THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail
From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.religion.sexuality,alt.magick.tantra,alt.religion,talk.religion.misc,talk.misc.newage
Subject: Sacred Prostitution (was Sex and Spirituality - ...prostitution)
Followup-To: alt.religion.wicca,alt.pagan
Date: 13 Jun 1996 22:07:40 -0700
Organization: Portal Communications (shell)
Lines: 123
Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com
Message-ID: <4pqs2s$47u@jobe.shell.portal.com>
References: <4l94br$kk5@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com <4lho04$3od@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <317D0448.599E@sonic.net> ...  <4o816n$e05@tombstone.kent.edu> <4on8el$egq@news1.sympatico.ca>  <31bad970.64166418@news1.is.net>   
Reply-To: AshleyB@halcyon.com (Ashley Branchfeather)
NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com
Xref: shell.portal.com alt.magick.tyagi:8500 alt.religion.sexuality:12904 alt.magick.tantra:1903 alt.religion:2348 talk.religion.misc:224109

[from alt.pagan: AshleyB@halcyon.com (Ashley Branchfeather)]

In article , boggles@io.com
(Jennifer Boggess) wrote:

>In article ,
>AshleyB@halcyon.com (Ashley Branchfeather) wrote:
>
>> I think it degrades the Goddess, and it certainly degrades the God. 
>
>So I take it you are opposed to the historical practice of the Sacred
>Prostiutes?  Is Innana not an aspect of the Goddess?

Is Molech an aspect of the God? Is sacrificing children sacred? Well,
unlike murder there's nothing wrong with prostitution if people want to do
it, but I don't think it's sacred.

>> His
>> Divine Love is considered 'not good enough' and money is asked of Him
>> instead. 
>
>Not at all.  In this interaction, the supplicant is raised to the status
>of the God by lovemaking with the Goddess in the form of one of her
>priestesses.  For the priestesses, this is a full-time job; shouldn't the
>clergy be kept fed?

Shouldn't the supplicant also be fed? What is it the priestess is doing
that she should be paid for that the supplicant isn't?

I think the paid priest(ess)/supplicant model is inherently unequal. It
suggests that some people are so much more sacred than others that money
should be paid in compensation. Well, perhaps sometimes that's OK, but the
union of God & Goddess is a union of equals. Both deserve offerings.

>The question of 'good enough' doesn't enter into it;
>this isn't a romantic love match, but a religious ceremony along the lines
>of the Eucharist.

Well, what kind of ceremony is it without Perfect Love? Perhaps the
supplicant could love the priest/ess perfectly, but would the priestess or
priest ever perfectly love the supplicant? Isn't the supplicant also
worthy of offerings? Isn't the union of the Goddess and God a romantic
love match?

>> The God I know would be deeply insulted at that, and I feel the
>> same way. 
>
>Hmm . . . the God I know would not be.  Pan, at least as I know him, would
>have no problems at all.

Pan would do it, and then laugh in the priestess's face when asked to pay.
Or He would find some ruse...

>Note that I would expect the God to have sacred prostitutes of his own . . . 

I can't imagine proud Venus giving offerings if She Herself was not offered to.

>> Come to think of it, the Goddess I know would be horrified if
>> She was ever offered cash for Her Divine Love. Love wants Love, not money.
>
>But what would her priestesses eat?  Yes, Love wants Love - but love may
>be expressed in many ways.  An offering of fruit or maintainence work on
>the temple would be appropriate, yes?  Then why not the money to purchase
>these things?  

Offering for what? Should not the priestesses also make offerings to the
God, in the form of the supplicant? Why don't the priestesses earn a
living the way the supplicant does?

>Now, if the Godess offered herself freely, and her supplicant
>misunderstood and believed it to be a transaction, I would understand her
>being offended - but not  by the simple and understood ceremony of Sacred
>Sex.

The Goddess always offers herself freely, and always gives as good as She
gets: that's the only kind of offering in Perfect Love. As the Carmina
Burana has it, 'Dulcissime, totam tibi subdo me' - 'Sweetest one, I give
myself to you utterly'.

...
>> >And if you think there being money involved
>> >automatically depersonalizes the whole thing, you have no business going
>> >to a massage therapist, doctor, nurse, or counselor - these require almost
>> >as much love and trust, and you don't blanch at handing them their earned
>> >check.
>> 
>> Trust, maybe, but I don't love my doctor nor does she love me. She heals
>> me and I'm grateful, and I pay her fee. 
>
>And how effective, without love, is that healing?  Does she not care for
>your well-being?  I wouldn't want to patronize a doctor who didn't care
>for each of his or her patients personally.

Well, maybe there's a little bit of love. I think most doctors approach
their patients as problems to be solved. They care too, but logic and
medical knowledge is foremost.

>> I don't heal her. She doesn't need to trust me all that much, either. 
>
>Doesn't she trust you to share the complaints and imperfections of your
>body with her?  Treating a hypochondriac is very difficult precisely
>because you can't trust them to report their symptoms accurately.

There's a little bit of trust, but not as much as I trust her. Even then,
I don't give her anything like perfect trust: generally I give her just
enough trust to let her heal me. If I'm suspicious, I might get a second
opinion. I also have the option of a malpractice suit if my doctor treats
me very badly.

>> Sex, on the other hand, is a lot more
>> than healing: when it's sacred it's an exchange of love and trust,
>> unsullied by one person's motive to extract money from the other. That's
>> what 'Perfect Love' means.
>
>I agree with you.  I still believe that sex with a Sacred Prostitute can
>be at least as healing and uplifting as an encounter with a massage
>therapist, counselor, or doctor, and possibly a lot more.

I'm sure it can be healing, but none of these relationships are the divine
union of the Gods.

-- 
Ashley Branchfeather