Hi guest! As you can see, the new Wizard Forums has been revived, and we are glad to have you visiting our site! However, it would be really helpful, both to you and us, if you registered on our website! Registering allows you to see all posts, and make posts yourself, which would be great if you could share your knowledge and opinions with us! You could also make posts to ask questions!
Absolutely!
Its because too much is too available too easily imo.
The current generation takes it for granted and dont appreciate how lucky they are. We would find old books and treasure them and drink the words, though ultimately find our way through the dark with actual practice. Slow and steady repetition. Now the youngsters just jump through advanced content and do the practice and it seems slapdash.
Like martial arts. One would spend so much time mastering basic technique that when more advanced technique came the basic technique was a part of us. Now its gungHo and its mass consumption of occult literature, without the essential mastery of basic occult principles and practices. Or so it seems..
Three things can be observed at the heart of all magical acts, be that sorcery, witchcraft, magic or as result of prayer or any other types ritual.
Mind (1) generates thought that (2) moves energy and (3) results in action.
There are many ways that this can be actualised by employing various different mechanical processes. When carefully considered, it becomes rather clear that behind all such occult-based magical acts, that may indeed often appear very different at face value, the fundamental principles at work reveal that this statements universally true. We all naturally realise how fundamental the understanding of energy is to a would be mystic or magician, as it is the expression of potential and the very manipulation of this very potential, is what defines a magical act from a mundane one.
Here's Why Energy Matters
There are only actually three fundamental states, as the alchemists of antiquity well knew and, these three act in seven ways. For each acts independently, each with the other and all together in synchronised fashion. Thus a, b and c = can act upon anything in the following seven ways =as a, b, c, a+b, ,a+c, b+c or a+b+c. Thus are distilled into the seven fundamental principles at the heart of Hermetics, Vedic Chakric systems, the seven principles of Kemetic spirituality derived from the attributes of the ancient Egyptian goddess Ma'at : truth, justice, harmony, balance, order, reciprocity & propriety, the seven principles of Middot as relates to Kabbalah, the seven principles of the Dao- Qu, Pi, Ziran, Yang-Yin, Wu-wei, De & the Dao or Tao. and the list goes on.
Though fundamentally this seven tiered system of understanding is related to the three planes of existence, three worlds of the shaman, namely: the Astral, Etheric and Causal realms respectively that represent the three fundamental states from whence the seven principles arise to begin with, it serves as an excellent way to understand the esoteric workings hidden in the occult shadow of the worlds formation.
The Causal "realm" or field of pure transcendence experienced abstractly as inspired thought.
The Astral "realm" or field of pure energy experienced as the qualities we consider abstractly as emotions and feelings.
The Etheric "realm" of field of form that we experience abstractly as ideas or thoughts.
These latter two are essentially a division of the Causal field that interact as do the twin serpents of Caduceus, Yang Yin or the spiral of Kundalini's ascent and descent between the chakras that produces the experience of changing qualities bound in adapting forms. Its all essentially the same idea presented in different ways and we call this time. with the three states representing the present, past and future, where the present polarises as the past becomes the future.
How these seven divine principles of Correspondence works through Polarity to manifest Cause andEffect as an expression of Vibration bound by Rythm that defines the Generative coupling that embodies in perfect preportion, the fundamental state of Mentalism, is yet another conversation. One that shall indeed come at a later stage. Suffice to say that these three fields of manifestation we have been discussing, that are behind this world and even begets this world, are essentially those of Thought, Energy and Form.
Energy thus stands between form aand thought, for as thought vibrates to the point that it gets expressed as energy, the very movement of that energty then then defines form as result of the effects that cause effects along the causal chain that structures space as time, producing the outcome of matter we experience as result.
The Hermetic Principle Of Polarity
When considering the cosmogony of how time and space evolve from pure thought, one can recognise that pure thought in all its abstraction started to produce vibration. This Vibration, the 3rd principle of Hermes, thus required a sense of movement in order to exist in its own right, for thats what vibration is. Vibration is essentially, mechanical ocilating waves around an axis. Cosmogenically speaking, that axis is the principle of Mentalism, or puere abstract thought that is not linear, ie Hermes 1st principle. The pattern of the oscilation consists of a field of Correspondence between the two waves- Hermes 2nd principle. Fundamentally the notion of vibration suggests movement and thus there is a definable range of movement implied. This "range of movement" expressed through the act of vibration is an actualised field of Polarity- Hermes 4th principle. Polarity is the potential expressed in any dynamic exchange of movement and is the source tapped to produce said movement in the first place, whereby the potential energy becomes kinetic energy and produces acoustic resonance as result.
Thus the polarity principle governs all energetic systems and is at the heart of how energy behaves and similarly acts as the source from whence it arises while defining its behavior. Duality is the currency of polarity and it embodies the substantial allocation of its bounds, as it defines the very process it embodies. All that new-age nonsense about non-duality is thus, from an occult perspective, essentially vomit, as it denies the nature of existence as it is in favour of adopting a theoretical ideal that is insubstantial and unobtainable while being alive. Sure there is a point where such isnt relevant, but thats not within the domain of an energetic system, such as the systems in which we find ourselves, be that physical or transcendent. Polarity reflects the 2nd principle of Correspondence and defines the Principle of Cause and effect, acting as an energetic bridge between the mental and physical states of being we experience.
The generative principle of gender is how polarity actualises itself in matter and thus carries the same somewhatly less abstact symbolic definition, whereby sometimes the one muight seem an expression of the other.
We can see how Polarity is defined as the union between the poles as a system that defines the process of interaction between these two nones.
Its mystic essence of two poles is thus a systemic reflection of the actualised third principle that defines the nature of relationship between these.
Hence the mystic character of Polarity is understood as emboding vibration of number 2 fundamentally, however its actual character reflects the vibration of the number number 3.
Below can be seen how the vedic and daoist systems treat these principles, so as to illustrate the uniform representation accross different cultural landscapes.
Yang (masculine) + Yin (feminine) = Dao (path from & to source) represent the forces that manifest the world and traverse the meridians of the body.
Pingala (masculine) + Ida (feminine) = Sushumna (path from & to source) represent the three above principles as they animate the body and the world via the nadi's.
As above so below (Hermes 4th Principle) maintains that the Dao contains within it the forces of Yang & Yin, as does the Sushumna contain within it the Ida & Pingala.
The Dao & Shushumna represent the diverse unity as considered "above" in Hermetics, as the Yang-Yin & Pingala-Ida pairs represent the unified expression of multiplicity "below"
I just wanted to say that I genuinely enjoyed reading what you wrote. I really appreciate the amount of thought, research, and effort you put into connecting all these different traditions. I honestly find that kind of thinking fascinating, especially the way you look for the underlying patterns rather than just taking each system at face value.
And honestly, I think it's a shame when someone puts that much time and thought into sharing something with a community, only to be met with sarcasm. People don't have to agree with every part of your theory, of course, but I think sharing an idea openly and giving others something to think about is valuable in itself.
You seem like someone I'd genuinely enjoy talking with and learning from. I've been exploring a lot of these subjects myself, and I'd be very happy to stay in touch and exchange ideas sometime if you're open to it. I'd consider it a pleasure to have you as a friend
I just wanted to say that I genuinely enjoyed reading what you wrote. I really appreciate the amount of thought, research, and effort you put into connecting all these different traditions. I honestly find that kind of thinking fascinating, especially the way you look for the underlying patterns rather than just taking each system at face value.
And honestly, I think it's a shame when someone puts that much time and thought into sharing something with a community, only to be met with sarcasm. People don't have to agree with every part of your theory, of course, but I think sharing an idea openly and giving others something to think about is valuable in itself.
You seem like someone I'd genuinely enjoy talking with and learning from. I've been exploring a lot of these subjects myself, and I'd be very happy to stay in touch and exchange ideas sometime if you're open to it. I'd consider it a pleasure to have you as a friend
I just wanted to say that I genuinely enjoyed reading what you wrote. I really appreciate the amount of thought, research, and effort you put into connecting all these different traditions. I honestly find that kind of thinking fascinating, especially the way you look for the underlying patterns rather than just taking each system at face value.
And honestly, I think it's a shame when someone puts that much time and thought into sharing something with a community, only to be met with sarcasm. People don't have to agree with every part of your theory, of course, but I think sharing an idea openly and giving others something to think about is valuable in itself.
You seem like someone I'd genuinely enjoy talking with and learning from. I've been exploring a lot of these subjects myself, and I'd be very happy to stay in touch and exchange ideas sometime if you're open to it. I'd consider it a pleasure to have you as a friend
Thank you so much! It’s lovely to be connected with you too, and sending warm blessings back to you!
I’m based in Vietnam, quite far from Cape Town geographically, but I’m glad the internet makes it possible for people with similar interests to connect regardless of where we are.
I’d love to exchange ideas and learn from each other. If you’d like, you can reach me privately at [email protected] It would be lovely to continue our conversations there.
And being by a Penguin Sanctuary in Cape Town sounds wonderful!
Absolutely!
Its because too much is too available too easily imo.
The current generation takes it for granted and dont appreciate how lucky they are. We would find old books and treasure them and drink the words, though ultimately find our way through the dark with actual practice. Slow and steady repetition. Now the youngsters just jump through advanced content and do the practice and it seems slapdash.
Like martial arts. One would spend so much time mastering basic technique that when more advanced technique came the basic technique was a part of us. Now its gungHo and its mass consumption of occult literature, without the essential mastery of basic occult principles and practices. Or so it seems..
You obviously put alot of thought into this coment
Though you could possibly try a little harder and possibly explain the "Gen-Alpha shorthand"?
That would make more sense..
You obviously put alot of thought into this coment
Though you could possibly try a little harder and possibly explain the "Gen-Alpha shorthand"?
That would make more sense..
I was being as polite and hoping you could figure it out. Your comment was shitting on newer practitioners because they have easier access to information than you did. I call bullshit on that attitude.
You also seem very invested in this “old school/old timer” practitioner identity, while somehow leaving out the humility to allow newer practitioners to be where they are. Strange.
Having access to every occult book ever written, every secret, every advanced text, means absolutely nothing unless someone actually practices. On that point, I suspect we probably agree.
So why the attitude toward people having better access to information? You could just lead by example.
Time in the occult does not automatically equal depth, wisdom, competence, or authority. It means you have spent time in/around the occult. What you did with that time is the part that matters.
Verbosity and elegant prose do not equal knowledge. Complexity does not equal depth. And making newer practitioners feel lesser because they didn't have to struggle for information the way you did is gatekeeping.
This must obviously be a sensitive topic for you, though you must assuredly be confused in your assertion. I appreciate that the nuanced concept was lost while you stumbled upon this over-simplified and highly assumptive perspective, imagining you understood the point made, which clearly was not the case. have you tried re-reading the comment a few times and possibly considering it a bit more deeply before jumping to conclusions?
We can all be a bit hastey when our emotions get in the way and we see what we want to, so dont feel bad, though the comment you just made doesnt actually add to this conversation in any meaningful way as its not actually responding to or at all accurately characterising what I said, while maintainting the air of pretence do do so.
But thanks for tryingyou get a bronse star for attendance
This must obviously be a sensitive topic for you, though you must assuredly be confused in your assertion. I appreciate that the nuanced concept was lost while you stumbled upon this over-simplified and highly assumptive perspective, imagining you understood the point made, which clearly was not the case. have you tried re-reading the comment a few times and possibly considering it a bit more deeply before jumping to conclusions?
We can all be a bit hastey when our emotions get in the way and we see what we want to, so dont feel bad, though the comment you just made doesnt actually add to this conversation in any meaningful way as its not actually responding to or at all accurately characterising what I said, while maintainting the air of pretence do do so.
But thanks for tryingyou get a bronse star for attendance
What did I mischaracterize exactly about your post?
Not another paragraph about me personally. Not the bronze star. Not the Gen Alpha swing and a miss attempts.
Specifically: how did I read you incorrectly when you said the newer generation has access to too much information too easily, and then followed it with: “Now the youngsters just jump through advanced content and do the practice and it seems slapdash.” That part.
Please explain how I misread those words and how that is not gatekeeping. If you meant something different from what you actually wrote, explain it. If I genuinely misunderstood you, I’ll apologize and let it rest.
Until then, you’re up to bat.
Speaking directly to the topic here, even if a new practitioner has access to advanced material and is actually able to put it to use effectively, I say great for them. We should want other practitioners to experience the magic, develop skill, make contact with spirit, and progress regardless of whether their path looked like ours.
One principle I do think is broadly useful in occult work is resistance to dogma. What works for you personally is great for you. That has very little bearing on what another practitioner must believe or how they must practice.
Even the best occult material is still guidance. It is not universal law. The more experience we gain, the more obvious it becomes that we usually know far less than we thought we did.
Eventually most serious practitioners begin modifying things anyway. We create our own rituals, our own formats, our own spellcraft, and our own ways of working based on experience.
This must obviously be a sensitive topic for you, though you must assuredly be confused in your assertion. I appreciate that the nuanced concept was lost while you stumbled upon this over-simplified and highly assumptive perspective, imagining you understood the point made, which clearly was not the case. have you tried re-reading the comment a few times and possibly considering it a bit more deeply before jumping to conclusions?
We can all be a bit hastey when our emotions get in the way and we see what we want to, so dont feel bad, though the comment you just made doesnt actually add to this conversation in any meaningful way as its not actually responding to or at all accurately characterising what I said, while maintainting the air of pretence do do so.
But thanks for tryingyou get a bronse star for attendance
"Your comment was shitting on newer practitioners because they have easier access to information than you did"
There for a start..
I was pointing out that when things come too easilt people dont appreciate them and make proper use of them. And too much isnt always better, as it makes for lack of application of basic principles before advancing.
Has nothing to do with dogma. And this comment: "And making newer practitioners feel lesser because they didn't have to struggle for information the way you did is gatekeeping" is just ridiculous really. Nobody actually did that at all. When my Sensei's told me to train basic technique more and not waste time on the jhumping uramawashi giri, I listened and paid off.. Because I focused on less. The newer practitioners can benefit from this advfice, so your attempt at twisting the facts serves no purpose. as for: "Verbosity and elegant prose do not equal knowledge. Complexity does not equal depth" We agree on this atleast and simplicity is the king. Though again, you are off clutching at straws to make your strawman argument.. I was bridging Hemetics, Dao, Vedic lore and being mindful of physics, hence words needed to be carefully chosen as inflection matters. The concepts shared are however very simple and thats something you seemed to miss. What you also failed to realise, is how readily people can misconstrue words and end up with a ridiculous word salad as you started with. Alot of words that essentially say nothing. Alot of words that say alot, thats another story.
As for : "Eventually most serious practitioners begin modifying things anyway. We create our own rituals, our own formats, our own spellcraft, and our own ways of working based on experience." - the irony isnt lost on me :-D Though I agree with the sentiment, it seems clear that some hypocracy is lurkingt in the depths and spluttering along behind that statement. As the articl;e was an organic expression of unconventional thought, the very unconventional practice you here praise, so the idrony isnt lost on your inference here made.
There's some sincere feedback.
Big Love
"Your comment was shitting on newer practitioners because they have easier access to information than you did"
There for a start..
I was pointing out that when things come too easilt people dont appreciate them and make proper use of them. And too much isnt always better, as it makes for lack of application of basic principles before advancing.
Has nothing to do with dogma. And this comment: "And making newer practitioners feel lesser because they didn't have to struggle for information the way you did is gatekeeping" is just ridiculous really. Nobody actually did that at all. When my Sensei's told me to train basic technique more and not waste time on the jhumping uramawashi giri, I listened and paid off.. Because I focused on less. The newer practitioners can benefit from this advfice, so your attempt at twisting the facts serves no purpose. as for: "Verbosity and elegant prose do not equal knowledge. Complexity does not equal depth" We agree on this atleast and simplicity is the king. Though again, you are off clutching at straws to make your strawman argument.. I was bridging Hemetics, Dao, Vedic lore and being mindful of physics, hence words needed to be carefully chosen as inflection matters. The concepts shared are however very simple and thats something you seemed to miss. What you also failed to realise, is how readily people can misconstrue words and end up with a ridiculous word salad as you started with. Alot of words that essentially say nothing. Alot of words that say alot, thats another story.
As for : "Eventually most serious practitioners begin modifying things anyway. We create our own rituals, our own formats, our own spellcraft, and our own ways of working based on experience." - the irony isnt lost on me :-D Though I agree with the sentiment, it seems clear that some hypocracy is lurkingt in the depths and spluttering along behind that statement. As the articl;e was an organic expression of unconventional thought, the very unconventional practice you here praise, so the idrony isnt lost on your inference here made.
There's some sincere feedback.
Big Love
I appreciate the clarity in your response. Some of your points I agree with.
My original reading of the words you used wasn’t pulled out of thin air. Your clarification helps, but it doesn’t erase the original wording or tone. I prefer your clarification over the original.
You drifted a bit at the end, though. There’s no hypocrisy lurking anywhere. If I take issue with something, I’ll tell you. I’m not here for validation, mincing words, or word salad. I say what I mean, and I’m generally pretty straight to the point.
I also don’t take anything personally on this forum, maybe its a GenX thing. We can fight, get nasty, disagree, or whatever else, then leave it in the thread where it belongs. Easy day.
Are you joking?
different gods? really?
Ever heard of the sky father Dyas Pita? Before Brahma and very ancient Rig Veda valley worship.. the Dyas part a soft dya sound, not that far from Zeus.. and not that far from Jupiter. Have you spent time studdying etymology?
Latin comes from proto Italic: dyeu for sky & day and pater for father. Sanskrit Pita. Dyas Pita was worshipped close to 4000 years ago plus btw. Zeus and Jupiter share etymological links..
The Persians worshiped A'hura and demonised deva, the Rig Veda valley demonised Asura and worshipped Deva. The allies of the Asuras were Raksha in India, yet were called Yazatas in Persia and were, yes wait for it, aligned with Ahura's - meaning lords.
Do you have any idea of how much of the known world was informed by the great Persian Empire? Religion, estoteric and occulty lore..? Zoroaster or Zarathustra was a later element that defined monotheism, though the connections go back further. The Aryan peoples of ancient India aka Arian or Iran peoples are all from that lineage. Yes Hitler was tripping on that lore as was theThule society he was a part of.
Who do you think tjhe gregori were? the watchers from ancient greece.. ever heard of the Igigi of ancient Sumer? the descriptions are the same oh and they both angered gods by mixing seed with humans and altering humans so they could breed.. its all well documented.
Hekate goddess of magic from Greece... Heka the embodiment of magic from ancient Egypt.. You do realise that the Greeks attribute all their ancient knowledge to coming from Egypt as did they receive their culture in its origins.?
You must realise that el was a hitite deity before it was a Jewish one right? That Yahweh was originally also such but Yah and part of a pantheon that was swollwed by yahweh after absorbing El.. El god of thunder and wind/sky Hittite pantheon also adpted Enlil, after he had been adpted by Akkadians as Ellil under that very same Akkadian name.. There is an endless list really that refutes what you said that contradicts the abundant evidence that suggests that Syncretism is a thing and even Yah and Ea have shared roots as was Lilith, a vengeful spirit from ancient Sumer that preyed on pregnant women, mens desires and children in ancient Sumer and travelled through many cultures to land in Jewdaic pantheons and used today in Kabalist practice of Qlippoth. The deities are all inherited and if one goes back far enough, start to stem from similar sources. One cant just make up their own fact, you know. Sweeping statements like you made that I quoted above need to be validated and I have provided enough baseline evidence here to show you that the deity's arent all "different gods"as you say..
Try and say Quetzalcoatl by Aztecs, Kukulkan by Yucatec Maya, Gucumatz by the K'iche' Maya, Ehecatl by the Huastec people, Ñuhu-Tachi: Used by the Mixtec people of Oaxaca, Votan in the Another name attributed to the deity in various southwestern Maya and also Chiapas regions. These may all seem like different deities for different cultures and epochs yet they are all then same bloke really.. Thats Just one continent. You do realise that hermes and all of the above share alot of attributes, and story too. They both hold the caduceus and are tricster deities of magic. Thoth too.. or Thehuti.. and of course Ningishzida from Sumer who was also Gizida of the Akkadians,k right? Ningishzida was god of snake and tree - right? and was associated with mušhuššu - bottom legs of bird and upper serpent body like: feathered serpent idea of Quetzacoatl. surely you know all this? since you speak of deities all being the same as if you are some autority? There is so much evidence of syncretism that few schollars dare to even challenge the idea, so, *I am surprised you just said it doesnt exist..
This is an area where I constantly see the Anglophone occult models as insufficient, while also useful in other contexts, so not a hard criticism.
Mesoamerican "gods" are not gods as Neopagans think of them (and neither are the Haitian Lwa, but that is another story), as Greek theoi. Nor are they Neoplatonic henads - the cosmic abstractions, achetypal patterns, sometimes beings, planetary correspondences, or universal, transcendental principles sitting atop a neat and tidy hierarchical Chain of Manifestation or Kircher Tree of Life diagram .
They are spirits, animated cosmic forces/cultural patterns, and venerated ancestors.
Anglophone Neopaganism heavily draws from Greco-Roman, Norse, and Celtic frameworks., and tends to treat deities as discrete, autonomous individuals , as divine "persons" with fixed personalities, distinct mythic biographies, and specific domain allocations - like a "God of War" or a "Goddess of Love".
On the flip side, Western Hermeticism, Ceremonial Magic, and Neoplatonism make the opposite error as they flatten these forces into cosmic abstractions, planetary correspondences, or Proclus' henads.
You can think of Mesoamerican manifestations more like the classical Greek daimon, as a mediating spirit between the divine realm and the mortal world. These forces sit squarely on weird, liminal, paranormal threshold. In Mixtec traditions, spirits are not fixed physical bodies. Nuhu-Tachi translated as "Wind Sacred Force/Spirit" from Mixtec, can manifest as a breeze, a localized whirlwind, an internal inspiration, or an anthropomorphic vision during a trance or ritual. You can more usefully compare them to the classial Greek Daimon.
So Mesoamerican thought is not so-called "hard polytheism" nor is it Hermetic Neopatonanism / Kabballah. It's dynamic and animistic, reflecting human engagement, creativity , and human needs . So there is no static "god of wind" like there is a Neopagan "Goddess of Love. " Ehecatl or Nuhu-Tachi is a localized, living manifestation - a spirt or daimon of individualized cosmic breath moving through matter. Just like we are.
They are much more like the daimons of the grimoires, but not as static characters (a recent import from modern Neopaganism ) - but rather as numinous processes, threshold spirits (daimons), and intermediaries bridging humanity and the Numious. Some are ancestor , but that is another ball of yarn to unwind.
So Mesoamerican thought is not so-called "hard polytheism" nor is it Hermetic Neopatonanism / Kabballah. It's dynamic and animistic, reflecting human engagement, creativity , and human needs . So there is no static "god of wind" like there is a Neopagan "Goddess of Love. " Ehecatl or Nuhu-Tachi is a localized, living manifestation - a spirt or daimon of individualized cosmic breath moving through matter. Just like we are.
They are much more like the daimons of the grimoires, but not as static characters (a recent import from modern Neopaganism ) - but rather as numinous processes, threshold spirits (daimons), and intermediaries bridging humanity and the Numious. Some are ancestor , but that is another ball of yarn to unwind.
I really think we can say the same about all these deities from all the world religions too, depending on when you're looking at it. At one time, each deity was a localized and living manifestation. Syncretism has happened throughout history, and I don't think it should be completely ignored. But I also think trying to syncretize every distinct chief storm god together and call them all epithets of Jupiter, for example, I think that is a mistake. Even though the Romans would have probably loved to do that. It's important to remember that most of the time this syncretism happened, it was to try to assimilate cultures that were taken over by other cultures, and at the very least it was always done between cultures trying to understand each other. It doesn't erase that these individual deities are intrinsically connected to the land and people they originate from. I think maybe it can be useful in practice, depending on your practice, but it is also an extreme oversimplification.
So Mesoamerican thought is not so-called "hard polytheism" nor is it Hermetic Neopatonanism / Kabballah. It's dynamic and animistic, reflecting human engagement, creativity , and human needs . So there is no static "god of wind" like there is a Neopagan "Goddess of Love. " Ehecatl or Nuhu-Tachi is a localized, living manifestation - a spirt or daimon of individualized cosmic breath moving through matter. Just like we are.
They are much more like the daimons of the grimoires, but not as static characters (a recent import from modern Neopaganism ) - but rather as numinous processes, threshold spirits (daimons), and intermediaries bridging humanity and the Numious. Some are ancestor , but that is another ball of yarn to unwind.
All very true. I'm just chiming in to add that even the Greek theoi often weren't the clearly defined and distinct entities that we tend to imagine them as today. They also had diverse and unruly manifestations which made their core identity unclear. This can be seen in the diversity of local forms of a given deity (is Zeus Meilichios the same definite being as Zeus Lykaios?), their multiple epithets (which were sometimes just poetic conceits, but often indicated distinct experiential aspects of the deities: Hekate Soteria and Hekate Brimo are pretty different phenomena), as well as the indeterminacy in the relationship between a deity and it's local children, which often functioned basically as emanations of the deity.
The clear biographies and definite domains, although grounded in genuine Greek material (and, even moreso, deriving from the univocality of the Roman translation of Greek religion, which was able to promulgate a single, unified state religion), emerge much more distinctly after people had stopped believing in and engaging with these beings.
This mercurial dynamism is such a widely recurring theme in the world's spiritual traditions, and one which matches my own experience with the spirits, that I can only conclude that this is just what spirits (of whatever name and category) are actually like. I've engaged with so many different traditions at this point and I have yet to find a spirit in any of these traditions that doesn't have some play around the edges. The spirits that I have found to be the most distinct and clearly boundaried in their being are very recently deceased Christian saints. This makes sense, since their existence is still tied rather closely to the embodied form of life, which supports a sharper distinctness of being and they exist within a tradition that ideologically promotes continued personal distinction in the afterlife. But inevitably as they age they increasingly reside in the mythic realm that I would call elfland and cannot resist becoming mercurial in the way that spirit nature is.
All very true. I'm just chiming in to add that even the Greek theoi often weren't the clearly defined and distinct entities that we tend to imagine them as today.
To the ancient Greeks it was much more like whenever they encountered something that inspired awe or fear, that was just “a god”?
Like, “Eek! A god arrives!”
The specific names at that time were more like predicates that could be applied to any power, presence, or phenomenon that manifested and inspired deep feelings of the sacred or terror. Theoi , as a word, can be applied to the Olympian mythological characters, daimons, and local spirits. But neopagans hate it when I refer to their "gods" as daimons. And i do not press the point. I do not wish to erase their faith/s.
Anyway, I feel about the daimon names in the grimoires the same way.
The grim trad names that many people these days have taken to treating as singular persons - in a sort of daemonic hard polytheism - are much better thought of more as categories , classes, or types, of types of spirit... as offices, I feel.
So my Guland, a daimonic ally from the GV, is more than a name in a book , and appears iin my room as a very solid-looking Lovecraftian critter - or over my eyes as a swirl of purple visual patterns - and will agree to harm my enemies or heal me. But I feel there are many "Gulands." "Guland" is a name for a type of pattern shaped by human perception of whatever he is .
“He” is Underworld / Chthonic pattern of disease and health. He “is” underworld because he is a spooky motherfucker called through chthonic rites. Not because he is part of a formal religious theology, as people like to make them out to be.
(To make it even harder to unpack, "religion" as a word we use it today is not an ancient or universal human category. It's modern, Western, Anglophone/Latinate academic construct overused by most of us who grew in the English or Anglo-American education system.)
But get to a place of more nauce - and Ii hope more inclusivity - we kind of have to unpack and get past popular Witchtok and neopagan conceptions of spirits/daimons as plastic pagan action figures. That may take a while. Jake Stratton- Kent, whom I like very much (and who made my Verum wands) is pretty much responsible for calling the GV daimons " pagan gods," which only confuses people, even while I very much support and enourage their individual practices But if they were "pagan gods" - whatever that means - then the pagan gods were really weird and bizarre.
No two cultures imagine gods in the same way, though it's irelavent. and that doesnt at all mean that syncrotism isnt at work, meaning the the same old stories, deities and fundamental framework seems to be largely shared by many cultuires, whether thought of the gods in different ways or not.
In the same way that a cow is a cow, though in India that cow is thoutht of symbolically in a different way to the thinking of a cow in USA for example. Yet it is still a cow.
Astrotheology is inherent and fairly universal in its associations, from China, to India, to middle east, Europe, Africa, North and meso American cultrures alike and is fairly normal.
The word European word "god" is doing too much work here. If no two cultures imagine gods the same way, then "god" is not a stable category. If it means everything, then it means nothing.
It also tends to introduce error and confusion when trying to understand spirits of other cultures. For instance my sweetheart takes Hawaiian dancing and studies Hawaiian "shamanism." She was originally very confused how all the Hawaiian "shamans" are Catholic. I had to explain toher that there is no conflict because Pele is not a "goddess" in the neopagan sense. She is a powerful local spirit who perceives the volcano to be her body.
In Hawaiian, the general class of spirits and "deities" (read only as more powerful spiritshere) is akua. Pele is an akua - a divine or sacred spirit of the earthly realm. More specifically Pele and her family are frequently described as ‘aumakua, or ancestral spirits who were the most important objects of ritual concern for the majority of the population. Some ‘aumakua became akua, or major 'god', (see, there is not a good translation) in some areas and is venerated as an akua by people not directly descended from her, and as an ‘aumakua' by her descendants.
So for Catholic Hawaiians venerating Pele, there is no contradiction.
But if you try to turn Pele into a goddess per the Anglo understanding, there will be issues. The categories are not exclusive in the way Western theology assumes. An akua can be a local spirit, an ancestral guardian, and a power of the land - and all at once. That is not syncretism, as you suggest. That is how indigenous people navigate a living animist reality.
-------------
-------------
Hmmm. I am fine with astrotheology. It long preceded Kabbalah, which is relatively late. Astrotheology is rooted in the observation of the heavens and the shaping of daimonic patterns over millennia. Kabbalah, especially in its Hermetic forms, absorbed these astrotheological patterns but reinterpreted them through Neoplatonic categories. The sefirot, for instance, are often placed in a hypercosmic realm, above the World Soul. But that is a later theological overlay which I reject.
In my model, the stars are not hypercosmic. They are patterns of the World Soul. 'Above' the World Soul is only the Nous and the One. There are no gods, no sephirot, no Proclian henads in that "hypercosmic" realm of pure consciousness.
Below the Demiurge - who is sometime symbolized as Saturn, The Solar Demiurge, and in the World Soul are the daimons. They are persons. They are not gods - but often look like them, not sephirot, not henads, not archetypes, and are not masks of the One. They have will, memory, agency, and express individuality. They are the Others. They are the planetary daimones, the zodiacal daimones, the decans, the elementals, the personal daimon, the ancestors, the heroes, the elevated dead. They administer fate, and reflect us at various levels, and this had many implications, and why astrotheology is also not 100% terrible here.
you get a bronse star for attendance
