Fallen gods
-
I was thinking about a puzzling phenomenon.
In the Qabalah there are qlipoth whose names are the names of pagan gods.
If we summon those beings within a Jewish system we obtain the presence of qlipothic beings, but if we make a invocation using the original system we get the presence of gods.A good example would be the evocation of Astaroth and the invocation of Astarte.
What puzzles me is:
Those beings that have similar names have some relationship with each other or the ritual context is such that the same formula (the name of the being) is capable of tuning a completely different “astral channel”?
-
It's intension.
If you know two people named Michael and you're with or within their emotional imprint on your inner space, when you say the name, that is who will almost certainly flash in your minds' eye, as opposed to the other Michael or a fiery archangel. -
@Faus said
"In the Qabalah there are qlipoth whose names are the names of pagan gods."
I'm not aware of any of these. Could you give an example?
I'm aware of many demons that fit this description, but not Q'lippoth.
"A good example would be the evocation of Astaroth and the invocation of Astarte."
Yes, those are goetic demons but not Q'lippoth.
-
Jim
If I am not wrong, Astaroth is one of the qlipotic princes in the column 606 of your book 776 ½.
In the context of the question, would there be any difference if the god name was used for a demon our a qlipoth?
Mephisto
I have exactly the same inkling about "context", but maybe there are things evolved that I am not aware of. Since I do not have much practical experience with this kind of cross-cultural magick, I decided to ask around here.
Well, as far as I know, we used to have a quite friendly relationship Mr. Mesphistofeles. It is not my fault that I was taken to heaven, who would predict that god would forgive me?
-
@Faus said
"If I am not wrong, Astaroth is one of the qlipotic princes in the column 606 of your book 776 ½. "
Got it, sorry. I was thinking of the Q'lippothic hordes, not the princes. - And FWIW I reproduced Col. 606 information (with some supplementation) from 777, but I actually prefer the list in 607 which doesn't have this issue.
But that doesn't do away with your quite valid question.
I think these princes are of a quite different sort than the Q'lippoth themselves. They are at least angelic, and probably archangelic (at least in some cases - I mean, we have Satan on the list!). Their relationship to the Q'lippoth is roughly comparable to the relationship of, say, Raphael to individual Air elementals.
My view of this is not too distant from yours, but has a different twist. I think these princes are archangelic-level beings. (At the very least, the Four Great Princes of the Evil of the World, so-called, seem, to every intuition I have, to be archangelic.) The Four Great Princes (I was told by a trusted source in an intimate moment involving them) were once the four archangels - but humanity's evolution put us out of synch with them, and more in alignment with Raphael, Mikhael, Gabriel, and Uriel than Lucifer, Satan, Leviathan, and Belial. - This would mean that it's not so much that they are evil, but that they are a mismatch for current (probably post-Isis Aeon) humanity. (It's not that they are bad people, just that they "aren't right for us" LOL.) Then, in the rejection and moving away over millennia, these have become further demonized within mass consciousness.
"In the context of the question, would there be any difference if the god name was used for a demon our a qlipoth?"
Context does matter. Even in simple ways, there is the comparison that the Raphael who is Archangel of Tiphereth is not the same as the Raphael who is Angel of Mercury. (Jesus the man-god is not the same as Jesus my gardener, though he'd sometimes like me to think otherwise.)
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
This would mean that it's not so much that they are evil, but that they are a mismatch for current (probably post-Isis Aeon) humanity. (It's not that they are bad people, just that they "aren't right for us" LOL.) Then, in the rejection and moving away over millennia, these have become further demonized within mass consciousness.
"93
An older thread by the looks of it, but let me share a few thoughts on the subject, pls.
Not evil, just different they are, I agree.
I had a close encounter with Belial, intentionally, and all I can say is that there is not much evil (evil=downright negative, aggressive, abusive, harmful energy, as it were) in this chap.
He is clever, fast etc... yes.It is our (my, in my case) negativity that gets projected onto him/them, IMHO. In a way, a part of our overall personal and transpersonal psychic makeup.
93 93/93
-
@Swamiji said
"The term in the book of Abra-melin is "Unredeemed Spirits" which I find very appropriate."
93
Yes, indeed.
My past conditioning tends to direct my thinking into interpretation along the lines of 'unredeemed elements of our overall consciousness'.
By evoking them, their seemingly objective presence finds its equivalent in subjective realm and, HGA willing, the divinity shines forth rendering them fully "submissive"... or not.It is a steep learning curve, for sure, and worth the while, IMHO.
93 93/93
-
Maybe they're like the Titans? That would seem to work as some of them used to be gods.
-
93,
Jim, you wrote
"The Four Great Princes (I was told by a trusted source in an intimate moment involving them) were once the four archangels - but humanity's evolution put us out of synch with them, and more in alignment with Raphael, Mikhael, Gabriel, and Uriel than Lucifer, Satan, Leviathan, and Belial. "
Are these exact correspondences, as in : Raphael-Lucifer; MIkhael-Satan; Gabriel-Leviathan and Uriel-Belial?
"- This would mean that it's not so much that they are evil, but that they are a mismatch for current (probably post-Isis Aeon) humanity. (It's not that they are bad people, just that they "aren't right for us" LOL.) Then, in the rejection and moving away over millennia, these have become further demonized within mass consciousness."
I am always of the mind that the ages co-exist. The notion of "unredeemed Spirits/unredeemed elements of our overall consciousness" introduced by Swamiji and Frater INRI suggests the Work of being Human is so complex, it is equally exhilarating and exhausting. As Marley sang "the power of philosophy flows through my head; light as a feather, heavy like lead." Knowing oneself...the Human Being as a Cognitive Event living in the 21st century...isn't that a lot of knowing? And a lot of loving?
Love is the Law, Love under Will
-
@Quad Nine 9 said
"
"The Four Great Princes (I was told by a trusted source in an intimate moment involving them) were once the four archangels - but humanity's evolution put us out of synch with them, and more in alignment with Raphael, Mikhael, Gabriel, and Uriel than Lucifer, Satan, Leviathan, and Belial. "Are these exact correspondences, as in : Raphael-Lucifer; MIkhael-Satan; Gabriel-Leviathan and Uriel-Belial?"
In the sense of correct elements, yes. (And, that probably means: More broadly, yes.) See 776 1/2, Col. 606.
"I am always of the mind that the ages co-exist."
I disagree emphatically (unless by "the ages" you mean something different than I mean by "the aeons"). What happens in an individual case is irrelevant to me - everyone has to recapitulate the developmental stages within themselves. But in terms of "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall," concurrence is nonsense.
But, as I just said, maybe "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall" isn't what you mean.
-
93
"I disagree emphatically (unless by "the ages" you mean something different than I mean by "the aeons"). What happens in an individual case is irrelevant to me - everyone has to recapitulate the developmental stages within themselves. But in terms of "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall," concurrence is nonsense."
So an Aeon is characterized by the specific "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall."
Question 1:
Do you see this "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall," as influenced by what is commonly called the procession of the ages? As in we are finishing up Pisces to go into Aquarius...the number of years differ, but generally something to do with 2,000+ years.Question 2:
Given that for you "What happens in an individual case is irrelevant...everyone has to recapitulate the developmental stages within themselves", could you define/describe the base line consciousness of mature, healthy members of the species during the last aeon?Question 3:
Can you say, in a general way, what % of the species are usually qualified as attaining this "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall?"I am posing these questions against the backdrop of "thy Will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven", interpreted as "what the mind can conceive and the heart believes, will be achieved." Who/What defines the maturity and health in the human species?
The Africans and the Mayans (for example) used their minds to transform the physical landscape as is evidenced today; they did this by working and living in harmony with the natural environment. African priests, for example who were considered mature, healthy examples within their communities; could perform astral travels, physically bi-locate, raise the dead, perform rituals which defy gravity, heal individuals with a touch or a thought etc. They believed themselves to be post-literate and used symbols/pictures instead of an elaborate alphabet (Western culture we have recently discovered the value of this post-literacy); yet are still considered today, by the mature, healthy examples of Western culture to have been, and to be backward.
Further, we are still just "discovering" through archaeology etc that our ancient ancestors were privy to and seem with great success technologies we are only now just discovering. The seas, desserts and mountain tops hold great secrets of our past, yet to be uncovered.
It seems to be more that we are REVOLVING rather than EVOLUTION. Or put another way, our EVOLUTION is a REVOLUTION. "God is a spiral force." Man as a cognitive event seems limited by his physiology, which is it is duty to transcend...maturity and health notwithstanding.
If our consciousness, the human consciousness mature healthy individuals of millions of years ago could defy gravity; what's stopping their present day counterparts? (the assumption being that defying gravity is important to our species).
Enlightenment versus mass consciousness is what defines our species? Maya...the illusion, is an illusion, is an illusion, is an illusion, is an illusion...
Love is the Law, Love under Will
-
@Quad Nine 9 said
"93
"I disagree emphatically (unless by "the ages" you mean something different than I mean by "the aeons"). What happens in an individual case is irrelevant to me - everyone has to recapitulate the developmental stages within themselves. But in terms of "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall," concurrence is nonsense."
So an Aeon is characterized by the specific "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall."
Question 1:
Do you see this "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall," as influenced by what is commonly called the procession of the ages? As in we are finishing up Pisces to go into Aquarius...the number of years differ, but generally something to do with 2,000+ years.Question 2:
Given that for you "What happens in an individual case is irrelevant...everyone has to recapitulate the developmental stages within themselves", could you define/describe the base line consciousness of mature, healthy members of the species during the last aeon?Question 3:
Can you say, in a general way, what % of the species are usually qualified as attaining this "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall?"
"This is the place to start: heruraha.net/viewtopic.php?f=86&t=6153
-
@Quad Nine 9 said
"So an Aeon is characterized by the specific "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall.""
Here is the definition I gave in the glossary of Visions & Voices:
ÆON. n. (1) An indefinitely long period of time. (2) Thelema. One of three vast periods of human history (thus far), each lasting thousands of years, characterized by vast evolutionary shifts in the consciousness of the human species, with consequent impact on social, religious, and other aspects of human society. (a) The three æons to date are attributed, respectively, to Isis (the Mother), Osiris (the Father), and Horus (the Child).
"Do you see this "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall," as influenced by what is commonly called the procession of the ages?"
No, Emphatically not. For example, since we still have 400 years to go in the Pisces Age, there's clearly not (for example) a time-relationship between the Aeon of Horus and the Age of Aquarius. A further definition from Visions & Voices (where I addressed the topic of the aeons at moderate length):
AQUARIAN AGE. n. (1) The period of time (2,134 years) during which the earth’s northern hemisphere vernal equinoctial point will pass through the Sidereal constellation Aquarius (2376-4510 CE). (2) Often casually used to represent any concept of a pending Utopian or otherwise transformational era; a close relative of “millennium fever.”
"As in we are finishing up Pisces to go into Aquarius...the number of years differ, but generally something to do with 2,000+ years."
Rough two-millennia time frames don't match either the frameworks of the physical or psychological period of humanity, or any of the social, religious, or other aspects of the human collective experience that have been associated with the aeons.
For example, my best estimation of the starting point of the Osiris Aeon (broadly understood as a patriarchal
and patrilineal stage in human culture, or "Age of the Father;" and especially that period of history when the baseline level of functioning of the typical adult human has been Ruach, or ego-consciousness), I would have to pick roughly 5,000 years ago, at the point when half the human race had moved from hunter-gatherer into intentional farming, city-building, and the start of urbanization."Given that for you "What happens in an individual case is irrelevant...everyone has to recapitulate the developmental stages within themselves", could you define/describe the base line consciousness of mature, healthy members of the species during the last aeon? "
Sure. In fact, I'll give you all three. (All these are subject to much elaboration. I have another essay on this somewhere on here, probably in the subforum on Visions & Voices under COT Publications.)
The Aeon of Isis was that period of history when the baseline level of functioning of the typical adult human was Nephesh, or what is now called subconsciousness.
The Aeon of Osiris was that period of history when the baseline level of functioning of the typical adult human has been Ruach, or ego-consciousness. (Being closer to us in history, we can see more finely its gradual development. Besides the accelerating urbanization and primitive technology, we can see 5th C. BCE Greece as a critical time when the architecture of the Ruach was well articulated. We can see late 1st Millennium times when important legends showed a young, underdeveloped ego-center, and later times when the hero figures matured. Then, probably about the time of the Magna Carta, we can see the "Act III" of its development in the explosive march of liberty, technology, etc.
The Aeon of Horus, which began in or near 1904, is that period of time within which the baseline level of functioning of the typical adult human will emerge as Neshamah, or superconsciousness.
"Can you say, in a general way, what % of the species are usually qualified as attaining this "base line consciousness threshold of [mature, healthy examples of] the species overall?""
That would be a wild guess. It's a gradual emerging (as we can trace through the recent Osiris Aeon). The kick-off seems to be something of a "100th monkey" type of effect. Other measurements seem to trigger evolutionary steps, e.g., ~1900 was the approximate time when half the human race no longer went to bed unsure of where it could get food for the next day.
"I am posing these questions against the backdrop of "thy Will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven", interpreted as "what the mind can conceive and the heart believes, will be achieved." Who/What defines the maturity and health in the human species? "
Oh, I'll do that if you like <vbseg>. - You seem to be treating this as a judgment, I'm just saying that we have sufficient scientific knowledge to see the basic shifts.
"Further, we are still just "discovering" through archaeology etc that our ancient ancestors were privy to and seem with great success technologies we are only now just discovering. The seas, desserts and mountain tops hold great secrets of our past, yet to be uncovered."
Of course. That's a different question from whether typical bodies had the neurological capacity to develop and use particular faculties, and whether these emerged in the way people lived their lives.
"It seems to be more that we are REVOLVING rather than EVOLUTION."
That was a popular view in the 1890s. Some of the writings from that time are interesting. In particular, they spoke of a pendulum swing between matriarchy and patriarchy (neither of which was well understood archaeologically or sociologically - but some of the writings were sincere and interesting).
"Or put another way, our EVOLUTION is a REVOLUTION."
I won't buy. Yes, we can fail and fall back, but that's not the same thing. Even with the fall of huge civilizations, the species baseline has kept on the increase throughout recorded history.
"Man as a cognitive event seems limited by his physiology, which is it is duty to transcend...maturity and health notwithstanding."
Exactly. But brain physiology has continued evolving, with significant leaps just in the last century or so. (I have a whole lecture on New Aeon Cognition that I need to hit more cities with - so far, I've only done it in NYC.)
"If our consciousness, the human consciousness mature healthy individuals of millions of years ago could defy gravity"
It couldn't. (That is, there is no credible evidence that anyone has ever defied gravity.)
"Enlightenment versus mass consciousness is what defines our species? Maya...the illusion, is an illusion, is an illusion, is an illusion, is an illusion."
Maya isn't illusion. It's the substance from which illusion is woven. And that substance tends to organize itself in neural circuits.
-
One thing to keep on your mind as you peruse through all this stuff, is to find similarities or differences between two things you wish to learn about.
For instance, Ariel and Auriel are two completely different creatures, (they do not share the same soul,). One is of Fire and one is of Air. And two different hierarchies of elemental beings at that.
Lucifer, prince of the Air, certainly had to wrap himself around the four corners with the "demons" of Earth and Water. God, especially while he was playing the part of our Fiery Set the entire time!
In dreams, I've seen "two witnesses" as Angels of Air and Fire. I believe this is why the two corners normally populated by directly air and fire archangels have been taken over by our Pillar of Lightening, our Prince. This also has a direct relation to why Air and Fire are "upward pointing" trigrams, and Water and Earth are "downward pointing".
As has been explained before, there's no such thing as "Good or Evil", there's just "Workable" and "Unworkable." If you wish to ask Lucifer for help, you should know what there is to know about Lucifer.
If you wish to invoke Raphael and ask him for help, know what there is to know about Raphael.Just as much, you could also call forth both Michael and Satan for help. I bet, (besides all the checkerboard crap you hear about in the bible,) would help you just as much as the other one would.
All in your mind, our minds, HGAs, exploded into Samadhi. The eye of the storm isn't always as calm as it looks, so be ready for beings that look and seem the same to be completely different, and for beings that live separately and seem completely different share the same soul, if not the same name as well.
Mercury-Hod-Elemental Air. -
93
Jim, I hear you.
But, given the Thelemic definition of aeon, I will still emphatically disagree with you.
“…thousands of years, characterized by vast evolutionary shifts in the consciousness of the human species…”
I don’t agree with you that the technology of our ancestors is a “different question from whether typical bodies had the neurological capacity to develop and use particular faculties, and whether these emerged in the way people lived their lives.”
Also, about the ability to defy gravity. The most you can say, is that you personally have no credible evidence; and your not having this credible evidence does not make it untrue, it only means that you have more to know.
And this is the basic point I am trying to make. Knowledge is the currency of the homo loquax. And there is always more to know. You and I (as typical of the species) existing in this time and space, are using our cognitive capacity to posit arguments… theories… facts…about our cognitive capacity. This is always a self-reflexive endeavour.
So far, we have managed for the most part to see time as a procession; the eternal now being defined as the meeting point of the past and future, notwithstanding. But the wheel is always spinning in both directions. I believe that there is nothing new under the sun, it’s all been done already. The breakthroughs in cognitive science are equally exposing our knowledge and ignorance.
Unless the means being used by our current civilization to determine the age of artefacts deemed to be older than the stipulated three ages is faulty (and they could well be); then we are way off in terms of how we are cataloguing our evolution.
And this is crux of the matter as Crowley puts it; we have set out to conquer the mind; and we must trust mercury, yet to trust him is to be sure to be deceived. We have no choice in the matter, as currently understood by our cognitive capacity. The God we are bound to is beyond all knowing.
The substance is the illusion…which is illusion…which is illusion. Yes, the neural circuits are all we have; and God is the Wisdom and Knowledge who is revealed in homo loquax through a self-reflexivity which extends and sustains being; and which accordingly, is always deficient. We know not, that we know not.
And with, Lucifer before me; Leviathan behind me; Belial on my left and Satan on my right, that is my speck of dust on the issue, before I get around to reading your cognitive piece. I have long awaited a publication on cognition by an initiate.
Love is the Law, Love under Will
-
Hello there, hope you dont mind me jumping into the discussion.
@Quad Nine 9 said
"But the wheel is always spinning in both directions. I believe that there is nothing new under the sun, it’s all been done already. The breakthroughs in cognitive science are equally exposing our knowledge and ignorance."
What cognitive (neuro)science breakthroughs are we talking about here exactly?
@Quad Nine 9 said
"The substance is the illusion…which is illusion…which is illusion. Yes, the neural circuits are all we have; and God is the Wisdom and Knowledge who is revealed in homo loquax through a self-reflexivity which extends and sustains being; and which accordingly, is always deficient. We know not, that we know not."
Interesting observation.
I am, however, inclined to disagree with the notion that neural circuits (I assume you mean neuro network in the brain) are all we have.@Quad Nine 9 said
"And with, Lucifer before me; Leviathan behind me; Belial on my left and Satan on my right, "
Ehm, have you actually done that? I mean, really evoking the four kings, physically, not just in mind, willingly and in the ritual setting?
-
@ThelemicMage said
"For instance, Ariel and Auriel are two completely different creatures, (they do not share the same soul,). One is of Fire and one is of Air. And two different hierarchies of elemental beings at that."
According to my knowledge, Auriel is a Hebrew name for Archangel Uriel, thus bringing in the element of Earth not Air. (Remember from LBRP, "...to my left-hand stands Auriel..."?)
One neutral source on the subject is this:
www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/002907052X -
It was an extensive typo. He meant Ariel and Aral.
