Do You Feel a Spiritual Connection with the Woods?
- Thread starter DanRobinson1
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
Spirituality is a nonsense term. Nonsense in that there is no sense or meaning to the word and its use should be avoided. Most of you in this thread seem to be asking what is spirituality or trying to desperately to define it, and that's a sure sign a word isn't doing its job.
As an atheist I can revel in the sights, sounds and smell of the woods and I can admire the aesthetic of a mighty Oak tree or sit by a bank and listen to the gentle running of a stream. I understand and value the natural world as a place of long history, great scientific interest, and as the humbled land in which our ancestors thrived. When I stand in a forest I feel grounded, and I remember what I am, a beast of the earth itself.
The natural world, to a scientist who revels at the complex microcosmic systems of cells, is just as beautiful a place as it is to an artist who, in turn, finds inspiration from the sight of the sun at dawn. But it is also a cruel and unforgiving place that cannot be conquered, its inhabitants having to constantly adapt to the elements. Nature is a lot of things to many people, it is as simple as that. We can interpret it in any way we choose. To me, nature is the driving force in the world and the provider of everything we need to survive. Nature is our first home, the place of our primordial origins. It is, ultimately, the place to which we all return.
Edit: I'm merely curious... There seem to be a few pagans in this thread, so might I ask if any of you subscribe to a particular reconstructionist movement, or have you opted already for a patch-work syncretic world-view?
As an atheist I can revel in the sights, sounds and smell of the woods and I can admire the aesthetic of a mighty Oak tree or sit by a bank and listen to the gentle running of a stream. I understand and value the natural world as a place of long history, great scientific interest, and as the humbled land in which our ancestors thrived. When I stand in a forest I feel grounded, and I remember what I am, a beast of the earth itself.
The natural world, to a scientist who revels at the complex microcosmic systems of cells, is just as beautiful a place as it is to an artist who, in turn, finds inspiration from the sight of the sun at dawn. But it is also a cruel and unforgiving place that cannot be conquered, its inhabitants having to constantly adapt to the elements. Nature is a lot of things to many people, it is as simple as that. We can interpret it in any way we choose. To me, nature is the driving force in the world and the provider of everything we need to survive. Nature is our first home, the place of our primordial origins. It is, ultimately, the place to which we all return.
Edit: I'm merely curious... There seem to be a few pagans in this thread, so might I ask if any of you subscribe to a particular reconstructionist movement, or have you opted already for a patch-work syncretic world-view?
Last edited:
+1 on comments above. Better put than I could ever manage.
However, woods do very little for me, I feel better in open hills. I prefer to see what's around further away than woods allow. It's not a spirituality because that means nothing to me, it's more about aesthetics I think. The crags, slopes, ridges, rocks, etc. I find of immense interest. The shape of the land not what's on it. I guess it's related to my interest/training in geology.
I do think people confuse love of the natural world with an idea of spirituality.
However, woods do very little for me, I feel better in open hills. I prefer to see what's around further away than woods allow. It's not a spirituality because that means nothing to me, it's more about aesthetics I think. The crags, slopes, ridges, rocks, etc. I find of immense interest. The shape of the land not what's on it. I guess it's related to my interest/training in geology.
I do think people confuse love of the natural world with an idea of spirituality.
I just stick with the idea that nature is a place created by someone else, that I am just lucky to be allowed into. As said the discussion on this subject can be endless.
The human brain is highly succeptible to hallucination, suggestion, overloaded sensory stimuli, sleep paralysis and wild imagination. It is not spirituality. Isn't reality amazing enough for you?
I could be wrong but I think the OP was being more generic. The "woods" could be hills, mountains, lakes/rivers/sea. Just as we call this a "bushcraft" forum though few of us are in the Australian "bush."
I think we might disagree on what's reality. That's ok in and of itself. As long as we don't try to force each other to accept our beliefs.
There's beliefs and opinions, of which everybody is entitled to hold dear. Then there are facts. Facts based upon evidence.
I get wood when i walk around my local forest if that's what you mean 
(no literally, i get wood, i chop up dead wood and take it home with me)
(no literally, i get wood, i chop up dead wood and take it home with me)
And every few hundred years the accepted "facts" get discredited with new discoveries.
I get wood when i walk around my local forest if that's what you mean
(no literally, i get wood, i chop up dead wood and take it home with me)
Hahahaha! I leave big logs all over the place!
What like when people thought the moon was made of cheese, but when man landed there it was made of rock?
Like when Newtonian physics taught that gravity was the attraction between two items of matter; but now the accepted theory is that it's the result of those objects making depressions in space.
-Generally (at least the most recent changes) have been tied to the shift from Newtonian physics to Einsteins theories.
Funny thing these discussions about the outdoors and spirituality... pro's and con's...
Funny how many people get jumpy and nervous when something like beliefs, feelings, the inner self or spirituality are brought up.
Funny how especially the con's make the harshest comments and make the most fun of the opponents.
Funny how hard it is to describe what this spirituality actually might be.
Funny how these discussions keep popping up. How people keep asking questions and seek answers..
Funny how nonbelievers are so eager to jump in and tell others it's all a load of bull.....
Doesn't it all come down to belief?
There are those who believe in the presence of spirits in nature, there are those who believe in modern science. For many those spirits are sheer nonsence, but for the native Americans for instance they were fact. As did and still do many other cultures not living in big societies or concrete jungles. Some believe in the facts of science, but have to revert to take someone else's word for it, believing what is said or written about these facts. And every once in a while they get proven to be wrong.
And yet we all claim to love nature. Than what is this love? Is it a fact? Or maybe a belief? Many would say it is an emotion. But what is an emotion? How do you describe that? But we all believe that these emotions exist, are a fact in out lives. If spirituality is nonsense, since one can not describe it, than so is love. I for one can not describe what it is, even though my heart is full of it. Any of you? And how do you prove it scientifically? Seems quit hard, doesn't it? Certainly earlier men had no way of doing that, so love did not exist in those early days, right? Yet everyone knew it was there. That was a fact....
It all makes me wonder..... If today's outdoorpeople claim to feel no connection to the land, then what are they doing out there? Trying to run away from society, their jobs, families? Themselves? Trying to prove that they are real men, who can cut it out there? What?
And how can you respect or even claim to love something you feel not connected to?
And if even outdoorpeople feel no connection, then how can they expect the non-outdoorpeople to have that? Let alone respect it?
As for me; yes, I do believe in a spiritual connection between man, animal and plant. Each of these have a spirit, a mind, a soul. yes, I do believe that there is even a connection between living organisms and "lifeless" things. I believe there is a connection between man, animal, plant, rock, air, water etc. I believe it is a connection on a very basic level. It is the spirit of these and within these things that connect us. And I confess that that belief is almost religious to me. Not in the shove-it-down-your-throat-way many of the larger religions do, but it is what I firmly believe in.
Funny how many people get jumpy and nervous when something like beliefs, feelings, the inner self or spirituality are brought up.
Funny how especially the con's make the harshest comments and make the most fun of the opponents.
Funny how hard it is to describe what this spirituality actually might be.
Funny how these discussions keep popping up. How people keep asking questions and seek answers..
Funny how nonbelievers are so eager to jump in and tell others it's all a load of bull.....
Doesn't it all come down to belief?
There are those who believe in the presence of spirits in nature, there are those who believe in modern science. For many those spirits are sheer nonsence, but for the native Americans for instance they were fact. As did and still do many other cultures not living in big societies or concrete jungles. Some believe in the facts of science, but have to revert to take someone else's word for it, believing what is said or written about these facts. And every once in a while they get proven to be wrong.
And yet we all claim to love nature. Than what is this love? Is it a fact? Or maybe a belief? Many would say it is an emotion. But what is an emotion? How do you describe that? But we all believe that these emotions exist, are a fact in out lives. If spirituality is nonsense, since one can not describe it, than so is love. I for one can not describe what it is, even though my heart is full of it. Any of you? And how do you prove it scientifically? Seems quit hard, doesn't it? Certainly earlier men had no way of doing that, so love did not exist in those early days, right? Yet everyone knew it was there. That was a fact....
It all makes me wonder..... If today's outdoorpeople claim to feel no connection to the land, then what are they doing out there? Trying to run away from society, their jobs, families? Themselves? Trying to prove that they are real men, who can cut it out there? What?
And how can you respect or even claim to love something you feel not connected to?
And if even outdoorpeople feel no connection, then how can they expect the non-outdoorpeople to have that? Let alone respect it?
As for me; yes, I do believe in a spiritual connection between man, animal and plant. Each of these have a spirit, a mind, a soul. yes, I do believe that there is even a connection between living organisms and "lifeless" things. I believe there is a connection between man, animal, plant, rock, air, water etc. I believe it is a connection on a very basic level. It is the spirit of these and within these things that connect us. And I confess that that belief is almost religious to me. Not in the shove-it-down-your-throat-way many of the larger religions do, but it is what I firmly believe in.
Love Nature? How "interesting" to "love" something that ensures that all wild animals die either from starvation or being torn to pieces! Even the plants are at it, killing off all competition for the right to access the best sunlight, water or fertile soil. From a human morality position, Nature is sadistic, evil and cruel. Interesting philosophy to base a religion on
Pretty though.......
Pretty though.......
