Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Demons

Expand Messages
  • Bugs Bundy
    Look at it this way... Satan is the celestial District Attorney; the guy who is out to get you and accuse you of all the bad you ve done. Lucifer on the other
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 31 7:58 PM
      Look at it this way...
      Satan is the celestial District Attorney;
      the guy who is out to get you
      and accuse you of all the bad you've done.
      Lucifer on the other hand is the brother of Goddess Diana
      and was and always will be the bright morning star
      and blessed great ArcAngel.Satan would love to see you in prison;
      Lucifer can set you free.
      Bright Blessings!
      Bug's Bundy

      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jake Stratton-Kent
      Thelema All, ... cue big and fairly comprehensive fwd regarding what the poets and philosophers thought. The theory in the grimoires is partly camouflage,
      Message 2 of 8 , Nov 1, 2007
        Thelema All,

        On 28/10/2007, estevan_peralta <estevan255@...> wrote:
        > I'm of the belief that these guys just got confused as the same entity
        > long ago by poets or philosophers, and the church simply followed
        > their logic.

        cue big and fairly comprehensive fwd regarding what the poets and
        philosophers thought. The theory in the grimoires is partly
        camouflage, privately the question has been open to interpretation,
        including reference to 'pagan' thought right the way through from
        Greece to the Grimoires. All the authors cited here were available to
        Agrippa, in fact he mentions more than these. He covered his ass by
        publishing a retraction of Magical beliefs before he brought out the
        Three Books. It is easy to see that these topics could get you in
        trouble, so taking the grimoires at face value is massively over
        simplifying, that is, if you care about the theory and the history,
        which I do! ;-)

        Anyway, on with the FWD:

        < it has been asserted by authors more learned than myself
        that daimon is not used in a negative sense before Christ, but this is

        The ancients used 'daimon' (general) and 'kakadaimon' (specifically
        evil). Agatha Daimon or 'good demon' was usually singular rather than
        indicating a class. The usual sense, and that most relevant to my own
        usage, is of a being intermediate between men and gods, active in the
        Creation; but this is not exhaustive. The Greek speaking editors of
        the Septuagint used the term to indicate aerial powers, essentially
        the gods or spirits of the planets and of the air. In Isa.lxv.11 this
        is destructive, in Deut xxxii 17 and Psalms cv 35 though it means
        'genial powers of nature', 'pourers forth' and in Psalm xcvi 5 it is
        used to indicate the gods of the Gentiles, but not in a specifically
        negative sense (religious differences excepted).

        Plutarch, Apuleius and Plato all agree the daimones are intermediary forces
        between God/Gods and man, the soveriegn gods were worshipped with pure mind,
        praises and hymns, the demons with sacrifices. This is later philosophy than
        the older Greeks who sacrificed to their gods, who at that time resembled
        the demons exactly anyhow! Essentially the demons represented powers
        of nature (as did the older gods) or intelligences resident therein. Apuleius
        also speaks of a higher order of demons always free from physical
        form, from which class Plato speaks of guardians appointed for
        individual humans and of yet another class who where themselves
        deified humans, apparently including all who died in war during the
        Heroic Age (no shortage of 'fighters' then, which was a very common
        class of spirit in ancient Egypt, not pleasant characters, but often
        employed protectively). Thus when Paul preached in Athens the locals
        took him to be saying Christ was such a deified
        human or Demon. Possession by demons was widely spoken of in the Greek
        sources, and included 'prophesying demons'.

        So far so good, daimones resemble the more primitive forms of the
        gods, as the gods were upgraded and etherealised the demons filled the
        gap - but the older gods were capable of rape, murder and pretty much any other
        amoral act. However on the 'purely' negative side we can refer to Porphry (De
        Abstin. lib ii. sect. 39, 40. 42.) and Plutarch 'those demons of Empedocles
        who were cast out by the gods and fell from heaven' though in this instance
        it is not certain whether Empedocles himself used the word or whether
        Plutarch substituted it for an earlier term.

        The picture becomes infinitely more complex when we turn to the Magical
        Papyri, where demons are spoken of in much more familiar and less
        purely speculative terms (philosophers and conjurors have different frames of
        reference on such things - as we have seen right here!) There the
        term demon indicates a being or deity whose assistance is sought, for good
        or ill, and while it does not have the purely negative sense that
        appears with the Christian New Testament it is a fact that their ranks
        include some downright unpleasant characters. The term there applies
        also to entities from outside Greek culture, who were formerly
        designated by different terms, some of them certainly purely negative
        (especially Mesopotamian forms, where 'evil' spirits where known in a
        whole slew of classes).

        The overlap between Greek and Jewish culture is also a complicating factor,
        since the Greeks themselves speak of possession by demons - usually
        prophesying demons, but probably not exclusively. The Jews speak of
        possession states, usually in a negative sense, but are often speaking
        of people or beliefs which do not have the same perspective. There
        were certainly people among the Jews and their neighbours that
        'practiced' demonic possession and prophecy - and where such practices
        and phenomena are found in modern Africa there are both positive and
        negative senses. That particular form of 'insanity' met with in the
        New Testament and termed demonic possession is actually encountered in
        modern West Africa outside the context in which possession is accepted
        as a beneficial part of the religion - this is not a Western import
        but a simple manifestation of a reality that the philosophers have
        only spoken about.

        On 01/11/2007, Jake Stratton-Kent <jakestrattonkent@...> wrote:
        > >it has been asserted by authors more learned than myself that
        > daimon is not used in a negative sense before Christ,

        but this is untrue or at very least extremely imprecise.

        The idea that a suffix (kaka or agatha) was added to indicate the nature of
        a particular spirit or class of spirits is simply wrong, the real
        clues being contextual.

        further on this:

        one minor difficulty here is that Plutarch while post Christian C1 AD) has
        apparently not heard of Christianity - we may legitimately take his use of
        terms as following in the late Greek tradition without admixture from the
        theology of St. Paul. There are also a great many references in the Hermetic
        literature to Daimones of mixed nature, and there again the same
        difficulty arises of how much Christianity may or may not be an
        influence. The same picture arisesas in Plutarch however, that there
        are demons whose particular role is violent, and not always in a
        punitive fashion. That is, while sometimes violent actions by demons
        may be seen in much the same way as punishments from God, this is not
        always the case in the literature. It is odd too that many of the
        descriptions of Demons role in the Universe in the
        Hermetica accords with ideas about Angels. Thus we read in the
        Hermetica of 'Choirs' of Daimones, and of Daimons surrounding God.

        The most telling possible authority for the existence of 'bad' demons
        long Christ is Homer - nine centuries BC. Since Plutarch quotes him on
        this very point the text following is from Plutarch's <Mysteries of
        Isis and Osiris>:

        ~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~


        XXV. 1. They, therefore, do better who believe that the things related about
        Typhon and Osiris and Isis are passions neither of gods nor of men, but of
        mighty daimones, who - as Plato and Pythagorus and Xenocrates and Chrysippus
        say, following the theologers of bygone days - have been more manful than
        men, far surpassing us in the strength of their nature, yet not having the
        divine unmixed and pure, but proportioned with the nature of soul and
        sense of body, susceptible of pleasure and pain and all the passions, which
        as innate to such metamorphoses trouble some of them more and others less.

        2. For the Gigantic and Titanic Passions sung of among the Greeks, and
        certain lawless deeds of Kronos and antagonisms of Python against
        Apollo, and fleeings of Dionysus and wanderings of Demeter, in no way fall
        behind the Osiric and Typhonic Passions, and others which all may hear
        unrestrainedly spoken of in myth.

        And all these things which, under the veil of mystic sacred rites and
        perfectionings, are carefully kept from being spoken of to, or being
        allowed to be seen by, the multitude, have a similar reason (logos).

        XXVI. 1. Moreover we hear Homer also on every occasion calling the
        good variously 'godlike' and 'equal to gods', and as 'having directions
        from gods'; whereas he employs epithets connected with daimones to both
        worthy and unworthy in common:

        'Draw nigh, thou daimonian! Why so fearest the Argives?'

        And again:

        'But when indeed for the fourth time he charged, a daimon's equal'

        'O thou daimonian! what so great ills do Priam now
        And Priam's sons to thee, that thou dost hotly rage
        Troy's well-built town to rase?'

        - as though the daimones possessed a mixed and unbalanced nature and

        2. For which reason Plato refers unto the God upon Olympus' height
        things 'right' and 'odd' [Pythagorean technical terms], and to the daimons
        those that respond to these. 3. Moreover Xenocrates [an immediate disciple
        of Plato] thinks that nefast days, and all the holy days on which are
        *strikings or beatings or fastings or blasphemies or foul language
        have nothing to do with honours paid to gods or to beneficent daimones;
        but that these are natures in the circumambient [the air or ether that
        surrounds the earth], mighty and powerful indeed, but difficult to
        turn and sullen, who take pleasure in such things, and when they get
        them turn to nothing worse*.
        [my emphasis].
        4. The benificent and good ones, again, Hesiod also calls 'holy
        daimones' and 'guardians of men' - wealth-givers and possessors of
        this sovereign prerogative'. 5. Plato again gives to this race the
        name of hermeneutic and of diaconic [that is, interpretative
        andministering] 'twixt Gods and men, speeding up thitherwards men's
        vows and prayers, and bringing thence prophetic answers hitherwards
        and gifts of all good things. 6.Whereas Empedocles [494-434 BC] says
        that the daimons have to amend whatever faults they make, or discords
        they may strike:
        'For aethyr's rush doth chase them seawards; as sea spews them on
        land's flat; and earth into the beams of tireless sun; and he casts them
        again into the swirls of aethyr. One takes them from another, and all
        abhor them'

        - until after being thus chastened and purified they regain their
        natural place and rank.

        XXVI 1. Born from the self-same womb as these and things like them,
        they say, are the legends about Typhon: how that he wrought dire deeds
        through envy and ill-will, and after throwing all things into confusion and
        filling the whole earth and sea as well with ills, he afterwards did make
        amends. 2. But the sister-wife of Osiris who upheld his honour, after she had
        quenched and laid to rest Typhon's frenzy and fury, did not allow
        forgetfulness and
        silence to overtake the struggles and trials he had endured, and her own
        wanderings and many deeds of wisdom, and many feats of manliness; but
        intermingling with the most chaste perfectionings images and under-
        meanings and copies of the passion she then endured, she hallowed at one and
        the same time a lesson of religion and consolation to men and women placed in
        like circumstances. 3. And she and Osiris, being changed through virtue
        from good daimones into gods - as were subsequently Heracles and Dionysus -
        possess the dignities of gods and daimones at one and the same time, fitly
        combined everywhere indeed but with the greatest power among those above earth
        and under earth.

        ~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~ ~*~ ~*~~*~

        and so may ye all



        --- End forwarded message ---
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.