Too Scholarly

[PoetPhilosopher]

Another thing I noticed - this may not be broadly true for everything, but if you set aside the 500+ page print books, and opt for a 150 page ebook written by a person with good credentials, sometimes I feel the words can come through a bit clearer and it can be a bit of an easier read.

Not everyone wants to hear about Wicca as it doesn't always apply to them, but I once returned a very long Scott Cunningham book on the subject, an old book retyped in digital format, and found better insight from the modern writings of someone I hadn't heard of previously, who wrote a 2015 ebook and is called Monique Joiner Siedlak.

Another thing I've found to be true, is while it's nice to read free samples of an ebook first, they don't always tell much. I actually find it better to first scrutinize the one-page description of how the author describes themselves, to see their mindset, their experience, and how they view the world and whether it's something you can relate to.

 

[Rival]

I actually find it better to first scrutinize the one-page description of how the author describes themselves, to see their mindset, their experience, and how they view the world and whether it's something you can relate to.

Yes, this can be very helpful. I always read reviews first, before buying, too.

 

[Clara Tea]

This is mostly intended for followers of reconstructed religions - Hellenismos, Religio Romana etc. but others are welcome to join.

I am finding that a lot of neo-Paganism is far too scholarly. Don't misunderstand me, I love scholarship, but most of the books we tend to read are by scholars, not practitioners (maybe this is just a thing in Kemetic faith?) and everything is so dry and intellectual. It's good to know history, but do I really need to know the name and date of every Pharaoh in order to be Kemetic? However, you then run into the problem that books by practitioners are often the 'personal gnosis' kind and are generally only based on one person's experience. So it's hard either way.

What's your take on this? How do you learn the cultic elements, to make them come alive, rather than from some dry scholarly work, for instance?

The facts of the bible are not nearly as important as the meaning.

When Kunta Kinte's master was having Kunta beaten to accept his new name, Toby, he was too busy to chat because he was reading the bible. Too much study, not enough practice.

 

[Clara Tea]

Another thing I noticed - this may not be broadly true for everything, but if you set aside the 500+ page print books, and opt for a 150 page ebook written by a person with good credentials, sometimes I feel the words can come through a bit clearer and it can be a bit of an easier read.

Not everyone wants to hear about Wicca as it doesn't always apply to them, but I once returned a very long Scott Cunningham book on the subject, an old book retyped in digital format, and found better insight from the modern writings of someone I hadn't heard of previously, who wrote a 2015 ebook and is called Monique Joiner Siedlak.

Another thing I've found to be true, is while it's nice to read free samples of an ebook first, they don't always tell much. I actually find it better to first scrutinize the one-page description of how the author describes themselves, to see their mindset, their experience, and how they view the world and whether it's something you can relate to.

I advise against predigested "short version" bibles because a lot is misinterpreted or omitted (either intentionally or unintentionally).

Interpretation of the bible is often wrong. For example, Some fear Iraq because they think that it is the "Whore of Babylon." But Revelation 17:18 makes it clear that the Whore of Babylon is the most powerful nation in the world that made war with Babylon, conquered it, then corrupted it. Thus, the United States is the Whore of Babylon (and the Dragon was Bush, and the son of the Dragon was the Beast, W. Bush). The Dragon and the Beast are Satanic demons.

 

[Rival]

I advise against predigested "short version" bibles because a lot is misinterpreted or omitted (either intentionally or unintentionally).

This thread isn't about the Bible.

 

[Clara Tea]

This thread isn't about the Bible.

Short versions of any books cut out important information. For example, when I was getting my degrees in philosophy, my TA laughed at my "for dummies" books that I used to supplement the reading. Yet, I have to agree that they offered good insight. But no professor considers a "for dummies" book to be a substitute for the real book.

So, if you want to study, you could get a predigested book that cuts down the information and highlights important details. But, be careful to also real the original (big and complicated) version, as well.

That TA also taught me that wise men always speak slowly, so he did, too.

Since then, every time I have something really stupid to say, I say it very very slowly, so I will sound wise.

 

[syo]

This is mostly intended for followers of reconstructed religions - Hellenismos, Religio Romana etc. but others are welcome to join.

I am finding that a lot of neo-Paganism is far too scholarly. Don't misunderstand me, I love scholarship, but most of the books we tend to read are by scholars, not practitioners (maybe this is just a thing in Kemetic faith?) and everything is so dry and intellectual. It's good to know history, but do I really need to know the name and date of every Pharaoh in order to be Kemetic? However, you then run into the problem that books by practitioners are often the 'personal gnosis' kind and are generally only based on one person's experience. So it's hard either way.

What's your take on this? How do you learn the cultic elements, to make them come alive, rather than from some dry scholarly work, for instance?

Only druids can revive paganism.

 

[JustGeorge]

Only druids can revive paganism.

Why do you say that?

 

[syo]

Why do you say that?

Druids have the lifestyle in accordance to nature. They have a great hearing and the appropriate wording.

 

[Callisto]

This is mostly intended for followers of reconstructed religions - Hellenismos, Religio Romana etc. but others are welcome to join.

I am finding that a lot of neo-Paganism is far too scholarly. Don't misunderstand me, I love scholarship, but most of the books we tend to read are by scholars, not practitioners (maybe this is just a thing in Kemetic faith?) and everything is so dry and intellectual. It's good to know history, but do I really need to know the name and date of every Pharaoh in order to be Kemetic? However, you then run into the problem that books by practitioners are often the 'personal gnosis' kind and are generally only based on one person's experience. So it's hard either way.

What's your take on this? How do you learn the cultic elements, to make them come alive, rather than from some dry scholarly work, for instance?

Personally, I find there isn't nearly enough scholarly research done among Neopagans which is why, overall, it's in a such muddled ineffectual state. Too many want to rely on social media and forums and that would be OK if it wasn't for the fact that there is exponentially greater misinformation and UPG than there is factual information. I've been active in the pagan community since the 1980s and, in my experience, people were far better informed about these religion prior to the internet. You would think it would have been a boon, opening access to information that once was only attainable by physically traveling to libraries and bookstores and, if you were lucky, access to university resources. Yet the opposite is true, regardless of the wealth of reliable info that is now easily accessible, most seem to prefer emotional, fabricated garbage. Along with anything that provides confirmation bias and appears to give people whatever validation it is they want. Factor in the anti-intellectualism that's pervasive in society as a whole, and "overly scholarly" isn't anything to truly worry about.

However, I do agree that there comes a point when the training wheels need to come off and there's a balance between learning and doing. The thing is, there isn't much in the way of learning, people often just want to jump to the doing. The problem with that is they don't know what it is they claim to pursue so then they default to the eclectic mantra of "there's no right or wrong way; do what feels right". That's fine if they're not claiming a tradition, it's not if they are claiming one because most pagan traditions are orthopraxies which, by definition, means there is a right or wrong way.

The value of having both primary (ancient) and secondary (academic) sources is they allow us to compensate for not being immersed in these traditions like ancient pagans were. The majority of ancient societies were peasants, they didn't read and write, they didn't have home libraries. But they were immersed in an environment where there was no demarcation between everyday life, culture, and devotion to the gods. It's like language, they were exposed to it from the day they were born. Subsequently, like learning a new language, it's not done overnight or in a couple of weeks, we have to play catch up and deep dive into studies on a recurring basis and practice what we learn because we lack that immersion.

But too many today want things quick and easy. They don't care about the how or the why nor care about the nature of the gods. That all makes it that much harder for the next crop of newcomers, more crap to wade through compounded by whatever fads and socio-political activism are trending.

 

[Callisto]

I use a mix of scholarship of myths and ideas, terms, linguistics etc. While also blending in my own personal gnosis. I see nothing wrong with UPG, as long as it's not contradicting the Scholarship.

UPG is unavoidable once a person is engaging in their religion on a consistent basis. The problem with UPG is when it's asserted as "fact" and the person expects others to treat it as such. Then when called out on it, they get pissy. UPG can be part of the discussion, people just need to be honest and clearly label it as such.

 

[Callisto]

I'm finding better results personally by trying to resort to seek out long articles rather than books.

That's just me, though. I kind of have a young, slightly naive view of the world, so books aren't really a medium I try to invest much time in.

The articles I find don't always tell everything, but they usually end in a zinger which makes one think or reconsider their perspective. And I feel that format is good for me.

I thrive on books. However, my research isn't limited to just books. We're fortunate that many academics make their papers available online and just about every university and museum on the planet has an online presence with valuable information freely available.

That's a good question. In a historical context, it's probably not possible. Only the "scholars" could write. So only their "from an intellectual distance" perspective got documented. In a more present tense, however, one would think there must be a few books around written by people that are actually engaged in these ideological practices.

Some traditions are well documented with much firsthand accounts surviving, as in the case of the Greek and the Romans. Others are not so fortunate, like Celtic, Germanic and Slavic peoples. At which point, they would be entirely lost was it not for, ironically, later Christian writers documenting at least some of their customs. Granted, one has to use filters and tweeze out the details covered in bias.

I have a friend that was a witch for a while. would probably ask her to recommend something 'ground level' to read, and then try to follow the rabbit hole.

Ground level reading on what?


Edted: fixed missing portion of my comments.

 

[Callisto]

I agree, and I think the biggest issue is that reconstruction stemmed from classical scholarship. So breaking out of that can be hard for some. And not all the scholars are practitioners either, take Jackson Crawford who I like as a resource, does not practice Paganism, but he's a great scholar.

It's a balancing act between sources for sure. Have you read any basic Paganism books? Like Paganism 101 or Paganism for Beginners? That can give solid metaphysical approaches, where you can then supplement with kemetic philosophy and Scholarship.

Personally, I'm ok with scholars not being practitioners. Granted, some are biased by their own Christian perspective (especially older writers) so you have to glean what's important while filtering out how they're presenting it. But over the years, I've found it necessary to rely on multiple fields of study to get a more faceted account of what I'm researching. I've found important "missing" details not covered by umpteen scholarly texts on religion in texts about chemistry or ancient civil engineering.

"Basic Paganism" books are almost always a crapshoot. While not everyone needs to have PhD, they're often written by people with no more greater knowledge than the reader and have simply packaged their own UPG and what's currently trending on social media.

 

[Callisto]

What's your take on this? How do you learn the cultic elements, to make them come alive, rather than from some dry scholarly work, for instance?

For me, it simply comes down to doing and realizing you're going to tweak and revise as you go along. That and people need to remember not to look at these religions in a one-track way. Generally speaking, ancient religions had two primary branches of expression, household and civic practices. The majority of the time, people would have been engaged in the former. The latter was when the community came together as a whole, such as for major festivals and times of need.

However, quite often both academia and pop culture focus on the civic side, gathering at temples, priesthoods officiating large sacrifices etc. Subsequently, people who don't distinguish the two sides of practice look at what's stated in regards to civic rituals and it came feel overwhelming as they try to reconcile it with how to establish their own household practice. Sometimes, all that seems to exist about a particular practice within a religion is what's recorded on a civil level but that's not always the case.

 

[Callisto]

Another thing I noticed - this may not be broadly true for everything, but if you set aside the 500+ page print books, and opt for a 150 page ebook written by a person with good credentials, sometimes I feel the words can come through a bit clearer and it can be a bit of an easier read.

Not everyone wants to hear about Wicca as it doesn't always apply to them, but I once returned a very long Scott Cunningham book on the subject, an old book retyped in digital format, and found better insight from the modern writings of someone I hadn't heard of previously, who wrote a 2015 ebook and is called Monique Joiner Siedlak.

Another thing I've found to be true, is while it's nice to read free samples of an ebook first, they don't always tell much. I actually find it better to first scrutinize the one-page description of how the author describes themselves, to see their mindset, their experience, and how they view the world and whether it's something you can relate to.

Scott wrote a long book? Do you remember the title? His stuff is pretty lightweight, I don't recall one where he delved deeply into anything.

But the topic of Wicca is an issue unto itself. The commercializing of solitary books claiming to make it accessible has not only distorted what the religion is but the influence from those books has definitely leaked into other areas of paganism as well. So much so that newcomers often don't realize that terms like "wicca" "pagan" and "witchcraft" are not exclusive synonyms.

 

[Callisto]

Only druids can revive paganism.

You know that modern Druidry isn't a continuance of ancient druidry, it's derived from 18th-century fraternal organizations, right? In the mid-20th century, Druids were frequently interacting with Wiccans (members of one joining the other). The festival calendar known as The Wheel of the Year used by both was created by Wicca's founder, Gerald Gardner, and the founder of the Druidic order OBOD, Ross Nichols (who also edited one of Gardner's books).

Edited typo.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Scott wrote a long book? Do you remember the title? His stuff is pretty lightweight, I don't recall one where he delved deeply into anything.

Wicca: A Guide for the Solitary Practitioner

But I just checked. It's 240 pages. Still a bit more text than I was looking for though.

 

[Callisto]

Wicca: A Guide for the Solitary Practitioner

But I just checked. It's 240 pages. Still a bit more text than I was looking for though.

That's a pretty lightweight book, information-wise. But YMMV.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

That's a pretty lightweight book, information-wise. But YMMV.

If I recall correctly, what put me off was that it got into basic concepts, and then 60% of the book was about spell recipes. It's been awhile though. Have you read it?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Druids have the lifestyle in accordance to nature. They have a great hearing and the appropriate wording.

The Irish Celts also used to collect the heads of the battle dead as "acorns" for Macha, the Celts often warred against each other, and they too did their own misdeeds against Mother Earth.
It's no different than the Native Americans, really. They had an appreciation of nature, it was their home, but we must recall the myth of the Noble Savage and acknowledge the reality of their existence. Even the Ancient Egyptians gave far more significance to the land than we do because they didn't get the luxury of being removed from how closely tied their survival and the health of the Land really are.