THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: zazas-l@hollyfeld.org (ZAZAS-L Satanist Elist)
From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nocTifer)
Subject: Devotion to Wrathful Beings (was Astarte...)
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 11:26:46 -0700 (PDT)

980916 AA3 Hail Satan!

sorry for taking so long to respond to this, here you go.  I'll
be appending this to the review I did of "Liber Astarte" and
posting the whole thing later.  since this applies to the
Satanic I'm posting it now for reference by appropriate forums.
for those who are first encountering this private-to-public
thread, the numbers below refer to Crowley's text and my review.

# perspective on certain areas that I completely overlooked....

I'm glad you benefitted from it as much as I. :>


#> 14- again agreed strongly; be sure of the *sources* when setting
#>     about a determination of what is 'hateful to the deity';
#>     there are many false ideas about what gods like and dislike,

# When I first began to explore magick (as opposed to actually
# practicing it), I thought I could just pick a deity-form and
# claim it like a patron saint. I used a few redone rituals inserting
# the chosen name, waved my hands in the air, waved a wand around,
# and bellowed some great words. In other words, it was crap.
# However, over time I have found that something of that must have
# worked since I have had dreams, visions, and inspirations from
# that godform that have been very real to me.

it seems to me that people place an over-emphasis on style and
historical association WRT deities and their worship, usually
forgetting cultural variation and innovation based on one's
personality and background.  too often I have heard things like
"Oh, *that*  isn't supposed to go with *that* god,
you should pair it the traditional way."  I think that this is
the rough equivalent of criticizing someone's diction in an
*absolute* fashion based on popular dictionaries (which I
regard as rightly *descriptive* or suggestive of practical
cues on communications of an imperative message) rather than
recognizing that people have their own lexicon and preferred
style of talking and that this may even become unique or quite
peculiar.  it presumes an agreed objective (say, attempting to
duplicate the pantheon or liturgy of a culture from which a
syncretist may be stealing her deity of worship; analogous,
respectively, to attempting to conform to some cultural norm
in order to facilitate what is rightly regarded as clear  
communication).

by the same token I would suggest that what 'works' depends
on what one sets out to achieve.  your adherence to that which
you felt drawn is admirable, as I see it, from the perspective 
of the eclectic syncretist.  of course if you had been trying
to integrate into a specific formal tradition, then such
resistance could prove troubling and prohibitive.


# Now I wish to follow the outline of Astarte (though modifying 
# it to my own forms) to the end of forming a bond between
# this form and myself.

I think that "Liber Astarte" offers a valuable toolset to
accomplish this.


# I have my own conceptions of this deity (or entity),
# but I wish to locate more than the drivel I find on the Net. 
# Can you steer me in a better direction for studies concerning 
# a more acturate nature of Baphomet? 
# ...it's not just a mere Templaric or quasi-Santanic(tm) 
# fascination to this choice.)

my goodness, we have many commonalities!  I've been
slowly developing a relationship with Baphomet as I
understand Hir in relation to my Satanism (not in
terms of devotion, which I've already established and
intend to continue long-term with Kali, but in terms
of service).  I've collected a number of iconographs
of Baphometic (hermaphroditic, goat-headed Mystrisses
of the Wild and Willful), including from a Feri Wiccan
friend, drawn a version myself in revision of Levi's
popular rendering, and fairly avoided the Waitean
Devil on account of the bondage-enslavement motif. I
found one Satanist group who regard Baphomet as solely
a goddess, and have begun to discover the relations
between Baphomet and Kali, Baphomet and Siva.

I identify Satan with Baphomet, serving Hir, and have
found it beneficial to think of Hir as taking many
different forms depending on the character of those
who wish to establish a relationship with Hir (from
Father of Lies and Bastion of Evil that fundies tend
to strap Hir into to the glorious Source of Hedonism
and Dionysian and Ecstatic Genius which many Thelemites 
and some Satanists have discovered).

as far as studies concerning the accurate nature of
Baphomet I'd say it depends on the character that SHe
has assumed in your life.  since you're talking about
"Liber Astarte", I'm presuming that you're focussing
more on a bhaktic relationship in which SHe takes on
a favorable (rather than adversarial or dangerous
allegiance) character.

the Thelemic culture (after Crowley, possibly some
small bit of Hermetic culture beyond this such as in
Levi) seems to contain a very broad spectrum of
favorable visions of Baphomet, from the obvious
identification of Crowley as some sort of 'avatar' or
manifestation of this energy/entity (followed by a
traditional association of it with all subsequent heads
of the OTO) to the liturgical, being presented by the
Gnostic Mass, or in the writings of authors like Kenneth
Grant or Michael Bertiaux.

following on my own preferences for Baphomet (about
which you can read some in the Hollyfeld archives,

	http://www.hollyfeld.org/heaven

along with a small collection of writ by others),
I would also suggest an investigation into the more
positive aspects of the Devil, Satan, in Euro-American
culture, some of which may be found in the TOKUS
Satanism Archive

	http://www.abyss.com/tokus/toksat.html

within the Propaganda directory.

authors such as Mark Twain, George Bernard Shaw, and
Satanist expostulators such as Jeffrey Deboo (whose
work I am in the process of constructing a complete
review) offer quite a bit, as do the occasional folk
stories about the genius and power, the majesty of the
Lord of This World (I've tried to assemble a variety
of excerpts in the TOKUS Archive which are representa-
tive of this range inclusive of the favorable).

I'd love to hear more about favorable Satanic or quasi-
Satanic sources on Baphomet and/or Satan if you find any.

 
# >43- again as AC's method and my own differ slightly in our
# >    preferences of cosmology (mine less unity-obsessed),
# >    I have less trouble with the Demon;
 
# How would the concept of a god form which includes both 
# the divine and the demonic function under the conditions 
# of Astarte? 

these are very good questions, ones which I have waited to
address so as to apply the proper attention.  it seems to
me that traditions such as Tibetan Buddhism have integrated
these under the descriptors of 'wrathful' (and therefore
worthy of caution but still important to encounter) and
'beneficent'.  the Indo-Buddhist 'dakinis' are also provided
an ambivalent character, sometimes offering us challenges
(demonic) and sometimes providing nurturance (angelic).  even
Western religions contain an element of this when speaking
of the 'fear of God' or the 'wrath of God' in scripture or
liturgy.  those outside of the cult sometimes examine the
"Old Testament" (for example) and determine that the god of
that scripture is 'demonic' or unworthy of worship (so many
Christians prefer the agapic Christ than the sometimes
wrathful Jehovah that this occasionally splits communities 
and becomes a defining factor for religious sectarians.

as regards Astarte, I think I have offered something of my 
own attitude in comparison to rote slavishness and it seems
to me that a guarded service may be the best one can achieve,
at least initially, with any spirit or god whose trustworthi-
ness or reliability is suspect.  complete devotion may truly
be impossible except for the self-abandoning or self-
destructive.  look at the Tibetans offering themselves up as
supper for the demons in their "Chud" rites, for example.

on the other hand, I think truly developed and mature gods
tend to develop all manner of appearance and character over
time.  I approached Kali through Her more beneficent images
first (Parvati) and, as I came to know other sides of Her 
or was able to accept that they were safe for me to engage, 
later began seeking out Her more horrific and demonic forms.
it was during this later search that I began to understand
the beauty and perfection of these wrathful energies and,
with a suitable precaution, how they could be integrated
into my devotional relationship with Her.

sometimes Kali becomes fearsome to me (as I see Her in the
world as my lover, for example).  She has instructed me to
protect myself where I feel we diverge, where I feel at
threat to Her power or will, and begrudges me nothing in
such an act.  if I do not give myself wholly and without
hesitation, then She only wants that part of my devotion
which includes this.  ultimately I have come to the
conclusion that She wants what is best for me and sometimes
takes on very scary faces in order to get me to put up
defensive boundaries of which I am in need, developing my
strength through tempering and difficulty rather than
supporting me in my endeavors or providing nurturing love.

 
# Do you find that such a duality would be detrimental to 
# the aspirant?

initially for the weak or immature aspirant I think it could
prove quite detrimental, yes.  many times I have been told
by those of longstanding traditions that integrate these
dual characters that the more wrathful are the 'advanced'
entities, yidams (meditative foci), and that to engage these
first would be too dangerous for beginners.  perhaps it is
comparable to trying to drive a formula racing machine prior
to learning how to handle ANY automobile.  the challenges to
those extremely familiar to the conventional would be diffi-
cult enough, let alone tossing in the intensities and facets
attendant to specialized performance/bhakti.

then again, I have known people for whom the *beneficent*
spirits and gods were the challenge, who seemed to have
developed a very good relationship to demons and the demonic
but who were repulsed by the 'white light contingent' and
traditional instructions.  I have occasionally fallen into
this pole myself and only later came to understand its
limitation.

instead I would suggest that each aspirant has a combination
of hir psycho-spiritual set which integrates well with some
but not all bhaktic dedications, and that maturation will
come to include a holistic acceptance of all faces of the
divine or the spiritual world.  what we each need varies,
and comparing and contrasting one aspirant's needs or
practices with another is usually not as helpful in coming
to understand them as simply looking at each in the context
of their background and beliefs.

in my case, for example, I was raised outside Christian
tradition, so the imagery and character ascribed to Satan
was more intriguing to me (esp. after many years of
fondness of pop-metal and infernal themes in art) than
that of Jesus Christ.  my attitude is such that I wish to
encompass the poles of any apparently dual relation, and
it was more difficult for me to accept the messianic ideal
presented by the story of Jesus than it was to accept the
lascivious and hedonistic ideals presented by the demonic.

only now am I setting about a real encounter with the
conservative Christian establishment on its own terms rather
than in some form of opposition (attending active rather
than passive ceremonial forms like Pentecostal or the more
musical Baptist factions in association with kindred who are
already drawn to it).

like Dr. Seuss's Sneeches, the way we come to the
transforming process (star-on; star-off) depends on what we
have experienced previously (do I have a star?  do I have no
star?), rather than any Tried and True method of which I
am aware. 

thanks for your inquiries.  they were very meaningful to me
and I learned alot in contemplating them.

Blessed Beast!
tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com
nocTifer