Untitled - Awaken Video

Chapter 2. Connections 50
earlier, but the ancient interpretation of the concept was somewhat different than
that which has developed in the latter half of the 20 th century. Back then, people
understood that a person was only an individual in that he or she brought special
personal talents into the overall functioning of the community. Talents or skills were
developed by the individual but were “gifted” to the totality of the community in
which one lived. A Viking warrior’s skills were added to the collective skills of the
crew because only by finely-worked team effort were battles won with a minimum
loss of life. A woman’s skills in the household or in the fields were added to those of
the family unit or to those of the community. Individualism, then, had more to do
with one’s individualized function/ role within a community, country, or world than
with acting “individually,” contrary to or in spite of current trends. This philosophy
also brings with it responsibility to family, friends or community and responsibility
for one’s actions and ensuing consequences. By choosing to look at relationships
between things instead of simply at individual things, one quickly begins to realize
that no act is ever committed in complete isolation, and that each act initiates a set
ripples in the large pond (reverberating effects) with the greatest effects being felt
closest to the act’s point of origin. To use an exaggerated example, if a woman slays
her husband, the effects are felt greatest in the families of both parties, slightly less
so in the community (depending on the size and the ’tightness’ of the community),
and at the national level, the act is reported but generally merits but one or two
small paragraphs on the some back page of USA Today (if even that). However, if a
senator commits the same act, because of the number and quality of his relationships
throughout the nation, i.e., the quality or power of individual ørlag (pl. form) he
has interacted with, the effect felt is greater.
In this worldview, responsibility is a burden that only human beings bear, and it
comes in two distinct varieties: responsibility to family, community, and ultimately
to the entire Tree/ Waters complex, and responsibility for one’s own actions. In
the Germanic system this is so because only people are capable of committing physical
acts which result in new layers being put down in the Well of Urð affecting
the Flow of the Waters/ power/ luck through the whole Tree. The wise person,
according to this ancient spiritual philosophy, chooses to interact with strong, compatible
lineages, such as Beowulf’s interaction with the “giantish sword’s lineage,”
strengthening the individual line, but also better to gain access to the flow of power/
luck for the individual himself. By accepting this challenge of responsibility and by
acting in an honorable manner, one is assured of at least maintaining one’s standing
in life in the community if not ultimately improving it. To act out of ignorance,
voluntarily or otherwise, one is dooming himself and his lineage to loss of power/
luck. Germanic sagaic literature is filled with such stories. Responsibility means
acting out of wisdom.