Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva) Newsgroups: alt.pagan,alt.satanism,alt.magick,alt.religion.all-worlds,alt.religion.wicca,alt.fan.kali.astarte.inanna,alt.magick.tantra,alt.hindu,alt.mythology,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan.magick Subject: Wrathful Gods (LONG) (was Re: Satanist/NeoPagan War) Date: 3 Jul 1996 20:04:10 -0700 Organization: Portal Communications (shell) Lines: 344 Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com Message-ID: <4rfcba$ebo@jobe.shell.portal.com> References: <4pkpee$dqu@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu| <4qo02r$nft@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> <4qosfv$55n@news.internetmci.com> <4qqdu0$1eh@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <4r1kr8$k10@pentagon.io.com> <4r295s$79k@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com> <4r2jkh$ge2@uwm.edu> <4r7jio$krh@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva) NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com Xref: shell.portal.com alt.pagan:165081 alt.satanism:46443 alt.magick:78152 alt.religion.all-worlds:8246 alt.religion.wicca:32932 alt.fan.kali.astarte.inanna:707 alt.magick.tantra:2176 alt.hindu:2511 alt.mythology:28219 talk.religion.misc:227734 alt.pagan.magick:909 kaliyuga 49960703 AA1 aum krim namah kali cdeville@ix.netcom.com (Catherine Deville): |>|...people who worship Kali or Hecate or Lilith (all three _very |>|different_ types of 'dark' goddess) are _usually_ "Pagan" and |>|often "Neo-Pagan".... I would appreciate reflections on the differences you and others see between these three goddesses as you presume them _very different_ types. I understand that their historical origins are, according to many sources, quite disconnected, yet I'm more interested in their *characters* as they manifest in Neopaganism or in comparative religion than I am their cultural deriviations. |>|"Satan" is a completely different archetype... both in his |>|masculinity and in his adversarial nature. I admit my bias in being dedicated to Kali for almost 5 years now and recently having entered the service of Satan as a solitary. however, my experience does not support the extremity of this statement and I'd like to explain a little of what I've been contemplating over the last few weeks in reflection of these gods and relationships. I notice that Catherine distinguishes within this post between 'gods' and 'archetypes' or 'constructs', and I find this quite interesting given the deities to whom these appendages are being applied (Satan appears to bear within Cat's vocabulary the latter two classifications). a great many individuals (including myself) do not accept the popular Judeochristian notions of Satan, by whomever these may have been so constructed or at whatever time. for example, a number of Satanists worship, honor or relate to Satan in the form of 'Baphomet' -- an apparently composite, dual-gendered deity of uncertain origins, related very distinctly to the natural world (albeit in unnatural configuration). also, given the traditional Judeochristian attitude toward the Underworld (the realm of the dead) and the surface earth plane (to many a veritable "Hell" itself), as well as to darkness, indulgence and destruction, it is no wonder that Satan is seen as specifically adversarial (and named (/titled?) well for this reason). and yet if we look to Kali in comparison throughout the diversity of Her appearance within India if not the world beyond this (you yourself make note of this diversity), I think we shall find that She is associated with many of these things as well, including quite specifically darkness (in Her very name), destruction (alone or with Siva) and indulgence (within the sometimes complex and ritualized vehicle of tantra). She is also at times called 'Queen of Asuras', who are the rough equivalents of demons or titans, the batch of which She has the power to put down as told in various Indian scriptures (iconographic similarity between asuras and Western demons is exceedingly similar). I would not say you are completely in error, here, Catherine, yet as Kali is often categorized as a War Goddess and even by some of Her Indian devotees is associated with plagues, diseases and natural disasters, I find it difficult to agree with the extremity of your separation. cdeville@ix.netcom.com (Catherine Deville): |...Nor did I mean to imply that worship of the "Dark Prince" precludes |worship of the "Dark Lady"... in fact those who balance the energies |come closer to meeting my definition of "Pagan" than those who do not. I tend to agree, though I might extend this beyond strictly heterosexual god-pairings. ;> in relation to this and the above, I recently was gifted with a vision upon waking which led me to consider not only the direct linkage of Satan and Siva through ancient Indo-European ties (Cernunnos-Rudra, as mythotypes if you will), but upon subsequent and brief examination of some of the texts here in the library came upon greater substantiation for commonalities betwixt them in regards scholarly literature and bhaktic practices. I provide what little I have yet discovered and ask that any others who may be similarly disposed add to this line of thought, since it emerges from my heart as an intuitive enterprise yet leads me to valuable academic resonances. I first read about a Saivite movement in India called the Virasaiva saints. their poetry is apparently quite extensive, and their often monotheistic fervency was mistaken by Christian missionaries for implications of previous Christian influences. within their philosophy I find some remarkable similarities to Satanists, with certain minor exceptions, which I hope will be clear within these few quotations: The Virasaiva saints -- unlike exponents of other kinds of Hinduism, and like other bhakti movements in India -- do not believe that religion is something one is born into. An orthodox Hindu believes a Hindu is born, not made. With such a belief, there is no place for convention in Hinduism; a man born to his caste or faith cannot choose and change, nor can others change him. But if he believes in acquiring merit only by living and believing certain things, then there is room for choosing and changing his beliefs.... Why did the vacanakaras [Virasaiva poets] (and certain other bhakti traditions in India and elsewhere) reject, at least in their more intense moods, the 'great' [that is, the Pan- Indian, Vedic] and the 'little' [the regional, folk religious] traditions? I think it is because the 'great' and 'little' traditions, as we have described them, together constitute 'establishment' in the several senses of the word. They *are* the establishment, the stable, the secure, ... in the social sense. In another sense, such traditions symbolize man's attempt to establish or stabilize the universe for himself. Such traditions wish to render the universe manipulable, predictable, safe. Every prescribed ritual or magical act has given results.... ...The 'great' and the 'little' traditions organize and catalogue the universe, and make available the price-list. But the vacanakaras have a horror of such bargains, such manipulations, the arrogance of such predictions. The Lord's world is unpredictable, and all predictions are false, ignorant, and worse. Thus, classical belief systems, social customs and super- stitions..., image worship..., the caste system..., the Vedic ritual of *yajna*..., as well as local sacrifices of lambs and goats... -- all of them are fiercely questioned and ridiculed. Vacanas [the poems themselves] often go further and reject the idea of doing good so that one may go to heaven. Righteousness, virtue, being correct, doing the right things, carry no guarantee to god.... the text goes on here to speak of how these poet-saints (I'd call them bards) sought what the author calls "'the unmediated vision,' the unconditioned act, the unpredictable experience" and how while we cannot do anything which may be formulated or pre-designed, to achieve it, we may "be prepared to catch It as It passes," and the manifestation of this preparation comes through the vehicle of *rebellion against establishment religious culture*. Yet we must not forget that this fierce rebellion against petrification, was a rebellion only against contemporary Hindu practice; the rebellion was a call to return to experience. Like European Protestants, the Virasaivas returned to what they felt was the original inspiration of the ancient traditions, no different from true and present experience. Defiance is not discontinuity. Alienation from the immediate environment can mean continuity with an older ideal. Protest can take place in the very name of one's opponents' ideals. I would assert that Satanism is predominantly a type of protest, often in rejection of moralism and doctrine, through direct adoption of the name of the Adversary. there is more, however, to the parallel. There are many varieties of bhakti; here we refer only to the kind exemplified by the vacanas. In the Northern traditions, Kabir's poems would be a parallel example. The 'great' and 'little' traditions flow one into the other, as in an osmosis. They together constitute the 'public religion' of Hinduism, its 'establishment' or 'structure'.... Bhakti as anti-structure begins by denying and defying such an establishment, but in course of time, the heretics are canonized; temples are erected to them, Sanskrit hagiographies are composed about them. Not only local legend and ritual, but an elaborate theology assimilating various 'great tradition' elements may grow around them. They become, in retrospect, founders of a new caste, and are defied in turn by new egalitarian movements.... Saivism in general, and Virasaivism even more so, has been rightly described as 'a revolt from within, while Buddhism and Jainism were revolts from the outside'.... Some Virasaivas, however, disclaim all connections with Hinduism. _Speaking of Siva_, from the intro. by A.K.Ramanujan, Penguin Books, 1985; pp. 27-36. _________________________________________________________ within these quotes I think there is ample room for comparison between Saivites and Satanists, not only due the aforementioned relationship (which LaVey identifies within his _The Satanic Bible_) between the old horned, fertility gods of pre-Christian days and the character of Satan as he appears within *Satanism* (note, not Christianity), but also due the relationship between the religious movements themselves, Satanism a rebellious webwork within a culture that is predominantly Judeochristian, intentionally denying, redefining and rebelling against the establishment's mythos and ideologies. lest you think I'm making over-extensive connections where unwarranted, and because I found it (:>), I would also mention another fascinating parallel betwixt the cultures Saivite and Satanic (I'm sure there are many more). one of the predominant and obviously central philosophic supports for the bulk of Satanism (in *contrast* to both Christianity and general Neopaganism) is the heavy focus upon Nietzsche. he, along with Blake and Whitman are sometimes called "the voice of modern Europe - the religion of Idealistic Individualism." in his book _On Indian Art and Culture_, Ananda Coomaraswamy, a respected commentator on culture and religion, introduces these three "European mystics" in precisely this way, then goes on to say; If it were realized that [Nietzsche's] originality does not consist in an uncomprehensible and unnatural novelty, but in a poetic restatement of a very old position, it might be less needful to waste our breath in the refutation of theses he never upheld. p. 140. ______________________________________________________ Coomaraswamy goes on to identify the various aspects of Nietzsche's mysticism: the Superman, his contempt for pity, the Will to Power, with traditional Indian classics, calling his teaching "pure *nishkama dharma*" and pitting it directly against Puritanism, the very essence of which, in its restraint of human nature, that Satanism deplores (pp. 140-8). |Xina's Frater Majere, for example, worships |Bast/Baphomet as the light/dark side of the Lady, I understand. I find it interesting that Baphomet is here identified with the dark side if the Goddess and have seldom heard of Hir described as anything but either masculine or hermaphroditic. I'd love to hear more. :> jsidwetz@csd.uwm.edu (The Toxic Magician): |>...most "thugees" (who presently live in India) in no way consider |>themselves "satanic." I was told and read elsewhere that the thuggees had been wiped out by the British during their oppressive tyranny of India. yes, they did make various appearances in Western media (e.g. 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom', Dan Simmons' _Song of Kali_, among others, I'm sure), and I have at times sought to identify with them as an oppressed people, even though criminal by my culture, though I've never heard before that remnants of them survived. do you have some sort of documentation or reference on this, or were you using the term in an off-hand way to refer to devotees of some manifestation of Kali? |>Kali-devotees are, for the most part, fixated on her and make no |>attempt to integrate a masculine nature into her character. |This is true, since within the Indian mythos, Kali does not have a |'masculine' side. She is, however consort to Siva (Shiva), the |Destroyer, I believe. Kali is variously said to be the product of Durga, the Mother of All, the Consort of Siva, the Great Destroyer, and the manifestation of Sakti (the power of all the gods). I'm sure it varies considerably, and yet I agree here with you that I have never heard of Her having a 'masculine' side, unless we were to identify such things as ferocity, warfare and power exclusively with the masculine (which I do not). She is often called 'the Mad Mother'. |My understanding of Hindu mythos is that it is _very_, very complex |and mulitlayered and a surface examination of it does not do it |service as the Gods are considered to all have many manifestations |(much like the original Hellenic pantheon did or, as I understand |from Xina, that the Egyptian pantheon did) ... layers and depths of |archetype that one cannot even begin to comprehend without deep study. I gather that where the Egyptian is certainly deep, it may not be quite as 'wide' (in terms of complexity at any one particular time), seeing that the religious forms and stories were apparently at times constrained within Egypt by the Pharoahs who ruled. 'Hindu' is a misnomer, some claim, due its reference to a geographical region, whose maestrom of gods and religious traditions could never be classified in any coherent or consistent way on account of its extensive variation. in this way it may be incorrect to even call it a 'Hindu mythos', but instead qualifies more as a mythological or theological complex -- a shifting, weaving, undulating social chiaroscuro. |>...there are those who came to her via Set or Satan and realize the |>rather complex nature of this egregore. |hmmm... this intrigues me? how does one come to Kali (a Hindu diety) |via Set (an Egyptian diety) or Satan (a Hebrew/Christian construct)? |And I wonder if Siva is not insulted by your pairing her up with these |"other men" ? ;-) As an eclectic who realizes that one must be |careful when mixing pantheons not to blend archetypes who might not |"play well with others", I'm curious as to your meaning in this |statement. there are absolute connections between Satan and Set within at least Western *occult* tradition (though I can't really vouch for their mythological accuracy), often surrounding the symbolism of the Eye and its relation to the Phallus and sex-magick (perhaps a relation to the Sivalingam): [in analysis of the Formula of FIAO] O The exalted 'Devil' (also the *other* secret Eye^3) by the formula of the Initiation of Horus.... This 'Devil' is called Satan or Shaitan, and regarded with horror by people who are ignorant of this formula, and, imagining themselves evil, accuse Nature herself of their own phantasmal crime. Satan is Saturn, Set, Abrasax, Adad, Adonis, Attis, Adam, Adonai, etc. The most serious charge against him is that he is the Sun in the South. [eds. note: 3. In man himself, i.e. the phallus.] _Magick_, Aleister Crowley, Eds. Symonds/Grant. p. 172. _____________________________________________________ and [in analysis of the tarot atu 'War'] The dominating feature of this card is the Eye of Horus. This is also the Eye of Shiva, on the opening of which, according to the legend of this cult, the Universe is destroyed. Besides this, there is a special technical meaning, which is explained openly only to initiates of the Eleventh degree of the O.T.O.; a grade so secret that it is not even listed in the secret documents. _The Book of Thoth_, Aleister Crowley, p. 108. ______________________________________________________ I'm unsure that these Eyes are the same as one another (thus linking Satan, Set and Siva), but it would not surprise me. Jai Kali! tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com nagasiva