Dangers of Deity? (a Conversation)

By: Dan Holdgreiwe
To: Adrienne
Re: Dangers of Deity?
-----------------------

In the presence of the Goddess, Adrienne said to Dan Holdgreiwe:

PH> ...to suggest that the human psyche, confronted with the Divine PH> presence
without being built up to sustain that impact, can frag ment.

DH> I don't buy it, at least not in those terms. This sort of thing makes for
impressive sermons, but it does not correspond to the Divine reality that I have
experienced.

Ae> Then you're lucky. I'm with Paul Hume on this one.

Well, I've been rethinking this myself, mostly because I realized that in other
contexts I make a big deal about the "dangers" of confronting the Divine. So why
was I so critical of the dangers espoused by Paul and others?

A major reason, I beleive is that I was taking their statements too literally. I
can't take the image of God as a high voltage line seriously. For that matter, I
find myself more and more disatisfied the the electrical metaphor that so permiates
modern discussions of magic. Words such as "charging," "grounding," and "energy"
capture only one side -- and not the most important side -- of ritual work. My over
literal reading of their posts conjured up a ridiculous image in my mind, which I
emphatically rejected.

Let me say instead that the dangers of encounter with the Divine are not electrical,
but rather are moral and intellectual. If one demands a relationship with Deity
which exceeds one's moral maturity, one does indeed face serious risks. I suspect
that most of these risks are related to self-deception and self-indulgence, but I
suppose that in extreme cases the damage to the personality could be more rapid.
All this, of course, presumes a basically healthy psyche.

On the other hand, approaching Deity often feels much more dangerous than it is. We
are likely to feel a great deal of fear as our pretensions and denials are stripped
away by the appraoch of the Divine presence. This feeling of fear is necessary and
good, but it is fear of change as much as fear of real danger.

Ae> Traumatic not just for the unwilling. I recently had a pries tess of
mine who did the Drawing Down for the first time and she was profoundly
disturbed by it. Not in an unpleasant way, but she's well trained and she
still found the whole experience hard to deal with on an emotional level.
Some people can shrug it off, others find it hard to incorporate into
themselves. Kinda like losing one's virginity...

I wasn't thinking that "emotionally hard to deal with" was what Paul et al. meant by
"zapped" or "crispy." Certainly such experiences can be emotionally hard to deal
with (although I have never found them so myself).

Ae> To be blunt, bullsh*t. Sure it can. The Gods sometimes force us to
prove our mettle, *especially* if we ask them to. If we are strong
enough,fine. If not...

Prove our mettle at what exactly? Lightning bolts at fifty paces? I probably agree
with you, but I reject the idea that we are tested like transistors -- turn on the
juice and throw away the ones that burn out.

1822

Ae> Besides, the biggest danger isn't in the presence of the Divine. It's
when the mage/priest *thinks* the Divine is there and is deluded. The
unconscious mind will happily produce all sorts of fantasies if you ask.

This I agree with 100%

Ae> It isn't a case of how effective the participants are, rather, how
ineffective. Delusion is a stock in trade for the occult arts.

Here you seem to have come around to my side. Most dangers come not from the
presence of the Gods, but rather from their absence. An imaginary power line isn't
dangerous, but an imaginary like with God/dess is.

Blessed Be
Dan

By: Paul Hume
To: Dan Holdgreiwe
Re: Re: Dangers of Deity?
----------------------------

Dan -

The zapped or crispy metaphor (hmmm, more Divine Electricity imagery) could include
"emotional discomfort," though I find that to be so basic an element in dealing with
Divine encounters (in my *vast* experience (g)), as the ego tries to relate to what
has just happened, that I don't really consider it at issue.

Someone who shrugs and mutters "No big deal," whether they've Drawn Down a God for
the first or five hundredth time has more of a problem, in my arrogant opinion, than
someone who throws shrieking fits in the wake of the experience (assuming they get
to stop screaming, eventually).

Yes, the crispness of the unprepared is, in fact, a metaphor for psychological
disintegration, an explosion of "mundane consciousness" in the wake of an experience
which blows the underpinnings out from under it. In a not uncommon example,
priesthood who begin to expect, to demand, the reverence shown them when they are
vessels of the Divine be shown them when they are not exercising their theurgic
office. Whether it is a Wiccan HPS or a Catholic monsignor (or
what you will), this is a typical poison that can breed in the wake of the Divine
invocation.

1823

Psychically, the Gods ARE high-voltage lines, whether you accept them as "real" or
"mere archetypes," or whatever. They, by definition, function on a level of
consciousness that is tremendously potent in the context of day-to-day awareness.
And they may be as solicitous of humans as a human is when caring for a small and
fragile animal, but They also do not exercise the same controls on humans that
humans do on animals, and rarely force us to turn away from danger, though They try
and protect us when we think to ask for it.

The fact that humanity contains (in my view) Divine potential in its own right
allows for humans to confront Deity on its own plane, even at the cost of the
present incarnation.

Paul

By: Dan Holdgreiwe
To: Paul Hume
Re: Re: Dangers of Deity?
--------------------------

In the presence of the Goddess, Paul Hume said to Dan Holdgreiwe:

PH> The zapped or crispy metaphor (hmmm, more Divine Electricity
imagery) could include "emotional discomfort," though I find that to be so
basic an element in dealing with Divine encounters (in my *vast* experience
(g)), as the ego tries to relate to what has just happened, that I don't
really consider it at issue.

Really? My own experience has included more than a little emotional
discomfort, but almost all of it was in those periods when I wasn't receiving
palpable confirmation that the work was acomplishing anything. Breaking through to
the Divine, on the other hand, is usually a joyful, ecstatic experience for me.

Part of this may be training (I spent about 10 unpleasant but productive years under
the disipline of a very demanding spiritual group) and part of it may be a matter of
pre-stripping the ego in anticipation of contact with the Divine (a less than common
practice among Pagans, who tend tobe suspicious of anything that smacks of humility-
).

PH> Someone who shrugs and mutters "No big deal," whether they've Drawn
Down a God for the first or five hundredth time has more of a problem, in my
arrogant opinion, than someone who throws shrieking fits in the wake of the
experience (assuming they get to stop screaming, eventually).

I would agree, but I find the more common reaction to be along the lines of "Oh,
wow!" or even "Mmmmmmmmmmm, yes!" Perhaps this means I'm not "plugged in" to the
high-amp Deities (like maybe Cthulu). <g>

On a more serious note, I probably use an egregore that mediates the
relationship with God/dess in ways that make screaming fits less likely -- thought I
suppose it could be disputed whether this was good or bad.

1824

PH> Yes, the crispness of the unprepared is, in fact, a metaphor for
psychological disintegration, an explosion of "mundane con sciousness" in
the wake of an experience which blows the under pinnings out from under it.
In a not uncommon example, pries thood who begin to expect, to demand, the
reverence shown them when they are vessels of the Divine be shown them when
they are not exercising their theurgic office. Whether it is a Wiccan HPS
or a Catholic monsignor (or what you will), this is a typical poison that
can breed in the wake of the Divine invocation.

Ah, this is where your metaphor confuses me. You speak of an "explosion" but your
example is more akin to a cancer -- not a dramatic shattering of the personality,
but a gradual corruption. The latter is a danger that I readily acknowledge.

PH> Psychically, the Gods ARE high-voltage lines, whether you accept them as
"real" or "mere archetypes," or whatever. They, by definition, function on a
level of consciousness that is treme ndously potent in the context of
day-to-day awareness.

PH> The fact that humanity contains (in my view) Divine potential in its own
right allows for humans to confront Deity on its own plane, even at the cost
of the present incarnation.

The Lord and Lady are indeed potent, but their energy is wisely controlled. Each of
us, hoever, is a high-voltage line in much less capable hands. I believe it is not
God/dess, but our own Divine potential which will "zap" us if we are careless in its
use.

Blessed Be
Dan

1825