Foreign Substances and the Wiccan Rede/Law of 3/Karma/etc

[A Scarecrow]

Without a doubt, foreign substances (and by this, I mean everything from marijuana, alcohol, tobacco, and the misuse of pain killers and prescription medicine) is harmful to a person's body. There is no end to the number of studies which back such a statement. These effects are, more often than not, both physical and mental. I doubt this information is new to any of you, and the point of this post is not to act as a PSA about the dangers of foreign substances, but instead to prompt discussion on the extent to which the Law of Three effects self-inflicted harm through the use of Foreign Substances (I feel that cutting and suicide are more deserving of their own thread for such a topic, and that I am most certainly not sensitive enough to make said thread).

First, I think, it must be decided whether or not the individual actor is encompassed within "none" in the phrase "An' ye harm none, do what ye will." If one subscribes to the belief that the Law of Three is a universal and cosmic law, than the wording is entirely straight forward: "None" is an absolute; there is no leeway, and by harming oneself you are harming someone.
The second school of thought is that the Law of Three, like most or all forms of 'magic', comes from within a person. From the view of this particular belief, it comes down to what the individual actor believes: If the actor believes that actions against themselves are in violation of "An' ye harm none", then there will be retribution. If they do not believe such, then there will not be.
Things become more convoluted when one thinks about individual actors: Those hurt by the 'collateral damage' of a person's self-inflicted damage.

If it is decided that the individual actor is indeed in violation of the rede, then one must decide whether or not the use of Foreign Substance constitutes as "harm". Here, it becomes necessary to define harm. No doubt, amongst each person the definition will be different, and so for the purpose of this discussion we will be using the following definition:

Quote:

That which causes injury, damage, or loss

It can then be decided that the use of foreign substances do count as "harm". However, the reason for their use should also be taken into effect, to decide if whether or not "the ends justify the means", if such a thing is possible within the bounds of the rede. If it is, then what might constitute 'legal' use of foreign substances within the bounds of the rede? Many use foreign substances for a variety of reasons, some for simple recreational use, others because it may be the only way to escape (as they tragically see it) emotional or physical trauma for a time, some are simply addicted, and yet others make use of some substances for ritual use. Many of these reasons may be more or less valid, depending on the individual viewer, than others. It is up to the individual, and only the individual, to decide how they feel on the subject, and what is, and isn't, 'legal' use of foreign substances within the bounds of the rede.  

[kage no neko]

Given that it is impossible to go through life without EVER harming, I think it'd be acceptable depending on how you view it. Some people may be more strict, others may be more lenient. Some might see it as only intentional harm. For those who are more strict about it, doing things like drinking alcohol would be unacceptable because it harms your body and is completely avoidable.

But what exactly happens if you violate the rede? Is this where the three fold law comes into play? If you harm your liver by drinking alcohol.. how will that come back x3?

Just my take on it. None of this is in my beliefs or practices, so I can't honestly say more than what I find my opinion to be.  

[Esiris]

Socially Inept Butterfly

First, I think, it must be decided whether or not the individual actor is encompassed within "none" in the phrase "An' ye harm none, do what ye will."

Before we do that, I think it is important to discuss if "An ye harm none, do what ye will."

If it matters, An isn't a contraction.

Quote:

If one subscribes to the belief that the Law of Three is a universal and cosmic law, than the wording is entirely straight forward: "None" is an absolute; there is no leeway, and by harming oneself you are harming someone.

I think you're confusing the Rede and the Threefold Law. The Rede is advice- not a Law.

I think since the rest of the post hinges on two ideas- what the Threefold Law and what the Rede are- I don't think there is much to discuss.

The Rede advises that if something doesn't cause harm, you don't need to give it a second thought. That isn't saying if it does cause harm you can't do it.  

[rmcdra]

Rede = advice, not law. If you don't like it or it conflicts with your path, you don't have to listen to it.

3 fold law is not what you are thinking and it's not related to the Rede. It has more to do that actions have a 3 fold effect, not that it's going to come back to you three fold.

An ye harm none, do what thou wilt, modernized would be, if it doesn't hurt anyone, go for it.

Tell you what let me give you something to think about especially if you take the Rede to be a law. If you are to harm none, I hope you haven't wiped your a** or washed your hands because you have just harmed hundreds of germs. Now if you claim but they are not people, why is your life more valuable then theirs?  

[Esiris]

rmcdra

Tell you what let me give you something to think about especially if you take the Rede to be a law. If you are to harm none, I hope you haven't wiped your a** or washed your hands because you have just harmed hundreds of germs. Now if you claim but they are not people, why is your life more valuable then theirs?

How does moving a micro organism equal harming it?  

[rmcdra]

Esiris

rmcdra

Tell you what let me give you something to think about especially if you take the Rede to be a law. If you are to harm none, I hope you haven't wiped your a** or washed your hands because you have just harmed hundreds of germs. Now if you claim but they are not people, why is your life more valuable then theirs?

How does moving a micro organism equal harming it?

I'm sorry i should have been more specific and stated using anti-bacterial soap.  

[too2sweet]

If the Rede really meant that we couldn't cause harm, the human race would die out - as anyone who has ever had a baby can attest to, Childbirth can often cause harm to mother and child both (temporarily anyways). sweatdrop  

[Freyis]

Yes using substances that harm your body would be a against the rede if you took it as law. However it is, as many have already said, advice.

Personally I don't really pay much attention to the rede as it is not really part of my own path. If I did I probably wouldn't smoke.  

[Esiris]

Freyis

Yes using substances that harm your body would be a against the rede if you took it as law.

What part of the Rede says you can't harm?  

[kage no neko]

Let me first say, I fully understand the arguments about the rede and threefold law. I'm just going with what I think the OP is thinking.

It's not so much that the rede says you can't harm, but it seems to imply (to those unaware) that you should avoid harming. The question is, what happens if it DOES harm. I'm guessing this is where the threefold is supposed to come into play? I really don't know, it's never been apart of my beliefs, but I'm trying to understand where others are coming from with it. What I don't get is why harming is considered to be a bad thing.  

[Shearaha]

And then you have the question what if the cure harms?

For example. I have severe shoulder and knee pain. Over the counter pain meds stopped working years ago and my doctors refuse to proscribe me anything stronger. I have taken to smoking a small amount of pot on days where the pain gets too bad to handle. So by relieving my pain with pot am I harming myself or helping myself?  

[Aakosir]

Shearaha

And then you have the question what if the cure harms?

For example. I have severe shoulder and knee pain. Over the counter pain meds stopped working years ago and my doctors refuse to proscribe me anything stronger. I have taken to smoking a small amount of pot on days where the pain gets too bad to handle. So by relieving my pain with pot am I harming myself or helping myself?

I have heard that pot only coats the brain cells and then wears off doing no harm. But then I have heard it damages brain cells and kills them... I think it is morally wrong, but for medicinal purposes I can look past that. But if people abuse the medicinal purpose then it goes right back to being morally wrong.  

[Sanguina Cruenta]

Aakosir

Shearaha

And then you have the question what if the cure harms?

For example. I have severe shoulder and knee pain. Over the counter pain meds stopped working years ago and my doctors refuse to proscribe me anything stronger. I have taken to smoking a small amount of pot on days where the pain gets too bad to handle. So by relieving my pain with pot am I harming myself or helping myself?

I have heard that pot only coats the brain cells and then wears off doing no harm. But then I have heard it damages brain cells and kills them... I think it is morally wrong, but for medicinal purposes I can look past that. But if people abuse the medicinal purpose then it goes right back to being morally wrong.

Why is pot morally wrong?  

[Aakosir]

Sanguina Cruenta

Aakosir

Shearaha

And then you have the question what if the cure harms?

For example. I have severe shoulder and knee pain. Over the counter pain meds stopped working years ago and my doctors refuse to proscribe me anything stronger. I have taken to smoking a small amount of pot on days where the pain gets too bad to handle. So by relieving my pain with pot am I harming myself or helping myself?

I have heard that pot only coats the brain cells and then wears off doing no harm. But then I have heard it damages brain cells and kills them... I think it is morally wrong, but for medicinal purposes I can look past that. But if people abuse the medicinal purpose then it goes right back to being morally wrong.

Why is pot morally wrong?

To me it is. It changes a person. I do not like being near people who are not in control of themselves. And it is an influence on behavior.  

[Esiris]

Aakosir

To me it is. It changes a person.

Food changes me. So does sleep.

I don't think either of those are morally wrong.

Quote:

I do not like being near people who are not in control of themselves. And it is an influence on behavior.

I'm not sure disliking something makes it morally wrong. I mean, I know I roll my eyes when people say that about witchcraft, same-sex couples, Voudon and other things they don't like to be around.