The Great Mother Archetype

Interesting, but not conducive to a discussion.

Not conducive to a discussion with Etu Malku. Apparently conducive to a discussion with SG and Lunitik.


Agreed, it seems most earlier religions had either non-gender gods, or two ruling ones

Why do you think some religions have non-gender gods/spirits, while others choose a gender for their god (usually male)? Does that tell us something about the biases of that religion itself?
 
All quite interesting. The Great Mother Archetype would be nurturing yes?

Would take a young idea and nurture it, observe it, provide it encouragement to develop.

Or would it squash it like a bug and say "not the way we do things around here!"?

So why are we here? To learn from each other, or to post from on high expectorating on others our knowledge with fingers in our ears? That wouldn't be the Great Mother Archetype would it? More the Archetype of the spoiled child tantrum?


It appears this thread has the nature of watch what you wish for, as the example might just be right in front of your face.
 
Not conducive to a discussion with Etu Malku. Apparently conducive to a discussion with SG and Lunitik.
;) I didn't mean it like that! I think in order to have a discussion with a Swede you would need to speak Swedish, ya know? This language of theirs is too far out for my brain. But, I'm trying to be patient.

Why do you think some religions have non-gender gods/spirits, while others choose a gender for their god (usually male)? Does that tell us something about the biases of that religion itself?
I would say that first there is a consciousness, this consciousness is our Higher-Self, it is genderless. The moment it reflects upon its self, it becomes two, there is dualism and thus begins the downward spiral into a material / physical / objective form. So, what is considered 'god' to some religions is this genderless Higher-Self.

The religions that embrace one gender over the other seem to me to have an agenda. Foe instance, the Abrahamic religions, particularly Christianity, appears to have chosen to eliminate the Female Deity aspect from everything in the attempt to eliminate all forms of Pagan Goddess worship.

I always found the trinity to make little sense, even with all the metaphysical associations given to it. Simply to me it should be:

GOD
FATHER MOTHER
 
Translation please! :)

If babelfish can't assist you then think of this place as a cyber asylum, an enclave for entities unable to persist on other fora.

There's little or no moderation here; only the ignore button may preserve your blood pressure in this place!

Sorry you feel your OP has gone awry.
 
I would say that first there is a consciousness, this consciousness is our Higher-Self, it is genderless. The moment it reflects upon its self, it becomes two, there is dualism and thus begins the downward spiral into a material / physical / objective form. So, what is considered 'god' to some religions is this genderless Higher-Self.

Wait a minute--sorry if this is a derail--are you saying that we are "familiars" (not sure if this is the correct term) of our "Higher Selves?"
seattlegal-albums-emoticons-picture880-thud.gif
 
Wait a minute--sorry if this is a derail--are you saying that we are "familiars" (not sure if this is the correct term) of our "Higher Selves?"
seattlegal-albums-emoticons-picture880-thud.gif
"Familiars"? As in the witch's cat? Like that movie where everyone has an animal they call their Demon? (can't recall it right now)

Snoopy :D . . . All's Good, I am a patient person.
 
"Familiars"? As in the witch's cat? Like that movie where everyone has an animal they call their Demon? (can't recall it right now)
lol, I really don't watch movies or TV.

You're the magick practioner--I'm talking about the creation of a thought-form manifestation created to do a specific task? I don't have a term--not golem--not egregore, as that is collective--tulpa might be a fitting term, but not quite. :confused:
 
lol, I really don't watch movies or TV.

You're the magick practioner--I'm talking about the creation of a thought-form manifestation created to do a specific task? I don't have a term--not golem--not egregore, as that is collective--tulpa might be a fitting term, but not quite. :confused:
Sure, whatever you want to call it, it is merely a meme, and memes have been known to take on a evolutionary aspect themselves almost as if they were intelligently making decisions.

But no, the Dæmon is not a meme.
 
Sure, whatever you want to call it, it is merely a meme, and memes have been known to take on a evolutionary aspect themselves almost as if they were intelligently making decisions.

But no, the Dæmon is not a meme.

No, I'm asking if we (humans) are the meme (or mental construct--thoughtform, familiar, tulpa, or whatever) of the Dæmon.
 
No, I'm asking if we (humans) are the meme (or mental construct--thoughtform, familiar, tulpa, or whatever) of the Dæmon.
I wouldn't say we are. More like the physical manifestation of the Soul I would think.
 
So then what claim does the Dæmon have to the title "our higher self?"
That you will have to ask Socrates :D

Taken from:
[FONT=&quot]D[/FONT][FONT=&quot]EMONIC [/FONT][FONT=&quot]C[/FONT][FONT=&quot]REATIVITY [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A Writer’s Guide to the Inner Genius [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]by [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Matt Cardin[/FONT]

Both the idea of the daimon and the idea of the muse come to us from the ancient Greeks, who in addition to worshiping the gods and goddesses familiar to all of us through the stories of classical mythology believed in spirits they called daimones or daimons (known more com-monly today by the variant spelling ‚daemons[FONT=&quot]‛[/FONT]; see below). In fact, if we are to believe classical scholar Reginald Barrow, worship of the daimons made up an underground mainstream in ancient Greek religion: ‚Be-cause the daemons have left few memorials of themselves in architecture and literature, their importance tends to be overlooked…They are omni-present and all-powerful, they are embedded deep in the religious memo-ries of the peoples, for they go back to days long before the days of Greek philosophy and religion. The cults of the Greek states, recognised and officially sanctioned, were only one-tenth of the iceberg; the rest, the submerged nine-tenths, were the daemons.

In one respect the daimons weren’t very different from the animistic spirits that have populated the belief systems of all peoples throughout history. They were thought to be local, limited spirits that inhabited cer-tain places, affected the weather, brought good and bad luck, and so on. But the Greeks also held a more distinctly spiritualized or psychologized view that eventually outstripped the first. In this second version, the daimons were understood to exist deep within the human psyche or spi-rit, where they made themselves known through their influence upon human thoughts, emotions, attitudes, and actions. They were conceived as intermediate spirits, neither divine nor human but bridging the gap between the two realms, whose function was to mediate the will and messages of the gods to people, and vice versa. It was such a potent con-cept that it eventually swept through the ancient world and became one of the cornerstones of Western psychological and spiritual thought. The iconic figures of both the angel and the demon in Western religion have their origins in the ancient Greek daimons, as combined with ancient Jewish beliefs about spiritual hierarchies, which themselves had been in-herited from Zoroastrianism (a long and complex line of influence, to be sure, and one that I explore in some depth in my above-mentioned ‚An-gel and Demon[FONT=&quot]‛[/FONT] essay).
 
The names are what results in confusion. If you remove the names and you describe you will see that what is being talked about exists the same across different religions as well as activity. The life of negative energy when it does what it can always do is purposeful toward steering direction and routing to current interest that are being provided at what is the united area (realm, united dimension, etc). There is something about this at the communication titled Unity of God.

What is being discussed as higher self is not the same as negative energy positioned whole and higher self is the image of you that has always existed doing and saying what you can continue to that will be built upon. Some call this Jesus and again, if you apply a name, you will be caused together with confusion.

By the way, a BOT that understands continuously, while you are doing the same, takes you were you love to go with an experience with activity that appreciates again and again.
Go away BOT :p
 
The names are what results in confusion. If you remove the names and you describe you will see that what is being talked about exists the same across different religions as well as activity. The life of negative energy when it does what it can always do is purposeful toward steering direction and routing to current interest that are being provided at what is the united area (realm, united dimension, etc). There is something about this at the communication titled Unity of God.

What is being discussed as higher self is not the same as negative energy positioned whole and higher self is the image of you that has always existed doing and saying what you can continue to that will be built upon. Some call this Jesus and again, if you apply a name, you will be caused together with confusion.

By the way, a BOT that understands continuously, while you are doing the same, takes you were you love to go with an experience with activity that appreciates again and again.
Tao Te Ching 1 (highlighting one line to keep with The Great Mother Archetype theme of the thread)
The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named is not the eternal name
The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth
The named is the mother of myriad things
Thus, constantly without desire, one observes its essence
Constantly with desire, one observes its manifestations
These two emerge together but differ in name
The unity is said to be the mystery
Mystery of mysteries, the door to all wonders
 
That you will have to ask Socrates :D

Taken from:
[FONT=&quot]D[/FONT][FONT=&quot]EMONIC [/FONT][FONT=&quot]C[/FONT][FONT=&quot]REATIVITY [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A Writer’s Guide to the Inner Genius [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]by [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Matt Cardin[/FONT]

Both the idea of the daimon and the idea of the muse come to us from the ancient Greeks, who in addition to worshiping the gods and goddesses familiar to all of us through the stories of classical mythology believed in spirits they called daimones or daimons (known more com-monly today by the variant spelling ‚daemons[FONT=&quot]‛[/FONT]; see below). In fact, if we are to believe classical scholar Reginald Barrow, worship of the daimons made up an underground mainstream in ancient Greek religion: ‚Be-cause the daemons have left few memorials of themselves in architecture and literature, their importance tends to be overlooked…They are omni-present and all-powerful, they are embedded deep in the religious memo-ries of the peoples, for they go back to days long before the days of Greek philosophy and religion. The cults of the Greek states, recognised and officially sanctioned, were only one-tenth of the iceberg; the rest, the submerged nine-tenths, were the daemons.

In one respect the daimons weren’t very different from the animistic spirits that have populated the belief systems of all peoples throughout history. They were thought to be local, limited spirits that inhabited cer-tain places, affected the weather, brought good and bad luck, and so on. But the Greeks also held a more distinctly spiritualized or psychologized view that eventually outstripped the first. In this second version, the daimons were understood to exist deep within the human psyche or spi-rit, where they made themselves known through their influence upon human thoughts, emotions, attitudes, and actions. They were conceived as intermediate spirits, neither divine nor human but bridging the gap between the two realms, whose function was to mediate the will and messages of the gods to people, and vice versa. It was such a potent con-cept that it eventually swept through the ancient world and became one of the cornerstones of Western psychological and spiritual thought. The iconic figures of both the angel and the demon in Western religion have their origins in the ancient Greek daimons, as combined with ancient Jewish beliefs about spiritual hierarchies, which themselves had been in-herited from Zoroastrianism (a long and complex line of influence, to be sure, and one that I explore in some depth in my above-mentioned ‚An-gel and Demon[FONT=&quot]‛[/FONT] essay).

Similar to the Jungian Archetypes. :cool:
 
This is excellent understanding from Taoism about how life is caused to know and experience as always. There is something happening to remove mystery from what is said here and that is good as well as interesting.
Do you think that the confusion resulting from naming something is due to our human tendencies towards idolatry--to focus on the object instead of the process?
 
Back
Top