Original version 1st published in Idunna, Volume 4 issue 4, December 1992
by Eric Wodening
Those words from Völuspá describe the creation of AskR and Embla from trees, the önd and ođR referred to are generally accepted as parts of the soul. Many heathen interpret önd as the breath of life, the divine spark, and equate it with Sanskrit atman. In Runelore Edred Thorsson defined ođR as a “...a term for ecstatic, inspired, numinous, or mental activity; it is almost like a physicological response in the psychological complex to a high level of stimulation present in such phenomena as ecstasy, enthusiasm [3, p. 169].” Thorsson later describes it as “...a term for ecstatic, inspired numinous or metnal activity; it is almost like a physicological response in the psychological complex to a high level of stimulation present in such phenomena as ecstasy, enthusiasum, outflowings of physcial power and the feeling of awe in the presence of the numinosium tremendum (the terrifying aspect of the divine) [3, p. 189]." While both of these definitions capture much of what we think of as óđR, they still seemed inadequate to me in defining the entire concept.
In Old Norse ođR meant “rage, fury” as well as “poetic inspiration.” Ufilas used its Gothic equivalent wođ, in his translation of the New Testament to mean “demonic possession.” Its Old English and Old High German cognates, wód (pronounced with a long O) and wut respectively, shared with ođR the meaning of “rage, fury,” though wód also meant “madness.” Both words survived into modern times, German wut meaning “rage” and the English adjective wood meaning “mad.” All of these words descended from an Old Germanic root which formed the prefix of Wođanaz (OE Wóden; OHG Wuotan; ON Ođinn); thus Wóden is the “master of wód.”
The various meanings ascribed to the words--”rage,” “poetic inspiration,” “demonic possession,” and “madness”--all seem diverse on the surface, though they actually have more in common than meets the eye. Throughout history people have viewed “poetic inspiration” and “madness” as being linked--both poets and madmen have been viewed as being “touched by the gods;” hence both poetic inspiration and madness have a touch of the ecstatic. Rage, to a lesser degree, has also been looked upon in such a way, particularly if it is interpreted as referring to the divinely inspired rage of the berserkgangR. Demonic possession presents us with some problems, but, if we interpret it as referring more to the possession by spirits in the shamanic experiences of primitive societies rather than something from out of The Exorcist, it too can be ecstatic in nature. Viewing these meanings as containing an element of ecstasy adds more than a little credence to Thorsson’s latter definition of wód. The fact remains, however, that rage and demonic possession (particularly if we’re talking Linda Blair here) do not always contain an element of ecstasy (which can be defined as a mystic state of overpowering joy or delight). With this in mind we must look to the one other thing rage, poetic inspiration, demonic possession, and madness have in common--they are all forces which can overwhelm a person’s entire being. This brings us very close to a concept found in both Greek and existential philosophy, the concept of the daimonic.
In the time of Homer, daimon was used interchangeably with theos (”god”) and seemed to refer also to the condition of one’s life. The daimon later seemed to be considsered a spirit greater than man, but lesser than the gods.
The daimon was considered as being able to possess a person and work through his mind. In Ćschylus’ The Persians, Xeres’ delusions are ascribed to a daimon which clouded his judgement. Here the daimon resembles wód in that it can overwhelm a person, Xeres’ madness reminding us that Old English wód also meant “madness.”
Later the daimon was regarded as a guardian spirit which guided man’s destiny. It aided man in the path towards self actualization. Socrates referred to his daimon as a voice, a sign which acted as a guardian. It was this daimon which told him to choose death over exile. Diotima, in Plato’s The Symposium, describes true love (eros) as a daimon, a link between the divine and the mortal, an intermediary between the men and gods which binds them both.
Still later the daimon came to be thought of as an aspect of the personality. This can already be seen in Socrates and Diotima. Indeed, during the Age of Enlightenment many scholars preferred to think of Socrates’ daimon as “prudence or conscience (John Quincy Adams).” Heraclitus states, “Man’s character is his daimon,” while Aristotle viewed it as a force of nature. Aristotle defines happiness--eudaimonism--as being in harmony with one’s daimon.
In all its forms the Greek concept of the daimon embraced the creativity of artists, religious zeal, the passion of lovers, rage, and, as shown by Ćschylus, even madness. It was more than capable of siezing a person and taking him over. No less an authority than Plato states that “divine madness” overtakes the creative person.
The Greek concept of daimon seems then to have much in common with the Germanic concept of wód. Both are capable of possessing the person--daimonic possesion in the literal sense. Both are assoicated with poetic inspiration, rage, and even madness. I do not feel it would be out of place to state that wód and daimon describe the same aspect of the human soul responsible for creative inspiration, religious ecstasy, and even romantic passion.
The daimonic went ignored in modern pyschology for many years until Rollo May confronted it in his classic work Love and Will. May defines the daimonic as “any natural function which has the power to take over the whole person [1, p. 123].” May further defines it as “the urge in every being to affirm itself, assert itself, perpetuate and increase itself [Ibid].” The daimonic is the “bridge between the divine and the human, and shares in both [1, p. 138].” The daimonic is the “urge to reach out towards others, to increase life by sex, to create, to civilize; it is the joy of rapture...of knowing we matter [1, p. 146].”
According to May, the daimonic can be a creative or destructive force and is ususally a little of both. The daimonic becomes destructive when it overwhelms the self with no regards for the self’s need for integration or to the goals, desires, and needs for integration of others. It then manifests itself in the darker side of mankind--rage, hatred, cruelty, and extreme violence [1, p. 123]. The way to overcome such daimonic possession is to confront it, to call the daimonic by its proper name [1, pp. 167-172]. This is reflected in folk beliefs that if one knows the name of a troublesome spirit, that spirit can then be controlled or dispelled.
As a creative force the daimonic can act as a voice of guidance, much as Socrates’ daimon did for him. Its link to Latin genii, and hence genius, make it the voice of a person’s generative abilities as well. It is “the unique pattern of sensibilities and powers which constitute the individual as a self in relation to the world.” The daimonic can manifest itself in dreams, conscious meditations and introspection. Through dreams the daimonic can guide the individual towards better ways of doing things [1, p. 125].
Creative people are naturally in tune with the daimonic. From the daimonic arises creativity, the force that pushes the individual into heightened states of consciousness. Such heightened awareness seems to drive the creative person farther away from innocence, hence creativity and schizophrenia often accompany each other. In studying only a short history of poets, philosophers, and artists it does not take one long to realize inspiration and madness often go hand in hand [1, pp. 170-172].
Because of its destructive capacities the daimonic must be directed or channelled. It begins in the infant as a “blind push,” the sometimes violent rage a baby might experience when it wants its way. This “blind push” remains in many adults as the potential for mob violence; the inciting of a crowd to riot is nothing more than stirring up this part of the daimonic within them. In this way the daimonic is impersonal. It is that urge to self-assertion which all people possess and which can lead to indiscriminate violence in its most extreme forms [1, pp. 159-162].
Despite its potential for violence, the daimonic must not be repressed. When one is not allowed to experience sexuality or show anger the daimonic may become obstructed. As the daimonic urges cannot remain dormant, this repression may result in ”daimonic possession,” in which the urges explode or are projected upon “undesirables [1, p. 163].” Rather than represssing the daimonic, the impersonal daimonic must be made personal. That is, through self-actualization the individual must integrate the daimonic into the self. In recognizing the daimonic and channelling it towards more creative ends one ceases to become one of the crowd and becomes an individual. The daimonic can then become like Socrates’ daimon, a voice of guidance and even a source of knowledge [1, pp. 163-167].
Rollo May’s concept of the daimonic is both creative and destructive, human and divine. It can overwhelm or possess an individual without regard to the self. It constitutes the urge to self assertion, as in rage or love. It is also a well spring for creativity and knowledge, and can even be a source of madness. Daimonic possession, rage, inspriation, and madness are words equated with our wód as well. The wód can then be said to be daimonic in nature.
In describing wód with daimonic we can now more accurately define wód. Wód is the faculty by which all human beings can enter into a higher state of self-awareness, thus entering the realm of the divine. In other words, wód is the source of all daimonic urges, the soruce of self-assertion. This definition is not at variance with Thorsson’s, for enthusiasm and ecstasy are both heightened states of self-awareness; however, wód contains an element of agony as well as enthusiasm and ecstasy, and agony is a state of heightened self awareness as well.
In naming wód as daimonic we may obtain a better understanding of it. Both runesters and berserkers depended on wód as the source of their power. It must be noted that the family of Egill Skallagrimsson, the great skald and runester, contained members of both professions. It could well be that it was only after the advent of Christianity, when the daimon began to be regarded solely as evil, that many berserkers started to lose control of their fury. Without an understanding of the power they wielded, it could not be controlled.
May considers the integration of the daimonic to be an important part of self-actualization. For heathen then the integration of wód should be a top priority. With a better understanding of this aspect of the soul, this process should become that much easier.
© 1998 Eric Wodening. All rights reserved.
Back
to House Wodening Home Page