Art: Audrey Melo
In my book Invisible Fire (2010: Capall Bann) I stated in the preface to the book the following: “The mysteries of Seth will prove to be provocative for many children of the modern spirit... The spirit of the modern world is marked by a high degree of individualism”. I summarized later on page 162 the objective with this book as it transforms into practice in the following way:
“This is ultimately the goal with all these practices. Through Wisdom the mystery is revealed and man is drawn one step closer to the Promised Land and the return to the Golden Age is enabled. By Wisdom revealed man can understand how to approach the world of matter and use it as a medium for ascent and thus bring the Divine Kingdom upon Earth and in this way restore the original flow of the axis mundi.”
This is of course a provocative proposition, as I stated. I just did not know exactly how the provocation would take shape in the passion rid soul of the critics. I thought my attacks upon the exaltation of individualism would be what gained the hardest toil – and in some way it is, but by a through a detour of sorts, as I see my comments on the modern luciferian tradition was perhaps the most pill to swallow. But before that I need to clarify my understanding of modernity in light of tradition as I see them as defying each other in principle and virtue.
Individualism is most important for the spirit of modernity. We live in a world where our ambition and desire can make any material possibility real. In a way, modernity tells us to look inward and search solutions in what is made, within creation while it exalts our ego as supreme. Tradition proper is concerned with the cosmic belongingness of the individual, about understanding fate so we can master Her – and through this achieve abundance, love and peace of all forms. Tradition proper focuses on who you are and how your substantial being can flow into the world and bring abundance to you and harmony to the world. So, for me modernity represents an inversion of values where strength and ambitious pursuit in the world of matter is seen as superior to wisdom and truth. I see modernity and thus by extension any modern luciferian tradition as profane. And what do I mean with this distinction? I simply mean that a person of a luciferian inclination tend to be light seeking, to be infatuated by the light as it reveals sparks of truth, quite different from someone who wants to solidify this spark into a modern tradition of theosophical succession, which is yet again a product of modernity by Blavatskian avenues.
One critical comment that puzzled me was concerning my lack of understanding of Cain’s pivotal role in relation to Seth. The critique suggested my complete failure in understanding this mystery. What this critic is speaking of is the transformation from the Man of Fire (Cain) to the Man of Light (Seth). We are speaking of a transmutation of the fire to a form that unites the left and right into a focused centre of hot light of being. To use a well known symbol, the caduceus, Cain is the left, Abel is the right – but Seth supports the staff itself, so there can be no separation and the brothers are instrumental in the unification of a higher unit that contains all as One. From this neo-platonic philosophy/theology I based my work upon it has been further been suggested that I see the ‘fallen angels’ and Cain as evil. If my discourse upon fall came across as ‘evil’, I beg apology here. My intent was to present this mystery in light of necessity. Sometimes when we see what we need to and act upon it can be interpreted as ‘evil’. But in reality ‘evil’ is a subtle factor in the principle of poison that needs ‘will’ and/or ‘conditioning’ to be released as I see it. To do what is necessary is a constant theme in the book when I discuss the implications of the fall. From the perspective of modernity the fall is exalted as Cain’ murder, we hail transgression for transgressions sake. But I ask, to what ends? Transgression is an option every time we are in the crossroad. Transgression is a verb, not a quality. As such Cain, as Judas Iskariot, as Mary Magdalena, as Salomé, as Odin does what is necessary within a give mystery. I asked myself; what are the consequences of Cain’s murder and transgression, what is the greater purpose - and a new quest started.... This opened up a new dimension of mysteries, which I recognized as the soothing heat and light of Seth, the origin of Cain’s fire. As I write in ‘Invisible Fire’:
“When Cain murders Abel this is caused by fire, but not necessarily the fire of rage. For instance the rune naud also expresses the principle of fire, but it is the need fire that carries the burden of duty coming with opening the hand of Fate” (Invisible Fire: 24)
Later in the book I am exposing the following in my discussion of Cain in the traditional theosophy of Elus Cohen:
“Reintegration was made possible by Abel and Cain, as a metaphysical necessity. Abel by giving up his blood and breath re-enacted the consecration of the Earth and made it holy. As such Abel reinstalled the truth and Cain, like Iblis, was the one appointed to affirm the truth. By necessity of sacrifice the anima mundi is released from its severity and through Seth mercy.” (ibid: 142)
I can’t really see how these meditations upon necessity and Fate condemn Cain as evil or how this leads to any suggestion that I am disregarding Cain’s importance in this mystery. It is only the children of Cain that can find and return to Seth, who is at the same time origin and continuation. This is the understanding I have of Cain, master of the accursed blood and what he gave to me – and upon this I believe no one should challenge.
My problem occurs when this mystery is subject for solidification and not transcendence. The transcendence finds release in the greater Sethian mystery and its extreme profane solidification in vulgar an immature Satanism, where the subdued individual in a fight for survival, full of hatred, usurps a pathetic position he or she deems superior. I have realized that my perception of these matters are tricky as i do not condemn everything, but just want to understand it s place. I believe that whatever is, has a meaning, great or small. Every person you meet and every situation you confront has a meaning, great or small. The individual or the situation will persist and invade until you figure out how to understand why it makes a part of your life. I see Cain very much like this fire. It is a fire that can strike to the ground in hatred and anger and elevate itself to the realms of understanding – both products of his severity. A modern tradition, born by the spirit of modernity and rebellion, tend to exalt the anger, while in a traditional context Cain is the one that exalts the fire into sense, from and understanding. This is how I see the work of the divine blacksmith; he paves the road for understanding. But as our world is of crossroads, on the other side of choice we can chose intolerance and hatred while condemning the understanding he provides. And it is here we enter into my critique on the modern luciferian tradition at large and question if this is not a child of ill theosophy and the spirit exposed by Otto Rahn. I question if this Germanic superhuman philosophy is not a tormented cry from suffering beings (a beautiful but erroneous consequence of Weltschmerz that I embraced and saught to understand) instead of portents of a tradition in its archaic (Platonic) sense. I find it problematic to celebrate material strength on its own accord. I see this brings only malice and hatred – and I do not want to accept a world of such ideals. I see envy, anger, poison, hatred and all this as enemies of what is good and true and paradoxically this is Cain’s crossroad – to understand the principles of severity or become its slave. I truly believe we are living in Kali Yuga, the age of dissolution – I don’t see this as ‘evil’, but as a fact that we need to embrace with understanding and not brute force. I write:
“The rebellion of the apostate angels thus represents an inversion of the natural order, where the higher falls into the lower by a misdirected eros or love. The rebellion itself was intrinsically linked to the abandonment of destiny in favour of adopting an inferior perspective and a nefarious condition.” (IF:127)
In this I present the fall as a crossroad and as a constant challenge. We can fall at any time in our decisions and in our passions, but only a fool persists in error. The crossroad invites a chance to ascend and understand the current corruption of the matter, not to worship it.
As I say: ‘the Cainite disposition, as it manifests in contemporary humans is one of restriction and heroism Cain went out to build cities and as such Cain in himself represents bondage and conformity to manifest law’ Manifestation invites to understanding solidification and matter as superior to the ideas that made them possible.” (IF: 28)
So we should not mistake the challenge for its essence. My problem with many modern expressions of luciferianism is exactly this unbalanced perspective where strength, might and conquest tend to be seen as superior to any other quality. Many modern luciferians have distorted the powerful mystery of the twins and the first murder and in the glorification of the blade comes the condemnation of Abel – herein lies a dualism that makes evil possible. If we on the other hand aim towards understanding the unifying metaphysical principles involved in the drama we will understand matters on a higher octave glorifies the blade while cursing the. I hold, as I wrote that:
“True tradition is timeless; it is a legacy that speaks of the cosmic laws and the archetypical as the stable poles of all manifestation” (IF: 12)
It is from this perspective I question if the modern expressions of luciferian traditions are really traditional, since I see dualism as presenting a theological and traditional error, as I comment:
‘Luciferian Tradition in contemporary occultism tends to focus on divinized misanthropy and exaltation of the left serpent of the Caduceus’...the left side represents poison, power, resistance and strength’ (IF: 63)
Our modern western world is designated by a profane, materialistic perspective and ideas and if these values are allowed to colour our tradition I at least suggest that this opens for corruption of the golden seed and we need to ask if the tradition in question can be viewed as such upon metaphysical premises.
We can approach Lucifer within the greater metaphysical scope of tradition where his powers consist in the transmission of sparks and light and thus he holds a virtue similar to Phanes or as the instigator of a tradition, which will then set him apart from everything – and naturally the devotees of such cult will be infected by the illusion of antagonistic division. I am of the opinion that ‘a Luciferian tradition’ is solely wishful thinking and clearly an idea of a highly modern origin. I find it far more healthy when a person is labelling oneself as ‘luciferian’ or having a ‘lucferian inclination’ or makes room for this angel in its myths. This will enable us to embrace his form and function by traditional forms of transmission rather than insist on Lucifer being subject for a traditional cult that opposes creation. But in the end of all, I invited to an enrichment of perspectives, but as perspectives are truly Saturn’s gold we can perhaps better understand the fight between matter and spirit. The Luciferian crossroad invites us to either be set aflame in light so we can overcome Fate or accepting Hubris as king of our Fate.
Let me add to this that I am a Cainite who sees Our Master with a purpose, and if this makes me a devil – it also makes me Him! Amen!
Lastly, I am thankful for the opportunity my critiques have given me to clarify matter of the book that might have presented itself as confusing. Let me end here with great blessings to companions as well as those who seek to challenge. May we in this find harmony, union, truth and beauty while we take