article
by Kevin Filan
A Hellenic Reconstructionist, a Theosophist, and a self-initiated solitary are sitting together in a hot tub. This could be the start of a joke -- or the start of a long and bitter argument. Neo-paganism has never wanted for debate, and few subjects inspire disagreement more than the question of "should we recreate historical traditions, use them as a framework for our own religious practices, or jettison everything which has gone before us and blaze a new path for a New Age?"
Like many deep philosophical pagan questions (DPPQs), this one doesn't really have a right or a wrong answer. And, like many other DPPQs, it has arisen in many other traditions as well. Exploring the ways in which other people have approached the question of tradition vs. innovation in religion can help us to reach our own conclusions on this thorny and often contentious topic. In this article I've referenced various faiths, including some that are not generally recognized as pagan. The tradition vs. innovation question is not an exclusively pagan one. Sooner or later, every spiritual path will face these questions. There's no point to reinventing the wheel -- why not learn from their experience as well?
The Traditionalist Approach
Some individuals think it's best to do things the way they have always been done. To this end, they strive to get the traditional materials, follow the standard liturgy, and generally do what they can to go native.
There are many examples of these traditionalist faiths. Hellenic Reconstructionists seek to honor the Olympian deities in a proper Greek fashion. Asatruar study the Eddas and Norse sagas to learn how Odin, Thor and the Aesir were worshipped among the Scandinavians, while Kemetic pagans look back to Egypt for religious guidance. Some traditions are able to skip the reconstruction part, since they have an unbroken lineage and traceable history. Lukumi (also known as Santeria) and Vodou preserve the African traditions brought to the New World by slaves: Freemasonry retains the rituals and practices of the medieval Craft Lodges.
The traditionalist's path has the steepest learning curve. You can't master a tradition -- any tradition -- by reading a couple of books on the subject. If you're trying to rebuild a dead tradition, you will have to study everything you can -- not just in your mother tongue, but in the original language. You're going to have to become at least proficient in Old Icelandic, Attic Greek, or medieval Breton. What's more, you're going to have to learn how to distinguish between material that is good, material which is outdated, and material which is just plain bad. This may involve reading scholarly journals and academic papers. You will have to learn the difference between Hieroglyphical Variants in Egypt's Middle Kingdom and UFOs Built the Pyramids, between Commerce and Conquest in Celtic Europe and Sparkly Moonbeam's Guide to Celtic Healing Energies.
If you want to work with a living tradition, you're going to have to do some field work in addition to all your studies. You don't get to declare yourself a Gardnerian high priestess after you read Witchcraft Today. You can't become a Freemason by self-initiating to the Third Degree, or an Iyalocha (priest of Santeria) by dedicating yourself to the Orishas. These traditionalist paths have a clearly defined hierarchy; you can only gain the priesthood by being recognized as a priest/ess and can only become a member by being accepted as a member. Hence, you will have to convince some elder -- a godfather, a guru, a high priest/ess, etc. -- of your sincerity and your stability. If there are no elders to be found in your vicinity, you may have to travel long distances. This may require a considerable outlay of time and other resources.
Most importantly, you must begin this journey as a novice. Coming from a pagan path, where many declare themselves high priests after reading a few books, this can be disconcerting. Your expertise in other religious paths does not make you a priest/ess of a living tradition; your knowledge of Wicca does not translate into expertise in Hellenic Reconstructionism or Asatru. Indeed, this previous knowledge may prove more hindrance than help: you may have to un-learn many of the ideas you picked up along the way. Most traditional paths do not subscribe to the "everyone's opinion matters, and everyone is welcome to think whatever s/he likes so long as s/he harms none" approach. Those who are used to a more egalitarian approach may interpret this as fascism and cult-think. (And, to be fair, there are plenty of cases where gurus or teachers have abused their authority and then tried to pull rank when they were called on it).
There are questions about how much a foreigner can enter into another culture. When we join a new tradition, we bring our preconceptions and prior education along with us. Will my experience of Vodou ever be identical, or even similar, to that of a Vodouisant who lives and works in Haiti's Artibonne Valley? I can convert to Judaism -- but will I ever have the knowledge, or the worldview, of a Chasidic Rabbi who comes from a long line of Rabbis and who was brought up in the tradition? Twenty-first century America is vastly different than pre-Christian Europe; can I interact with Odin or Brigit the way people did 1,500 years ago?
In an effort to compensate for this, some traditionalists wind up fetishizing the authentic. They spend so much time sounding the notes that they lose the music along the way. Instead of serving the divine and working toward their own self-improvement, they become fixated on doing things "exactly right." Authenticity can become a marketing tool or a club to use against competition ("I'm an authentic practitioner; s/he's a phony-baloney poser!"). And of course the inevitable question must arise: Am I following tradition stringently because I want to honor the divine or because I want to convince others, or myself, that I'm just as good as any native-born priest/ess.
Despite these obstacles, some hardy souls are willing to put in the work required to become experts in their adopted tradition. Impoverished and disabled by severe asthma, Englishman Allan Bennett still made his way to Sri Lanka where in 1897 he became Ananda Metteyya, the first Englishman to be ordained as a Theravada Buddhist monk. Thomas Merton started life as an Episcopalian and secular humanist; ultimately he turned his back on a promising academic career to become one of the greatest Catholic mystics of the twentieth century.
The Eclectic Approach
Eclectic practitioners blend workings and images from various traditions: if it works, they will happily use it. They see nothing wrong with holding a Kali circle one weekend and an Aphrodite ritual the next. Their altars are decorated with Haitian Vodou flags, quartz crystals and Greek statues; they see "Namaste" and "Blessed Be" as interchangeable greetings. If all religions are paths to the Divine, then the eclectic practitioner has no objection to travelling on several of these roads at once. Many, perhaps most, solitaries are eclectics; they draw from various wellsprings in serving divinity.
Traditionalists often accuse eclectics of laziness. Instead of taking the time to actually learn one system, these critics claim, eclectics would rather learn a very little about ten or twelve different traditions. And they may have a point. At its worst, eclecticism can degenerate into silliness. ("Hi, my name is Lord Shiva Pendragon, and I'm a Native American Asatru Shaman Reiki Healer in the Arthurian tradition.") There is a fine line between drawing on multiple traditions and creating a jumbled mush which owes little to any of its original components.
When dealing with living traditions, we must consider the question of cultural appropriation. Many of these traditions have survived among people who are at a considerable financial and social disadvantage. Native Americans have suffered four centuries of oppression, genocide, and theft. Today many live in conditions of poverty and want, with little access to a better future. When we take their symbols and their legends to create our own "Native American Wicca," are we showing them respect - or are we following in the footsteps of those ancestors who took their land and herded them like cattle into reservations?
Many of us believe that we are entitled to use religious symbols and traditions from any culture. Many of our ancestors believed that they were entitled to use any land and resources they could claim, since they were capable of using it more efficiently than the "savages" or "primitives" who were already there. Have we inherited their sense of entitlement? Once again, there is no one right answer to this question...but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't question our motivations and own up to our position of privilege before we decide to incorporate a living tradition into our own practice.
Those who follow an established tradition have access to that tradition's safeguards. Those who pull imagery and ideas willy-nilly from a tradition may miss those small but important details. Santeros know that Oya and Yemanja don't like each other and keep their shrines as far apart as possible. Asatruar know how seriously the Norse divinities take even casual oaths, and how poorly they regard oathbreakers. A casual student of Santeria or Asatru may not know these things -- until they find out the hard way. Some practices have gained a reputation for being "dangerous," largely because of people who burned their fingers when playing with forces they didn't understand.
As a counter-argument, those of a more mystical bent might argue that we have incarnated in our current multicultural, information-rich world for a reason. Perhaps our present path requires the diversity and ready access to resources that we find today. In rejecting our birthright and trying to shape our lives and our worldview to an alien tradition, we could be missing the important lessons that we were supposed to learn in this time and in this place. Less mystical sorts might point out that even the most "traditional" religious and magical practices drew inspiration from multiple sources. The Greeks happily honored Levantine gods like Adonis and Cybele; the Romans happily honored Greek gods. Living traditions (and traditions which have been brought back to life) are not static things. If they are to be relevant to the world in which they exist, religions must draw upon the experiences of their followers.
The interplay between various cultures and worldviews regularly produces fascinating and powerful new traditions. Indeed, many of today's religious traditions began by people who mixed and matched various strains. The synthesis of Egyptian Neoplatonism, Persian Mithraism and Hebrew philosophy that became Christianity is a good example. Aleister Crowley combined Hinduism, Sufi mysticism, Western Occultism, and a few other traditions to create Thelema, while Helena P. Blavatsky created a Hindu and Tibetan-influenced mélange, which we still know as Theosophy.
To use an eclectic approach effectively may require as much or more research than doing things traditionally. If you are going to incorporate elements from other paths, you should first have at least a basic understanding of those paths. You may not need the in-depth scholarly research favored by those who are trying to reconstruct Egyptian or Norse practices, or the field work required by aspiring Vodouisants or Lakota medicine men...but this kind of enthusiasm and rigor won't hurt, either. At its best, eclecticism may well require more homework than sticking to one tradition and learning it inside and out.
The Lone Wolf Approach
For lone wolves, tradition is something to be avoided. They follow their own unique systems, making things up as they go along. The English surrealist and mystic Austin Osman Spare is one excellent example of a lone wolf. His system of sigilization had little in common with any of the forms of magick found in Victorian or Edwardian England...and yet it worked exceedingly well for him, and for many of the Chaos magicians who have followed in his footsteps. Another example might be Lao-Tze, the founder of Taoism. After his meeting with Lao-Tze, Confucius (who was a traditionalist's traditionalist if ever there was one) said, "I know the bird can fly; I know the fish can swim; I know the animals can walk. But the dragon is just moving in the sky with the wind and cloud. I see Lao-Tze today. He is a dragon."
The lone wolf may include references to past systems and other traditions -- but in a style that is so distorted and transformed as to be nearly unrecognizable. Kenneth Grant claims to be Aleister Crowley's successor, for example. But his nods to H.P. Lovecraft, his fascination with UFOs and his "beings from outside the circles of time achieving perichoresis with this plane of existence" make his Typhonian OTO a distant cousin at best to Aleister Crowley's Thelemic philosophy. This can also be true of badly-done eclecticism, of course...but the lone wolf's approach shows originality and creativity, while bad eclecticism features a shallow and superficial mishmash of poorly-understood material.
Often the lone wolf receives direct inspiration from Beyond through mystical experiences. Philip K. Dick's encounter with VALIS colored much of his later fiction, while the poet and artist William Blake frequently had dinner table conversations with angels, prophets and devils. Unfortunately, there are few completely reliable ways by which one can distinguish between a mystical vision and the symptoms of schizophrenia or other mental disorders. Nor is it easy to determine whether the "voice of the gods" is merely wish fulfillment or self-delusion. You may have encountered an astral teacher who wants to send a message to you; you may be suffering from lack of sleep or some kind of organic disorder; you may have an overly active imagination. (And never mind trying to get reinforcement from others: most are going to write you off as delusional or worse if you start telling them about your spirit contacts!)
Traditionalists and studious eclectics can measure their experiences against a historical standard. If Thor comes to you in a pink tutu and does a ballet dance for you, it's probably not Thor; if Aphrodite comes to you in sackcloth and recommends fasting and chastity, it's probably not Aphrodite. But how do you determine whether or not a personal vision, one that has no historical antecedents, is real or valid? Unless you have a considerable degree of self-awareness and self-discipline, you're going to have a hard time distinguishing between visions, hallucinations and wishful thinking.
To put a more positive spin on this problem, the lone wolf has to encounter the Divine; s/he cannot rely on what s/he has learned from others. S/he cannot take refuge in scholarship, but rather must be an active participant in the process. The lone wolf cannot help but have a direct and personal experience of faith and magick. S/he cannot learn the path, but instead must live it. This is a formidable task: There are no safeguards here, no reassurance from a sympathetic group, no map and no compass. Lone wolves wander in uncharted terrain. Frequently they get lost or badly injured in their travels...but every now and then they stumble upon enormous treasure. Many of the most popular religious and magical traditions began with lone wolves: in a few generations, the lone wolf's travels and findings may be preserved by traditionalists who scorn any kind of innovation from the Master's work.
None of these paths are right or wrong -- but each may be right or wrong for you. Some require the structure and rules of a tradition, while others need the freedom of an eclectic approach and still others have a vision that they must pursue to its conclusion without the burdens of history. Which one should you choose? Only you can figure that one out. (Hey, I told you in the beginning there were no simple answers to be found here, didn't I?)
If you're interested in learning more about some of the traditions referenced above, here are a few worthwhile Web pages:
Traditionalists
The Asatru Alliance, www.asatru.org; Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye (Lukumi), www.church-of-the-lukumi.org; Kemetic Orthodoxy (Egyptian reconstructionism), www.kemet.org/home.html; Temenos Theon (Hellenic reconstructionism), www.kyrene.4t.com/index.html; Temple of Yehwe (Haitian Vodou), www.vodou.org
Eclectics
Branwen's list of eclectic Wiccan covens, www.branwenscauldron.com/resources/eclectic.html; Four Quarters Interfaith Sanctuary, www.4qf.org; The Sacred Texts of Thelema, www.sacred-texts.com/oto; Theosophy Library Online, www.theosophy.org; Universal Eclectic Wicca Tradition, www.witchvox.com/trads/trad_uew.html
Lone Wolves
Austin Osman Spare archive, www.banger.com/spare; William Blake Archive, www.blakearchive.org; Philip K. Dick Official Web site, www.philipkdick.com; the TaoDeChing (Lao-Tze), www.chinapage.com/gnl.html; Typhonian OTO (Kenneth Grant), http://user.cyberlink.ch/~koenig/staley.htm
Copyright © 2006 by the article's author