|
Post by stefan on Dec 1, 2008 16:09:46 GMT -1
Point taken Craig, I totally understand where your coming from.
However I personally find the Pendragon Order very exciting and something totally fresh and powerful brought to the Druid table. If Druidry had been more like this from the beginning of its revival I would have had one hell of a lot more respect for it. People would, indeed could not, have been self appointed, they would have had to prove themselves worthy of rising up the ladder of attainment, being accountable to their peers and those at the top I think without doubt would have become quite remarkable individuals.
There is some odd, bewildering stuff in it like the symbols used for the book of Amrhan, but so much of it is very thought provoking indeed, again the practice related to folk tradition is again full on, with more grit to it than I have seen anywhere else. Indeed for me, so much of folk tradition magick in this book is brought to life with even greater clarity than the Witchcraft tradition
So yes, I really like it, but again its only a personal opinion and for me another personal agenda is removing myself from anything that seems remotely influenced by the counter culture and thats certainly a box the Pendragon material ticks big style.
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 1, 2008 16:28:38 GMT -1
The particular Tantric practice I was referring to is actually one amongst many. It's a solitary practice, so not like the Great Rite, and focuses on channelling energy around the body in a similar manner to that described by Stefan.
Techniques of ecstasy, really, as opposed to a shag with a manual. But, as LR says, there are plenty of people who take anything out of context.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2008 9:12:33 GMT -1
I loved the book. It had guts, and one of the most moving creation myths I'd ever read. The idea behind the 'song' spoke straight to my Bardic heart. It was one of those books that I really wanted to be authentic, but I'm quite sure it is as much a modern forgery as Barddas was before it.
As with a lot of other poetic works, be that Iolo, Graves or the Pendragon book, they seem to be written for a particular time, for a group of people with a particular need. For Iolo it was about Welsh culture, for Graves it was about poetic inspiration and re-enchantment, for the Pendragon book it seems to have been offering a more demanding magical structure - something that a lot of people are yearning for. In a way it's a shame that it was marketed as 'authentic'. If it had just been offered as his own ideas, I think it would have had more legs. I don't think a lot of people can be bothered to read another ''fake' book, but they might have been interested in reading it in its own right.
|
|
|
Post by stefan on Dec 8, 2008 16:28:36 GMT -1
I totally agreed with you Damh. The religious aspect concurs completely with my own religious beliefs, i.e. the creation myth etc. I now do many of the Pendragon teachings within my own practice. It is for me one of the most inspiring books I have ever read. Whether or not I consider myself a Druid, I would be more than happy to be involved in reforming the Order and have talked about doing so to several people. I think every modern magical organization since the 18th century has created a fake history for itself, so although I know many find that too much of a hurdle to get over, the Pendragon cosmology more or less could give me the substance and depth of practice I crave for and that modern Druidry has failed to provide so far.
|
|
|
Post by shropshirepagan on Dec 12, 2008 20:23:37 GMT -1
I must admit that this book does intrigue me and I would like to read it some time. The 'song' in the creation story does resonate with me, reminds me a bit of the more Christian myth in the Narnia stories of Aslan singing Narnia into being.
I'm glad to hear that it resonates with you Stefan. Could it be modern myth and inspired rather than made up? And with regard to the Bardas, am I correct in hearing that some scholars now don't think it's entirely made up?? Personally I feel that if inspired texts touch someone's soul, they've done their job!
Warm blessings
Elaine x
|
|
|
Post by stefan on Dec 14, 2008 13:07:39 GMT -1
Hi Elaine. Most people think this book is entirely made up, but it gives me such a funny feeling when I read it, its hard to describe, it really does contain so much power and in many ways feels really old, in such a way I think someone writing it recently would really struggle to accomplish. It has a kind of Victorian/Edwardian feel and yet also way, way out there, radical, for those times. I can imagine our occult elite at the turn of the century putting something together like this, but so much hints at things I doubt they would have known about back then. If it is a modrn forgery then not to have fallen into any traps of alluding to modern Pagan culture/thinking is very clever indeed, I would have thought almost impossible. Personally I feel it has far more relevence than Barddas. You can pick it up and run with it. Indeed if it was the only book on Druidry you had, it provides an entire world of religion, religious beliefs and practices, magick, rituals and just as importantly a precise focus for the future. If someone made all this up for a laugh, not only are they near genius, but they also have far too much time on their hands.
Again that it is so serious and demands total comittment is so refreshing in this age of anyone can do what they want.
Stefan
|
|
|
Post by Francis on Dec 14, 2008 15:51:28 GMT -1
Okay you win!!!!!! I've ordered a copy
|
|
|
Post by aelfarh on Dec 15, 2008 22:30:01 GMT -1
|
|
|
Post by arth_frown on Dec 16, 2008 20:29:54 GMT -1
|
|
|
Post by shropshirepagan on Dec 17, 2008 18:57:15 GMT -1
Hi Stefan Maybe this book contains information that was put to paper in that Victorian/Edward period, when people developed a wider fascination with the esoteric and mysterious. I agree it is possible that it's authentic, or that at least threads of it are authentic, filled in with inspired material during the Victorian/Edwardian period. From what I've seen of the Barddas, I feel that is more ... inspiration rather than a structured method of practicing druidry. It does sound to me as though the Druidic Order of the Pendragon is an extremely useful book for someone seeking to deepen their practices. Let's say it's near the top of my book wish list Thank you for sharing your thoughts Stefan. Blessings Elaine x
|
|
|
Post by stefan on Dec 20, 2008 12:06:10 GMT -1
Yes thats the right book. I can't say that any of its authentic, what I can say is that no book about Drudry has had such an effect on me. The material does feel very old and because its likely to have been written pre the latest phase in Pagan evolution, i.e. the 1980's, when OBOD resurfaced, first Matthews books etc, etc, again it has a very unique feel about it.
The clever bit is that it provides virtually no historical references whatsoever. It just tells you what to do and why, as if you already knew the history and did not need to research it. Like a car manual today does not need to fill you in on the history of cars, it just tells you how to fix one.
Again I really like the serpent magic, which is really deep and if you know about this subject will realize just how multi layered it is. The philosophy behind the underworld is also very specific and makes complete sense, leaving you in no doubt about the theology behind life after death. It really is very refreshing to read something that is in no way ambiguous and will polarize the reader. Forcing you to decide its ether a load of crap or something indeed quite remarkable.
The historical claims at the beginning will I feel sure make you draw the conclusion its completely made up, perhaps by an Edwardian Order? But the actual content really forced me to scratch my head and ponder, who the fuck actually wrote this?
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 23, 2008 18:05:09 GMT -1
Well, I've ordered the book out of curiosity .... and it arrived today.
I'm having a read at the moment, 'cos I'm having a restful few days.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 24, 2008 20:20:48 GMT -1
It's making interesting reading Stefan, especially as I was born in the Sherwood Forest area and spend a lot of time in the Derbyshire dales.
RR
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 28, 2008 11:13:45 GMT -1
Well, I've read it and I have to say that I agree with the majority of Stefan's comments. It may well be the result of an overactive imagination, but it must have taken a lifetime to create all of this, so my suspicions are that it couldn't possibly be the result of one individual. It doesn't concern itself with providing historical evidence but concentrates upon the framework from which to experience it's teachings, a pragmatic approach that would appeal to people who want to experience whether this works for them or not. It makes no claims as to the "outcome" of all this, but merely states that it is the journey that is important, not the outcome, and positively reinforces that gaining "high" office is not for the majority! (Where have I heard that before?) I am interested in the conspicuous absence of named deities and the approach that it is the power or energies present that they wish to experience rather than the subjective attention of human construed entities, thus taking away any premise of "personal" power. In this sense it seemed to be trying to achieve, to an extent, an ego less state, thus using their connections with these powers as a conduit. A position that is consistent with spiritual healing practitioners, whose goal is to use their bodies to "channel" the healing energies. But rather than use "spiritual guides" as intermediaries, the serpent is the source of this energy. As usual with all religious belief systems, it's all a matter of definition!
RR
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 28, 2008 20:41:37 GMT -1
One bit in the introduction made me smile - the idea that "most modern pagans" would have trouble with a symbolic triple death initiation and the lying in a grave that is then covered over. *grins broadly*
I read it the other day 'cos I was a bit poorly with the 'flu.
It's OK. Nothing much of a surprise, though, because I've managed to put together a remarkably similar system for myself, pieced together from shamanism, yoga, and research into channelled hands-on healing techniques.
I did like the absence of Higher Beings and Ascended Rainbow Masters, though.
I'll stop being naughty in a minute. Promise. And, yes, I was right about what RR was reading in the other thread. *grin*
|
|
|
Post by littleraven on Dec 28, 2008 20:58:21 GMT -1
I've read the intro. It says it's origins are pre-Roman, yet has been 'amended' so that anything of age is effectively unprovable, making it's actual provenance unprovable. A nice little trick that means it's claiming nothing, it's significance is implied and effectively put on it by the reader. Nice, and quite clever. But if you look at the extant relgious traditions their material of significant age is often quite discernible within their canon.
Skimming through the text what I've seen absolutely f***ing screams stuff that has it's origins in 19th century/Golden Dawn type techniques - there are 'patterns' in Occult material that are fairly easiy discernible whne you read enough. Using simple stratigraphy this means it's origins, or it's source material, is in the 19th century. A Big differrence, and stuff I've been in contact with before on two seperate occasions. It can read as quite esoteric to a modern audience.
I'm thoroughly with Megli on this so far.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Dec 28, 2008 21:32:39 GMT -1
Yes, I would agree that it does seem rooted in the 19th century. I smiled at the Copernicus style postumous publishing! However, it does provide a framework within which to work, even if there is no historical evidence for it's origins. If only for this reason, it is, in my opinion, preferable to the diluted "do as thou will" neo-pagan claptrap espoused nowadays. At least you have a common route by which to experience the author's ideas and as thus, is to a degree quantifiable. Show me other preferable frameworks that stand on their own merits. The monotheistic religions are grounded in questionable history, at least this make no such claims, and if for no other reason, it is this fact that makes it an interesting read.
RR
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 31, 2008 11:25:32 GMT -1
It's a framework of sorts, that's all. There are plenty of frameworks out there - it's just that, for the most part, people seem to prefer some kind of spiritual pick and mix taking what they fancy from all different cultures, paths and streams. Bit like a box of Quality Street, really, then when you get to the bottom of the carton and find there are a few sweeties in there you don't really like (generally to do with aspects of oneself one would prefer to ignore) you throw it in the bin and go off in search of a new one.
(By the way, in this I'm using the word "you" in the broadest and most unspecific sense and not referring to any particular individuals. I could just as easily mean "me" 'cos I've done that in the past - although I don't any more - but my use of the word "you" has got me in trouble in the past where individuals have got the idea that I'm pointing fingers, which I have absolutely no interest in doing.)
In terms of shamanic interaction with the Other World, Ty Andoman or whatever - the place he describes does exist there, at least in my experience. However, 'tis extremely limited to think that this is the sum total and extent of the Other World 'cos (again, in my experience) it is not. It's a bit like describing places in OUR world, such as the outback of Australia or the Brecon Beacons, in the manner of a walk around New York's Bronx district and saying the landscapes are the same.
|
|
|
Post by littleraven on Jan 2, 2009 21:31:53 GMT -1
However, it does provide a framework within which to work, even if there is no historical evidence for it's origins. If only for this reason, it is, in my opinion, preferable to the diluted "do as thou will" neo-pagan claptrap espoused nowadays. At least you have a common route by which to experience the author's ideas and as thus, is to a degree quantifiable. Why is this, as an invention, any different from any of the other neo-pagan claptrap? Invention is invention. There is absolutely no reason why this won't work, as indeed can any other invented system work for people who are receptive to it. The difference is what it works *on*, whether it be external or internal. It is said that symbolism is the language by which the Gods speak to us, but those symbols originate from without and we find the meaning. When we create a system we invent the meaning, and this allows us to speak to the unconcious mind within, beyond language and returning to symbolism. I could invent a system tonight where my teapot is the altar, the kitchen is the temple and the God is named the 'Twining'. If I ascribe meaning to this and pass it to others those meanings will allow those others to experience things they may consider 'spiritual' but originate in the pscychological. For those ordinary people the end result may be utterly fulfilling, but it's not a connection to the Gods, it's a connection to the mind. Show me other preferable frameworks that stand on their own merits. The monotheistic religions are grounded in questionable history, at least this make no such claims, and if for no other reason, it is this fact that makes it an interesting read. Yes it does make a claim, it says it originates Pre-Roman yet then claims it can't be proven. Going on to describe the history of the order and how it addressed the coming of the Romans is a rather strong implication.
|
|