Part 2 now of the following 4-part series on my
idiosyncratic beliefs about “ultimate reality”:
- Azathoth, of the Lovecraft mythos
- Az, of Zoroastrian mythology
- Azerate, of anti-cosmic Satanism, via Dissection’s album“Reinkaos”
- How do you venerate a “blind idiot” god without running a nihilistic death cult?
As mentioned previously, each entry in this series will
start off by describing the “primary” entity as I have come to understand it
from various sources, and then provide some tie-ins re: why, beyond the “A” and
the “z,” I interpret these as all being essentially one being, albeit with
three distinguishable facets.
Note about the entry below: as we’re now moving on to
a being that originates in a specific culture, rather than in fiction, it seems
worth pointing out that I am not a religious specialist in Zoroastrianism, with
much of what follows coming more from Michael Ford’s Luciferian take on the
demons of that pantheon than from academic/primary/etc. sources. One should thus keep in mind that what
follows is presented primarily because I
find the narrative in question, whatever its
ultimate true source, to be an apt fit with my
beliefs, vs. no claim is being made as to its adequacy in educating anyone
about any “real” beliefs pertaining to Zoroastrianism.
* * *
Az
Az is the female consort of Ahriman, the ultimate evil
being/principle in the dualistic religion of Zoroastrianism. The name is related to a word that means “to
strive,” and she is accordingly associated with avarice, lust, gluttony and
other such vices that orient one’s attention toward carnal matters in neglect
of religious ones.
In addition to being Ahriman’s most intimate associate and
mother of all subsequent demons (whom she in turn teaches to mate with one
another and/or incestuously breeds with), Az is also said to be Ahriman’s
“weapon” by which he corrupts the world.
Interestingly though, the story goes that Ahriman’s downfall is
prophesized to entail Az consuming everything he holds dear and ultimately he himself; he foresees this outcome,
yet takes up the “weapon” anyway because it is “of his own essence” and he is
thus unable to do otherwise.
These last few details strike me as raising a question or
two about who’s really the most powerful demonic force in that particular
pantheon.
On the occult side of things, some additional connections
involving Az include:
- Luciferian Michael Ford associates her with Lilith, which makes sense inasmuch as both dark ladies are said to be the consorts of the ultimate evil of their pantheons, mothers of demons, and corrupters of humanity with a notable emphasis on lust + rejection of the traditional subjugated-female role.
- V.K. Jehannum associates her with Semjaza from the Book of Enoch, the leader of the Watcher-angels who descend to earth, have relations with human women and then reveal forbidden knowledge to their wives. It seems relevant to note that the other primary antagonist of this episode is named Azazel, and that he is blamed the most for messing up God’s creation via teaching humans how to make weapons and cosmetics, a.k.a. encouraging ambition and violence among men, and vanity and lust among women. These fallen angels being male is of little consequence re: potentially detracting from connections to Az, since she is said to switch genders readily, having done so as part the “sex ed” lesson she gave to her demon horde.
- Buddhists in regions adjacent to Zoroastrianism’s traditional turf use a word of the same root as Az’s name to translate the term trishna, which refers to desire/thirst/craving, but is also the name of one of the three daughters of Mara, the “devil” of Buddhism. These three daughters are the female demons who famously tried to tempt the Buddha while he was meditating to achieve enlightenment.
On the philosophical side of things, Az strikes me as a
mythological personification of Schopenhauer’s Will-to-Live,
described very aptly in that
encyclopedia article as “an endless striving and blind impulse with no end in
view, devoid of knowledge, lawless, absolutely free, entirely self-determining
and almighty.” The pessimistic
conclusions that Schopenhauer drew from this – the world being beyond good
& evil, intrinsically frustrating/futile, and hence better to withdraw from
– are then consistent with the conclusions Buddhism draws with regard to the
same force/tendency.
As with Azathoth, I grasp this is unlikely to sound like an
attractive entity to many readers. The
appeal I would argue for is similar though, inasmuch as one might well look at
the natural world and conclude that it does
rather appear to be one big, mindless,
seething mass of eating, mating and death. Should one not then, if one values “undefiled
wisdom,” affirm this via proposing an entity whose qualities reflect this
reality?
On a somewhat more constructive and thus reassuring note, however,
one might also point out that if Az is associated with indulgence, and I argued
elsewhere that the LaVeyan conception of indulgence should be understood as
going beyond the merely animalistic, then in turn, Az represents not just animalistic fulfillment, but striving for fulfillment of any kind
whatsoever. This understanding would
then situate her as potentially benevolent from a LaVeyan Satanic
standpoint.
I say “potentially” because the LaVeyan formula is not only “indulgence, not abstinence”
but also “indulgence, not
compulsion,” and I do not see the latter distinction evident in the way Az is
conceptualized. One might thus envision
a somewhat “frenemy”-like relationship between her and the individual Satanist,
wherein the interests of both are united in terms of seeking indulgence, but
diverge inasmuch as Az’s vivacity excludes both self-control and wisdom. Ironically, it would then seem to follow that
the Christian notion of needing to resist the Devil’s temptation turns out not to
be entirely irrelevant to the Satanist, as one must develop self-discipline and
self-understanding in order to be able to enjoy the gifts that Az offers. Giving in to any and every desire she
presents, on the other hand, is liable to lead to destruction of oneself and/or
one’s loved ones.
This analysis is relevant to what I’ve at times claimed re: of the right-hand path religions,
Buddhism is the one that I agree with the most.
More specifically, I agree with its first two Noble Truths re: life is
inherently dissatisfactory and dissatisfaction is caused by craving, but I
disagree with the rest of the Noble Truths formula (re: how to cease suffering
by ceasing to crave) inasmuch as I choose to continue to wrench enjoyment from
indulgence despite the first two
Truths. To me, LaVey’s talk of
“undefiled wisdom” and “man as just another animal” imply just this sort of
stance, i.e. one has one’s eyes open re: the more unpleasant aspects of the
“dark force of nature,” yet nonetheless chooses to continue to affirm the world. By contrast, right-hand path religions either
have their eyes open to these same realities only to reject the world on that
basis, or else keep their eyes closed and thereby convince themselves of
sunnier ideas – i.e. the “spiritual pipedreams” which LaVey warns against.
As for Az and Azathoth being one thing, this claim is said to be made
forthrightly by some influential occultists, such as Kenneth Grant. But the detail most interesting to me on this
front comes via literary reflections, specifically Lovecraft’s designation of
Azathoth as “daemon sultan,” and the revelation that this designation is likely
inspired via a reference to Beckford’s gothic novel “Vathek.” The main character of that novel is a caliph
who renounces Islam and makes an ill-advised deal with Eblis (Islam’s Devil)
toward the end of fully gratifying all of his passions, in the course of which
he enthusiastically commits a wide variety of moral transgressions. Vathek’s insatiable thirst is then a theme of the novel on multiple levels, e.g.
supernatural affliction of physical thirst; lust as a thirst that motivates his
treachery toward his human and demon allies alike; thirst for knowledge; etc.
One could argue
that one should not make too much of the Vathek connection, as it is not as if
Azathoth, as he is portrayed in the mythos, resembles the character that
strongly. One might then propose that
the designation of “daemon sultan” may have appealed to Lovecraft for merely
“problematic” reasons to do with his feelings about other races, rather than
being all that revelatory of anything actually substantial to do with
Azathoth.
Nonetheless, the web of associations here could alternately invite one to
associate many of the verbs used to describe Azathoth’s activities – e.g.
“seething,” “bubbling,” “gnawing,” etc. – with the notions of “striving” and
“thirst” associated with Az. Moreover, what
I said above about Az and compulsive
indulgence is further reflected in the designation of Azathoth as the blind idiot god, and here the tie to
Vathek becomes highly relevant, as upon full acquaintance with the plot of the
novel, I think more than a few people might judge him to be not only degenerate in the extent to
which he allows his passions to rule over him, but also rather stupid in many of his decisions. Two seemingly disparate titles of Azathoth’s
– “blind idiot” and “daemon sultuan” – are thus revealed to be interrelated with
one another via Az’s key theme of unregulated desire.
A further Az-Azathoth-relating thought is that one could
draw a parallel between the idea that one can only have a constructive
relationship with Az if one cultivates certain Satanic virtues on one hand, and
the idea that the world can only exist so long as Azathoth is kept from full
activity by the music of his demonic flutists on the other. In both instances, the force behind life
itself is “an endless striving and blind impulse with no end in view, devoid of
knowledge, lawless, absolutely free, entirely self-determining and almighty,”
which, if allowed to go unrestrained, winds up being destructive of the world
as we know it and of all that which might be enjoyable in that world if only a
little moderation were practiced.
Now, at the same time as insights are to be had from
equating these entities, insights can also be had by keeping them
distinguished. My thought here is that a
primary distinguisher of the three components of the “dark trinity” I’m
describing is with regard to their
attitude toward the world as we know it.
On this front, we thus far have an indifferent creator in Azathoth, and an enthusiastic maintainer in Az.
Azathoth is “indifferent” inasmuch as he does not set out to create anything
in particular, being instead rather like the Neoplatonic concept of The One,
for whom the creation of realities outside of itself is simply an unintended
overflow of its inherently-fruitful inner nature, or the Hindu concept of
Brahman, which is said to create as spontaneously and unconsciously as a person
breathes. Az, on the other hand is
“enthusiastic” inasmuch as she is that which strives to remain
ever-in-existence and ever-grasping-at-more.
When destructive consequences follow in the wake of either entity, this
seems to come about simply through an excess of the force that they represent, without entailing the notion that they intend to destroy existence because they
hate it and want it to end.
This is not to say though that the force in question cannot
nonetheless be characterized as hatefully and intentionally destructive in
certain contexts. And it is to those
contexts that Azerate will speak, completing the picture with the addition of a
monstrous destroyer. But I will save the details of that for the
next entry…
