While I really hate this loaded term, what are you going to do- I’m looking for the exact roots of Emanationism to understand both Kabbalah and Sufism
Plato defined the “demon” as an essentially good middle-being between gods and humans (Symposium 202d–203a), as a personal tutelary being (Republic 617d–e, 620d–e, Phaedo 107d), or as an equivalent to the divine part of human soul, the νοῦς (Timaeus 90a–c).
It’s easier to understand for us moderns to think of it less anthropomorphically and more like a “formless gnosis”. If I were to relate it to the realm of the senses I’d say it’s closer to something you hear than something you see. Some people see columns of light, that’s not my experience anyway.
If you want to think of something kind of scary, western whites DO have an “intermediary being” between them and the gods, similar to the imams in Iran- and that’s the Jewish people.
Anyway, before that was set in stone, this is what Aquinas did
Proclus postulated henads, intelligences, souls, and demons, and Aquinas collapsed all of those into one, the “angel”. This could cause some problems if the angel is too far away from humans, because “intelligences” might be a necessary intermediary between humans and angels. Without that connection you slide into materialism. Yes, with a materialist worldview it’s easy to see how human beings (Jews) can take the place of higher intermediary beings.
By giving one name to different types of beings, the theologian brings a whole variety under one category.
You might think here of ancient Greek polytheism where there were gods of varying magnitude. In those days the words Hermes, messenger, and angel were near-synonyms. Plato rationalized this theology and then Aquinas adjusted it to Christianity.
Gotta tell you americans, I don’t trust your “Hermes” one bit.
If you think of the Shi’ists, the imams claim they say nothing new, that they’re only unpacking Muhammad, and that Muhammad was following the Angel Gabriel. We have nothing like that distance in the west. We’re thoroughly rooted to the earth. I’d even go further and say that we have a “neck condition” which prevents us from looking up. I’m just trying to explain why the Shi’ists don’t take your “Hermes” seriously–and why you do.
This emoji again
They’re definitely not ordinary human beings, closer to a demon than an angel though I’d say – probably time to take em out
For one, angels/gnosis don’t care only about themselves at your expense. And you cannot say that about your “Hermes” whatsoever. Gnosis doesn’t have a mission to pull sparks out of you. It has a mission to tell you the truth. Your “Hermes” has the opposite intention. Their egregore is actually the enemy of Gnosis. Part of the mission of “Hermes” is to distance you from Gnosis more and more. Gnosis is the intermediary being between you and the divine light, and the further “Hermes” takes you away from that, the more of an empty shell you are.
Go ahead and try to talk about all this in an “unfiltered, unrefracted” way to the world. I challenge you to try. Why not?