|
|
Qal Yn, yes, Set(h) is another in the growing family of divinity I interact with intellectually and magickally. Set(h)'s attributes and correspondences are nearly as resonate with me as the Norse "fire god's" (a debatable attribution, but pertinent, ne'ertheless). Also, though it's crap-support, the one photo-still I've seen from the Eris movie has her with bright red hair, as well. (Still-Life with Woodpecker, anyone?)
General discussion: the nature of gods, godforms, ascended ancestors, HGAs, et cetera is every bit as subjective and mercurial as Gypsy Lantern suggests, in my book. Though I respect their position and beliefs, I find it difficult to discuss divinity with some reconstructionist heathens as a consequence of their necessary understanding of their gods as objective beings. Though it will most likely drive me balls-out bonkers by the end of it, I have been attempting for a number of years to craft a non-absolutist understanding of GOD, Universe and infinity that embraces ALL possibility and perspective. Knowing that that understanding will only truly come with union with the same (hence the mind-exploding insanity should it happen in this life) hasn't disuaded me, yet. All that means, in far less lucid speach than Gypsy Lantern expressed is that everyone's relationship with whatever aspect of the divine they interact with is, by necessity, unique to the individual.
Er, that would be sooooo much clearer if I sat and honed it... |
|
|