How does anyone know if story cycles and legends - which generally seem to be medieval, no earlier - can tell us anything much about belief systems that existed prior to Christian, medieval Europe? Aren't they refracted and distorted through the Christian lens? Rely on these texts is dangerous, surely?
There is also a problem with people basing their lives/belief systems on anything for which they have to rely on translation.
One reason to be a pagan is to reject living by any book or dogma. Sure, it's a way of life for others who can't break away from the lure of dogma, being told what to think by a written text or a liturgy. But for others, it has no authority.
And, on a more personal note from one:
I love "The Mabinogion" but I could never live by it, quite apart from the fact I can only ever read it in translation so can only pick up a shadow of what it's actually saying.
My thoughts follow.
Linguists are still making inroads into unravelling the texts, allowing us to see the influences, so I don't consider an inability to read texts in their original language a barrier. Besides which, I don't have the ability to read any of the texts in their original language, nor do I have the means to go to university and study linguistics, history and archaeology in order to confirm/deny for myself the validity of the translations. Then again, I suspect I'm not the only pagan in this position. I imagine a lot of heathens, celtic and brythonic pagans find themselves in the same position. I suppose western buddhists and other non-Christian groups would find themselves with similar dilemnas.
Linguists are still making inroads into unravelling the texts, allowing us to see the influences, so I don't consider an inability to read texts in their original language a barrier. Besides which, I don't have the ability to read any of the texts in their original language, nor do I have the means to go to university and study linguistics, history and archaeology in order to confirm/deny for myself the validity of the translations. Then again, I suspect I'm not the only pagan in this position. I imagine a lot of heathens, celtic and brythonic pagans find themselves in the same position. I suppose western buddhists and other non-Christian groups would find themselves with similar dilemnas.
I can understand the statements made in the quotes above. However, there is a wealth of texts relating to stories (which can be traced back, linguistically and historically) prior to their being put in written form. I don't see any reason to dismiss any of them, just because I am unable to read, or listen to them in their original language and/or form. I prefer to seek out those who study the texts and then discern, for myself, what is valid and what is not.
And, what about SPG - does one completely ignore these when examining texts?
In my opinion, the texts are still valuable guides when seeking to verify UPG and, certainly, this seems to have been borne out over the years by various groups working towards a common goal.
That said, I have a lot of reading still to do in relation to myths, legends, folklore, history and languages of the British Isles. Just because my reading list is long doesn't mean to say I base the whole of my beliefs on texts alone. Experience, aligned with the stories in the text, is far more meaningful. Well, let's just say, I'm glad I have the written word to check against, rather than a long line of SPG. It makes my chosen spirital path less about faith and more about belief.
I would be interested to hear the opinions of others as to whether they believe the texts are useful or obsolete in relation to their chosen path.
