I prefer to view the gods as unique and individual personalities. To see them as anything else just feels kinda dumb. Sure, there are gods who hold some similar domains, but you can see in the myths that they are different people. For example, Hermes, Thoth, and Odin. Below are the way I would describe each of these gods.
Hermes feels like the knowledgeable big brother. He tutors you in school, shows you how to drive, helps you make friends, and teaches you different things. However, he plays pranks, subverts authority, and even offers to teach you that as well.
Thoth feels like the stern teacher and father. He demands excellence, and is strict in how things are to be done. But he isnât abusive. He tries to keep you on a straight and narrow path because he knows how deviating from it can go. So, he tells you cautionary tales to keep you out of danger.
Odin feels like a grandfather who in appearance is very kind and jovial, but has lived long and explored many places in his life. Including the darker corners of the world. He is strong, cunning, and can be relentless when pushed. All because he has chosen to walk a path few travel. And heâs willing to teach you to be as strong and cunning. But like Thoth, he demands excellence.
These are not three different faces of one being. They are three different entities with their own unique personalities, values, and positions of reasoning that simply share a few characteristics in common.
Itâs because a lot of people want the particular imaginary friend they happen to worship to be the one and only. Iâve always viewed it as similar to the playground âmy dad can beat up your dadâ mentality. Itâs basically just monotheism in another guise.
So many worshippers of Lucifer, for example, like to claim that older gods are really just masks of him because they want to tie their favourite imaginary friend to ancient pantheons that predate his actual historical creation within the religion of Christianity. Itâs another example of the hypocrisy that is prevalent in the Left Hand Path, because it is exactly what Christians do when they say that all other gods are really just emanations of their One True God. â˘
Azazel is quoted in the Book of Azazel as saying, âif every one of us stood upon the surface of the earth our numbers would block out the sun.â Itâs just plain silly to assume that the small handful of gods that we have known throughout human history are the only game around.
I think this is inherent in our species. There is a tendency to classify things as equal based on our experiences. Perhaps one of the reasons for this (besides the existence of our subconscious that seeks to save brain energy by restricting the total conscious) be the fear of the different by itself.
Since any other entity âwould be the sameâ just in other forms, therefore, they wouldnât have to worry about learning that entityâs likes and dislikes. And with that, all fear of the unknown and the fear of new things they donât fully know, would be gone
Then that would be like me offering you an apple when you really want an orange, just because I like apples and my friends like apples. Though realistically, I prefer oranges.
Idk, I feel as if reducing all deities to basic archetypes is just dumb. Thatâs like taking real people and reducing them to stereotypes.
I mean, taking away a godâs individual identity is like saying everyone from a particular genre of music is just the same as the other. âYou see one country singer, youâve seen them all.â Sure, itâll make sense to the person outside of that musical genre, but for an actual fan it would be pretty ignorant and insensitive. But the non-country fan either doesnât care or doesnât understand the reason why that person is upset because they only see through their perspective.
On a spiritual level, reducing gods to archetypes takes away the mystery of them and leaves as spiritually devoid of meaning.
By that logic, reducing 7+ billion people to 12 astrological signs is also dumb. Psychology as a line of studies becomes dumb too. Karl Jung who initially presented us with that theory is probably a joke to you too?
I personally believe that nowadays there are too many people who know better whatâs right and whatâs wrong based on the way they do things. You mention that you âdonât understandâ but have yet to pose a single question, instead going on with self-righteous preaching on how such a personal and intimate thing as magic is not done correctly by others just cause you âfeel likeâ it.
The only ârightâ way to perform magic is the one that works. Period.
If this particular system doesnât work for you, find another one that will.
There are lots of different traditions and systems of magic in the world. We might not even be aware of the vast majority. And they perfectly exist and work regardless of your or somebody elseâs personal preferences.
I donât believe in astrology or the Carl Jung diagram, but I do think they have a place in magick and literature/marketing. I donât think theyâre good for determining someoneâs ability or character.
To me these charts seem very strange too, I think thatâs a need that human beings have to âbe cataloged/commandedâ⌠I think itâs because these diagrams end up unintentionally attracting people because of psychological principles like Identification and Relief Valve. At the end they become real for reasons of the collective subconscious.
When I say that I donât believe in them Iâm talking about of not believing in their âsourceâ (a.ka origins). I believe in YHWH, but not in his origin/narrative, because some important details are lost when perspectives are distorted. And look how interesting it is that, even though these narrative distortions happen, theyâre what keep some things alive.
Some spirits in Goetia were probably gods of âpaganâ civilizations, and were classified as perverse and evil creatures by religion. But it was because of this distortion that many came to know them and understand their true nature.
And I, in the same way, believe in astrology and in the theory of Carl Jung. But I donât believe in its totality, since in Jungâs time psychology was still in its development and astrology was exactly what you said (and that I believe is true), it is a divination instrument just like the tarot (it wasnât a Book of Life that dictated what âenergiesâ influenced you.).
Metaphysically, when deities are linked together, whether through marriage, joining of names or some other way, it is a symbolic representation of the two forces joining together and working together.
For example, to take Amun and Ra and join them as Amun-Ra is a symbolic representation of the two Gods working in concert, as one. Amun was the hidden light, and Ra was the visible light. When you join them together, you now have the hidden and visible in unity and ultimate power. Deeper, Ra represents consciousness and Amun represents sub conscious, so it is a unifying of these two minds and the power they have, working together to create our realityâŚand Amun-Ra was the supreme creator of the macrocosmic reality.
The post is about people who claim that some entities like Mercury are other forms of Lucifer or whatever entity. Basically, people saying that God Y = God X.
But I like your explanation of how the Linking Bond between entities represent.
The Odin/Mercury link is the most wft association. Just read mythology and you realise they have so many little in common.
I believe the general idea of âThe Universe is mentalâ or âAll Is Oneâ tend to push people to find association.
That being said, some âweirdâ associations exists as history proved it⌠Cernunnos/Mercury, Pagan goddesses mixed to the Virgin Mary, Michael/Ra, Selene/Gabriel (from the Greek Papyrus)
I understand your stance but a concept Iâd like to propose is âaspectsâ, the way I understand it is these entities have numerous name tags.
Now these name tags donât discredit your personal experiences with these entities, or the way that you perceive them. One thing that I would like you to consider when it comes to different Gods/Goddesses being linked together is the fact that itâs not uncommon for them to have a number of different names that they go by.
For example Belial is an Infernal King, but after the Solomon myth which states that after his release from the brass ring that he âwent out to be as Gods to the peopleâ along with Asmodeus and Balberith.
One name for Belial is âBaccusâ, which is also one of the names for Dionysus who in his own myth is said to have traveled to India with his Maenads - "Raving Ones".
Another is Abaddon who also goes by the name of âApollyonâ - which is Greek for the âDestroyerâ, which is a shared name with the Greek God Apollo.
Itâs my belief that the demons we work with now did evolve with the times, and in many ancient cultures not only was it not uncommon for these beings to travel but also adapt to the culture of the area they were immersing themselves in - hence my mention of name tags. Itâs my belief that they adapted to the needs and even in certain cases, Iâd say the perceptions of the people.
I believe this is because these entities share knowledge and abilities such as rhetoric and charisma. Unfortunately, some more strict religions prefer their adherents to remain immobile in the face of reason, dubbing the act of receiving and applying knowledge âlibertinismâ. That, I believe, explains the similarity between defamed entities.
What is your opinion?