“The Only Proper Use of Aggression is to Protect One’s Rights or the Rights of Others” – The Book of Rabyd 1:7
Thoughts and Exposition:
The Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) is stated many ways but the basic gist of it is a combination of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and “love your neighbor as yourself”. Every major religion in the world has something like this in it, but then all of them turn around and use fraud or even force to control others.
So leaving religion behind, it is simply that people have their rights and no one should use violence or lies to take them away. If someone or group of someones does use violence to try to take rights away, the NAP simply states that the person whose rights are being threatened or people around them who see that their rights are being threatened have the right then to use violence in return in defense.
Aggression is further defined as the use of physical force, threatening the use of force or fraud. This is not pacifism as the use of force or even the threat of force is allowable in actions that involve self-defense or the defense of others. There are other types of force but the NAP is about physical force, threat of physical force or fraud.
This means a lot of other areas where things are about influence, politics and other types of force are not necessarily covered by the NAP. However, if one thinks on this that means that much of what government does is a violation of this principle. This really limits how much the government should do and puts it clear focus on the government as the force that protects the rights of its citizens and does not threaten them with force or trick people out of their rights through fraud.
On a personal level, this means that if I were to act in a violent manner, that means the one who I am acting on has made a decision to violate my rights or the rights of another person. Other than that, it is never right for me to initiate violence and it is certainly never right for me to engage in fraud. This part is actually more challenging in many ways than gripping about government. One must always be first concerned that you are following the NAP before you judge others on their following it. It is more a philosophy of personal responsibility than anything else.
Following the NAP leads to a practical morality. There is nothing more frustrating on the one hand than people who, because of their politics, religion or other beliefs, think they have the right or force their viewpoint on others through law, violence or fraud. One the flip side, it is also frustrating to watch people stand aside while violence or fraud is perpetrated and they do nothing about it. The NAP gives us a principle to guide us. It is not perfect, but it is a lot better all others I have found so far and far more practically useful.
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods and goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves, and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.
We also don’t take an offering here. We figure the powers that be probably don’t need it. Let’s be honest, offerings are not giving to the divine powers, they are given to an organization to support it. Just being honest. God, the gods or whatever never see a dime, farthing or peso of that money; it all goes to the church, mosque or shrine.
Opening Song: ‘Paranoid” – Black Sabbath
Considered widely to be the first metal band and this one of the first metal songs. I start by giving Black Sabbath props for being trail blazers.
Poem: “Unknown” – The Ruined Man
The problem with being real is being hated. The problem with being fake is you’re a lying coward.
Meditation:
Song of Preparation: “Non-Aggression Principle” – Liberation Animation
I love this song, it is a fun. It also introduces today’s topic very well.
Text:
‘The Only Proper Use of Aggression is to Protect One’s Rights or the Rights of Others’ – The Book of Rabyd 1:7
Sermon:
The Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) is stated many ways but the basic gist of it is a combination of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and “love your neighbor as yourself”. Every major religion in the world has something like this in it, but then all of them turn around and use fraud or even force to control others.
So leaving religion behind, it is simply that people have their rights and no one should use violence or lies to take them away. If someone or group of someones does use violence to try to take rights away, the NAP simply states that the person whose rights are being threatened or people around them who see that their rights are being threatened have the right then to use violence in return in defense.
Aggression is further defined as the use of physical force, threatening the use of force or fraud. This is not pacifism as the use of force or even the threat of force is allowable in actions that involve self-defense or the defense of others. There are other types of force but the NAP is about physical force, threat of physical force or fraud.
This means a lot of other areas where things are about influence, politics and other types of force are not necessarily covered by the NAP. However, if one thinks on this that means that much of what government does is a violation of this principle. This really limits how much the government should do and puts it clear focus on the government as the force that protects the rights of its citizens and does not threaten them with force or trick people out of their rights through fraud.
On a personal level, this means that if I were to act in a violent manner, that means the one who I am acting on has made a decision to violate my rights or the rights of another person. Other than that, it is never right for me to initiate violence and it is certainly never right for me to engage in fraud. This part is actually more challenging in many ways than gripping about government. One must always be first concerned that you are following the NAP before you judge others on their following it. It is more a philosophy of personal responsibility than anything else.
Following the NAP leads to a practical morality. There is nothing more frustrating on the one hand than people who, because of their politics, religion or other beliefs, think they have the right or force their viewpoint on others through law, violence or fraud. One the flip side, it is also frustrating to watch people stand aside while violence or fraud is perpetrated and they do nothing about it. The NAP gives us a principle to guide us. It is not perfect, but it is a lot better all others I have found so far and far more practically useful.
Closing Song: ‘Dizzy’ – Tommy Roe
I include this song this week because it was the popular song on the radio the day I was born. My 50th birthday was this last week so this is more nostalgia than anything else. I like the video of a 1960s girl in a short skirt doing the 1960s dancing. Couldn’t fit that era more if you tried.
Parting Thought:
Be yourself. If people can’t handle it, that is their problem, not yours.
I remain,
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
March 20-21st is the Festival of Ostara, the Spring goddess. She is Germanic but not much else is known about her. In Viking Culture Spring is also associated with Freya and Thor, both divine beings of fertility, and that is exactly what most of this festival is about. It is about renewal, fertility and rejoicing about the end of winter and the beginning of the Summer half of the year.
If the name Ostara seems slightly familiar, it is because its other spelling is Eostre, which after the Christians get a hold of it becomes – Easter. Even some of the Easter traditions are based on the pagan ones. Most notably egg coloring and hiding and then letting children go seek them. Flowers, rabbits an other spring symbols are here as well. The rabbit is used because it is the animal that is often most associated with spring as it is often the first animal you see, and for its fertility. Hibernating animals also get a look as well, as they come out of their sleep.
The festival has a lot of traditions involving children during the day and adults at night. The various sources I read seem to skirt around the night time rituals of the adults, which kind of indicates fertility rites are probably present. That’s sex and a lot of it . Not surprising, as at this time in a lot of pagan mythologies, the sun or storm god has sex with an earth or nature goddess and she conceives to give birth at the end of harvest. Love making takes place a lot during this festival.
I mention St’ Patrick’s day because there is also a lot of pagan elements in it. In fact I would say historically this is when the Christian powers that be figured out that by adopting pagans symbols and traditions they could get more conversions. Or they could justify wiping out the pagan elements, they wanted out and keeping stuff that supported their viewpoint. The Celtic Cross is very much a part of this combining sun worship with the cross.
Irish Pagans view of this varies, Some mourn the day because it marks the persecution of Irish pagans where they were driven out, killed or went underground. Others see it as a time to say ‘I will celebrate the day pagan style’. The big thing is the mythology that St. Patrick drove out all the snakes from Ireland. It is kind of like the tall tale that Paul Bunyan logged off North and South Dakota and that why there are no trees. There were no snakes in Ireland in the first place and there were no trees in ND and SD either. The only holidays in my opinion that is more ironically a combination of pagan and Christian ideas is probably Easter and Christmas.
Time to Look Through the Eye:
Faith:
I have faith that nature will do her thing. I mean do I look at the Spring as a goddess – no. I believe in science, so there are natural forces at work. That said, I don’t think a holiday celebrating the end of winter and the beginning of summer is a bad one. It has a positive mental aspect to it. I suffer from mild depression that turns pretty dark at times in the winter, Spring begins to overcome that. I start my walks and getting outside again and that is something that builds my heart and mind, as well as my body.
Religion:
This time of year also marks the contention between Christianity and Paganism in Europe which spread to the United States. Like it or not this contention has led to a lot of heartache, persecution and war. I would also say the problems have largely come from Christians, Paganism has no ‘correct’ way of being a pagan. No, dogma or religious order to force on others. For that you need to turn to the Abrahamic religions. They are the ones with missionaries and zealots who have to ‘convert’ people to their faith by any means necessary. St. Patrick’s Day is probably a sore spot for Irish people for this reason.
Theology:
A theology of renewal and fertility is something that as a Deist and Pagan, I can look at with a smile. In Christianity, sex is given a feeling of being dirty or a necessary evil. Not so in pagan ‘theology’. Sex is something good, loving and a necessary good for the purpose of enjoyment and fertility. It is a stark contrast. I would say when you see a religion or theology trying to control or direct your thoughts about sex or your money, you have cult behavior. Yes, I would say Christianity is loaded with this cult behavior, as well as almost every religion I know. Paganism seek to control neither, and so what many Christians consider ‘cultish’ is actually the furthest from it.
Spirituality:
I must say that I gain a lot of spirituality from some of the concepts behind the idea of renewal. I can’t wait to get out walking again this spring. There is a renewal of my spirit that comes with it. I would also say that sexuality and sex itself has a spiritual good side that I resonate with the pagans far more than the Christians. Making love to my wife from my side of things is one of the most spiritually good and wonderful things I know. I don’t look at it as dirty or sinful at all. Now even more so, it is an expression of pure joy and love to me. Ostara is something that reminds me of that as well.
Conclusion:
I like to be reminded of things that are important. Spring is important for not only its time of planting seeds and cleaning, but for its spiritual side of renewal of the soul and life. It is important to remind ourselves of the joys of sex and sexuality and their results -children. There is something here that reminds one of taking a good cleansing breath, feeling your mind and heart open up and feeling right with the world. Of taking your lover’s hand and walking to a place of lovemaking and spending time not only having sex, but also renewing your relationship and starting anew with new dreams for the year ahead. I like it, it feels good.
Continuing to Walk the Path,
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods and goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves, and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.
We also don’t take an offering here. We figure the powers that be probably don’t need it. Let’s be honest, offerings are not giving to the divine powers, they are given to an organization to support it. Just being honest. God, the gods or whatever never see a dime, farthing or peso of that money; it all goes to the church, mosque or shrine.
Opening Song: “Stricken” – Disturbed
Poem: “The Scar” by Edward W. Raby, Sr. (Rough Draft)
Time heals all wounds
“Bullshit” I say
I have been down this road before
I have scars that still bleed inside
Internal bleeding of the soul
Seepage of pain within
Toxic soul-blood poisoning
Hidden behind my scars
The scar you left on me
Is like all the others
A covered scab
Hiding a slow bleeding wound
Another scar
A badge of survival
The poison blood inside fuel
The pain inside motivation
I know this is the second poem I have written for the Pulpit in rough draft form without polishing them later in a Skald’s Tales and Poems but that is coming this week probably.
Meditation:
Me too Penn, Me too.
Song of Preparation: “Anthem’ – Rush:
Text:
“People Do Not Have The Right to Take Away The Rights of Others” – The Book of Rabyd 1:6
Sermon:
The real key here to understanding rights that inalienable is that it means that everyone has them. Truly understand rights then requires that while we all may have the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and property; it does not mean that we can exercises those rights at the expense of someone else’s rights. You must respect the rights of others to truly understand what rights entail. If you don’t, you have an improper understanding of rights.
It is morally wrong to force another to give up their rights so that you can have yours. It morally bankrupt; in my opinion, to use any kind of force and power to exalt your rights over another. This is something that has to be remembered because as much as we say – “I have my rights”, we also need to say – “they have their rights” in the same breath. It is this respect of rights as a concept that is just as important as respect of my own rights. When we do this we are learning to see others as human beings. It is this issue that if implemented would solve a ton of problems. As much as I feel I have the right to stand on my rights, I must also allow others to stand on theirs.
This why I find the use of government today so repugnant. Much of it is one side or the others trying to take power to use on others. The Republicans try to seize power so they can use it against the Democrats and visa versa. No one is trying to take government so they can genuinely defend the rights of all. Libertarianism for me is simply a wonderful philosophy that seeks to actually see the rights of all protected. The goal of our politics then would be to stop the government from violating the rights of all individuals.
I have been using the issue of abortion to illustrate the problem when rights collide. The right to life movement say the right of the child to live is not being respected, the pro-choice folks say the right of the woman to privacy which is connected to her rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness is being violated if she does not have the choice of an abortion. The problem is we simply cannot play a game of two against one to decided who is right. A single violated right by force is wrong. The argument really centers on whether or not the child/fetus is genuinely a human being and thus has rights. Pro-life folks say yes / pro-choice folks say no. This is not going to be resolved because the arguments on both sides have problems. I am not going to get into that because the arguments for both sides are legion as well. My point is if a single right is being violated on an individual then the action is wrong and should not be allowed.
The problem with abortion is asking a question of personhood and at that point you are getting far more into metaphysics and theology than philosophy. My personal position is to say I am pro-choice on one hand because I do not feel it is my right to force my viewpoint of when life begins on another, and it is a debatable point. But I am also pro-life on the other hand, because I would hope that we would recognize our ignorance on when life truly and genuinely begins, and thus choose to err on the side of life because of that ignorance.
My point in all this is the debate is not what our rights are for those that follow the Book of Rabyd. Those are clearly understood. The debate for me and for my family is to understand and know when rights are being brought into conflict either intentionally or unintentionally and coming up with solutions that both allow one to exercise their rights but not interfere with the rights of others. This is the challenge of those who follow the Book of Rabyd.
Closing Song: ‘Hurt’ – Johnny Cash:
I include this song at the end because I talked about it with some friends this week. I suppose it is a simple reminded that all things, including our lives, end. What legacy we leave is important. Johnny Cash speaks for a lot of people in this song when they near the end. The regrets you have probably have more to do with hurts received and hurts given.
Parting Thought:
I remain,
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
I still very much embrace Deism as the most rational way to approach the subject of the divine. I think the notion that there is no god is just as irrational as the theist or religion who thinks he/she has god locked down. The great challenge for me as a deist is to deal with the subject of the divine using only reason and natural revelation as a guide. Heavy emphasis on the reason part because natural revelation is still subject to human interpretation.
Epicurus’ argument against God is pretty well-known and I still have some of the same problems with it as I had as a Christian. In fact much of my arguments against it have not changed because even back then the defense against philosophy is not theology, it is more philosophy. Most notably Epicurus assumes his definition of all-powerful, etc. are locked down and cannot be challenged. He seeks basically to win the argument about god through definition which is an argument from authority based on the authority of the definition. What his argument does do is present the rational contentions about the divine that need to be addressed very concisely and in a logically sound manner.
This is actually one time where the Eye lines up pretty good with each part of Epicurus’ argument. So….
Time to Look Through the Eye:
Faith:
If he is able but not willing? He is malevolent
I find it interesting that Epicurus engages in faith at this point. He has faith that there is such a thing as malevolence or beneficence and assumes that god must be one or the other. Such definition really lose their meaning if you dismiss notions of good and evil and realize there might be a rational reason why a supreme being might create and then move on. As George Carlin points out – God may simply not give a shit. He may be a creator, but it does not imply that he is malevolent simply because he refuses to do something about ‘evil’. He may simply also look at humanity and say – “you did this shit to yourselves and you have the capability to get yourself out, take responsibility for the ‘evil’ and suffering you have caused and fix it yourselves.”
I actually think this is the strongest argument for polytheism. That the reason we see so many problems in the world, is it was created by a committee. Just saying.
My faith is that if there is a god or gods or whatever, that they are creators but not necessarily cosmic babysitters. Like good parents he/she or they want us to grow up and tackle our own problems and we can’t learn how to do that effectively without struggle.
Religion:
If God is neither able or willing, then why call him God?
Actually because the definition of ‘god’ is much broader than “Omni” classifications. We also use the term ‘god’ to describe beings of great power and use a small ‘g’. It is religion that paint god as all-powerful in the sense that he can do anything, but there may be laws to the universe that prevent the divine from acting and they may as pointed out above, not give a shit. It doesn’t stop them from being more powerful than anything else and thus deserving the title of ‘god’.
Theology:
If God is wiling to prevent, but not able. Then he is not omnipotent.
I like to point out at this point that Epicurus does not eliminate god with this statement as some atheists claim. It just shows that perhaps human conception of the ideas of omnipotent, omniscient, etc. might not be properly defined. So such a god could exist with all the power that actually exists, knowing everything in the way it is knowable and be present in all places that actually exist. Yes, these ideas create a powerful being worthy of being called god, but there are limits here. Such limits make the normal understanding of omnipotence in need of adjustment, but it doesn’t make such a god not possible or lacking in existence. All this statement really does is point out that our definitions might be in need of change.
Spirituality:
If he is both able and willing? Where does evil come from?
Moral evil is easy to justify if you use freewill as a defense and a god who does not interfere because he wants humanity as a whole to learn and grow. It may not be logically possible to have freewill without suffering. Natural evil is a little harder to justify. Other than if god is still bound to the laws of the universe, then the laws of physics make natural ‘evil’ simple existent and God may very much be a powerful being who fights these forces but cannot do everything. Rationally, the god that actually exists might have limits – both because the laws of the universe place those limits or those limits might be self-imposed because it is not always wise to interfere.
Conclusion:
I am not saying Epicurus is wrong. He may very well be right and God is a figment of human imagination. I respect the atheist position but I find it personally a little extreme because of human ignorance of the universe. His argument actually forms a lot of rational response for deism as it must address these issues to have a rational reason for belief in the divine’s existence. His argument guides the search for the rational god because the questions are valid. That said, I do, as a theologian, see the irony of accepting certain theological definitions in order to make your argument against the existence of god, when those definitions themselves can be challenged.
For me the search for the rational God is part of the journey that I walk. But as a pagan, it is not my only criteria.
Continuing to Walk the Path,
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods and goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves, and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.
We also don’t take an offering here. We figure the powers that be probably don’t need it. Let’s be honest, offerings are not giving to the divine powers, they are given to an organization to support it. Just being honest. God, the gods or whatever never see a dime, farthing or peso of that money; it all goes to the church, mosque or shrine.
Opening Song:“Mr. Roboto” – Styx
I was joking this week with my daughter about using this song as a song about my grandson Otto. All I would have to do is change the words a little to make this song about him. That said, this actually is a pretty cool song made for a rock opera that dealt with dystopian future where rock and roll as well as other forms of free expression are outlawed. Styx always was very good and their vocalist has a ton of range in this one.
Poem: “The Storm” by Edward W. Raby, Sr.:
Wind, grey skies and pouring rain.
The Storm rages in my soul.
Fed by my inner pain.
Will I ever be whole?
Lightning flashes
Thunder rolls
I tighten my grip on the staff of my reality
Knowing only the treading of my feet
Boots grinding through grey mud
Soaked in sorrow, but my heart closed
Numb to the cold of The Grey
I struggle onward, not daring to feel
Lest my tears join the flood
And drown me in the rising tide.
I walk with the hope of seeing sunlight
I walk with the hope of feeling love
But right now, I feel nothing
So I will survive.
Soon, the wolf within will rise
The ravens will caw again
when the light breaks through.
Then I will laugh,
Once again I have become the storm
And I have become stronger
Note: This is still in rough draft form, but it is good enough I think to at least post it. It needs refining but I like how it captures my struggles with depression at times. I will probably present this poem in it own post when it is more refined.
Meditation:
Song of Preparation: “It’s My Life” – Bon Jovi
Text:
Everyone has the Right to Property – The Book of Rabyd 1:5
Sermon:
This is a new verse for the Book of Rabyd. Most people don’t realize that the original Declaration of Independence had originally ‘life. liberty and property’. Later editing changed it to the pursuit of happiness. But the idea of the inherent right to property to anyone who owns it is something that has not always been recognized in history. That changed with the Founding fathers as the notion of people having a right to translate their right to pursue their happiness. As Ayn Rand wisely pointed out this means the right to property.
I would argue that this right is what defends the others as well. Your Life. liberty and Pursuit of Happiness are yours and now one should be allowed to take them away from you. This means you also have the right to defend what is yours. But ownership of property being a right extends to all things that are yours. The most important of which is ownership of self. Self-ownership means to take responsibility for yourself and your own destiny instead of leaving in the hands of others. You need to exercise your right to own private property to do this.
I often wonder if those who try to attack this right realize that what they are doing allows people to basically take away all the others. If my life is not mine, if my liberty is only granted and can be taken away, if my pursuit of happiness requires that someone else give it to me, then they are not rights but privileges. The right to property is what brings in this concept of ownership of not only my stuff but my rights.
To think otherwise is to have the mentality of the thief and the societal leach. I make no apologies for saying this. I people have the notion that other people don’t have a right to property, then they are perfectly OK with the notion that such property can be taken away. They also have no problem when people have their property taken from hem through taxation so they can be supported. In short they envision people can think and work but the results in part belong to them even though they have done nothing to earn them. This justifies their stealing it or letting others do it for them.
So we turn again to abortion. The seeming conflict is that the woman has her right to liberty and pursuit what will make her happy. The notion being that the fetus is her body and she owns it so she can dispose of it as she sees fit. The opposite side of the coin is that the child has he right to live and pursuit its happiness by living. The real issue is it possible for one person to really own another and I would say that there is some inherent ownership of ones’ self in such a right to property.
For me the question of abortion has long been a sticky one. As a Christian I had pretty clear guidelines, but it was still troubling at times. Mostly because reality is that natural abortion happens all the time and with far more frequency than people think. Most are never known to even exist.
Post-Christian, the issues now falls to whether the fetus is a person. If not, the nit has no right to ownership of self and all the other rights that go with that. If yes, then he/she does and they have those rights. I am not sure I can answer the question definitively at this point but I still maintain that liberty and life are important in equal measure. I hope the choice is life, because I consider abortion a waste of human potential, if nothing else.
The real question for me is should the state be allowed to interfere? Once again we are still left to determining when a person becomes a person and the answer seems clear. Given all our rights and the notion of self-ownership, if the fetus can be proven to be a person then the answer is yes, but if not we still find ourselves in a controversy. It seems with all the advances in science, we should be able to determine this. Then the right to property with its concept of self-ownership kicks in. This still doesn’t give us a clear answer but we have two more principles left so we shall see.
Closing Song: Amen – Halestorm:
Parting Thought:
I remain,
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
I know a lot so scholars point out the massive similarities between Frigg and Freya, but as someone who can see why certain things would change. There are some personality differences in my opinion and I doubt Loki would have challenged the wife of Odin and basically call her a slut without some real proof out of fear the Odin would take it out on him. Oor is Freya’s listed husband it is said she cries tears over his absence and the similarity to Odin makes people think that maybe Freya and Frigg are the same goddess with different names,
I would point out however that while Freya is a mother, her motherly attributes are subordinated whereas Frigg’s stories seem to have her motherly aspect front and center, particularly for Balder her son. The fact is that the two goddesses are also said to have different children and their encounters with the other gods and goddess are distinct in the stories. Frigg is Aesir and Freya is Vanir along with her brother Frey. The only evidence that seems to suggest they are the same goddess is the similarity in their husband’s names and those husband having a tendency to wander. Sorry in all other aspects they are pretty distinct and different.
Freya is the goddess of love, fertility, beauty, and fine possessions. The Greek goddess Aphrodite might be a good comparison except Freya has very Norse qualities. Most notably she will suit up for battle when necessary. She also presides over the realm of Folkvang, one of the realms of the dead. Freya’s duty is to pick half the slain in battle to dwell here while Odin gets the other half. There is no criteria it seems for who get to go where, just her choice. This makes her one of the Valkyrie.
Some scholars call Freya, the party girl of the Norse gods. Loki basically accuses her of sleeping with every god and every elf including her own brother. Her defense is not denial but that it is not considered a taboo for a woman who is married to not take a lover when she wants to, just like the men. There is really no denial. In short Freya is the kind of girl a guy likes when he is single. Her attachment to the forces of fertility, love and beauty draws her into the realm of passionate sex. The image you can see is a girl who can drink, play and fuck all night long.
The one other quality she has is that she is the very definition of a person who practices the magical school of Seidr or the magic of fate. She can see the future through prophecy and can pronounce curses or blessings that stick. It is she, when the Vanir-Aesir War ended, that brought this magic to the gods and taught it to them including Odin. It is probably a significant thing this happened; as from then on, Odin and all the gods are focused on altering the future fate of their realm. It drives them and their actions and the whole concept of Ragnarök becomes center stage.
In popular culture, Freya does not appear very much. Except it is she who were probably conceptualize that the Valkyrie the most. That sexy, scantily clad warrior goddess is something her image probably brings to us. She appears once in Marvel’s Thor the comic book in 1993. She is merely a supporting character. She is much more than that in the mythology. She probably has had many appearances in video games as far as image and character than anything else.
Freya speaks to us of prosperity, knowledge and abundance and all the pleasures thereof. She is connected to cats and fairies. Her sphere is love, lovemaking and pleasure. But she also is one of the goddesses that can see the fate of men and chooses the slain of sword for her realm and Odin’s Valhalla. A prophetess who sees the future and says – “It’s not going to end well; everyone dies, so let’s party while we have the time to party.
In my own series The Grey Wayfarer, it is why I chose to separate her from Frigg. She will give me a goddess character to counter the more motherly Frigg. She is the woman who will be the good ‘naughty girl’ who tempts my protagonist. But in the end will also see his fate and weep as much over him as her lost husband.
I find Freya to be a great character and one that is distinct and full of potential. There are two very interesting sides to her; as well as a bunch of nuances, that make her a very fleshed out goddess. Definitely underused in popular culture by her proper name, but her image inspires a lot of characters of fiction and lore.
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
We don’t pray here – we figure God, the gods and goddesses, or whatever powers that be either know already, don’t give a fuck, or are busy with more important matters than our petty stuff. We also kind of assume that they expect us to do stuff that we can do for ourselves, and that we will do them ourselves and not be lazy. We also believe in being good friends, so we don’t presume on our friendship with the powers that be by asking them all the time for stuff while giving them nothing in return.
We also don’t take an offering here. We figure the powers that be probably don’t need it. Let’s be honest, offerings are not giving to the divine powers, they are given to an organization to support it. Just being honest. God, the gods or whatever never see a dime, farthing or peso of that money; it all goes to the church, mosque or shrine.
Opening Song: Never Give Up – Motivational Video
I don’t normally post motivational videos but I do listen to them from time to time. I think I might consider creating a morning playlist as I write. This might be the one to kick it off.
Poem: ‘Go Get it’ – Will Smith – From the movie The Pursuit of Happiness.
Meditation:
Song of Preparation: “Happy” – Pharrell Williams
Text:
“Everyone has the Right to Pursuit Happiness” – The Book of Rabyd 1:4
Sermon:
Will Smith has a great line in the movie “The Pursuit of Happiness”. He centers on the idea of how the founding fathers has enough wisdom to put in the word ‘pursuit’. This is what is often forgotten in this right. You do not have the right to be happy. You do have the right to pursue what will make you happy or what you think will make you happy. It does not include a safety net where the government bails you out if you fail.
I suppose it should be argued at this point that this right is equal to the other two already stated of life and liberty. The issue here is that some people will be champion of people’s life and liberty, but then involve themselves in the affairs of others in such a way as to either meddle or try to restrict other’s pursuit of happiness by law or ordinance. They think they know what would make others happy and try to use force or influence to make it so.
Truthfully, the respect for this right in others is the biggest litmus test of whether you genuinely treat people as human beings or objects. The person who can see what would be better for someone else but does not act because he or she respects that person’s right to pursue their own happiness is a person who also is seeing them as a human being, not as something to manipulate.
I have been using the abortion debate throughout this discussion so I will use it again here. The conflict is simple I think because a woman might argue that having a child would not be in line with her pursuit of happiness. The counter argument then comes that you are violating the child or fetus’ right to live. On the front of pursuit of happiness both have this right and so we are still at draw.
If we are truly seeing the two rights as equals then we are pretty much left in a stalemate and so the issue falls to other things. In abortion, we have a conflict of rights but the question is which right has superiority over others. If we give certain rights superiority over others then how can we say we are treating them all equally? Some other factor, must come into play to settle this quandary, and it may be Rabyd 1:5 which we will talk about in the next week.
For me personally this is why I try to conduct myself (and I hope my family conducts themselves with the idea as well) of not meddling in other people’s affairs. If we do feel we have a better way for people to live that might aid them in their pursuit of happiness; we do not force the issue, but attempt to persuade people to that end. Our goal is not to meddle, but we will certainly act in compassion if we see a need and react if asked to help. Part of respecting the pursuit of happiness is respecting the need for people to struggle through that issue on their own. To impose my view of what I think would make them happy on them would be wrong. It is wrong because it does not recognize the other person’s humanity or their right to pursuit what they believe will make them happy.
Closing Song: “Tacky” – Weird Al Yankovic
Having a little fun to end it. Weird Al in a classic. Have a laugh and pursuit what you feel will make you happy. It is your right.
Parting Thought:
A crude statement I suppose, but true. In your pursuit of happiness – be careful to not be drawn into things that will get you off the path. For instance, by giving a fuck about certain people who you suspect don’t give as much a fuck about you as you do them. Just keep walking toward your happiness.
I remain,
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
I suppose the imagery of a giant is pretty universal but as we will see there is a controversy about it when it comes to Norse Mythology. Giants are the primary antagonists in most of the stories of the gods in Norse mythology. The frost giants take prominence but there are also other types of giants. Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition’s Monster Manual lists six types of giants – Cloud, Fire, Frost, Hill, Stone and Storm. It might be argued that all of these have some from ideas found in Norse mythology.
But the question starts pretty early as regards if the Norse people actually conceived these giants as ‘giants’. The problem is one of translation and when Christians began to translate the word for ‘giant’ they may have bastardized it by adding the Greek mythology concepts and used the word for ‘giant’ that reflected this change. What you see then is a mutation of the original Norse Idea and the Greek idea of titans.
The original concept in the Norse may simply have been beings that represented the forces of Chaos. When you look at some of the giants you get that – Storm, Fire, Frost, Hills, Stone and Clouds are forces of nature that are both large and powerful. Both needed for survival, but also feared because of their destructive nature at times. The “giants” are simply personification of these forces. They may or may not have been large humanoids to the Norse people. It would make more sense if they were not.
The reason I say it would make more sense if they were not, is the simple fact that the gods and goddesses mate with giants and produce offspring. Sex between two individuals of great difference in size becomes problematic, unless the Norse people didn’t really have the concept of giants being large humanoids but rather simple humanoids that personified certain powerful natural forces. To the Norse people the gods and the giants may simply been the same size just representing on the one hand forces of order and civilization (the gods), and on the other, the raw natural forces of the world (the ‘giants’).
What I am saying is that the whole notion of these ‘giants’ being large humanoid like creatures might be a later addition. This would explain why later writers had to give some of the gods the ability to shape shift and change size. But the original myths may not have had this at all. The my simply have been referring to ‘giants’ as those being who represented the great powers of nature.
To me this makes the parings of some of the gods and giants interesting because it represents symbolically the need for the forces of civilization and humanity, if you will, to sometimes cooperate and draw strength from the chaotic forces of nature. That sometimes the ‘children’ of these paring represent both sides of that equation such as Loki pairings with the giantess that produced Fenrir, Hel, and Jormungandr. All of these Children have their chaotic element but there is also the ability to think and speak beyond the base animal that they represent in the case of Fenrir and Jormungandr. Hel herself is human like but represents that primal force of Death, but also her realm is orderly and well thought out.
It is why in Norse mythology all of the gods and giants are the product of a an original giant. That out of the primal forces of nature came the forces of order and chaos. Both are necessary and both can be in conflict or in love (lust) for each other. To me it speaks of how the Norse people could recognize that; in all things, some necessary things were present. Fire is a primal natural force that is dangerous; but without it, civilization and technology is simply not possible. The earth and hills can be wild and dangerous places; but without the earth we mine and the trees we cut down, we would not have tools or shelter. The mythology reflects this idea of necessary harmony, even tough at times those forces are a threat to each other.
In our world the giants represent much the same. Large chaotic forces that must be fought and overcome. The show up in a lot of places in fantasy mythology. But the idea of being primal natural forces is pretty interesting and we see that too. For me though I prefer if the giants remain as the larger than life humanoids. It just makes the battles more epic. Courage is a necessary thing when facing them. Every movie or book that uses them reflects this. Or on rare occasions we find a giant that is actually gentle who desires to help but his great power can unintentionally cause harm. Thus even when we bend such forces to our will, there is still a danger because of their nature.
All important lessons taught to us through the giants.
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
The Wayfarer’s Spiritual Side. This post and those titled like it to follow in the future are largely just me looking through the Eye, so to speak at my own spirituality. To gaze into my own spiritual journey and come up with some observations I hope will be helpful to me as I continue to walk my life.
I would say that the two great struggles I have had since leaving my religion and my ministry have firstly been to adapt to the change and secondly try to find some way to achieve balance spiritually speaking.
I suppose part of the problem is defining my spirituality:
I want my spirituality to be my own journey of discovery. That is why religion and I have a problem. That is, I see all of them as being someone else’s journey of discovery that other people follow.
I want my spirituality to embrace all that I am in balance. Reason, Emotion, Relationships, Health (Both mental and physical) and that aspect we call Spirit must all be involved equally. Most of my spirituality is about achieving balance between all these things.
Back to the two struggles, adaptation is a struggle because I am very conscious of the fact that I was engaged in a lot of spiritual activities as a Christian that I would consider irrational now.
I went to church, but I now understand what that was. It was the reinforcement of belief by repetition, not necessarily by coming to understanding the truth, but group think and emotional experience are powerful ways to teach you how to deny what is true.
I prayed, but I have realized that I was probably talking to myself most of the time. Even if there is a god, the way I was conceiving him as I prayed him took on the aspects of my earthly father. it was my concept of god I was praying to, not necessarily the divine power that actually exists.
I worshiped, but that conception of god was my own creation, so I was worshiping my own ability to conceive god. I don’t do a lot of this anymore. I honestly can’t say I miss it much.
I studied the Bible. But this was about repeating something over and over again and when you do that you are just training your mind to think a certain way. Doesn’t mean that way is true or right.
In my adaptation, I don’t want spiritual practices that don’t also leave me open to see possibilities I may not have considered or get me to be dogmatically telling others what “The Truth” is at the expense of their own freedom to figure it out themselves. it leaves very little other than practicing meditation on the virtues I want evident in my life and living life with a spiritual eye.
The other struggle is balance. Keeping one thing from dominating so much that the others are neglected.
Time to Look Through the Eye:
Faith:
I have faith in myself. Like it or not it is all I really have. People say that might be a poor thing to have faith in and they may be right. However, my self is all I really know I must have faith in, because it is the best thing I have to place my faith in that I know is real. Other things I will list that I have faith in I know based on my experience and reason that this is so, but I still must say I have a little less faith in these things than myself for obvious reasons. My wife, my small circle of friends, humanity all are worthy of various measures of my faith because they are real and proven through their actions. That said at the end of the day the only one who can keep my spiritual life in balance is me. The only one I can ultimately trust is me.
Religion:
I really try to avoid being religious, the problem is religion is very prevalent in spirituality, and eliminating it can be quite a challenge. The issue religion brings to the table is how much of other people’s spiritual experiences can be used to help my own and which ones are just controlling or fear mongering. I find that if a spiritual notion leads me to being afraid or is trying to ‘force’ me to certain activities then it is a religious element to be rejected. I just have time for notions that basically without proof try to tell me what ‘the truth’ is. I think there may be many truths, but one single monolithic truth? No. I don’t think the universe is that small. If there is any force that can take me off my notion of balance it is religion.
Theology:
The most elementary shift in my thinking theologically speaking it is realizing that sin is a made up concept. The writers of the Bible or any other holy book that talk about sin, just straight up called what behaviors they didn’t like ‘sin’. Therefore, they took it upon themselves to speak for the divine as to what offends the divine. They offer no direct proof for this. They claim it, but never prove it
Theologically speaking then, is humanity then inherently evil because they have picked up a sinful nature then? No. I have not proof one way or the other about that either. It is just asserted. So when it comes to my spirituality it is not so much avoiding or overcoming sin anymore. My spirituality has shifted more to the notion of making myself better by strengthening what is positive or turning something negative into a positive. I don’t believe that part of my humanity needs to be destroyed or redeemed anymore. I just think all elements of my humanity (needs, wants, reasoning, wisdom, etc.) need to be focused and work together to help me grow with balance.
Spirituality:
All of life then becomes just as much spiritual as it is anything else. From taking a shower, to going to work, to making love to even me sitting right now and writing on this blog. All of it has the potential to strengthen me spiritually. I simply have to find the element of each activity that helps me become a better person. What is it that leads to long life, prosperity and balance.
Conclusion:
The issue I find is still the issue of balance and adapting to being an X=Christian. Sometimes I find myself thinking about an issue and asking “Is that the former Christian talking or is it the real me?” It is the current state of my Spirituality as I walk the path of life. It is a question that comes up often.
Continuing to Walk the Path,
The Rabyd Skald – Wandering Soul, Bard and Philosopher. The Grey Wayfarer.
The Grey Wayfarer 