Sunday, October 12, 2008

The Philosophical Meaning of "Harm None"....and is It Right?

There is obviously some debate over whether the harm none is a necessary or correct principle of magic, and the different interpretations of the definition. What does everyone think about what it really means? Does it mean that no matter what you do, none of the repercussions can harm anyone? What about spells that return negativity (I hesitate to use the word evil due to the often contradictory opinions on the word) to its source. Wouldn't that harm said source? I know Wiccans adhere to "an it harm none" (as do I, as best I know how), but to what individual degrees or interpretations? And what about everyone else?

What about whether its even a principle that makes sense? Many people think that this is a stupid (or incorrect) principle... that magic contains both positve and negative aspects, and should be performed utilizing both. I can see the logic in this as well, as everything else (as I understand things) contains both good and evil. Yin and Yang type thing. I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on the matter.

My personal thoughts: I try to make sure that nothing I do harms anything else. Even with banishing type spells, I don't want harm to come to whatever I may be banishing, I just want it/them to go away. I DO know that my personal feelings on this matter have to do with me being somewhat empathic, and I can't stand for anything to be in pain. The exception is in protecting my family. AN EXAMPLE: Walking down a street I might have to beat off an attacking dog with a large tree branch, hurting it in the process in order to protect my children, but I would do it, even as my heart hurt at the sounds of pain coming from the dog.

Template by - Abdul Munir | Daya Earth Blogger Template