Pazuzu Sigil Options

Have you ever placed the Pazuzu sigil over the picture on the image of the Pazuzu statue?

Try and you will see that the sigil is based on its shape and marks out its head, wings, arm, legs and feet. I would say this sigil is a sigilic drawing of the Pazuzu statue. The Humwawa sigil is also based on the traditional face of Humbaba.

Interesting.



(IMG:http://ancestors.blox.pl/resource/pazuzu1.jpg) (IMG:http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~jasen01/texts/pazuzu.gif)





(IMG:http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~jasen01/texts/humwawa.gif) (IMG:http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mclennan/BA/HL/images/Humbaba-face.gif)

This post has been edited by scorpionis: May 17 2007, 05:44 PM

Okay, to start with I must say that when I comment the necronomicon I comment the whole book, from the first page of the book to the last. For I am convinced that the author of the introduction of the book is also the author that has put together the Necronomicon text. I guess I am talking about "Simon".

This does NOT make the book useless in my opinion, but fact is fact and I will give him credit for putting together a great and interesting synthesis between Babylonian mythology (Enuma Elish is Babylonian creation myth, not Sumerian) and the Lovecraftian mythos. The system WORKS, but that does not mean that the book is historically authentic. All myths and magical systems are created by man, sometimes guided by the inspiration given from the Gods. So just because Simon created the version of the Necronomicon we talk about it does not mean that its magic is without power.

With that being said I return to the topic and point out the text on page xviii, xix and xxiii of the introduction chapter. In these pages you can see how the author connects the Chthonic to Kutulu and therefore also Chaos/Tiamat. He identifies Kutulu with Absu and because of that the Man of Kuta becomes, within that context, the male ruler of Chaotic forces. On page xxiii you can read:

"...For she descended into the Underworld and defeated her sister, the Goddess of the Abyss, Queen ERESHKIGAL (possibly another name for TIAMAT)."

On page 161 of the book you can read:

"...So that the strike ringeth out
And call TIAMAT from Her slumber
From her sleep in the Caverns Of the Earth."

The "Caverns of the Earth" is the chthonic realm (the underworld), and this is again something that points out Tiamat as the Queen of the Underworld. This is also something that you can not find in the original Babylonian myth about Tiamat.

On page 161 you can also read about "Of the Generations of the Ancient Ones" and in that part of the text you can see that the Utuku Limnuti are mentioned together with PAZUZU. First you can read that they are all "In the creation of Anu spawned" and on page 162 you can again read that they "Are children of the Earth that in the creation of Anu were spawned, but on page 165, in the end of the "Of the Generations of the Ancient Ones" you can read that all the Underworld spirits named earlier in the text are:

"...At their Mother's breast
At the Foundation of CHAOS
In the Araliya of Mumu-TIAMAT
And at the Gates of Iak Sakkak"

This clearly points out the underworld spirit (The Seven and Pazuzu, but also all other spirits and ghosts that are mentioned in the parts of the text I have pointed out) as "Of the Generations of the Ancient Ones" and their Mother is named as Mumu-Tiamat.

So this is what I base my earlier comment upon. Simonomicon, from my perspective, places Tiamat in the realm of Ereshkigal and identifies Ereshkigals servants/demons/ghosts/vampires and gods as the children of Chaos. This is not something that can be found within the traditional Babylonian mythology and religion.

And this was what I pointed out before.

On page 174 of the necronomicon you can again read how :

"ERESHKIGAL rejoiced.
Blind AZAG-THOTH rejoiced
iAK SAKKAK rejoiced.
ISHNIGGARAB rejoiced.
KUTULU rejoiced..."

This clearly places Ereshkigal amongst the Ancient Ones and shows how they are by her side and celebrate her Victory. The only one not named is Tiamat herself and one could argue that this is because Ereshkigal herself is viewed as a manifestation of Tiamat. But what is made VERY clear is that Ereshkigal is placed as one of the members of the group of dark gods that Azag-Thot, Iak Sakkak, Ishniggarab and Kutulu belong to. And this is what I pointed out.

Pazuzu is not "prince of cup-cakes", no. But he is not of the "generation of the Ancient Ones" either.

I am not saying that these forces are to be played around with. And I am not saying that they do not have very dark/destructive function. What I am saying is that the Ancient Ones are the Forces of Anti-creation (pro-Chaos) and the Underworld gods and spirits are NOT!

Also this talk about having Pazuzu killing people right and left, to be honest I am not sure what I believe about that kind of talk. If you kill through magic the first thing you learn is to keep silent about it. But that is off topic.

Hope I have made clear what I meant in my earlier post about the above mentioned subject.

About Persephone and Ereshkigal, you do not see the similarity between the FUNCTION of Nergal/Hades and Ereshkigal/Persephone? But that is not really important in the present discussion.

Also you have to pardon my poor English.

This post has been edited by scorpionis: May 28 2007, 01:26 PM

Okay, to start with I must say that when I comment the necronomicon I comment the whole book, from the first page of the book to the last. For I am convinced that the author of the introduction of the book is also the author that has put together the Necronomicon text. I guess I am talking about "Simon".

I have, for the most part, ignored a majority of Simon's introduction to the book. I hold the idea that the introduction is full of blatant blinds such as what you mentioned about Simon citing Tiamat as a possible name for Ereshkigal. I maintain that if Simon was serious about this assertion, ie it is not a blind, than there is no way that he wrote the bulk of the book (the actual text) as it is very explicit about what banishings to use, the roles of Tiamat and Ereshkigal, etc. That is not to say that there aren't a few gems in the introduction, but it bares little use, theoretical or practical, for anything beyond a general introduction into the Necronomicon.

This does NOT make the book useless in my opinion, but fact is fact and I will give him credit for putting together a great and interesting synthesis between Babylonian mythology (Enuma Elish is Babylonian creation myth, not Sumerian) and the Lovecraftian mythos. The system WORKS, but that does not mean that the book is historically authentic. All myths and magical systems are created by man, sometimes guided by the inspiration given from the Gods. So just because Simon created the version of the Necronomicon we talk about it does not mean that its magic is without power.

I disagree about there being overt Lovecraftian tones in the book but that is for another thread, otherwise I agree with you for the most part. I would argue though that the book is (other than Marduk and his 50 powers) more Sumerian than Babylonian, though only stating that for discussions sake has it contains no real meaning per this dialogue. I would however like to point out that Enochian and Kaballa were created by man and are debated and discussed ad naseum. Let us not degenerate (not necessarily you and I but in general the occult community) into avoiding intelligent debate and discussion over the Simon Necronomicon. The system can stand alone on its own merits, and there are certainly enough viewpoints and kernals of information for us to really dig into the system.

With that being said I return to the topic and point out the text on page xviii, xix and xxiii of the introduction chapter. In these pages you can see how the author connects the Chthonic to Kutulu and therefore also Chaos/Tiamat. He identifies Kutulu with Absu and because of that the Man of Kuta becomes, within that context, the male ruler of Chaotic forces. On page xxiii you can read:
....
....
....
....

I will admit that at first appearances it makes it look that way but in truth the Necronomicon makes it very clear that their connection is only superficial. Let us examine the Lost Bowl of Tiamat, the Dur of Indur. This is, in my opinion, the one of the keys to unlocking the book's potential. I am not advocating making the bowl, but merely a study of what it is. Dur means totality. Remember what totality is? Lets move back a few and remember Crowley's discussion over totality. The abyss is both everything and nothing at the same time, totality. Place the "In" in front of Dur and it creates "Indur," which roughly translates to the abuse of the abyss. The abyss which abuses. It is like a perversion of the abyss. To paraphrase "Lest he wonder the wastelands forever." I say it is like a perversion of the abyss because there is no real way to describe it, it is beyond rationality. Pazuzu can give you life or he can give you death (IMG:style_emoticons/default/hmm.gif)

Pazuzu is not "prince of cup-cakes", no. But he is not of the "generation of the Ancient Ones" either.

I agree 100%

I am not saying that these forces are to be played around with. And I am not saying that they do not have very dark/destructive function. What I am saying is that the Ancient Ones are the Forces of Anti-creation (pro-Chaos) and the Underworld gods and spirits are NOT!

Agreed, but the Underworld deities, even though Elder Gods, hold the keys to the outside.

Also this talk about having Pazuzu killing people right and left, to be honest I am not sure what I believe about that kind of talk. If you kill through magic the first thing you learn is to keep silent about it. But that is off topic.

Agreed

About Persephone and Ereshkigal, you do not see the similarity between the FUNCTION of Nergal/Hades and Ereshkigal/Persephone? But that is not really important in the present discussion.

Their function yes, I thought you were saying something else.

I would just like to make it clear, and anyone on the forums can support this, I am arguing you for the sake of intelligent dialogue. I am not just arguing with you to be an a$%*#!* or for an ego boost. I enjoy these types of discussions very much so thanks in advance for the dialogue.