What makes a "sacred text" sacred?

In my tradition, we believe that objects and living things can have their own spirits.

OK... I would ask:

1. If they 'can' have spirits, does that also mean they can not have spirits, and how does one know the difference?

2. To clarify, are you saying that there are living things (not 'inanimate' objects) which do not have their own spirits in your tradition?

3. And are you saying that an object can have its own spirit but not be sacred? (I was presuming yes...)

1. I mean that it is impossible to know if everything does or does not have it's own spirit.

2. I have no way to know that.

3. There are many things that are not personally sacred to me, depending upon how one defines sacred.

Maybe I should explain, we have a member who is Native American and she believes everything, every place has it's own spirit. This is not at odds with with the tradition's beliefs.

OK, that wasn't as helpful as I hoped! No worries. I agree with your NA member, and so do many other traditions of course including classical pagan, plus Hindu and Tibetan Buddhist I believe.

I will ask you one more question. What in your own opinion is the reason that a tradition would believe that?


My answers to my three would be:

1. I believe everything has a spiritual content, nothing can exist without nonphysical content on what I call the levels of being above physical. I base that on OBEs looking at objects (where obviously I am not using my physical eyes.) But for an object to be actually inhabited with a spirit, that is something which must be done deliberately.

2. All living things not only have spirits, or souls if you prefer (the word 'animal' means 'ensouled') but in my opinion they usually have many.

3. To me, the interaction with the higher (or deeper, or less material, whatever) levels of being is interaction with the sacred, whether within oneself or someone else. Personally I think of a genuinely 'ensouled' object like Lydia the bitch sword as being 'more sacred' than a sword without a spirit in it, and she would agree with me.

You can say it's all UPG if you want. There's more to it than that IMO.

Ah, okay.

1. I think that an object can have it's own spirit (or energy signature) and therefore no one, be it human, animal or god, has to put it there. It simply is. I believe that there are gods of place however, and some might think of that as a spirit of place, depending upon the definition used.

I realize now that you group the world into living and non-living things. I don't in this case.

2. I do not think of a spirit as a separate or more divine thing than the body and mind and I believe it is our job to fully integrate all three. I am not convinced that I, or anything else, have a soul (spirit) that will live on after death. I believe that I am made of energy and that "energy can neither be created or destroyed; only change it's appearance." (All One Wicca)

3. You would be interested then in another definition of sacred from Kaatryn MacMorgan-Douglas. "Those things which, by bringing us closer to ourselves, bring us closer to divinity." We name the things that are sacred to us because by doing so we learn to know ourselves better.

Maybe this example of my belief?

If I make a pot, I am not creating a pot and thrusting a spirit in it. I am taking clay and water and flakes of my skin and designs in my mind and serendipitous things and creating something new that has the energy of all those things in it which forms a new combination. The same with creating a baby. Some people might believe that their god (or someone) thrusts a spirit into it, and maybe that can happen, who knows? I think that all that energy forms something new, a new combination.

We're getting there I do believe! Somewhere anyway. What an epic...

1. Well you're conflating 'spirit' with 'energy signature', but they are definitely not the same thing. It takes a special method to implant an animated soul into an inanimate object, and this is not the same thing as putting energy and intent alone into it.

All things have spiritual content (including energy signature and huge amounts more). Yes I do draw a distinction between living and non-living things at the soul level, because there are many different types of soul/spirit IMO, there is not just one.

2. How do you know that mind and body and spirit even exist, and what is their relation to 'energy'? What is their nature?

When energy is transmuted to another form, what form might that be? How is this known? Is it possible for something non-physical to have form?

3. It's not bad, but to be honest I think John T Mainer's Valkyrie experience summed up a lot of what I mean by it, not sure whether that fits the description you gave here. The thing is to me the sacred is primarily a kind of experience which I know when I have it, but can't easily define. What his experience had was that ring of truth where something happened, something related to meaning of a transpersonal as well as merely personal kind.

If I make a pot, I am not creating a pot and thrusting a spirit in it.

Of course you're not -- I already said that if you want to put a spirit in an object that is a special technique. It's something the Egyptians had, the Greeks had, the Tibetans have, the Taoists have, it's something Glenn encountered, and I've given two examples of books with specific descriptions of how it's done, and I hope one day to do it myself. (BTW one of the guys I know has done it for sure by the same system is a Wiccan I believe.) But it's not something that happens with every pot!

Certainly 'energy forms something new' (how could it not...?) I just think there is a lot of detail about how that happens to be observed.

But you said that a person consists of mind and spirit and body, are you saying that all of these are made from energy? That might get us somewhere.

And one more: you say that amongst the things that go into the pot are 'designs in your mind'. So: does the pot have a mind of the same type? And/or how do the designs in your mind affect the pot? And is the pot (like the baby) able to have designs of its own, of the same kind?

Plus, how do you know these things are true? Why is it not 'UPG' as they say? (Isn't it experience, simply, that tells you?)

No, we really aren't getting there.

1. You said "Well you're conflating 'spirit' with 'energy signature', but they are definitely not the same thing." You forgot to say, IN YOUR OPINION. You cannot prove that are not the same thing.

2. As I have said, it is all opinion. Yours, mine and everyone else. There is no proof.

3. I'm glad that John's summed up your opinion. Mine sums up my opinion nicely, thanks.

You cannot prove that the Greeks or the Egyptians, or any one else, had or has that special technique or that it is possible. You have given examples of hearsay evidence.

I cannot prove that the pot doesn't have it's own will to be created in a particular way, or that the Divine doesn't dictate how it will be made or if it is a design of my own or one from someone else.

I don't know that they are true. I only have an opinion, as you do. I should have added that our experiences go toward our world views, as mine does.

gillyflower of course all this is my opinion! If you think it's wrong that is cool, and I am sorry if anything I asked made you defensive. None of my questions was intended to suggest you should believe anything other than what you believe, as I hope you understand.

I still believe we were getting somewhere. I don't want to push it, but there is a logic behind what we are both saying that is compatible.

For example if you believe that energy can create mind and spirit and body and that all human beings have these attributes... well I believe this is really the same as the levels of being idea. Mind and spirit are more subtle levels and body is a denser level, all existing in the same being.

Even if we agreed on that, there's no 'proof'. But there are other means of direct empirical knowing than this kind of 'proof', that is what I'm saying. Not everything for which there's no proof is idle conjecture! If any of the info I'm giving is incompatible, irrelevant or unconvincing to you, I'm sorry -- I do often see connections where others don't.

I'll shut up now!

*materializes into forum*



Great discussion, let's keep it informative and not be snippy! Let's come to each others' posts from a place of curiosity and inquisitiveness, not judgement, so we can learn together in knowledge and not stunt the growth of what could be.

*dematerializes back out*

I'm not defense, no worries. I am old enough and mature enough to go right on believing what I believe no matter what other people believe.

Why I thought we weren't getting anywhere was this statement by you:

"You can say it's all UPG if you want. There's more to it than that IMO."

IMO, if there is more to it than that, then there has to be proof, and so far it's all UPG.

No, I believe that mind, spirit and body - the entire being/object - is all energy. So, I believe, intent is energy.

None of the information/opinions that you are passing on to me has to be compatible, relevant or convincing to my practice. What you, and everyone else, posts helps me refine my own beliefs as does having to articulate my beliefs and opinions in posts. I enjoy hearing about what other people believe or I wouldn't be here.

Just saw you post, TED.

If I came across as snippy I'm sorry. I was just sharing what I believe/my opinions and world view, as well as that of my tradition. As long as people obey the laws of the land and don't hurt other people or force their beliefs on others, I don't care what they believe in their personal religions.

A bit.

That's when third parties come in handy to see when it's time to take a few deep breaths and redirect.

We know you don't care but in this case, P might not; hasn't had time to lose his forum virginity just yet.

My post was simply an unaffiliated third party reminder to choose verbiage carefully so the convo continues uphill rather than going down. I've been lurking and this is a good one, great posts from everyone involved. Thanks for that.

Well, good.

You jump in here, TED. (Although I have to go run errands for awhile.) What do you think of objects having spirits, gods of place and the rest of it? Do you believe in a separate soul? And what things are sacred to you?

IMO, if there is more to it than that, then there has to be proof, and so far it's all UPG.

I'll give an example.

Take Robert Monroe (mentioned in the astral projection thread), who found he could exit his body without training. He wrote three very interesting books about it.

He also wrote methods on how to do it. Amongst those who read his methods and tried them were people like William Buhlman and Robert Peterson, who (with persistence) successfully also experienced leaving their bodies and wrote books in their turn.

In many respects, the experiences of all three authors agree. Furthermore, the 'Monroe Institute' ( http://www.monroeinstitute.org/ ) administers courses during which hundreds of people have these experiences every year.

The aforementioned William Buhlman also has done surveys about people's OBE experiences -- he received I think 18,000 responses in a single year. In addition, a great deal of work has been done compiling the experiences of other traditions that have OBE training and there is huge crossover in the experiences. (See for example: http://www.amazon.com/Projectiology-Panorama-Experiences-Consciousness-Outside/dp/8586019585/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263840246&sr=1-1 )

So:

1) If you do any kind of OBE training you can prove the experience for yourself; and
2) The fact that the experiences show internal consistency, that there is some lab evidence (with more on the way), etc., shows IMO that the idea is not arbitrary.

Prior belief does not make any difference. It doesn't matter whether you believe it is possible or not or what your religious beliefs are, etc. It is a question of experience only -- but the experience has now been shown to be replicable.

So I think this is different from a one-person unsubstantiated gnosis. When Robert Monroe had solo OBEs, that was UPG. But when others started to have similar experiences based on the instructions he gave, the gnosis was no longer unverifiable -- because anyone who puts in the time can verify it. This remains true to this day and the verifications are ongoing.

So to talk about OBE is not the same as talking about a Flying Spaghetti Monster!

The idea of ensouling objects is very similar IMO. Just not as well-known or researched.

It has the same ingredients: thousands of years of history, done in the present by many religions, instructions exist on the market which you can learn from and verify yourself. Only the surveying and lab work hasn't been done, and frankly, that's because the experience doesn't matter that much to many people!

But think about it: if I go through a course of instructions to the point where I can make one of these ensouled objects, I will 'verify the gnosis' (if it works.) And if I can, so can anyone. Furthermore I don't think the experience contradicts any belief system or tradition and it does confirm a good many of them.

On this:

No, I believe that mind, spirit and body - the entire being/object - is all energy. So, I believe, intent is energy.

Yes but I believe that too! It doesn't contradict anything I've said. What I'm saying is that in my experience, (and that of many) and hence belief, these parts of something are separable from each other even though they are part of the same person or object. (And that does not mean there is a 'separate soul' -- there is a separable soul.)

And I would also say nothing about this contradicts any of the beliefs you've put forward so far... It is only that it is not part of your experience.

Really must go now, nothing personal to anyone, will be back soon...

I'm not too opinionated on this because I only go with feelings and what makes sense to me; I have no UPGs or proof of soul stuff.

First, keep in mind that I'm a pantheist; I know this has been covered in previous posts, but I believe everything physical comes from the un-physical, all of which comes from the Divine. So in that regard, either everything is sacred or nothing is sacred. My teachings denote that everything is sacred, so that's how I roll.

I've recently got into studying a very little of Hermetics. The books P_synth mentioned, I've skimmed and read parts of. The concept of elemental magic and embodying objects with personal elementals is interesting but nothing I have any experience with.

I do think, as I'm sure does anyone with energy work experience, that in our plane of existence we experience different kinds of energy ('good' and 'bad', so called) in different concentrations in different places and things. Energy is very fluid, and easily transferred, absorbed, shifted, altered, etc. etc. When X amount of people show up at Stonehenge to celebrate its sacredness, if there wasn't a great spiritual energy there before there will be afterwards. What people believe turns into reality. None of this is "gods", IME, just people transferring and collecting energy in one place they've given or called there themselves.

Same goes for sacred or haunted objects and houses. I have experienced and certainly believe that people transfer their energy into places and things. They present themselves to us in our experience as haunted or sacred or blessed. Common in terms of cleansing, I might take an object and ask that all negative energies, entities, beings, demons, thought forms be released from it and ask that it be enfused with the energy of God to fill the void of whatever was there...rendering it neutral and clean.

I like to think that embodying personalities into magic objects is possible, simply because it's fascinating. I've never experienced this myself and I often think that whenever there's an energy in an object people mistakenly view it as a complete personality, or soul, when it's really just perhaps some leftover energy from grandma.

Sacred to me... I'm a little funny about this. In reality, the things I treat most sacred are the physical valuables, not the spiritual. I move the computer gingerly so I don't tear up the hard drive, I polish the gold and silver and antiques to keep them clean and nice looking. Even though I have an altar and spiritual objects that to me are great- pendulums, wand, bowls, tarot cards and so on that I find useful for spiritual practice, I am very adamant that things like that are just tools. When I teach dowsing, students are so keen to make their pendulum into a god. I always stress that the pendulum (and so on) is just a tool, it's your spirit that makes it useable. Pendulums, bibles, books that are immensely holy to me, are just objects. Humans have the tendancy to make things into idols, and tools quickly become subject to idol worship.

In my physical reality there are things of monetary and spiritual value, but things are just things- there is only one Spirit, total, in all things, that expresses as all things. These holy objects and things are just the shadows on the wall, illusions that we must look past so we can see the hand that casts the shadows. All these things that we hold sacred will pass away in the end, and all that will be left is the Spirit that we were created from and eventually will return to. And to me, that's really all that matters.

P_Synthesis wrote:

IMO, if there is more to it than that, then there has to be proof, and so far it's all UPG.

I'll give an example.

Take Robert Monroe (mentioned in the astral projection thread), who found he could exit his body without training. He wrote three very interesting books about it.

He also wrote methods on how to do it. Amongst those who read his methods and tried them were people like William Buhlman and Robert Peterson, who (with persistence) successfully also experienced leaving their bodies and wrote books in their turn.

In many respects, the experiences of all three authors agree. Furthermore, the 'Monroe Institute' ( http://www.monroeinstitute.org/ ) administers courses during which hundreds of people have these experiences every year.[emphasis added]

I think it significant to note the phrases I've bolded above. Both Buhlman and Peterson were influenced by Monroe's experiences. Been too many years since I read Monroe, so I don't recall how he hit upon the idea that OBE's were real and could be initiated at will. But I bet he got it from some influence outside himself. Otherwise, how did he know that he wasn't simply becoming mentally ill?

The aforementioned William Buhlman also has done surveys about people's OBE experiences -- he received I think 18,000 responses in a single year. [emphasis added]

And how did all these people surveyed know that's what they were doing without prior knowledge that such experiences "exist"?

I don't regard this as proof that any such experiences are actual. While I'm inclined to think that they may be, I don't think we know enough about the nature of OBE's that occur spontaneously in cultures not predisposed to regard them as actual to pontificate that anyone knows them to be literal experiences and not merely an interesting delusion or hallucination.

The problem that I have with such discussions is that we too often presume that that which we believe/wish to be real actually is.

When I go to hold public ritual at someplace that is not mine, I always come days before to make an offering to the wights, the spirits of the place. When I get there, I will open myself and see where I feel the strongest presence, and there I will leave my offerings, and my pledge that in return for their acceptance I will pledge that we shall be respectful guests in this place.

I am always amused when the day of the ritual comes, and those who are likewise given to gifting or greeting the wights of the place they gather to celebrate go to the same places that I did. My offerings are long gone, but the power draws people again and again to the same places. The landwights in some places are very strong, in others almost silent.

Some newbies ask where to build an alter for offerings on the land they move to, and I admit that I have never seen the need to. Almost anyplace I have been, you will see the wights have a place prepared for the offerings. The world is filled with spirits, arising from the life of the earth, the waters, the winds, the plants, animals and folk. Those who do a lot of work with them can tell you a lot more, but I have never really striven much in that area. I will say that they are not hard to find, even if communicating is a different story.

When we get right to it, "Every sperm is saaacred; every sperm is great..."

(And no, I'm not sorry I said that. < sassy wink & grin >)

Quoting the inimitable Flip Wilson as Geraldine, "The devil made me do it."

John T Mainer wrote:When I go to hold public ritual at someplace that is not mine, I always come days before to make an offering to the wights, the spirits of the place. When I get there, I will open myself and see where I feel the strongest presence, and there I will leave my offerings, and my pledge that in return for their acceptance I will pledge that we shall be respectful guests in this place.

I am always amused when the day of the ritual comes, and those who are likewise given to gifting or greeting the wights of the place they gather to celebrate go to the same places that I did. My offerings are long gone, but the power draws people again and again to the same places. The landwights in some places are very strong, in others almost silent.

Some newbies ask where to build an alter for offerings on the land they move to, and I admit that I have never seen the need to. Almost anyplace I have been, you will see the wights have a place prepared for the offerings. The world is filled with spirits, arising from the life of the earth, the waters, the winds, the plants, animals and folk. Those who do a lot of work with them can tell you a lot more, but I have never really striven much in that area. I will say that they are not hard to find, even if communicating is a different story.

I think that what you call the wights, I call the gods of place. I think it is very important to give respect to the gods of the place.

We call them wights, the Romans knew them as Lares, the Japanese as Kami.

John, what sorts of things do you leave as an offering to the wights?

Mead, meat, bread, or the first sip of a fresh morning coffee. That which brings joy is shared, that they without bodies can share in the joy of those who have.

DotNotInOz wrote:When we get right to it, "Every sperm is saaacred; every sperm is great..."

(And no, I'm not sorry I said that. < sassy wink & grin >)

Quoting the inimitable Flip Wilson as Geraldine, "The devil made me do it."

*spits coffee out on computer screen*

Ah, feeding the computer wight again, I see.