Wiccan Ethics: More than just Harm None

First off, let’s get one thing straight. Wiccan Ethics are more than just the Rede, and the Rede does NOT mean “Don’t hurt anything, ever, because if you DO it will come back to bite you three-fold.” A lot of folks make that common misinterpretation, and the tap dancing I’ve seen them do to justify that position would make Gene Kelly jealous. Wiccan ethics are actually a lot simpler than that, and yet a lot more complex. That’s the paradox of ethics. Let’s start with examining the “Harm None” couplet of the Rede: An’ it harm none, do what you will. Loosely translated into modern English, it means, “If it doesn’t cause harm, do what you like.” This is not a “shall not” at all. Rather, it’s a “shall”. Anything that doesn’t cause harm is fine to do. That’s an enormously freeing statement. It means that we aren’t bound by someone else’s moral code, only our own. All acts of pleasure are sacred to us. But what about actions that do cause harm? Isn’t that where the “Law of Three” comes in? Yes, and no. The “Law of Three” really isn’t a law, per se, and it’s hard to find any sources for the origins of this principle in early Wiccan writings, according to a very well-researched paper found on http://www.waningmoon.com/ethics. There are some sources for a “Law of Return”, which basically states that whatever you put out you’ll get back. Or, in other words: you reap what you sow, good and bad. This makes sense to me, given the physical law of “equal and opposite reaction”: whatever you put out into the world will also push back on you. Of course, this also depends on how one defines “harm”. How do we know which actions will cause harm and which will not? I define harm as “deliberately hurting someone or something unnecessarily”. The two key words there are “deliberately” and “unnecessarily”. Deliberately implies conscious intent. You intend to cause harm with your actions, therefore you’re aware of what you’re doing and ought to be prepared for the consequences. “Unnecessarily” implies that there are actions that will not cause harm that you choose not to do. Looking at my definition, you’ll see that my concept of harm leaves out key things like killing something to eat it, and self-defense. These are necessary harms. You must kill a plant or animal in order to get the nutrition you need to survive. Sometimes you must hurt or kill something that’s threatening you in order to survive. It also leaves out unintentional things, like stepping on a bug or accidentally running over a squirrel with your car. I believe that these actions come without consequence. No discussion of Wiccan ethics would be complete without examining two other key points: personal responsibility and free will. You’d be hard pressed to find a Wiccan that doesn’t believe you must take responsibility for your actions. Even those who believe the three-fold thing literally believe that you’ll be forced to deal with consequences. If you take it upon yourself to do something, then you must face the consequences. I find this to be especially important with regards to magic. If you’re willing to go the extra distance to take magical action in a situation, then you must deal with the consequences as well. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Speaking of magical action, this leads us into the principle of “free will”. Many believe it is unethical to use magic against something’s “free will”. Simple idea, but this concept brings its own round of tap dancing. Some claim that love spells don’t violate another’s free will because it’s good for them. Some claim that bindings don’t violate another’s free will because it’s good for you… or perhaps good for them as well. That’s all rubbish, really. If we’re going to take magical action, we’re judging what we think the best outcome should be. While I think it’s incredibly stupid to work a spell to attempt to force someone to fall in love with you, I do think it’s ok to work a spell to draw love to you, or to help you love yourself. I worked a spell to find a lover with certain qualities I like, and I got one. Does it violate anyone’s free will? I honestly don’t know. I know that we’re both happy, and that’s enough for me. What about bindings? While it might seem stupid to work a binding spell to keep a co-worker from gossiping, what about doing one to keep an illness from spreading in a person? By binding or banishing a cancer, are you interfering with the free will of the illness? How do you know that, deep down inside, the person doesn’t want to be sick and by healing them you’re interfering with their true free will? I don’t think it’s right to manipulate people or situations to fit your best interests, but ultimately I have to act in the best manner I see fit. I cannot know all possible outcomes of what I do, magically or otherwise, nor can I foresee every possible harm from my actions. I have to make my best judgment, using my personal code of ethics, and trust that what I’ve done is the right course of action. In the end, that’s all any of us can do. Ethics are a very personal thing. The teachings of Wicca give you guidelines for how to act, magically and “mundanely”, but that’s all they really are. In the end, it’s up for you to decide how to apply those guidelines to your life, how you’ll define harm, how you’ll define free will, and what consequences you’re willing to accept.