Sex With Angels and Spirits   14 comments

Greetings Angel Lovers!

Bernini's "The Ecstasy of St. Teresa"

Bernini’s “The Ecstasy of St. Teresa”

A rather interesting (and likely controversial) subject has come up on my Solomonic Group at Yahoo, and I couldn’t resist sharing it with you here.  I think the title of this blog really says it all, so I’ll just get right into the posts.  First, here is the question that was asked on the group:

I am a married father of four who is aged in his fifties.
I am also a theology student and a school teacher.
Two years ago I was studying the Old Testament and noticed how Solomon and David both had many wives.  This made my very curious and also quite envious.
Because at that time my marriage was lacking intimacy, and so out of desperation I prayed to God for a concubine or a second wife.
I didn’t think much of it, but about two weeks later a spiritual entity connected with me in an intimate way.  This has conintued regularly for the last two years.  It honestly feels like God has answered my prayer.
I did read somewhere that monks experiences similar types of connections with angels.  Has this sort of phenomenon ever been reported before?  Do you think that the biblical descriptions of Solomon and David having many wives may have been alluding to spiritual or angelic wives and concubines?

I find it rather intersting that – given this person’s particular sub-culture, which would not tolerate adultery or polyamory – he was able to find a spiritual solution to his problem.  That aside, I decided to answer his specific questions:

Ok, first to answer your question about the prophets and their multiple wives:  no, that was not an allusion to them having spiritual wives. They in fact had multiple physical wives and concubines. It is still practiced, in various ways and to various degrees, in many cultures around the world.

As for your other question:

Are you kidding?? Angels are all *about* the sex, man! ;)

(NOTE for those outside the US:  The phrase “…all *about* the…” is an American idiom that basically means “like it a lot.”)

Occult and religious lore is chock-full of spiritual beings mating with humans.   Stories of Succubi and Fairies producing offspring with human partners abound – including Lilith (who, in the form of the Queen of Sheba, is said to have indeed slept with Solomon). Some Jewish funerary rites are intended to banish all the deceased “demon children” who might otherwise appear at the funeral to demand their inheritance.

Pagan Gods – who are basically the same species of being as Angels – seem to have taken mortal mates on a regular basis – hence the existence of Demigods (half-human, half god) like Hercules and Perseus.

Also note the “Sons of God” described in Genesis, who descended to Earth and traded the secrets of heaven in exchange for sexual favors. This is an extension of the above Pagan concept – as the Bible offers this as the explanation for superhuman heroes and the “Nephilim” or giants. God supposedly flooded the world to get rid of them. (Though it wasn’t entirely successful, as Noah was rumored to be one of these offspring – effectively making *all* of us part-Angel today.)

Biblical legend also suggests that Eve mated with Satan to give birth to Cain.

And don’t forget Dee and Kelley’s (in)famous wife-swapping episode, which they undertook at the direction of their angelic contacts. (Though they didn’t mate with the Angels themselves, it was still the Angels who showed an interest in human sexual activity.)

Shamanic vocations often involve the shaman obtaining a “spiritual spouse” – literally marrying his or her Patron Deity to establish a life-long relationship.

An example of this is found in the Book of Abramelin – my own preferred grimoire – which promises “Knowledge” of one’s Holy Guardian Angel. This is an archaic term for “having intimacy with.” (Such as the Biblical term “He ‘knew’ his wife.”)

My own Guardian Angel has most certainly been my spiritual wife – and one of my earlier and most intense experiences with her was an extremely sexually charged encounter. Plus, once she was bound to me physically, she spent some months ravenously seeking out sexual and other physically pleasurable experiences. (It seemed to be part of her adjusting to suddenly having access to physical sensation.)

On that same note, there are many religio-magickal operations in which a divine being is called into the body of a human host in order to perform a sexual act with either a Priest or Priestess alone, or with one who has also drawn down a divine being. Such as the Wiccan Great Rite – where the High Priest and High Priestess become vessels for the God and Goddess to physically mate.

Plus there are several grimoiric spells intended to evoke beautiful spirits for the express purpose of having sex with them.

The examples could go on and on – this is a theme that permeates Western religion, mysticism and occultism. I have a feeling Jake [Stratton-Kent] will also respond to this, with many examples of magickal practices and operations that involve sexual contact with spiritual beings.

LVX
Aaron

And Jake did, indeed, respond as well:

happy to oblige :)

well an obvious road sign is the Comte de Gabalis:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/cdg/

big influence on some published and manuscript grimoires.

Also the close relations of Lamiae (such as Lilith/Sheeba) and the Sibyl or sibyls is central to our magical traditions. Consider too the narrow line between ‘angels’ and ‘demons’.

From there to the Testament of Solomon, and gendered spirits at the root of Solomonic magic, despite later  appearances/assumptions, places the theme pretty centrally.

Jake

This is why I love the Solomonic Group.  So often, people get real touchy and defensive whenever sex and spirituality are mentioned in the same breath.

There certainly are groups out there that make use of sex and magick to abuse young naive aspirants.  (See, for example, the “Theocratic Unity” group run by the Horos couple in the early 1900s.)

Yet, as we can see in the above examples, sex has been an intimate (pun intended) aspect of Western occultism for a very long time.  And it goes beyond the usual subject of “sex magick.”  Shamans, priests and wizards have been marrying themselves off to (that is to say, intimately bonding with) spiritual entities in order to learn occult secrets since the earliest tribal shamanisms.

UPDATE:  A member of the Solomonic Group asked me a good question about the Holy Guardian Angel and the subject of physical sensation.  I’ll share that question and my answer here with you as well:

> I had thought the Holy Guardian Angel was part of the transcendence of the
> flesh and its desires  often associated with the Judaeo-Christian tradition.
>
> Aaron, may I ask why an  angel of that class would want to enjoy sexual and
> physical  experiences? I thought they are supposed to come from a realm
> where such needs have been transcended?

I feel the reason is *because* they come from such a transcendent realm.  You take such a being from a place where there is no such thing as sensory input, then suddenly thrust them into a human host with full access to such alien sensations as physical pleasure (and, for that matter, pain), and I think it would be quite natural to want to explore and learn about these new things.  Add to that the fact that they have not spent a lifetime learning how to regulate such desires, and it can result in behavior similar to an addict seeking out a fix.  lol

I suspect this is the kernel of truth behind the stories of the Watchers and other divinities who were willing to trade all the secrets of heaven with mortals in exchange for sex.  While “in the flesh”, the Watchers were willing to chance the Eternal Punishment of God for just a few hours of intense physical pleasure.

For a good visual example, check out the movie “Michael” starring John Travolta in the title role.

Of course, this state was only temporary for my Guardian Angel.  Over time she seemed to adapt to her new state of being bound to a physical body, and the intensity of the experience finally balanced out.  After that is when she got down to the business of training me – but she certainly had a much better understanding of what it is like to live down here, which was important for the relationship to grow.

LVX
Aaron

Witch and Devil - Jos A Smith

Witch and Devil – Jos A Smith (From “Witches” by Erica Jong , 1981)

Posted July 16, 2013 by kheph777 in magick and history

Tagged with , , , ,

14 responses to “Sex With Angels and Spirits

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I think, though, that the general principle of testing spirits with the correct divine and angelic names ought to be observed – that would be like the astral equivalent of safe sex!

  2. 5:1 its a self created “entity”…apparently he has the frustration juice to power it.

  3. I begin my manuscript of Inappropriately Touched by an Angel today…

    or maybe another Law and Order Spin-Off “Angelic SVU”.

  4. And then, in the 19th century, there was Ira Craddock, who seems to have come out of left field with her experiences of an angelic spouse (except that there could have been some HB of L influence, too). Review here: http://freemanpresson.wordpress.com/2010/11/27/sexual-outlaw-erotic-mystic/

  5. Hey Aaron,

    I am certainly not agreeing with any insults directed at you or anyone. :) I do think Josephine is right in her comments on the subject matter itself. I really do not think anyone here is displaying any puritanical ideas or over emotional reactions.

    However, if there are reactions, to be honest Aaron, you seemed to want to provoke them. I mean:

    “Are you kidding?? Angels are all *about* the sex, man! ;)”

    You’re a smart man. Even with the quotes and winking, you know this statement will NOT conform to many people’s experience and encounters with angels. I know Jews, Christians, magicians and new age folk who have encounters with angels, where the angels are not “all *about* the sex”. You know that too :)

    Since sex is so trivialised and debased in our society, people who have deep and sacred experiences with angels may see that you may be trivialising their experiences, and even angels themselves. I am not saying you meant this, only that it could be seen that way.

    As you say, “My post merely listed out a number of historical precedents for sexual relations between humans and spiritual entities, ending with some basic descriptions of my own sexually-charged experiences with my HGA.”

    You did not address any sense of how common these experiences are, and that many encounters, historical and contemporary are not ‘sexual’. Nor did you address the concerns that Josephine raises, even though you must know about them already. People may have responded to this lack, rather than your comments themselves, methinks. :)

    And also, I know some Pagans who’ll come for your balls for saying the Gods are “basically the same species of being as Angels”. :) And you’ve even managed to sneak in a red rag to the Catholics by including Bernini’s wonderful sculpture – no sex there from an orthodox Catholic point of view, as again you would know :)

    I deliberately did not comment on the topic itself, as these matters are for me, as I am sure they are for you, sacred and deep. The topic comes under the banner of ‘sacred sexuality’ as far as I am concerned and to quote meself from MOTO:

    “as an esoteric community we should say very little about the practice of sex magic or ‘Tantra’ and a lot about how we move towards valuing sex as sacred.”

    My approach to helping do this is to say little publically about the inner dimensions of sexuality and a lot about how we change our consciousness so we can appreciate all that sex represents. I do the same with inner order and Enochian material. Your approach may be different, which is great :) No probs there.

    Thanks for this discussion – and BTW the reason why I seldom reply on your blog is (thank the Gods for newsreaders!) the blue hurts me eyes :) But I will copy and paste this over there now anyway :)

    • Greetings Peregrin!

      Just the opposite of you, I’m replying to this on my blog, and will then copy it over to Facebook. :)

      First, you said: “I am certainly not agreeing with any insults directed at you or anyone.”

      I didn’t think so for a second. :) I am, however, disappointed in several aspects of your response, which I’ll cover as we go. First and foremost I must say I’m disappointed and shocked that you would say:

      “I do think Josephine is right in her comments on the subject matter itself.”

      Josephine hasn’t offered any actrual rebuttal to any point made in my post. She has only called me a “dumbass” and asserted that I lack a basic knowledge of magick. With what, exactly, are you agreeing with her here?

      My second point of disappointment comes with your (and others) zeroing in on a single off-hand comment I made, which was only intended to be humorous – that being: “Are you kidding?? Angels are all *about* the sex, man!” To this you replied:

      “You’re a smart man. Even with the quotes and winking, you know this statement will NOT conform to many people’s experience and encounters with angels. I know Jews, Christians, magicians and new age folk who have encounters with angels, where the angels are not “all *about* the sex”. You know that too.”

      I want to say this entire comment is disingenuous on your part. Yet, it might actually be a cultural misunderstanding. A forum post is not a book or an essay – it tends to be more laid back and lighthearted (at least in *my* forums). And in this case I was using what may be a particularly American idiom. When an American says “X ia *all about* Y”, they are not actually saying the entirety of X is defined by Y.

      Let me give you an example. My wife makes the best meatloaf I’ve ever tasted. I beg her to make it for me on a regular basis (which she refuses to do! lol). So when I come to dinner and find that she has made me her meatloaf, I might say “Awesome! I am *all about* the meatloaf!” Such a statement is not intended to convey that my entire being and life’s work is about her meatloaf. It just means that I like it a lot.

      So, honestly, to sit here and debate the merits of that single comment as if it were some kind of declaration of ultimate truth on my part is, frankly, side-stepping the entire post itself. Yet, you say the following:

      “Since sex is so trivialised and debased in our society, people who have deep and sacred experiences with angels may see that you may be trivialising their experiences, and even angels themselves. I am not saying you meant this, only that it could be seen that way. ”

      I have had my share of deep and sacred experiences with the angels – one of which I mentioned right in the same post we are discussing. But those experiences have not led to my having a tight ass over them. I can still be lighthearted about them, and even turn a joke or two about them. Others who may be “offended” by that are entirely beneath my notice.

      I will admit, my relationship with the angels is very personable. As one friend will often do to another, I crack jokes about them, and even make fun of them from time to time. And this *has* shocked and dismayed others who do not understand the kind of relationship I have with the angels.

      The next bit in your response that disappointed me was this:

      “You did not address any sense of how common these experiences are, and that many encounters, historical and contemporary are not ‘sexual’. [...] People may have responded to this lack, rather than your comments themselves, methinks.”

      Peregrin, Peregrin, Peregrin… again I point out that we are talking about a forum post here. Not a book. Not an essay. It amazes me how often I see people “poo poo” a forum post based on what it does *not* cover, as if the poster was obligated to write an entire book covering all angles of the subject. I’m shocked to see you engage in this.

      In fact, I have had *many* non-sexual experiences with angels. (Shall I add, “Quick Captain Obvious, to the DUH mobile!” lol) But this post was in answer to a question about sex and angels – so that is the subject I addressed. If you want to see me talk about a vast array of angelic experiences, just search the Solomonic and Abramelin yahoo forums, or my blog, or read “Experiencing the Angels” in chapter 8 of “Secrets of the Magickal Grimoires.”

      You also added: “Nor did you address the concerns that Josephine raises, even though you must know about them already.”

      As I said above, Josephine did not raise any points for me to address – other than that she was “aghast” at the subject and that I was a “dumbass” for whom the basics of magick had “passed by.” If she wants to post something substantial for me to address, I’ll be happy to do so. But for now let’s move on to other subjects:

      “And also, I know some Pagans who’ll come for your balls for saying the Gods are “basically the same species of being as Angels”.”

      I would love to have them do so! I can offer plenty of historical evidence to support my statement – beginning with several Pagan Deities who later became Archangels or Saints. I can also list many of the countless similarities between the occult methods of working with Angels and Saints and older methods of working with Gods. This is a subject I’ve delved rather deeply into – so let my fellow Pagans have at me! lol

      You say: “And you’ve even managed to sneak in a red rag to the Catholics by including Bernini’s wonderful sculpture – no sex there from an orthodox Catholic point of view, as again you would know.”

      I firmly disagree with you on that one, my friend. As it goes with works of art, they are left open to interpretation. And I have seen many serious artistic analyses of that Bernini statue that assert St. Teresa is clearly having an orgasm. Not to mention the cupid-like angel preparing to thrust a dart into her. The sexual symbolism of that work is plainly obvious – at least to me and many others. That there are some Catholics who choose not to interpret it that way is irrelevant to my view.

      You say: “I deliberately did not comment on the topic itself, as these matters are for me, as I am sure they are for you, sacred and deep. The topic comes under the banner of ‘sacred sexuality’ as far as I am concerned and to quote meself from MOTO: “as an esoteric community we should say very little about the practice of sex magic or ‘Tantra’ and a lot about how we move towards valuing sex as sacred.””

      That is your choice to make. I don’t choose to approach it that way. And even if I did, I say again that my post simply listed numerous instances of human-angel sexuality throughout Western mythos and history. Your attitude (in as far as you seem to agree with Josephine’s “aghast” attitude) seems to imply that even mentioning these things should be “taboo.” Surely you don’t agree that it makes me a juvinile dumbass as Josephine asserts?

      “My approach to helping do this is to say little publically about the inner dimensions of sexuality and a lot about how we change our consciousness so we can appreciate all that sex represents. I do the same with inner order and Enochian material. Your approach may be different, which is great No probs there.”

      I commend the motivations behind your choices. But how does this make it somehow wrong to simply point out – for example – the Watchters who traded the secrets of heaven for sex? Or for me to openly share the fact that I have had strongly sexually-charged experiences with my HGA? The nay-sayers have not thought to ask me about those experiences – only to call me names for mentioning them at all.

      “Thanks for this discussion”

      You are, as always, welcome, Frater. You know there are no hard feeings on my part. :)

      LVX
      Aaron

      • I to have had sexual friendships with angels. I have seven angels ones a girl the rest are all guys…. I’m totally agreeing with you here. Of course I never asked them to having sex with me they started teasing me and by poking me and coming into my dreams at night playing wiotg me and joking. Eventually. At the age of 21 they took. My souls virginity, it wasn’t like they forced me. They are friends even if they are sexual. I wouldn’t marry anyone cause that’s just not my style. But they are fun to play and hang out with.. Even if I can’t see them with my eyes physically. I’m glad I found this blog I can relate. (Hugs)

  6. Hey Aaron,

    I am glad there are no hard feelings on your end; certainly none on mine.

    Quickly then:

    I agree with Josephine’s comments about various, often unknown, entities interacting with humans and the misinterpretation often given to that. And the fact it is often an unhealthy and parasitical relationship. This is based on many years of encountering and helping folk in this situation. I DON’T think you’re a dumbass.

    My apologies for zeroing in on “Are you kidding?? Angels are all *about* the sex, man!”.

    I zeroed in because of the ‘all’ and was not aware of the cultural context it was used in. Thanks for the very clear example. As soon as someone says ‘all’ my antennae rise as it is, in my experience, often used by someone declaring a universal truth. So this was honest miscommunication.

    Yes, I agree with the fact this is only a post, not a book. However – and I own I am probably too anxious on this subject – your post can be read, I think, as a licence for sexual interaction with non-physical entities. I would not post such an implicit suggestion without many caveats. I have seen too much damage over the years in this area. While of course no author is responsible for what his or her readers do, I personally would not say much about this area without those important caveats. This is why I responded to this matter in the way I did.

    As for the Gods being the same species as Angels – I was just pointing out that statements of definition made with such surety can alienate people. That’s all. I am sure you have solid reasons for your opinions, but so do they. As for the Catholics and St Teresa – yes, many folk do say it’s a face in orgasm etc. But St Teresa is largely a Catholic saint and it is mostly viewed from within that religion as a representation of a transcendent mystical experience. Again, all I was saying was that in your short post included yet another potential offence. :)

    Of course, Aaron you are free to have your own approach to discussion on these things. I don’t think they should be taboo, but I do think they should be handled with care. I am not, no offence, interested in yours (or anyone’s) sexually charged experiences with interior beings, for the same reason I have no interest in your physical sex life: it is private. I would not read it, even if it was all online.

    For me, sex is a sacrament, which using the standard definition which I like, is an outward and visible sign of an inward and invisible grace. Therefore just as we do not get all excited by the actual wafer in church – it’s size, shape, taste etc – but are transformed by what it becomes, so it is with sex. The outer aspects – whether it be with human or non-incarnate being – only embody and point to the transcendent mystery, and like Christ as the Eucharist, that is, to my mind, what is more important.

    I would wager also, good sir, given a few hours of good discussion over an unnecessary amount of quality booze, we would find more agreement on this subject that disagreement. Thanks :)

    • Ah yes, I see where you are coming from in regard to my post seeming to imply a “go for it!” attitude toward sex with spiritual entities. Certainly there are parasitic entiteis out there who latch onto the unwary (see the Succubus and Incubus stories), and caution is called-for. Warnings didn’t exist in my post simply because I was answering a specific question (that being – are there precidents for sexual relationships with spiritual entities?). It was the first post in what may become a longer discussion thread, where such warnings might have been covered more in-depth.

      In the long run I’m sure we see sacred sexuality in a similar manner and would agree upon more than we disagree. Even if our approach to the subject with the public might be a bit different. :)

  7. Might I add a point of insight here, pertinent to this discussion?
    Angels are not exactly in the same category as the gods, in my view, in my system of magick. There is a crucial difference: There is something that makes angels superior to the gods, and that is that they are of ‘unmixed good’. They are a ray of the Divine. They can only act under orders from the Supreme Being. They have no ‘Free Will’, in that sense. But the gods, on the other hand, can be corrupt and are corruptible. There is always a demonic and negative aspect to the gods. Each god has his or her down side. (S)He can be ‘debased’, fallen, or in ‘detriment’, ill aspected. You’ve got to watch that carefully when working with them. For you never know exactly what you are invoking. Do they have a dark side, and how do you guard yourself against it?
    You are much safer working with the angels. Then, if there are any unintended consequences or side effects, it was meant to be so. You are not accountable. It was the ‘Will of Allah’.
    But I would say that the archangels and the seven planetary gods are the most potent beings in the Universe, short of the Supreme Being. And the archangels are at the very top of the pile.
    I work an Islamic system heavily based on Qur’an and the 99 Names. There is no concept of a ‘fallen angel’ in Islamic theology. That is a foreign, Christian concept for us. Demons are a very different category. They would be similar to the Djinn and the Shaitan. But they are NOT angels.
    For example, I work with the Angel of Death, called ‘Azriel’ by Muslims. But I am very, VERY careful that I invoke the ‘angel’ of death, not the ‘demon’ of death. It takes great courage to perform such an invocation. You cannot AFFORD to have any fear of death or anything else. This puts me on edge every time. For, IF the invocation is successful, then there is a very real possibility that I might die. If THAT possibility is not there, then the invocation is not successful.
    You take your chances.

  8. Hello all.

    When you write: “I suspect this is the kernel of truth behind the stories of the Watchers and other divinities …”

    What does “the Watchers” stand for?
    Where can I find more information on them?

    THANK YOU.

    • The Watchers are a class of angels, also called the Grigori:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watcher_(angel)

      In the Book of Genesis, they are called the “Sons of God” (a fairly generic term for angels) – who traded the secrets of heaven for sex with the “daughters of men.”

      • Thank you Khepp777.
        Sometimes the most obvious solution is not seen, as I didn`t imagine a Wikipeida article on this theme.

        One idea came to me when reading the “Watchers” term:
        Is there a relation with Crowley`s “Holy Guardian Angel”?
        Is the HGA one of the Watchers or he may belong to other differen Higher Spirits strand?
        Sounds interesting?

        Best!

      • Greetings!

        No I would not say the Holy Guardian Angel is one of the Grigori, nor any of the traditional angelic orders. The HGA is a direct emissary (or child) of the Logos and Sophia, better known as the Spiritus Sanctus (Holy Spirit). In Gnostic and Christian symbolism, it is represented by the white dove descending from Heaven.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,724 other followers

%d bloggers like this: