Fear nothing but stagnation. Either it can be managed or not; your control is rooted in reaction.
First we should discuss the idea of stagnation and why it is the exception to “[f]ear nothing”. Stagnation is the end of change, when you settle into a life or identity and stop growing as a person. This is a fate worse than death, as one looks back on one’s life later on and sees a decade, two decades, or an entire lifetime loss to conformity. These are the living dead who follow a path because they think it is what they are expected to do, not living an individual life but taking on a template without questioning if that is what they want. That is the terror of stagnation: to find yourself living the same unexamined, Sisyphean day, going through the motions to pass time until your inevitable death.
The idea of “[f]ear nothing” is cleanly explained in the next sentence: “Either it can be managed or not; your control is rooted in reaction”. Let’s look at the first part of that to begin. It is a fairly straightforward statement, and establishes a logical binary: any event, disaster, or experience in your life will either be manageable, or it won’t. Likewise, misfortune will either be fatal, or you will survive and be able to work from there. In either case “your control is rooted in reaction”, as even in completely unmanageable situations you still have agency in how you react to it, weather the storm, and bounce back.
Tomorrow we’ll be continuing our discussion on self-awareness and avoiding stagnation; if you’d like to read ahead the entire chapter is posted here.
Sit with your feelings; analyse, find the physical, find the beauty.
It is easy to push down feelings to get on with your day. This verse is fairly straightforward with its message: “[s]it with your feelings” and allow them to be felt. Process them intentionally and identify the physical manifestation of said emotions. Emotions can come out ugly, but they are a natural part of the human experience. When processed, they can be processed as giving texture to the human experience.
Tomorrow we will be talking about growth and stagnation. If you want to read ahead, the full chapter is posted here.
Embrace mistakes as a chance to improve. Hope to be embarrassed of your current self, as that is typically a sign of growth.
The only time you will stop learning is if you decide you understand life. This is delusion, posturing as superior while stagnating. The “[e]mbrace [of] mistakes” is in the recognition of your mistakes. Seeking them out can be paralyzing if you do so from a punitive perspective, so simply analyze your past actions and enjoy finding what you can learn from.
If this relation to mistakes is kept, you will continue to grow. Ergo, you will find your past states of self embarrassing. They were you, but they do not represent you. See the joy in that, while sitting and accepting the emotions, but recognize the denial of stagnation. If you were not “embarrassed of your current self” in the future, you would not have never grown. “Hop[ing] to be embarrassed” is a hope against stagnation.
Tomorrow we will be discussing how we can approach our feelings in a healthy and productive way; if you’d like to read ahead the whole chapter is posted here.
Centre yourself in love and compassion. Start with yourself and extend outwards.
“Centre[ing] yourself in love and compassion” is a great basis for acting within The Bardic Circle. It is an idea prevalent in theology philosophy around the globe, and for good reason: we are social creatures. We yearn for community. As humans, we want to connect, to belong. Within our biology you can find this predisposition of love, despite how corrupted and confused it and its expression can become.
We start with ourselves because we are the primary human we deal with, and the way in which we regard ourselves leaks out into how we see others. This is not to say that those who think little of themselves feel the same for others; the standards we place on ourselves inevitably influence those we place on others, with obvious variation in extent between individuals. Beyond keeping in mind how we regard humans, treating ourselves well is good practice.
Compassion, acceptance, and forgiveness for ourselves, our most intimate connection, is a stepping stone. It gives us a basis with which to consider all we do not see in others which we know in ourselves, and extend that same love and compassion.
Tomorrow we will be talking about making peace with our mistakes; if you want to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
It is more important to know and strive for how you want to act, be treated, and treat others, than worrying if you are perfect in the moment. It is a practice.
This verse could be applied to any temptation toward perfectionism. We want to do our best and it is easy to see that best as perfection. But if you feel you must create perfection, you will be drawn to inaction as that is the one sure way to avoid imperfection.
Instead, put your energy into knowing where you want to be, and act knowing that is purely aspirational. “It is a practice” and a matter of adjustment. Act, live, but most importantly take time to reflect on what may be improved.
Tomorrow we will be talking about centreing ourselves in love and compassion; if you want to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
Over the past two weeks, we have gone through the second chapter of Resh, so here is a reposting of the updated chapter with the full analysis, for anyone who would like to revisit or catch up, beneath the “Keep reading” link.
Chapter Two
1. The practice is, at its core, individual. Communion with others is advisable, as individuals may empower each other through the collective, but this fact should not be forgotten.
2. Any organization which seeks to limit or restrict the individual, barring cases in which said limitations or restrictions prevent the encroachment on the rights of others, should be dismissed.
3. Freedom and community, in pursuit of knowledge, is the joy of communion.
4. Simplification to negation is a trick; organized on shared love and values above hate and opposition.
5. Shared responsibility denies hierarchy. Discuss ideas, not idols.
6. Individuals become community through volition. A fox gnaws off its leg to escape the trap.
7. Perfect agreement is not necessary, as members learn more from each other while growing in different directions, but consistency in agreed practice is needed for healthy engagement. Policy may shift as the group grows, but caution must be employed to avoid chaos and tyranny.
8. The individual must always be able to raise concerns. Discomfort is cause for examination.
9. There is a distinction between debate and argument, namely respect and curiosity. All ideas profit from discussion, none from competition.
10. The rights of the individual supersedes organization and tradition.
11. Do not let any outside source dictate your worth. Self-worth is above all, sourced from love and compassion as with any other.
Verse One
The practice is, at its core, individual. Communion with others is advisable, as individuals may empower each other through the collective, but this fact should not be forgotten.
First and foremost, what is “[t]he practice” being referenced? The text is a collection of principle ideas, analysis of fairly universal concepts; the closest it gets to “practice” is merely principles for gathering under this interpretational framework. “The practice is, at its core, individual”, ergo it is not defined by the text, it is defined by you. It may seem strange to generalize about a concept defined individually, but regardless of the spiritual or religious practice it will differ based on the practitioner. As explored in Resh Chapter One, our perspectives are unique to ourselves and influence how we behave in the world.
“[T]his fact should not be forgotten” suggests that this verse goes beyond identifying the individual variance in how a practice is considered and carried out. Even if you have never been a solo practitioner, even if your only engagement with your practice is through others, your relationship to it is still your own. The practical end of this consideration is that how you practice is volitional, it should be based in what is beneficial* to you, not what is the status quo. This brings us to “[c]ommunion with others”.
Rooting “[t]he practice” in the individual does not discount the benefit of gathering with others, nor does centreing the empowerment of individuals make it a transactional affair. This simply dismisses the idea of the group being anything else than a collection of individuals, in the sense that the focus is on empowering the individuals around you rather than getting lost in the abstract idea of The Group. Keeping the consideration of “[t]he practice” on an individual level defends against dogmatism and groupthink.
*It is worth clarifying that this should be in no way construed as simply meaning material gain; in many practices the beneficial aspect experienced by the practitioner is emotional or spiritual rather than material.
Verse Two
Any organization which seeks to limit or restrict the individual, barring cases in which said limitations or restrictions prevent the encroachment on the rights of others, should be dismissed.
This verse is fairly common sense, but is worth saying and expounding. Humans are social creatures, to the point that being separated from others can be physically detrimental. Beyond the social aspect of gathering, it also allows us to find power in numbers, take care of each other and be taken care of, to learn from individuals whose path of research differs from our own. Unfortunately, some will take advantage of this human inclination, so it is important, especially in esoteric practices, to know the signs of a noxious cult.
The characteristics of a noxious cult are (source):
The group is focused on a living leader to whom members seem to display excessively zealous, unquestioning commitment.
The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
The group is preoccupied with making money.
Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
Mind-numbing techniques (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, debilitating work routines) are used to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
The leadership dictates sometimes in great detail how members should think, act, and feel (for example: members must get permission from leaders to date, change jobs, get married; leaders may prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, how to discipline children, and so forth).
The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s), and members (for example: the leader is considered the Messiah or an avatar; the group and/or the leader has a special mission to save humanity).
The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which causes conflict with the wider society.
The group's leader is not accountable to any authorities (as are, for example, military commanders and ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream denominations).
The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify means that members would have considered unethical before joining the group (for example: collecting money for bogus charities).
The leadership induces guilt feelings in members in order to control them.
Members' subservience to the group causes them to cut ties with family and friends, and to give up personal goals and activities that were of interest before joining the group.
Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group.
Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.
A large number of these can be boiled down to limitation or restriction: isolation, the dictation of thought, the dictation of action and expression, etc. There is a reasonable exception to this warning against restriction: “prevent[ing] the encroachment on the rights of others”.
“When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression” (Unknown), ergo it is important to make the distinction between restriction for its own sake versus creating guidelines to ensure the protection of every individual’s rights.
Verse Three
Freedom and community, in pursuit of knowledge, is the joy of communion.
The idea of “communion” is the foundational aspect of this verse, so let us start there. It is a coming together, a sharing of something. This can differ based on your practice, but in the context of The Bardic Circle (Vau Chapter Two) it is coming together to share music, food, and, most importantly, knowledge. This is the crux of “community, in pursuit of knowledge”, so in terms of joy let us start there.
While it is undoubtedly a venture of learning, The Bardic Circle is in no way dry academia. The benefit in being unfettered by the sentimentalism of blasphemy is crafting a joyous pursuit of knowledge. We still respect the ideas of others, but they are just ideas. It is ridiculous to get together “in pursuit of knowledge” and deny the human element of joking, sarcasm, satire, etc.; the point is the ideas, not how they are expressed.
In this community we can find freedom to think, feel, and express ourselves without judgement. And that freedom, that relief from the burdens of posturing, is joy. There is a balance to be struck, however, as the legitimization of bigoted talking points naturally attracts bigots. This can be addressed through the application of Resh.2.2 and Lamed.1.1.
Verse Four
Simplification to negation is a trick; organized on shared love and values above hate and opposition.
The meaning of “simplification to negation” can be seen in the last part of the verse. The “trick” is boiling down an ideology or organization to what you are against. It is easy to parse being against something, easy to feel like you are doing something positive because it is easy to act against something in the negative. That is the “trick”: presenting a simplified worldview where the answer is stopping one particular thing.
The key to stopping this is “organiz[ing] on shared love and value”; it may be hard to reach that point, and it will likewise make it hard to direct said organization to positive means. This is why “The Bardic Circle is of singular pursuit” (Lamed.2.1). Despite this difficulty, when members come together for a cause they know they are acting out of love and for their values.
Verse Five
Shared responsibility denies hierarchy. Discuss ideas, not idols.
The threat of “hierarchy” is the threat of power. Having a de facto leader creates a power dynamic, and beyond creating a status quo it attaches undue weight to the words of just another individual. However, having leadership allows for direction and structure in group proceedings. The solution is “shared responsibility”.
The way this plays out in practice is down to the group, but Vau.2.4 suggests it work on a rotating basis. The main goal is avoiding discussions over who said something rather than what was said.
Verse Six
Individuals become community through volition. A fox gnaws off its leg to escape the trap.
It is important to stress that the “volition” referenced is an active willful engagement with the community. The “community, in pursuit of knowledge” (Resh.2.3) is formed through communion, ergo said communion requires the continual consent of the individual. Naturally, community will develop amongst members outside communion as well. Here is where volitional engagement with community becomes the most important.
It is a common tactic to use social bonds as leverage in order to keep someone within a group, or even as a way to quash dissent. Certain cults common in the USA, for example, have policies in which members are barred from community with outsiders, especially those who have left or have been expelled from the group. This verse recognises the painful sacrifice which must be made to escape such groups, and the fact that said sacrifice is a matter of survival. As in all things, prevention is the best antidote. However, as well prepared as you may feel, it is foolish to assume you are immune from said “trap[s]”. If they were obvious, they wouldn’t work.
Verse Seven
Perfect agreement is not necessary, as members learn more from each other while growing in different directions, but consistency in agreed practice is needed for healthy engagement. Policy may shift as the group grows, but caution must be employed to avoid chaos and tyranny.
The avoidance of dogma necessitates disagreement. Without disagreement communion would not have discussions, but exercises in reaffirmation. As members explore ideas “in different directions”, they can offer alternate perspectives which may help others suffering from academic tunnel vision. However, some baseline agreement is necessary in practical matters for orderly proceedings.
As the group grows, either in number or in spirit, proceedings must accommodate. This must be a time for caution, as any transitory period is vulnerable to abuse. This is in no way applicable only to giant changes in policy, as it is often a slow road to the breakdown of order, either through stagnation or inattentiveness, or to the warping of egalitarian standards to the vision of the power hungry few.
Verse Eight
The individual must always be able to raise concerns. Discomfort is cause for examination.
Beyond blind acceptance of the status quo, the dismissal of concern provides ample ground for tyrants to rise. Due to the internalization of capitalist dogma, we tend to place too much emphasis on productivity and efficiency. This can cause an ostensible pressure to keep moving, to keep the conversation fresh and exciting. This is the impulse to watch out for.
If interrupting the flow of conversation is the objection, keep notes and the main thread can be resumed. It is the duty of all to stand against bigotry and abuse, ergo when concern is raised or discomfort expressed everything else must be put aside to examine the machinery and ensure our values are being upheld.
Verse Nine
There is a distinction between debate and argument, namely respect and curiosity. All ideas profit from discussion, none from competition.
Many supposed proponents of “debate” merely argue; they seek not perspective, only victory. This is weakness, to be so bound up in an idea to close your mind. These people will waste your time and suck the very life out of you. Don’t play their game, there is nothing to be gained.
The nature of social media inundates us with this reductive, combative way of engagement. The exceptions only prove the rule. We would be better off to cultivate a community from the ground up with a common understanding of “respect and curiosity” than trying to inject that standpoint into a toxic environment. Competitive rhetoric has leaked out into the real world, causing further polarization.
Verse Ten
The rights of the individual supersedes organization and tradition.
The appeal to tradition is a common thought ending cliche. Somehow, the rights and sanctity of the individual gets positioned as secondary to the organization, but “[t]he collective is a beneficial illusion formed to empower the individual” (Vau.1.1). “The sure sign of a dead tradition is an inability to adapt to modern times” (Vau.3.3), but some would rather oppress their members than acknowledge this fact.
Verse Eleven
Do not let any outside source dictate your worth. Self-worth is above all, sourced from love and compassion as with any other.
It feels good to be validated by others. We are social creatures and it is in our nature to desire approval in our communities, an affirmation that we belong. However, it is easy to tie our self worth to this social affirmation, especially when social media makes it a quantifiable metric.
A large part of the social approach in The Bardic Circle is the idea that love and compassion is fostered internally, then applied externally (Resh.3.2). Once we learn to accept ourselves as individuals, we can seek to internalize the fact that others are individuals in the same way and extend that love and compassion for ourselves to them. This is why “self-worth is above all”, as it gives us solid ground for our self-love. Likewise, the understanding that worth is not externally dictated both prevents us from devaluing ourselves and from applying the same misapprehension to others.
Do not let any outside source dictate your worth. Self-worth is above all, sourced from love and compassion as with any other.
It feels good to be validated by others. We are social creatures and it is in our nature to desire approval in our communities, an affirmation that we belong. However, it is easy to tie our self worth to this social affirmation, especially when social media makes it a quantifiable metric.
A large part of the social approach in The Bardic Circle is the idea that love and compassion is fostered internally, then applied externally (Resh.3.2). Once we learn to accept ourselves as individuals, we can seek to internalize the fact that others are individuals in the same way and extend that love and compassion for ourselves to them. This is why “self-worth is above all”, as it gives us solid ground for our self-love. Likewise, the understanding that worth is not externally dictated both prevents us from devaluing ourselves and from applying the same misapprehension to others.
Tomorrow there will be a reposting of the chapter and the analysis thereof, for anyone who wishes to revisit it or catch up.
The rights of the individual supersedes organization and tradition.
The appeal to tradition is a common thought ending cliche. Somehow, the rights and sanctity of the individual gets positioned as secondary to the organization, but “[t]he collective is a beneficial illusion formed to empower the individual” (Vau.1.1). “The sure sign of a dead tradition is an inability to adapt to modern times” (Vau.3.3), but some would rather oppress their members than acknowledge this fact.
This entire chapter will being dealing with the sovereignty of the individual within organizations; if you’d like to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
There is a distinction between debate and argument, namely respect and curiosity. All ideas profit from discussion, none from competition.
Many supposed proponents of “debate” merely argue; they seek not perspective, only victory. This is weakness, to be so bound up in an idea to close your mind. These people will waste your time and suck the very life out of you. Don’t play their game, there is nothing to be gained.
The nature of social media inundates us with this reductive, combative way of engagement. The exceptions only prove the rule. We would be better off to cultivate a community from the ground up with a common understanding of “respect and curiosity” than trying to inject that standpoint into a toxic environment. Competitive rhetoric has leaked out into the real world, causing further polarization.
This entire chapter will being dealing with the sovereignty of the individual within organizations; if you’d like to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
The individual must always be able to raise concerns. Discomfort is cause for examination.
Beyond blind acceptance of the status quo, the dismissal of concern provides ample ground for tyrants to rise. Due to the internalization of capitalist dogma, we tend to place too much emphasis on productivity and efficiency. This can cause an ostensible pressure to keep moving, to keep the conversation fresh and exciting. This is the impulse to watch out for.
If interrupting the flow of conversation is the objection, keep notes and the main thread can be resumed. It is the duty of all to stand against bigotry and abuse, ergo when concern is raised or discomfort expressed everything else must be put aside to examine the machinery and ensure our values are being upheld.
This entire chapter will being dealing with the sovereignty of the individual within organizations; if you’d like to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
Perfect agreement is not necessary, as members learn more from each other while growing in different directions, but consistency in agreed practice is needed for healthy engagement. Policy may shift as the group grows, but caution must be employed to avoid chaos and tyranny.
The avoidance of dogma necessitates disagreement. Without disagreement communion would not have discussions, but exercises in reaffirmation. As members explore ideas “in different directions”, they can offer alternate perspectives which may help others suffering from academic tunnel vision. However, some baseline agreement is necessary in practical matters for orderly proceedings.
As the group grows, either in number or in spirit, proceedings must accommodate. This must be a time for caution, as any transitory period is vulnerable to abuse. This is in no way applicable only to giant changes in policy, as it is often a slow road to the breakdown of order, either through stagnation or inattentiveness, or to the warping of egalitarian standards to the vision of the power hungry few.
This entire chapter will being dealing with the sovereignty of the individual within organizations; if you’d like to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
In about three hours (3pm IST) we’ll be starting our first livestream here. It’s mostly a pilot/test stream to test out the tech and format, but there will still be music, food (for me), a lecture on Resh.1.1, and a little Minecraft to have some fun. If you can’t make it, don’t worry, the lecture will be posted on the YouTube (as long as I can figure out how to do that).
Individuals become community through volition. A fox gnaws off its leg to escape the trap.
It is important to stress that the “volition” referenced is an active willful engagement with the community. The “community, in pursuit of knowledge” (Resh.2.3) is formed through communion, ergo said communion requires the continual consent of the individual. Naturally, community will develop amongst members outside communion as well. Here is where volitional engagement with community becomes the most important.
It is a common tactic to use social bonds as leverage in order to keep someone within a group, or even as a way to quash dissent. Certain cults common in the USA, for example, have policies in which members are barred from community with outsiders, especially those who have left or have been expelled from the group. This verse recognises the painful sacrifice which must be made to escape such groups, and the fact that said sacrifice is a matter of survival. As in all things, prevention is the best antidote. However, as well prepared as you may feel, it is foolish to assume you are immune from said “trap[s]”. If they were obvious, they wouldn’t work.
This entire chapter will being dealing with the sovereignty of the individual within organizations; if you’d like to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
Shared responsibility denies hierarchy. Discuss ideas, not idols.
The threat of “hierarchy” is the threat of power. Having a de facto leader creates a power dynamic, and beyond creating a status quo it attaches undue weight to the words of just another individual. However, having leadership allows for direction and structure in group proceedings. The solution is “shared responsibility”.
The way this plays out in practice is down to the group, but Vau.2.4 suggests it work on a rotating basis. The main goal is avoiding discussions over who said something rather than what was said.
This entire chapter will being dealing with the sovereignty of the individual within organizations; if you’d like to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
Simplification to negation is a trick; organized on shared love and values above hate and opposition.
The meaning of “simplification to negation” can be seen in the last part of the verse. The “trick” is boiling down an ideology or organization to what you are against. It is easy to parse being against something, easy to feel like you are doing something positive because it is easy to act against something in the negative. That is the “trick”: presenting a simplified worldview where the answer is stopping one particular thing.
The key to stopping this is “organiz[ing] on shared love and value”; it may be hard to reach that point, and it will likewise make it hard to direct said organization to positive means. This is why “The Bardic Circle is of singular pursuit” (Lamed.2.1). Despite this difficulty, when members come together for a cause they know they are acting out of love and for their values.
This entire chapter will being dealing with the sovereignty of the individual within organizations; if you’d like to read ahead the full chapter is posted here.
theartofmadeline
dededos
andulkaphoto
izzy806
gummygunk