Darkness

[qos]

I've been wrestling recently with how to explain that I'm now working seriously with a "dark goddess" as part of my spirituality. It can be tough enough to describe Paganism in a way that people a) take seriously and b) don't get scared by -- but talking about working with an underworld goddess, and one with something of a bad reputation at that, doesn't make it any easier.

Not coincidentally, I've run across some discussions about bdsm recently that focus on the "dark" aspects as part of the attraction. Some people engage in bdsm because they delight in the sense of transgression. They like the thought that they're doing something "bad".

That's never been my kink.

What suddenly became clear to me during a discussion on this topic in another forum, is that I've contributed to my own frustration by allowing myself simply accept the whole "dark/light" dichotomy in the first place. Again, it's a weakness of the Queen of Swords archetype: a tendency to see or analyze things as an either/or model.



The best way to short-circuit my own difficulties is to liberate myself from the dark or light, or dark vs. light model -- and then refuse to allow any conversations to get bogged down in it.

The other way is to be sure that I am comfortable discussing "darkness" as a range of things: as the shadow, as what is hidden, as a place of transformation, as chthonic. Yes, it can also be used as a symbol for "evil" -- and yes, I'm doing some reclaiming of things that have been typically categorized as evil (underworld deities, bdsm activities, etc.) but that doesn't mean that I believe they are evil or that I should let that history set the tone of the discourse.

It's been interesting to look at how my own attitude toward the "darkness" of bdsm has shifted over the years. I am able to engage in it -- and enjoy it -- at a much deeper level since I stopped feeling shame, accepted what I'd been told were "dark" (bad, unhealthy, not acceptable) aspects of my sexuality, and allowed my own desires and limits to frame my play -- not those of social expectations, bad pornographic novels, or my partners' desires. By allowing my own desires to "come to light" and accept them, I liberated myself from shame. I no longer see it as "dark/harmful" and therefore I enjoy it more.

The biggest personal taboo I have -- and by that I mean something that is sometimes perceived as desireable but is always outside my limits -- is true non-consensuality. "Consensual non-consent" -- a scene or play in which the participants pretend one has no choice is simply that: play. But I found that after such play it was extremely important to me to re-establish the fundamental equality, respect, and love with my partner. Without that, I felt that I did go to a dark place in the negative sense, and it left me feeling violated, shamed, injured in my psyche.

If we remain within the dark/light paradigm, then language falls short. There's positive darkness, but there is also negative darkness: the darkness of violence, abuse, wanton destruction, cruelty, and etc. The only way I want to go into that darkness is to shine a light to eradicate it.




And maybe this is where things come full circle for me. As a priestess of a "dark goddess" part of my work is to be familiar with both positive and negative darkness and able to work in and with both. Ereshkigal is a mistress of the descent. She presides over the ordeals which overtake us -- whether voluntarily or otherwise -- and helps us transform them into growth experiences, to gain strength and wisdom from them. She is a guardian of boundaries (in contrast with Inanna, who transgresses boundaries) and her stories illustrate the power of righteous rage when she is violated.

I aspire to be an ordeal mistress, someone who can facilitate rituals which promote transformation, healing, and/or transcendence in the participant(s) through extremes of sensation and challenge. I want to be able to help a person move something they have kept in darkness into the light, whether that is the pain and shame of past injuries, or their own hidden strength and power -- or both, or more. (I also want to do this outside the context of ritual ordeals.)

Darkness can be the depths of the compost pile where things break down, ferment, and explode into new life. Darkness can be the quiet room where contemplation leads to peace. Darkness can be the apophatic perception of the Divine.

Darkness can be the shadows which scare us, our own personal monsters, which we have to face in order to claim their power.

To say "dark bad, light good" is to miss -- and misunderstand -- the richness of possibility for what can be found in the darkness.

Comments

[sharpchick.livejournal.com]

Who is making you feel as though you owe them an explanation?

From your writing, I cannot imagine it is your teacher. My take on her is that she is very supporting of your path.

If the folks looking to you for an explanation can't get it, then I think they are more focused on the word dark and what it means to them, and probably stop listening to you shortly after they hear the word. And if that's the case, then you'll never be able to make them understand what you mean.

[qos.livejournal.com]

My teacher is absolutely supportive!
She serves an underworld goddess as well, so darkness is a non-issue to her.

You raise some good questions, which I'm about to address in an additional post.

Thank you!

[wlotus.livejournal.com]

I like the distinction between dark as "bad" and dark as a complex thing. I have never thought of it that way. It makes me question my understanding of "the underworld" from Greek and Roman mythology (which was colored by my traditional Christian upbringing of hell/hades/the underworld being the place "bad" people went after they died). Was it really a place to fear, or was it simply another place to be, where life continued in some form that is different from life overground? I should reread some of that mythology and see what I think, now.

[qos.livejournal.com]

I like the distinction between dark as "bad" and dark as a complex thing. I have never thought of it that way.

Thanks. Our society is built on a tradition of dualism: making a distinction between two things and then honoring one over the other: dark/light, spirit/matter, male/female, rationality/intuition, etc.

Was it really a place to fear, or was it simply another place to be, where life continued in some form that is different from life overground?

It varied, of course. Most of the classical underworlds were not "hellish" in the Christian sense, but they were usually imagined as dark and not particularly pleasant. If you were a hero or demigod you might get a better location either within the primary underworld or someplace else.

For example, in the Norse belief system, warriors who died in battle were claimed by Odin or Freyja (each got half of the slain) to come and feast in their halls. The ordinary folk went to the underworld ruled by the goddess Hel, which wasn't bright and fun -- but wasn't torment either.

[queenofhalves]

i think you're on to something with ditching the dichotomy. do you have to describe ereshkigal as a dark goddess at all? you seem to have many more words to describe what she's all about.

persephone is also queen of the dead, so it's not even as if all underworld deities are fierce. i find her very comforting.

one other thing that comes to mind -- you seem to be in a phase of wanting to be out and honest with many more people, which is great. but not every audience needs all the details of your practice or your views. i try to give people what they are able to understand, in the best words for them to understand it. i don't think i would speak very deeply of my connection to my gods in front of a non-pagan audience. it's just too private, and i'd rather focus on our points of overlap.

[qos.livejournal.com]

You make a good point about not necessarily calling Ereshkigal a dark goddess, especially in certain company. That's a box I need to get out of.

And you're right: not all underworld deities are fierce. I think a lot of them have been perceived as fierce due to humanity's fear of death.

I'm addressing your other thoughtful comments in a new post. :-)

[neversremedy.livejournal.com]

It is often very difficult these days for people to separate evil from darkness. There is need for us each to look into the mirror and see the dark sides of who we are. While I work primarily with Tiamat, a creation goddess of the ocean, she has been both nurturing mother and vengeful destroyer. Sometimes I forget her history when she brings me comfort, but it is always there, for she is the sea. The closest I've come to truly working with a dark goddess was working with my girlfriend who is dedicated to Kali Ma; before she moved to SF, she and I danced for Kali and the sense of ash and embers, of dark musk filled me despite a pleasant summer day outside. I have found ways to deal with my own dark places--both the negative and positive--and I applaud the work you're doing. It is not an easy path, especially considering the prejudice you've described, but it is a necessary one that often gets overlooked. Blessings on you. *hugs*

[qos.livejournal.com]

*hugs

Thank you!

[oakmouse]

The insights and understandings you've been achieving are phenomenal. *hug*

[qos.livejournal.com]

Thank you!

*hugs

[gothic-coop.livejournal.com]

only in understanding can we know where we are at.

I have never really held the value of dark vs. light. I have however held this in positive and negative energy. Even in rage it depends on the energy that is pushing it forward. allowing your desires to come out is the most important part of sexuality and learning how, as a partner, to help them along. While also, having them help you along. All of these things are more of a power/control issue then light/dark issues to me.

[qos.livejournal.com]

*nods

The discussion can be held using a variety of terms.

[veronica-milvus.livejournal.com]

thanks. I found that.... enlightening!

[qos.livejournal.com]

*grin

Thank you!

[amqu.livejournal.com]

Are you saying nonconsensual is dark for you but not necessarily for other people? If someone is forced there is, necessarily, a forcer. Is that person's desire to enforce submission to his/her will always bad?

[qos.livejournal.com]

I think that some people find noncon "dark" and they like that. But consent is what distinguishes bdsm from criminal acts. No matter how much people may enjoy playing at nonconsent, they usually have some framework of consent in place. There's a certain suspension of disbelief that takes place.

Is that person's desire to enforce submission to his/her will always bad?

I would say it depends on the relationship. For those who define their relationship in terms of dominance and submission, then it's the responsibility of the dominant person to enforce the submission of the other. But there is an understanding that the other person has chosen to participate in that relationship dynamic.

In writing this, I'm assuming you're speaking in terms of an adult power-exchange relationship. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[amqu.livejournal.com]

I'm assuming you're speaking in terms of an adult power-exchange relationship.

Not particularly. BDSM and the power-exchange relationship is simply a way to express a certain sexuality in "play" and all that leads to and entails. It doesn't actually have anything to do with true nonconsensual bending to another's will. At any rate, it has little to do with my question.

I was more interested in how your worship of the underworld goddesses affects your worldview. It seems to me from what I have read on your journal that the stories of Erishkagel and Innana are not all about consensuality. Things were done to them and they did things to others that would be considered forced submission to another's will, not necessarily in a sexual sense. I guess I was wondering, considering your post, to what extent that is considered a bad thing. Is that metaphor for something else? Or is that a part of our personality that should be sublimated? A part of our personality that should be celebrated? Or something in between?

If that darkness of the goddesses is not something to be considered dark but instead complex, what is the proper way that should be expressed, if it should be expressed at all.

[qos.livejournal.com]

Thanks for clarifying. I didn't think I was following your question the way you meant it.

I raised the issue of consent specifically in the context of bdsm as a practice perceived by society and even many of its practitioners as "dark". It's not a topic I usually think about in other contexts.

You raise an interesting issue about consent and the goddesses in other contexts. I'm running late at the moment getting ready for work. I'm going to come back to respond fully later -- possibly in a new post.

Thanks, as always, for making me think!

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

You know I have wondered why Ereshkigal, but I haven't wondered why a dark deity.
It matters not at all to me that she's sometimes seen as "dark". I suppose it might matter to some, not me though.
But yah, I've wondered why Ereshkigal specifically. Curious is all, but I never asked cause I figured it's personal.

[qos.livejournal.com]

Why Ereshkigal?
Quite simply: because I was led to her.

I had been doing a ritual that involved being bound to an altar to act as a sacrifice-supplicant on behalf of another, to pray on behalf of another. But my prayers turned to dust in my mouth, and I found myself as if dead.

Hecate came to me then, and led me down to Ereshkigal's throne room where I was offered the opportunity to become Her priestess and learn from Her. We had met once or twice before, I had already started to realize that my previous understanding of Her had been too narrow, so when She told me that this was my opportunity to "go deep" I took it.

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

That's really cool. Thanks for telling me the story. :)