Nietzsche, Zarathustra, Dionysus, and Paganism

An odd title indeed, for what perhaps comes across as an odd article. For who would have thought of applying Nietzsche to Paganism? And who on Earth is Zarathustra and what has he got to do with Dionysus? Throughout this article I shall be examining the main strands of Nietzsche's thought and showing how it can become a workable Pagan ethic - no matter what path within Paganism you follow. Before we begin though, it should be made clear that the ethic which comes out of Nietzsche's thought is not a mass ethic for a group, but instead an individual ethic to be practiced by each person as they see fit.

But Nietzsche? Wasn't he that Nazi fascist egoistic maniac who slept with his sister? How can his ideas have anything to do with Paganism? Well, firstly he wasn't a Nazi - wrong time period for a start, though undoubtedly his works were well-known by the leaders of the Nazi party. This does not, however, make Nietzsche's work a no-go area simply because a bunch of maniacs used it for the wrong reasons. Was Nietzsche a fascist? Again, no. But he was egoistic and egotistical. So egotistical was Nietzsche in fact, that he entitled his chapters in Ecce Homo (stop sniggering at the back!) 'Why I am so Wise', 'Why I am so Clever', 'Why I write Such Good Books', and 'Why I am Destiny.' But I think this makes Nietzsche a more interesting character - maybe slightly delusional about his own achievements, but interesting nonetheless, and obviously someone who thought outside the box. Did he sleep with his sister? I have no idea. But I am of the opinion that Nietzsche didn't get very much sex at all, and he would have been a lot less highly strung and critical of women if he had!

Nietzsche's amazing character flaws aside, I believe that Nietzsche's most interesting ideas - namely the Death of God; Zarathustra; and the Dionysian Man - are highly applicable to modern Paganism, and can provide a guide by which each individual can live. I shall show this through a brief explanation of these ideas using some of Nietzsche's later works, and by looking at where Nietzsche has influenced modern Paganism already.

The Death of God

For Nietzsche:

Throughout Nietzsche's works, three different characters declare the death of God. The first is the Madman in The Gay Science (section 125 - and no sniggering about Nietzsche's poor choice of book titles!) The second is Nietzsche himself,[1] and the third is his famed Dionysian overman, Zarathustra[2]. It is interesting to note that each declarer is a different kind of person, and his declaration states something important about the response to it. The Madman can be seen as the symbol for the response to the death of God, as his declaration is met with confusion and laughter by the crowd, who perceive the declarer to be mad:

"Since many of those who did not believe in God were standing around together just then, he caused great laughter." [3]

Through the story of the Madman's declaration Nietzsche says that the majority will view those who see the death of God as mad, insane, and weird. (This is evidenced in the mere fact that he is titled 'Madman'.) But at the same time Nietzsche makes it clear through the Madman that those who see the death of God are ahead of their time: whilst everybody else still clings to God out of mere habit, the 'Madman' can see he is dead:

"'I come too early,' he then said; 'my time is not yet. This tremendous event is still on its way, wandering; it has not yet reached the ears of men... This deed is still more remote to them than the remotest stars- and yet they have done it themselves!" [4]

The second declaration- made by Nietzsche- explains the process of the death of God and its significance, so we shall come back to it later. Zarathustra's declaration, however, is used by Nietzsche to make it clear what kind of a man declares the death of God. Zarathustra is the epitome of the overman- a man who is 'Dionysian', that is, he accepts all of life, even the tragic, and says 'Yes' to it instead of rejecting it as worthless like a nihilist or pessimist would. To Nietzsche, he is the healthiest, strongest man, yet he too is ahead of his time. Zarathustra also refers to the knowledge that God is dead as a gift to mankind ("I am bringing mankind a gift." [5]) This is explained later when we find out the significance of God's death.

What of Nietzsche's declaration? It is mostly found in The Gay Science, where he says that it is caused by a mass crisis of faith ("...some old deep trust turned into doubt." [6]) He does not explicitly state what caused this crisis, though he does say that: "...metaphysical belief has died; it has been destroyed, as Nietzsche often points out, by itself, by the belief in truthfulness." [7] He views the metaphysical view of the universe as a lie that encourages truth, thereby undoing itself. Perhaps this is the cause of the crisis of faith? Whatever the cause though, the death of God is the death of Christian belief, the death of Christian morality, and the death of metaphysics. Faith in God suddenly evaporates and people don't care about it anymore. However, they do cling to God and belief out of sheer habit, not really believing but finding it easier, more comfortable, and convenient to do so. Nietzsche expresses this in The Gay Science, section 108:

"After Buddha was dead, they still showed his shadow in a cave for centuries- a tremendous, gruesome shadow. God is dead, but given the way people are, there may still for millennia be caves in which they show his shadow- And we- we must still defeat his shadow as well!"

Notice the cave imagery: obviously a reference to Plato's cave of illusion. [8] We' in this passage seems to be free spirits and philosophers, and Nietzsche seems to be saying that it is their job to vanquish this shadow of God.

For us:

For the modern Pagan, this image of the shadow of Buddha in the cave is potent and poignant, and I think it emphasizes the need for neo-Pagans to guard against superstition and habitual beliefs that serve no purpose for us. As 'victims' of what Nietzsche has called the Death of God (because who among us did not feel that way at some point in their spiritual questioning?) we should really think about our views, not just accept blindly what we are told my old religion or new. Sadly, in neo-Paganism there is a lot of rubbish available in books, masquerading as logical knowledge. It is at times like this that scepticism can be a useful tool (and I refer readers to an article in a previous issue of Offerings: "The Sceptical Pagan", by Chrissy Derbyshire.)

What is most striking about the Death of God is that it is not Nietzsche who declares it first - it is an unnamed Madman. It is Everyman. When it was written, this Madman was ahead of his time, but happily we live in a post-Death-of-God era, when the death of Christian morality has been underway for around a century and a half (mostly due to the increasing popularity of Enlightenment reasoning.)

Aleister Crowley picked up on this idea of the Death of God, and wrote about the Death of 'Because' in The Law is For All, commenting on the lines "Now a curse upon Because and his kin! May Because be accursed for ever! If Will stops and cries Why, invoking Because, then Will stops and does nought." [9] To him, 'Because' is just like dogma and those orators of God who expect you to follow their lead 'because they said so'. [10] With the Death of God comes also the Death of 'Because', but we should still be wary of 'Because' - we always needs to question 'why?' and 'what for?' and not just believe things because some author told us to. [11]

The Significance of the Death of God

For Nietzsche:

For Nietzsche, the death of God and Christian belief is bittersweet. One the one hand, it often leads to nihilism and pessimism- since everything is founded on traditional Christian belief, upon its death the crumbling foundations take away the constructs that depend on them, leaving people with nothingness, emptiness: "...and, now that this faith has been undermined, how much must collapse because it was built on this faith, leaned on it and grown into it- for example, our entire European morality." [12]

Many conclude from this that existence is worthless, painful, and to be avoided at all costs. This, for Nietzsche, is the very anathema of his Dionysian pathos and he hates it, viewing it as weakness, believing you cannot judge existence based on isolated experiences of pain. Indeed, Nietzsche's use of the term 'shadow' to describe the death of God expresses this negative side to it very well:

"The greatest recent event- that 'God is dead'; that the belief in the Christian God is unbelievable- is already starting to cast its first shadow over Europe." [13]

When God and Christian belief dies, so does purpose and meaning for many people, and they embrace nihilism and pessimism instead.

However, the death of God also has a positive side. Nietzsche viewed morality as based on fear and resentment, and as representing a victory of the weak over the strong (this is made very clear when you understand the dichotomy of Dionysus versus the Crucified- the Yes-sayer versus the pessimist. [14]) In Ecce Homo he states that "God is a gross answer, an indelicacy against us thinkers- at bottom merely a gross prohibition for us: you shall not think!" [15]

This view explains why, when the death of God is announced, Nietzsche feels it sets thinkers free. When Christian belief is dead 'free spirits' can venture out and explore freely without being bound or viewed as Madmen:

"We philosophers and 'free spirits' feel, when we hear this news that 'the old God is dead' as if a new dawn shone upon us... At long last the horizon is bright; at long last our ships may venture out again, venture out to face any danger; all the daring of the lover of knowledge is permitted again; the sea, our sea, lies open again; perhaps there has never yet been such an 'open sea.'" [16]

It is interesting to note that Book 5 of The Gay Science, the book that most focuses on the significance of the death of God, is titled 'We Fearless Ones.' Undoubtedly these Fearless Ones are the philosophers and free spirits who use their freedom from Christian belief and metaphysics to explore fully in a way they couldn't before. Indeed, one is reminded of all the 'free spirits' of the past who were persecuted by Christianity for their scientific and philosophical exploits. (Galileo, for example.) For them, the death of God brings new opportunities, releases them to an open sea and new places to explore, as they are no longer restricted or viewed as Madmen.

For us:

Can we, as Pagans, place ourselves under the heading of 'We Fearless Ones'? Certainly the Death of God has given us an opportunity to explore the seas of alternative spirituality; to question traditional values that we no longer hold dear; to throw out beliefs and ideas that do not hold water. And luckily, we also live in an age when we can do this without being laughed at as much as the Madman, and isn't this opportunity what brought so many of us to Paganism in the first place? It is important to remember though, that this is an opportunity that should not be wasted, and we should always guard against complacency, superstition, air-headedness, and blind belief in dogma. We have the capacity, ability, and resources to explore this wide, open sea that has been reclaimed through the Death of God, so why not make the most of it? Maybe a viable Pagan ethic can be the simple exhortation to understanding, wisdom and knowledge, and the call to quest forever for a greater understanding of ourselves and the world around us. Certainly, this is what mystics aspire to continually, and what so many Pagan paths teach us. This saying of "Know thyself" is apt, and once you know yourself you are also closer to knowing the world around you. And since we are studying a philosopher here, we might as well conclude this section with a few guidelines from philosophy, that I feel are particularly apt for neo-Paganism and a response to the wide open sea before us: Always question; never believe - have ideas instead; don't be afraid to get rid of what is no longer true for you; oh, and always question.

The Uberman/Dionysian Man/Zarathustra

Having set the scene with the Death of God, and explained how and why so many people turn to Paganism (and maybe why it is said to be the fastest growing religion in the UK), and finally exhorted neo-Pagans to an eternal quest for knowledge, understanding, and wisdom, we can now move onto the real crux of Nietzsche's philosophy - his Uberman.

For Nietzsche:

The terms 'Uberman' and 'Dionysian Man' are used almost interchangeably by Nietzsche, and they are exemplified in his character Zarathustra. The concept appears first, and in a very primitive form, in The Birth of Tragedy [17], Nietzsche's first book, and at first it seems to simply be the distinction between different views of life (Apollinian and Dionysian.) [18] But in his later work Nietzsche develops the concept of Dionysian pathos until it becomes almost a synonym for his ideal of the Uberman ('overman'.) This overman is a person who is self-overcoming, who constantly overcomes himself so that he can become 'better'. He is Dionysian, and accepts all aspects of life.

Nietzsche saw Dionysian pathos as the highest state of affirmation of existence [19], since the Dionysian man does not cower from the negative aspects of existence, and instead accepts that both the terrifying and the beautiful exist. In this sense, he sees the Dionysian attitude as belonging to one who is stronger and 'healthier' than normal men: the Dionysian man "meets with courage and good humour that which makes the weakling shudder." [20] Nietzsche also sees it as being irrevocably linked to his concept of the will to power, in that the Dionysian is governed by the Greek God Dionysus, who every year is said to be cut into pieces so that he can be reborn again - better, like the overman overcoming himself. This is linked to the will to power because a necessary pre-requisite for this will is to self-overcome, thus becoming stronger and better. Nietzsche saw this Dionysian overcoming as a vital change undergone by the strong, in whom "...the desire for destruction, change, becoming can be the expression of an overfull power pregnant with the future." [21]

The Dionysian pathos is a justification of life even at its most terrible, ambiguous, and mendacious, and is in direct opposition to the pessimism that Nietzsche rebelled against:

"At the same time I grasped that my instinct went into the opposite direction from Schopenhauer's: toward a justification of life, even at its most terrible, ambiguous, and mendacious; for this I had the formula 'Dionysian'" [22]

In this way, the Dionysian or tragic pathos became a superior counterforce to the denial of life that pessimism and pessimistic nihilism advocated, and offered in their stead an acceptance of life, no matter how terrible. It is important to understand however, what Nietzsche thought of pessimism, since this will tell us precisely what the Dionysian pathos is not, and it is in such a way that Nietzsche most often explains it.

Usually we see optimism as the opposite of pessimism, but for Nietzsche this was not the case at all. He despised optimism as much as he did pessimism, and saw both as diseases to which the Dionysian pathos was the tonic. He maintained that both optimism and pessimism are over generalized judgements based on isolated personal experiences, and since we cannot extend our personal afflictions into the form of universal judgements, both optimism and pessimism make a fatal mistake[23]. The pessimist judges the value of existence based on the appearance of pleasure and displeasure and because he sees the existence of displeasure he concludes that it is better not to exist at all. But he is weak, because the 'healthier man' (and by this one assumes Nietzsche means 'overman' or the Dionysian man,) realizes that the "value of life is certainly not measured by the standard of these 'trifles.'" [24] Nietzsche also says that suffering might predominate, but in spite of that a "powerful will might exist, a Yes to life." (See [9]) So, the Dionysian man does not judge the value of existence based on either his isolated, personal experiences, nor on the appearance of pleasure and displeasure. He does not judge at all, but instead simply accepts (says Yes to) all aspects of life, both the pleasure and displeasure- no aspect of life is subtracted or expendable. [25] This is further expanded by Nietzsche's concept of Amor Fati - love of fate. This love of fate is quite simply the love of the overman for all of life, including the terrible: instead of hating 'fate' for sometimes being cruel, the overman accepts it and learns to love it.

For us...

It may have struck some of you that this Dionysian will to power can be seen in a lot of neo-Paganism already, particularly in the practice and idea of initiation. Within an initiation, the initiate is required to cut away an old part of themselves so that they may be reborn as stronger and better people. In the Wiccan Second degree initiation, the Descent of Inanna is told/re-enacted, telling the story of a Goddess who descends into the Underworld, removing all her clothing and jewellery, and being flogged (thus removing her ego) - just as the initiate descends into the depths of their psyche in order to tear themselves apart so they can more closely examine what is at their core. We find this in alchemy, where the process of putrefaction and the stage of nigredo (the Black Dragon) putrefy the elements being used in the alchemical process, and leaves them to decay so that they may be purified. Even the Great Rite and hieros gamos (Sacred Marriage) that is such a big theme in neo-Paganism involves letting oneself be destroyed by the process, (le petit mort, anybody?) giving oneself up to it, and becoming better than you once were. We also see this process illustrated in the Major Arcana of the Tarot, with the Hanged Man sacrificing himself to gain more wisdom and insight, or the Tower being destroyed by a lightning flash from the Gods in order to make way for something new and improved to be built in its place. This is what happens to the Dionysian man, and what all Pagans should welcome with open hearts. How can we change if parts of our selves do not die? As Pagans, we should be constantly evolving and bettering ourselves, rising above our pettiness and phobias, our insecurities and falsity.

Not only does the Dionysian Man constantly overcome himself, but he also affirms the entirety of existence, not just the good side. He does not cower from the painful, terrifying part of life, but accepts it and life as a whole - he does not discount the joy of existence due to the appearance of some pain. In just the same way, many Pagans try to reverence the 'darker' sides of life, by recognizing deities of the Underworld, Trickster deities, deities of destruction, deities that represent the darker side of human nature. For us, pain is not responded to by stomping out feet, pouting, and exclaiming "It's not fair!" - instead we respond by accepting that these things happen, and learning from it. We say Yes to all of life, instead of No to it because it isn't all wonderful.

The Will to Power and the True Will in Thelema

Those of you familiar with Thelema and the works of Aleister Crowley may already know that Crowley named Nietzsche a 'Thelemic Saint', regarded his works very highly, and was greatly influenced by him. Indeed, the True Will of Thelema (kind of like the 'meaning of life' for each individual) is very similar both in concept and in practice to Nietzsche's Will to Power. Crowley also pervaded Thelema with his love of strength and the strength of will - the strength to persevere despite all odds, and the strength to continue with one's purpose. [26] It is the strength that is also admired by many neo-Pagans - the strength to face the Abyss, stare into it, and see none other than one's own face staring back out of the chaotic, black depths. The strength to simply shine a light into that Abyss so one can see it better, instead of shrinking away from it.

Conclusions, Closing Thoughts, and "Oh Gods, my brain is dribbling out of my ears!"

If your brain hasn't completely turned to mush yet (and mine is just about bearing up, for now), then please indulge me a few more words.

It must be remembered that Nietzsche's philosophy wasn't intended by him to be a moral treatise, however for those who are so inclined I believe it does provide a very sound basis for an ethical viewpoint that allows for situation ethics, instead of dogma and absolute values such as "all abortion is wrong!" - which cause so many problems for an individual's ethics, as well as in a community. It also does not require any religious belief, and most importantly allows our ethical actions to be informed by the higher principles we govern our lives by - be they spiritual enlightenment, compassion, higher wisdom, or just survival.

It should also be noted that when Nietzsche says we should better ourselves, he does not mean we should better ourselves by crushing others beneath us - nowhere in his philosophy is there precedent for this. Indeed, contrary to popular belief about Mr. Nietzsche, there is room for compassion, kindness, and humanity in his rather cold-faced philosophy: it all depends on how we define "a better person."

As you can see, Nietzsche's thought has not only influenced much of Thelema and some neo-Paganism, (as well as a lot of the Goth movement and philosophy!) but also bears many striking similarities to what is already held as true by the neo-Pagan community and the common trends that run through mysticism and mythology.

So, let us push our boats out onto this Open Sea and explore! Let us approach all of life with a resounding "Yes!" and continually reinvent ourselves and improve ourselves, always questioning, always persevering, always destroying ourselves.

"Into all the abysses I still carry the blessings of my saying Yes!" [27]

Bibliography:

Nietzsche, Ecce Homo. Trans. Walter Kauffman, Vintage Books, 1969.

Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Trans. R. J. Hollingdale, Penguin Books, 1969.

Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy. Trans. Douglas Smith, Oxford University Press, 2000.

Nietzsche, The Gay Science. Trans. Josefine Nauckhoff, Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Nietzsche, The Will to Power. Trans. Walter Kauffman and R. J. Hollingdale, Vintage Books, 1967.

Peter Heller, Dialectics and Nihilism: Essays on Lessing, Nietzsche, Mann and Kafka, University of Massachusetts Press, 1966.

Janet and Stewart Farrar, The Witches Bible, Phoenix Publishing Inc. 1996.

Aleister Crowley, The Law is For All. Ed. Israel Regardie, New Falcon Publications, 1993.

The Book of the Law, received by Aleister Crowley. Weiser, 1976.

Footnotes

[1] The Gay Science, section 343

[2] Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Zarathustra's Prologue 2.

[3] The Gay Science, section 125, p. 119

[4] The Gay Science, section 125. p. 120

[5] Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Zarathustra's Prologue 2, p. 40

[6] The Gay Science, section 343, p. 199

[7] The Gay Science, Introduction, p. xiii. Although not written by Nietzsche, the writer of the introduction summed Nietzsche's point up very well.

[8] See The Republic, Book VII.

[9] (Second use) The Book of the Law, Book 2, section 28-33.

[10] The Law is For All, p.199-202.

[11] And all you Thelemites out there, feel free to call me a Centre of Pestilence now that I have discussed the Book of the Law!

[12] The Gay Science, section 343, p. 199.

[13] The Gay Science, section 343, p. 199.

[14] See The Will to Power, 1052, p. 542-543

[15] Ecce Homo, 'Why I Am So Clever, 1' p.236-237

[16] The Gay Science, section 343, p. 199

[17] The Birth of Tragedy 1-6, p.19-42. Oxford World Classics, 2000.

[18] The Birth of Tragedy 1, p.19-23.

[19] The Will to Power 852, p.449-451. Vintage Books, New York, 1968.

[20] The Will to Power 852, p.450.

[21] The Will to Power 846, p.446. This is echoed in The Gay Science, 370, p.235. Cambridge University Press, 2001.

[22] The Will to Power 1005, p.521.

[23] Dialectics and Nihilism: Essays on Lessing, Nietzsche, Mann and Kafka, by Peter Heller, p.132-133. University of Massachusetts Press, 1966.

[24] The Will to Power 35, p.23.

[25] Ecce Homo "The Birth of Tragedy 2", p. 272. Vintage Books, New York, 1969:

[26] This is shown in Crowley's Thoth Tarot, in the 9 of Wands card.

[27] Ecce Homo "Thus Spoke Zarathustra 6", p.306.