicate either a death penalty OR ritual sacrifice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bog_body
Roman gladiatorial games - started as funerary games with an associated sacrifice of human blood (not necessarily death) that developed into what we now see as a gore-fest. Often pagan criminals (or christians) were effectively sacrificed in the arena.
Viking Blood-Eagle : allegedly a type of sacrifice / death-penaly
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_eagle
You then get into the full medieval period and have such lovely death penalties as Hanged-Drawed & Quartered
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanged,_drawn_and_quartered and other such bloody events (which we would now call atrocities) as Vlad 'The Impaler' followed.

We also need to remember that the 'human sacrifice' argument was initially coined by the Romans as an excuse to invade Gallic and British lands, whilst they conveniently ignored their own state's flaws. It's been used a number of times, in similarly hypocritical situations, since then.

Perhaps this is where a Meso-Druidic organisation like OBOD can draw a line under the past and winnow the culturally positive wheat from the negative violent and bloody chaff?

[DJ Droood]

Just looking at "modern" death penalties, in countries that still retain it, the whole system of justice is based on notions of the divine, priests are often in attendance to solomize the process...

Did you mean solemnize or did you mistype an l for a d

yes yes...solemnize....(oh...haha...just got your joke!) yea, I don' have a smart phone, I have a "differently abled" phone...it cannot mask my functional illiteracy like my desktop can.


btw, fully in support of OBOD's non-human sacrifice policy...hope it is still in effect for the East Coast Gathering.

[Lorraine S.]

btw, fully in support of OBOD's non-human sacrifice policy...hope it is still in effect for the East Coast Gathering.

Well, we do need SOMETHING to appease "Kat, Omnipotent Ueber-being of the seventh level, great shredder of sofas and bringer of mice, she-who-comes-by-night-to-the-litter-tray, wearer of the 007 collar, carrier of the mighty tinkle-ball, mighty changer of newbie names and great sleeper on soft, fluffy pillows and organizer of the Great East Coast Gathering!" If not a human sacrifice, what would you suggest?

[treegod]

Perhaps this is where a Meso-Druidic organisation like OBOD can draw a line under the past and winnow the culturally positive wheat from the negative violent and bloody chaff?

Absolutely. The human sacrifices of a long-dead druidry have nothing to do with a reinvented druidry living into the modern age. They're worlds apart. There's nothing to discuss.

[Narvl-Years]

The Dark Side of Druidry need not be cast as an opposite. Perhaps it isn’t the opposite of positive or the opposite of good. It is neither negative nor evil. Perhaps it is simply a different way of experiencing reality and nature. Perhaps it is a way of discovery where discovery requires the participant to uncover lost ways that are hidden or occult. Perhaps it includes different ways of accepting or seeing what is really going on. Some will look at the Dark Side of Druidry and call it by the name Argel and not Awen.

From the Hippocrene Standard, Welsh-English English-Welsh Dictionary by H. Meurig Evans, the word Argel means: "argel, (-ion). n.m.f. SECRET PLACE, OCCULT, REFUGE a. HIDDEN, SECRET"

From the same source we discover that Awen means: "awen, (-au). n.f. REIN, POETIC GIFT, THE MUSE" Of course there is more to Awen than just a line from the Dictionary. There may also be other ways of viewing Druidry. One of them I shall call Argel.

What do Argel practitioners do if they are not negative and evil? I would propose that there is a place for religious observances of Druidry that should be apart from or outside of ties with other religions and devoted exclusively to the customs and practices from the Brythonic, Celtic, and Insular Druids. Some will call these observations Pagan but the word Pagan traces back to Middle English (pagan), Latin (pagus), and Late Latin (paganus). It is not a word used by the Celts or Bythons to describe their people. So the quest for an appropriate word to describe the religion of the Brythons and Celts is a good starting point regarding the Argel practice of Druidry.

Kind regards,

Narvl Years