Ancestor work begins, for most people, in a spirit of reverence. The candle is lit. The photograph is placed. The altar is arranged with care. The practice is framed around healing and connection and the receiving of wisdom from those who came before. And all of that is real, and it matters, and it is a genuine and important part of what this work is for. But then, somewhere in the process, you find yourself face to face with an ancestor who was not a wise elder. Who was not a source of healing or a carrier of gifts. Who was, in the simplest terms, someone whose actions caused harm, to the people around them, to the children they raised, to the lineage they passed forward. Most lineages contain at least one of them. Many lineages contain several. What do you do with an ancestor who was unkind? Who was violent? Who held beliefs that you find abhorrent? Who did things that caused real damage that you can still trace, in the family and in yourself, several generations later? This is not a hypothetical question. It is one that every practitioner who works seriously with the ancestral field will eventually encounter. And the available frameworks for answering it are, in many traditions, either unsatisfyingly vague or actively misleading. The Problem with Unconditional Reverence Some ancestor work traditions hold that all ancestors are to be honoured without qualification. That the dead, by virtue of death, have moved beyond the categories of good and bad. That your obligation to your lineage is total and prior to any moral evaluation. There is something real in this position. The dead are not available to be confronted, changed, or held accountable in the ways the living can be. The relationship you have with an ancestor is, necessarily, a different kind of relationship than the one you would have with a living person who had done the same things. And there is genuine wisdom in the recognition that ancestral work operates across a wider frame than individual moral judgment. But unconditional reverence is also, in many cases, another form of the family silence. Another way of not looking directly at what is there. The lineage that cannot be examined honestly cannot be healed honestly. And healing, not performance of ancestral connection, is what this work is ultimately for. The ancestor who caused harm did not stop causing harm when they died. The harm exists in the lineage, in the patterns, in the nervous systems and behaviours of every person who came after them. Treating the harm as sacred because the person who caused it is now dead does not address the harm. It perpetuates it. What the Difficult Ancestor Actually Needs Here is something that the older traditions understood and that contemporary framings of ancestor work sometimes lose: the difficult ancestor is not helped by being placed on a pedestal. In many traditional frameworks – particularly in West African and African diasporic traditions that form the backbone of so much contemporary ancestor practice – there is a distinction between the elevated dead and the unelevated dead. The elevated ancestor has processed what they carried in life. They have, in whatever form post-death development takes, worked through the consequences of who they were and what they did. They have the clarity and the orientation toward the living’s wellbeing that makes them genuinely good allies to work with. The unelevated ancestor has not done this work. They remain caught in what they were in life. The same patterns, the same unprocessed wounds, the same unresolved impulses. They are … Continue reading “The Neutral Ancestor ~ When Your Dead Were Not Good People”
She lived four thousand three hundred years ago, in a city whose ruins now lie beneath the desert sands of southern Iraq. She held one of the most powerful religious offices in the ancient world. She wrote poems of such force and precision that they were copied by scribes for two thousand years after her death. And she signed her name to them. Which is why we know who she was at all.
Her name was Enheduanna. And she is not merely the first named author in the history of Mesopotamia, or the first named author in the ancient Near East. She is the first named author in the recorded history of the human species.
Walk into any well-stocked occult bookshop and you will find rows of correspondence tables. Which crystal corresponds to which intention. Which herb to which planet. Which color to which element. Which day of the week to which magical purpose. The tables are sometimes simple and sometimes extraordinarily elaborate – 777, Aleister Crowley’s correspondence compendium, lists associations across dozens of categories for every number from zero to thirty-two. Agrippa’s Three Books of Occult Philosophy fills hundreds of pages with the interconnected web of correspondences underlying Renaissance magic.
Family lines carry trauma as reliably as they carry gifts, and they carry it through the same mechanisms: through behaviour modelled and absorbed, through the way nervous systems are shaped in early childhood, through the stories told and the stories conspicuously not told, through the silences that are themselves a form of transmission.
Some people come to magical practice through a lineage.
A grandmother who knew things. A family tradition of folk magic so embedded in everyday life that it was never named as magic at all – just how things were done. A cultural inheritance of ritual and symbol and cosmology that was waiting when they arrived, shaped to fit.
And then there is everyone else.
In Japan, if you visit almost any Shinto shrine, you will encounter them. Young women in white robes and deep red hakama skirts, moving quietly through the grounds, assisting priests, distributing talismans, performing sacred dances. They are called miko (巫女), and the image has become so familiar . So thoroughly absorbed into the aesthetic of Japanese religious life, that it is easy to mistake it for the whole story.
It is not the whole story.
There is a particular kind of grief in the ancestral field that is different from ordinary grief.
Ordinary grief knows its object. You know who died. You know what was lost. The mourning has a shape and a direction, even when it is shapeless and directionless in every other sense. But the grief that lives in ancestral erasure is different. It is the grief of not knowing. The grief of the blank space where a name should be. The grief of the person who was there, who contributed something essential to your existence, and then was made to disappear.
Most magical instruction assumes a particular kind of body.
A body that can stand at a cardinal direction for twenty minutes. That can kneel to draw a circle. That can hold a drumbeat or sustain a chant for an extended period. That has reliable energy on demand, that shows up the same way on a Tuesday as it did last Tuesday, that can be pushed and pushed and pushed in the name of spiritual development.
Most practitioners are good at preparing for a working.
They research correspondences, choose materials, time the ritual to the moon phase or planetary hour, set up their space with care. The preparation receives attention and intention. And then the working happens. And then, often, life continues. The candle burns out. The circle is opened. And nothing gets written down.
There is a man at the heart of one of China’s most enduring spiritual lineages whom no one can quite locate in history.
He may have lived in the twelfth century, or the thirteenth, or the fifteenth. He may have been a former Shaolin monk who walked away from one tradition to found another. He may have been a composite figure, the accumulated legend of several teachers collapsed into a single name across several generations of storytelling. He may, according to some accounts, have achieved immortality and simply never died.
His name is Zhang Sanfeng (張三豐), and he is the legendary founder of the Wudang tradition. One of the most significant streams of Taoist internal practice ever to emerge from the sacred mountains of China.
