Path: kudonet.com!kudo20!tyagi From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nocTifer) Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.satanism,alt.pagan,alt.pagan.magick,alt.magick,alt.evil,alt.mythology Subject: Demons, Gods and Ecology Followup-To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.satanism,alt.pagan,alt.evil,alt.mythology Date: 11 Apr 1997 00:00:51 -0700 Organization: KudoNet On-Line Services Lines: 165 Sender: tyagi@bjt.net Message-ID: Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nocTifer) NNTP-Posting-Host: kudo20.kudonet.com Xref: kudonet.com alt.magick.tyagi:8932 alt.satanism:50018 alt.pagan:164384 alt.pagan.magick:2204 alt.magick:80367 alt.evil:39749 alt.mythology:27569 [Orig-To: private email] 49961019 AA1 Hail Satan! Io Pan! all text below is by nocTifer: >>>>...I have begun the contemplation of the invocation of demons for the >>>>purposes of re-energizing the old gods in the defense of what remains >>>>of the wild, for example.... >>by 'demon' I am referring here to a vast array of 'spirit-energies' >>condemned by Christians as contrary to their religious cosmology, >>deity, and social tradition. I understand that the term derives >>from the Greek 'daemon', which meant (and means to me today) >>simply 'spirit', without designation of relation to the individual >>(malovolent/beneficent). I see the value of personal assessment of these energies and discovering what one is equipped to handle so as not to be over-run by them, but to me the beings called 'dakinis' and 'djinn(s)' in Eastern and Middle-Eastern cultures, respectively, are of the same order and quality. they are much like people in that they cannot be generalized, even individually, as 'inimicable' or 'beneficent'. it depends at least in part on what side of the bed they got up on this morning and the relationship which humans (and the magician in particular) has had with them. Christians or former-Christians seem to have many problems with them in my experience. the role of 'shaitan' within Judaism and early Christianity also may be applied here -- inasmuchas the 'shaitan' is a temporary adversary, someone who tempers us in the cause of the divine, so too do I see that some demons/dakini will appear fearsome and antagonistic to me, just as some humans will. taking this into account is part of the training of the mage, and ceremonial magicians for this reason are often instructed in methods of 'banishing' or of 'agape' (resolving all apparent dualisms) as preparation for noxious encounters. >>much in the same way the 'faeries' may well have been 'made smaller' and >>'dispelled' (I'd argue that this was within consciousness and within the >>natural world which was becoming urbanized) by the invading Christian >>religious, so the old gods were relegated within overt education and >>religious instruction to the status of 'spirits' and then condemned as >>contrary to the Lord of Light and Prince of Peace (Christ). the terms 'god', 'spirit', and 'demon' have been used exchangeably by people, oft-times in order to dissuade interaction with them on the part of others. I'm not personally very concerned what was or was not 'originally a pagan deity/name', though I would like as direct a connection to these beings (today) as is possible. >>...a preliminary investigation of Demonology, ...yields with few >>exceptions a massive horde of gods formerly worshipped by pre-Christian >>peoples, some of them less often on account of their wrathful attributes >>(gods of the dead, of the night, of the underworld, of death, of disease, >>etc.), but often provided respect all the same as gods. >>...these are precisely the aspects of the pagan gods which are most >>needed in a defense of wild nature, and from a psychological perspective >>they appear to be the elements of me (relating to feelings like sorrow, >>grief, anger, loss) which are most repressed and oppressed by society >>(only Christian? not entirely). [re: 'various names-same god' hypothesis] this is possible. it is a very old argument, one often used in the justification of coercion of worship. I'm not saying that you are doing this, only that I have a bias against it on account of its historical usage within religious debates. [re: needing the earliest name of 'a god'.] why? what if we compared technology? do you want a can-opener which has as close to its initial design as possible? what about friends? when one of them changes their name, do you want to consistently call them by their birthname regardless of how they are known now or their desires in that regard? do older names (compare the flap about Vulgate vs Latin masses) somehow convey more *power* to you? as I said, this is a very old debate which I've seen within the cyberspace magical and religious community for years. it usually includes presumptions about what constitutes the identity of a god, how to go about tracing their 'history', and sometimes begins to address the comparison between Neopaganism and pre-Christian religious theology and practice (let alone ecology). it may also begin a discussion on what constitutes 'power' in ritual, why older or alien-sounding tongues inspire or don't inspire us, etc. like remnants or shells of a passing snake, I have also found a value of coming to a knowledge of the older names of the gods. however, I also find value in their newer incarnations. to me it is a continuum which may be important in my developing relation with them. I may well use entirely other names for them when I interact with them directly. I may even take names which are used in popular senses (say, "Satan"), and find that these are quite applicable to the gods as they appear to me today (possible examples: Siva, Pan, Cernunnos, Set, etc.). those gods whose energy and power would be most useful in defending Satan (wild nature). I see room for compassionate defense (showing the pain to the oppressor) as well as the more martial. there is an abundance of sweetness and light in typical Neopagan worship. I don't mind this, though I don't see that it alone will be able to stave off the human consumption-machine. [re: "#1 is also important to me."] >>...the reasoning usually goes something like: "taking care of 'the >>Earth'? why bother? if we fuck this planet up we can always move to >>Venus or Mars, or construct space colonies and seek out new planets to >>terraform. humans don't have the sense to manage ourselves, so I figure >>it is a waste of time to try to stave them off and would rather *look >>out for #1*." ...I agree with the sentiment of your assertion, but I >>don't know it to be logically persuasive to the average materialist, >>scientific, mobile urban Joe and Jane, even some who ostensibly >>worship 'nature gods'. "think globally-act locally". for this reason I have given up using automotive transport in favor of electrical and public systems wherever possible. usually the reaction I have from people on this is "sure, but it won't work for me due to where I live and work, etc.". to me this is a poor excuse, since we define for ourselves where we live and work and can arrange our lives so that we are in greater support of ecologic-change if we are looking at things from a serious, long-term perspective. it just takes some effort. in my society there is a great deal of emphasis placed on 'saving humans'. I would like to see this type of compassion applied with humans in a healthy relation (preservative of diversity and respect) with other species. too often we place human beings as 'top of the food chain' and suppose this to be an administrative appointment deserving of unparallelled honor and worthiness (this is in some measure what many organized religions see fit to preserve in comparison to materialists' bleak and neglibly valuable 'wisdom' of equanimity in the face of 'energetic physics' which you appear to support here). to the extent that I invert this I do so on account of the idiocy of humanocentrism. [re: objective perspectives and apathy] such perspectives are DEtachment-oriented. what causes apathy is when we feel that something *must* be changed but that we are powerless to assist. in such an instance it could slip into despair and self- destruction quite easily, and in part my objective is to see that such feelings in response to ecological disaster may be followed up with the empowerment of the individual in symbolic acts of suicide (those Buddhists you were talking about being perhaps a good example). what I find problematic (and this does refer quite directly to my feelings about Neopagans and my own style of Satanism) about the materialist 'conservation of energy/we'll all be around anyway' idea is that it lacks heart. I care for all the living beings who are being enslaved and consumed in the undiscisplined, lemming-like frenzy which is course of the human animal. blessed beast! tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com nocTifer -- see http://www.hollyfeld.org/~tyagi/nagasiva.html and call: 408/2-666-SLUG!!! ---- (emailed replies may be posted) ---- CC public replies to author ---- * * * Asphalta Cementia Metallica Polymera Coyote La Cucaracha Humana * * *