The Magus’s Generalizations
Describing his Way and the Myth that frames it, every Magus inevitably finds that the forces, effects, and agents he interacts with during his development can be described according to different mythological systems.
At the same time, the Magus himself may feel an inner affinity for a system that is unable to adequately explain his experience.
Therefore it often happens that, in order to describe his Way and to organize his experience, a Magus needs to borrow categories from different systems.
It is extremely important, however, to determine how far the Myth may be expanded, because if too many alien elements are included, the system may change beyond recognition, or even collapse altogether.
Therefore every Magus who maps his Way and classifies the elements of that Way must clearly understand when it is better to borrow a category from another Myth to describe an object, and when it is better to expand or supplement the meaning of his existing descriptive apparatus.
It is clear that the less an object’s perception depends on cultural or social particularities, the more permissible it is to generalize between Myths, and conversely, the wider the gulf between Myths’ perceptions, the more dangerous it is to mix systems.
We have already said how incorrect it is to draw analogies between gods of different mythological systems. Indeed, gods are not merely ruling principles; they are malleable beings who change their nature depending on how they are perceived. In other words, one and the same principle, perceived from different points of view, gives rise to different gods, whose identification is usually unwarranted.
At the same time, describing the ways Power flows, its directions, modifications, and the like rarely depends on cultural context; therefore, in such cases, drawing parallels and correspondences between different mythological systems can be highly productive, since different viewpoints may complement one another — one school may have noticed what another missed.
Put otherwise, the less personal the object of interaction is, the more general its description; the less the object engages the human mind, the fewer subjective layers its description will include.
In forming his myth, his syntax, the Magus must take this feature of Mythological systems into account. A system that equates gods of different cultures or readily mixes, say, Hindu concepts with Norse ones, will most likely prove ineffective. A system that is fully aware of its roots and draws concepts mainly from descriptions of spirit-kin, using others only to broaden its view of the objects already within it, will, on the contrary, be harmonious, and therefore stable and, quite possibly, more effective.
If you often use the terminology of different traditions and moreover perform practices of these traditions, this can often lead to (sometimes even) unbearable internal conflicts. As if the forces are engaged in some conflict within a person. Therefore, it is better, of course, to use your own scheme, the one that is closer and not mix it with others. Otherwise, it still results in something else 🙂
Everything depends on how harmonious these terms and practices are with the personal Path of a specific magician. Therefore, even the most incredible and absurd combinations, at first glance, can turn out to be harmonious and effective for someone. But, of course, in most cases, using already established systems tends to be the most effective, rather than hybridization.
Nevertheless, even in ancient times, there were often cases of hybridization of gods, even within the same paradigm. Take, for example, the case when the gods Amon and Ra merged to create the god Amon-Ra. Moreover, in ancient times, there were frequent occurrences where gods migrated from one mythological system to another.
Absolutely, and each time it was a step backwards and away from the ideas originally contained in the image of a particular deity.
Hello! An interesting article that I think is relevant to many, since any consciousness is based on the worldview of the being. An intriguing question arose for me, with which I think many grapple: as is known, each individual has their own set of unique qualities and characteristics that are not present in others. Is it possible that none of the known myths resonate with them ‘in spirit’, according to their personal vision of the world? In that case, one’s consciousness may create its own myth, linking together the knowledge available to it at that stage. The question is whether such a myth would be effective for the development of consciousness and whether it would be relevant on the Path to Power at all?
It is quite possible that a specific Traveler will have to build their own Myth. This is a very complex task, but, in principle, achievable, especially considering that there is no choice: going along someone else’s Path will definitely not lead to Power or Freedom, and if one tries to build their own, there is still a chance, albeit tiny.
But if that’s the case, and everyone can build their own myth, then in this case, the bricks for building one’s myth can also be parts of other myths. Moreover, various ones. In this sense, indeed, from the perspective of a supporter of a particular myth in a historical context, such a connection of different myths may seem ‘out of the ordinary’ – say, someone who considers themselves an adherent of the Hindu myth will treat the introduction of Kabbalistic elements into this myth with condemnation. But, from the point of view of the subject constructing the myth, everything may be quite right, since from their perspective it won’t be a mixing of myths, but their own myth encompassing elements of previously existing myths. Take, for example, Thelema. Thelema appeals, to some extent, to the ancient Egyptian myth. However, if someone were to claim that Thelema is a revival of the ancient Egyptian tradition, it would elicit, at the very least, a smirk, and at most, a call for fierce criticism from an expert in ancient Egyptian culture and magic. But if we consider Thelema as a separate myth, even though it includes fragments of the ancient Egyptian myth, that is a different matter.
Of course, but one should not confuse the concepts of ‘Personal Myth’ and ‘Tradition’. Each person may mix any myths for themselves if they find it effective, but recommending such mixing as a general rule is at least unwise, since then everyone will start mixing Myths without first thinking about whether this is necessary, whether any of the coherent existing systems suit them, and to what extent their addition is permissible without destruction. As for Thelema, it is quite clear that the development of myth is not a ‘mixing’. The Tradition of the ZS developed and transformed the Egyptian Myth, and the AA, in turn, developed and transformed the ideas of the ZS. Therefore, in this case, we have a somewhat different process. And these Traditions do not claim universality – they have a fairly limited circle of adepts, whose Power flows in the corresponding direction, but for many others, the Paths are entirely different. So it is unnecessary to closely associate the concepts of ‘personal myth’ and ‘social myth’.
The problem of the actualization of the Earth in the Myth gave rise to the One God in the Microcosm, and Polytheism in the Macrocosm.
Again, about the Earth is very relevant! =)
Because it is the impeccable master of generalizations. It weaves all existing threads into a single harmonious fabric. When you unlock this ability of hers, everything becomes simpler. No matter how different the myths, descriptions, systems are – the Earth will always find a harmonious, relevant, and working merger for them.
After all, it is She that dreams all the myths of each person, each being, each world, weaving all this into a single Dream, into a single Myth.
If you rely on your mind and life experience – you still find yourself in a bind, sooner or later. Therefore, if you really need to lay something out on the shelves, I ask the Earth to show me what is what. From the heart..) And after a while, She will definitely respond.