Sunday, October 28, 2018
Saturday, October 20, 2018
Spirits, Daemons, Gods - Toward a Coherent Model
In the development of Neopagan religious practice and
discourse several disputes have arisen concerning the true nature of the gods
and spirits. In my opinion these disputes arise mainly due to the remains of
Judeo-Christian theological thinking, combined with the influence of modern
skepticism and rationalism. As one who finds consideration of theology and
metaphysics useful, I will attempt to venture perhaps further into such
speculations than is common in our modern Pagan discussion.
The Reality of the Spirits
Let me begin by saying that for this discussion we will
treat the world of spirits as ‘real’. In this we need not adopt any firm
description of the final nature of that reality. Whether it is a subcategory of
‘material’ manifestation within the quantum foam, or a psycho-linguistic field,
or an epiphenomenon of human telepathy, or any other thing, the whole world –
every culture in every age – has experienced the presence of the spirits.
Communication; direct material action, possession and para-personal expression
are just some of the spirit-phenomena common to many or most human cultural
experiences. Materialist science has devised a number of clever efforts that
attempt to ‘explain away’ such phenomena.
In the mythic reality of our Paganism, let us begin by taking spirits as
given, and making it our business to know how to deal with them well.
While we may not be able to box up the ‘True nature’ of spirits, we can
approach them as phenomena, and discuss the traits that humans have seen. To
avoid a long summary of world-wide evidence, I will presume to propose a list
of general behaviors and characteristics of spirits, in no particular order:
• Spirits are not primarily material, though many traditions
describe them as able to manifest bodies of air and smoke, or even of more
dense elements.
• Spirits act both psychospiritually and on occasion materially. Like much of
magic, spirits seem to operate by affecting How Things Go – which crossroads
are taken, which way the coin falls, etc. It is rare to the degree of ‘miracle’
for spirits to act directly on matter, but it is not unknown.
• Spirits resonate with and respond to the material world.
When described as ‘animism’ we think of spirits as being ‘in’ or ‘of’ specific
material objects – the spirit in a tree or of a waterfall.
• Spirits act through living people, not only by direct
possession or guidance, but by influence based on their nature. A merry spirit
makes mortals near it inclined to merriment.
• Spirits are widely various in their influence on mortals,
some being potentially or overtly dangerous or destructive and others providing
blessings worthy of the divine.
Non-Locality of the Spirits
Spirits who become the ‘Gods’ of humankind seem to be those
who are particularly powerful or able. In essence they are those who respond to
human worship, and give good blessings. While some spirits seem rather
localized – attached directly to a specific material basis - the spirits who
are called ‘gods’ by the poets often have presence in a wider range of culture
and geography; they transcend the local. Sometimes this has a natural material
basis – the Sun is visible in all places, even if its effects vary. Sometimes
it has a widespread cultural basis – customs surrounding hearth-fire can be
relevant to most human habitation.
As a Pagan I take nature and its dance to be a map of the real nature of
spiritual reality. As above, so below, the old wisdom says – nature is the
materialization of spirit, and we can learn much about one from the actions of
the other. When we apply this principle to the nature and presence of the gods
we arrive at what I see as the center of polytheism.
Just as with any real thing in our natural world, the divine
exists in and as multiple (infinite… uncountable…) entities. The gods as they
appear in ‘mythology’ – in the bodies of tales preserved and retold by poets –
bear only a generic resemblance to those gods as they are present in local
temples and regions. If one considers “Diana” of the Anatolian city of Ephesus,
in comparison to the Artemis/Diana of Greco-Roman story my principle is clearly
indicated. This phenomenon happens across the polytheist world. In both India
and in W African religions it is often formally acknowledged. The Goddess or
honored spirit ‘of’ a local village may have the same name and stories as that
of three villages away, yet have local presence, history and nature that
clearly distinguishes her from another presence in another temple. This doesn’t
prevent scholars and theologians inside the tradition from identifying them all
as one entity, or villages from competing over whose Goddess is the coolest.
To me this entirely blurs the argument between so-called ‘hard’
and ‘soft’ polytheisms, in which ‘hard’ insists that every iteration of a deity
is a distinct entity and not an ‘aspect’ of some other, while the ‘soft’ holds
that deities are trans-individual, existing in many aspects. It is clear to me
that traditional polytheisms today, and almost certainly those of European
ancestors, are and were both. I sometimes propose an axiom that gods and other
mighty spirits simply have the power to exist as multiple persons.
To find a specific solution in the myth and metaphysics of
Pagan peoples I turn to the Hellenic notion of ‘daemons’. The word ‘daemon’
(from roots meaning ‘separate being’) is a general Greek term for ‘a spirit’.
Homer applies it to the Gods while popular Hellenic Paganism could apply it all
the way down to one’s garden-sprites as well. In Classical Greek Pagan theology
the Daemons were similar to what we think of as ‘angels’ – agents and
messengers of the gods. They were understood to attend the sacrifices on behalf
of the gods, to carry the blessings of the gods in turn to mortal worshippers,
and in essence to function *as* the god at the local level. In this way Zeus “of”
a particular regional temple could be both a separate self-acting agency, and a
‘person of’ the storied deity.
I have described Sam Webster’s Fire metaphor before, but it
is so very apt here. If I take a spark from a fire, and go a mile away, and use
it to light another fire, it will be, in many ways, almost exactly the same as
the original – same chemical processes, consuming the same kinds of fuel, etc.
It is Fire, in the directly descriptive sense. Yet each such fire is distinctly
individual – it is in a new place, it illuminates new things, it develops a
unique history and narrative. So, we might think, it is with the Gods. A new
image is made, a new ritual fire is lit, and customs are established influenced
by the landscape and climate of the new temple.
We may say that in such work a different daemon of the deity
is attracted to one temple than to another. In essence these spirit ambassadors
or presences act and exist as the
deity, as it may appear in the setting mortals have made for it. Mythic tales
tell of deities making their own places of worship, reshaping the material
world but, again, this level of the miraculous is not the rule. More commonly
humans make a particular pattern, lay a sacred feast with a particular flavor,
and it attracts the deity in and as a properly resonant daemon.
In this way it is not mistaken to think of the beings that
act in each temple as separate and individual beings, who may have their own
inclinations and desires. Likewise if you spoke with any one of them they would
identify themselves as That God From the Stories, even as local versions of the
myths diverge. This polyvalent perspective renders empty many disputes about
which kind of worship, which narrative, which theology, is the “real” version
from Ancient Days. The real pattern of ancient Paganisms was probably a
patchwork of localisms linked by larger cultural forms.
This model has applications at both the most immediate
levels, and at the transcendent. For those of us working to establish a home
cultus it offers the freedom to establish the work as we will, and accept the
results we get. When we establish a home shrine, develop out customs and
implement them ‘religiously’ we summon a daemon of the god who is fit for the
work we are fit for. If one wishes simply to establish harmony, get a good
blessing, and live in peace then the simple sacrificial relationship with your
own local daemon of your god may be all you need. For those of more mystical
bent, the divine work of formal ritual makes a pathway of linkages – from the
image of the God in your mind, through the material form of an idol and
invocation, to the daemon of the God who serves at your fire to, perhaps, the
cosmic principle of the God themself.
This model can lead us toward certain other speculations.
Modern Pagans often ask ourselves about how such culturally similar forms as,
say, Diana and Artemis, or Manannan and Manawyddan may be spiritually related.
For those drawn to lumping, this daemon theory can easily be expanded from the
local to the regional. I, myself, find it just too unlikely that thunder-gods
from neighboring cultures with linguistically-neighboring names such as
Taranis, Thunor and Thor must be utterly distinct entities. If there is some
shorter list of great powers behind the many cousins of the European pantheons,
the transpersonal and transcultural spiritual powers behind so many local
daemons. Even so they need be no more relevant than a poet’s tales of the
Earth-Mother are to bringing in a good harvest, as we approach those Powers
almost exclusively through their local expressions. There is nothing in Pagan
ways to insist that the ‘highest’ must be a special object of worship;
practical work often is better done through more earthly spirits. Once again,
we need not try to decide which is “true” – that all gods are separate
individuals, or that some gods are ‘aspects’ or ‘persons’ of one another. We
can comfortably and reasonably go for “both”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)