So little in Wicca is original

[Chessa]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

Honestly, everyone is talking about neo-paganism, but even when it comes to the recons, there's so much missing, and you have to get ideas from *somewhere*. Sometimes if the gap is big enough, the best you can do is peek over at someone else's paper and see what they're doing.

[Medusa]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

*looks at title.

Actually, I agree. But what isn't? I mean even my LaVeyan Satanism was influenced by others. That's how the brain works. I have an idea. I add to it my own individual understanding. Viola! A new idea.

I think you are just having a 'I just got me some edumication' blues going on. It happens when we become aware.

Like when I found out what happens when you eat flaming hot cheetohs and poop in the morning. Everything is Magenta and you think you are dying. But nope, it's just flaming hot cheetohs.

[MaskedOne]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

I am reopening this thread. To quote a staff member that will remain nameless unless they choose to announce their identity,

Because as someone else already pointed out, all traditions borrow from others (predecessors). I'd like to see more real talk about that

There are however, several ground rules to be aware of:

a. The thread is shorter. If you don't know what I've removed then you don't need to. If you do then don't revive it, the results will not be benign.
b. I am all for the use of links to evidence that supports your position or refutes your opponent's arguments. Do not spam the thread with links designed to personally devalue your opponent. I am aware that people do stupid things on the internet. 95% of the possible idiocy you can find about someone is not relevant to discussions on PF.
c. If you think that you are in possession of something from that special 5% that is relevant to PF then take it to

http://www.paganforum.com/forumdisplay.php?73-Staff-Comms

d. I define relevant as plagiarism, criminal activity and new and interesting forms of moral depravity. If it doesn't fall into those categories then it probably isn't relevant.
e. Keep the remainder of this thread civil. I'm already enacting a penalty that I would've preferred not to. I can enact more if I come back to this thread.
f. Lydia, for the love of heaven, work on tact. It is profoundly easy to come across as aggressive on text based media and I don't like the paperwork that comes with it when people respond to that. This thread would not have required my presence if the opening post was handled better.

[MaskedOne]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

Sealed till I get around to dealing with some issues tonight.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

- - - Updated - - -



Ms.P,I copied the text from that site,and saved it to a text file. If you want it let me know.

Thank you. Got it now. I'm not sure saying that Wicca leaned heavily on Druidism proves that Wicca is not 'original' because quite frankly, modern Druidism is hardly original either. Just because something is original doesn't make it worth following.
Also the idea of scourging was hardly Crowley's innovations, nor even the Golden Dawn's but has been around in Christian monasticism for centuries. It's probably older than that, too.

[anunitu]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

So simple,yet so much for some people to argue about...everything is from everything else..Democracy copied from Greece...humans copied from much earlier Great Apes...

[ThePaganMafia]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

I mean Neo-Paganism is largely appropriated from other cultural and religious practices. There is even a word for it-eclecticism.

[thalassa]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

Well yes, Gerald Gardner did not spring Wicca into being from his own imagination. There's nothing new about that--it was an admitted and unabashed amalgamation of the occult, European folklore, non-Christian religious ideas, and the writings of several people in those circles at the time. Triumph of the Moon has been out for almost two decades now...and these things were even known and admitted then.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

Can't get the link to load. Has anyone managed to do so?

[Sean R. R.]

Re: So little in Wicca is original

I put you to the test of finding ONE JUST ONE religion that didn't pump everything from other sources.

Originiality doesn't mean valuable.

[Lydia]

Last year, as I was studying Wicca, I came to learn that much of it is unoriginal content.
Then, starting in november of last year, I began to compile a list of all of the elements of Wicca that were taken from other sources, in a reference article, as I began doing more in-depth research to find those elements.

As time went on and I learned more and more, I learned that there is less and less in Wicca that is original. At one point, I thought: "at least their cone of power is original", and then later I learned that it isn't. At another point, I thought: "at least that bit about having a knife in one's hair is original", and then later I learned that it isn't. At a later point, I thought: "the only original things in Wicca are the five-fold kiss, and the triple-consecrating with oil, wine, and kisses", and then later I learned that both of those practices, while still largely original, are derived from two respective earlier practices which both come from the same source.

After doing thorough research over the past few months, the reference article now appears to be complete. It is here: about wicca

Of the many discoveries listed in the article, many of them are discoveries that were made by me personally which I don't think had been made before, or at least had not been published before; others are discoveries that were made independently by both myself and other researchers; and others are things that I would not have known if they had not been discovered by other researchers.