Movement/Nonmovement vs. Good and Bad

ygdrassil2

The following is excerpted from: Return of a Green Philosophy: The Wisdom of Óðinn, the Power of Þórr, and Freyja’s Power of Nature

First off, the Norse-Germanic people had no concept similar to Christianity’s original sin. Additionally, their concept of good and bad was philosophically different from today’s religiously influenced dualistic mind-set of good and bad. Instead, they considered movement or action essential to the well-being of all things. This concept was rooted and related to the movement of the sacred waters boiling up from Urðarbrunnr throughout the total essence of Yggdrasill. Movement or action was reflected in all aspects of life within Midgard from the cycles of nature to the tides of the sea and cycles of the moon.

Movement was the key to life throughout the width and breath of Yggdrasill and would symbolize our concept of good or positive. Of course then, nonmovement or inaction would be looked upon as bad or, if you will, sinful or evil. According to Eric Wódening referring to Paul Bauschatz’s book The Well and the Tree states, “the Germanic people viewed stasis or inaction as negative and movement or action as positive. Bauschatz insisted this concept was typified by the interaction between the Well and the Tree.”[i]

We may see the impact of a shift in mind-set from an individual’s concept of good and bad to movement and nonmovement in countless ways. As an example, good and bad is rooted more in personal judgment, based possibly on prejudice, dogma, or doctrine. On the other hand, action or inaction is pretty straight forward, as there is no room for judgment; there is either movement or no movement. As an example, in a community setting, “inaction on the parts of individuals could affect the survival of a community. The man who out of sloth failed to do his share of the harvest or the man who out of cowardice did not join in battle beside his tribesman could cost lives through his inaction. These are crimes in which the individual has not so much committed a wrong as he has failed to do what is right. In other words, he has failed to act. An inaction is usually not beneficial to the community and does nothing to maintain the community.”[ii]

A present day example would be a dysfunctional marriage where both partners ignore the dysfunction and keep the relationship static with no action toward resolving the roots of the dysfunction. This inaction would affect any children within the family and the extended family. Movement would involve a change of behaviors of both, possibly counseling, and, if need be, separation or divorce.

Reflect on your life and see if there is any area where there is inaction. Then, in the spirit of “deeds not words,” institute movement and change/transformation.

[i] Eric Wódening, We Are Our Deeds, 67–68.

[ii] Ibid., 69–70.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *