Animism, Pantheism, Atheism, and Druidry

[Blaiddwen]

Hello All,
In my estimation, we bring our own understandings/beliefs to our spiritualities, and Animism, Pantheism, Atheism are 3 core understandings that are frequently found among Drui folk. While some of the concepts found within these 3 understandings seem to mirror the other, there are concepts that remain unique to each.
First, I'd like to try to establish a working definition of each of these beliefs/philosophies, then discuss how we relate these concepts to our Druidry.

dathlu y taith,
Blaiddwen

[DaRC]

Perhaps Wikipedia should be used as a starting point...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
and introducing Panentheism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism

then go from there?

[Hennie]

So, what if we lay the Holy Wikipedia aside and try to come to ideas as experienced, thought and lived by our own practises?

[Frog]

Hennie - good point, but I think having the link to describe what is meant by these terms I think was useful. As an example, I had always considered Animism to reflect the gods being Animal shaped (thinking along the Egyption lines), where Pantheism being more akin to the Greek Mount Olympus.

As for how I would apply it? A far more interesting question - and it does lead to quite conflicting views. I certainly don't perceive a "god" figure, but I do use the term as it's an easier phrase to box my thinking into (an analogy is that I would go somewhere "by rail" - although in effect I would be in a train carriage on train tracks etc etc). That said, I can perceive that the world is made up of energy and it is plausable to think that some of the energy is manifest in forms which can guide me in my decision making, whilst other bits glue themselves together to make the keyboard I'm using, or the trees that I saw at the weekend.

Whilst I can accept the logic of athiesm, that of NO god figure at all, as opposed to the nontheist (which sounds like a fence-sitter to me ), part of me finds that quite sad that there is no scope to allow for the magic that exists in the world to create the life-spark, or no appreciation of beauty in nature - just recognising the function from the form. But that is my personal view on that.

[Blaiddwen]

So, what if we lay the Holy Wikipedia aside and try to come to ideas as experienced, thought and lived by our own practises?

Very good Hennie that's what I was looking for! Care to elaborate mate?
At the same time, the wikipedia definitions are a good reference (thank you DaRc) to begin with. For example, Frog's understanding that Animism has to do with animal gods, (which is mistaken by the way) can be cleared up, and we can all work from a common basis. As a basic definition, Animism is the belief or understanding that everything has its own "Anima", being soul or spirit, ie; Anima Mundi, or world soul. Trees, rocks, animals, rivers, lakes, all posess their own Anima just like we human folk do.

[DJ Droood]

Hello All,
In my estimation, we bring our own understandings/beliefs to our spiritualities, and Animism, Pantheism, Atheism are 3 core understandings that are frequently found among Drui folk. While some of the concepts found within these 3 understandings seem to mirror the other, there are concepts that remain unique to each.
First, I'd like to try to establish a working definition of each of these beliefs/philosophies, then discuss how we relate these concepts to our Druidry.

dathlu y taith,
Blaiddwen

Out of curiousity, why have you excluded monotheism? I have probably seen more christians/druid-christians posting here than any of the above catagories.

[Hennie]

Well, I am on a slightly different stance, being condemned to agnosticism . I think, feel and trust, that all and everything is interconnected and interdependent, but at the same time I think there is no way I can (dis)prove God(s). Goddess(es), the animation of all things or the existence of a spirit, soul or life after death or reincarnation. Where that leads me : to the conviction that where as no one can be certain, we might better try to get along peacefully and with as much understanding that is in me; the person next to me just might be holding truth...

[Blaiddwen]

Hello All,
In my estimation, we bring our own understandings/beliefs to our spiritualities, and Animism, Pantheism, Atheism are 3 core understandings that are frequently found among Drui folk. While some of the concepts found within these 3 understandings seem to mirror the other, there are concepts that remain unique to each.
First, I'd like to try to establish a working definition of each of these beliefs/philosophies, then discuss how we relate these concepts to our Druidry.

dathlu y taith,
Blaiddwen

Out of curiousity, why have you excluded monotheism? I have probably seen more christians/druid-christians posting here than any of the above catagories.

Please include any and all DJ, who knows, there may be some polytheists animists in the crowd too.
Hennie, all things being interconnected and interdependent is something that I see as true as well, however, this does not tell anyone much more than that which was stated. It seems like a rather "safe" statement to me.

[Merlyn]

Blaiddwen you beat me to the punch here, I was thinking in much the same ways and had this same kind of idea,

How is it we have such a freedom in druidry?
Of the three you mention Animism, Pantheism, Atheism. I agree there are many more.
I will reflect on the roots here, and how much of what we study is rooted in the early foundation of spiritual thought that druidism is.
Of Atheism, yes we can be purely elemental, this branch has proven itself as valid.
Pantheism is pretty much part of the Celtic way, as is animism. The two being in one is unique to paganism as opposed to monotheism.

My coffee is telling me I have to get back to work...

[DJ Droood]

Please include any and all DJ, who knows, there may be some polytheists animists in the crowd too.

And I would also guess a fair number of monotheist animists, panthesitic Christians, athiest dualists and agnostic diests as well.

[Blaiddwen]

Please include any and all DJ, who knows, there may be some polytheists animists in the crowd too.

And I would also guess a fair number of monotheist animists, panthesitic Christians, athiest dualists and agnostic diests as well.

Well said! Yes, parts of the Coptic gospels seem very pantheistic, and the Essene gospels seem very animistic.
Let's see where all of this goes.

[Merlyn]

Well sure, we all know burning bushes can talk.

[Blaiddwen]

This topic must not be controversial or inflamitory enough to merit much response, oh well, such is the public board I suppose.

[Merlyn]

Sure it is
Just "testing" the waters a bit.

A burning bush speaking the word of God is pretty animated don't you think?
Monotheism isn't at all void of combining many things.

Neither is druidism.
God is in all things, in many spiritual paths like the Native American way.
We drui can then break it into parts, see the polarity, balance, like god and goddess, pantheons and even dragons.

Here is the "thing".
We humans "think" and awful lot. We then meditate to clear our head and tune in to what is around us.
We also awaken the body chakras so they can interact freely without our mind being in the way, sense the beauty of all things, listen to the subtle ways our heart feels them.

So.. does an atheist-druid do the same?
I think so. S/he may not name the tree, but feels it just the same, may not assign god-names to anything, yet still feel the inspiration, the connections and life just as much.

[DJ Droood]

what if we don't attach any of those labels to our druidry? what if our druidry is raising the search for truth to a spiritual level....finding inspiration and strength in what is real, according to our examinations and observations of the world around us?

IMO, the term "atheist" is just an attempt by Christians (or other religious people, but mostly Christians in our society) to make everyone conform to their world view..it is sort of like a racist saying you can only be white or "non-white" and expecting anyone who isn't white to call themselves a "non-white". What if "theism" is of no more importance or interest to us and our druidry than, say, bulgarian interpretive dance? Should we be expected to call ourselves "a-bulgarian interpretive danceist druids"?

Just wondering about the perimeters of your discussion...do you want to keep it tightly focused on the three things you mentioned?

[Julysea]

OK< experiences, rather than wiki definitions: This is something I've been pondering a while - how do you define the 'theism' aspect of pantheism, panentheism (which was a new one on me) and so on? For many years, I've struggled wih the question of what is god/spirit/sacred? I'm not explaining this very well, let me elaborate. If you believe, as I do, that everything is all part of one great consciousness, the whole universe is one and we are all part of it, everything is part of it - is that pantheism, or animism or even atheism? I don't believe that this all-encompassing consciousness is a god in the usual sense of that word, but I do believe it is sacred, as in special. So that means everything is sacred, which also kind of means nothing is. So, I don't believe in a god, which I guess means that my thoughts can't be labelled as anything which ends in a 'theism' unless we radically redefine what is meant by that. And yet atheism does not seem to fit either. It has always felt to me to be one of those paradox/polarity things which seem to pop up whenever you get to the heart of the matter.

Anyone any idea at all what I'm wittering on about?

[Corwen]

So, what if we lay the Holy Wikipedia aside and try to come to ideas as experienced, thought and lived by our own practises?

As a basic definition, Animism is the belief or understanding that everything has its own "Anima", being soul or spirit, ie; Anima Mundi, or world soul. Trees, rocks, animals, rivers, lakes, all posess their own Anima just like we human folk do.

The Wikipedia article is rather dated. Animism isn't necessarily about 'spirit' or 'soul'. That was Victorian anthropologists projecting their own ideas about religion onto tribal peoples. Animism these days, both contemporary Animism among Pagans and the Animism among First Nations peoples is understood as being more about 'personhood' rather than any immaterial invisible soul or spirit (though some people may believe in spirits, not all Animists do). For this reason it is perfectly possible to be an Atheist and an Animist, if you accept that other beings have a personhood of equal worth, though different in nature, to your own.

By personhood Animists mean the quality of self motivation, awareness, desire to fulfil their own path and the ability to have relationship with other persons. These are attributes shared by all living things, and collectively by communities of living things, and which may be possessed by some non living entities according to some people. So we live in a world where there are human-persons and other-than-human-persons. All capable of relating in different ways. I don't use this dinstinction in any anthropocentric way, for instance hedgehogs of course live in a world of hedgehog-persons and other-than-hedgehog-persons, we all talk best to our own species!

Graham Harvey is one of the leading figures in the Animist community, you can find his Animist Manifesto here:
http://www.bioregionalanimism.com/2007/09/animist-manifesto.html

[Blaiddwen]

Thank you Corwen, that was excellent!
We have a beautiful Black Walnut living in front of our home, when we first arrived here it was beneath that tree that seemed most inviting and comforting. She is a very quiet person, and in her presence silence is easily found, this is where our family grove was established. Over time I have learned a few things about this tree, one of them is the fact that she does'nt care to listen to crabby human people, a crabby human will be bopped with a walnut (or 2 or 3...)! But to say that this tree has no soul or spirit (IMO) is to be mistaken, this beings "presence" attests to the contrary.
I also agree that the wiki definitions are a bit off in some respects, but they offer a basis from which we can begin, and it is up to us to clairify things for ourselves.
Merlyn, I always thought that the "burning bush" was a quaballistic reference, you know, the human tree? It appears as though we are part of a collection of people and nations, but we are all related, we have a common Mother.

[Frog]

OK< experiences, rather than wiki definitions: This is something I've been pondering a while - how do you define the 'theism' aspect of pantheism, panentheism (which was a new one on me) and so on? For many years, I've struggled wih the question of what is god/spirit/sacred? I'm not explaining this very well, let me elaborate. If you believe, as I do, that everything is all part of one great consciousness, the whole universe is one and we are all part of it, everything is part of it - is that pantheism, or animism or even atheism? I don't believe that this all-encompassing consciousness is a god in the usual sense of that word, but I do believe it is sacred, as in special. So that means everything is sacred, which also kind of means nothing is. So, I don't believe in a god, which I guess means that my thoughts can't be labelled as anything which ends in a 'theism' unless we radically redefine what is meant by that. And yet atheism does not seem to fit either. It has always felt to me to be one of those paradox/polarity things which seem to pop up whenever you get to the heart of the matter.

Anyone any idea at all what I'm wittering on about?

Sounds like Taoism to me.

Blaiddwen - you are quite right, I was thinking along the wrong lines, but the links that Hennie had posted allowed me to understand the technical nature of what the belief was about - and then I could apply what I actually thought.. and arrived somewhere else.

Merlyn - I think we have such a freedom in Druidry because we allow it. Paganism is a wide umbrella of belief systems, and (based on the members I have read here) OBOD members join to explore a more grounded, spiritual base that works for them. In some cases, not following one path strictly, but cross-pollenating from many. In my own beliefs (of which I know that I'm still working on) I have already started to combine a number of world belief ideas.... I may just call it Frogism Of course, the easiest way is not to attach a label to the belief...

[Corwen]

But to say that this tree has no soul or spirit (IMO) is to be mistaken, this beings "presence" attests to the contrary.

I don't think 'presence' necessitates 'soul', to believe this is to have unconsciously swallowed a Christian style dualism, which separates matter and spirit, making for a rather chopped up world which we can see only half of. The tree is obviously a very good 'tree person', (very good at being a tree that is), and you and the tree obviously have a good and respectful relationship, a relationship which an Animist sees as between persons, not between souls.

I actually have a big problem with the words soul and spirit, because I don't want the emphasis in our relationships to be with parts of beings which we can't see and have no proof about. I am more interested in how we relate to other beings in the here and now. Positing the existence of a soul or even the lack of a soul, or the worst of all worlds where some people/beings have souls and others don't, has been used to justify some very poor relating in the past, both among human people and in our relationships with other-than-human-people.

Bundled with and implicit in the words soul and spirit are all sorts of other ideas about other worlds, afterlives, God, judgement and so on. I don't have to believe in any of that to be 'spiritual' (there's that word again, perhaps I should substitute a musical metaphor like 'harmonious'). I don't need any of that stuff to relate to other persons in a respectful and kind way, even to those persons I have to eat.

I see that we have a choice between three worlds to live in:

acknowledge that we cause pain and harm to other beings/persons through our living (and especially our eating), and embrace the pain, sorrow and responsibility that we feel as a result. Seek to do minimum harm and keep a conscious and compassionate connection to those beings we have to kill,
or
use beliefs about the presence or absence of souls to justify a world-view where we somehow have the right to exploit other beings, or can somehow maintain a clear conscience by telling ourselves that we haven't really destroyed this other person, because some part of them lives on,
or
choose to live in a depersonalised world where by rejecting souls and spirits in the name of science we also reject personhood, because deep down we still see the world in a Christian dualistic way and can't separate the categories of 'person' and 'soul'. We are then free to exploit and destroy what we have chosen to see as a mechanical clockwork world, but of course we have become just clockwork beings ourselves.

Personally I choose to live in a world full of persons (who may or may not have souls, I don't care) who I can have relationships with. I choose to acknowledge that I have no right to cause suffering to other persons, but that I am here and so have to eat and live and that's just how it is. As a compassionate being I seek to minimise the harm I cause, this too is in my nature, and it is part of respectful relationship with the world. I am happy to become food myself when the time comes, and in the meantime choose to feel both the sorrow and joy implicit in a world full of life and death, and not deny either. I choose to embrace the physical world and have my relationships with what is, rather than what could be or might be.