Gnostic Demiurge

Manicheism

Here is a doodle I made. I need to find out more about Manicheism which is an Iranian/Persian version of a Draco-Gnostic mythos. I just made up the term "Draco-Gnostics" to refer to Gnostic sects that hold the snake in high esteem; the Ophites, like I've mention, used the snake in a Eucharist ceremony and the Manicheism believed Jesus to be the incarnation of the Great Serpent (aka God) and were heavily inspired by Persian mythos. The Manicheans were also very Dualistic, on par with other Gnostic sects and Zoroasterism.

Also I'd like to explore how the Bacchus Cult influenced the Ophites because their Snake Eucharist was similar to a Baccuhusian ritual.

Also apparently the first mention of an Oracal ever in recorded history was by Virgil in the Aneaid where he mentions a priestess of Ob (or Aub) in the Canaan. Aeneid. Virgil. p. 46, &c, Worship. Dean. p 89 &c. Deane argues that אוב, in Leviticus chapter 20 verse 27, which is typically translated as "hath a familar spirit" or as a "ventriloquist" is most correctly translated as a "Priest/Priestess of Ob". I still need to go through some various Bible translations and check this out and cross check it with some Biblical commentary. Rashi would be the easiest to look up.

Also Manichism was influeneced heavily by Buddhist ideology and it is said that Mani reached Parinarvania but when used in the Manichaean it has a different context than with the Buddhist ideas.

And that's all I have for now.

Snake Worship and the Bible

I'm putting this stuff in this blog so I can refer to it later as a springboard of ideas.


"Worship of the Servent" chapter 1: http://www.sacred-texts.com/etc/wos/wos04.htm#fr_143

Things to look up and cross source:

HIVITES - Canaanite serpent worshipers (May have influenced story in Second Kings about Nehustan). Mentioned in Genesis chapter 10 in the Table of Nations. Also mentioned in Deuteronomy chapter 7 "the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nation". Also mentioned countless other times especially in Joshua.

Baalim - term for Israelites that secretly praticed Serpent Worship. May term "baalim" is plural form of either Baal or Bel which are both Canaanite gods.
Ophites- Οφῖται - This is just the greek term for a snake worshipper but refers to a couple different specific groups when used in context. Epiphanius uses this term when he describes a sect of Heritical Christian Sect.

""the Ophites sprung out of the Nicolaitans and Gnostics, and were so called from the serpent which they worshipped... The Ophites attribute all wisdom to the serpent of paradise, and say that he was the author of knowledge to men... They keep a live serpent in a chest; and at the time of the mysteries entice him out by placing bread before him upon a table. Opening his door he comes out, and having ascended the table, folds himself about the bread. This they call a perfect sacrifice. They not only break and distribute this among the votaries, but whosoever will, may kiss the serpent. This the wretched people call THE EUCHARIST. They conclude the mysteries by singing an hymn THROUGH HIM to the supreme Father. " Epiph. lib. i. tom. 3. p. 268, &c.

Hezakiah and Nehustan

Thought this would be an interesting topic of discussion. How in Exodus chapter 32 while Moses is getting the Decalogue, or Ten Commandments, the Israelites are activly turning their jewelery into a gold calf and worshipping it, breaking the first two commandments. Of course, as most of know and have seen the reinactment by Charlston Heston, Moses angerly throws down the tablets, has a fit, destroys the calf, grinds it to powder, throws it in a river and forces the Israelites to drink it.

However after God tells him not to make any idols, not even of God, he tells Moses to make a snake staff to heal snake bites in Numbers chapter 21. But as we learn from 2 Kings chapter 18, Hezakiah broke the snake staff because people were starting to burn incents for it and called it Nehustan, as if it were a god. It became an idol. (in my imagination I can't help but imagine Hezakiah grinding it up and throwing it into a river like Moses had done)


Even more ironically is that God tells Moses to put golden cherubims on the Ark of the tabernacle. And despirte the popular version of "Cherubs" we have today which are little chubby angels:

Some scholars think that cherubim, as understood by the original audience, would of more likely resembled a wingled lion or bull with a human head:



which makes chapter 32 seem even more ironic. What exactly is the Bible's stance towards graven images? I'm defintly not sure but I do collect Batmobile minitures.

Is there a lesson to be learned from all this? Probably but you'll need to find somebody that cites their sources if you're looking for something with that deep of a meaning.

Satan and Lucifer: two differnt beings

Lucifer and Satan traditionally the same being? I disagree.

Last month something sparked my interest in the figure of Satan/The Devil. It's been a pretty hard task for me to shift through all the stories and references found in the Bible, the Christian New Testament, and Apocrypha.
For the purposes of this post I'm just going to focus on Lucifer and Satan.

The characater of Lucifer is referenced in the book of Isaiah chapter 14 and the myth may also be referenced in the Ezekial chapter 28. Both times they're making paralleling to an Earthly king who's about to experience a fall. Since this characater is not clearly introduced or given his own background story in the canone it's almost a safe bet to say that they where drawing from an oral tradition about an Angel who has something to do with the morning star, Venus, which is where we get the name Lucifer.
Isaiah chapter 14

Quote:

12How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: 14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. 15Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Now the story that one can piece together from these references is that this Angel rebelled against God and is then cast directly into Shoel, the underworld, which is one of the main differences between Lucifer and Satan; where they get banished.

Now let's talk about Satan. I'm sure most of us know and appricate this characater's work in the book of Job. He's not given an origin in this story.

In the Christian New Testiment there are passages which give us a background story for Satan. In Luke Chapter 10 Jesus says "I saw Satan fall like lightening from heaven." And in Revolations 12 it says that Satan was cast out heaven and sent to Earth. The idea that Satan goes to Earth and not Shoel is also found in other non-canone texts.

Also in the apocrypha Vita Adae et Evae (Life of Adam and Eve) we're given a very clear cut description of how and why Satan was cast out of heaven (for refusing to bow down to Adam). And in the apocrypha 2 Enoch we're told very explicity by God himself that Lucifer was thrown out of heaven for trying to overthrow Him, not for anything having to do with Adam. And even though these stories are just apocrypha/pseudoapoocrypha that doesn't really deminish their value at tracing a myth. And please, please understand that I use myth in the neutral sense to mean a story.

This are kind of made fuzzy by the phrase in second Corinthians chapter 11 about how Satan can transform himself into an angel of light. There could be some confussion about this passage and trying to equate Satan to Lucifer, but Satan's ability to look like an angel of light is simply an alagory about liars, which is what that entire first half of the chapter is about. Besides we already know from Isaiah that Lucifer went to Shoel, the underworld, and thus would have no dealing with humans in any way what so ever.

On a note of tracing this myth down to it's origins (which is not my goal in this post) there is a pretty neat little trail of similar stories surrounding rebelion of Lucifer and Satan, Rahab the angel/prince of the sea, the rebellion of the water (from when God seperated the upper and lower waters in Genesis), the personification of the firmament from Genesis in the book of Ezra, and the Babylonian story of the god Marduk slaying Tiamat, the personification of water and splititng her body as land to create the Earth. One really interesting difference in that little chain is that Timat the Babylonian goddess is female and Rahab the angel is male/masculine. And I'm next to positive that Zoroasterism mixes into the Christian sides of these stories too somehow. (All of these links of course beings ones I've read and discovered in other sources, I'm not claiming I'm smart enough to put all these pieces together).

Lucifer rebeled on the second day of creation (before humans where ever created- Enoch chapter 29) and Satan rebeled on the 6th day of creation (because of Adam - Vita Adae et Evae Chapter 13)

Second Book of Enoch Chapter 28 verse 4 to Chapter 29 verse 4 (God speaking)
Quote:

4Thus I made fast the firmament. This day I called me the first-created. Chapter 29 1And for all the heavenly troops I imaged the image and essence of fire, and my eye looked at the very hard, firm rock, and from the gleam of my eye the lightning received its wonderful nature, which is both fire in water and water in fire, and one does not put out the other, nor does the one dry up the other, therefore the lightning is brighter than the sun, softer than water and firmer than hard rock. 2And from the rock I cut off a great fire, and from the fire I created the orders of the incorporeal ten troops of angels, and their weapons are fiery and their raiment a burning flame, and I commanded that each one should stand in his order. 3And one from out the order of angels, having turned away with the order that was under him, conceived an impossible thought, to place his throne higher than the clouds above the earth, that he might become equal in rank to my power. 4And I threw him out from the height with his angels, and he was flying in the air continuously above the bottomless.

Lucifer isn't named in here but the notion that it's Lucifer (or even somebody besides Satan) is because this characater wants to place his thrown higher than God, not refuse to bow before Adam. Also this fits in exactly with the analogy in Isaiah chapter 14 "Instead you are brought down to Sheol, to the bottomless pit".

Vita Adae et Evae Chapter 13 (This is Satan Speaking to Adam)

Quote:

2 from that place. When thou wast formed. I was hurled out of the presence of God and banished from the company of the angels. When God blew into thee the breath of life and thy face and likeness was made in the image of God, Michael also brought thee and made (us) worship thee in the sight of God; and God the Lord spake: Here is Adam. I have made thee in our image and likeness.'

Of course both of these books didn't make it into the canon but that doesn't diminish their value as far as knowing what people of their day thought. The idea that Satan is different than Satan can be made strickly using canon material, as I think I did earlier)
If you made it to the end of my post PLEASE note that I've only scratched the surface of this topic. What do you think?

No Self

It's hard for me to totally wrap my brain around the no-self concept but I've thought of this example:

DPI, dots per inch. When you print a picture of a person out of a printer when you look at the picture and you see a person. However if you look through a magnifying glass you see that the photo is really just thousands of little dots. The idea that all those dots combine into one thing is an illusion, so too is the idea of an "I" an illusion.

That example is somewhat limited though because it doesn't really demonstrate the idea that the dots are constantly changing, so to further develop my example imagine that not only is the picture made of dots but that the dots are also fading. The dots are like all components that make up "you" they're constantly changing and they're not connected. There's no part of the picture, or you, that's the same from one microsecond to the next, so how is it logical to say that the picture from the printer at 4:00 is the same as the picture at 5:00? All of the dots have faded, they've changed.

The picture has no self no atman, it's just a group of dots, and those dots are constantly in flux.